wards natives, the above three distinctions are clearly observed in aggravation or mitigation of the particular offence. Thus (Leu-lee, 6th Div. 2d B.)—

1. In a conspiracy to kill, all those who actually contribute to the perpetration of the offence are equally punished with death, though there is the difference between beheading and strangling for the principals and accessaries. Even where the wounds inflicted do not prove mortal, the principal suffers death.

2. Killing by pure accident, that is, where there was not any previous knowledge of the probable consequences, is redeemable by a fine of about twelve taëls to the relations of the deceased.

3. A householder killing a burglarious intruder, and a policeman killing a thief in taking him, are not punished at all.

The Chinese principle, with regard to the punishment of crime, is precisely the same as ours :— "Better let the guilty escape than put the innocent to death." How strangely this contrasts with their conduct to foreigners! Their ancient books say of capital punishment, "Thrice be it deferred;" and such is the actual practice at the present day; for the local magistrate sends the case to the provincial judge, the provincial judge to the Criminal Board, and the Criminal Board to the Emperor. The Chinese Government would pretend that foreigners are tried and sentenced according to the law; but we know from experience that every legal safeguard provided for the native is dispensed with in the case of the stranger. The benefit of the delay arising from an appeal to the Emperor was expressly taken away from foreign homicides in 1753, at the recommendation of the Canton Government. On this plain and intelligible ground we may rest the necessity, 1st, of nonsubmission to Chinese punishment; and, 2d (which

arises out of the first), of a competent English court, on board ship if not on shore, for the trial of homicides.

"that

["If it be true," observes Dr. Morrison, foreigners are not protected by the laws of the land, the necessity for obedience is cancelled. Still foreigners living under a despotic Government must be without resource, were that Government to compel the obedience which it demands. Were physical force resorted to, and innocent persons seized as hostages, foreigners, unsupported by their own Governments, must be obliged to submit. Such an unjust and violent measure has formerly, on various occasions, been resorted to; but of late years the plan adopted, in cases of homicide, has been to demand of the fellow-countrymen of the alleged manslayer, that the guilty person be found out and handed over to the Chinese for punishment. This is in effect to constitute them a criminal court. Were a man to be delivered up by the persons thus called upon, he would be regarded by the Government as already condemned. His punishment, painful experience tells us, would be certain. Since, then, the Chinese are thus ready to regard foreigners as the judges of their fellow-countrymen, why should foreign Governments hesitate to establish criminal courts? Courts so established will, it is true, meet with difficulty when compelled to acquit a man declared guilty by the Chinese, or to punish lightly one whom, by the unjust decree of Kien-loong, the local government would capitally condemn : when, however, it is found by the Chinese that the guilty manslayer can no longer pass unpunished, it is probable that they will themselves remove every difficulty, and the decree of Kien-loong will meet the disregard that it merits."]

END OF VOL. I.

LONDON:-Printed by W. CLOWES and SONS, 14 Charing Cross.