(Confidential.)
Sir,
2
Annex.
Draft of Letter to Colonial Office,
[The alterations made by the Law Officers are printed in italics.]
3
Foreign Office, August 1886. I am directed by the Earl of Iddesleigh to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 25th May, inclosing a despatch from the Officer administering the Government of Hong Kong, relative to the case of Cheung-a-Chi, whose extradition has been applied for by the Chinese authorities, and requesting to be informed whether Mr. Marsh's action in the matter should be approved.
I am, in reply, to transmit to you two despatches from Her Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Peking, in which he reports the dissatisfaction of the Chinese Government at the manner in which extradition cases under Article XXI of the Treaty of Tien-tsin are dealt with in Hong Kong.* There is great difficulty in forming an opinion here as to the sufficiency of "the proof of guilt" which is required by the Treaty.
In the case of the eleven fugitives whose surrender was refused about two years ago, the Law Officers in 1885 differed from their predecessors in 1884 as to the sufficiency of the proof.
The former were of opinion that the "proof of guilt" was sufficient, while the latter had grave doubts, but on the whole reported in favour of the conclusion arrived at by the Governor in Council. I am to inclose (confidentially) copies of their Reports.†
As regards the present case of Cheung-a-Chi, Lord Iddesleigh is not prepared to say that the conclusion arrived at by the Governor of Hong Kong was wrong.
It is difficult to lay down any precise rule in such a matter, but his Lordship is disposed to think that where the magistrate has committed the fugitive on evidence which, in his opinion, constitutes a prima facie case, the extradition should not be refused unless the Governor in Council is satisfied, on a review of the evidence, that the decision of the magistrate was erroneous, either on the ground (1) that the material evidence against the alleged fugitive criminal was unworthy of belief by reason of bribery, intimidation, or other circumstances; or (2) that taking the evidence as a whole it fails to support the conclusion arrived at by the magistrate. But his Lordship thinks that the Governor in Council should in each case weigh the matter with great care, and differ from the magistrate only where he feels constrained by a strong and clear opinion so to do.
His Lordship presumes that the Governor in Council acted in that spirit in the present case. There seems reason, however, to believe that the prisoner is an old offender.
It is not unlikely, therefore, that the evidence to be adduced against him on the further sixteen charges of piracy, which it is stated are hanging over him, may be sufficient to justify his extradition.
Mr. Marsh's despatch is returned herewith, and I am to request that Mr. O'Conor's two despatches, which are sent herewith in original, may be returned to this Office.
I am, &c.
Office or Individual,
Date.
Hong Kong
No. No 15497
(Subject.)
335
DOMES C. O.
15497
REC? ► REGP 27 AUG 86,
sipale Service of a writ on Zerman V. Conant
Last
1886
bank previous Paper. Lunds death suds in orig prom
сорд
Cww.
r.fw.is.
Berlin re to
(Minutes.)
Ambs at
Ind Bramsti
What fiint chractions are we
me we & give
to
Forense in raft Blis
55
ces Jatch
...
* Mr. O'Conor, No. 138, April 29; ditto, No. 147, May 3, 1886. † Law Officers, September 18, 1884; ditto, September 19, 1885.
ext subsequent Paper.
7680
the 23d Feb. Carl-
Ser die Jukan Pannenporis
senati.
he
tack of Ein E. Malts sees parch saying that to
German Fort Mus" a "explanation" /
wisted
By
and Asemre.
the Consal's Conduct.
The original pappas eventuell über relived 57.0.
Such and 27
Ash 7.0. chelling & is the quem of how