letter No 1,320 dated 31st October last, it appears that in my original letter to that Gentleman, N55 of the 13th October, the negative "not" was inadvertently left out in the first Paragraph of that Document: "did not emanate" being the correct reading.
the correct reading evidently "did emanate" the error; the context of the sentence clearly defines that a negative sense was to be attached to it.
In explanation of the omission of the negative in my letter No.55 of the 13th October I have to state that the pressure of official matters has been so great upon my Department of late that few letters leave my office that are not in my handwriting. A plan I have been compelled to adopt to save time as all the Gentlemen in my office are but imperfectly acquainted with our language and Clerical labour.
It has happened that in transcribing my letters into the letter book - omissions and errors would escape detection, as in the present instance, when entered by a Portuguese Gentleman.
XIX. No misnomer or inaccurate Description of any Person, Place or Tenement in any Document required for the purposes of this Ordinance, nor any mistake, informality or omission committed in any proceeding had hereunder shall invalidate or prejudice such Document or Proceeding or in anywise affect the execution of this Ordinance, provided only that such Person, Place or Tenement be designated in such Document or Proceeding to common intent and understanding, and that such mistake, informality or omission be not of such a nature as to prevent the requirements of this Ordinance from being substantially and in effect complied with.
Having in my letter addressed to you as Permanent Under-Secretary of the 30th Ultimo, and transmitted through His Excellency Mr Mercer, omitted to forward a copy of the XIX clause of the Police and Lighting Rate Ordinance No 5 of 1863 - I now enclose one in Print, when I think that upon its perusal you may arrive at the conclusion that "the mistake was not of such a nature as to prevent the requirements of the Ordinance from being substantially and in effect complied with".
I have the honor to be, Sir, Your Most Obedient humblest Servant,
Brest, Fort