we should see.
"The Hammond was also pleased to state that by his letters to the (olomial Office of the 2nd a 8th into & by your Lordship's Instruction to Sir R. Merck, of which copies were inclosed, the course that peaking a final decision it is proposed to follow, to "guard against a recurrence of a similar "result of extradition as "ecently recurred.
as that which hav
rout
"But that the point which he was now specifically to submit for Consideration is whether as a Christion. Power Great Britain would not be Entitled to insist on the remunciation
or
by the Chinese foot in some form other of the infliction of Cruelties repugnant to humanity on Chinese criminals placed at the disposal of the local authorities, & failing to obtains this, to refuse altogether to give effect to the 21st Article of the Treaty of Sentime
hr
L
J
331
W. Hammond was also pleased to state
that we should observe that much inconvenience
is felt from the omission in the Treaty ofany
reciprocal provision for the surrender of persons whether Chinese or others who having Hong Kong have sought
Committed crimes in
refuge in the Chinese dominions. The Cuinese Authorities indeed while claiming to try
fugitives subjects of thine whe having Committed Crimes in Hong Kong have sought an asylum
luse in thine, refuse to give theme of: for trial in Hong Kong. But that it is not quite clear whether this refusal extends to the (limese subjects of the British Crown whom the Chinese foot have
of
Course his right to claim to deal with
as subjects of the Superor
as regards the Cxtradition of the Emperors subjects, the question arises whether in strictures a nation is bound under an Extradition | Resty to give up one of it on
subjects. In Mind
St.
Cometry