•  
  •  

Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 4 > Issue 5 (1906)

 

Abstract

The Chinese have long been accustomed to the presence in their midst of foreign populations governed by laws peculiar to themselves and, perchance, owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. As long ago as the eighth century the Arabian traders who resorted to Canton were permitted to govern themselves by their own laws. The Mohaminedans have for many centuries formed a distinct element in the population, being subject to a separate law and to their own authorities. When, therefore, in the sixteenth century the first European traders began to appear on the China coast the government treated them as they had been accustomed to treat other foreigners: the Portuguese were allowed a separate establishment, under their own laws, at Macao, not far from the present emporium of Hong Kong, and the Dutch, Spaniards, English and other nationalities who followed them were given a quarter in Canton where they were left to manage their affairs in their own way. It was only in criminal matters that the government reserved to itself jurisdiction, and this was seldom exercised except in serious cases. The Penal Code, as revised in 1647, provided that foreigners guilty of offences should be tried and sentenced "according to the established laws." But this provision had been modified by subsequent imperial rescripts. The extent of the jurisdiction which the imperial government thought necessary to reserve to itself was defined in 1808 by the Hoppo, or Superintendent of the Port of Canton, in passing on the case of the Englishman, Edward Sheen. This man had caused the death of a Chinese by accidentally dropping a stick from an upper window of the British factory. The homicide was purely accidental, but the Chinese Penal Code makes accidental homicide criminal, and provides for its punishment by strangulation.

Download

Share

COinS