CO885-(13-15) — Page 355

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

זזז

Reference :-

C.O. 885

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

L... to C.O.

1 Jan. 1861.

L.O. to C.O.

18 Dec. 1862.

L.O. to C.O.

43 Dec. 1862.

LU. to C.O.

98 Oct. 1863.

2

That Mr. Bramaton was, at the same time, to transmit four reports by former Law Officers, as noted in the margin; and, with reference to the first of such reports, to state that the commission to the Governor did not contain express words vesting in him the prerogative right of endorsing petitions of right.

That copies of the Letters Patent constituting the office of Governor, of the Royal Instructions now in force, and of the commission appointing the Earl of Kintore to be Governor were enclosed for reference; and that Mr. Bramston was to request us to favour your Lordship with our opinion-

1. Whether you would have been justified in delaying the reference of this case to us until you had communicated again with the Colony as desired by the Colonial Ministers.

2. If so, whether that course should be taken now?

3. If not, whether the petitions in question were in proper form, and raise questions proper for decision on a petition of right?

4. If the petitions were not correct in form, what were the defects, and would it be requisite for your Lordship to return them to the Colony for amendment?

That Mr. Bramston was also to ask us to be good enough to advise your Lordship generally in the matter as to the manner in which the Queen's fiat was to be obtained, if that duty belonged to your Lordship; and, further, as to the course which the Colonial Office would have to take subsequently, in the event of Her Majesty's fiat being obtained.

We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your Lord- ship's commands, have the honour to

That in our opinion-

Report-

1 and 2. Your Lordship would not have been justified in delaying the reference of this case to us until you had communicated again with the Colony, and ought not now to delay acting upon this opinion.

3. That the petitions are in proper form, and raise questions proper for decision on a petition of right.

4. That it will not be necessary for your Lordship to return the petitions to the Colony for amendment.

5. That Her Majesty's fiat is to be obtained by one of the Principal Secretaries of State. It should run "Let right be done in the Supreme Court of South Australia."

It would seem to be convenient that your Lordship, as Colonial Secretary, should take Her Majesty's pleasure as to the fiat-advising her thereon. Afterwards your Lordship will have no further duty in the matter, the petitions being returned to the petitioners.

The Most Hon.

The Marquess of Ripon, K.G.,

&c. &c. &c.

We have, &c. (Signed) C. RUSSELL.

JOHN RIGBY.

5313.

No. 52A.

(HoNG KONG.)

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

MY LORD,

Royal Courts Justice, Februry 14, 1894. We were honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Sir Thomas Sanderson's letter of the 18th November last stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the papers noted in the accompanying list relating to a question to which your attention had been called by Her Majesty's Minister at Pekin in regard to the overcrowding of vessels engaged in the Chinese passenger traffic between Chefoo and Chinese and Russian Manchuria.

That the position of the question, so far as British vessels were interested in it, was fully stated in Mr. O'Conor's Despatch (No. 171) of the 29th July 1893.

That our attention was especially invited to the despatch on the subject addressed by Mr. Allen, the British Consul at Chefoo, to the Government of Hong Kong on the 27th of June, in which he explained the grounds which, in his opinion, necessitated the adoption of effective measures in order to provide against the risks of overcrowding in British vessels conveying passengers between Chefoo and the districts above referred

to.

That Mr. Allen appeared to have consulted the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at Shanghai whether he should put in force the regulations of the Hong Kong Ordinances, No. 5 of 1874 and No. 1 of 1889, in the case of steamers clearing from Chefoo to Vladivostock with more than 20 Chinese passengers.

That eventually a proclamation was issued by the Hong Kong Government under Section 3 of the Chinese Passengers Act of 1855, whereby obligations were imposed on British ships so employed as to additional accommodation, fees, &c., such as are not entailed in the case of shorter voyages.

That that proclamation was, however, subsequently withdrawn on the ground of the disadvantages entailed thereby on British shipping, so long as the vessels of other Treaty Powers were not subjected to similar regulations for the safety of passengers.

That the Board of Trade, to whom the correspondence had been referred, had expressed the opinion that it was desirable that effective measures should be taken to prevent overcrowding as far as British vessels engaged in the Chinese passenger traffic between Chefoo and Chinese and Russian Manchuria were concerned, but that power to interfere with British ships in such a matter should not be entrusted to a Consular Officer unless he was in a position to avail himself of the requisite technical advice and assistance.

That Sir Thomas Sanderson was to request that we would take the papers into our consideration, and that we would favour your Lordship with our views as to the form which such restrictive measures should take. That your Lordship was of opinion that,

in any event, before such measures were enforced against British subjects and ships it would be necessary that Her Majesty's Government should procure the concurrence

of other Maritime Powers to similar restrictions being applied in respect of their nationals and vessels respectively.

That your Lordship also desired to be favoured with any general observations we might have to offer on the subject.

We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your Lord- ship's commands, have the honour to

Report-

That in our opinion any measures for the regulation of the passenger traffic in British vessels between Chefoo and Vladivostock should be in the form of a special Ordinance of the Legislature of Hong Kong to be passed, under section 2 of the Chinese Passengers Act 1855, after consultation with, and obtaining the concurrence of, other Maritime Powers as regards their ships; and to be duly proclaimed as mentioned in the said second section.

o 79871.-11.

95.-4/94.