115
magistrate.
A chinese officer from bandon attended: with witnesses to prove the charge, and the
prisoner
was
Counsel
defended by Camoel.
It is unnecessary to trouble
Your
Grace with the depositions in the case, but
Sufficient
to state that the Magistrate dismissed
the charge on
the
ground of want of proof
Wong atsont was
but held to bail to
him
for
was acen
uw wer
offenders as made in the Treaties then existing; that is in the Supplementary Treaty of 1843.
This Supplementary. Treaty is abrogated
by Urtide I of the recent Treaty of Tientsin, but article XXI
this latter Frealy re-enacts the rendition - clause though in different and
of
less comprehensive phrasiology.
Our local Ordinance however is sitt
accordingly released,
in forer
any charge against
The Article in the Tientsin Treaty-
b
the next three months.
I have explained the whole case.
V
Mr beansul Robertson for the Vice Roy's – information, but have reason to doubt the recult being satisfactory to the Chinus Authorities.
Our local Ordinance Ne 2 of 1850 gives effect to the stipulations for rendition of
specifics "Criminals, subjects of China, and direct's their rendition " on proof of their guilt. "__ the words of
"crime or
had the
our Ordinance are (Clause !) "any
offence against the Lusss of Chine?
presume that under this wording.
proof
been
have been given up.
sufficient, Wong atsue bast