CO129-141 - Public Offices - 1869 — Page 333

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

own laws and Authorities, and by them only. –

In art XV there is no limitation at all, and therefore, the assumed reserve to cases only where crime has been committed in China would seem to have no further application than as a repetition of a minor Clause included in the larger concession, and in confirmation of the first as to the absolute exclusion of territorial jurisdiction. At least I can come to no other Conclusion, and in accordance with this undoubtedly is the practice. This too is the understanding in China, both as regards British and Chinese Authorities. I do not regard it as a matter of sufferance on the part of the latter.

but of right, the larger concession embodied in the IIth Article necessarily overriding any limitation in the matter of crime or locality as applied only to the Special conditions exempted in the XIIth article. The practice of seizing any British subject in China under the Consul's Warrant and without any reference to a Chinese Authority, has assuredly grown up under the Treaty as I think was intended, and therefore I only repeat my opinion that "there is no impediment to the British Authority pursuing and arresting any British Subject in Chinese Territory." The only difficulty lies in the fact that Hongkong Authorities have jurisdiction by the Queen's Order in Council of March 1865, in

331

Edit History

2026-05-20 10:05:58 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

own laws and Authorities, and by them only. – In art XV there is no limitation at all, and therefore, the assumed reserve to cases only where crime has been committed in China would seem to have no further application than as a repetition of a minor Clause included in the larger concession, and in confirmation of the first as to the absolute exclusion of territorial jurisdiction. At least I can come to no other Conclusion, and in accordance with this undoubtedly is the practice. This too is the understanding in China, both as regards British and Chinese Authorities. I do not regard it as a matter of sufferance on the part of the latter. but of right, the larger concession embodied in the IIth Article necessarily overriding any limitation in the matter of crime or locality as applied only to the Special conditions exempted in the XIIth article. The practice of seizing any British subject in China under the Consul's Warrant and without any reference to a Chinese Authority, has assuredly grown up under the Treaty as I think was intended, and therefore I only repeat my opinion that "there is no impediment to the British Authority pursuing and arresting any British Subject in Chinese Territory." The only difficulty lies in the fact that Hongkong Authorities have jurisdiction by the Queen's Order in Council of March 1865, in 331

Baseline (Original)

} own laws and Authorities, and by them only. – In art XV there is no limitation at all, and therefore. the assumed reserve to cases only to here crime has been committed in China would seem to have no further application than asal -repetition of a minor Clause e included in the larger concession, and in confirmation of the first as to the absolute exclusion ofterritorial jurisdiction. At least I can come to no other Conclusion, and in accordance with this undoubtably is the practice. This too is the understanding in China, both as regards British and Chinese Authorities. I do not regard it as a matter of sufferance on the part of the latter. but 331 but of right, the larger concession empodied in the IIth Article necessarily overriding any limitation in the matter of crime or locality as applied only to the Special conditions exemtrated: in the XIIth article. The practic British subject in of seizing any China under the Consul's Warrant and without any reference to a Chinese Authority, has assuredly и ve grown up under the Treaty' as I think was intended, and. therefore Ionly repeat my opinion that " there is no impediment to " the British Authority pursuing " and arresting any British Subject. " in Chinese Perritory." The only difficulty lies in the fact that Hongkong Hongkong Authorities have furisdiction by the queen's Order in Council of March 1865, in the

2026-05-20 10:05:58 · Baseline

View content

}

own

laws and Authorities, and by them only. –

In art XV there is no limitation at all, and therefore. the assumed reserve to cases only to here crime has been committed in China would seem to have no

further application than asal

-repetition of a minor Clause e included in the larger concession, and in confirmation of the first as to the absolute exclusion ofterritorial jurisdiction. At

least I can come to no other Conclusion, and in accordance with this undoubtably is the practice. This too is the understanding in China, both as regards British and Chinese Authorities. I do not regard it as a matter of sufferance on the part of the latter.

but

331

but of right, the larger concession empodied in the IIth Article necessarily overriding any limitation in the matter of crime or locality as applied only to the Special conditions exemtrated: in the XIIth article. The practic British subject in of seizing any China under the Consul's Warrant and without any reference to a Chinese Authority, has assuredly

ve grown up under the Treaty' as I think was intended, and. therefore Ionly repeat my opinion that " there is no impediment to " the British Authority pursuing " and arresting any

British Subject.

" in Chinese Perritory." The only difficulty lies in the fact that Hongkong Hongkong Authorities have furisdiction by the queen's Order in Council of March 1865, in

CO129-141 - Public Offices - 1869 — Page 333

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note