}
Hong Kong 16th June 1911
169
sir,
We have the honour to address you relative to the facta and circumstances set forth below.
On the 12th inst., we were informed in writing by Captain Wu Kwang Taung that His Excellency, the Viceroy of the two Kwang had been pleased to appoint us as legal advisers to the Imperial Chinese Government in connection with the proceed ings in extradition cases instituted in Hong Kong our ap- pointment being restricted to the proceedings in the Police
Court.
Subsequently Capt. Wu informed us that a Warrant had been
applied for and granted and issued against one Lo Nai, and he
requested us to take the necessary steps in the matter.
We accordingly, in connection with Chief petective Inspec
tor Collett, attended before Mr. Hazeland, the First Police
Magistrate, at 10 a.m. on the 14th inst. to apply for a remand
of the case in question.
On our doing so Mr. Hazeland had a conversation with Mr.
Harston in the course of which he intimated that in view of
what he understood to be the decision of the Chief Justice he
(Mr. Hazeland) could not consent to hear Mr. Harston in the matter until he (Mr. Hazeland) had had an opportunity of com-
municating with the Chief Justice.
Mr. Harston intimated that he had perused the case of In
re Wong Ka Cheong, reported on page 1 and the following pages of Part 1 of Volume 5 of the Hong Kong Law Reports, and parti- cularly that portion of the Chief Justice's Judgment set out on pages 7, 8, 9 and 10 and on page 20 of the report in ques- tion, and added that it seemed to him (Mr. Hareton) that inas- much as it was not necessary to the decision of the case in question that the Chief Justice should give any intimation as
-1-
}