CO129-225 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [1-3] — Page 119

of the

the

here,

{

criminal claxes

dvanta

서

nhei

iii

their

ince afer

Co

es of coming

puncher

reiacuee

Country becomes

I have the honour tobe,

Your

Sis,

Ment obedient humble

Servant

March

Enclosure A,

"China Mail

14 February, 18.

THE SEIZURE OF A MAN BY CHT- NESE MEN-OF-WAR'S MEN.

The eight seamen belonging to H.I.C.M. gunboat Ngui San who are charged with assaulting and unlawfully detaining one Chang Obi, in Victoria, on the 22nd Janua- ry, again appeared before flis. Worship.

The Acting Crown Solicitor, Mr Â. P. Stokes, appeared and stated that he had re- ceived instructions from the Government to withdraw the prosecution in this case and he had notified Mr Caldwell that he was appearing to-day for that purpose. The Government had heen led to withdraw the prosecution in consequence of a telegram re- ceived from Her Majesty's Chargé d'Aff tires at Peking stating that the Chinese Govern- inent had expressed its entire disapproval of the action of the Captain of the Chinese gonboat and that the Governor General of Poochow had received instructions to express regret to the Hongkong Government for the occurrence. Though the men charged were the actual parties who committed the act the moral responsibility rested with others. His Worship said he would like to see the telegram referred to and a copy of the telegram upon the subject was then hand. ed to his Worship who informed the de-i fendants, through the interpreter, that a letter from the Chinese Government at! Peking had been received apologising for the act committed by them and that the Governor General of Foochow had been instructed by his Government to express It was his regret at what had happened. intention if the present action had not been taken and if the offence had been proved to have sent the defendants to prison for twelve months each for daring to come into our territory and seize a man; but as their Government had apologised in this manner he would discharge them. defendants were then discharged.

The

C. O.

4182

!

117