Wuex writing on the 13th of July on the subject of the enquiry then about to be held into the alleged murder of a Chinaman by Japanese in the City, we mentioned that in a serious case like this the Consul for Japan has only power to hold a preliminary enquiry here, and that the prisoners, if a primd facie case against them, would have aki to be tried. We suggested that this conflicted with the existing treaty between Japan and China, according to which a Japanese accused of a serious crime committed in China has to be tried by the local author#sy and the Consul together, and if the offence is sufficiently serious, eapitmal punishment shall be inflicted at the scene of commission of the offence." Is mentioning that the prisoners would have to be sent to Nagasaki for trial we said: "We cannot doubt that this will seem a hardship to the Chinese, who will have to send their esses to Nagasaki—a discones matter for the neigh-hours of the unfortunate pedlar. To them asea-voyage of five hundred miles, follow ed by the necessity of appearing in a foreign court, among a people feared as the Jospanese are by the commonalty of this part of China, is no joke." reference to this the Japan Mail, an official paper, explained that only the depositions, not the witnesses themselves, would have to be sent to Nagasaki; and it was also explained that there we s a precedent for the course to be adopt ed—which it was acknowledged was not in accordance with the Treaty—a Chinaman who committed a murder in Nagasaki having been sent to China to be tried aug! punished.
"The enquiry into the murder has been held, there being five Japanese accused. As we mentioned at the close of the enquiry, the Chinese Magistrate came to the conclusion that two of the five were innocent of the murder, two guilty as principals, and one as an accessory. At his request, however, we understand, the Japanese Consul reserved his dec sion, the Magistrate being anxious to consult the higher authorities, After a short delay the Japanese Consul aunounced that he found three of the accused innocent and two guilty, and that the two guilty ones would be sent to Nagasaki to be tried; and in this he is strictly according to his instructions. Mr. Yuan, the Chinese magistrate, is by no means satisfied with this decision, and in a long despatch, a translation of which will be found in another column, he gives his reasons for his dissatisfaction; and as there is every reason to believe that he is acting under instructions from above, we have the elements of a pretty diplomatic imbroglio.
Phere appears to be little doubt about the guilt of two of the accused, Fukuhara and Omoto, while the evidence is not direct, apparently, against the third man, Narasaki, who is discharged by his Consul. Mr, Yuan objects to this, as he does to the sending of the other two men to Nagasaki. Mr. Yuan begins by quoting the treaty, as to the intent of which there is little question, and, as we said before, "it is generally understood, in international law, that municipal legislation carnot override treaty engagements that is, that the Japanese: government having agreed by 'Treaty that a Japanese who commits a murder in China shall be tried and punished China, cannot turn round and say that their consul has no power to try an often der charged with a crime punishable wit', more than five years' hard labour. "he only precedent for not followirag the Treaty which Mr. Yaan quot os. is one in which a Japanese, who ki"ted a thief in the act of robbing lira, was sent to Nagasaki for trial. ""y@ Viceroy protested at the time™' says Mr. Yuan, "against the marier in which the Japanese authori' gies dealt with that case as contrary to Treaty, and demanded that "the Japanese showd be sent back fore trial at Shanghai by a joint, or "mixed, Court." But the Chinese are a practical people, and they appear to have let their protest drop, because it was a case of justifiable homicide, Mr. Yuan goes on to give a hist ory of the present case, of which we nave already given a picturesque aer-aunt from a native paper, and which 2 appears to have been really a brutal, unprovoked murder, and gives his reasons for believing that the third accused, Narasaki, was one of the men who killed Chen Kuan-fu. He then returns to the objection, from the point of view of the Treaty, to the removal of the accused to Nagasaki for trial "You state that you have no authority from your Geverumext to pronounce
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.