と
the case which that often. has taken,
in which it is confirmed by the conduct dopted by the Chief French Officer on the spot, and will see that a series of be
Ανι
use
gross crimes and wrongs has been Committed by the Pererano in question
over of the I their agents, under cover French Hay; and by availing themselves of the
of a British port, both axamet the Coolier and the Carriece foot. That they began their comminat enterprise by fitting out the ship within British Jurisdiction, into which they afterwards brought the Chinese subjects whom they tod seized in China, thus seriously compromising the relations of China & Great Brition; and that if, for technical reasons, it has not been found possible to punish them, or to deal with them (as the master and Crew of the French Vessel
chartered by them have been dealt with) by remitting them for prunishment & their own foot, this is only to be regretted.
H
It will be for Y. L. to counder
you. whether or not to transmit to the
Peruvian Mimeter any of the Evidence
contained as the Pabels!
we observe that in the letter of Sir Frederick Boyers to hit Hammond of 31st week. 1861, the ques
Deck
tion is raised
78
whether the Hong Kong anthorities were: pnotified, according to English law in giving up to the French Commandant the master of the French Ship Vitted agen
We
are
under
of opinion that this
question must be answered negatively. Internationally, as between France and England, no complaint can of course be made; but the Extradition could; according tour low, be pistified out. the statute embodying and inforang the Frenty with France for Exotradition; and this Treaty (1843) and the Statute enforcing it (ace 6 & 7lict. Cap. 75) relate to such offences only
as are committed
- within