10503.
should be thought necessary or desirable to issue a commission Her Majesty's signature would have to be obtained before that date.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken the questions submitted to us into our consideration, and have the honour to
Report
That we assume that the proclamation issued in 1868 by Sir Philip Wodehouse was duly authorised by the Queen and recognised by his creation as Governor or in some like manner, so that Basutoland has been duly and according to precedent added to the dominions of the Queen as in the cases of the Penguin Islands, and Waterboer's country which have been lately before us.
If this be so the question simply is in what way this territory already British should he annexed to a particular British Colony.
It seems to us that the Act of the Cape Parliament having been passed with the Governor's assent and concurrence if the Act is now reserved for the special assent of the Queen, as suggested by Sir H. Barkly, all will have been done which constitutional principle requires should be done. Indeed, assuming Sir Philip Wodehouse to have been duly authorised the case will substantially resemble the case of Waterboer's country on which your Lordship was pleased to consult us in May last. The procla mation of the Queen's authority will have been made by the Governor and the annexation to the Colony will have been made by the Colonial Legislature with the assent of the Crown. That an interval of some years has elapsed between these two proceedings instead of their being, as in the case of Waterboer's country, contem- poraneous does not seem to us to make any difference in principle.
We are, &c. (Signed)
The Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley.
R. P. COLLIER. J. D. COLERIDGE,
MY LORD,
No. 732. (Hong KoNG.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Herbert's
Temple, October 26, 1871. letter of the 16th instant, stating-
1st. That he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the Despatch from the officer administering the government of Hong Kong, respecting No. 121,
copy of a the case of a Chinaman named "Chen-ssu," who has been sentenced in Hong Kong 7 Aug. 1871 under section 50 of the Hong Kong Ordinance No. 4 of 1865, a copy of which was Ordinance annexed for our information, to nine months' imprisonment for forcible detention No. 4 of within the Colony of three Chinese women with intent to sell them.
1865.
Ordinance *
2nd. That the Chinese Government having applied for the rendition of the prisoner No. 2 of to them, after his sentence shall have expired, on the ground that the abduction of 1850. those girls took place in Chinese territory, Mr. Herbert was to request us to take Treaty of those papers into our consideration and favour your Lordship with our opinion on the question whether that prisoner might, after the expiration of his sentence, be properly surrendered to the Chinese authorities.
3rd. That Mr. Herbert was also to annex, for convenience of reference, a copy of the Hong Kong Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, together with a copy of the Treaty of Tientsin.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken the papers into our consideration, and have the honour to
Report
That we are of opinion that the crime for which the Chinese subject named Chen-ssu has been punished under section 50 of the Hong Kong Ordinance No. 4 of 1865 is not identical with the offence for which his extradition is claimed under the Treaty of Tientsin, and that he may accordingly, after the expiration of his sentence, be properly surrendered to the Chinese authorities.
We have, &c. (Signed)
The Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley.
R. P. COLLIER. J. D. COLERIDGE. TRAVERS TWISS.
Tien-tein.
• 16976.-710. 25.-5/86.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
PLLC.O. 885
11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
ه ای طلب می کند و این امین در مونده به