His Excellency, but we const swapprehend the position
might
he holds with reference to the extradition of pervono claimed from the Government of this belony by the Government of blime if we did not place the following explanation before hims and point out that he is not bound to hand over prisoner to the Chinese authorities because a prima facie case has been found against him, Before; therefor we addres ourselves in
any way to ith merito of the cave in which our client was the third
it's third privoner;
Ave
the
purpose to draw ith orttention of His Excellency to
what
humbly
conceive to be the stati
and we
ith Law
with reference to the rendiation of people from this leolony to the neighbouring Eufine; that should Edis Excellency. on statementő
are w
wently of
attention he would us in
feet convinced come to the condueion that even the
any
very slighest event allow Lessig uden
to be transmitted to any of the Chinese Authorités until the whole question had been referred to Oder tuajesty's Government in
England.
For the Im pose of enabling des Excellency to we ask him to put the constriction
understand why
we claim that he shouter.
ดู
upon
of 1850 and 2 of 1871, we
that there is no
lo sina, that is to
to day
there is
the two local Ordiriances.
must first of all point out is no Extradition Treaty between England
Extraction Treaty in the pense in which these words are used in beglich low books. In treatis made for the by tradition of alleged criminals between European Governments provising is made in emme instances
for
ith non renditia
urendition of persons who belong to the state from which then rendition is claimed. For instance, France refuses to give up to the Engie! inthorities for trial Frenchmen, who having comanitted
Crisco
85
crimes in England, have sought refuge in France, but
in almost all, if soot in all, cases
the
or
provision is made that claimed chall not be tried for political crimes
before
the crime
for
which
person for other crimes committed. rendition is clanned. Provision is likewise made for
insertedt
ith now rendition, where, according to the law of the State from which rendition is claimed, the time for -prosecuting ith particular offence alleged has terminated and other provisions are cometimes
for
the return of the accused to the country from which he is claimed and for the admission of depositions taken before the authorities
of
The country making the claim. No Rendation Treaty containing or similar provisions exists between England
therefore, any
law bethe containing the law baved upon
These
China, statements
of
Treaties of this noture
with
referenice
become to a great extent worthless when considonny the action dis Excellency
purone
should
to rendition from the Colony to blime. To alluchrate shortly what we have just pointed out, Franz thutter,
༸དྨ་ས་ཆ་iཔ་༥ London, after murdering Un Briggs
A
the
Aw
the Fouth London Railway, fled to the United States Aspion and was given up by them upon a claim for lies rendition made by the English Government: Ed and he fled to bautu instead of New York he could not have been clanned by England under
any
Extradition Treaty with chinos. Iv
converse of
the put
case, if our client in etwis case had bar residing in London instead of in
in Wongking at the time the blinese' official di Loi applied for his arrest, could he have been clanned from England
china under Extradition Treaty? We think where cannot be the slightest doubt that he could not
Having
вод
cry
G