گی
7
488
It
has fallen
is needless to say that the Vice Roy
the British Authorities
furisdiction, should in my opinion be protected
ว
<
into
an orYOY
in supposing
that
against.
anest and
Sirice
may
Hang hông
punish Chinese Criminiato
@mimitted in Chins,
On the other hand the Chin
In offences
Anthorities
mays by
their code of Saws
have the perver to arrest and
purnish when within their jurisdiction Chinese offences
found
Criminals who have committed
in Hongking
and as there is no clause by- we own demand the rendition of
which we
such erminals it is well that they are?
in their own
Contin
tiable to punishment but the assumption by the Veci Roy of a Jurisdiction
XVI
and "a
over them by fortiori of
11
vistive of Article
an exelusive
writing
the above I have been
formed with the last Grimumõction të thes Government from H. ll. loonusul at kanton (No 66 dated 29th June 1865) in which he states that the Via Pty does not question
Heer
Majesty's jurisdiction Criminals in Houghing-
ow chinese
Houghing. If this be so "Cadit an actio". But the tree Roy in
his letter to Her Majesty's Convent dated the 22nd of June 1865 claims undu Editide XV, the right of punishing the man Chem.
-a-Kino mud still under article XVI M
referdes
bosend him to Hongkong except for the
purpose of tracing the stolen property and
a gumonter of for his redelivery
undu a