stating that
my
letters
were
always
forwarded to the Firm of Fee Rawson & Co Notwithstanding however the repeated answers to the contrary, feeling constrained to assert that there must be more letters for me I again applied by letter under the signature of my firm and succeeded in obtaining another letter from the April mail, accompanied by the enclosed reply to my note
in order to prove that the irregularities and certain deliveries of my letters, as well as those of my friends, in order to excuse made that the errors arose from want of knowledge of my residence, must have been unfounded, and that having done my part in acquainting the Postmaster with it, I have good cause for complaint
These are not, however the only instances of letters having been detained much to my inconvenience, for the Packet was delivered to me only on the 24 May bearing date the 17th May Hongkong Post mark of the 17th month besides other limited delays which but for my absence at Canton would have been noticed more promptly and
compelled to overlook several instances of overcharges upon letters and newspapers,
I trust however, I have enumerated sufficient to prove that my complaints are not frivolous. The detention of the letter for Robt quail from the 28th May until the 7th July has been a most serious inconvenience as well as expense much might have been overlooked and allowances made for the difficulties that I am aware the Postmaster may have