46030
43871
572
C16 1903)
COPY.
REC'd 22 DEC 08
PEKING.
to Hongkong.
24 November 1908:
1:525:
Sir,
3.58.
I have the honour to enclose copies of the correspondence referred to at the close of despatch No.504 of November 7th 1908, regarding the question of the jurisdiction of the Hongkong Courts in China:
The question arose in consequence of a request addressed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Hongkong to the Consul-General as Judge of His Majesty's Court at Canton, to transmit a writ of summons to the Wamhoi magistrate for service on a Chinese defendant in China. The Chief Justice's authority for requesting the Consul General to do this appears to rest on Article 29 of the China and Corea Order in Council 1904 only, but as Mr. Fox has pointed out, the jurisdiction conferred by the Order in Council is limited by Articles
Right Honourable
Sir Edward Grey, Bart., K.G.
&C.
&C.
&c.
5
46030
43871
572
C16 1903)
COPY.
REC? & Red 22 DEC 08
PEKING.
to Hongkong.
24 November 1908:
1:525:
sir,
inton
3.58.
I have the honour to enclose copies of the correspon-
dence referred to at the close of despatch No.504 of
November 7th 1908, regarding the question of the
jurisdiction of the Hongkong Courts in China:
The question arose in consequence of a request
addressed by the chief Justice of the Supreme Court of
Hongkong to the Consul-Goneral as Judge of His Majertyle
Court at Canton, to transmit a writ of aumons to the
Wamhoi magistrate for service on a Chinese defendant in
China. The Chief Justice's authority for requesting
the Consul General to do this appears to rest on
Article 29 of the China and Corea Order in Council 1904
only, but as "r. Fox has pointed out, the jurisdiction
conferred by the Order in Council is limited by Articles
Right Honourable
Sir Edward Grey, Bart., *.P.
&C.
&C.
&c.
5
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.