CO129-172 - Public Offices & Others - 1875 — Page 352

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

345

claim

Loring

was disallowed by Vice Consul

and Ellis then appealed to

the local Court, and succeeded in

obtaining

a

reversal

of

the Vice-Consul's

decision. A correspondence thereupon ensued, between

In Loring

had no

the

and

The

former

Count

Governor of Hong Kong : maintaining that the Hong Kong

jurisdiction in the matter, and intimating his intention of appealing to his Government. Copies of this

correspondence together with a

copy

of

a letter, which after consultation

with the Law Officers of the Crown,

I caused to be addressed to the

Colonial Office in this matter, are inclosed herewith for your information.

In support of

In Loring's view, you

Schenck referred me to Phillmore's International Law, Edition 1871, page

290, from which he argued that the

decision

of

the local Court was

contrary

to International Law, and that the

case was

one

which could only

be

dealt with by the United States Consular authority.

U.S. Courts recognise International Law

in cases

of

this kind, but that

British Courts do not; and he affirmed that the claim to jurisdiction of

Courts, in cases like the one under

discussion, is not justifiable.

Mr Schenck then cited the case of the "Bucephalus", which occurred

at

Edit History

2026-05-21 06:35:12 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
345 claim Loring was disallowed by Vice Consul and Ellis then appealed to the local Court, and succeeded in obtaining a reversal of the Vice-Consul's decision. A correspondence thereupon ensued, between In Loring had no the and The former Count Governor of Hong Kong : maintaining that the Hong Kong jurisdiction in the matter, and intimating his intention of appealing to his Government. Copies of this correspondence together with a copy of a letter, which after consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown, I caused to be addressed to the Colonial Office in this matter, are inclosed herewith for your information. In support of In Loring's view, you Schenck referred me to Phillmore's International Law, Edition 1871, page 290, from which he argued that the decision of the local Court was contrary to International Law, and that the case was one which could only be dealt with by the United States Consular authority. U.S. Courts recognise International Law in cases of this kind, but that British Courts do not; and he affirmed that the claim to jurisdiction of Courts, in cases like the one under discussion, is not justifiable. Mr Schenck then cited the case of the "Bucephalus", which occurred at
Baseline (Original)
345 claim Loring was disallowed by Fice Consul & and Ellis then appealed to the local Court, and succeeded in obtaining a reversal if the Vice-Consul's decision. A corres espondence thereupon ensued, between In Loring had no the and The former Count Governor of Hong kong : maintaining that the Hong kong furisdiction in the matter, and. intimating his intention of appealing. to his Government. Copies of this - correspondence together with a of a < серу letter, which after consultation with the Law Officers of the Crown, I caused to be addressed to the Colonial Office in this matter, are inclosed herewith for your inform " . In In support of In Loring's view, you' Schenck referned me to Phillmore's International Law, Edition 1871, page 290, from which he argued that the decision of He loral Count was con Contrany to International haw, and that the Case waJ One. ¥ which could only be dealt with by the United States Consular He further contended that authority. 4. S. Courts recognise International. law C a s e s of this kind, but that British Courts do not; and he affirmes that the clasin to jurisdiction of Courts, in cases like the one under. discussion, is not pistifiable Geur Scheuck then cited the case of the "Bucephalus", which occurred. at
2026-05-21 06:35:12 · Baseline
View content

345

claim

Loring

was disallowed by Fice Consul

& and Ellis then appealed to

the local Court, and succeeded in

obtaining

a

reversal

if

the Vice-Consul's

decision. A corres

espondence thereupon ensued, between In Loring

had no

the

and

The

former

Count

Governor of Hong kong : maintaining that the Hong kong

furisdiction in the matter, and. intimating his intention of appealing. to his Government. Copies of this -

correspondence together with a

of

a

<

серу

letter, which after consultation

with the Law Officers of the Crown,

I caused to be addressed to the

Colonial Office in this matter, are inclosed herewith for your inform " .

In

In support of

In Loring's view, you'

Schenck referned me to Phillmore's International Law, Edition 1871, page

290, from which he argued that the

decision

of

He loral Count was con

Contrany

to International haw, and that the

Case waJ

One.

¥

which could only

be

dealt with by the United States Consular He further contended that authority.

4. S. Courts recognise International.

law

C a s e s

of

this kind, but that

British Courts do not; and he affirmes that the clasin to jurisdiction of

Courts, in cases like the one under.

discussion, is not pistifiable

Geur Scheuck then cited the case of the "Bucephalus", which occurred.

at

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.