CO885-(13-15) — Page 637

18528.

No. 221.

(Host KoN.)

SIR,

LAW OFFICERS TO COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice, July 17th, 1899.

We were honoured with your commands signified in Mr. Lucas's letter of the 13th instant stating that he was directed by you to transmit for our consideration a copy of a telegram from the Governor of Hong Kong respecting the conviction and sentence to

death of two Chinamen.

That the crime of which those men were convicted was committed in the territory recently acquired from China, on a Lease for 99 years, under the Convention of the 9th of June, 1898, which had been declared by the Örder in Council of the 20th October. 1898, to be part and parcel of the Colony of Hong Kong.

That the new territory was formally taken over by the Governor of Hong Kong on the 16th April. That the murder was understood to have been committed on the 17th April, and the laws of Hong Kong were brought into force in the new territory from that day by Proclamation, under Cause 3 of the Order in Council.

That it appeared from the telegram that it was contended on behalf of the prisoners that under the terms of the Convention Her Majesty the Queen had no power to introduce the laws of Hong Kong in the territory thereby ceded to Her, and that consequently the Order in Council of the 20th October last, and the Proclamation issued under it were invalid, and that Chinese law was still in force in that territory.

That in view of our Report of the 17th October last,* that the Draft Order in Council as amended and initialled by us was sufficient and proper for the purpose proposed, it appeared to you that the contention of the Counsel for the prisoners could not be sustained, but that you would be glad to be favoured with our opinion on the subject at the earliest possible date.

That Mr. Lucas was to enclose to us in his letter copies of the Convention, the Order in Commeil, the Despatch transmitting it to the Governor, and of our Report of the 17th October last. A copy of the Governor's Proclamation was also enclosed.

That Mr. Lucas was to request us to take these papers into our consideration and to advise you

(1.) Whether the contention now put forward on behalf of the Chinamen who had been convicted of murder within these territories was justified in law, and if grounds?

SO, ón what

(2.) Generally. In obedience to your commands we have taken the papers into our consideration, and have the honour to

Report-

(1.) That in our opinion the contention now put forward on behalf of the China- men who have been convicted of murder within these territories is not justified in law. The argument based on the word jurisdiction is not well founded, but apart from that, the territory leased became British territory and Her Majesty was at liberty to provide that the law of Hong Kong should apply therein. We understand that no question arises as to the jurisdiction of the Chinese Officials within the City of Kowloon.

(2.) We have nothing to add.

The Right Honourable J. Chamberlain, M,P.,

&c.,

&c.,

&c.

• No. 197A.

3358-25-799

Wt 439 D&S

ง

We have, &c.,

RICHARD E. WEBSTER. ROBERT B, FINLAY,

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

885

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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