CO885-(10-11) — Page 139

PUBLIC RECORD

OFFICE

19

C.O.

Reference :-

· 885

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

aware of what had happened in connexion with the "Ville d'Agen's" proceedings, he promptly intervened and applied to the authorities of Hong Kong on the subject, and upon full inquiries was so satisfied of the guilt of the master and crew of the "Ville d'Agen" that they were on his requisition delivered up to him to be sent to France for due punishment; but the British and French authorities at Canton and the British authorities at Hong Kong had made the fullest inquiries into the case and had procured satisfactory evidence of the entire truth of the above facts. That under such circum- stances they had rightfully interferred at the request of the French Commandant to prevent the coolies thus brought under the French flag within British jurisdiction from being detained therein against their will, and that judicial proceedings Ind been instituted against Pastor and Helquero at Hong Kong, in respect of their conduct in wrongfully bringing into, and keeping them in custody, within British jurisdiction.

That, notwithstanding the acquittal of Pastor and Helquero on technical grounds, on this charge the Chinese Governor of the province within which the coolies had been seized, had made a formal application to the Governor of Hong Kong for the surrender of those persons to him, upon which after a full argument the Chief Justice had held them to bail and remitted the case to England; and that it was only on a fuller consideration of the question here that the conclusion has been arrived at, that in strictness of law the Chinese application cannot be complied with. That Her Majesty's Government is convinced that the Government of Peru will, upon further information, take the same view of the substantial merits of the case which that of Her Majesty has taken, in which it is confirmed by the conduct adopted by the chief French officer on the spot, and will see that a series of gross crimes and wrongs has been committed by the Peruvians in question and their agents under cover of the French flag, and by availing themselves of the use of a British port both against the coolies and the Chinese Govern- That they began their criminal enterprise by fitting out the ship within British jurisdiction, into which they afterwards brought the Chinese subjects whom they had seized in China, thus seriously compromising the relations of China and Great Britain, and that if, for technical reasons, it has not been found possible to punish them, or to deal with them (as the master and crew of the French vessel chartered by them have been dealt with) by remitting them for punishment to their own Governinent, this is only to be regretted.

ment.

It will be for your Lordship to consider whether or not to transmit to the l'eruvian Minister any of the evidence contained in the papers.

We observe that in the letter of Sir Frederic Rogers to Mr. Hammond of 31st December 1861, the question is raised whether the Hong Kong authorities were justified, according to English law, in giving up to the French Commandant the master of the French ship "Ville d'Agen." We are of opinion that this question must be answered negatively. Internationally, as between France and England, no complaint can of course be made, but the extradition could, according to our law, be justified only under the statute embodying and enforcing the treaty with France for extradition, and this treaty (1843) and the statute enforcing it (see 6 & 7 Vict. c. 75.) relate to such offences only us are committed" within the territories and jurisdiction" of France.

(Signed) J. D. HARDING.

WM. ATHERTON. ROUNDELL PALMER.

The Earl Russell.

2115.

No. 107.

(NEW ZEALAND.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Temple, February 26, 1862. MY LORD DUKE,

WE were honoured with your Grace's commands, signified in Sir Frederic. Rogers' letter of the 28th January last, in which he stated that with reference to the Law Officers' report of the 21st of June last, he was directed by your Grace to transmit to us a copy of a Despatch from Colonel Grove Browne, together with a memorandum drawn up by his responsible advisers, respecting the Act of the New Zealand Legislature "to simplify the law relating to the transfer of landed property "in New Zealand," and to request that we would inform your Grace whether the explanations now supplied in Colonel Grove Browne's Despatch and its enclosures were sufficient to remove the objections stated in such report to some of the provisions of the Bill, and if so, whether the Act in question, together with the subsequent Acta, of which copies were annexed, entitled respectively, "An Act for giving effect to "regulations under the Land Registry Act of 1860, and for amending the said Act," and "An Act for correcting surveys of land," might be left to their operation. In obedience to your Grace's commands we have taken this matter into considera- tion, and have the honour to

Report

That the first point to which attention was directed by the former Report of the Law Officers was the necessity of providing adequate safeguards and securities, with a view to ensure notice to all persons interested of any application to register a title; as to which it was observed that the opinion to be formed of the justness and reasonableness of the proposed measure would depend in a great degree on the rules of procedure which might be made by the Governor in Council under the powers of the proposed Act, and which were not then before the Law Officers.

These rules of procedure, confirmed by the "Land Registry Amendment Act, 1861," are now before us. By the 47th Rule it is provided that “within one month after receipt of an application to register a title to land, the district registrar shall cause a notice to be inserted in some local newspaper circulated in the district, and shall "continue such advertisement three times consecutively in such newspaper."

M

11

The notice (which is the only safeguard or security taken for non-apparent claims or titles) is to state the name, &c. of the applicant, is to give "a short description of the land, specifying the estimated contents, the section, parish, district, county, "&o. where situate," and is to appoint a day for all parties interested to lodge their claims and evidence in support thereof, and to attend personally or by attorney at a specified time and place for the purpose of establishing their rights. The time to be fixed for the appearance of parties is thus left absolutely and without limit to the discretion of the district registrar; if they do not appear at the time appointed they will be liable to be absolutely concluded by the entry of the name of the applicant upon the register, which entry, under the 33rd section of the Land Registry Act, will give the person registered (unless he obtains the registry by fraud) an indefeasible title in fee simple, free from all charges and titles whatsoever which are not entered or saved by reservation on the face of the register.

It is impossible not to perceive the serious danger to which persons absent from the Colony, or living in the Colony, but at a distance from the district where the land is situate, may be exposed under such a mode of procedure. The sole medium of notice is an advertisement in three successive numbers of a local newspaper circulating in the district, and the interval between the notice and the entry of the applicant's name on the register may be indefinitely short. The difficulty, therefore, which was felt by the Law Officers on this point in June 1861 is not at all removed by the regulations which have hitherto been made.

The remarks upon this subject of the Registrar General of New Zealand in paragraph 20 of his able Report dated the 3rd May 1861, and of the Colonial

0 16978.-415. 25.-9/86.

• No. 68.