176
by the Privy Council arose out of the law of Hong Kong and
were of importance to that Colony.
The Foreign Jurisdiction Act under which the Order in Council is authorised seems to contemplate that the case should be dealt with exactly as though the offence had been committed within the Colony to which it is remitted for trial and makes no reservation as regards
expenses.
It appears to Them therefore that the appeal was a matter for the Hong Kong Government, and as instructions were given to the Solicitors to the Crown Agents to the Colonies in regard to it, this view secus to have boon shared by the responsible authorities of the Colony. If any other view had been taken before the appeal was heard and if the case had not been regarded as a Colonial appeal, arrangementa with regard to it should have been made with the concurrence of This Board through the Treasury Solicitor. Their Lordships are therefore not satisfied that the expenses of the appeal can properly be charged to the Imperial
Exchequer.
I m,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
(Sd.) T. L. Heath.
Page 180Page 181