265
Judge.
1880
21
10
1886
446
2.
Sub-enclosure
Admiralty
· Registrar.
240
223
*
Infor
Fees.
Deputy Registar
13
7.
N
1887
10
$$
Marshal.
73
21119
144
A.
2
1888
19
15-
115* | 12
0
22 18
33
2
6
1889
23
6
10
1890
28
10
96
10
38
6
1891
10
12
310
2013
1892
10
180
14
*
10
156
12
1893
24
up to 6th bor
132
10
1
20
6.
1-93
21.69
It appears the original text is a table. Here's my attempt to reconstruct it in Markdown table syntax: | Year | Judge | Registrar | Deputy Registrar | Marshal | Fees | Other | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1880 | 21 | | | | | | | 1886 | 446 | | | | | 2 | | 1887 | 10 | 240 | 13 | 73 | | | | 1888 | 19 | | | | | 115* | 12 | 22 | 18 | 33 | 2 | 6 | | 1889 | 23 | | | | | 6 | 10 | | 1890 | 28 | | | | | 10 | 96 | 10 | 38 | 6 | | 1891 | 10 | | | | 310 | 2013 | | | 1892 | 10 | | | | 180 | 14 | | 10 | 156 | 12 | | 1893 | 24 | | | | up to 6th bor | 132 | 10 | 1 | 20 | 6 | 1-93 | 21.69 | However, the original data doesn't seem to fit perfectly into this table, and some columns/rows appear to be missing or misaligned. A more accurate reconstruction would require a better understanding of the original table structure. Here is the revised HTML output with the table: Year Judge Registrar Deputy Registrar Marshal Fees Other 1880 21 10 1886 446 2 1887 10 240 13 73 7 1888 19 15- 115* | 12 0 22 18 33 2 6 1889 23 6 10 1890 28 10 96 10 38 6 1891 10 310 2013 1892 10 180 14 * 10 156 12 1893 24 up to 6th bor 132 10 1 20 6 1-93 21.69Here is the revised HTML output without the table:
265
Judge.
1880
21
10
1886
446
2.
Sub-enclosure
Admiralty
· Registrar.
240
223
*
Infor
Fees.
Deputy Registar
13
7.
N
1887
10
$$
Marshal.
73
21119
144
A.
2
1888
19
15-
115* | 12
0
22 18
33
2
6
1889
23
6
10
1890
28
10
96
10
38
6
1891
10
12
310
2013
1892
10
180
14
*
10
156
12
1893
24
up to 6th bor
132
10
1
20
6.
1-93
21.69