HYNDMAN-JONES CJ

This rule must be discharged. It is said that the requisition must be made by the Governor of the Colony from which prisoner has escaped, and that as in this case the order of the Deputy Governor to the Chief Magistrate recites that the requisition has been made by the Consul-General for the Netherlands in Singapore, there was no jurisdiction in the Magistrate to issue his warrant, or to deal with the case and commit the prisoner to prison with a view to his extradition, and that the prisoner is entitled to be discharged. Now s. 17 of the Extradition Act reads as follows (His Lordship read the section). The words in the latter part of subsection I are, "or if the fugitive, etc.," "by the Governor of such colony or dependency," meaning the colony or dependency from which the prisoner has escaped. It is, however, said that the prisoner having escaped from a colony or dependency of the foreign state on behalf of which requisition is made, the requisition must, by reason of the latter portion of subsection I of s. 17 of the Act, be made by the person who is recognised as the Governor of that colony. In my view, the object of the Extradition Acts is to aid nations, who come within the Acts, in the arrest of fugitive criminal offenders, and to interpret s. 17 in the way Mr. Van Someren suggests, is to hamper the utility of the Act, and this interpretation is, by the language of the Act, necessary.

If in the section the words "or" had been "but," one would have been obliged to consider the argument; but I am clear that in the section in question the word "or" is used in the alternative sense. The requisition may be made by the Consul-General or by the person recognised as Governor of the Colony. The intention is to allow the Governor to make the requisition in addition to the Consul-General, as cases may arise in which, owing to the escape of the criminal, despatch may be of great importance, and delay might arise in communicating first with the Consul-General in the Colony where the escaped is alleged to be resident, and so the Governor of the Colony from which the prisoner has escaped, can make his requisition direct to the Governor of the Colony in which the prisoner is residing, without the necessity of such requisition having to go through, or be made, by any other channel. The wording of s. 17 is not intended to restrict, but to enlarge the power to make requisition.

As to the authentication of the warrant and depositions, the Act and Treaty are not very explicit as to authentication in cases arising between the Colonies of the High Contracting Parties, although it is clear as to the method, in cases of extradition from one of the mother countries, to the other. It is argued that the seal necessary to authenticate a document must be the seal of the Minister of Justice in Holland, or some Minister of State in Holland, and that the seal of any official in the Colonies cannot be taken to be the seal required under sub-clause 4, of Article XI, of the Treaty. The Treaty is not very clear, and the question, to me, appears to present some difficulties; but, in this case, it is unnecessary for me to give a decision on this point, as we have other means of authentication. "Authenticate" means to show that documents are what they purport to be, and are genuine. Mr. BRILL gives evidence as to his knowledge of Mr. LUTTER'S signature, although he has not actually seen him write. The point is, is Mr. LUTTER the man who signed the warrant and depositions, and Mr. BRILL, by his evidence, proves this, and his evidence is sufficient, under the Evidence Ordinance; and there can be no shadow of a doubt that Mr. LUTTER signed the documents, and that his signatures are genuine.

Rule discharged.