265
for the surrender of Chinese from Hongkong to China.
There is, however, a reciprocal arrangement for
extradition in the Burmah-Yunnan Frontier Convention
of March 1st, 1894, as there were at the time no British Consular officers in the districts adjoining that
frontier. It was intended to apply to Chinese on
the one side and Burmese on the other.
Neither party is bound by this arrangement to surrender its own nationals, and the Chinese Government would, if a reciprocal Extradition arrangement were at any time negotiated, be entitled to make a reservation as to surrendering Chinese subjects.
Such a reservation would certainly be made use of by them in a case like that which has now arisen.
I am further to state that His Majesty's Government have recently refused to hand over to the Chinese Authorities two criminals who admit having published articles inciting to the murder of the Emperor of China, although the offence has been committed on Chinese territory assigned under agreement for the residence of Europeans.
It would seem therefore to be altogether inconsistent to demand from the Chinese Government the surrender of Chinese subjects who are accused of crime in a British Colony. The reply of the Chinese Government to such an application would be obvious and in Lord Lansdowne's opinion unanswerable.
It may be mentioned that, as a matter of principle, it has, on more than one occasion, been deemed inexpedient to ask for the surrender of a fugitive Criminal in the absence of express Treaty stipulations providing for such a course, and in view of all these considerations, it appears to His Lordship that it would be inopportune for His Majesty's Minister at Pekin to make a representation to the Chinese Government in the sense suggested in your letter.
I am,
Sir,
Your most obedient,
humble Servant,
Charles Hardinge