279
without presuming to question the justice of this decision, I cannot refrain from pointing out to 4.2.
that the main points adduced in its support are that intimidation was used to procure the evidence of two of the witnesses – who are characterised as accomplices of the prisoner and that steps were taken for the Extradition of the accused for some months after the alleged crime
now in China there are no other means that I know of, short of intimidation of one sort or another, to procure the attendance of witnesses, and it may fairly be questioned whether ordinary intimidation for the purposes aforesaid can be regarded as much more than the Chinese mode of subpoena;
while to anyone resident in China the delay of a few months in preferring criminal charge will be matter neither of surprise