lawyer, that I had no doubt he had got up
Evidence against Lo.d. pias in an
Ꮽ
way investigate
requested
irregular
4.2. W. thoroughly
o the matter
the
for
his
own sake.
the late proceedings had thrown a shadow
of doubt
doubt & mistrust upon demands for the rendition of criminals Why it was
unfortunate to have attached to so grave delicate a proceeding.
replied that he was
The
Viceroy surprised to hear
Cham shu hien had been put forward by the Officers whom he had deputed to go
a that be must disclaim
to Hongkong, knowledge of his procedings on that if he of the Colonial
breach
had committed any Law he certainly sh? punish him severely 。 that he w. appoint a commission to to
a w?
Examine him.
What has been the result I have not heard, & think it better to let the matter rest where it is.
You will see from the correep?" that
sa
404
Sir A. Kennedy, the goo? of Hongkong. most auxions to avoid any complications I believe had chiên shu have been. sentenced to imprisonment is? have Exercived his prerogative & pardoned
him.
The proceedings in this case so far o they relate to the rendition of Lo. A pias
as
that
were conducted in accordance with the provisions of Colonial Ordinance no r. of 1850, a copy of Wh I enclose for yt? inform? certainly it is desirable in every way all precautions ch? be taken that the person whose rendition is demanded sh? be quilly
of the crime imputed to him, political question
that us
is involved, but if
or
failing to prove the former the Officers sent by the Chinese foot to conduct the Case are liable to an indictment for conspiracy & perhaps consequent imprisonment, there
does appear
to be some
ground for assertion on the part of the Chinese Authorities that it,
• is impossible with such a penalty im pending
D
E