CO129-363 - Public Offices & Others - 1909 — Page 139

138

the place to which he belongs, and obviously my warrant

under Article 66 sending him to Hongkong would not cover

his deportation thence.

In view of your opinion that it is undoubtedly de-

sirable to prevent the return to the Treaty Ports of

persons convicted of serious offences, I have the honour

to suggest that, when a serious offence has been committed,

the culprit should be liable to be deported without

the option of finding security, if his crime is such as

to render such a punishment as that of six months im-

prisonment a proper one, and if the Court trying him is

of opinion that his return to China would be prejudicial

to good order, then, I think, that the Court might as

part of his sentence order his deportation.

Six months

may seem a small minimum, but I would point out that

the sentences passed in China are as a rule, for several

reasons, considerably lighter than sentences for like offences in England, and it must be remembered that the

addition of deportation to the sentence is serious.

Provision should also be made for the removal of

the prisoner at the expiration of his sentence from

Hongkong direct to the place to which he is to go, and

I think this might be done under an article similar to

the repealed Article 84 of the China and Corea Order in

Council 1904. Article 83 should apply to all deporta-

tions alike, with the necessary modifications to cover

cases of deportation from the Colony.

I have drafted and have the honour to enclose an

Article to deal with the extension of powers which I

have indicated above.

This might be inserted in the

(Amendment) Order in Council now under consideration.

As the matter will have to be referred to the

Government of Hongkong I have sent a copy of my draft

to Sir F. Lugard with a despatch, to explain what is

desired and to ask his co-operation. A copy of this

is also enclosed herewith.

I have, &c.

(Signed)

H. W. de Sausmarez.

Hongkong

Feuse