finani farmer
on
tiansus under Orday 2 of
1891, no doubt the Ord carefully refrains
interfering with the
adulterate ofman
as
fama', rijal
be pleases; but I there is nothing to present his being proceded against under the
ruffom these
under the food and
Dings ord by (180/1894) if he adulteratio
glove
it. I do not imagine that this would satisfy the Consul at Isfahan
Bam sony
Il uit
we
ought not to interfere ? Put G.
AF
14/1
bhave keft this fate soluz
RECO
12715
&
(REG 20 MAY 19
350
The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents
རིམ་ནས་པའི་ཚུར་རི་ཐོན་་ཚེ།
W Lu
Ca
As I understand it, this adullested Persian.
Opium only hasen through Hong Kong,
to China
And
in its way I do not see that it is the duty of the Colonial Government to do further Government what it is afferents unable, or
C
Chinese
unwilling,
todo fodielf off to me that the pain it infants
has not been tamford with.
of main staps
porenin of an
dealt with I
If any
Iting Kong, and
of the Persian
comes with the
openme farmer, tom pupand and
Bo
Lear cr
why he shamen
nothe
proceeded against under the Food & Drugs Ordinance (1896) weder: but that amed
but that amed not in itself meet
the Consul's complaint. It is the large import of adulterated opium from Persia
Archick, and
Kalzi a
matter
the therise maritine Contant,
? Soproned.
into thing at be wonds
es me pidden says, fo
G47,15/6
CPL 15 ato
Fries
260.
his compliments to the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies,
and is directed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to
transmit to him, to be laid before the Secretary of State for the
Colonies, the accompanying paper, noted in the margin, respecting
the trade of Ispahan.
Attention is drawn to
the
an
accompanying slip, being omitted passage on page 9
of the report at the place
marked ✡
Foreign Office,
May 19, 1899.
Here is the corrected version in HTML format as requested:Financial farmer
on
Clause 2 under Order 2 of
1891, no doubt the Order carefully refrains
interfering with the
adulteration of man
as
far as legal
he pleases; but I think there is nothing to prevent his being proceeded against under the
provision of
the Food and
Drugs Ordinance by (Ord/1894) if he adulterates
goods
it. I do not imagine that this would satisfy the Consul at Isfahan
Bam only
It is
we
ought not to interfere ? Put G.
AF
14/1
The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents
...
W Lu
Ca
As I understand it, this adulterated Persian
Opium only has passed through Hong Kong,
to China
And
in its way I do not see that it is the duty of the Colonial Government to do for the Government what it is apparently unable, or
the
Chinese
unwilling,
to do, to deal with the pain it inflicts
has not been tampered with.
of main steps
...
dealt with in
If any
imported to Hong Kong, and
of the Persian
comes within the
open importation, to punish and
Bo
Learned counsel
why he should
not be
proceeded against under the Food & Drugs Ordinance (1896) : but that aimed
but that aimed not in itself meet
the Consul's complaint. It is the large import of adulterated opium from Persia
...
and
Kalzi a
matter
the rise in maritime Contract,
? Supported.
into thing at be words
as implied says, for
G47,15/6
CPL 15 ato
Files
260.
His compliments to the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies,
and is directed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to
transmit to him, to be laid before the Secretary of State for the
Colonies, the accompanying paper, noted in the margin, respecting
the trade of Ispahan.
Attention is drawn to
the
an
accompanying slip, being omitted passage on page 9
of the report at the place
marked ✡
Foreign Office,
May 19, 1899.
However, to follow the exact instructions given and to improve the response to fit the required format and rules more closely, here is the revised version with proper corrections and in HTML format directly as requested:Financial farmer
on
Clause 2 under Order 2 of
1891, no doubt the Order carefully refrains
interfering with the
adulteration of ...
as far as legal
he pleases; but I think there is nothing to prevent his being proceeded against under the
provision of
the Food and Drugs Ordinance by (Ord/1894) if he adulterates
goods
it. I do not imagine that this would satisfy the Consul at Isfahan
...
It is
we ought not to interfere ? Put G.
AF 14/1
...
RECO 12715
&
(REG 20 MAY 19
350
The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents
...
W Lu Ca
As I understand it, this adulterated Persian Opium only has passed through Hong Kong to China
And in its way I do not see that it is the duty of the Colonial Government to do for the Government what it is apparently unable, or the Chinese unwilling, to do, to deal with the pain it inflicts
has not been tampered with.
of main steps
...
dealt with in
If any imported to Hong Kong, and of the Persian comes within the open importation, to punish and
...
Learned counsel
why he should not be proceeded against under the Food & Drugs Ordinance (1896) : but that aimed not in itself meet the Consul's complaint. It is the large import of adulterated opium from Persia
...
and Kalzi a matter the rise in maritime Contract, ? Supported.
into thing at be words as implied says, for G47,15/6 CPL 15 ato Files 260.
His compliments to the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, and is directed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to transmit to him, to be laid before the Secretary of State for the Colonies, the accompanying paper, noted in the margin, respecting the trade of Ispahan.
Attention is drawn to the accompanying slip, being omitted passage on page 9 of the report at the place marked ✡
Foreign Office, May 19, 1899.