80
19.
17.
I am therefore happy to be able to dispose so effectually of this imputation of irregularity in the proceedings and of Kwok-a-Chuong's consciousness of a "weak case", though I cannot but express my great surprise and regret under such circumstances that an allegation like Kwok-a-Cheong's should have been advanced on such untenable grounds by Sir Rutherford Alcock who had all the papers before him. I can only suppose that he had not sufficiently studied their contents.
18. On the other hand, it is most satisfactory to find that Sir Rutherford Alcock has given a very clear and accurate statement of the law affecting the case, though herein he differs entirely from Consul Robertson, who committed the original mistake, which has led to all this complication of supposing the presence of the "Prince Albert" in non-treaty Port to be conclusive of confiscation which admitted of no explanation. Sir Rutherford Alcock rightly maintains that the illegality of the act of resort and entrance of the vessel into a non-treaty Port is liable to be rebutted by proving satisfactorily to the Chinese Government that the vessel was there by no fault of her own, such as being brought there by stress of weather, legitimate fear of Pirates or other circumstances which rendered...