CO129-123 - Sir MacDonnell - 1867 [7] — Page 125

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

I confess to be entirely at a loss myself to understand wherein the difficulty lies? The mere resorting to a Treaty Port renders her strictness subject to confiscation by the Chinese Government under the 47th article of the Treaty. Also British vessels unlawfully entering a port and carrying on clandestine trade along the coasts of China are equally liable to this penalty. If a vessel is found in a port not a Treaty Port, the onus of proving that she is there not unlawfully rests upon her, and her hesitation in doing so in this case has led to an inference of unlawful intent.

I have no doubt at all that the infliction of the penalty for a violation of this section is within the competence of the Chinese government; otherwise, the confiscation would not be the act of the Chinese government (as is expressly provided by the Treaty) but the act of the Court of whatever nationality it might be, before which the offence was proved and by which the penalty was decreed. The Consuls were present at the investigation on the part of the Chinese Authorities and in no way necessary to legalize their acts. But even with a willingness to deal fairly with a Chinese Subject when he owned a vessel which had been permitted to fly our Flag by the Governor of...

Edit History

2026-05-19 18:49:29 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
I confess to be entirely at a loss myself to understand wherein the difficulty lies? The mere resorting to a Treaty Port renders her strictness subject to confiscation by the Chinese Government under the 47th article of the Treaty. Also British vessels unlawfully entering a port and carrying on clandestine trade along the coasts of China are equally liable to this penalty. If a vessel is found in a port not a Treaty Port, the onus of proving that she is there not unlawfully rests upon her, and her hesitation in doing so in this case has led to an inference of unlawful intent. I have no doubt at all that the infliction of the penalty for a violation of this section is within the competence of the Chinese government; otherwise, the confiscation would not be the act of the Chinese government (as is expressly provided by the Treaty) but the act of the Court of whatever nationality it might be, before which the offence was proved and by which the penalty was decreed. The Consuls were present at the investigation on the part of the Chinese Authorities and in no way necessary to legalize their acts. But even with a willingness to deal fairly with a Chinese Subject when he owned a vessel which had been permitted to fly our Flag by the Governor of...
Baseline (Original)
123 aw entirely at a los myself J confess to understand wherein the difficulty lies? The mere resorting to ستند to a fact of a a Mon British Nepel Treaty Sort renders her strictnes subject to confiscation by the Chinese Government under the 4.7" article of the Treaty. Also of British vessels unlawfully enter a mon. carry on clandestine trade carry الاسم Treaty Sort or liable the coasts along. equally, to this penalty, of China, they are equally t vepel is found if a repel in a mon. Treaty of proving that she is there and Sort the onus of proving not unlawfully resto upon her hesitation in in this case. I have an for an unlawful and Owners and this I have mo saying they entirely failed to to mo doubt at all that the infliction of the penalty for of the Treaty a violation of this section is within the competence of the Chinese govemment otherwise the confiscation would not be the act of the bhinese govemment (as is expreply provided by the Treaty) but the act of the lasurt of whatever nationality it might be, lufore which the Offence which the penalty presence concefsion was proved and by was decreed. The Consuls at the investigation om was a the part of the Chinese Authorities and in no way necessary legalize their acts. But it evidence of their even with a owned a to was aw to deal fairly willingnes to deal a Chinese Subject when he vepeel which had been permitted to fly our Flag by the Governor of a
2026-05-19 18:49:29 · Baseline
View content

123

aw

entirely at a los myself

J

confess to understand wherein the difficulty

lies? The mere resorting to

ستند

to a

fact of a

a Mon

British Nepel

Treaty Sort

renders

her

• strictnes subject to confiscation by the Chinese Government under the 4.7" article of the Treaty. Also of British vessels unlawfully

enter

a mon.

carry on clandestine trade

carry

الاسم

Treaty Sort or

liable

the coasts

along. equally, to this penalty,

of China, they are equally t

vepel is found

if a repel

in a mon.

Treaty

of proving that she is there

and

Sort the onus of proving

not

unlawfully

resto

upon

her

hesitation in

in this case.

I have

an

for an unlawful and

Owners

and this I have

mo

saying they entirely failed to to

mo

doubt at all that the infliction

of the

penalty for

of the Treaty

a violation of this section is within the competence of

the Chinese govemment otherwise the

confiscation would not be the act of the bhinese govemment (as is expreply provided by the Treaty) but the act of the lasurt of whatever nationality it might be, lufore

which the

Offence

which the penalty

presence

concefsion

was

proved and

by

was decreed. The Consuls

at the investigation

om

was

a

the part of the Chinese

Authorities and in no

way necessary

legalize their acts. But it evidence of their

even with a

owned a

to

was aw

to deal fairly

willingnes to deal

a Chinese Subject when he vepeel which had been permitted

to fly our Flag by the Governor of

a

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.