80
19.
17.
I am therefore happy to be able to dispose so effectually of this imputation of irregularity in the proceedings and of Kwok-a-Chuong's consciousness of a "weak case", though I cannot but express my great surprise and regret under such circumstances that an allegation like Kwok-a-Cheong's should have been advanced on such untenable grounds by Sir Rutherford Alcock who had all the papers before him. I can only suppose that he had not sufficiently studied their contents.
18. On the other hand, it is most satisfactory to find that Sir Rutherford Alcock has given a very clear and accurate statement of the law affecting the case, though herein he differs entirely from Consul Robertson, who committed the original mistake, which has led to all this complication of supposing the presence of the "Prince Albert" in non-treaty Port to be conclusive of confiscation which admitted of no explanation. Sir Rutherford Alcock rightly maintains that the illegality of the act of resort and entrance of the vessel into a non-treaty Port is liable to be rebutted by proving satisfactorily to the Chinese Government that the vessel was there by no fault of her own, such as being brought there by stress of weather, legitimate fear of Pirates or other circumstances which rendered...
80
19.
17.
I am iturefore happy to be able to dispose so effecturally of this I inpurtation of inegularity in the proceedings
and of Kwose-a · Chuongs" " consciousness of
a
wease case", though I cannot but express
my great surprise and re
under such circumstances
regrat
aw
chat
allegation dine Kwok a cheong
so calculated to prejudice Rrok-as
should have been advanced on such
on.
Rutherford
unturable grounds by Sie Rustin ford Alcees who had all the papers before
only suppose that he had
him. I
can
not sufficiently studied their contents.
18
On ite the hand; it is most
satisfactory to find that Six Rutherford
Alcause has
given a very
clear and
accurate statement of the low affecting.
g
the
case,
though herein he differs entirely
from Consul Robertson, who committed
the
original mistake, which has led to
all there complication of supposing the presence of the "Prince Albus in
non-treaty Pork to be
conclusive
Port to be a final and
of confiscation which
admitted of no explanation. Sir Ruiterford Alcorse rightly maintains stras
the illegality of the act of resort and
entrance
of the vessel inte a
N
non-treaty Port is liable to be rebuitted by proving
satisfactorily to the Chirose Government that the vefood.
there by no fault of
McDo
hee own such as being brought there by strep of weacher, legitimate fear of Pirates
or other ciranistences which rendered
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.