CO885-(10-11) — Page 452

11894.

No. 370.

(Hong Kong.)

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

19

Reference :-

C.O. 885

10 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

MY LORD,

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

Lincoln's Inn, November 25, 1865. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Hammond's letter of the 8th instant, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to request our early attention to the correspondence enclosed.

Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that it had originated in the execution by a cruel death of a Chinese subject whose extradition as a pirate was demanded of and granted by the Governor of Hong Kong; and in a previous instruction given by Mr. Secretary Cardwell, though not received at the time, prohibiting the surrender of pirates except under an assurance that they would not be dealt with in a manner revolting to humanity.

Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that Her Majesty's Government are as yet imperfectly informed in regard to the case of the surrendered pirate. But that when the reports which have been asked for have been received from the Acting Governor of Hong Kong, and from Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, they would be referred to us. But that in the meanwhile there are other questions on which your Lordship desired to have our opinion.

The question of the claim of the Acting Governor of Hong Kong to correspond directly with the local authorities at Canton has been disposed of by Mr. Secretary Cardwell's instruction prohibiting that practice.

The material questions arise under the 16th and 21st Articles of the Treaty of Tientsin.

The first of these articles is clearly limited to the trial and punishment by their own authorities of Chinese subjects who are charged with having committed crimes within the dominions of the Emperor of China.

The main difficulty arises under the 21st Article, which provides for the general surrender of Chinese criminals charged with offences committed in China for whom a demand has been made and supported by evidence on the British Colonial authorities. appears that there are certain crimes punishable in China by a lingering and cruel death. Among these is the crime of piracy.

It

s

In the year 1855 a question arose as to the disposal of pirates captured by British N.B.- naval forces on the coast of China. That question was at the time considered by there the legal authorities, in accordance with whose opinion Her Majesty's naval officers have Tien-tsin. since been instructed, while delivering up to the Chinese authorities pirates captured R.P. within Chinese jurisdiction to make "an express stipulation with the said authorities that the pirates receive a fair trial, and are not subjected to torture or any punish- "ment repugnant to the usages of civilised nations."

Treaty

of

Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that we should see by his letters to the Colonial Office of the 2nd and 8th instant, and by your Lordship's instruction to Sir R. Alcock, of which copies were enclosed, the course that pending a final decision it is proposed to follow to guard against a recurrence of a similar result of extradition as that which has recently occurred,

But that the point which he was now specifically to submit for our consideration is whether, as a Christian power, Great Britain would not be entitled to insist on the renunciation by the Chinese Government in some form or other of the infliction of cruelties repugnant to humanity on Chinese criminals placed at the disposal of the local authorities, and, failing to obtain this, to refuse altogether to give effect to the 21st Article of the Treaty of Tientsin.

Mr. Hammond was also pleased to state that we should observe that much incon- venience is felt from the omission in the treaty of any reciprocal provision for the surrender of persons whether Chinese or others who, having committed crimes in Hong Kong, have sought refuge in the Chinese dominions. The Chinese authorities indeed, while claiming to try fugitives, subjects of China, who, having committed crimes in Hong Kong, have sought an asylum in China, refuse to give them up for trial in Hong Kong. But that it is not quite clear whether this refusal extends to the Chinese subjects of the British Crown whom the Chinese Government have of course no right to claim to deal with as subjects of the Emperor.

o 10278.-86. 25.-2/86.