that it was decider tumit htt 70. said
some thing for this.
70 however no
deference to the Judge neart the Om (11910 (Keieinth) to a b fil
the for power to deport (if legaby empowered)
any bus ordued by the Chere fourt
mas
The deported. Baction nos
I think we to
17 King
taken in
: Sand copy / 22/57/02/09 70/4000 s/by
*
Bt. Kagistat
This paper hitting oleh them,
A to a
to me the them to
comply with antele 3 of the Um C.
some
if 7.0.
It is
very
paned the
R23/10/14.
odd that 70
1520
? Unle
have
shld have
Neiller S.R.2 Rept
k
one without any
Reference to us athenely jone back on the police wh. He had agreed
but, since we have peme with Theven Vorlegislate goine for ok, a thin
forok. order contains the Sairing words "or
I thewall it is effecting, Thervvise + sufficient to give the firs depar tation ander under local law
#
necessary extrateritorial force and But as we have heard nothing
thin
we might perhaps om direction to lose as supposed my marginal addition
Comm Mi
Busty
and Au He
it suds i Wetter of
I vide impar
to this
40005/09
C
པ་རིག་ནས་ཚད་པ 9.
prouid विधु
14
240
Since our letter to F.0. of 21 December 1909
the legislation suggested in paragraph 4 thereof has been passed by Hong Kong. See Deportation Ordinance 1912 sections 5 (3), 7, and 8.
Under these provisions a British subject not belonging to Hong Kong who has served in Hong Kong a sentence imposed by the China Court can be made the subject of a Deportation order and kept in custody until he leaves the Colony, with a penalty of imprison-
ment in case of disobedience.
This does not empower the Governor to "deport such person to the place to which he was ordered by the Court to be deported", but the Governor could issue the Deportation order keep the person in custody until there was a ship sailing to the place in ques- tion and then put him on board with a passage paid out of consular funds.
The F.0. might take as an objection to this course that he would not be in legal (or in any) custody
on board ship and could leave it at an intermediate
port if the ship touched at one.
The question therefore arises can Hong Kong legislate further, as F.0. now request, so as to
provide
|