96
2.
by liis Majesty'supreme Court. This I did, but it
will be seen from a further letter, of which a copy
is enclosed, which weaars. Teesdale, Newman and
Company subsequently sent me, that the Court has
rendered a preliminary judgment in which it has ruled
that it must exercise jurisdiction in the C8B6. In
view of the terms of the Chinese nationality law, the
Court could not have ruled otherwise and it would be
useless for me to protest against the judgment. I
understand from Ar. Newman that under Chiness law a
childless widow, such as krs. Tsong is, is not entitled
to the whole estate and there is accordingly every
probability that the plaintiff will succeed in her
claim. Apart from property in hanghai, deceased
also owned property in Hankow and Tientsin and the
Court would have little difficulty in enforcing
judgment, it given in favour of plaintiff,
4. It is plainly unjust that krs. Teng should
be subject to two jurisdictione in so far as it
involves double expense, but under the present
definition of British subject in the order in Council,
His Majesty's supreme Court is bound to take juris-
diction over her husband'a estate and make her pay
probate fees and under the Chinese nationality law the
Chinese Court is equally bound to claim her and her
late husband as Chinese citizens,
5. The last correspondence on the subject of
your negotiations with the Minister for Foreign
Affairs on this question of dual nationality, that I
/can
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.