CO885-(10-11) — Page 29

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O.

885

10 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

3rd. We are of opinion that the Colonial Legislature cannot legally enact an Ordi- nance, such as the 3rd question describes. The powers of such a Legislature are bounded by the limits of the Colony. On the other hand, it is competent to the Imperial Parliament to provide for the punishment of the Queen's subjects for criminal acts wheresoever committed or completed.

His Grace the Duke of Newcastle,

&c.

&o.

&o.

We have, &c. (Signed) RICHARD BETHELL,

WM. ATHERTON.

4078.

MY LORD,

No. 11.

(CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.)

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

Doctors' Commons, March 27, 1860. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Lord Wode- house's letter of the 19th March instant, in which he stated that with reference to our Report of the 5th September ultimo, upon the case of Joseph Taylor, a British subject imprisoned in the gaol of New Bedford, United States, in a mutiny on board the American vessel "Claremont," he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us a letter from the Colonial Office enclosing a copy of a report from the Attorney General of the Cape of Good Hope respecting the steps taken by the Colonial authorities, at the request of the United States Consul, with regard to the mutineers on the above-mentioned vessel being brought by them into Table Bay, and to request that we would take the same into our consideration and report to your Lordship our opinion thereupon.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken these papera into our consideration, and have the honour to

Report

It is stated in the letter of Mr. Porter (the Attorney General for the Cape of Good Hope) that Captain Holmes (the American Consul) was informed that no law existed under which these men (the crew of the ship), considered as offenders against the American law, could be detained in a Colonial prison; but that under the peculiar circumstances the Colonial authorities were prepared to exert a rigour beyond the law in consideration of his appeal as Consul of a friendly Power, and of the expediency as regarded the mercantile marine of all nations of preventing mutinous seamen who place their captain in irons and take possession of the ship from going at large and escaping with impunity. The mutineers were accordingly detained in prison until the "Minnesota" (an American war steamer) came.

The authorities at the Cape and Mr. Porter should be informed that this course of proceeding cannot receive the approbation of Her Majesty's Government.

They have deliberately violated English law, viz., the Cape authorities.

They had

no authority to imprison the men, or to deliver them over as prisoners to thecaptain of the "Minnesota.

We cannot concur in any part of the reasoning of Mr. Porter.

If the master was detained in confinement by the crew whilst the ship was in Table Bay within British jurisdiction, though such confinement was for a few minutes only, an offence was committed within English territory for which the Attorney General might have prosecuted the offenders in the Colonial court according to English law.

As the crime of the men comes under the legal term piracy, the case might have been brought within the Act 6 & 7 Vict. o. 76., for giving effect to the Extradition Treaty between England and the United States, if proper care had been taken to observe the formalities required by that statute, but this does not seem to have been adverted to.

The Lord John Russell,

&c.

&c.

&c.

We have, &c..

(Signed)

J. D. HARDING.

R. BETHELL.

WM. ATHERTON.

0 16278.--3,

25.-2/66.