i
J.
.3
4
P
165
have there pointed out, namely, that it is undoubtedly the fact that but forthe decisions of the Chief Justice we should have been appointed Solicitors to the Chinese Governments in con- nection with Extradition Cases, and that it is because of those decisions which to say the least are open to question that you (acting through the Government of Hongkong) possess the power (which would otherwise vest in the Chinese Govern- ment) of appointing the Solicitor who shall conduct such cases. With reference to the second paragraph of the Colonial Secretary's letter to us of the 16th inst. above referred to,we would respectfully submit that but for the decisions of the Chief Justice in regard to the "locus standi" of the Chinese Government in Extradition Cases (which decisions as we have pointed out in our letters to the Colonial Secretary, Hongkong, are not only open to question but are in the opinion of the Attorney General, Mr.Rees-Davies, actually erroneous) that "locus standi" would undoubtedly he recognised by the Hongkong Government in Extradition Cases, and we would further respect- fully submit that the question of such "locus standi" both in regard to the Chinese Government and in regard to ourselves does not partake of the nature of a diplomatic matter and that therefore our failure to obtain the appointment as Solicitors
to the Chinese Government in connection with Extradition Cases
must be due solely to the fact of the decisions of the Chief
Justice above alluded to.
In conclusion therefore we would respectfully add that in
requesting you to re-consider the directions given by you to
His Excellency the Governor of Hongkong to the effect stated in
the opening paragraph of the letter of the Colonial Secretary
to ourselves under date the 16th inst., we are merely askingfor
bare justice which we venture to hope you will not deny to us.
Rt.Hon.Lewis Vernon Harcourt,
We are,
Sir, H.M.Principal Secretary
of State for the Colonies.
Your obedient servants,
Levens Marston