CO129-320 - Governor Sir Blake Acting Governor May - 1903 [11-12] — Page 527

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

28

both countries and within the treaty. It seemed to him (Darling, J.) that in this case the same thing had been made a criminal offence in England and in the United States. It was not in his opinion essential that the offence should be called by the same name in both countries.

In regard to the first charge, following the course taken in Re Arton (L.R. Q.B.D. 1896 (1) 509; 65 L.J.M.C. 50; 18 Cox C.C. 277; 60 J.P. 132), the matter was remitted to the Magistrate in order that it might be made clear by the warrant of committal that Dix was committed for the following offence, viz. The crime of fraudulent conversion by a director, member, or public officer of a public company or body corporate, according to the law of England contrary to section 81 of the Larceny Act, 1861, and constituting the crime of larceny by embezzlement within section 7119 of Act 1 of the Constitution of the State of Washington, U.S.A.

(As to this order, see In re Joseph Bluhm, L.R. Q.B.D. 1901 (1) 764; 70 L.J.K.B. 472, where the Court having found that the evidence in reference to one case was sufficient declined to go into the other charges)

FUGITIVE OFFENDERS.

C.O. 34683 RECO REGS 17 CEP OR

Summary of Replies to the Colonial Office Circular of the 15th September, 1897, printed at page 14.

521

Edit History

2026-06-01 12:04:00 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
28 both countries and within the treaty. It seemed to him (Darling, J.) that in this case the same thing had been made a criminal offence in England and in the United States. It was not in his opinion essential that the offence should be called by the same name in both countries. In regard to the first charge, following the course taken in Re Arton (L.R. Q.B.D. 1896 (1) 509; 65 L.J.M.C. 50; 18 Cox C.C. 277; 60 J.P. 132), the matter was remitted to the Magistrate in order that it might be made clear by the warrant of committal that Dix was committed for the following offence, viz. The crime of fraudulent conversion by a director, member, or public officer of a public company or body corporate, according to the law of England contrary to section 81 of the Larceny Act, 1861, and constituting the crime of larceny by embezzlement within section 7119 of Act 1 of the Constitution of the State of Washington, U.S.A. (As to this order, see In re Joseph Bluhm, L.R. Q.B.D. 1901 (1) 764; 70 L.J.K.B. 472, where the Court having found that the evidence in reference to one case was sufficient declined to go into the other charges) FUGITIVE OFFENDERS. C.O. 34683 RECO REGS 17 CEP OR Summary of Replies to the Colonial Office Circular of the 15th September, 1897, printed at page 14. 521
Baseline (Original)
28 both countries and within the treaty. It seemed to him (Darling, J.) that in this case the same thing had been made a criminal offence in England and in the United States. It was not in his opinion essential that the offence should be called by the same name in both countries. In regard to the first charge, following the course taken in Be Arton (L.R. Q.B.D. 1896 (1) 509; 65 L.J.M.C. 50; 18 Cox C.C. 277; 60 J.P. 132), the matter was remitted to the Magistrate in order that it might be made clear by the warrant of committal that Dix was committed for the following offence, viz. The crime of fraudulent conversion by a director. member, or public officer of a public company or body corporate, according to the law of England contrary to section 81 of the Larceny Act, 1861, and constituting the crime of larceny by embezzlement within section 7119 of Act 1 of the Constitution of the State of Washington, U.S.A. (As to this order, see In re Joseph Bluhm, L.R. Q.B.D. 1901 (1) 764 ; 70 LJ. K.B. 472, where the Court having found that the evidence in reference to one case was sufficient declined to go into the other charges ) FUGITIVE OFFENDERS. C. O. 34683 RECO REGS 17 CEP OR Summary of Replies to the Colonial Office Circular of the 15th September, 1897, printed at page 14. 521
2026-06-01 12:04:00 · Baseline
View content

28

both countries and within the treaty. It seemed to him (Darling, J.) that in this case the same thing had been made a criminal offence in England and in the United States. It was not in his opinion essential that the offence should be called by the same name in both countries.

In regard to the first charge, following the course taken in Be Arton (L.R. Q.B.D. 1896 (1) 509; 65 L.J.M.C. 50; 18 Cox C.C. 277; 60 J.P. 132), the matter was remitted to the Magistrate in order that it might be made clear by the warrant of committal that Dix was committed for the following offence, viz. The crime of fraudulent conversion by a director. member, or public officer of a public company or body corporate, according to the law of England contrary to section 81 of the Larceny Act, 1861, and constituting the crime of larceny by embezzlement within section 7119 of Act 1 of the Constitution of the State of Washington, U.S.A.

(As to this order, see In re Joseph Bluhm, L.R. Q.B.D. 1901 (1) 764 ; 70 LJ. K.B. 472, where the Court having found that the evidence in reference to one case was sufficient declined to go into the other charges )

FUGITIVE OFFENDERS.

C. O.

34683 RECO REGS 17 CEP OR

Summary of Replies to the Colonial Office Circular of the 15th September, 1897, printed at page 14.

521

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.