2
The situation of this house might easily have been proved, and it is a great pity that evidence on the subject was not furnished; for the want of it enabled the prisoners-one of whom, at all events, seems clearly to have been guilty of a very brutal outrage—to escape altogether.
If Tiekidaugay's house had been shown to be situated within the British territory a conviction for murder might have been obtained; and, if proved to be situated without the jurisdiction, we think the prisoners might on the indiot- ment for murder have been found guilty of the attempt to murder (see 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100. sec. 9)-for murder is the killing with malice aforethought of a person in the Queen's peace; and as, in the case assumed, the injured person died outside the British territory, the offence of murder was not absolutely completed.
Upon the evidence as stated, however, the prisoners were not liable to be convicted either of murder or the attempt. not shown that the death took place within the jurisdiction; and not of the Not of the murder, because it was attempt, because it was not proved that the offence charged in the indictment was not completed, as it was not shown that the death did not occur out of the territory.
With regard to the 24th & 25th Vict. c. 100, we think the Court were quite right in deciding that section 10 of that statute did not apply to the case. 2. We are of opinion that a conviction under the 34th Vict. o. 8. could not have been obtained without some proof on the part of the prosecution that the prisoners were either British subjects, or not the subjects of any civilized power. More- over, we are of opinion that an indictment under the statute ought to contain the special averments referred to by the Court at Sierra Leone.
3. We consider that the prisoners, or one of them, might, under the circumstances stated, have been convicted on an indictment charging an assault with intent to murder or do grievous bodily harm. been supported, although the proof of the situation of the house where the death We think this conviction might have occurred, i.e. whether in or out of the British territory, was left indefinite. 4. We do not think that any amendment of 34 Vict. c. 8. can be suggested.
We have, &c.,
(Signed)
The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,
&c.
&c.
&c.
RICHARD BAGGALLAY. JOHN HOLKER.
7291.
No. 26.
(CANADA.)
LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.
MY LORD,
Lincoln's Inn, 23rd June 1874. We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Lord Tenterden's letter of the 12th instant, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the accompanying draft of a Reciprocity Treaty which had been submitted to the United States Government by Sir E. Thornton and Mr. Brown of Canada, who had been authorised to negotiate on the subject; and that he, Lord Tenterden, was to request that we would take the same into our consideration, and favour your Lordship with our opinion whether the wording of the Article is right and proper, and whether there are any objections in English law to the draft being approved.
Copies of the Treaty of Washington, and of the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854, were Treaty of enclosed for reference if required.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to
Report
That we see no objections in English law to the draft being approved.
Your Lordship is aware of the difference between Her Majesty's Government and the French Government with reference to the rights claimed by French subjects in the so-called French shores of Newfoundland. Should Newfoundland, therefore, be here- after included in the Treaty under Art. XIV., some provision with respect to these rights will be necessary.
1871. See
Hertslet's Treaties,, vol. 9. p. 998.
We do not understand the note of interrogation after the word "port," line 3, It was a Art. 7. In other respects the wording of the Article seems to us right and proper.
The Earl of Derby,
&c.
&c.
We have, &c.,
(Signed)
RICHD. BAGGALLAY. JOHN HOLKER. J. PARKER DEANE.
query in- serted by the decypherer, there being
en error in
the figures.
▲ 19916.-7. 95.-12/84.
|_ | | | / | | | | | | | | | | |||||
ཟྭ། ༄། ། ། །
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
19
C.O.
Reference :-
885
12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO