CO129-233 - Acting Governor Cameron - 1887 [6-8] — Page 210

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

With this case, and have come to the following conclusions:

When dealing with them, we do not consider that the letter which Mr. Marsh directed to be written to the magistrates on the 23rd of Feb. last, by Mr. Marsh's direction, and cautioning them against unnecessary delay in dealing with extradition cases, and stating the principles which, in the opinion of the government, should guide the magistrates in dealing with those cases, constituted any undue interference with the magistrates on the part of the Executive.

I fail to verify that the letter was written to the magistrates by Mr. Marsh's direction. I am of the opinion that Mr. Wodehouse acted wrongly in adjourning the case of perjury against the witness Leung You until the charge against him should be disposed of, but that in giving instructions for the resumption of the hearing of the case, the Executive interfered unduly with the judicial functions of the magistrate.

I do not consider that Mr. Wodehouse was deserving of censure for asking in his letter of the 22nd of April...

Page 210

Page 211

Edit History

2026-05-25 17:43:18 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

With this case, and have come to the following conclusions: When dealing with them, we do not consider that the letter which Mr. Marsh directed to be written to the magistrates on the 23rd of Feb. last, by Mr. Marsh's direction, and cautioning them against unnecessary delay in dealing with extradition cases, and stating the principles which, in the opinion of the government, should guide the magistrates in dealing with those cases, constituted any undue interference with the magistrates on the part of the Executive. I fail to verify that the letter was written to the magistrates by Mr. Marsh's direction. I am of the opinion that Mr. Wodehouse acted wrongly in adjourning the case of perjury against the witness Leung You until the charge against him should be disposed of, but that in giving instructions for the resumption of the hearing of the case, the Executive interfered unduly with the judicial functions of the magistrate. I do not consider that Mr. Wodehouse was deserving of censure for asking in his letter of the 22nd of April... Page 210 Page 211

Baseline (Original)

with this case, and have Come to the following conclusions Whon them. ukon do not consider 13. I fail to very that the letter which M Manch directed to bomb was written to the magistrates by on the 23rd of Feb. last by M2 Marsh's direction, and cartiming them against unnecessary delay in dealing with extradition cases, and stating the principles which opinion of in the opinion the government should granted quide them magistrates in with those cases Uthose dealing with contending constituted Abid / any undure interference with the magistrates on the part of the Executive, 205 -4...I am of opinion that gopinion Committed a mistake M- Wodehouve acted tonongly in adjouning the case charge of perjury until the had against the witness Leung You should be disposed tappion kme but that that in instructions giving in homing the hearing of for the resumption of the case the Executive interfered unduly with the judicial functions of the magistrate. I do not consider that m. Wodehouse was (ensure deserving for asking in 22nd his letter of the 22th of April Page 210Page 211

2026-05-25 17:43:18 · Baseline

View content

with this case, and have

Come to the following conclusions

Whon them.

ukon

do not consider

13. I fail to very that the

letter which M Manch directed to bomb was written

to the magistrates by on the 23rd of Feb. last by M2 Marsh's direction, and cartiming them against unnecessary delay in dealing

with extradition cases, and

stating the principles which opinion of

in the opinion

the

government should granted quide them magistrates in

with those cases Uthose dealing with

contending constituted

Abid / any undure interference

with the

magistrates on the part of the Executive, 205

-4...I

am of opinion that

gopinion

Committed a mistake

M- Wodehouve acted tonongly

in adjouning the case charge of perjury

until the

had

against the witness Leung You should be disposed

tappion kme

but that

that in

instructions

giving in homing the

hearing of

for the resumption of the case the Executive interfered unduly

with the judicial functions

of the magistrate.

I do not consider that m. Wodehouse was

(ensure

deserving

for asking in

22nd

his letter of the 22th of April

Page 210Page 211

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.