[ { "id": 243531, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-066 - Public Offices - 1857", "page_number": 456, "title": "CO129-066 - Public Offices - 1857", "content_text": "# \n\n\"Ho \n\nthe first step on this account, the extradition \nof Aundred \nuly (170) by the Phaber Drente has lost upwards of fourt \nJour. Thou caud. Dollars ($4000) in it \nsome one \nIt is brus. that the Police Rate was increased \n7 \nto 10 per cent, to meet the Police Augmentation, but in the first place the sum thus raised could not suffice even for the Police expenditure, and in the \nsecond it was \nL 3600 \n-51 \n455 \n\nI have the honor to be \nyour obedient servant \nMuurne \nColonial Secretary, &c. of Hong Kong. \n\nP. S. As I perceive that Sir John Bowring's \n: as the Colony had no concern with the lover of \nreasonable. to make \nMore \nby you \nyoun \nis in original, \n\"return it herewith. \ndisturbance, it was not, \nnot just that on the Colony should Depotch inclverden fall the \nheavy, to right of the sinbooked, for expenditure. and that it was perfectly reasonable application to H. M. Treasury for pecuniary aid, especially as it was in the power of St. The Govt to enforce repayment of the sums thus advanced, by the real authors of the calamitous & losses, the turbulent inhabitants of the Procugtung Province. \n\nIt will \nThe moral question of the propriety & supporting the Colony of Hong Kong by Parliamentary Grant, probably be considered presumptuous in me here to discuss, but I trust I shall be pardoned if I recall to remembrance the following paragraph in the Report of the House of Commons Committee of 1847. \n\n4 \nnor do I think it \nright \nthat the burden of Maintaining \nthat which is rather a post for the general influence & the protection of the general trade in the China Seas; than a \nColony in the Holenary sense, should be thrown in any great \nMo \nthe merchants or other \npersons who \nGray \n\"Nephew \nresident on it \" If this opinion be correct under ordinary circumstances, how much more to the right must it be at the present time.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-066 - Public Offices - 1857.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 263100, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-107 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [10-12]", "page_number": 322, "title": "CO129-107 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [10-12]", "content_text": "## oftorture \n**Criminal** \non \nSurrendered fr \nHongkong. \n072-2 \n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell apees with In Mercer Sa Barden Munate on That prime faire the dus of securing fulfilment of its Engagements of Chiners fost wet with the diplomatic agents ght 12 foot, but.\n\n## \n12 4 21 For171 that portion of Jam ducited to add Heat the 320 Colonial Authenting will not be instructed I continue extradition longer kan then Shall be ample reason Jakewing that Criminal handed ove Chenen fort bof the are hot treated inham ans for Acting for despatch which relate to Ad te mactive of defe orting fundicants from stough onghas tin referred to the Law Oppium other comm ver\n\nReconstructed text:\n\n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that prime faire the duty of securing fulfilment of its Engagements. \n\n12 4 21 For171 that portion of Jam ducited to add Heat the 320 Colonial Authoring will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chenen fort. Those who are not treated inhumanly are acting for despatch which relate to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong, referred to the Law Officer, other committee verifying.\n\nHowever, a more plausible reconstruction is:\n## oftorture \n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that the prime duty is securing fulfilment of its Engagements of Chinese first wet with the diplomatic agents... ght 12 foot, but.\n\n12 4 21 For171 that portion of Jam ducited to add Heat the 320 Colonial Authoring will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chinese fort. The are not treated inhumanly for Acting for despatch which relate to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong has been referred to the Law Officer, other committee verifying.\n\nLet's try a more plausible reconstruction with some losses marked:\n## oftorture \n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that the prime duty is securing fulfilment of its Engagements... ...ght 12 foot, but.\n\n12 4 21 For171 that portion of... ducited to add Heat the 320 Colonial Authority will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chinese fort... are not treated inhumanly. For Acting for despatch which relate to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong has been referred to the Law Officer, other committee verifying.\n\nLet's simplify:\n## \n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that the prime duty is securing fulfilment of its Engagements of Chinese... with the diplomatic agents... ght 12 foot, but.\n\nThe Colonial Authority will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chinese fort. Those not treated inhumanly are acting for despatch which relate to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong has been referred to the Law Officer.\n\nLet's reformat to a more readable version:\n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that the prime duty is securing fulfilment of its Engagements of Chinese... with the diplomatic agents... ght 12 foot, but.\n\nThe Colonial Authority will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chinese fort. \n\nFor Acting for despatch which relate to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong has been referred to the Law Officer.\n\nThe best reconstruction is \n## oftorture \n**Criminal** on Surrendered from Hongkong. 072-2\n\nLambs state that Lanto Melandrell agrees with In Mercer, Sa Barden, Munate on that the prime duty is securing fulfilment of its Engagements... with the diplomatic agents ght 12 foot, but.\n\nThe Colonial Authority will not be instructed to continue extradition longer than then shall be ample reason for taking that Criminal handed over to Chinese fort. Those are not treated inhumanly. Despatch relating to the active defence of fugitives from Hongkong has been referred to the Law Officer.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-107 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [10-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 276410, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-134 - Public Offices - 1868", "page_number": 466, "title": "CO129-134 - Public Offices - 1868", "content_text": "Report which has been furnished by\n\nLaw Officers\n\nOffering\n\non the subject.\n\nI am,\n\nYour\n\nSir,\n\nmost obedient\n\nhumble servant\n\n18; Helland\n\nI paston tie for. must be told\n\nsubstance of the\n\nLand\n\na bit be munt\n\nselmet inn\n\n...\n\nThe\n\nWe\n\nenabling ter sod.\n\nl-delion our\n\nPortuguese\n\n458\n\nFugitives - Le Sin P. Aqui mente or 2290. 1116 Left\n\nJ\n\nWMX\n\n14\n\nwould also send be R. Mardonnet\n\nIt cautions\n\na copy the Report of the Extradition Committee (N.393 Hof.)\n\nWH\n\n14/9 THE 1419.\n\nin the examining different treaties -\n\nand the notes the Maces for A Jower be worked into\n\n9\n\nI have required at the F.O; and am informed\n\nthat there\n\nis no limitation at Macao. I think the Portuguese for mot to be consulted. I propose therefore to direct R.M. to prepare\n\nA submit for consideration a\n\ndraft ordine\n\n...\n\nIf they will form the basis of negotiation\n\nwith the Port: for. I send on draft\n\nrevise with\n\nJ1171 23/9\n\nHowever, to better follow the instructions and improve readability, here is a more processed version:\n\nReport which has been furnished by\n\nLaw Officers Offering on the subject.\n\nI am,\n\nYour Sir,\n\nmost obedient humble servant\n\n18; Helland\n\nThe substance of the Land ... must be told a bit be munt selmet inn ...\n\nThe We enabling ter sod. l-delion our Portuguese 458 Fugitives - Le Sin P. Aqui mente or 2290. 1116 Left\n\nJ WMX 14 would also send be R. Mardonnet. It cautions a copy the Report of the Extradition Committee (N.393 Hof.).\n\nWH 14/9 THE 1419. in the examining different treaties - and the notes the Maces for A Jower be worked into 9\n\nI have required at the F.O; and am informed that there is no limitation at Macao. I think the Portuguese should not be consulted. I propose therefore to direct R.M. to prepare a submit for consideration a draft order...\n\nIf they will form the basis of negotiation with the Port: for. I send on draft revise with\n\nJ1171 23/9\n\nLet's correct and reformat it according to the given rules:\n\n## Report\nReport which has been furnished by Law Officers on the subject.\n\nI am,\n\nYour Sir,\n\nmost obedient humble servant\n\n18; Helland\n\n## Substance of the Matter\nThe substance of the Land must be told...\n\n## Fugitives\nPortuguese 458 Fugitives - Le Sin P. Aqui mente or 2290. 1116 Left\n\n## Actions\nJ WMX 14 would also send be R. Mardonnet. It cautions a copy the Report of the Extradition Committee (N.393Hof.).\n\nI have required at the F.O; and am informed that there is no limitation at Macao. I think the Portuguese should not be consulted. I propose therefore to direct R.M. to prepare a draft order for consideration.\n\nIf they will form the basis of negotiation with the Port. for. I send on draft revise with J1171 23/9\n\nHowever, the best representation following the exact instructions given would be in HTML format directly without the intermediate steps shown above.\n\nThe best answer is Report which has been furnished by Law Officers on the subject.\n\nI am,\n\nYour Sir,\n\nmost obedient humble servant\n\n18; Helland\n\nThe substance of the Land must be told...\n\nPortuguese 458 Fugitives - Le Sin P. Aqui mente or 2290. 1116 Left\n\nJ WMX 14 would also send be R. Mardonnet. It cautions a copy the Report of the Extradition Committee (N.393Hof.).\n\nWH 14/9 THE 1419. in the examining different treaties - and the notes the Maces for A Jower be worked into 9\n\nI have required at the F.O; and am informed that there is no limitation at Macao. I think the Portuguese should not be consulted. I propose therefore to direct R.M. to prepare a draft order for consideration.\n\nIf they will form the basis of negotiation with the Port. for. I send on draft revise with J1171 23/9\n\n.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-134 - Public Offices - 1868.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278859, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 428, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "Inclosure type\n\nDraught of an Ordinance prepared (400 copies) by the Attorney General (Mr Pauncefote) to provide for the Extradition of Fugitives from justice when claimed by the authorities of Macao.\n\n2. I have also the honour to inform Your Lordship that the Government of that Colony is prepared by similar Act of their Legislature to give reciprocal Rights to the Government of Hongkong.\n\nThe Draught Ordinance is accompanied by the Attorney General's explanatory notes and by below references to the recommendations in the Report of the Select Committee of 1868 upon which the various clauses have been framed.\n\n425\n\n4. The Draught has been submitted to the Government of Macao, and the Attorney General has had several personal interviews on the subject with Governor de Souza and the Chief Justice of that Colony, the result of which he has reported in a further Memorandum on Clause 13, of which a copy is enclosed. It thence appears that the enclosed Ordinance substantially meets with their approval, though they are particularly desirous it should be further extended to the Rendition of Military Deserters—a point which I hope will be conceded, as I am", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278868, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 437, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "Sir,\n\nIn 134\n\nAttorney General's Offices\n\nHong Kong, 13 March, 1867\n\nI have the honour to transmit\n\nthe Draft of the proposed \"Hong Kong\n\nand Macao Extradition Ordinance\" which I have prepared after\n\nthe examination of the Report of Select Committee on Extradition.\n\nThe Legislative measures pressed\n\non this subject both at home and in\n\nthe Colonies\n\nare chiefly directed to\n\nProcedure, while the conditions of the\n\nsurrender of a fugitive are contained\n\nThe Honourable\n\nJ Gardiner Austin,\n\nColonial Secretary.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278869, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 438, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "हे\n\n0\n\n435\n\nin the Treaties to which they are intended\n\nto give effect.\n\nBut as in this case\n\nTreaty it becomes necessary\n\nthere is no\n\nto embody in the Ordinance all the\n\nProvisions which are usually found\n\nin\n\nExtradition Treaties and also those\n\nwhich are\n\nspecially\n\nrecommended in\n\nthe Resolutions of the Select Committee\n\n(See Report III.). For this,\n\nMeadow\n\non the\n\n111.).\n\nOrdinance will be found somewhat\n\nlengthy than some of those in force in the West Indian Colonies\n\nbut not more so than I think is\n\nrequired to provide a simple and Complete Code of Extradition in\n\naccordance with the recommendations\n\nof the Select Committee and the\n\nsuggestions of some of the experienced\n\nwitnesses whom they\n\nexamined.\n\nWe have prepared a complete\n\nset of\n\nForms, which will facilitate\n\nthe working of the Ordinance; and\n\na few remarks\n\nupon the Clauses seriation which may assist\n\nHis Excellency the Governor in referring\n\nto those parts of the Report\n\ndealing with the subject matter,\n\nin which the matter of each Section is\n\ndealt with.\n\n(Signed) J. Pannelate,", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278871, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 440, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "7 437\n\nForeign Countries are justiciable by Funch Tribunals (See Loi du 24 Juin - 3 Juillet 1866. Appendix to Report, p. 96 also Evidence of Mr. Hind 033–832, of Mr Nestor Freit 1332-1372-1377-1334- and of Mr Mullens 1169-1167-1277-1378.\n\nI may mention that in the Maltai Ordinance (Appendix, p. 144) and in the Extradition Treaty with Denmark (Appendix 120) and in the Convention with Prussia of the 5th of March 1864, Art I, not now in operation (App. p.129) Nationals are excepted.\n\n\"within the Territory of Macao\": see post observations on the Schedule held to Triersy juve gentium.\n\nSection 5.\n\nThis Section is drafted mainly from the precedent of our General Act suggested by Sir R. Henry (App. p. 93)\n\nSub Section 3.\n\nWith regard to the necessity of this Provision see the Evidence of Mr. Nestor Treit as to Condamnés par contumace and Condamnés Contradictoires 1306–1928–1339 et seq. also the Evidence of Sir R. Henry 300–309.\n\nSub Section 6.\n\nThe language of this Provision is taken from 29 and 30 Vic. c. 121 (See Resolutions of Select Committee and App. 123)", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278876, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 445, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "442\n\nas would never be sanctioned by the\n\nsuch as won\n\nBritish Government - In fact,\n\nrequisition with no other evidence than\n\nthat of identity.\n\nExplained that the Draft Ordinance was prepared in accordance with the recommendations of the Select Committee on Extradition, and that any substantial modification of it would\n\nhave to be arranged between the two Governments at home.\n\nThe Chief Justice of Macao appeared to think that the Magistrate would have power to go into the prisoner's defence, but Explained to him that the practice of Magistrates in cases over which they have no Summary Jurisdiction is to satisfy themselves that there is a prima facie case and not to go into the defence.\n\nIndeed under the Draft Ordinance I apprehend that it would not be competent to the Magistrate to go into the defence.\n\nThe two points which His Excellency the Governor and the Chief Justice of Macao laid stress upon were firstly that the Ordinance should extend to Military Deserters, and secondly that they should not be called upon to give up nationals of any other Country but China without the sanction of the Consular Authority of the nation to", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278882, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 451, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "448\n\nOpinion of the Attorney General:\n\nThe question which arises out of the requisition of the Governor of Macao for the surrender of an escaped prisoner is one of some difficulty.\n\nThe man is said to be a pirate, an assassin, and a fugitive from justice. It is declared by public jurists that every state is bound (independent of Treaty) upon application and due examination of the case, to surrender a person guilty of crimes of great atrocity deeply affecting the Public safety. (Manning's International Law by Abdy p. 125, 126). In the report of the Select Committee on Extradition it will be found that this", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 278884, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "page_number": 453, "title": "CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7]", "content_text": "450\n\nhaving regard to the strong feeling\n\nd) in\n\nwhich has been making ground in favour of extending Extradition, (see Report of the Select Committee) and to\n\nthe circumstance that this Government is at this moment engaged in preparing an Ordinance for the extradition of fugitives from Macao in pursuance of directions from the Imperial Government, and to the fact that the fugitive in this case is accused of Piracy and Murder, I cannot but think that the Government will be acting wisely and with a just discretion in taking upon itself the responsibility of surrendering him to the Macao Government after having taken reasonable precautions to ascertain that he is properly identified and that there is strong prima facie evidence of his guilt.\n\n(Signed) Julian Pauncefote,\n\nAttorney General.\n\nHong Kong, 23rd February, 1869.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-138 - Sir MacDonnell - 1869 [6-7].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 279939, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-140 - Public Offices - 1869", "page_number": 336, "title": "CO129-140 - Public Offices - 1869", "content_text": "It appears to his Lordship to be inconvenient that the question should be raised for the first time when the Court of Appeal, which might thereupon be called upon to reverse the decision of\n\na Magistrate for reasons\n\ncould not have been brought under his notice.\n\nIt is not, perhaps, easy to determine whether the political question should be left to the sole decision of the Executive, or whether it should be dealt with in the first instance by the Magistrate, subject to review by the Court of Appeal, and to the final determination of the Governor under the 10th section.\n\nLord Framville is inclined to prefer the latter course.\n\nThe practice, as pointed out by Thomas Henry in his evidence before the Extradition Committee, Question 492, seems to arise in cases of charges of murder; and it seems harsh to call upon a Magistrate merely on Appeal to decide that the offence charged amounts to \"Murder\" within the meaning of the Ordinance, when it may be notorious that the killing was political and not a murder in the legal sense of the word.\n\nLord Framville comes with the suggestion that the word \"shall\" should be substituted for \"may\".\n\nWith respect to the comments upon section 12, the addition of a few words \"or until the acquittal of the fugitive from", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-140 - Public Offices - 1869.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 284143, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "page_number": 38, "title": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "content_text": "# SECTION VI.\n\nThe word \"Surrender\" has been struck out and the word “Committed” substituted for the reason stated in the last preceding Note. The final Proviso contained in the corresponding Section of the original Draft whereby the Fugitive might on the return of the Writ of \"Habeas Corpus\" urge his Discharge on the ground that the Offence charged is a Political one, has been omitted by direction of Earl GRANVILLE.\n\n## SECTION VII.\n\nThis Section is entirely new and is substituted for VII of the original Draft, which introduced (subject to certain modifications), the Provisions of Ordinance No. 4 of 1858 as to Appeals. Upon reconsidering the Provisions of that Ordinance it was thought desirable to provide a more simple and expeditious mode of obtaining the Decision of the Supreme Court upon any point raised before a Magistrate under this Ordinance.\n\nThis new Section contains in itself a complete Code of Appeal for such cases. It provides against a frivolous Appeal by the Fugitive without affecting his remedy by \"Habeas Corpus.\"\n\nSub-Section V provides for Notice being given to the Attorney General before a Fugitive is discharged by the Magistrate at the close of the inquiry.\n\nSub-Section VI expressly limits the functions of the Supreme Court on Appeal, to deciding whether or not there is sufficient \"primâ facie\" evidence of the criminality of the Fugitive, and whether or not the conditions of Section V have been complied with. (See Note to Section X.)\n\n## SECTION VIII.\n\nThe Provisions of this Section are now limited to transmitting a Report, as the original Depositions and other Documents can be submitted to the Governor at any time if required.\n\n## SECTION IX.\n\n4 'If he shall in his Discretion think fit.\" These words have been added by direction of Earl GRANVILLE.\n\nA Proviso is added enabling the Governor to grant the Extradition Warrant immediately upon the decision of the Supreme Court, whenever there has been an unsuccessful Appeal by the Fugitive, or he has failed to obtain his discharge on a Writ of \"Habeas Corpus,\" before the expiration of the 15 days.\n\n## SECTION X.\n\n\"But it shall not be open to the Fugitive, &c.\" This Provision has been inserted by direction of Earl GRANVILLE, (see Note on Section VI.) The Governor alone will decide whether the surrender of the Fugitive sought for on political grounds.\n\n## SECTION XI.\n\n“Or until his Acquittal or the Abandonment of such Charge.\" These words Sub-Section XI of the original have been added by direction of Earl GRANVILLE.\n\n## SECTION XII.\n\nThis Section, which corresponds to Section XIII of the original Draft, gives a general Power to the Governor, at any time, to order the discharge of a Fugitive in custody under this Ordinance.\n\n## SECTION XIV.\n\nThe last Clause of Section XV of the original Draft, \"except that no Person shall be surrendered, &c.\" has been struck out by direction of Earl GRANVILLE, (see Note on Section III.)\n\n## SECTION XV.\n\nThis is a new Section which seems a natural sequel to the one preceding it.\n\n## SECTION XIX.\n\nThis is a new and important Section. It is founded on Resolution VII of the Select Committee on Extradition and has been substituted in the place of the Provision contained in Section XI of the original Draft in order to avoid the necessity of personal undertakings between the Governors of Hongkong and Macao.\n\nThis Section now contains a substantive Enactment which the Fugitive can set up as a Defence, if the case contemplated should arise. It will be seen on reference to Section XIX of the Imperial Act of last Session, that this mode of carrying out Resolution VII of the Select Committee on Extradition has also been adopted in England.\n\n## SECTION XXI.\n\nThis Section contains in an amended form, the Proviso of Section XVIII of the original Draft empowering the Governors of Hongkong and Macao by mutual consent to repeal or suspend this Ordinance and the reciprocal Law of Macao respectively, or any Part thereof.\n\n## THE SCHEDULE OF CRIMES.\n\nThe heading to the corresponding Schedule in the Imperial Act has been introduced and in fact the whole of that Schedule has been adopted almost verbatim, with the addition of the following Crimes and Offences which owing to the propinquity of Macao, and to local circumstances it was deemed expedient to include; namely:\n\n| Crimes and Offences |\n| --- |\n| Wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm. |\n| Receiving Stolen Goods. |\n| Forcible taking or Detention. (See Section L of Ordinance No. 4 of 1865.) |\n| Piracy by Municipal Law. |\n| Desertion from the Naval, Military or Police Forces. |\n\nIt should be borne in mind that this Schedule is rendered very \"elastic\" by the Provisions of Sections XIV and XV, which give Power to add thereto or expunge therefrom any Crime or Offence, in case it should be deemed expedient so to do. This Power would of course not be exercised except in pursuance of a reciprocal understanding with the Governor of Macao and with the sanction of the Secretary of State.\n\n## THE SCHEDULE OF FORMS.\n\nI have generally revised the Forms in this Schedule and have added Nos. 5 and 6 to meet the new Provisions of Section VII as to Appeal, and No. 7 for cases where the Fugitive is discharged by the Magistrate.\n\nThe Ordinance will not be brought into actual Operation until the Governor has proclaimed that a reciprocal Law has been enacted by the Governor of Macao. (See Section XVIII.) I would only add in conclusion, that so much labor has been bestowed upon its preparation and upon the consideration of its Provisions by the Home Government, that it was thought desirable to bring it into Force, although the Imperial Act of last Session may by Order in Council be extended to British Possessions; and I am inclined to think that notwithstanding the great skill and experience with which the Imperial Act has been prepared, this Ordinance may be found to work better here in practice, as it provides more simple and complete machinery for carrying out its special Design and has been framed expressly with reference to the local circumstances of the Colony. I presume, however, that as the Ordinance only applies to the surrender of Fugitives from Macao, the Provisions of the Imperial Act will be extended to this Colony in order to meet the very rare cases which may occur of Extradition under Treaties with other foreign Governments.\n\nHongkong, December, 1870,\n\n**JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE,**\nAttorney General.\n\n37", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 284412, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "page_number": 307, "title": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "content_text": "## The word \"Treaties\" being in the plural can have no other interpretation. The Extradition Clause of the Supplemental Treaty of Nanking was only abrogated to be re-enacted in substance in the Treaty of Tientsin as appears by the recital in Article I. (See per the Lord Chancellor in Regina v. Wideman, 14, Law Times N. S., as to the French Treaty and the Imperial Act passed to carry it out.)\n\nOrdinance No. 2 of 1850, is moreover impliedly declared to be still in force by Ordinance No. 7 of 1864.\n\n## 4th Point. \nThe offence for which the Prisoner stands committed is if anything Piracy on the high Seas, and, on the authority of \"re Terman\" 33° L. J. M. C. 201 is not within the Treaty and Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, being justiciable here. Phil. 379, 391.\n\n33 L. J. M. C. 201.\n\nThe offence for which the Prisoner stands committed is the one for which his rendition was claimed, namely Murder. Murder is a distinct crime from Piracy though too frequently coupled with it.\n\nThe Prisoner after the commission of the crime returned to China. Afterwards and while a Chinese Tribunal was sitting for the Trial of some of his accomplices, he was found in this Colony. He therefore, \"took refuge\" in Hongkong, within the meaning of Art. 21 of the Treaty of Tientsin.\n\nThe Point here raised involves three Questions.\n\nA. Is the crime disclosed by the Depositions Piracy jure gentium and cognizable by the Hongkong Courts?\n\nB. If it be so, is Piracy jure gentium a crime within the intent of the Treaty of Tientsin?\n\nC. If not within the Treaty, may the Prisoner be surrendered for the crime of Murder in respect of which crime alone the application for his rendition and his commitment are limited, though the facts may also disclose the crime of Piracy jure gentium?\n\n### Firstly as to A.\nThe opinion of the Law officers of the Crown in England in 1852 will be found at page 229 of Mr. Forsyth's Work on Constitutional Law, and is to the effect that in a Case precisely similar to the present one (the sole difference being that the Foreign Coolie Emigrant ship in which the Murder was committed was an American ship instead of a French one) the crime was not cognizable by the Tribunals of Hongkong, and consequently was not Piracy jure gentium. Since In re Ternan, 9 Cox C. C., P. the date of that Opinion the Case of the Joseph Gerrity was decided, in which the Judges held that upon the construction of the word \"Piracy\" in the Schedule of the Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, Piracy jure gentium was not included in the List of Crimes for which Extradition could be demanded.\n\nNaylor. Falmer, 22 L. J. Ex. 331.\n\nIn that Case the Judges were of opinion that the crime committed on board the Joseph Gerrity was if anything, Piracy jure gentium; but the facts were not the same as in the present Case. From the Report of it (nomine, in re Ternan) in 9 Cox. C. C., Crompton J. seems to base his opinion that the crime was Piracy jure gentium on the ground that the Prisoners had surreptitiously embarked in the Joseph Gerrity in the disguise of Passengers.\n\nIn the present Case the depositions show that the vessel carried Emigrants for Peru under Contracts of Service, and that the Coolies seized the ship for the purpose of getting rid of their contracts and returning to their own country. The element of \"universal hostility\" is here wanting to constitute Piracy jure gentium. The seizure was made animo revertendi and not animo furandi though the ship was afterwards plundered. It cannot be said that the Coolies who were engaged in the seizure, were outlaws recognizing no Flag and no Government.\n\nIt is submitted, therefore, that notwithstanding Ternan's Case, the opinion of Sir John Harding, Sir Frederic Thesiger, and Sir FitzRoy Kelly, given in 1852 upon precisely similar facts as those appearing in the depositions before the Court, is still a correct exposition of the Law. Mr. Forsyth has published that Opinion in his recent work on Constitutional Law without any remark, although be frequently refers to Ternan's Case. (As to the Elements of Piracy jure gentium, see note 81 to Wheaton's International Law by Prof. Dana (8th Edition), Kent's Comm. by Abdy p. 428, 1 Wildman's International Law p. 208.)\n\n### Secondly as to B.\nIt must be borne in mind that in the Treaty of Tientsin no particular crimes are named and that our Government has stipulated to deliver to the Chinese Authorities \"Criminals, subjects of China, who shall take refuge in Hongkong,\" without any limitation as to the nature of the crime.\n\nTherefore as far as concerns the nature of the crime charged, it is again submitted that on the face of the Treaty and of the Ordinance, No. 2 of 1850, a Court of Law has no power to release a Chinese Prisoner committed by the Magistrate under that Ordinance if the depositions show that there is any Evidence of the commission by him of a crime known to British Law. On this point the evidence of Mr. H. T. Holland (Legal adviser to the Colonial Office) before the Special Committee of the House of Commons on Extradition which sat in 1867, is as follows (p. 49 of Report) :-\n\n| Question | Answer |\n| --- | --- |\n| M. Layard, Question 985.-Have you a list of the various crimes for which we should give people up under the Treaties and Agreements which exist in China? | We have only the Treaty of Tientsin. |\n| Question 987.-Is there no definition of the crime? | No, none at all. Consequently, two questions arose upon that Article 21; first, whether the Treaty required the extradition of all Chinese Criminals, including Political Offenders; and secondly, whether we were bound to give up Offenders when we knew they were going to be tortured. I believe there has been some difference of opinion here upon that Second Point; but instructions have at all events been given both by Lord Russell and Mr. Cardwell, that Political Offenders should not be given up, and that Persons should not be given up in case where we knew that torture would be applied. |\n| Question 988.--Then in fact the definition of the crime under the Treaty is left entirely to the Colonial Government? | Yes. Upon the face of the Treaty we ought to give up every one who is claimed for any crime at all, because it says simply \"if Criminals, subjects of China, shall take refuge in Hongkong, or in British vessels, they shall be given up.\" |\n\nIt cannot be argued that Piracy jure gentium is not a crime which may be included in extradition Treaties, for the Imperial Extradition Act of 1870, expressly includes it, and it was inserted in the Schedules of Crimes of our recent Hongkong and Macao Extradition Ordinance (`No. 13 of 1870`) by order of the Secretary of State.\n\nTherefore if the terms of the Treaty of Tientsin are large enough to include that crime, and it is contended that they are, as they include all crimes, there is no legal objection to the commitment, on the ground that the depositions disclose a crime of Piracy jure gentium. The decision in Ternan's Case is not in point, as it turns upon the construction of the limited Schedule of Crimes annexed to the Treaty with the United States, whereas there is no limit to the description of crimes for which the surrender of a Chinese may be demanded of the British Government by the Chinese Authorities under the Treaty of Tientsin.\n\n### Thirdly as to C.\nMay the Prisoner be surrendered on the charge of Murder though the evidence supporting it is sufficient also to support a charge of Piracy?\n\nThis question has been answered in the affirmative by the Law Officers of the Crown in England, as may be seen by reference to the Report of the Select Committee on Extradition, p. 54:\n\n| Question | Answer |\n| --- | --- |\n| Examination of the Right Honorable E. Hammond. Question 1052.-What is the next point you wish to refer to? | In question 73 a question was raised as to giving up a man claimed by the United States on a charge of piracy. A person named Locke was charged in the Bahamas with conspiracy and forgery in connection with the destruction by a Confederate privateer the Chesapeake of an American Merchant Vessel the Hanover. That was in 1864 and 1865. His extradition was also demanded by the United States, on charges of Piracy and Murder. In that case it was held, that if the Piracy had been committed on the high seas, though on board an American vessel, it would be triable in a British Court, but if the charge was confined to Murder, though on the high seas, the vessel being an American vessel, over which the United States would have exclusive jurisdiction on the high seas, the man might be given up. The case of the Joseph Gerrity (10 Law Times Reports New Series, page 499) was cited by the Law Officers in support of this Doctrine as regards Piracy, but not as applicable as regards Murder. |\n\nPage 303", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 284413, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "page_number": 308, "title": "CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4]", "content_text": "# Extract from Despatch No. 3 of the 26th December, 1885, from The Right Honorable Edward Cardwell, M.P.\n\n## 5th Point\nThere has been no complaint, information or communication by any officer of the Chinese Government made or forwarded to the Committing Magistrate or to his Court desiring the arrest of any Person being a Chinese subject and alleging, &c., &c., to give the Magistrate Jurisdiction under Section 1 of Ordinance 2 of 1850, and no Warrant or Order from the Governor to the Magistrate under Section IV.\n\nThe Prisoner was already in custody upon a charge then under Investigation. Section I of Ordinance 2 of 1850 therefore applies and no Warrant from the Governor under Section IV was required.\n\nThe letter from the Colonial Secretary to the Magistrate informing him of the Demand for Extradition is annexed to the depositions. The practice in England is similar. (See Report of Select Committee on Extradition page 18.)\n\nEvidence of Sir Thomas Henry.\n\n| Question | Answer |\n| --- | --- |\n| 319.-Do you get all the London Cases? | The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs examines the papers, and if he sees that the offence is one of those named in the Treaty, he sends the papers on to Home Secretary. The papers are examined at the Home Office again, and if the Home Secretary is satisfied that it is a Case within the Treaty, he then sends to the Chief Magistrate at Bow-street a letter, signifying that requisition has been made in the proper manner by the Ambassador or the Minister of the Foreign Country to have the accused delivered up. |\n| 320.-That letter sets you in motion? | That sets me in motion. |\n\nThe Practice to be followed in Hongkong is prescribed in a Despatch from the Secretary of State, of which the following is an extract:\n\n\"Questions have been raised both as to the forms in which the extradition shall be demanded and to the cases to which it shall apply, on both of which I am desirous that you should be fully informed of the views of Her Majesty's Government.\n\n\"On the first head I am to instruct you that the Consular or other Diplomatic Officer is in all cases the recognized Channel of communication between Chinese and British functionaries. That all ordinary communications should be carried on through that Officer and that without his concurrence direct communications should not take place between Colonial Officers and the Chinese Government. Requisitions for the delivery of Criminals should therefore be conveyed to the Colonial Government through the Consular or Diplomatic Officer or with his authority.\"\n\nUnder `6 & 7 Vic. cc. 75 & 76`, the Statutes passed to carry out the Treaties with France and the United States, the communication to the Magistrate must be by Warrant under Seal. Under Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, it is not even required to be in writing. The Writ of Habeas Corpus in this case is a Writ at Common Law and the Return cannot be traversed (3 Chitty's Stat. 3d. Ed. p. 69 note).\n\n## 6th Point\nThere is no evidence whatever before the Court, nor was there before the Magistrate to show that the offence charged against the Prisoner is an offence against the Laws of China. The alleged offence having been committed on board a French ship on the high seas, the presumption is the Chinese Courts have no jurisdiction, and the evidence shows that Chinese Mandarins having the opportunity to arrest and try the Coolies from the \"Nouvelle Penelope,\" took no steps to punish them, (Phil. 377, 413) and no right to claim Extradition.\n\nThere is nothing in the Treaty of Tientsin or in Ordinance No. 2 of 1850 which imposes upon the Magistrate the duty of ascertaining that the crime charged is a crime against the Laws of China;-but in any Case the Court will assume that Murder being a crime malum in se as distinguished from malum prohibitum, is a crime against the Laws of all civilized nations.\n\nIf the Description of Crimes for which Chinese may be surrendered under the Treaty of Tientsin is to be limited at all, it is submitted that it should be limited to such crimes as by our Statute or Common Law would, if committed by a British subject, be justiciable by the Courts of this Colony. This Rule was adopted in the Ashburton Treaty. (See In re Windsor, 10, Cox C. C.), and is also adopted in the Imperial Extradition Act of 1870, in which the following heading to the Schedule of Crimes is prefixed:\n\n\"The following List of Crimes is to be construed according to the Law existing in England, or in a British Possession (as the case may be) at the date of the alleged crime, whether by Common Law or by Statute made before or after the passing of this Act.\"\n\nIf the Murder charged in this Case had been committed by a British subject, it would have been justiciable by the Courts of this Colony. (`Reg. v. Azzopardi. 2 Moody, C. C. 288.`)\n\n## 7th Point\nThe depositions disclose no offence whatever. The conduct of the Coolies in getting possession of the ship being justifiable, they being illegally restrained of their liberty and there being no excess. Unless the acts charged against the Prisoner are such as English Laws attach criminal responsibility to, the Extradition Treaty does not apply.\n\nThe depositions disclose the Murder of nine persons.\n\nAll homicide is prima facie Murder subject to be reduced to justifiable homicide by the particular facts proved in defence. (1 Russell on Crimes, p. 668.) The Prisoner is identified as being one who actually took part in the Murder of the Captain and was an accomplice in the general massacre of the other victims. There is no evidence of his having been illegally coerced and much less of his having been reduced to slavery by the Master of the ship, Captain Le Vigoureux, whom he murdered, or by any one connected with the ship. In Anderson's case (that of the fugitive slave) it was admitted that the case was one of Slavery. (See Wheaton's Int. Law, 8th Edition, Note 75.) Here the question whether the homicide was Murder or excusable homicide on the plea of self defence is not raised on behalf of the Prisoner in the depositions. One of the witnesses states that he was kidnapped by a Barber, Chea Afook, but nevertheless that he told the Macao Authorities he was willing to go and did contract to go to Peru. He likewise says that he heard others say they had been kidnapped. But he does not accuse the Master of the ship or any of the crew of the kidnapping but on the contrary describes their conduct to have been most kind.\n\nThe \"proof of guilt\" required to justify the Surrender under the Treaty of Tientsin is thus stated in a Despatch of the Duke of Newcastle:\n\n\"It is at the same time quite clear in the letter of the Tientsin Treaty that it is only on proof of their guilt that Chinese Criminals can be demanded by Chinese Officers and the proof intended can of course be no other than proof satisfying the minds of those,--the British Officers--who have to determine the question at this preliminary stage. On this head I have to instruct you that as a general rule reasonable evidence ought to be accepted as sufficient, such for example as would lead a Grand Jury, in this Country to find a true bill where the evidence is ex parte only, or such as with evidence on both sides, would induce a Magistrate to commit for Trial.\"\n\nThe Expression \"Proof of Guilt\" in the Treaty of Tientsin has had legislative interpretation, so far as our Courts are concerned, by Section III of Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, which directs the Magistrate to commit on \"probable cause of guilt.\" There is abundant \"probable cause\" within the meaning of Section III of Ordinance No. 2 of 1850, to warrant the Committal. (Wheaton's International Law, Section CXVII, Note 75, by Professor Dana, 8th Edition.)\n\nTernan's case. 9 Cox, C. C.\n\nTernan's Case shows that a Court or a Judge, upon such a Proceeding as the present, is not to weigh the effect of the evidence; that is a matter for the Magistrate. The Court can only consider whether there is enough evidence to justify a Committal, and it is unnecessary to add that in the present case no Magistrate could hesitate to commit the Prisoner for Trial if the case were cognizable by the Supreme Court.\n\nIt has been doubted in the United States whether evidence of Justification of killing can be received at all under the Extradition Treaty with Great Britain. (See In re John Bennett, Southern District Court of New York, reported in 11 Law Times N. S. page 488.)\n\nThe King v. Marks (3 East) shows that if there be a corpus delicti on the depositions, the Prisoner must be remanded, and the cases collected by Mr. Forsyth at page 451 of his work on Constitutional Law show that the Return (if necessary) may be amended. Finally it is again submitted that all Decisions upon other Extradition Treaties are inapplicable so far as the nature of the crime charged is concerned, inasmuch as the Treaty of Tientsin embraces all crimes. The facts alleged in the Return cannot be traversed. [The Writ of Habeas Corpus taken out in this case is a Writ at common Law. As to contradicting the Return...]", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-149 - Lieut Governor Whitfield - 1871 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 295491, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-169 - Others - 1874", "page_number": 715, "title": "CO129-169 - Others - 1874", "content_text": "## Order in Council under Section I of \"the Extradition Act 1870\" (33 & 34 Vic C 52) and not Local Ordinance\n\nThe would also, in my opinion, be very desirable to define the crimes and offences for which fugitive offenders may under the Treaty of Tientsin be surrendered. On this point I would refer to the recent judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of the Attorney General of Hong Kong F. Kwok Asing.\n\nIf it should be decided to effect the proposed change by means of a Local Ordinance, I would suggest the insertion of a clause (which I omitted in my Draft Bill) rendering false and contradictory evidence given before the Governor in Council punishable in the same manner as perjury committed in the proceeding of a Judicial Court.\n\nJulian Pauncefote, \nChief Justice of the Leeward Islands, and late Attorney General of Hongkong. \nAntigua, 25 Feb. 1874.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-169 - Others - 1874.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 295686, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-170 - Sir Kennedy - 1875 [1-3] -- Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [3-6]", "page_number": 148, "title": "CO129-170 - Sir Kennedy - 1875 [1-3] -- Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [3-6]", "content_text": "143\n\ndistrib unnecessarily \nthe amicable relations \nexisting \nbetween the two \nGovernments - 8.3.\n\nJudgment of \nobserved in the \nthe Prison Committee to which \nhave before referred, \nthat \nthe extreme generality of \nthe \nWords \ncrimes and offences against \nthe law of \nChina, \nfirst section \ntheir \n1850 \nthe \nin the \nOrdinance \nrenders \nConstitution difficult, and it appears \nto \nus \nthat \nfitting \nappropriately presents itself \nan opportunity of amending the local Legislation which governs \nthe \nSurrender \nof \nCriminals \nunder the Treaty. \nWe \nthink it would \nbe \ndesirable to repeal \nthe \ntwo existing \nOrdinances \nand to \nsubstitute \none \napplicable \nto \nevery \nfuture arrangement \nwhich might be made \nwith the Chinese Government \non \nthe subject \nof extradition. The new \nOrdinance.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-170 - Sir Kennedy - 1875 [1-3] -- Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [3-6].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 296531, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-171 - Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [7-11] -- Sir Kennedy - 1875 [12]", "page_number": 261, "title": "CO129-171 - Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [7-11] -- Sir Kennedy - 1875 [12]", "content_text": "Separate Despatches\n\nTo go of 4 Aug 1875 and No 32.\n\nNo 102 of 13th Aug 1875. (There Papers Hong Kong) 70641\n\nDespatch No 90 treats solely the Schedule of Extradition and this is the matter most difficult to adjust.\n\nUnder Article 21 of the Treaty the British boot \"if Criminals subjects of China shall take refuge in Hongkong on board British Ships there, they upon due requisition by Chinese Authorities shall be searched for and Proof of their Guilt be delivered up\".\n\nThe extreme generality of these words has given rise to much difficulty in practice.\n\nSir Henry Holland's Evidence on the subject given before the Select Committee will be found at p. 49-50, Questions 985-1000 of the Report sent herewith.\n\n... copy of Counsel at Counsel's Opinion on the Progress of the case of Houstong & Kwok a sing, which is Marked pp. 5-6.\n\nI have inked the red in the Views expressed by the Judicial Committee and the Crimes for which they should be surrendered under the Treaty of Extradition.\n\nThe Despatch transmits four Schedules of Extradition Crimes. The one prepared by the Attorney (see first Column) seems unobjectionable.\n\nThat suggested by Robertson is quite unobjectionable and pointed out in the Despatch.\n\nWith regard to the words of the Act (see within) Despatch No 102 & 13 Aug 1875, Section 16. I think the concluding words of subsection (1) give rise to the objection.\n\n \n \"Extradition ... should be defined in ...\"\n\nPage XX", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-171 - Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [7-11] -- Sir Kennedy - 1875 [12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 305404, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-187 - Governor Hennessy - 1880 [1-4]", "page_number": 145, "title": "CO129-187 - Governor Hennessy - 1880 [1-4]", "content_text": "towards \n\nChairs sent from Government House were provided for the whole party, but the Viceroy preferred his own sedan chair. Two officers of the Viceroy's staff, with a Deputy officer, Mr. CH'ÊN SUNG-SHU, took command of the escort. The procession formed without difficulty in the following order: First, came a party of Chinese Marines armed with Snider rifles; next, twelve of the Viceroy's private servants, without arms; then, six staff officers on horseback, followed by an enormous red umbrella borne by two men who walked in front of the Viceroy's sedan chair and its eight bearers. Next followed some more staff officers on horseback; next the Viceroy's Aide-de-Camp and his interpreter, whilst Colonel LAI and Sub-Magistrate WONG of Kowloong City, with some of their subordinate officers, closed the procession, which presented a rather picturesque aspect as it slowly wound its way to Government House, the whole length of the road being lined by Police Constables placed at intervals of a few yards. On reaching Murray Barracks, where the guard of honour with the band were stationed, the Viceroy gracefully bowed to the colours and to the officers, as the troops presented arms. A guard of honour of Sikh armed police was drawn up under the portico of Government House, and presented arms as the Viceroy ascended the steps, where His Excellency the Governor, in Court uniform, received his illustrious guest, and conducted him forthwith into the drawing-room, where the members of Council were successively introduced to the Viceroy. Amongst the company assembled to receive His Excellency were, His Excellency Major General DONOVAN, His Honour Chief Justice Sir JOHN SMALE, Commodore Suttie, R.N., the Honourable W. H. MARSH, Colonial Secretary, Honourable J. RUSSELL, Acting Attorney-General, Honourable J. M. PRICE, Surveyor-General, Honourable M. S. TONNOCHY, Acting Colonial Treasurer, Honourable P. RYRIE, M.L.C., Honourable NG CHOY, M.L.C., Commander CHING, R.N., H.M.S. Iron Duke, Commander SALMOND, R.N., H.M.S. Midge, Commander EDWARDS, R.N., H.M.S. Kestrel, Commander EVANS, R.N., H.M.S. Hart, Lieut. Commander BRIDGER, R.N., H.M.S. Sheldrake, Lieut. CLARK, R.N., H.M.S. Iron Duke, Major HUSKISSON, A.M.S., Captain ST. CLAIR, Brigade-Major, Lieutenant DRUMMOND, A.D.C., Major PALMER, A.D.C., Dr. Eitel, Chinese Secretary and Mr. D'ALMADA E CASTRO, Private Secretary. On shaking hands with Sir JOHN SMALE, the Viceroy said he had heard a good deal of him, and of his exertions for the suppression of the coolie trade. The Viceroy also recognised the Honourable P. RYRIE, who had been introduced to him, he said, on a former occasion, in Canton. When the Honourable NG CHOY was presented, the Viceroy cordially congratulated him on his appointment as a Member of Council, and appeared to have entirely forgotten or forgiven the very strong criticism which Mr. NG CHOY last year, as counsel in an extradition case, passed on the action of some of the Viceroy's subordinates, whose tampering with witnesses for the defence Mr. NG CHOY at the time exposed in unsparing terms. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Tung-wah Hospital Committee, Messrs. CHIU U-T'IN and LEUNG ON, were also present by invitation, and were subsequently introduced to the Viceroy. There was some conversation in the drawing-room between the Viceroy and the Governor, who were seated between Major-General Donovan on the one side, and the Chief Justice on the other. The Viceroy spoke of the personal friendship he felt for Mr. HENNESSY, and said he should not fail to take the first opportunity, after arrival in Peking, to bring to the notice of the Throne how well Mr. HENNESSY deserved the thanks of the Emperor for the effect his policy has had on the maintenance of good relations between England and China. He expressed also a wish to have a portrait of Mr. HENNESSY, and promised to send his own in return. No business, official or diplomatic, was alluded to, the Viceroy being evidently careful to preserve for his visit the character of a friendly semi-official call. He also explained that, if he had not already been relieved of his office in Canton, without having entered yet upon his office in Nanking, he would not have been able to pay even this informal visit to Hongkong, without a special Imperial Edict. He gave Mr. HENNESSY a cordial invitation to visit him in Nanking, where, he said, he would take up his residence as soon as he had paid a visit to his mother and reported himself at the Court. On being shown the pictures of Her Majesty the Queen, the Prince Consort and the members of the Royal Family, His Excellency spoke of the length of Her Majesty's reign, and made some laudatory remarks on the subject. He also showed great interest in two portraits of Lord BEACONSFIELD, and some conversation arose as to the correct pronunciation of the first syllable in the name; and he evinced his knowledge of the Premier's policy when he quietly remarked that he was surprised to notice the great age of Lord BEACONSFIELD as, from the vigour of his Government, he had imagined him to be a much younger man. After an inspection of Mr. HENNESSY'S collection of blue and white Ming porcelain, and other antiques, the whole assembly adjourned to the dining-room, where tea was served. The intermixture of English naval uniforms and Chinese costumes presented a good effect. On rising to leave, the Viceroy bowed to all the visitors present, and once more assured Mr. HENNESSY \n\n## 142 \n\nof his warm friendship, to which he added the hope of seeing him soon a guest in his future home at Nanking. He also left his cards for the General, the Commodore, and the Chief Justice. The Viceroy then left, accompanied by His Excellency the Governor, who parted from him at the wharf, where the Viceroy embarked in the launch Fei-ma. He subsequently privately visited the City Hall, accompanied by Dr. Eitel, and spent a considerable time in examining the Museum library, where he specially noticed the autograph of the Queen. He went over the whole building, and then proceeded to the Public Gardens, which he perambulated at leisure, without concealing his admiration of the effect produced by the talent and care bestowed on the gardens by Mr. FORD, the Superintendent. He did not visit any other place, but returned on board, and left shortly afterwards to return to Canton. \n\nWe have good reason to believe that this visit was really what it purported to be, a mere friendly call, prompted by feelings of personal friendship for Mr. HENNESSY. But, considering that His Excellency LAU is the Ex-Viceroy of Canton, and the Viceroy elect of Nanking, and that in his latter capacity he will be ex-officio Superintendent of trade for the South of China, this visit not only reflects favourably on the principles which governed the Viceroy's past career, but indicates also the friendly tendencies which will no doubt mark his Government of the Two Kiang in Central China and give colour to his future superintendency of the trade of South China.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-187 - Governor Hennessy - 1880 [1-4].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 307687, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-191 - Public Offices & Others - 1880", "page_number": 265, "title": "CO129-191 - Public Offices & Others - 1880", "content_text": "261\n\nnot\n\nthe requisite capacity to endure physical agony. Surely this is not to serve the ends of justice. It cannot see on what ground the surrender can be justified\n\nif a crime then goes\n\nunpunished\n\nand is the criminal.\n\nbehind a safe refuge on British Soil? I have answered items in the Memorandum which I drew up for the Society. We can banish\n\na man\n\nup for\n\nmen who come to be charged\n\nwith crimes\n\nit is our duty to\n\nourselves to do so, and if we desire that they should be punished, we must take upon\n\nourselves\n\nthe burden of bringing\n\nand\n\npunishing them ourselves. The De treaty provision of the then Sir\n\nCh...\n\nwas\n\na blunder or rather\n\na tissue of blunders. It gave us no corresponding Extradition right\n\nit did not in terms exclude\n\npolitical offences (the only offences that the Chinese Government cared for)\n\nand it made no stipulation against the use of torture if any adequate\n\nwere possible\n\n-\n\nI hope that our Committee\n\nwill not imagine\n\nthat I am\n\nthe head of the anti-extradition School. If they will refer to the Wellington\n\nTerries", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-191 - Public Offices & Others - 1880.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 319611, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882", "page_number": 166, "title": "CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882", "content_text": "Surrender to the Chinese.\n\nGovernment of two Chinese Fugitives charged with the crime of Piracy, and I am in compliance with the request of the Earl of Kimberley to be informed of the answer which in Lord Granville's opinion should be sent to that Enquiry, that if, as Lord Granville presumes, the Piracy referred to in the Telegram is Piracy jure gentium, it would seem that the crime is not within the Extradition Clause of the Treaty of Tientsin, and that the Prisoners should be committed for trial at the Supreme Court of Hong Kong, as decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Appeal Case of The Attorney", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 319699, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882", "page_number": 254, "title": "CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882", "content_text": "# Gentlemen,\n\n**Foreign Office, June 4, 1882.**\n\nI AM directed by Earl Granville to request that you will favour him with your opinion on the following point :-\n\nBy Article XXI of the Treaty of the 26th June between Great Britain and China, commonly known as the Treaty of Tien-tsin, it is provided that-\n\n\"If criminals, subjects of China, shall take refuge in Hong Kong, or on board the British ships there, they shall, upon due requisition by the Chinese authorities, be searched for, and, on proof of their guilt, be delivered up.\n\n\"In like manner, if Chinese offenders take refuge in the houses or on board the vessels of British subjects at the open ports, they shall not be harboured or concealed, but shall be delivered up, on due requisition by the Chinese authorities addressed to the British Consul.\"\n\nNOTE. The construction of this Article came under the consideration of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the appeal case of the Attorney-General of Hong Kong *v.* Kwok-Asing (`5 Law Rep., Priv. Co., 179`).\n\nThe Extradition Clause above cited is carried out in Hong Kong under `Ordinance No. 2 of 1850` and `Ordinance No. 2 of 1871`.\n\nThe first case which attracted public attention to the subject was that of the surrender by the Government of Hong Kong of a fugitive described as the Mo-Wong in 1865, the particulars of which will be found in the Parliamentary Papers sent herewith.\n\nIn consequence of the apprehensions entertained that fugitives surrendered to the Chinese authorities might be subjected to torture, it has been the practice of the Government of Hong Kong, in pursuance of instructions from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, to decline to surrender any fugitive under the Treaty unless a promise in writing be previously given by the Viceroy of Canton to Her Majesty's Consul there, that no torture should be applied.\n\nThis promise has invariably been given; and until recently there appeared no reason to believe that it has not been faithfully observed. Rumours, however, have been lately circulated in the public press of Hong Kong to the effect that the promise was habitually disregarded; and in August 1880 Mr. Hewlett, Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, was called on for a Report on the subject, and especially with reference to the case of thirteen prisoners who had been surrendered during the previous year, and who were alleged to have been tortured.\n\nYou will perceive from Mr. Hewlett's Report, contained in his despatch `No. 14` of the 29th April, 1881, that he entertains the conviction that, \"in spite of the Viceroy's explicit promise to the contrary, torture in a horrible form was had recourse to in order to extort a confession from some of the thirteen criminals whom the Hong Kong Government had given up to the Canton authorities.\" In the meanwhile, a fresh demand had been made by the Viceroy to the Government of Hong Kong for the surrender of thirteen other fugitives charged with murder, and Consul Hewlett informed...\n\n**The Law Officers**\n\n8 Dr Deane QC", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-205 - Public Offices - 1882.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 322803, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-211 - Governor Sir Bowen - 1883 [8-9]", "page_number": 160, "title": "CO129-211 - Governor Sir Bowen - 1883 [8-9]", "content_text": "155\n\n(8)\n\nJune 30th this year is only 4, and one extradition case to Singapore, and no case has been grave enough to send to the Supreme Court. This result must be considered satisfactory.\n\nIn paragraph 18 page 123 of the Blue-book cited above Lord KIMBERLEY partially discusses three different suggested remedies. His first suggestion is to make it a misdemeanour to purport to pass a child for money in the Colony. The objections to that change in the Criminal law His Lordship himself pointed out. I think they are almost fatal and that our present Criminal law goes as far as a general regard for liberty will permit. His Lordship's third scheme, namely, registration of adopted children, had been thought of and already suggested; but there are in my opinion insuperable objections to that plan. The best informed Chinese think so too; for it will be remembered that money always passes when strangers-in-blood are adopted, as well as in cases of domestic service. The registration of such a transaction at a Government office would be at once construed as giving a good title in virtue of the money payment and it would be used against a child seeking its freedom. Frequently Chinese will come to the Registrar General's office and ask to have a transaction of sale into adoption witnessed with the view of having the fact recorded that a certain amount of money was advanced or paid. This is to preserve evidence in case a claim is made for the child. The danger therefore is that the Government would be compromised by countenancing in any way a transaction where money was paid for a child. I think a modification of Lord KIMBERLEY'S second suggestion would be practicable, as it is based on the universal custom of giving security which prevails in China. It would work smoothly and probably accomplish much good. At all events it might be tried as an experiment.\n\nThe scheme which I suggest is that power should be given to the Registrar General to summon before him suspicious persons who had \"pocket-daughters\" or female domestic servants, and in his discretion to call upon them to find reasonable security for their bonâ fides towards such children. The Registrar General should associate with himself say three or four members of the Po Leung Kuk--the Chinese society for the protection of women and children-who would advise him as a Consulting Committee. He should also have power to summon before him all women of disreputable character who kept girls between the ages of 8 and 16 inclusive by virtue of adoption or of purchase for domestic service. He should have power to require the attendance of the girls at his office before himself and the consulting Chinese Committee. He should be able also to summon persons as witnesses who could give information about either the children or their so-called owners. The girl could be instructed in her rights in cases of suspicion and shown how she could be protected; and the woman put under a rule of bail to produce the girl when required. There should also be a power of appeal in a summary way to a Judge in chambers against any order of the Registrar General, and the Registrar General should be empowered to apply to a Judge for a writ of Habeas Corpus with the view of taking away any child from the custody of persons who had no right to keep it, and whose retention of it militated against the child's interests. The Judge of course would be governed by the principles of English law and make such order as the best interests of the child demanded. The knowledge of the existence of such a power and its occasional exercise would, in my opinion, be most useful, and the leading Chinese whom I have consulted think it is the only practical method yet suggested which whilst not interfering with the respectable and settled population would be a very powerful aid towards suppressing the \"Tsó Chü fa\" nurseries for rearing up young girls for immoral purposes. The names of the consulting Chinese Committee should be approved by the Governor. The Committee would have no executive power. Their function would be purely consultative. By way of further precaution, and for the better promulgation of our law of liberty, I think there might also be erected in some of the public thoroughfares on the borders of our territory on the mainland and near some of the Chinese wharves stone tablets with inscriptions to the effect that in British territory no such thing as slavery existed, and that all transactions of purchase and sale of children were null and void. Similar tablets might be placed at the Temples and Theatres and other places of public resort. The Chinese promulgate edicts by proclamations and have engraved on stone what they want to be permanent. I would suggest also that notice boards should be put up permanently in the River steamers pointing out that every woman and child had a right to personal freedom and that no money bargain could be valid on English soil. On the steamers plying between Canton and here, and Macao and this port, and in the passenger steamers to the Straits Settlements such notices are posted up by the Emigration Officer warning people who go before him that they are free to refuse to go on board if they wish, and that they can complain to the officers on the ships or at Singapore. A more general statement of the rights of all persons might be prepared and painted on white boards. With these precautions in addition to those now in force, and a continued vigilant care on the part of all Judicial and Executive officers to promptly attend to all cases where there is any suspicion against the liberty of the subject, the abuses arising from the system of domestic service and adoption will be all but put a stop to, whilst the views of the Chinese -who are the bulk of the population-will be met, and their customs and usages maintained, (so far as is consistent with perfect freedom of the subject) as was promised them when Hongkong was erected into a Colony and they were invited to settle here.\n\nTO RECAPITULATE.\n\n1° It is shown that child adoption in China and among the Chinese in Hong-kong is always accompanied by the payment of money and a \"deed of gift\" or bill of sale when the adopted are strangers-in-blood; and that even money passes in the case of relatives if the parents of the adopted child are poor or not nearly related to the adopting parents.\n\n2° It is shown that male children are not bought and sold as servants in Hongkong nor in the Canton province, but that female children are disposed of for money by their parents according to Chinese usage and custom, and that the Chinese authorities recognise such sales as binding if executed with due formalities, whilst Hongkong treats all such transactions as null and void, giving no rights and conferring no title.\n\n3°. It is shown that the abuses arising from the Chinese system of money passing in the case of adoption and domestic service are :-----\n\n1 Kidnapping to some extent,\n\n2° Brothel bondage; and that female children who are voluntarily parted with by their parents for daughters and servants may be sold as prostitutes by disreputable persons.\n\n4° It is shown that claims set up by Chinese to ownership on the ground of purchase have been promptly set aside in Hongkong and the claimants punished for any assault or offence committed against the person claimed-and that no opportunity has been lost of proclaiming the freedom of the subject,\n\n(9)", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-211 - Governor Sir Bowen - 1883 [8-9].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 327019, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-218 - Administrator Marsh Governor Sir Bowen & Others - 1884 [11-12]", "page_number": 483, "title": "CO129-218 - Administrator Marsh Governor Sir Bowen & Others - 1884 [11-12]", "content_text": "be subjected to judicial torture.\n\nIt is unnecessary for us in our correspondence to repeat the facts so clearly set out in your letter. But the Committee desire me to add that several years ago they had a correspondence with Carl Spannier which produced the impression on their minds that her Majesty's Government would not allow the Extradition Act to be enforced in any case unless ample guarantee were given that torture would not be inflicted. The Committee, on the Bishop Raimondi's appeal, earnestly hope that it will meet with a favourable response from your Lordship, and that the person for whom he pleads will not be surrendered.\n\nI have the honour to be\nYour Lordship's obedient servant\nZW. Shenson\nSecretary\n\n## Page 480", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-218 - Administrator Marsh Governor Sir Bowen & Others - 1884 [11-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 330541, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-226 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [4-5]", "page_number": 4, "title": "CO129-226 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [4-5]", "content_text": "# Co.129/226\n\n## Contents\n## Volume II\n\n| Page | Subject |\n| --- | --- |\n| 103 | Report on Victoria Gaol for 1885 - Ordinance 7 of 1886. Moury, acting Governor |\n| 104 | |\n| 105 | |\n| 108 | |\n| 109 | |\n| 110 | |\n| 112 | Trade marks |\n| | Direct Cable with Singapore |\n| | Draft Cathedral Ordinance |\n| | Heavy Guns for the defence of Hong Kong |\n| | Ordinance 6 of 1886 : Printers and Publishers |\n| | Suicide of Ang Tai Duck in Prison |\n| | Presentation of the \"Belilios Educational Awards\" |\n| 118 | Finances of the Colony |\n| 119 | Extradition of Chung Chi Chang |\n| | Extradication of Chinese Pirate |\n| 124 | Increase of Taxation |\n| 130 | |\n| 133 | Passing of the Loan Ordinance |\n| 134 | Votes for sums in excess of Estimates for 1885 |\n| 135 | Council for March Quarter, Votes of Council |\n| 136 | Remarks on Estimates for 1886 |\n| 138 | Report on Botanical Gardens for 1885 |\n| 139 | Chinese Govt and Tung Wah Hospital |\n| 140 | |\n| 145 | Report of Committee of Enquiry into the Police Force |\n| 146 | Probable Vacancies in European Police Force |\n| | Report on the Hong Kong Observatory for 1885 |\n| | Accommodation in Victoria Gaol. Appt. of a Committee to enquire into |\n| | Appt. of a Committee to enquire into the growth of the Secret Triad Society |\n\nPage", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-226 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [4-5].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 331529, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-228 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [7-9]", "page_number": 3, "title": "CO129-228 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [7-9]", "content_text": "0129/228\n\nđang trong\n\n1886.\n\nVolume TV\n\nContents\n\n1\n\nSubject\n\nBlocking of Kellet's Bank by a row of files\n\nMt. Stephens Complaint reepy. Marine hot no. 184 Rules and Regulations of the Victoria Gaol\n\nOlap ho\n\nDate.\n\nacting Septe.\n\n6 July\n\nConf.\n\nGovernor marsh\n\nmy hister's appen. For Col. Seciplich, Hong Kong. Proceedings of the opium Commission\n\n232\n\n४\n\n294\n\n12\n\n235\n\n236\n\n\"\n\n237\n\n13\n\nJel\n\n21\n\n246\n\n24\n\n董事\n\n248\n\n26\n\nرا\n\nDraft\n\n251 29\n\n4\n\n253\n\n259\n\n262\n\n264\n\nPolice Pensions.\n\nExtradition of Cheung-a-chi\n\nEnlistment of 12 European Pobil Constables\n\nDraft Vagrancy Ordinance [punishment the infliction of corporal\n\nCrdee.\n\nНорд\n\nThe Triad society : Disappearand of Constable hi-Fun\n\nBoard\n\n3 Aug Proposed Establishment of a Chinese National Postbific Draft Public Health Ordinance, hew appts. to Samitany\n\n!!\n\n4\n\n12\n\n\"\n\n13\n\nአ\n\n265\n\n14\n\n\"\n\n26-9\n\n18\n\n\"F\n\n20\n\n#\n\n241\n\n272\n\n243\n\n2045\n\n*#\n\n4\n\n}}\n\n#\n\n24\n\n246\n\nJel\n\n25\n\n250\n\n129\n\n\"\n\n282\n\n30\n\nMajor\n\nSend Gordon's Military Pension\n\nlive of signals for storm warnings\n\nWaters\n\nDiscipline on AM. Ships in Colonial\n\nMaintenance of Discipline\n\nAllowance for Quarters in computation of perio\n\nTemporary appt of Mr. Bill Toving \"Capt Thomsett to the Pension of Mr. J. Parker\n\nParticulars of medical Appts in the Colony\n\nDraft brace. dealing with Triado\n\nBribery\n\nin the Police Force\n\nEnlistment of 6 more European Constables\n\nLegislation reepy.\n\nthe\n\nconveyance of catite Proposal to make public the proceedings of\n\nFinance Committee\n\nthe", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-228 - Acting Governor Marsh - 1886 [7-9].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 335755, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-235 - Public Offices - 1887", "page_number": 371, "title": "CO129-235 - Public Offices - 1887", "content_text": "## July 22, 1887\n\nLi, C. welt\n\n**DRAFT**\n\n7.0.\n\nT4 406 Hory Rory 368\n\nJuly\n\n**Under Secretary W** 25 July 87 **Greifs Office Immediate**\n\n## MINUTE\n\n25 July\n\nMr. Pearson 25, Mr. de Robeck 25\n\nMr. Wingfield. 25\n\nMr. Bramston.\n\nMr. Meade.\n\nSir R. Herbert.\n\nLord Onslow.\n\nSir H. T. Holland.\n\n**letter**\n\nIn reply to your letter of the 22nd Inst. I am directed by Sir H. Holland to transmit to you for the information of the Secretary of State and Committee of Enquiry as to the expenses connected with the Extradition of Mark... Hould be deemed...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-235 - Public Offices - 1887.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 358265, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-268 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1895 [7-11]", "page_number": 430, "title": "CO129-268 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1895 [7-11]", "content_text": "## DESPATCH\nA. Ahmed to be 4th Clerk in the Magistracy with a salary of $18648 a year, dof M. J. G. Marques to be 5th Clerk in this Magistracy with a salary of $18432 a year; understood it being un... that the salary of the Clerk in the Stamp Office will be reconsidered when a successor to M. d'Aquino is appointed.\n\nI regret that in their several other cases, it has not been found possible to adopt the recommendations for economy made by the Retrenchment Committee.\n\n**Governor.**\nNo. Hong Kong No. 17676\n\n| Subject | Date | Last previous Paper | Next subsequent Paper |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Extradition from N. Borneo | 3 Sept 1895 | `Copy BMB38` | 19726 |\n\nForwards for consideration Draft Bill with copy Atty. Gent's remarks in which he concurs.\n\n**(Minutes.)**\nW. Wingfield 7/10: See the A. G.'s minute: do we know what is the criminal law for N. Borneo?\n\nMr. Bramston 8/9/10: The Indian penal code with amending Acts was proclaimed in 1881 and is law still; but Shall I write to the company privately & ask?\n\nC.P.d. 12 Oct: Forward send a copy of this to the M. Borneo Company for any observations They may wish to make.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-268 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1895 [7-11].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 382674, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-307 - Governor Sir Blake - 1901 [10-12]", "page_number": 657, "title": "CO129-307 - Governor Sir Blake - 1901 [10-12]", "content_text": "His Honour.\n\nIt appears that the Committee's present address cannot be traced, nor is there any clue as to whether it is any longer in existence or what its present address may be, nor is there any information regarding the whereabouts of Mr. Maigatter.\n\nDESPATCH.\n\nHONG KONG\n\nNo. 2380\n\n20 JAN 12\n\nNo. 1500\n\n901\n\n(Subject.)\n\nExtradition of Catherine Herrington.\n\nPrevious Paper.\n\nCopy letter from Consul at Canton on the subject of trial.\n\n(Minutes.)\n\nSubsequent Paper.\n\nThe enclosures referred to in the letter were received for this.\n\n407-\n\nun 1202\n\nsent to Hong Kong.\n\nBM 227", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-307 - Governor Sir Blake - 1901 [10-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 390973, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-320 - Governor Sir Blake Acting Governor May - 1903 [11-12]", "page_number": 526, "title": "CO129-320 - Governor Sir Blake Acting Governor May - 1903 [11-12]", "content_text": "26\n\n27\n\nSPILSBURY 7. R.\n\nFugitive Offenders Act, 1881. Morocco Order in Council, 1889. 24th March and 3rd May, 1899.\n\nJUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL: Earl of HALSBURY, L.C., and Lords WATSON, HOBHOUSE, MACNAUGHTON and DAVEY.\n\n1 R. App. 1899, 392; 68 L.J. P.C. 66; 19 Cox C.C. 303.\n\nThe Supreme Court of Gibraltar, by an order of 5 September, 1898, ordered appellant to be tried before a Judge with or without assessors, in accordance with the Morocco Order in Council, 1889, and not with a jury of 12 men.\n\nUpon appeal therefrom it was\n\nHeld: That \"Section 38 of the Gibraltar Order in Council expressly applied to appellant's case. It was a criminal case depending before the Supreme Court of Gibraltar, which had concurrent original jurisdiction with the Court in Morocco. When once it is ascertained that the Supreme Court of Gibraltar was rightly seised of the jurisdiction to try, their Lordships think that the mode prescribed by the Gibraltar Order in Council must be pursued.\" Appellant was entitled to trial with a jury.\n\n(Appellant was ultimately acquitted by a jury at Gibraltar.)\n\nFurther papers having subsequently been submitted by the German Government, Bluhm was again brought up on the 5th March and committed on four further cases.\n\nAn order nisi for a writ of habeas corpus was obtained on the grounds of there being no sufficient evidence within two months for his extradition; and of irregularity in any proceedings after the two months: and of there being no evidence of the identity of the accused with the person wanted in Germany.\n\nHeld: There was sufficient evidence produced in reference to the one case within two months of apprehension, and prisoner was therefore not entitled to the benefit of Article XII. In regard to the other grounds it seems to me that the proceedings were entirely regular. The right given by Article XII. to a person against whom a case had not been made is to be absolutely set at liberty: if that does not apply the procedure is to be the same as the procedure in this country. It may be that when he gets over to Germany, and he is tried there, he may be entitled to say, under Article VII., or under the provisions of the law of Germany in accordance with Article VII, I have only been properly extradited with reference to one of these charges. If that is a good point, he can make it in Germany, but he cannot make it here.”\n\nIN RE JOSEPH BLUHM.\n\nGermany.\n\n15th March, 1901.\n\nKING'S BENCH:\n\nCHANNELL and BUCKNILL, JJ.\n\nL.R. Q.B.D. 1901 (1) 764; 70 L.J. K.B. 472.\n\nBluhm was arrested on 15th December, 1900, on a provisional warrant for obtaining money by false pretences, and was remanded from time to time until the 14th February, 1901, the last day of the two months mentioned in Article XII. of the treaty with Germany, at which time the Magistrate had before him a requisition supported by a warrant and evidence in respect of one case, which was thus ready for committal-the Magistrate being satisfied with the evidence and a warrant and evidence relating to 31 other cases, which, having only been received by the Magistrate the preceding day, had not been all translated; and in respect of these 31 cases the Magistrate was not prepared to decide upon the evidence, and he therefore remanded the prisoner for a further week (at the same time informing the defendant that he considered the evidence upon the one case sufficient to justify him in committing the defendant for extradition). At the end of a week, on the 21st February, 1901, the Magistrate committed the prisoner for extradition on the one case, and on 30 of the 31 cases mentioned in the further warrant.\n\nR. v. DIX.\n\nU.S.A.\n\n14th January, 1902\n\nKING'S BENCH: DARLING and PHILLIMORE, JJ.\n\n\"Times,\" 15th January, 1902.\n\nDix had been committed for extradition for the crimes of larceny, embezzlement, and fraud by a banker or member or officer of a company, upon two informations showing (i.) that, while acting as manager of a bank, he received money on deposit knowing at the time that the bank was insolvent and in failing circumstances; (ii) that, while president and manager of a bank, he fraudulently discounted certain worthless bills with the bank, and drew cheques on the bank, which were honoured although his account was overdrawn; when the bank got into financial difficulties, the bills were found to be worthless, and prisoner owed the bank about $23,000.\n\nA summons for a writ of habeas corpus was taken out.\n\nIt was\n\nAdmitted by the Attorney-General (appearing in support of the Magistrate's committal) that the first charge did not amount to larceny according to English law, and that the prisoner could not be extradited on that charge. And it was\n\nAdmitted by Mr. Biron (appearing for the prisoner) that the depositions as to the second charge made out a prima facie case of \"larceny by embezzlement\" within the definition of that offence in the Washington Statutes.\n\nHeld: That there was evidence of an offence within section 81 of the Larceny Act, 1861: it might be that in American law that would be called \"larceny by embezzlement\"; but the essential thing was to see whether what the evidence showed prima facie that the prisoner had done was a crime in\n\n520", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-320 - Governor Sir Blake Acting Governor May - 1903 [11-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 420196, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-358 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1909 [10-11]", "page_number": 86, "title": "CO129-358 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1909 [10-11]", "content_text": "## MINUTE\n\nOn the following amendment that I consider ought not to be made :- \n\nIt appears that the grant of relief against the forfeiture of a Lease is a matter which can properly be dealt with by a quasi-judicial body such as the Executive Committee.\n\nI am unwilling to withdraw it from consideration as it affects the public character likely to arise and it is one of substance.\n\n## DRAFT\n\nMr. Fiddes. \nMr. Just. \nMr. Cox. \nSir C. Lucas. \nSir F. Hopwood. \nCol. Seely. \nLord Crewe.\n\nConsider that the former slimmer take the advice of the Executive Committee on all such matters.\n\nIt is considered that the Governor in-Council must be retained in the second line of Section 10.\n\nThe question to be considered is whether the extradition Ordinance...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-358 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1909 [10-11].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 427015, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-369 - Acting Governor May Governor Sir Lugard - 1910 [10-11]", "page_number": 100, "title": "CO129-369 - Acting Governor May Governor Sir Lugard - 1910 [10-11]", "content_text": "1 \n\ndisallowance \n\nregard \n\nx \n\nto exercise his powers \n\nOrd. \n\nwith \n\nNo \n\n369 \n\n9 1910 \n\nZ X a g \n\nLegislature \n\n1. IT. \n\nJ \n\nentitled \n\nAn Ordinance \n\n* \n\napply \n\na \n\nSum \n\nnot exceeding forty-two \n\nSix Million and \n\nThousand \n\nfive hundred \n\nand \n\nForty-Three \n\nd Mors \n\nx \n\nThe \n\nPublic Service \n\nZa \n\ng \n\nYear 1911. \n\n1911.\" \n\n3. \n\nI am \n\nobliged for \n\nThe explanations \n\ngiven \n\nThe \n\nF. H. May's \n\n72 g \n\nOct. \n\nwith regard \n\nmain \n\nChanges \n\nThe \n\nEstimate \n\nand \n\nA \n\n5 \n\non \n\nThe programme of expenditure \n\n4. \n\n7. \n\nPublic Works. \n\nI \n\nwould observe \n\nThe Estimates \n\ncontain \n\nprovision for the \n\nnewly created post of \n\nthe Assistant \n\nCrown Solicitor : \n\nA \n\nThe \n\namount required for the \n\nsalary \n\nThis post will, \n\nhowever, be largely \n\nrecouped by fees for Extradition \n\nI may \n\nalso \n\nmention \n\nThe suggested grant \n\nof £100 \n\nfor Entomological \n\nResearch \n\nsuggested \n\nby the \n\nCommittee \n\n29438/10 \n\n(refers to \n\nthe \n\nGeneral \n\n/3/2 \n\nof \n\nThe 42nd \n\nNov.) \n\nIf approved, will \n\ninvolve additional expenditure. On the other \n\nhand", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-369 - Acting Governor May Governor Sir Lugard - 1910 [10-11].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 433643, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-381 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1911 [11-12]", "page_number": 224, "title": "CO129-381 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1911 [11-12]", "content_text": "## \n\nthe present Government of Canton, and be in no way mixed up with politics. They had at once grasped that portion of their Resolution dealing with National Love &c., when they heard I objected to it.\n\nIr. Sun Tak Tun Vice-Chairman rose and said the object of the Committee was entirely confined to Commerce. He had objected to their sending a Committee of 12 to Canton to investigate unless they first received a request or hint from the new Government.\n\nI then replied that I had listened with the utmost satisfaction to the speeches made, and had heard with special pleasure of the correct attitude, and sound advice given by the Members of Council. I had not convened this meeting with the primary object of discussing the question of this Committee, but rather to establish confidence between us, to have their views, and express my own on the general situation. I told them of the incident on the frontier, and pointed out how friendly my attitude had been, and that in the letter of the Railway I had agreed to re-open the line the moment that the Canton Section were in a position to do so. In all Executive and Administrative matters I was ready to co-operate with the provisional Government for the public peace and the re-establishment of trade and prevention of famine, but in purely legal questions such as extradition &c., I was at present powerless.\n\nDr. Ho Kai then asked me regarding the raising of funds. He said he had advised that there was nothing illegal in any individual sending his own money to Canton if he desired to do so, but he was in doubt whether he could legally transmit the subscriptions of others. I replied that no public fund in aid of the Revolutionary Government could be properly started in Hongkong, and no such fund could be advertised, or any company or association formed to promote it. I was not blind to the fact that there was no representative of the Peking Government in Kwangtung, and that the provisional Government must be carried on in order to save life and property in which Hongkong men were", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-381 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1911 [11-12].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 447489, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-410 - Governor Sir May - 1914 [3-5]", "page_number": 31, "title": "CO129-410 - Governor Sir May - 1914 [3-5]", "content_text": "who are how\n\nclaiming exemption\n\nHowever, unfair\n\nthough at the P.C.\n\nCase\n\nas\n\nwill refer to\n\nthey\n\nwill\n\nTreat it\n\ncouncil case\n\nleave\n\nunlawful\n\nsee that there is some\n\ncase on the\n\nmerits.\n\nwith regard to the advisability of having fish. Winlay.\n\nIn lock not\n\nMosing\n\non\n\naufro\n\nWe have\n\nThe winning\n\nan application for Special leave of consideration\n\nis desirable that we should defeat the application, &\n\nSui. R.7.\n\nweight\n\nmaybe\n\nthe idea\n\nLens\n\nA-\n\nit\n\nwho came out with their Landsley's\n\nuseful in dispelling that this\n\nin any\n\npolitical case\n\nmight be held to be\n\nwere the\n\nCommittee to suspect\n\nthat all the appellant's actions\n\ndirected now and kin\n\nhad been stopped\n\nin rebellious form or that it had\n\nhis intention to\n\nhad never heard\n\nConvert Yo\n\n1\n\nhis\n\nown private\n\n30\n\nBut there is also this to be\n\nConsidered\n\nretain\n\nthat it\n\nwe don't\n\nfir. R.7. for an application for\n\nleave,\n\ncation for\n\nside\n\nthe min\n\nthe applica\n\nmay, and if\n\ngranted, we\n\nhave their\n\nthe hearing\n\non the whole\n\n1.\n\n(i)\n\nShall\n\nagainst in\n\nall\n\nhaving regard to\n\nThe fact that it\n\nis\n\na\n\nCase\n\n7\n\nExtradition to China\n\nwh. the Committee may\n\nview with suspicion\n\n(ii) that there is a chance of\n\nme of a skilful Counsel creating\n\na political\n\nsphere\n\n(iii) The\n\nQuestions\n\nat issue are\n\ninternational\n\nstatus\n\nI should be inclined\n\nto retain fir. R.7.\n\nTo Mu\n\n;", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-410 - Governor Sir May - 1914 [3-5].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 459993, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]", "page_number": 126, "title": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]", "content_text": "Page 124\n\nV4878/5\n\nReport on an Ordinance intituled an Ordinance to amend the Deportation Ordinances, 1912 - 1914.\n\nThe Right Honourable Secretary of State signified his approval of the introduction of this Ordinance in His despatch of the 1st October, 1915.\n\nThe alterations referred to in that despatch have been made. Three other amendments were made in the bill in the committee stage.\n\nIn section 2 (1)(a), the words \"whatever the immediate or ultimate destination of the said ship\" were added.\n\nThis was done in order to make it clear that the Governor is to have power to choose the ship irrespective of its destination.\n\nIt was thought that a deportee might argue on the paragraph as originally drafted that he had a right to choose the destination and that the Governor had only the right of selection among ships leaving for that destination.\n\nThe following proviso was added at the end of sub-section (1) of Section 2:-\n\nProvided that where extradition proceedings have been previously taken against any such person, and the said proceedings have resulted in the discharge of such person either by a magistrate or by the Supreme Court on habeas corpus, nothing in this sub-section shall be construed as empowering the Governor to order such person to leave the Colony by any ship the immediate destination of which is a place in the state by which the surrender of such person was demanded.\n\nIt was thought advisable to insert this proviso as a matter of form, though it cannot be imagined that a person whose surrender had been demanded by a foreign state, but who had obtained his discharge in the extradition proceedings, should be surrendered.\n\nPage 124\n\n...\n\n...\n\nPage 125", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 468231, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]", "page_number": 535, "title": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]", "content_text": "-3-\n\nsome landlords were already preparing to collect from their tenants a considerably higher percentage of additional rent than was justified.\n\nSection 10 is directed to the case of persons in the service of the naval and military authorities who already pay income tax in the United Kingdom. Persons in this class have suffered severely through the war, chiefly on account of the abnormal rise in exchange, their pay being fixed in sterling, and there seemed to be a general feeling in the Colony that they should be relieved from this special war rate.\n\nThe outlying villages and agricultural districts are excluded from the schedule.\n\nIn my opinion this is an Ordinance to which His Excellency the Governor may properly assent in the name of His Majesty and on His behalf.\n\nAttorney General,\n\n12th June, 1917.\n\n41\n\nFonds.\n\n25th May.\n\n1\n\n1919.\n\nHONGKONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\n\nTHE COLONIAL TREASURER seconded, and the Bill was read a first time.\n\nEnemy Trading\n\n4140\n\nThe \"objects and reasons\" state :-It has been pointed out by the Crown Agent that the War Loan Ordinance, 14, makes all interest on bonds cease from the date of the drawing. The effect of this would be that a bond holder might not be able to claim his principal and interest on the amount so claimed. It has therefore been decided to provide that a holder shall be given notice before the date on which the interest ceases to run.\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the first reading of a Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to amend the law relating to trading with the enemy and the export of prohibited goods.\"\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a first time.\n\nThe Bill also provides for the mode of drawing in more detail than the principal Ordinance. It was originally intended that these details should be directed by the Governor under section 11 of the principal Ordinance, but it was considered convenient to include them in this Bill. The provisions are based on the model of the General Loan and Inscribed Stock Ordinance which is used in the case of loans domiciled with the Crown Agents.\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the first reading of a Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to repeal the North Borneo Extradition Ordinance, 1898.\"\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a first time.\n\nThe \"objects and reasons\" state :- The Straits Settlements and Protected States Fugitive Offenders Order in Council 1916, which was made by virtue of the provisions of the Fugitive Offenders (Protected States) Act, 1918, provides that the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, is to apply as if the State of North Borneo were a British possession. This Order in Council, which was published in the Hongkong Gazette of the 15th December, 1918, was brought into force on the 1st February, 1917, by the necessary notification under Article I. This notification was published in the Hongkong Gazette of the 27th April, 1917. In consequence of the above legislation the North Borneo Extradition Ordinance, 1898, Ordinance No. 1 of 1898 of the Ordinances of Hongkong, is no longer necessary, and this Bill accordingly repeals it.\n\nHongkong's War Loan\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the first reading of a Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to amend further the War Loan Ordinance 1916.\"\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a first time.\n\nThe Bill also corrects a discrepancy between the long title and the date of redemption for bonds previously redeemed by drawing or purchase. The date adopted in the Bill is the 1st November, 1928, which was the date specified in the prospectus.\n\nWar Finance\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the first reading of a Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to provide for a temporary increase in the contributions of the Colony to His Majesty's Government towards the expenses of the present war.\"\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a first time.\n\nThe \"objects and reasons\" state-The object of this Bill is to impose a special war rate of 7 per cent., in addition to the ordinary rates, for the purpose of providing an additional contribution to be paid by the Colony to His Majesty's Government towards the expenses of the war. The whole of the revenue collected by means of this rate will be paid.\n\nThe outlying villages are excluded from the scheme.\n\nHIS EXCELLENCY-At the meeting of this Council held on the 22nd of February last, I said that I hoped very shortly to make definite proposals to you on the subject of increasing taxation for the purpose of contributing still further to Imperial War Funds. I had in my mind the imposition of an Income Tax, but after spending considerable time in studying that project I found that the difficulties of imposing such a tax in this Colony are, for the present at any rate, insuperable. We are, in a word, too close, both geographically and commercially to the Canton Province. On the 20th March I mentioned in the Press a proposed offer by the Chinese community of a voluntary gift of $1,000,000 to the Imperial War Chest. Though most anxious to give effect to this offer, our Chinese friends found the difficulties of self-assessment so great that they were forced to appeal to me for help and guidance in the matter. I had myself, with the assistance of my officers, been at pains to devise a method of taxing the non-Chinese portion of the community by a special increase of the rates as a complement to the proposed Chinese gift. We found such a scheme to bristle with difficulties, and in the result I had to confess myself beaten in both fields. I could not devise a scheme of self-assessment for the Chinese, nor a satisfactory one for a discriminating increase in the rates. The result is that the Government has been forced to adopt the scheme of partial increase in the rates embodied in the Bill before you. In that Bill we have eliminated from taxation the agricultural classes in the community. My objection all along to a general increase in the rates has been that it involves taxation of many who, under a scheme of Income Tax, would have escaped taxation. A scheme of Income Tax having failed, I can only say that this Bill is the best substitute the Government have been able to devise. In order to protect the occupiers from increases of rent out of proportion to the War Tax, a clause will be added to the Bill in Committee providing that landlords shall give particulars of increases in rents made since the 1st of May, and the reason therefor, and empowering the Government to review and vary these increases or other increases brought to its notice by, or on behalf of, occupiers.\n\nHIS EXCELLENCY-Council stands adjourned until next Thursday.\n\nMeeting of the Finance Committee followed, the COLONIAL SECRETARY presiding.\n\nRe-arrangement of Moorings\n\nThe Governor recommended the Council to vote a sum of four thousand six hundred and twenty-five dollars ($4,625.00) in aid of the vote Harbour Master's Department, Special Expenditure, Acquisition and re-arrangement of Moorings in Victoria Harbour.\n\nTHE COLONIAL TREASURER-The original amount was merely for buying up the existing buoys. This proposal now is to allow them to have one or two spare buoys. It is an additional amount.\n\nThe vote was agreed to.\n\nKowloon-Canton Railway\n\nThe Governor recommended the Council to vote a sum of five hundred and sixty dollars ($560) in aid of the vote Kowloon-Canton Railway, Working Expenses, Other Charges, Painting Contract, Carriages.\n\nTHE CHAIRMAN-These sums are for painting carriages. The original paint used has been found to be unsatisfactory, and a more lasting varnish is required for the carriages. This sum is for painting another five carriages.\n\nThe vote was agreed to.\n\nMiscellaneous\n\nThe Governor recommended the Council to vote a sum of four hundred dollars ($400) in aid of the vote Miscellaneous Services, War Expenditure, Other items of Expenditure.\n\nTHE CHAIRMAN-This vote is in connection with the Military Service Commission. It includes $300 for myself as Secretary, and $100 for clerical assistance.\n\nThe vote was agreed to.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 468235, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]", "page_number": 539, "title": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]", "content_text": "୮\n\nConchosurect.\n\n17. coins\n\nHONGKONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\n\n47\n\n46\n\nsions, charges on account of the public and debt, and so on, and until recently large sums were being received from the sale of subsidiary circulation for the purpose of demonetisation. The Colony's Accounts are kept in dollars, and each transaction is recorded withdrawn in dollars in the Colony at the average export rate of exchange for the month in which the transaction takes place, the balance being struck at the end of each half-year.\n\nIt provides penalties for the mutilation or destruction of documents which being passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It also provides penalties for the making of false statements, or furnishing false guarantees or certificates in connection with the export of goods which require a licence.\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and this was agreed to.\n\nCouncil then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.\n\nThe following clause, numbered Clause 4, was added:\n\n4. The penalties provided in this Ordinance shall be in addition to, not in substitution for, those provided in any other enactment: Provided that no person shall thereby be fined or imprisoned more than once for the same offence.\n\nOn Council resuming,\n\nAt the end of June, 1916, the Colony had spent in London £234,150, and had been credited with £382,150, leaving a credit balance of £128,000. The sums received and expended, at varying rates of exchange during the course of the half-year, amounted to $3,741,888 on the one hand, and $2,376,032 on the other, the credit balance being $1,365,036. We had therefore on June 30th a credit of £18,000 with the Crown Agents, and a credit in the books of the Colony of $1,365,056. But when the books were closed on June 30th, with exchange risen to 2s. 1d., £128,000 was worth only $1,193,019 instead of $1,365,056, a difference which amount is debited against the next half-year as loss in exchange. Similarly, in the second half-year, a loss of some $70,000 was incurred, making a total loss of $172,046 for the year, in exchange of $248,416.\n\nSupposing the account had been the other way and the Government had had a sterling debit instead of a credit, then there would have been a profit instead of a loss on exchange. It must be remembered, on the other hand, that these losses on exchange are more than counter-balanced by savings due to high exchange. A sum of $287,000 was saved on the sum voted for salaries, a considerable part of it is due to the high exchange, and $52,728 were saved upon pensions. There has also been considerable reduction in the dollar prices of supplies, in the public debt, in the sterling mail subsidy, and in transit charges.\n\nI now beg to move the second reading.\n\nTHE COLONIAL TREASURER seconded, and the Bill was then read a second time and referred to the Finance Committee.\n\nEnemy Trading\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the second reading of the Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to amend the law relating to trading with the enemy and the export of prohibited goods.\" He said: The object of this Bill is to introduce here the provisions of sections...\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved that the Bill be read a third time. THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was then read a third time and passed.\n\nNorth Borneo Extradition\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the second reading of the Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to repeal the North Borneo Extradition Ordinance, 1896.\" In doing so, he said: Recent Imperial Legislation brings North Borneo within the scope of the Fugitive Offenders Act, and, that being so, the local North Borneo Extradition Ordinance becomes unnecessary, and this Bill therefore proposes to repeal that Ordinance.\n\nCouncil then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. There were no amendments, and on Council resuming,\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved that it be read a third time. THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was then read a third time and passed.\n\nHONGKONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\n\n5339\n\nNew Committee Members\n\nHis EXCELLENCY - It is necessary to make appointments to the Public Works Committee in the places of the Hon. Mr. Shellim and the Hon. Mr. Holyoak, who are absent from the Colony. I therefore nominate the Hon. Mr. Shewan and the Hon. Mr. Dodwell to serve in their places.\n\nPolice Reserve Discipline\n\nTHE ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the first reading of a Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to amend the Special Police Reserve Ordinance, 1914, and to remove doubts as to the effect of proclamations made under section 10 of the said Ordinance.\"\n\nThe Objects and Reasons state:-The objects of this Bill are as follows:-\n\n(a) To alter the technical title of the Special Police Reserve force to the title which is in general use, viz., the Hongkong Police Reserve.\n\n(b) To provide for the punishment of minor breaches of discipline by members of the Hongkong Police Reserve in a way which will not involve the publicity of proceedings before a magistrate and which will be more in accordance with the procedure in the case of other police and military organisations.\n\n(c) To give the Captain Superintendent of Police powers, with the approval of the Governor in Council, to make regulations for the government and discipline of the force.\n\n(d) To remove doubts as to the effect of proclamations under section 10 of the Special Police Reserve Ordinance, 1914.\n\nSupplementary Vote\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY moved the second reading of the Bill intituled, \"An Ordinance to authorize the Appropriation of a Supplementary sum of $291,173.97 to defray the charges of the year 1916.\" In doing so, he said: In asking Council to charge upon the revenue of the Colony the sum shown in this Bill, it should be explained that the money is required rather for the purpose of adjusting the expenditure for the year 1916 than of supplementing it.\n\nIt will be seen from the draft appropriation account that there was in fact a saving under every head except under the three heads shown in this Bill, and under Military Expenditure, which latter head is governed by a special Ordinance.\n\nThe excess under the three heads in this Bill, with the excess of some $72,000 under Military Expenditure added, amounts to $363,650; but the saving under other heads totals $1,140,296, with the result that there is a saving of nearly $800,000 as the amount originally voted by the Council for the service of the year 1916.\n\nThe sums shown in the Bill in respect of the Harbour Department and Public Works Recurrent call for comment, as the money, and considerably more than the money, now asked for has already been provisionally voted by this Council.\n\nThe sum of some $250,000 shown in the Bill under Miscellaneous Services falls under a somewhat different category, as the excesses under this head have not yet been referred to this Council.\n\nThe principal excesses are those shown under War Expenditure, Other Items of Expenditure, and under Other Miscellaneous Services.\n\nThe War Expenditure comprises the following sums:- fitting out vessels for conveyance of prisoners, $18,500; passages for prisoners of War, $175,000; Volunteer Salaries, $39,000; Colonial Allowances, $300,000.\n\nThese Colonial Allowances are paid to Civil Servants on active service in order to make up to them the difference between their pay received from the Navy or Army and their pay as Civil Servants.\n\nThis Council has already voted the full pay for these officers in the various departments, and so they are now asked merely to sanction the transfer of the money from the departmental votes to War Expenditure, under which heading the expenditure properly falls.\n\nIt should be explained that this considerable expenditure is due almost entirely to the expenditure on the prisoners of war; and the reason why the Government have not brought the matter before the Council at an earlier date lies in the fact that they were waiting for and proposed to add the account for the maintenance of the prisoners in Australia.\n\nThe Government conducts, through the Crown Agents, considerable sterling transactions in the United Kingdom, as, for instance, the purchase of supplies, payment of salaries and pensions.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6].txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 511144, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-505-10 Chinese Extradition Ordinance 1927- proposed amendments 14-7-1927 - 2-11-1927", "page_number": 88, "title": "CO129-505-10 Chinese Extradition Ordinance 1927- proposed amendments 14-7-1927 - 2-11-1927", "content_text": "RECEIVED\n\n12 SEP 1927\n\nCOL. OFFICE\n\n788\n\nTELEGRAM from the Governor of Hong Kong to the Secretary\n\nof State for the Colonies\n\nDated 12th September, 1927.\n\n(Received, Colonial Office, 1.0 p.m. 12th September, 1927)\n\nMy telegram of 16th August to you and Foreign\n\nOffice telegram No.529 to Lampson reporting that you wish a test case to be taken I submit ordinance preferable to test for the following reasons (1) Ordinance would be certain and rapid result of case would be doubtful and delay might be caused (2) Ordinance would involve a more restricted degree of recognition than a case Ordinance would limit recognition (a) to recognition by the Governor (b) to recognition for extradition purposes. Case would involve certificate or oral evidence that requisitioning authority is recognised by His Majesty's Government and it might not be possible to restrict that statement to recognition for extradition purposes (3) Consul General says requisition would probably be signed by General Li Chai-sum as Chairman of Provincial Government of Kwangtung. It might be argued that Chairman of Committee which administers cannot himself be said to administer the Government (4) It might be argued that the Canton Government is not a Provincial Government within the meaning of the present ordinance because that Ordinance contemplates a Provincial Government which recognises a central Government of the whole of China (5) It is doubtful if a letter from the Governor on this point would be accepted see weekly note of 9th July 1927 Alternative would probably be to call on the Consul General and he might be cross-examined\n\nPage 205", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-505-10 Chinese Extradition Ordinance 1927- proposed amendments 14-7-1927 - 2-11-1927.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 520581, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929", "page_number": 109, "title": "CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929", "content_text": "# HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.\n\n213\n\nmeets the above objections. It is practically a copy of section 22 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, `4 and 5 Geo. 5, c 58`.\n\n7. Section 11 of this Ordinance adds to section 26 of the principal Ordinance a new sub-section which is taken from section 45 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1925, `15 and 16 Geo. c. 86`. It provides that if a prisoner is brought to a police station, and the officer in charge considers that the inquiry into the case cannot be completed forthwith, that officer may discharge the prisoner upon his entering into a recognizance to appear at such police station and at such time as is named in the recognizance.\n\n8. Section 12 of this Ordinance inserts in the principal Ordinance a new section 26A which is based on section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1925. It provides that a warrant of arrest may be lawfully executed by any officer of police notwithstanding that the warrant is not in his possession at the time. This provision is not necessary in Hong Kong in the case of offences against Hong Kong law, because the police have a general power of arrest without warrant, but it may be useful in such cases as extradition and deportation.\n\n9. Section 14 of this Ordinance is the usual section providing for the general substitution of \"Inspector General of Police\" for \"Captain Superintendent of Police\" in all enactments, contracts and other documents where such substitution is necessary in order to give effect thereto.\n\n## MAINTENANCE ORDERS (FACILITIES FOR ENFORCEMENT) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE, 1929\n\n**THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** moved the second reading of the Bill intituled \"An Ordinance to amend the Maintenance Orders (Facilities for Enforcement) Ordinance, 1921.\"\n\n**THE COLONIAL SECRETARY** seconded, and the Bill was read a second time.\n\nCouncil went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. No amendment was made in Committee, and upon Council resuming,\n\n**THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** moved the third reading.\n\n**THE COLONIAL SECRETARY** seconded, and the Bill was read a third time and passed.\n\n## THE BUDGET\n\nThe Council resumed the debate on the Budget.\n\n131", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 520672, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929", "page_number": 200, "title": "CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929", "content_text": "# HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.\n\n213\n\nmeets the above objections. It is practically a copy of section 22 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, `4 and 5 Geo. 5, c 58`,\n\n7. Section 11 of this Ordinance adds to section 26 of the principal Ordinance a new sub-section which is taken from section 45 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1925, `15 and 16 Geo. c. 86`. It provides that if a prisoner is brought to a police station, and the officer in charge considers that the inquiry into the case cannot be completed forthwith, that officer may discharge the prisoner upon his entering into a recognizance to appear at such police station and at such time as is named in the recognizance.\n\n8. Section 12 of this Ordinance inserts in the principal Ordinance a new section 26A which is based on section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1925. It provides that a warrant of arrest may be lawfully executed by any officer of police notwithstanding that the warrant is not in his possession at the time. This provision is not necessary in Hong Kong in the case of offences against Hong Kong law, because the police have a general power of arrest without warrant, but it may be useful in such cases as extradition and deportation.\n\n9. Section 14 of this Ordinance is the usual section providing for the general substitution of \"Inspector General of Police\" for \"Captain Superintendent of Police\" in all enactments, contracts and other documents where such substitution is necessary in order to give effect thereto.\n\n## MAINTENANCE ORDERS (FACILITIES FOR ENFORCEMENT) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE, 1929.\n\n**THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** moved the second reading of the Bill intituled \"An Ordinance to amend the Maintenance Orders (Facilities for Enforcement) Ordinance, 1921.”\n\n**THE COLONIAL SECRETARY** seconded, and the Bill was read a second time.\n\nCouncil went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause. No amendment was made in Committee, and upon Council resuming,\n\n**THE ATTORNEY GENERAL** moved the third reading.\n\n**THE COLONIAL SECRETARY** seconded, and the Bill was read a third time and passed.\n\n## THE BUDGET.\n\nThe Council resumed the debate on the Budget.\n\n221\n\nPage 200\nPage 201", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-519-2 Estimates for 1930 19-9-1929 - 19-9-1929.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 529589, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-533-10 Position of prostitution in Hong Kong 16-1-1931 - 19-9-1931", "page_number": 53, "title": "CO129-533-10 Position of prostitution in Hong Kong 16-1-1931 - 19-9-1931", "content_text": "## Immigration and Emigration Statistics\n\n### Immigration\n\n| Category | 1925 | 1926 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 |\n|-----------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|\n| 1. Men | 75,304 | 100,482| 139,180| 145,953| 139,915|\n| 2. Boys under 16| 4,804 | 8,598 | 12,687 | 12,678 | 13,457 |\n| 3. Women | 8,765 | 14,949 | 22,089 | 22,683 | 24,681 |\n| 4. Girls under 16| | 2,749 | 7,144 | 6,533 | 7,337 |\n| TOTAL | 91,622 | 128,601| 185,390| 187,847| ... |\n\n### Emigration\n\n| Category | 1925 | 1926 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 |\n|-----------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|\n| 1. Men | 108,548| 167,357| 215,701| 188,505| 172,754|\n| 2. Boys | 10,155 | 16,012 | 18,090 | 18,399 | 13,708 |\n| 3. Women | 18,353 | 29,358 | 43,953 | 42,210 | 34,805 |\n| 4. Girls | 3,478 | 4,800 | 6,256 | 7,849 | 8,048 |\n| TOTAL | 140,534| 216,527| 285,593| 257,162| 227,523|\n\n## Emigration Details (Women and Girls over 16)\n\n| Reason for Emigration | 1925 | 1926 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 |\n|---------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------|\n| 1. Going to find relatives | 3,170 | 6,329 | 11,416 | 11,960 | 10,823 |\n| 2. Servants | 2,422 | 5,272 | 8,719 | 5,861 | 5,356 |\n| 3. Needlewomen | 301 | 384 | 873 | 586 | 409 |\n| 4. Prostitutes | 245 | 700 | 71 | 2 | ... |\n| 5. Gardeners | 138 | 266 | 376 | 249 | 173 |\n| 6. Miscellaneous | 22 | 62 | 61 | 102 | 73 |\n| 7. Accompanying husband or relation | 3,201 | 6,574 | 24,986 | 12,440 | 8,610 |\n| TOTAL | 9,499 | 19,587 | 46,502 | 31,200 | 25,444 |\n| Girls under 16 | 1,570 | 2,797 | 7,027 | 5,814 | 5,063 |\n\nThese figures refer to female third-class passengers on emigrant ships who are examined at the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs in accordance with the `Asiatic Emigration Ordinance 1915`. The details are taken from the passenger lists.\n\n## Prostitution Statistics\n\n**(c) (1) European**. Total 21 (French 11, British 5, U.S.A. 3, Russian and Latvian 1 each). Of these 13 had been less than 1 year in the colony on November 30th 1930. This total includes brothel keepers as well as inmates. The ages of the latter are given as 22 to 34 years, the average being 26.\n\n**(2) Chinese**, **(3) Japanese**, 2,628 and 29 respectively. Figures taken from return made on January 1st 1930. Statements by Chinese prostitutes regarding their age or period of residence are entirely unreliable and no attempt has been made to co-ordinate information on these points. In the case of a registered prostitute, the date on which she first entered a known brothel is on record. 99% of girls applying for permission to enter known brothels state that they are between 21 and 24 years of age, and that they have arrived in the colony only a few days previously.\n\n## Cases of Procuring or Enticing Women or Children\n\nDetails have already been sent to the League of cases in which investigation resulted in the conviction or deportation of an offender. Where it has not proved possible to take action against an offender, the evidence is usually incomplete or untrustworthy. Records of a number of typical cases of this nature have been selected and can be shown to the Commission if they so desire.\n\n## Extradition Procedure\n\n**(a)** None.\n\n**(b)** The `Chinese Extradition Amendment Ordinance No. 17 of 1927`. The principal object of this Ordinance is to enable extradition proceedings to be taken even though for political reasons the persons actually exercising authority in any province or part of China do not hold this position de jure.\n\n## Repatriation and Deportation Statistics\n\n**(a)** and **(b)**. The following figures are taken from the annual reports of the Committee of the `Po Leung Kuk`.\n\n| Category | 1925 | 1926 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | Total |\n|----------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|-------|\n| Girls repatriated from Singapore and Bangkok | 15 | 26 | 37 | 40 | 31 | 149 |\n| Girls sent to Charitable Institutions in China | 29 | 28 | 47 | 50 | 65 | 219 |\n\nThe nationality of all these women may be assumed to be Chinese and the average age to be between 15 and 19. The figures are incomplete as they do not include women repatriated by, e.g., the Singapore authorities and not sent to the `Po Leung Kuk`. It is not possible to distinguish clearly between **(a)** and **(b)**.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-533-10 Position of prostitution in Hong Kong 16-1-1931 - 19-9-1931.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 534052, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-539-4 Mui Tsai system 28-6-1932 - 28-11-1932", "page_number": 70, "title": "CO129-539-4 Mui Tsai system 28-6-1932 - 28-11-1932", "content_text": "47\n\n12\n\nI3\n\n(c) That the formation of armed bands should in all cases be made a criminal offence; (d) That, if the local authorities tolerate the formation of such bands, they should be severely punished, particularly if these bands by their actions have occasioned the death of any person or the capture of slaves;\n\n(e) That, in all countries concerned, the law should be supplemented, if necessary, by provisions for the infliction of severe penalties on persons who enter a foreign territory with arms;\n\n(f) That orders should be given by the States concerned to their officers on the spot to report immediately and by the speediest means available to the nearest foreign local authorities the entry or the probable return into the territory under the latter's authority of armed bands and the frontier region which is likely to be crossed;\n\n(g) That agreements as already recommended by the Temporary Commission should be reached between these States authorising their officers, when in pursuit of the captors of slaves, to enter the territory of the other Power to which the captors have returned or in which they have taken refuge, and to arrest such persons if the authorities of the other Power have not available on the spot sufficient forces to proceed immediately to do so themselves, with the proviso that the culprits would be handed over to the latter authorities either for judgment or until the necessary extradition formalities have been completed. An arrangement of this nature has been concluded between French Equatorial Africa and Darfur.\n\n24. It would seem that these proposals, or at any rate those set out in (f) and (g) above, could be readily accepted by the Abyssinian Government, since, in its letter of April 12th, 1924, it expressed the desire to reach an agreement with the neighbouring countries with a view to joint action in the campaign against slavery, an intention which was reiterated by the Abyssinian delegation in the Sixth Committee of the eleventh League Assembly. One result of the measures proposed would certainly be to prevent incidents which are bound to disturb the relations of good neighbourliness between the States concerned and to have a harmful effect from the international standpoint as well.\n\nIt cannot, however, be expected that the officers of the Abyssinian Government will be able to assist foreign States in preventing or suppressing slave-raids in the territory of the latter, or that slave-raids and individual captures by Abyssinians will be put down in Abyssinia itself, until the central authority is sufficiently powerful to enforce obedience to its orders by its officers to the utmost limits of the Empire. The abolition of the status of slavery by the Abyssinian Government would again be of immense assistance in the suppression of these practices.\n\nCHAPTER III. SLAVE TRADE.\n\nA. Survey of the Situation.\n\n25. The Temporary Commission's report includes under this heading only transactions for the purchase or sale of slaves on a commercial basis. According to the report, traffic in this sense persisted only in the States of Arabia or the coast of the Persian Gulf, and to a certain extent in Abyssinia.\n\n26. The abolition since then of the status of slavery in Iraq, Persia, Kelat, Afghanistan and the Bahrein Archipelago has dealt a severe blow at the traffic in these countries.\n\n27. The Abyssinian Government, which, by its Edict of March 31st, 1924, amended by that of July 15th, 1931, made the transfer of slaves, whether with or without payment, an offence entailing very severe penalties, will doubtless continue to meet, in the suppression of this practice, with difficulties of the kind mentioned in the part of the present report which deals with the status of slavery—viz., resistance from a considerable portion of the population and even from some of the authorities. The propinquity of Arabia complicates the Abyssinian Government's task, because whatever measures (hereafter referred to) may have been taken to prevent the importation of slaves into Arabia, it may still be that, in the Yemen, Hejaz and Nejd, and the Sultanates situated along the south-east coasts of the Arabian peninsula, traders may still find it possible to sell slaves at a good price. True, in its Edict of September 15th, 1923, the Abyssinian Government prohibited its officers from allowing slaves to leave their area, but, even supposing all these officers were desirous of complying with the edict, the extent of the frontier would make it difficult to organise effective supervision.\n\n28. As regards transit across the British, French and Italian colonies bordering on the Red Sea and the embarkation of slaves from Abyssinia at any point on the west coast of that sea, the authorities of those colonies are making the most commendable efforts to prevent it, inter alia, by vigilant inspection of the passengers and crews of all vessels leaving their colonies, and the French expert points out that France frequently sends méharistes along the coast of its Somaliland colony with a view to the prevention of clandestine departures.\n\nFurther, British, French and Italian warships more or less frequently cruise in the Red Sea and Indian Ocean, along the Arabian coast and in the Persian Gulf, to prevent the importation of slaves into the Arabian peninsula, but the commanders of these warships find it much more difficult now to take effective action against the transport of slaves in these waters owing to the fact that the General Act of the Brussels Conference has been abrogated by their Governments, and that, so far, none of the general or special Conventions provided for in Article 3 of the Slavery Convention of 1926 has been concluded.\n\n29. However that may be, the Hejaz, in a treaty concluded on May 20th, 1927, with the British Government, has undertaken to co-operate with the United Kingdom in the campaign against the slave trade. The same undertaking has been given by the Sultanates of Muscat, Oman and the Bahrein Archipelago, the Trucial Sheikhdoms and most of the Sultanates of the Hadramouth coast.\n\nThe right to continue in territorial waters the pursuit of vessels suspected of being engaged in the transport of slaves has been granted to British warships by the greater part of these States and Sultanates.\n\n30. Are slaves from Africa imported in considerable numbers into the slavery-tolerating States or Sultanates of Arabia or the Persian Gulf? The Committee is unable to give a definite reply to this question. According to certain documents from private sources, such importation still exists on a considerable scale. On the other hand, the opinion of British officials who, according to the British Government in the United Kingdom, are in a very good position to judge, is that the traffic is now on a very small scale. This view is confirmed by the Italian expert on the Committee.\n\nIn any case, it is alleged that the importation of slaves into the Sultanates of Muscat and Koweit has virtually ceased, the only additions to the number of slaves in these countries being children born of marriages or concubinage with slaves. Slaves, if sold at all, are only sold, it is maintained, in secret.\n\n31. It is far from improbable, however, that a certain number of free persons forming part of the crews of vessels bound for Arabia or represented as such, or members of the family of passengers for Arabia, are sold in Arabia as slaves. Pilgrimages to the holy places of Arabia are said to provide the principal opportunity for this traffic.\n\nThis danger has been forestalled by the Netherlands Government in the Far East. Pilgrims only leave for Arabia at certain seasons of the year, and exclusively on vessels of certain large steamship companies which have a de facto monopoly of their transport by sea. The companies are required to give every guarantee that the transport conditions are satisfactory, hygienic and sure. They have to deposit a surety for the return of the pilgrims. The persons organising these pilgrimages on the outward and return trips earn large profits. Only persons of unquestionable respectability are permitted to assemble and embark pilgrims. Pilgrims may not embark unless they possess individual passports in which they are carefully identified. Copies of these passports are kept by the Consul of the Netherlands at Jeddah, and registers are kept in the place where the passports are issued. By these means, the pilgrims are effectively protected. It is due no doubt in part to this strict supervision that no case of enslavement in Arabia of pilgrims from the Netherlands colonies in the Far East has been reported for a long time past.\n\nThe Governments of the Federated Malay States and the Straits Settlements have also established a passport control organisation. The Committee has no information as to the working of this system, but it understands that a public official of the Straits Settlements accompanies the pilgrims to the holy places in Arabia.\n\nThe French Government also takes steps to protect pilgrims proceeding from the African territories under French control. The pilgrims are assembled in certain towns, provided with individual passports and conducted to the holy places of Arabia under the supervision of officer-interpreters who hold collective passports. To prevent the supply of contingent of slaves to the Hejaz from the population of the Chad region, an Order of August 16th, 1930, promulgated by the Governor-General of Equatorial Africa makes it compulsory for natives proceeding abroad from this colony in all cases to be in possession of a passport.\n\nIt is not impossible, however, that pilgrims belonging to territories administered by France sometimes leave these territories individually and without passports for Arabia. The same applies to pilgrims belonging to the Italian colonies, despite the regulations to which pilgrimage is subject there.\n\nLastly, other Governments of Africa have not taken the measures and precautions described above, probably on account of the special conditions of the territories administered by them.\n\nPilgrims coming from the African continent therefore still run the risk of being sold in Arabia as slaves.\n\n32. The United Kingdom, France and Italy, like the Netherlands, have each an agent at Jeddah. Every person who takes refuge with these agents is, in fact, assured of his freedom.\n\nAs regards the British Legation at Jeddah, its right of manumission has been recognised by treaty with the King of the Hejaz, and extends to slaves who do not belong to British territories. In cases of manumission, the Legation repatriates the slave or, if he wishes to remain in Hejaz-Nejd, takes the necessary steps to obtain for him an official certificate of manumission, with the consent of his former owner. British political agents in the Sultanates of Muscat and Bahrein, and on the Hadramouth coast also have the power of manumitting slaves, and this power is well known along the whole of the coast of the Persian Gulf.\n\n33. The committee regrets that it possesses no information regarding the co-operation of Egypt in the campaign against the slave trade, except that contained in paragraph 35 of the Temporary Commission's report.\n\n88\n\nPage 70\n\nPage 71", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-539-4 Mui Tsai system 28-6-1932 - 28-11-1932.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 536896, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-543-13 Proposed amendments to Deportation ordinance 22-3-1933 - 11-1-1934", "page_number": 3, "title": "CO129-543-13 Proposed amendments to Deportation ordinance 22-3-1933 - 11-1-1934", "content_text": "You spoke to me about the donor feel sure that the despatches foreshadowed in the last sentence of No.39 in `12525/33` Gene is in fact No.1 in `13091/33`, particularly as both of those despatches were dated 4.4.33. I still think that we may expect a further despatch from The Straits on the question of communist agitators. However, subject to legal opinion, I see no objection to the amendments in the existing law of Hong Kong which are proposed in the despatch, though care will have to be taken to ensure that the powers of deportation are not used as a means of extradition for a non-extraditable offence.\n\nI am however from `92583/8/32` prepared to have already held up the proposed Consolidation of the deportation law of Hong Kong until the Committee on the Deportation of British subjects has reported. If a reply is now sent to this despatch, I would be willing to suggest to you that the actual amendment of the law be deferred... on the...", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-543-13 Proposed amendments to Deportation ordinance 22-3-1933 - 11-1-1934.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 552493, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-559-5 Attempted assassination of Wong Ching-wei- proposed extradition of alleged accomplice 17-3-1936 - 15-5-1936", "page_number": 14, "title": "CO129-559-5 Attempted assassination of Wong Ching-wei- proposed extradition of alleged accomplice 17-3-1936 - 15-5-1936", "content_text": "# THE HONG KONG WEEKLY PRESS\n## A CASE TO ANSWER\n### Magistrate's Ruling\n#### EXTRADITION PROCEEDING\n\nThat the four alleged fugitives wanted by the Nanking Government in connection with the attempted assassination of Mr. Wang Ching Wei and Marshal Chiang Kai Shek had a case to answer in the extradition proceedings against them was the decision of the Central Magistrate, Mr. W. Schofield in answer to Mr. Peter H. Sin's plea at a previous hearing that his clients had no case to answer.\n\nMr. D. L. Strellet, of Messrs. G. K. Hall Brutton and Co., appeared for the prosecution.\n\nThe four fugitives who appeared before Mr. Schofield on Wednesday were Yu Lap-fai, Chan Chi-ping, Wu Tai-hoi and Cheung Chi-hon.\n\nOutlining his defence, Mr. Sin said that on the part of the first fugitive he will say that he never met Wong Ah-chui in Hong Kong, nor did he conspire with him or others, not in custody, to murder Marshal Chiang Kai-shek and Mr. Wang Ching-wei. If this mysterious person named Wong Ah-chui did conspire to murder these men, then he (first fugitive) was in no way to blame. He only met Wong Ah-san a few times. He was detained for 15 months on one occasion by Marshal Chiang Kai-shek owing to his subordinates causing a minor revolution and he (the first fugitive) being in command was blamed for the upheaval.\n\nHe will admit that he stayed at No. 10, Wing Hing Street where he shared a flat with a man named Chang. He then moved and stayed at No. 69, Shing Wo Road where Mr. Chang Yick-kin, the principal tenant, shared a flat with him. He had never met Wong Ah-chui nor had he any dealings with him.\n\nHe will submit to the Court that Wong Ah-chui was a person who held different political views from those of the Central Government, and thus because his extradition was sought, why should his (first fugitive's) also be sought? He will say that the evidence of Wong Ah-san was absolutely false. How Wong Ah-san came here, the first fugitive did not know, but there was a great deal behind these proceedings.\n\nThe second fugitive will say that he was a guest of the first fugitive and that he was a former member of the Executive Committee of the Seamen's Guild of Wo Hoo, Anhui Province. He came to Hong Kong and became the first fugitive's guest. He will also say that he never knew Wong Ah Chui nor had he conspired with him to murder the said statesmen as alleged.\n\nThe third fugitive will tell the court that he was formerly connected with General Mok Hung, then in command of the 88th Division, which division was connected with the Central Government. He was unemployed and came to Hong Kong to look for work. He was at one time a cook at Cheng Yick Kin's house at No. 69 Shing Wo Road and while he was thus employed, he was arrested. He had been asked by Mr. Cheng to carry certain documents to No. 92 Robinson Road and was asked to wait for him. He will also deny any suggestions of using a bomb in the Nanking outrage. In short, he had nothing to do with any conspiracy with Wong Ah-chui whom he had never met.\n\nThe fourth fugitive will deny point blank being related to Wong Ah-chui, or that his sister was married to him. At the time of his arrest, he was staying at No. 199 Wanchai Road. He had never met Wong Ah-chui or any of the other fugitives before he came to this court.\n\nAll the fugitives will say that the story as unfolded by Wong Ah-san was a fabricated one and will deny all the allegations in total.\n\nMr. Schofield said: Having consulted the cases quoted, I am satisfied that I am in no sense bound to dismiss this case nor am I in the position of a jury which has to be warned but which nevertheless can convict. That being so, there is evidence which raises a probable presumption of the fugitives' guilt and this is in fact my opinion. There is a case to answer.\n\nAfter the evidence of Cheung Kin-pui, translator of certain documents found on the third fugitive when arrested, the case was adjourned till today.\n\n## Page 864\nMay 22 \n24", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-559-5 Attempted assassination of Wong Ching-wei- proposed extradition of alleged accomplice 17-3-1936 - 15-5-1936.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 587037, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949", "page_number": 15, "title": "CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949", "content_text": "242\n\nHONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\n\nprovision inapplicable to persons who have been expelled from a territory to which they belong.\n\nSecond, Sir, I move amendment of paragraph (g) of clause 4 by deletion of paragraph (g) and by the substitution therefor of the following paragraph reading as follows:-\n\nOrdinance No. 7 of 1889.\n\n(g) has been convicted by a competent court outside the Colony of an offence which if committed in the Colony would constitute any of the offences specified in the First Schedule to the Chinese Extradition Ordinance, 1889; or\".\n\nSir, the reasons for this amendment to paragraph (g), or substitution of paragraph (g), is this: in its present form paragraph (g) suggests that a person may be deemed undesirable even if he has the means to support himself and his dependents. Adequate provision for cases of incapacity for self-support is made by paragraphs (b) and (c) of clause 4. The substitution proposed makes provision to empower the expulsion of persons convicted of serious offences elsewhere and the Chinese Extradition Ordinance, 1889, provides a convenient list of such offences.\n\nThese were agreed to.\n\nCouncil then resumed.\n\nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Expulsion of Undesirables Bill, 1949, had passed through Committee with two amendments and moved the Third reading.\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Third time and passed into law.\n\nEMERGENCY REGULATIONS (AMENDMENT) (NO. 2) BILL, 1949.\n\nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL moved the Second reading of a Bill intituled \"An Ordinance further to amend the Emergency Regulations Ordinance, 1922.\"\n\nTHE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a Second time.\n\nCouncil then went into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.\n\nCouncil then resumed.\n\nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL reported that the Emergency Regulations (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1949, had passed through Committee without amendment and moved the Third reading.\n\n15", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 587065, "series_id": 27, "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine", "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949", "page_number": 43, "title": "CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949", "content_text": "'C'.\n\n45\n\nEXPULSION OF UNDESIRABLES ORDINANCE, 1949.\n\nAt Committee Stage, Attorney General to move the following amendment to clause 4 :-\n\nThat clause 4 be amended\n\n(a) by deleting the words \"on repatriation\" in paragraph (e) thereof; and\n\n(b) by substituting the following paragraph for paragraph (g) thereof :-\n\nOrdinance No. 7 of 1889.\n\n\"(g) has been convicted by a competent court outside the Colony of an offence which if committed in the Colony would constitute any of the offences specified in the First Schedule to the Chinese Extradition Ordinance, 1889: or\".\n\nReasons for proposed amendment :\n\nAs regards para. (e) of clause 4 The words \"on repatriation\" in paragraph (e) of clause 4 are too restrictive in that they would render the provision inapplicable to persons who have been expelled from a territory to which they belong, e.g. Malaya.\n\nAs regards para. (g) of clause 4\n\nParagraph (g) of clause 4 in its present form suggests that a person may be deemed undesirable even if he has the means to support himself and his dependents. Adequate provision for cases of incapacity for self-support is made by paragraphs (b) and (c) of clause 4.\n\nThe substitution proposed makes provision to empower the expulsion of persons convicted of serious offences elsewhere.\n\nThe Chinese Extradition Ordinance, 1889, provides a convenient list of such offences.", "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-604-7 Expulsion of Undesirables Ordinance 1949 19-8-1949 - 16-12-1949.txt", "external_url": "", "rank": 0 } ]