CO129-410 - Governor Sir May - 1914 [3-5] — Page 53

X

+

52

A jury then, would seem to be justified in finding as

that this property on the 4th. August belonged to the

a fact

Kwong Tung Government.

The fugitive cannot claim his discharge because the allegation of property is incorrect.

-

Secondly, the discharge of the fugitive is claimed on the ground that assuming the contention of the learned Coun- sel on the first point to have been valid, the present Kwong Tung Government has no right to claim the surrender of the fugitive because the right to the restitution of the proper- ty has now since the 4th. August vested by right of success- ion in the Central Government, which it is suggested suppress. ed the rebellion in Kwong Tung.

The authority cited for the propsitions contained in both the first and the second points ie "The United States of America v. Mo. Rae" (38 L.J.406).

-

After what has been said on the first point this sec-

ond point does not really arise. But it would be as well to

notice in passing that Chan Kwing Ming was succeeded as Governor General on the 4th. August by . local appointee, So Shun Teo, who promptly dissociated himself from the irregu-

larities of his predecessor. So Shun Tso was succeeded on

the 5th. August by another local appointee Cheung Ngo Kun.

Lung Chai Kwong arrived on the 11th. August. It is then

clear that between the 4th. August and the 11th. August the

administration was in the hands of a local Government, which

was loyal and not rebellious, nor is there any evidence that

Lung Chal Kwong as Governor General, was any the less head

of a local administration than were his predecessors in office.

If therefore the second point now required decision

I should not be prepared to discharge the defendant on that

ground.

-7-

ព