(6)
to the Superintendent. If he consider the seizure justified, he will direct the Foreign Commissioner of Customs to give notice to the party to whom the ship or goods are declared to belong, that the ship or goods have been seized because such or such an irregularity has been committed, and that the said ship or goods will be confiscated unless before noon on a certain day, being the sixth day from the date of the delivery of the notice, the Superintendent receive from the British Consul an official application to have the case fully investigated.
The British subject to whom the ship or goods belong, if prepared to maintain that the alleged irregularity has not been committed, is free to appeal within the term of six days direct to the Commissioner. If satisfied with his explanations the Superintendent will direct the release of the ship or goods; otherwise, if he elect not so to appeal to the Customs, or if, after receiving his explanations, the Superintendent still decline to release the ship or goods, he may appeal to his Consul, who will write to inform the Superintendent of the particulars of his appeal, and to request him, the Superintendent, to name a day for the public investigation of the evidence on which the action of the Customs is founded.
Article II. The Superintendent on receipt of the Consul's communication, will name a day for meeting him at the Custom House, and the Consul will desire the merchant to appear with his witnesses at the Custom House on the day named, and will himself on that day proceed to the Custom House. The Superintendent will invite the Consul to take his seat with him.
The Commissioner of Customs will also be seated to assist the Superintendent. Proceedings will be opened by the Superintendent, who will call on the Customs employés who have seized the ship or goods, to state the circumstance which occasioned the seizure, and will question them according to their evidence. Whatever the merchant interested may have to state in contradiction of their evidence he will state to the Consul, who will cross-examine them for him. Such will be the proceedings in the interest of truth and fairness.
The Consul and Superintendent may if they see fit appoint Deputies to meet at the Custom House in their stead, in which case the order of proceeding will be the same as if they were present in person.
Article III. Notes will be taken of the statements of all parties examined, and the paper containing these will be signed and sealed by the Consul and the Superintendent. The room will be then cleared, and the Superintendent will inform the Consul of the course he proposes to pursue. If he propose to confiscate the vessel or goods, and the Consul having given notice of the appeal to the Superintendent, they will forward copies of the above notes, the Consul to his Minister, and the Superintendent to the Yamên of Foreign Affairs at Peking. If the Consul agrees with the Superintendent that the ship or goods ought to be confiscated the merchant will not be entitled to appeal. In no case will the release of ship or goods entitle the merchant to indemnification for the seizure, whether these be released after the investigation at the Custom House, or after appeal to the high authorities of both nations at Peking.
Article IV. The case being referred to superior authority, the merchant interested shall be at liberty to give a bond binding himself to pay the full value of the ship or goods attached should the ultimate decision be against him, which bond being sealed with the Consular Seal, and deposited with the Superintendent, the Superintendent will restore to the merchant, the ship or goods attached, and when the superior authority shall have decided whether so much money is to be paid or the whole of the property seized confiscated, the merchant will be called on to pay accordingly.
If the merchant decline to give the necessary security, the ship or merchandize attached will be detained. But whether the decision of the superior authority be favorable to the appellant or not, the appellant will not be entitled to claim indemnity.
SIR,
THE CONSUL IN REPLY TO THE PETITION,
BRITISH CONSULATE,
CANTON, 11th April, 1866.
I have received your Petition stating the circumstances under which the steamer Prince Albert, of which you are the registered owner, was seized by the Imperial
(7)
Maritime Customs for alleged breach of Treaty, and praying that the said vessel may be released and handed back to you, or, if the authorities decline to do so, that I will apply for the proper investigation and adjudication in the matter.
In reply I have to observe that proper investigation and adjudication implies the exercise of judicial functions and powers, which I am not aware in such cases exist, but I have communicated with H. E. the Superintendent of Customs on the subject, and he has appointed to meet me at the Foreign Custom House, on Tuesday, the 17th instant, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, when you and any evidence you may bring forward will be heard in support of your Petition; and I shall then be enabled to judge whether or not, in my opinion, the seizure you complain of has been made in accordance with Treaty. You will, therefore, be good enough to attend at the place, and time above indicated.
Mr. Kwok A'Cheong,
I am, Sir,
Your Obedient Servant,
&c., &c., &c.
Hongkong.
(Signed)
D. B. ROBERTSON.
H. M. Consul,
PETITION TO SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS.
CANTON, 19th April, 1866.
To H. E. the Superintendent of Customs, Canton,
The Humble Petition of Kwok A'Cheong, the Owner of the Steam-ship Prince Albert, of the Port of Hongkong.
That in the petition, which your petitioner forwarded to the British Consul, at Canton, he prayed that an investigation might be made into the circumstances attending the seizure of his said steamer by the Officers of the Imperial Maritime Customs, at Sue Tung, and he made certain statements as to the facts concerning her presence there. That Your Excellency, in concert with the British Consul for Canton, having decided that the vessel has violated the provisions of the Treaty, by being at the place where she was found, it only now remains for your petitioner to appeal to the merciful consideration of your Excellency, in the hope that you will allow him to have the vessel back again.
It has already been brought to your Excellency's notice that the vessel had no cargo on board, and did not go to Sue Tung for the purpose of trading or in any way defrauding the Imperial Revenue, but was in search of a Junk which she had been chartered to tow up to Hongkong, and which when last seen was dismasted, and lay at anchor under the Island of Foong Ky, about 6 or 7 miles from the entrance of the River in which Sue Tung stands, and about nine miles from where the said steamer was seized. The steamer did not leave Hongkong with the intention of going to any port or place whatever, and was sent away in a hurry, even her master and crew being newly hired for the voyage, and she would not have even approached Sue Tung except for the purpose of endeavoring to find out where the Junk could be, by enquiring amongst the native craft there, and down the Coast below Sue Tung.
As the master had to act in the instant, and without the possibility of being able to communicate with your petitioner, your Excellency will see that though the very letter of the Treaty has been broken your petitioner is innocent of either any intent or act in Violation of the Treaty or in fraud of the Revenue, and he trusts that your Excellency with your well known liberality and impartiality will be pleased to give back the vessel to your petitioner, and merely inflict such a fine as may punish the master for his thoughtless, and unauthorized act, and while upholding the strict enforcement of the provisions the Treaty, may not so heavily punish the innocent owner of the vessel, who neither authorized nor sanctioned the act, and who could get no profit nor benefit from this wrongful act of the master.
Your Petitioner therefore prays that your Excellency will be pleased to take his application for a remission of the sentence of confiscation into your gracious, and merciful consideration, and do such favor to your petitioner, as in mercy and fairness he ought to have.
Dated the 19th day of April, A.D., 1866.
93