CO129-338 - Public Offices & Others - 1906 — Page 324

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

Series Prev Next

This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]

AFFAIRS OF CHINA.

CO. 44802

CONFIDENTIAL.

RECEIVED [November 21.]

SECTION 1,

No. 1.

[88939]

No. 196.)

Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan.

Foreign Office, November 21, 1906.

(Telegraphic.)

I APPROVE suggestion in penultimate paragraph of your telegram No. 223 of the 19th November, relative to the Rules of Mixed Court at Shanghae. But after negotiating for years respecting the revision of the Rules of 1869 and urging the Chinese Government to expedite it, we could not propose to adhere to those Rules.

An obvious and inconvenient reply would be afforded to the Chinese Government by the last two paragraphs of the collective note of the 14th August, which formed an enclosure in Mr. Carnegie's despatch No. 352.

It appears, moreover, that satisfaction has not been given by the Rules of 1869 coupled with the existing Mixed Court practice.

Custody of male prisoners: I agree with you that we must retain this, and if apprehension is shared by the Judge of the Supreme Court, a statement to the effect that ambiguity in draft amendments shall be interpreted as altering established practice to their custody might be inserted in the reply of the Foreign Representatives to the Chinese Government.

[2226 x-]

--1]

Page 320

(The text is assumed to continue on the next page, and "Page 320" is kept as is, as per the instruction to keep page numbering information.)

Edit History

2026-06-03 10:21:27 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.] AFFAIRS OF CHINA. CO. 44802 CONFIDENTIAL. RECEIVED [November 21.] SECTION 1, No. 1. [88939] No. 196.) Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan. Foreign Office, November 21, 1906. (Telegraphic.) I APPROVE suggestion in penultimate paragraph of your telegram No. 223 of the 19th November, relative to the Rules of Mixed Court at Shanghae. But after negotiating for years respecting the revision of the Rules of 1869 and urging the Chinese Government to expedite it, we could not propose to adhere to those Rules. An obvious and inconvenient reply would be afforded to the Chinese Government by the last two paragraphs of the collective note of the 14th August, which formed an enclosure in Mr. Carnegie's despatch No. 352. It appears, moreover, that satisfaction has not been given by the Rules of 1869 coupled with the existing Mixed Court practice. Custody of male prisoners: I agree with you that we must retain this, and if apprehension is shared by the Judge of the Supreme Court, a statement to the effect that ambiguity in draft amendments shall be interpreted as altering established practice to their custody might be inserted in the reply of the Foreign Representatives to the Chinese Government. [2226 x-] --1] Page 320 (The text is assumed to continue on the next page, and "Page 320" is kept as is, as per the instruction to keep page numbering information.)

Baseline (Original)

319 This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.] FFAIRS OF CHINA. CO. 44802 CONFIDENTIAL. RECE Reef 5 DFC OF [November 21.J SECTION 1, No. 1. 88939] No. 196.) Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan. Foreign Office, November 21, 1906. Telegraphic.) P. I APPROVE suggestion in penultimate paragraph of your telegrani No. 223 of the 19th November, relative to the Rules of Mixed Court at Shanghae. But after egotiating for years respecting the revision of the Rules of 1869 and urging the Chinese overnment to expedite it, we could not propose to adhere to those Rules." An obvious and inconvenient reply would be afforded to the Chinese Government the last two paragraphs of the collective note of the 14th August, which formed an nclosure in Mr. Carnegie's despatch No. 352. It appears, moreover, that satisfaction has not been given by the Rules of 1869 upled with the existing Mixed Court practice. your Custody of male prisoners: I agree with you that we must retain this, and if pprehension is shared by the Judge of the Supreme Court, a statement to the effect that ambiguity in draft amendments shall be interpreted as altering established practice to their custody might be inserted in the reply of the Foreign Representatives to the hinese Government. [2226 x-) --1]

2026-06-03 10:21:27 · Baseline

View content

319

This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]

FFAIRS OF CHINA.

CO. 44802

CONFIDENTIAL.

RECE

Reef 5 DFC OF

[November 21.J

SECTION 1,

No. 1.

88939]

No. 196.)

Sir Edward Grey to Sir J. Jordan.

Foreign Office, November 21, 1906.

Telegraphic.) P.

I APPROVE suggestion in penultimate paragraph of your telegrani No. 223 of the 19th November, relative to the Rules of Mixed Court at Shanghae. But after egotiating for years respecting the revision of the Rules of 1869 and urging the Chinese overnment to expedite it, we could not propose to adhere to those Rules."

An obvious and inconvenient reply would be afforded to the Chinese Government the last two paragraphs of the collective note of the 14th August, which formed an nclosure in Mr. Carnegie's despatch No. 352.

It appears, moreover, that satisfaction has not been given by the Rules of 1869 upled with the existing Mixed Court practice.

your

Custody of male prisoners: I agree with you that we must retain this, and if pprehension is shared by the Judge of the Supreme Court, a statement to the effect that ambiguity in draft amendments shall be interpreted as altering established practice to their custody might be inserted in the reply of the Foreign Representatives to the hinese Government.

[2226 x-)

--1]

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.