Strict communication on the part of the Col: Officers exists, & farther intimates that "whatever may be the formal regulations on the subject, special public emergency, "to put them on one side." How far this may be consistent with the instructions conveyed by the Sec: of State for the Colonies, in H. M's. Desp: of the 25th of Jan: a copy of wh. Y. L. transmitted to me in N°22 of the 5th of Feb. 1868, or with the views of H.M. Govt, is a question of too grave importance in the conduct of relations with China to be left in doubt.
In the mean time I have instructed the Consul that I cannot recognize any such right or power as that claimed on the part of the Col: Author at Hongkong.
As I have farther explained, it does not appear to me that any clear case of inconvenience or injury has been made out by the Col: Sec:, Mr. Gardiner, & the acting Superintendent of Police. There is no impediment to the Police pursuing & arresting any British Subject on Chinese territory under International Law.
Nor Treaty gives any right to Foreign Powers to arrest & carry off by force from Chinese ground a Chinese Subject. It seems important to insist upon this because, in the Memorial of the Hongkong Chamber of Commerce, the claim to do so has already been put forward by the Memorialists, that the surrender of Chinese criminals escaping from Hongkong, & expecially the rendition of absconding debtors, is, in the opinion of the Memorialists, as apparently, of the Govt, Sir R.J. Macdonnell unquestionably "a clause which should be added to the Article for the protection of the interests of the mercantile community."
I have not taken any step, in my preliminary negotiations, to meet such demands on the part of the Colony; & it seems so totally contrary to all usage & precedent, even in extradition Treaties, to demand the rendition of subjects of one State.
Page 60
Page 61