The facts stated below were stated by the Acting Governor:
That the Chinese appellant was not charged with having committed named robberies in Chinese dominion, but with the charge of extradition. This man carried on business at Hongkong under the name of How-To-Hee. He was brought before the Police Magistrate in pursuance of the Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, under which the Magistrate has power to apprehend Chinese subjects who have committed offences against the laws of China, and to investigate charges against them and hand them over to the Governor for rendition if "Quilt is founded".
The case in question was properly investigated.
The farts
stated
le o
by the Acting Governor' -
That The Chines
pp no
are
foot charged
A
Iraw
Jeen
Committed
Named How-To-
with having
Robberies in Chinese
dominion
that
demo
charge
Extradition
This man carried
on business at Hongkong
under the
Z. C
How-how-how-
He was brought befor the Police Magibrate
می دیگر
in pursuance of the 170
Ordiname N°2
under which
91850
the
Magistrat has former
to apprehend Chinese Subjects who have
•Committed offences
"
"
#
against the Laws of Chine staken usage
"and to investigate
charges against
Haphon
and thand them & the Sovernor their
over
" for rendition of "Quilt is foroned"
The case
in question
was properly investigated,
T
EX
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.