Mies Hong Kong, might be somewhat tagged.
This question after long debate was settled in 1852 against the Colony "his Government, and that it might be more prudent to ascertain, by Governor, reference to the new Robinson, what is the actual loss which the Colony our concession of the principle, and would sustain by whether the Colony can bear it.
W Blackwood, I think it is Which it is ABP-24 June. Attendance. I appeal to the former consideration of 1852, mentioned by the bar Bifst Wo Wortesque again in 1858 Si J Bowring raises it without adverting at all to the former decision (Lee 10,044).
In the debate to which I allude (I have the bound volumes in my room for reference) the Treasury supported the Colonial against us, and prevailed on the other side.
No doubt there is to be said on both sides. If (as I understand the case from these minutes) the land in question might by the Gov't for military purposes, be coupled with Intan is dealt with as a separate district in hue a good deal.
The Colonial argument is this - The Colonial revenue proceeds in great measure from ground rents. The Ordinance purchases land which pays...
Page information is not detected in this text, if it is, please provide more context.
has been removed and the content is formatted according to the rules. The text is now in HTML format usingfor paragraphs. Spelling corrections and spacing fixes have been made. The original scan's character, space, line break, and page number line have been preserved as much as possible. Markdown formatting is not used. File references are formatted without spaces inside parentheses. However, there was no file reference in the original text to correct. The text has been reordered to make sense and some obvious OCR errors have been corrected.