•TUDO bad
.Y H0 O
179
„La tored-y emot‡A .пoH
en dage end atið?în see did not vinderoe2 a¿T ert no creiv yu nơy evi at em exec ell .ergoq Litnebitnoo exert mod mens torrt edt denbryr segundo ert na vita lusiti'q bna,dae į dva ,me2 set of bas tú ynɑli II,uid) neT
Lioy en
+
+
oiw duoca eco al reddam elody eff
yd tq ove zalar el to ydinutiorqo ekstil oved exetaimed,wond Jund (196) eomis) cmit sit go Hub juli,au !ied alqoq rentɔ dach CIA odw sgodt mod red yitnedaroo awd I loved be nitsong over I BuodTequvido ads tadt ‚eveiled I modw bar womal of moitisoq a mi Vinties » groma eli vong Betno deomodath to Jochna ban noidutiŞKİ yitnou ett eved I wore to ¡adzelo cesmid) 'eratini los to emein re a cernit nedt hæred Juoda ae hemn‚ort derit end ylleiocare fm
.cuolugureanu boð sIda,svitne tsom ent To how di rettam edt to eruden edt mor¶
erit sou ong et ‚•Idireoqui dom ti „tim 1991 yrev ed sewoo „Jïộ n eroˆed esztado dous ed÷ldnsdadue of greeɛssex eorsbive jot emilceh y+iIidedorq Ils ni blow somehive edt ovky no adr esofT etr Begirtin art tect Isvowon heontvnoo me I .yloilduq br'wrɔt emoo -arðaini.ba erit no told Bidh Jact word I bra,bobnwot [[ew not yIno gni+mwana to vtinu rro esenin ent ni beningoset si wel to noit- .Cabrona a ot
niedrao to egheloni Innostoa supe eved I benoitrew and exir ́ 1. ererido tot pratetoa? arki dołów Regno JaeosT
¦ BOOTNOT ENDİry sort eralwitroq had sad ed doin to
fò we' ev
edd bar,motnedƐ „Til yd od børster moito» ylimet në ant .3.0 t1:00 ILA add hre,und dogli oH .v mod uido el noitas qiderentzaq Becap. 986 7↑ „nodne0 % doad .v ide vol val noitoa arit ni langge Ji so tai ne Toghe Ivond yn has ¡drenodeth vízzelɔ eIew
-NOO
,800
¿ víð erïettá seenid Tol yzataroak est at eban etroger and Built- hna yd heatnayyo sedro Ikoyɛ yd nui ylevotraquedo Grew 888co baedt
including Lam Tan Chiu and Li Hong Mi in the first case,
and Li
Hong Mi in the second case, and Lo Taz Sou in the third case. Further with regard to the first case, lir. Wei Yuk informed me be- fore the trial, as I have informed the Secretary for Chinese Affairs, that Lam Tan Chiu had offered to Mr. Wong, late inter- -preter at the Supreme Court, bribes gradually increasing from 85,000 to $50,000 to give expert evidence in support of a forged document on which the fraudulent claim to property worth about 81,000,000 depended; the desired evidence being contrary to the opinion which Mr. Wong had already expressed to Lam Tan Chiu that the document was a forgery, as indeed it was ultimately pro- -nounced by the Court. There is among these papers a written statement by Mr. Wong confirming this, and I can only take it as true.
It would I think be a salutary warning to this class of men, and of great advantage to the Colony, if these three could be got out of it.
28th. July, 1917.
(sd.) E. H. Sharp.