510
Estradition Act, 1870 sec. 15) could be admitted as evidence.
The difficulty would be preventing the abuse of this concession by Chinese subordinate officers.
There would be a popular suspicion that some minor official in China wrote out a statement to suit the case and presented it to some kneeling, ignorant deponent, who made his mark to it without daring to question the accuracy of anything therein contained lest he should be punished in respect to the official.
12.
It seemed to me, however, that it might be provided that the Deposition (which need not be taken in the presence of the accused) must be taken in the presence of the British Consul and a proper certificate appended. Such certificate might be required to specify that the Deposition was taken in his presence and read over to the Deponent and he appeared to fully understand the contents and that, to the best of his (the Consul's) belief, no compulsion had been used.
The advantage of this change would be that the Consul would have, at least, some knowledge of the difference between evidence and mere reports and hearsay and village talk. If this change were permitted a short ordinance supplementary to 26 of 1889 would be required.
Personally I should feel inclined to allow such deposition to be admitted in the cases of Murder, Manslaughter, Burglary and house-breaking, Robbery with violence and Piracy; at all events, where the accused had not been resident in the Colony for more than six months on the date of the Requisition.
With regard to the various matters mentioned in the Memorandum,