70
Consulate works of reference such as "Hertslet's Commercial
Treaties".
3.
Section 6 of the ordinance states that "When-
ever a requisition for the surrender of a fugitive criminal who is in or suspected of being in the Colony is made to the Governor by some officer of the Chinese Government, the Governor may, by order under his hand and seal, signify to a Magistrate that such requisition has been made, and require him to issue his warrant for the apprehension of the fugitive criminal". From this it would appear that it is not for the magistrate but for the Governor to decide, for the purposes of this ordinance, who are the Chinese Government. There is
nothing in the ordinance which allows the magistrate to question the Governor's ruling on this point, and the Governor's sole responsibility in this connection is further emphasized in Section 12, which provides for the surrender of the criminal "to such person as the Governor considers to
be authorized to receive him on behalf of the Chinese
authorities". This, moreover, is only reasonable, as in the
absence of any legal definition of the term "Chinese Government", the question remains a political and diplomatic one, which it is not within the competence of a judicial
officer to decide.
4.
If then, as I suggest, the Governor is
entrusted by the ordinance with the duty of deciding what
authority is entitled to requisition for the surrender of a fugitive criminal, it will be impossible for the defending counsel to raise the point in Court. The magistrate would
refer him to the Governor's order, from which there is no
appeal in law.
5.
1
But if I am wrong, and it is the Court which
must decide what is meant by the words "Chinese Government"
in
Page 70Page 71