CO885-(11-13) — Page 371

PUBLIC

RECORD OFFICE

3

[ ‛「 ;། །」

CO.

Reference :-

885

12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

2

of the Law Officers' report of the 12th October 1368, your Lordship would be glad to be furnished with our opinion upon the provisions of the Bill, and that he was to submit the following questions:-

1. Whether the answer which your Lordship proposed to send respecting the 2nd

and 3rd sections of the Bill was proper?

2. Whether the jurisdiction of the Admiralty extended to acts of piracy committed by Chinese upon Chinese extra fauces terræ, and beyond the Colonial waters but within three miles of Chinese territory, so that the perpetrators were justiciable in the Supreme Court of Hong Kong under the Act 12th and 13th Vict. cap. 96 ? 3. Whether the jurisdiction of the Admiralty extended to acts of piracy committed

in such localities by foreigners other than Chinese?

4. Whether it was competent to the Colonial Legislature to pass the proposed 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th clauses of that Bill; and if so, whether those sections or any of them might legally be enforced in respect of piracies which were proved to have been committed by Chinese or other foreigners extra fauces terræ and outside of Colonial waters, and (a) within three miles of Chinese territory, (b) beyond that`limit?

And that your Lordship would be obliged by any observations which it might occur to us to offer on the subject generally.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

That-

Report

1. The answer which Lord Carnarvon proposes to send respecting the 2nd and 3rd sections of the Bill is proper.

2. The jurisdiction of the Admiralty extends to acts of piracy jure gentium committed by Chinese upon Chinese extra fauces terræ, and beyond the Colonial waters but within three miles of Chinese territory, so that the perpetrators are justiciable in (the) Supreme Court of Hong Kong, under the Act 12th and 13th Vict. cap. 96.

3. The jurisdiction of the Admiralty extends to acts of piracy jure gentium committed in such localities by foreigners other than Chinese.

4. It is competent to the Colonial Legislature to pass the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th clauses of the Bill. These clauses will make the setting forth, aiding, trading with, and receiving pirates, &c., &c., crimes punishable as prescribed, although the acts of piracy, &c., may have been committed by Chinese or other foreigners extra fauces terræ and outside of Colonial waters; and either

(a) Within three miles of Chinese territory, or (b) Beyond that limit.

The acts made criminal by the clauses in question must, however, in order that Colonial Courts may have jurisdiction, have been committed within their jurisdiction.

We may further remark that the Supreme Court seems to us (even on the assumption that the rules of international law ought to be strictly observed in dealing with the Chinese) to have been in error in conceiving that they had no jurisdiction to try acts of piracy jure gentium committed within three miles of the Chinese coast. Indepen- dently of the decision in Reg. v. Keyn (2 Ex. D. 63), the Admiralty has jurisdiction to try all acts of piracy jure gentium. These acts may be committed on any part of the high seas, which term, at any rate, includes all the open ocean extra fauces terræ and beyond low-water mark.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&c.

We have, &c.,

(Signed)

JOHN HOLKER. HARDINGE S. GIFFARD.

5922.

MY LORD,

No. 137.

(WESTERN AUSTRALIA.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Malcolm's

Temple, 18th May 1877. letter of the 30th of April ultimo, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us a copy of a despatch from the Governor of West Australia, in reference to a question which had been raised in the Colony by Assistant Commissary-General Thompson, who claimed, under the provisions of the Colonial Customs Ordinance at present in force, to be exempted from the payment of duty on liquors imported or purchased for his own consumption; and to request that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion whether, in the circumstances stated, Mr. Thompson was entitled to the benefit of this exemption by the terms of the Local Ordinance 24 Vict., No. 5.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

Report

That in our opinion Assistant Commissary-General Thompson is not entitled to be exempt from the payment of duty on liquors imported or purchased for his own consumption.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&o.

&o.

بر

&o.

(Signed)

We have, &c.,

JOHN HOLKER. HARDINGE S. GIFFARD.

{

▲ 19916.-183. 25.-12/84.

6191.