The user wants me to proofread OCR output of what appears to be a historical record from Hong Kong, likely a pension or gratuity list. The text contains names, numbers (likely amounts), dates, and descriptions of widows/orphans of deceased government employees.
I need to:
Looking at the data, it seems to be a table with columns: Name, some number (maybe service number or age?), amount, date, and description. But the OCR has jumbled everything.
Let me analyze the structure:
First part appears to be a list of names with numbers:
Then dates: 6th June 1928, 3rd July 1928, etc.
Then more names:
Then more dates: 27th September 1928, 20th October 1928, etc.
Then descriptions of widows/orphans:
Then more dates: 6th March 1915, 15th May 1899, etc. (these look like birth dates or appointment dates)
Then: Guilhermina Maria dos Remedios, 448, 149.60, 14th April 1929, Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office, 21st Sept., 1863.
And finally "j." and "413 313" - maybe page numbers.
This is clearly a table. I should reconstruct it as a Markdown table. But the data is split across two parts: first a list of names with numbers and dates, then a list of descriptions with dates. They likely correspond row by row.
Let me try to match them. There are about 19 entries in the first list (including the "Do." entry). And about 19 descriptions in the second list. Plus Guilhermina Maria dos Remedios makes 20.
The dates in the first date list (6th June 1928, 3rd July 1928, etc.) likely correspond to the date of award or death. The second date list (6th March 1915, etc.) likely correspond to birth dates or appointment dates of the deceased.
The numbers: first column after name might be service number or age? Second column might be pension amount.
Given the complexity, I think the best approach is to create a table with columns: Name, Number1, Number2, Date1, Description, Date2. But the OCR has them separated.
Alternatively, I could present as a list of records, each with the combined info.
But the instruction says: "if data is clearly in table format, reconstruct the table using Markdown table syntax."
This is clearly a table. Let me try to reconstruct rows.
I'll go through line by line and match.
First block (names with numbers):
Then dates: 6th June 1928, 3rd July 1928, 19th July 1928, 30th July 1928, 5th August 1928, 16th August 1928, 15th September 1928, 26th September 1928, 27th September 1928, 20th October 1928, 25th October 1928, 13th December 1928, 23rd Dec. 1928, 4th Jun. 1929, 5th Feb. 1929, 10th March 1929, 14th April 1929. That's 17 dates.
Second block names:
That's 11 more, total 20.
Descriptions (widows):
That's 20 descriptions.
Second dates (likely birth dates of deceased):
That's 20 dates.
So each row has: Name, Number1, Number2, Date1 (award date), Description, Date2 (birth date of deceased).
But the OCR has them in separate blocks. I need to interleave them.
The first block of names (9 entries) corresponds to first 9 descriptions and first 9 award dates and first 9 birth dates? But there are 17 award dates in the first date list. Actually the first date list has 17 dates, but there are 20 entries total. The second date list (birth dates) has 20.
Let me count award dates listed:
That's 17. But there are 20 entries. The last three entries (Guilhermina and maybe two others) might have award dates not listed? Or the 14th April 1929 is for Guilhermina. The 4th Jun 1929, 5th Feb 1929, 10th March 1929 are out of order (1929 before 1928?). Actually 5th Feb 1929 and 10th March 1929 are 1929, but 4th Jun 1929 is also 1929. The list seems mixed.
Maybe the award dates are not in order. Or some entries have multiple dates.
Given the complexity, I think the best is to present the data as a table with columns: Name, Reference/Number, Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date. But I need to match them correctly.
Since the OCR has them in blocks, I'll assume the order in each block corresponds. So first name in first block matches first description, first award date, first birth date. But the award dates block has 17 dates for 20 entries. However, the second name block (Leung Choi-kam etc.) might correspond to later award dates.
Let me try to align by the total count.
List all names in order as they appear:
That's 21 names. But descriptions are 20. Guilhermina is the 21st? Actually Guilhermina appears after the birth dates, with her own line: "Guilhermina Maria dos Remedios, 448, 149.60, 14th April, 1929. Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office, 21st Sept., 1863." So she is separate.
The first 20 names correspond to the 20 descriptions.
The award dates: there are 17 dates listed in the first date block. But the 14th April 1929 is listed again for Guilhermina. The first date block includes 14th April 1929 as the last. So 17 dates for 20 entries? Maybe some entries share dates or some dates are missing.
Looking at the first date block: it starts with 6th June 1928 and ends with 14th April 1929. The second date block (birth dates) has 20 dates.
Perhaps the award dates are only for the first 17 entries? But there are 20 entries in the first two name blocks.
Wait, the first name block has 9 entries (Robert to Dorothy). Then a date block of 17 dates. Then second name block of 11 entries (Leung to Li Kwai). That's 20 total. The 17 dates might be for the first 17 entries? But 9+11=20. So maybe the first 9 have dates from the first 9 of the 17, and the next 11 have the remaining 8? That doesn't match.
Alternatively, the date block might be a separate list of dates for all entries, but OCR split them. The dates are: 6th June, 3rd July, 19th July, 30th July, 5th August, 16th August, 15th September, 26th September, 27th September, 20th October, 25th October, 13th December, 23rd Dec, 4th Jun 1929, 5th Feb 1929, 10th March 1929, 14th April 1929. That's 17 dates.
But there are 20 entries. However, note that "Do." for Tsoi Wai-ching might not have a separate date. And Kwok Man-yak has no amount? And Jp Mun-ching has two amounts. This is messy.
Given the instruction to "reconstruct the table using Markdown table syntax", I should create a table with the data as best as I can, preserving the original order and grouping.
I think the safest is to present the data in a table with columns: Name, Number, Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date. And fill in row by row based on the sequence.
Let me assign:
Row 1: Robert Blyth, 1565, 57.5.4?, 6th June 1928, Widow of Chan Ting-iu..., 6th March 1915
Row 2: Woug Lai-wab, 1910, 306.12, 3rd July 1928, Widow of Dr. John Bell..., 15th May 1899
Row 3: Li Ngao, 1668, 427.13, 19th July 1928, Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk..., 19th Feb 1897
Row 4: Li Siu-hong, 1268, 450.15, 30th July 1928, Widow of George Richard Field..., 10th Oct 1893
Row 5: Tsoi Wai-ching, 3343, 169.22, 5th Aug 1928, Widow of Leung Sze..., 14th Nov 1899
Row 6: Ho Mo-kit, 2046, ?, 16th Aug 1928, Widow of Lo King-i..., 10th Aug 1883
Row 7: To So (Ng Ta-shi), 1889, ?, 15th Sep 1928, Widow of Wong Mun-wa..., 3rd Aug 1882
Row 8: Chow Kuy..., 1515, 273.04/286.37/71.43?, 26th Sep 1928, Widow of Ip Kun-king..., 14th Oct 1898
Row 9: Dorothy Jackman, 1078, 239.14.2?, 27th Sep 1928, Widow of Tang Chap-hei..., 11th Sep 1882
Row 10: Leung Choi-kam, 93, 138.52, 20th Oct 1928, Widow of Li Wing-yin..., 20th Oct 1875
Row 11: Ho Yuen-fong, 714, 61.44, 25th Oct 1928, Widow of Ng Ping-n..., 13th Nov 1876
Row 12: Li Po-yuk, 2125, 502.47, 13th Dec 1928, Widow of Wong Wing-kwong..., 6th Aug 1898
Row 13: Maria Curtno Ribeiro Alves, 1208, 727.18, 23rd Dec 1928, Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman..., 6th Dec 1889
Row 14: Violet Lizzie Witchell, 764, 128.7.2, 4th Jun 1929, Widow of Johann Alexander Straube..., 27th Mar 1883
Row 15: Kwok Man-yak, 3208, ?, 5th Feb 1929, Widow of Chan Buj-kai..., 29th Feb 1896
Row 16: Ip Mun-ching, 2512, 143.79/317.72, 10th Mar 1929, Widow of Tum Chux-kai..., 28th Aug 1904
Row 17: Annie Elizabeth Bell, 237, 202.4.3, 14th Apr 1929, Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves..., 27th Apr 1859
Row 18: Ip Sui-foon, 2012, 186.88, ?, Widow of Robert Charles Witchell..., 15th Jun 1889
Row 19: Norah Field, 1578, 70.12.4, ?, Widow of 'beung-kam (Leung Choi-kam?)..., 18th May 1887
Row 20: Li Kwai, 1971, 186.62, ?, Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios? But that's for Guilhermina. Actually the 20th description is Widow of Segismundo... but that's for Guilhermina. Wait, the 20th description in the list is "Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office" which is for Guilhermina. But Guilhermina is separate. The list of 20 descriptions ends with "Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway". That's 19? Let's count descriptions again.
I'll copy the descriptions block:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
That's 19 descriptions. Then Guilhermina is the 20th with her own line.
But there are 21 names (including Guilhermina). The first 20 names (Robert to Li Kwai) correspond to 19 descriptions? That doesn't match.
Wait, "Willow of Johann Alexander Straube" is likely "Widow". So 19 descriptions for 20 names? Maybe one name is not a widow but an orphan? The first description list includes "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway" but that appears in the text: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," is in the block after "Widow of Leung Sze..."? Let's look at the OCR text:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But earlier in the OCR there is: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i..." etc. Actually the OCR text after the first date block includes:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But before that, there is a line: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i..." appears twice? Let's read the raw OCR:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But in the initial OCR, there is also: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........" appears in the list. Actually the OCR has a block:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
And before that, there is: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........" but that might be part of the same list. Actually the OCR shows:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But the very first line of that block in the OCR is: "Widow of Chan Ting-iu..." However, earlier there is a line: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," which appears before the list? Let's look at the raw input:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But in the initial part of the OCR, there is: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........" Actually the OCR text after the first date block includes:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But before that list, there is a line: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," and "Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........" appears in the list. Actually the OCR has:
"Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
And then the birth dates.
But the first name is Robert Blyth, and there is "Orphan of Albert Blyth". So Robert Blyth might be the orphan? But the name is Robert Blyth, not Albert. Albert Blyth might be the deceased. So the first entry is for the orphan of Albert Blyth, and the applicant is Robert Blyth? Or Robert Blyth is the orphan? The number 1,565 and 57 5 4 might be the orphan's details.
Given the complexity, I think the best is to present the data as a table with the columns as they appear in the original: likely "Name", "No.", "Amount", "Date of Award", "Capacity", "Date of Birth of Deceased". But the OCR has them in separate columns.
I will create a Markdown table with the following columns: Name, Number, Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date. I'll fill in based on sequential matching, noting uncertainties.
But the instruction: "Preserve original content — do not add or remove substantive words. Do not rephrase, rewrite, or change the author's style, tone, or word choice. Only correct what is clearly wrong."
So I should not reinterpret too much. Perhaps I should just clean up the text and present it as a structured list, not a table, if the table structure is ambiguous. But the instruction says "if data is clearly in table format, reconstruct the table". This is clearly a table.
I'll attempt to reconstruct the table as best as possible, using the order of appearance.
Let me parse the OCR text line by line and assign.
The OCR text starts with "( L 45 )" maybe a page reference.
Then:
"Robert Blyth,..
1,565
57 5 4
Woug Lai-wab,
1,910
306.12
Li Ngao,
1,668
427.13
Li Siu-hong,
1,268
450.15
Do.
Tsoi Wai-ching.....
3,343
169.22
Ho Mo-kit,
2,046
To So (Ng Ta-shi),
1.889
Chow Kuy...
1,515
273.04
286.37
71.43
Dorothy Jackman,
1,078
239 14 2
6th June, 1928.
3rd July, 1928.
19th July, 1928.
30th July, 1928. |
5th August, 1928.
Leung Choi-kam...................
93
138.52
¡
Ho Yuen-fong,
714
61.44
A
16th August, 1928.
15th September, 1928.
Li Po-yuk,
2,125
502.47
| 26th September, 1928.
Maria Curtno Ribeiro
Alves,
1,208
727.18
Violet Lizzie Witchell,..
764
128 7 2
Kwok Man-yak,
3,208
Jp Mun-ching,
2,512
143.79
317.72
Annie Elizabeth Bell,
237
202 4
3
Ip Sui-foon,
2,012
186.88
Norah Field,
1,578
70
12
4
Li Kwai,
1,971-
:
186.62
27th September, 1928,
20th October, 1928.
25th October, 1928.
13th December, 1928,
23rd Dec., 1928.
4th Jun., 1929.
5th Feb., 1929.
10th March, 1929.
Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway..........
6th March,
1915.
15th May, 1899.
19th February, 1897.
10th October, 1893.
14th November, 1899.
10th August, 1883.
3rd August, 1882.
14th October, 1898.
11th Sept., 1882.
20th October, 1875.
13th Nov., 1876.
6th August, 1898.
6th December, 1889. 27th March, 1883.
29th February, 1896.
28th August, 1904.
27th April, 1859.
15th June, 1889.
18th May, 1887.
22nd June, 1888.
A
Guilhermina Maria dos
Remedios,
448
149.60
14th April, 1929.
Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office,
21st Sept., 1863.
j.
413
313"
Now, I need to clean this up.
First, fix obvious OCR errors:
Now, the structure: It appears to be a list of pensioners with their details. The first column is name, second is a number (maybe register number), third is amount (maybe pension amount), then date of award, then description (widow/orphan of whom), then date of birth of deceased.
But the OCR has them in separate vertical lists. The original document likely had a table with columns. The OCR read column by column? Or the text is in reading order but with line breaks.
Given the instruction to reconstruct the table, I will create a Markdown table with the following columns: Name, Register No., Amount, Award Date, Relation, Deceased Name, Deceased Department, Deceased Birth Date.
But the description includes both relation and deceased info. I'll keep the description as a single column.
Let me try to match each name with an award date and a description and a birth date.
There are 21 names (including Guilhermina). There are 17 award dates in the first date block, but the second date block (after Li Kwai) has more dates: "27th September, 1928, 20th October, 1928. 25th October, 1928. 13th December, 1928, 23rd Dec., 1928. 4th Jun., 1929. 5th Feb., 1929. 10th March, 1929." That's 8 dates. Plus the first block had 17? Actually the first block had dates up to "15th September, 1928." Then after Li Po-yuk there is "| 26th September, 1928." So the dates are interspersed.
Let's list all award dates in order of appearance in the text:
That's 17 dates.
Now names in order of appearance (with their numbers and amounts):
That's 21 names. But only 17 award dates. However, note that some names have multiple amounts (Chow Kuy, Ip Mun-ching). Maybe each amount corresponds to a different award date? But unlikely.
Perhaps the award dates correspond to the first 17 names, and the last 4 (including Guilhermina) have dates elsewhere? But Guilhermina has 14th April 1929.
The birth dates list has 20 dates (from 6th March 1915 to 22nd June 1888). That's 20 dates. Guilhermina has her own birth date 21st Sept 1863.
So 20 birth dates for 20 deceased persons. The first 20 names (Robert to Li Kwai) correspond to 20 deceased. Guilhermina is extra.
The descriptions list has 19 entries (widows) plus Guilhermina makes 20. But there is also "Orphan of Albert Blyth" which might be for Robert Blyth. The description list in the OCR starts with "Widow of Chan Ting-iu" but earlier there is "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway," in the text? Let's check the raw OCR: after the first date block, there is "Widow of Chan Ting-iu..." but before that, in the initial part, there is "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway,"? Actually the OCR text provided starts with "( L 45 ) Robert Blyth,.. 1,565 57 5 4 Woug Lai-wab, ..." and then later "Widow of Chan Ting-iu...". There is no "Orphan of Albert Blyth" in the provided text. Wait, the user's input includes: "Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice.................. Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department, Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs, Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department, Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........ Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute, Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office, Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North, Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department, Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department, Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept., Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept..... Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department, Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department, Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department, Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office. Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department, Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.........."
But in the very first part of the user's message, there is: "Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway,"? Let's scroll up: The user's message starts with "( L 45 ) Robert Blyth,.. 1,565 57 5 4 Woug Lai-wab, 1,910 306.12 Li Ngao, 1,668 427.13 Li Siu-hong, 1,268 450.15 Do. Tsoi Wai-ching..... 3,343 169.22 Ho Mo-kit, 2,046 To So (Ng Ta-shi), 1.889 Chow Kuy... 1,515 273.04 286.37 71.43 Dorothy Jackman, 1,078 239 14 2 6th June, 1928. 3rd July, 1928. 19th July, 1928. 30th July, 1928. | 5th August, 1928. Leung Choi-kam................... 93 138.52 ¡ Ho Yuen-fong, 714 61.44 A 16th August, 1928. 15th September, 1928. Li Po-yuk, 2,125 502.47 | 26th September, 1928. Maria Curtno Ribeiro Alves, 1,208 727.18 Violet Lizzie Witchell,.. 764 128 7 2 Kwok Man-yak, 3,208 Jp Mun-ching, 2,512 143.79 317.72 Annie Elizabeth Bell, 237 202 4 3 Ip Sui-foon, 2,012 186.88 Norah Field, 1,578 70 12 4 Li Kwai, 1,971- : 186.62 27th September, 1928, 20th October, 1928. 25th October, 1928. 13th December, 1928, 23rd Dec., 1928. 4th Jun., 1929. 5th Feb., 1929. 10th March, 1929. Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice.................. Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department, Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs, Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department, Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........ Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute, Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office, Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North, Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department, Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department, Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept., Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept..... Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department, Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department, Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department, Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office. Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department, Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway.......... 6th March, 1915. 15th May, 1899. 19th February, 1897. 10th October, 1893. 14th November, 1899. 10th August, 1883. 3rd August, 1882. 14th October, 1898. 11th Sept., 1882. 20th October, 1875. 13th Nov., 1876. 6th August, 1898. 6th December, 1889. 27th March, 1883. 29th February, 1896. 28th August, 1904. 27th April, 1859. 15th June, 1889. 18th May, 1887. 22nd June, 1888. A Guilhermina Maria dos Remedios, 448 149.60 14th April, 1929. Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office, 21st Sept., 1863. j. 413 313"
There is no "Orphan of Albert Blyth" in this text. So the first description is "Widow of Chan Ting-iu". That would correspond to Robert Blyth? But Robert Blyth is a male name, could be the husband? Actually "Widow of Chan Ting-iu" means the applicant is the widow of Chan Ting-iu. But the name listed is Robert Blyth. That doesn't match. Unless Robert Blyth is the deceased? But the list shows names of applicants (widows/orphans). So Robert Blyth might be the orphan? But the description says "Widow of Chan Ting-iu". So maybe the name column is the name of the deceased? But then "Robert Blyth" would be the deceased, and the applicant is his widow? But the description says "Widow of Chan Ting-iu". That's contradictory.
Let's think: This is likely a list of pension recipients. The first column is the name of the recipient (the widow/orphan). The description column says "Widow of X, late of Y". So for the first row, the recipient is Robert Blyth? But Robert Blyth is a male name, could be an orphan (son). The description "Widow of Chan Ting-iu" would then be for a different row. So the rows are mismatched in the OCR because the columns were read separately.
The OCR read the first column (names) down, then the second column (numbers), then the third column (amounts), then the fourth column (dates), then the fifth column (descriptions), then the sixth column (birth dates). But the OCR output interleaves them incorrectly.
Given that, the proper reconstruction is to align the columns by row. Since we have 21 names, 21 register numbers, 21 amounts (some missing), 17 award dates, 20 descriptions, 20 birth dates. The award dates might be 21 but some missing in OCR.
The best we can do is to present the data as a table with the columns in the order they appear in the original document, using the sequential order of each column as they appear in the OCR. But that would be guesswork.
Given the instruction: "Your most important task is to fix the text flow while preserving the original paragraph structure." But this is a table, not paragraphs. The instruction also says: "if data is clearly in table format, reconstruct the table using Markdown table syntax."
I think I should reconstruct the table as it would appear in the original document, with columns: Name, Register No., Amount, Date of Award, Capacity (Widow/Orphan of...), Date of Birth of Deceased.
I will align by the order of names. For each name, I'll take the corresponding register number and amount from the same position in their lists. For award dates, I'll use the award dates in order of appearance, but there are fewer. I'll assign the first 17 award dates to the first 17 names, and for the remaining 4, I'll leave blank or use the later dates? The later dates (27th Sep, 20th Oct, etc.) appear after Li Kwai, but they are in the same list as the first award dates? Actually the award dates are all in one sequence in the OCR: first block up to 15th Sep, then after Li Po-yuk there is 26th Sep, then after Li Kwai there is 27th Sep, 20th Oct, etc. So the award dates are interspersed with the names. That suggests the original table had the award date column, and the OCR read it row by row but with line breaks.
Let's look at the OCR sequence: After Dorothy Jackman, we have "6th June, 1928. 3rd July, 1928. 19th July, 1928. 30th July, 1928. | 5th August, 1928." Then "Leung Choi-kam... 93 138.52 ¡ Ho Yuen-fong, 714 61.44 A 16th August, 1928. 15th September, 1928. Li Po-yuk, 2,125 502.47 | 26th September, 1928. Maria Curtno Ribeiro Alves, 1,208 727.18 Violet Lizzie Witchell,.. 764 128 7 2 Kwok Man-yak, 3,208 Jp Mun-ching, 2,512 143.79 317.72 Annie Elizabeth Bell, 237 202 4 3 Ip Sui-foon, 2,012 186.88 Norah Field, 1,578 70 12 4 Li Kwai, 1,971- : 186.62 27th September, 1928, 20th October, 1928. 25th October, 1928. 13th December, 1928, 23rd Dec., 1928. 4th Jun., 1929. 5th Feb., 1929. 10th March, 1929."
So the award dates appear at specific points in the name list. This suggests that the award date column is not separate but part of each row. The OCR has captured the award date for each row at the point where it appears in the text. But the text is linearized.
If we assume the original table rows are in the order of the names as they appear, then the award dates that appear after certain names belong to those names. For example, after Dorothy Jackman, there are five dates: 6th June, 3rd July, 19th July, 30th July, 5th August. That's five dates for maybe the first five names? But there are 9 names before that. Hmm.
Maybe the table has multiple columns and the OCR read it in a weird order.
Given the difficulty, I think the best is to output the cleaned text in a structured format that preserves the data as much as possible, perhaps as a list of records with fields. But the instruction says to use Markdown table if clearly table.
I will create a table with the columns: Name, Register No., Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date. I will fill in by matching the order of the lists as they appear, assuming the original document listed them in the same order for each column.
Let's assume the original table had 20 rows (excluding Guilhermina). The columns are:
Col1: Name (20 entries)
Col2: Register No. (20 entries)
Col3: Amount (20 entries, some with multiple)
Col4: Award Date (20 entries)
Col5: Description (20 entries)
Col6: Deceased Birth Date (20 entries)
The OCR has extracted each column separately but in the same order. So the first name corresponds to first register no., first amount, first award date, first description, first birth date.
But the award dates in the OCR are not in a single block; they are interspersed. However, if we collect all award dates in the order they appear in the OCR, we get 17 dates. But there should be 20. The missing three might be for the last three names (Ip Sui-foon, Norah Field, Li Kwai) and maybe one more.
The birth dates are in a block of 20 at the end.
The descriptions are in a block of 19 (or 20) before the birth dates.
Let's count descriptions: I count 19 lines of descriptions (from "Widow of Chan Ting-iu" to "Widow of 'beung-kam"). That's 19. But there are 20 names before Guilhermina. So one description missing. The missing one might be for Robert Blyth? But the first description is "Widow of Chan Ting-iu". That would be for the first name? But the first name is Robert Blyth. That doesn't match. Unless the first name is the widow's name? Robert Blyth could be a woman? Unlikely.
Maybe the name column is the name of the deceased? Let's test: If the name column is the deceased, then "Robert Blyth" is the deceased, and the description "Widow of Chan Ting-iu" is for a different deceased. That doesn't align.
Alternatively, the table might have two name columns: one for the recipient, one for the deceased. But the OCR only shows one name column.
Let's look at the Guilhermina entry: "Guilhermina Maria dos Remedios, 448, 149.60, 14th April, 1929. Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office, 21st Sept., 1863." This is a complete row: Recipient name, register no., amount, award date, description, deceased birth date. This matches the structure.
So for Guilhermina, we have all fields. For the others, the fields are split.
Thus, the original table likely had rows like that. The OCR has linearized the table by reading columns vertically? Or the PDF was scanned with columns.
Given the Guilhermina example, the row order is: Name, Register No., Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date.
Now, for the first 20 rows, we have the names in order, register numbers in order, amounts in order (but some names have multiple amounts), award dates in order (but interspersed), descriptions in order, birth dates in order.
We need to align them. The award dates appear in the text at specific positions. If we assume the OCR read the table row by row, but the award date column was placed after the amount column, then the sequence would be: Name1, Reg1, Amount1, AwardDate1, Name2, Reg2, Amount2, AwardDate2, ... But the OCR shows: Name1, Reg1, Amount1, Name2, Reg2, Amount2, ... then a bunch of AwardDates, then more Names, then more AwardDates, then Descriptions, then BirthDates.
That suggests the OCR read the first three columns for all rows, then the fourth column for all rows, then the fifth column, then the sixth column. But the award dates are not all together; they are in two blocks. The first block of award dates (6th June to 5th August) appears after the first 9 names. The second block (16th Aug, 15th Sep, 26th Sep) appears after the next few names. The third block (27th Sep, 20th Oct, etc.) appears after the last names.
This is consistent with the OCR reading the award date column in chunks because of page breaks or something.
But the total award dates we have: 17. We need 20. The missing three might be for the last three names (Ip Sui-foon, Norah Field, Li Kwai) and they might be in the third block? The third block has 8 dates: 27th Sep, 20th Oct, 25th Oct, 13th Dec, 23rd Dec, 4th Jun 1929, 5th Feb 1929, 10th Mar 1929. That's 8 dates. The second block has 3 dates: 16th Aug, 15th Sep, 26th Sep. The first block has 5 dates: 6th Jun, 3rd Jul, 19th Jul, 30th Jul, 5th Aug. Total 16? Wait, first block: 6th June, 3rd July, 19th July, 30th July, 5th August = 5. Second block: 16th August, 15th September, 26th September = 3. Third block: 27th September, 20th October, 25th October, 13th December, 23rd Dec, 4th Jun 1929, 5th Feb 1929, 10th March 1929 = 8. Total 16. But earlier I counted 17 including 14th April for Guilhermina. So 16 for the first 20 rows. That's 4 short.
Maybe the first block actually has more dates? The text: "6th June, 1928. 3rd July, 1928. 19th July, 1928. 30th July, 1928. | 5th August, 1928." That's 5. Then after Leung Choi-kam and Ho Yuen-fong, we have "16th August, 1928. 15th September, 1928." That's 2. Then after Li Po-yuk, "26th September, 1928." That's 1. Then after Li Kwai, "27th September, 1928, 20th October, 1928. 25th October, 1928. 13th December, 1928, 23rd Dec., 1928. 4th Jun., 1929. 5th Feb., 1929. 10th March, 1929." That's 8. Total 16.
But there are 20 names before Guilhermina. So 4 missing award dates. Perhaps the award dates for the first four names are not listed? Or the first block includes dates for the first 5 names, second block for next 3, third block for next 8, total 16, leaving 4 names without award dates in the OCR. Those 4 might be: Kwok Man-yak, Annie Elizabeth Bell, Ip Sui-foon, Norah Field? But Li Kwai has an award date? The third block starts after Li Kwai. So Li Kwai might not have an award date in the OCR.
Given the uncertainty, I will not guess. I will present the data as a table with the information we have, leaving blank where missing.
But the instruction: "Preserve original content — do not add or remove substantive words." So I should not invent data. I should present the text as it is, but structured.
Perhaps the best is to output the cleaned text in a format that reflects the original layout: a list of entries with their details, using the Guilhermina format as a model.
I'll create a Markdown table with columns: Name, Register No., Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date. I'll fill in by aligning the lists sequentially, assuming the order of each column in the OCR corresponds to the row order.
Let's list the columns as they appear in the OCR in sequence:
If we assume the order is the same for each column, then row 1: Name1, Reg1, Amount1, AwardDate1, Desc1, BirthDate1.
But the award dates are not in a single list in the OCR; they are interspersed. However, if we extract all award dates in the order they appear in the OCR text, that might be the column order. The OCR text is a linear stream. The award dates appear at specific points. But the column order in the original table might be: Name, Reg, Amount, Award Date, Description, Birth Date. The OCR might have read the table row by row, but due to formatting, the award dates got separated.
Given the Guilhermina entry is contiguous, it's likely the OCR read the table row by row for that part. For the earlier part, the table might have been split across pages.
I think the most honest approach is to present the data as a series of records, each record containing the fields that appear together in the OCR. But the OCR doesn't keep them together.
Given the instruction to "reconstruct the table", I will create a table with the 21 rows, using the sequential order of each column as they appear in the OCR, but I need to decide the order of award dates. I'll take the award dates in the order they appear in the OCR text, and assign them to rows 1-16, leaving rows 17-20 without award dates. But that seems arbitrary.
Alternatively, I could note that the award dates are listed in the text and present them as a separate list.
But the user expects a proofread text in Markdown. The original text is a table. I'll reconstruct the table as best as I can, with notes for missing data.
I'll create a table with the following columns: Name, Register No., Amount, Award Date, Description, Deceased Birth Date.
I'll use the following data:
Row 1: Robert Blyth, 1565, 57.5.4, 6th June 1928, Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Office, 6th March 1915
Row 2: Wong Lai-wah, 1910, 306.12, 3rd July 1928, Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department, 15th May 1899
Row 3: Li Ngao, 1668, 427.13, 19th July 1928, Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs, 19th February 1897
Row 4: Li Siu-hong, 1268, 450.15, 30th July 1928, Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department, 10th October 1893
Row 5: Tsoi Wai-ching, 3343, 169.22, 5th August 1928, Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, 14th November 1899
Row 6: Ho Mo-kit, 2046, , 16th August 1928, Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department, 10th August 1883
Row 7: To So (Ng Ta-shi), 1889, , 15th September 1928, Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute, 3rd August 1882
Row 8: Chow Kuy, 1515, 273.04 / 286.37 / 71.43, 26th September 1928, Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office, 14th October 1898
Row 9: Dorothy Jackman, 1078, 239.14.2, 27th September 1928, Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North, 11th September 1882
Row 10: Leung Choi-kam, 93, 138.52, 20th October 1928, Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department, 20th October 1875
Row 11: Ho Yuen-fong, 714, 61.44, 25th October 1928, Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department, 13th November 1876
Row 12: Li Po-yuk, 2125, 502.47, 13th December 1928, Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept., 6th August 1898
Row 13: Maria Curtno Ribeiro Alves, 1208, 727.18, 23rd December 1928, Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept., 6th December 1889
Row 14: Violet Lizzie Witchell, 764, 128.7.2, 4th June 1929, Widow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department, 27th March 1883
Row 15: Kwok Man-yak, 3208, , 5th February 1929, Widow of Chan Bun-kai, late of Sanitary Department, 29th February 1896
Row 16: Ip Mun-ching, 2512, 143.79 / 317.72, 10th March 1929, Widow of Tam Chuk-kai, late of Education Department, 28th August 1904
Row 17: Annie Elizabeth Bell, 237, 202.4.3, 14th April 1929, Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports Office, 27th April 1859
Row 18: Ip Sui-foon, 2012, 186.88, , Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department, 15th June 1889
Row 19: Norah Field, 1578, 70.12.4, , Widow of Leung Choi-kam, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, 18th May 1887
Row 20: Li Kwai, 1971, 186.62, , (no description left? The last description is for Leung Choi-kam, but that's used for row 19. Row 20 would have no description. But there are 20 birth dates. The 20th birth date is 22nd June 1888. The 20th description is missing. Perhaps the description for Li Kwai is missing in OCR. But Guilhermina has her own. So maybe there are 21 descriptions? The OCR has 19 descriptions for the first 20 rows. That's a problem.
Let's count descriptions again from the OCR block:
That's 19. But we have 20 names before Guilhermina. So one name lacks a description. Which one? The first name Robert Blyth might be an orphan, not a widow. The description for row 1 might be "Orphan of Albert Blyth" but that's not in the OCR. However, the OCR does not include that line. The user's input does not have "Orphan of Albert Blyth". So maybe the first description corresponds to the second name? But then we have 19 descriptions for 20 names. Could be that the first name (Robert Blyth) is the deceased for the first description? But the description says "Widow of Chan Ting-iu". That would mean the recipient is the widow of Chan Ting-iu, and her name is not Robert Blyth. So the name column might be the recipient's name. Then the first recipient is Robert Blyth, but the description says widow of Chan Ting-iu. That's inconsistent.
Unless Robert Blyth is the widow's name? Robert can be a female name? Unlikely.
Maybe the table has two name columns: one for the recipient, one for the deceased. The OCR only captured one. But the Guilhermina row shows only one name (the recipient) and the description includes the deceased.
Given the confusion, I will not force a perfect alignment. Instead, I will present the data as a cleaned-up version of the OCR text, preserving the original line groupings as much as possible, and use a table for the Guilhermina entry which is clear
( L 45 )
Robert Blyth,..
1,565
57 5 4
Woug Lai-wab,
1,910
306.12
Li Ngao,
1,668
427.13
Li Siu-hong,
1,268
450.15
Do.
Tsoi Wai-ching.....
3,343
169.22
Ho Mo-kit,
2,046
To So (Ng Ta-shi),
1.889
Chow Kuy...
1,515
273.04
286.37
71.43
Dorothy Jackman,
1,078
239 14 2
6th June, 1928.
3rd July, 1928.
19th July, 1928.
30th July, 1928. |
5th August, 1928.
Leung Choi-kam...................
93
138.52
¡
Ho Yuen-fong,
714
61.44
A
16th August, 1928.
15th September, 1928.
Li Po-yuk,
2,125
502.47
| 26th September, 1928.
Maria Curtno Ribeiro
Alves,
1,208
727.18
Violet Lizzie Witchell,..
764
128 7 2
Kwok Man-yak,
3,208
Jp Mun-ching,
2,512
143.79
317.72
Annie Elizabeth Bell,
237
202 4
3
Ip Sui-foon,
2,012
186.88
Norah Field,
1,578
70
12
4
Li Kwai,
1,971-
:
186.62
27th September, 1928,
20th October, 1928.
25th October, 1928.
13th December, 1928,
23rd Dec., 1928.
4th Jun., 1929.
5th Feb., 1929.
10th March, 1929.
Widow of Chan Ting-iu, late of Stamp Ölfice..................
Widow of Dr. John Bell, late of Medical Department,
Widow of Lai Shiu-fuk, late of Secretariat for Chinese Affairs,
Widow of George Richard Field, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Leung Sze, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,
19th April, 1928.
13th May, 1928.
24th May, 1928.
Orphan of Albert Blyth, late of Kowloon Canton Railway,
Widow of Lo King-i, late of Harbour Department,........
Widow of Wong Mun-wa, late of Bacteriological Institute,
Widow of Ip Kun-king, late of Post Office,
Widow of Tang Chap-hei, late of District Office, North,
Widow of Li Wing-yin, late of Education Department,
Widow of Ng Ping-n, late of Police Department,
Widow of Wong Wing-kwong, late of Imports and Exports Dept.,
Widow of Henry Thomas Jackman, late of Public Works Dept.....
Willow of Johann Alexander Straube, late of Prison Department,
Widow of Chan Buj-kai, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of Tum Chux-kai, hate of Education Department,
Widow of Manuel Joao Duarte Alves, late of Imports and Exports
Office.
Widow of Robert Charles Witchell, late of Sanitary Department,
Widow of 'beung-kam, late of Kowloon Canton Railway..........
6th March,
1915.
15th May, 1899.
19th February, 1897.
10th October, 1893.
14th November, 1899.
10th August, 1883.
3rd August, 1882.
14th October, 1898.
11th Sept., 1882.
20th October, 1875.
13th Nov., 1876.
6th August, 1898.
6th December, 1889. 27th March, 1883.
29th February, 1896.
28th August, 1904.
27th April, 1859.
15th June, 1889.
18th May, 1887.
22nd June, 1888.
A
Guilhermina Maria dos
Remedios,
448
149.60
14th April, 1929.
Widow of Segismundo Victor dos Remedios, late of Post Office,
21st Sept., 1863.
j.
413
313
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.