1
1367.
luch
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
Thimic.O. 885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
No. 456.
(HoNG KONG.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
MY LORD,
Lincoln's Inn, February 7, 1867. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Sir Frederic Rogers' letter of the 11th December last, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to request that we would favour you with our opinion on the following questions :-that The prevalence of piracy on the coasts and in the neighbourhood of Hong Kong had been already under our notice as a serious evil, and that it was desirable to maintain an armed vessel under the control of the Governor of the Colony, for the police of the port to secure that the bays of the island are not allowed to become shelter for pirates, to pursue and capture offenders within British waters, and it may be occasionally to take part with vessels of the Royal Navy in the punishment of piracy in the neigh- bouring seas; but that
It was obvious that the efficiency of such a vessel, even for purely Colonial purposes, would be most seriously abridged if she was unable to pursue a flying pirate beyond the three-mile line, and compelled to show that every particular capture was effected within this, not always very definite, line; that
This inconvenience would be avoided if the vessel were commissioned by the Lords of the Admiralty, and possessed the character of an ordinary vessel of the Royal Navy, as in that case it would have on the high seas all the powers as against British subjects and persons offending against the law of nations which that law or imperial authority can give; but to this course there are objections which it was needless to specify, and which for the present purpose must be considered conclusive.
Sir Frederic Rogers was pleased also to say that your Lordship was desirous of learning to what extent an armed vessel thus maintained by the Colonial Government for the purposes of water police, but not commissioned by the Lords of the Admiralty, has by law the power, or can be lawfully invested with the power, to exercise beyond these Colonial waters-(1) those powers which a Colonial police vessel could exercise within these waters; (2) those powers which a vessel of the Royal Navy could exercise on the high seas; and that these general questions appear to resolve themselves into the following, viz. :-Whether such a vessel as Sir Frederic Rogers described can beyond the limits of Colonial waters seize and bring into the Colony for trial before Colonial courts-
1. British subjects or vessels concerned within the Colony in offences against British (i.e., Colonial) law.
2. British subjects or vessels concerned beyond the Colony in offences against the law of nations (say, piracy) or the laws of the British Empire (say, in a slave trade), such offences being triable by some court within the Colony.
3. Foreign persons or vessels concerned within the Colony in offences against Colonial
law.
4. Foreign persons or vessels concerned in or out of the Colony in offences against the law of nations.
Sir Frederic Rogers was pleased also to say that your Lordship would also desire to know (5) whether the legality of any capture made beyond Colonial jurisdiction will be affected by the circumstance that the pursuit was commenced within that jurisdiction.
6. Whether the supposed vessel can lawfully aid ships of the Royal Navy in the capture of pirates generally; and
7. Supposing that the Governor cannot under his existing commission (of which a copy was enclosed) empower a Colonial armed police vessel to exercise any of the powers above described, your Lordship wished to know by what instrument (if any) you could be enabled to confer such powers
Sir Frederic Rogers was further pleased to enclose an extract from a commission issued in the year 1817 to Lord Combormere, as Governor of Barbados, and to say that modern commissions do not contain any such clause.
0 10978.-100. 25.-5/8;.
2