CO129-446 - Others & Individuals - 1917 — Page 573

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

We contemplated, at this stage, an Extension similar to the parent institution but on a larger scale and our idea was that expenditure upon it should absorb at least the greater part of your funds. It proved, however, to be very difficult to find a house suitable for the realisation of this idea, and, in view of this difficulty, when the Hospital Committee eventually proposed to house the Extension at No. 34 Bryanston Square, we felt constrained to agree.

We did not regard this as a satisfactory arrangement from the point of view of the Colony, because the prospect was that your funds would suffice for the maintenance of the two houses, while the Colony would ostensibly be supporting only one of them, but we could not see any grounds upon which we could base an objection to the proposal.

Fortunately, before being committed to the lease

Edit History

2026-06-14 02:07:36 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

At this meeting we were informed that the parent Hospital at No. 37 Bryanston Square accommodated nineteen beds and the Lady Superintendent confirmed the statement previously made by the War Office that the cost of upkeep was something less than £24,000 a year.We contemplated, at this stage, an Extension similar to the parent institution but on a larger scale and our idea was that expenditure upon it should absorb at least the greater part of your funds. It proved, however, to be very difficult to find a house suitable for the realisation of this idea, and, in view of this difficulty, when the Hospital Committee eventually proposed to house the Extension at No. 34 Bryanston Square, we felt constrained to agree.We did not regard this as a satisfactory arrangement from the point of view of the Colony, because the prospect was that your funds would suffice for the maintenance of the two houses, while the Colony would ostensibly be supporting only one of them, but we could not see any grounds upon which we could base an objection to the proposal.Fortunately, before being committed to the lease

Baseline (Original)

;5.568At this meeting we were informed that the parent Hoppital at No. 37 Bryanston Square accommodated nineteen beds and the Lady Superintendent confirmed the statement previously made by the War office that the cost of upkeep was something less than 24,000 a year.We contemplated, at this stage, an Extension similar to the parent institution but on a larger scale and our idea was that expenditure upon it should absorb at least the greater part of your funds. It proved, however, to be very difficult to find a house suitable for the realisation of this idea, and, in view of this difficulty, when the Hospital Committee eventually proposed to house the Extension at No. 34 Bryanston Square, we felt constrained to agree.We did not regard this as a satisfactory arrange-ment from the point of view of the Colony, because the prospect was that your funds would suffice for the mainten-ance of the two houses, while the Colony would ostensibly be supporting only one of them, but we could not see any grounds upon which we could base an objection to the proposal.Fortunately, before being committed to the lease

2026-06-14 02:07:36 · Baseline

View content

;

568

At this meeting we were informed that the parent

Hoppital at No. 37 Bryanston Square accommodated nineteen

beds and the Lady Superintendent confirmed the statement

previously made by the War office that the cost of upkeep

was something less than 24,000 a year.

We contemplated, at this stage, an Extension

similar to the parent institution but on a larger scale and

our idea was that expenditure upon it should absorb at

least the greater part of your funds. It proved, however,

to be very difficult to find a house suitable for the

realisation of this idea, and, in view of this difficulty,

when the Hospital Committee eventually proposed to house

the Extension at No. 34 Bryanston Square, we felt constrained

to agree.

We did not regard this as a satisfactory arrange-

ment from the point of view of the Colony, because the

prospect was that your funds would suffice for the mainten-

ance of the two houses, while the Colony would ostensibly be supporting only one of them, but we could not see any grounds upon which we could base an objection to the

CO129-446 - Others & Individuals - 1917 — Page 573

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note