The user wants me to proofread OCR output of a historical document about Widows and Orphans' Pensions in Hong Kong. The document appears to be a table/list of pensioners with various details. I need to reconstruct this into proper Markdown format.

Let me analyze the OCR text:

1. Header: "WIDOWS AND ORPHANS' PENSIONS. (Ordinance No. 15 of 1908)."
2. Column headers: Name of Pensioner, No. of Pension Register, Amount of the Pension in Sterling per annum, Amount of the Pension in Dollars per annum, Date from which the Pension has been paid, Particulars, Date of Birth of Pensioner.
3. Then there's a list of entries with dates and names.

The OCR is quite messy. I need to reconstruct the table properly. Let me parse the data:

Looking at the structure, it seems like there are multiple columns but the OCR has jumbled them. Let me try to reconstruct each row.

From the text, I can see entries like:

• "298 ( L 36 )" - possibly a page/reference number
• Dates: 19th February 1933, 22nd February 1933, 6th March 1933, 5th April 1933, 9th April 1983 (likely 1933), 15th April 1933, 4th May 1933, 9th July 1933, 16th September 1933, 18th September 1933, 19th September 1933, 24th September 1933, 1st October 1933, 4th October 1933, 9th November 1933, 10th November 1933, 28th November 1933, 12th December 1933, 2nd Jan 1934, 13th Jan 1934, 13th Jan 1934, 26th February 1890, etc.

Names of widows/orphans:

• Widow of Chan Ip Man, late of Public Works Department
• Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund (likely "Slund" is OCR error for "Slund" or "Slund"? Maybe "Slund" is "Slund" - could be "Slund" but probably "Slund" is a name)
• Widow of Cheung rok-teni (likely "Cheung Rok-ten" or similar)
• Widow of Syed Batsha, late of Sanitary Department
• Widow of Fan Ling-hong, late of Harbour Department
• Widow of Sir Claud Severn, late of Colonial Secretary's Office
• Widow of Yeung Sing-u, late of Imports and Exports Department
• Widow of David Wood, late of Public Works Department
• Widow of F. H. Holdman, late of Post Office
• Widow of Kwan Kong, late of Imports and Exports Department
• Widow of Kwok Yin-hing, late of District Office, North
• Widow of Lo Kwong, late of Sanitary Department
• Widow of E. L. Agassiz, late of Official Receiver's Office
• Widow of Natha Singh, late of Supreme Court
• Widow of Chu Tsan-hing, late of Assessor's Office
• Widow of Ho Sheung, late of Public Works Department
• Widow of W. F. Blackman, late of Police Department
• Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin (likely "Arthur Cawto Franklin" - maybe "Arthur Cawto Franklin" is "Arthur Cawto Franklin"? Could be "Arthur Cawto Franklin" but probably "Arthur Cawto Franklin" is a name)
• Widow of William Cameron, late of Police Department
• Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé, late of Harbour Office
• Widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes, late of Post Office
• Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway

Then there are pensioner names and amounts:

• Chan Li Wan, 1,644, $65.98, 4th February 1933
• Claire Iris Shaud (née Mattock), 3,160, 130, 2 10 (maybe £2 10s?)
• Cheong Mak Shi, 11 (maybe register no.), Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248
• Fan Tin Yuk Heung, 2,309, 162.39, 153.54, 323.06 (multiple amounts?)
• Lady Margaret Annie Severn (née Bullock), 1,703, 386 0 5 (maybe £386 0s 5d)
• Young Man Shi, 1,439, 451.10
• Sophia Milne Wood (née Boulton), [8H 16 9] (maybe £8 16s 9d?), 141, ******, 168 16 5
• Alice Eliza Holdman (née Rootes), Kwan Wong-chon, 2,560, 118 3 10
• MA (maybe?), GARIAN (maybe?), Kwok Wong Shek Mui, 3,175
• Lo Kwong-shui, 2,986, 92.52, 294.04, 57.00
• Edith Amy Agassiz (née Hobhouse), 4,012, 223 13 7
• Shum Kaur, 1,661
• Chu Chan Sing Cho, 1,273
• Ho Kong Kain Ming, 1,792, 542.10, 237.51, J21.68 (J maybe $)
• Lilian Ellen Blackman, 1,580, 73 11 7
• Lily Franklin (née Aabdown), 906, 100 9 2
• Mary Dewar Cameron, 473, 45 1 0
• Maria José Pincé, 1032
• Izabel Mendes, 446
• (Chan Chai-tai, 28.07, 1,632.64
• Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044, Lan Shin-cheung, *********, Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55

This is very messy. The OCR has mixed up columns. I need to reconstruct a proper table with the columns: Name of Pensioner, No. of Pension Register, Amount of Pension in Sterling (£ s. d.), Amount of Pension in Dollars ($ c.), Date from which Pension has been paid, Particulars, Date of Birth of Pensioner.

But the data seems to be in two parts: first a list of widows/orphans with dates (maybe date of pension commencement?), then a list with amounts and birth dates.

Looking at the original structure: The header says "Name of Pensioner. No. of Pension Register. Amount of the Pension in Sterling, per annum. Amount of the Pension in Dollars, per annum. Date from which the Pension has been paid. Particulars. Date of Birth of Pensioner."

Then there is "298 ( L 36 )" which might be a page number or reference.

Then a list of dates and "Widow of ..." entries. Those might be the "Date from which the Pension has been paid" and "Particulars" columns.

Then later, there are names like "Chan Li Wan", "Claire Iris Shaud", etc. with numbers and amounts. Those might be the "Name of Pensioner", "No. of Pension Register", "Amount in Sterling", "Amount in Dollars", "Date of Birth"? But the dates of birth appear earlier (26th February 1890, etc.) and also later.

Actually, looking at the dates: 26th February 1890, 2nd December 1897, 20th August 1897, 22nd July 1895, 5th January 1896, 2nd April 1886, 13th March 1882, 31st March 1875, 17th July 1888, 31st October 1898, 3rd March 1905, 8th December 1885, 11th November 1864, 24th April 1894, 6th December 1896, 4th April 1887, 3rd August 1877, 12th January 1882, 13th August 1869, 8th August 1879, 22nd Sept 1903, 18th October 1918, 5th October 1920, 1st August 1922, 30th November 1924, 16th April 1930. These are likely dates of birth of the pensioners (widows/orphans). They appear after the list of widows.

Then there is "£ s. d." header, then the pensioner names with amounts.

So the structure might be: The document has a table with columns. The OCR has read it in a jumbled way. I need to reconstruct the table rows by matching each pensioner with their details.

Let me try to match each widow/orphan entry with the subsequent data.

List of widows/orphans with commencement dates (from the first part):

1. 19th February 1933 - Widow of Chan Ip Man, late of Public Works Department
2. 22nd February 1933 - Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund, late of Medical Department
3. 6th March 1933 - Widow of Cheung rok-teni, late of Treasury
4. 5th April 1933 - Widow of Syed Batsha, late of Sanitary Department
5. 9th April 1933 (OCR says 1983 but likely 1933) - Widow of Fan Ling-hong, late of Harbour Department
6. 15th April 1933 - Widow of Sir Claud Severn, late of Colonial Secretary's Office
7. 4th May 1933 - Widow of Yeung Sing-u, late of Imports and Exports Department
8. 9th July 1933 - Widow of David Wood, late of Public Works Department
9. 16th September 1933 - Widow of F. H. Holdman, late of Post Office
10. 18th September 1933 - Widow of Kwan Kong, late of Imports and Exports Department
11. 19th September 1933 - Widow of Kwok Yin-hing, late of District Office, North
12. 24th September 1933 - Widow of Lo Kwong, late of Sanitary Department
13. 1st October 1933 - Widow of E. L. Agassiz, late of Official Receiver's Office
14. 4th October 1933 - Widow of Natha Singh, late of Supreme Court
15. 9th November 1933 - Widow of Chu Tsan-hing, late of Assessor's Office
16. 10th November 1933 - Widow of Ho Sheung, late of Public Works Department
17. 28th November 1933 - Widow of W. F. Blackman, late of Police Department
18. 12th December 1933 - Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin, late of Medical Department
19. 2nd Jan 1934 - Widow of William Cameron, late of Police Department
20. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé, late of Harbour Office
21. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes, late of Post Office
22. 26th February 1890? Wait, that's a birth date. Actually the next line: "Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway" - but no date? The date "26th February 1890" might be the birth date of the first orphan? Or maybe the commencement date for the orphans? The text: "26th February, 1890. 2nd December, 1897. 20th August, 1897. 22nd July, 1895. 5th January, 1896. 2nd April, 1886, 13th March, 1882. 31st March, 1875. 17th July, 1888. 31st October, 1898. 3rd March, 1905. 8th December, 1885. 11th November, 1864. 24th April, 1894. 6th December, 1896. 4th April, 1887. 3rd August, 1877. 12th January, 1882. 13th August, 1869. 8th August, 1879. 22nd Sept., 1903. 18th October, 1918. 5th October, 1920, 1st August, 1922. 30th November, 1924. 16th April, 1930." These are 24 dates. There are 22 widows/orphans entries above? Let's count: I listed 21 entries (1-21). Plus the orphans of Lan Koon (maybe multiple orphans). The orphans might be multiple children: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan (5 names). That would make 22 pensioners? But there are 24 birth dates. Hmm.

Then after the birth dates, there is "£ s. d." and then a list of names with numbers and amounts. Those names correspond to the widows/orphans? Let's see:

• Chan Li Wan (likely widow of Chan Ip Man? Chan Li Wan could be the widow's name)
• Claire Iris Shaud (née Mattock) - widow of Joseph Taylor Slund? But Slund? Maybe "Slund" is "Slund"? Could be "Slund" but the widow's name is Claire Iris Shaud.
• Cheong Mak Shi - widow of Cheung rok-teni? Cheung rok-teni -> Cheong Mak Shi? Possibly.
• Bibi Khair Didda - widow of Syed Batsha? Syed Batsha -> Bibi Khair Didda (Muslim name).
• Fan Tin Yuk Heung - widow of Fan Ling-hong.
• Lady Margaret Annie Severn (née Bullock) - widow of Sir Claud Severn.
• Young Man Shi - widow of Yeung Sing-u? Yeung Sing-u -> Young Man Shi? Maybe.
• Sophia Milne Wood (née Boulton) - widow of David Wood.
• Alice Eliza Holdman (née Rootes) - widow of F. H. Holdman.
• Kwan Wong-chon - widow of Kwan Kong.
• Kwok Wong Shek Mui - widow of Kwok Yin-hing.
• Lo Kwong-shui - widow of Lo Kwong.
• Edith Amy Agassiz (née Hobhouse) - widow of E. L. Agassiz.
• Shum Kaur - widow of Natha Singh.
• Chu Chan Sing Cho - widow of Chu Tsan-hing.
• Ho Kong Kain Ming - widow of Ho Sheung.
• Lilian Ellen Blackman - widow of W. F. Blackman.
• Lily Franklin (née Aabdown) - widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin.
• Mary Dewar Cameron - widow of William Cameron.
• Maria José Pincé - widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé.
• Izabel Mendes - widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes.
• Then orphans: Chan Chai-tai, Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan (6 names). But earlier "Orphans of Lan Koon" - maybe Lan Koon is the father, and the orphans are his children. The names: Chan Chai-tai? That doesn't match Lan. Maybe "Chan Chai-tai" is a separate entry? The text: "(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64" then "Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55". So there are 6 orphans? But the birth dates list has 24 dates. The first 22 dates might correspond to the 22 widows, and the last few to the orphans? But there are 24 dates for 22 widows + maybe 5 orphans = 27? Not matching.

Let's count the widows entries: I counted 21 widows + 1 orphans entry (but orphans might be multiple). The list of commencement dates has 21 dates (from 19th Feb 1933 to 13th Jan 1934). Then "Orphans of Lan Koon" with no commencement date? Maybe the commencement date for orphans is missing.

The birth dates list: 24 dates. If there are 22 pensioners (21 widows + 1 orphan group?), but the orphan group might have 5 children, total 26 individuals. But the birth dates are 24. Hmm.

Maybe the birth dates correspond to the pensioners (the widows/orphans) in the same order as the commencement dates. Let's match:

1. 19th Feb 1933 - Widow of Chan Ip Man -> birth date 26th Feb 1890? That would make her 43 in 1933. Possible.
2. 22nd Feb 1933 - Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund -> birth date 2nd Dec 1897 (age 35)
3. 6th Mar 1933 - Widow of Cheung rok-teni -> birth date 20th Aug 1897 (age 35)
4. 5th Apr 1933 - Widow of Syed Batsha -> birth date 22nd Jul 1895 (age 37)
5. 9th Apr 1933 - Widow of Fan Ling-hong -> birth date 5th Jan 1896 (age 37)
6. 15th Apr 1933 - Widow of Sir Claud Severn -> birth date 2nd Apr 1886 (age 47)
7. 4th May 1933 - Widow of Yeung Sing-u -> birth date 13th Mar 1882 (age 51)
8. 9th Jul 1933 - Widow of David Wood -> birth date 31st Mar 1875 (age 58)
9. 16th Sep 1933 - Widow of F. H. Holdman -> birth date 17th Jul 1888 (age 45)
10. 18th Sep 1933 - Widow of Kwan Kong -> birth date 31st Oct 1898 (age 34)
11. 19th Sep 1933 - Widow of Kwok Yin-hing -> birth date 3rd Mar 1905 (age 28)
12. 24th Sep 1933 - Widow of Lo Kwong -> birth date 8th Dec 1885 (age 47)
13. 1st Oct 1933 - Widow of E. L. Agassiz -> birth date 11th Nov 1864 (age 68)
14. 4th Oct 1933 - Widow of Natha Singh -> birth date 24th Apr 1894 (age 39)
15. 9th Nov 1933 - Widow of Chu Tsan-hing -> birth date 6th Dec 1896 (age 36)
16. 10th Nov 1933 - Widow of Ho Sheung -> birth date 4th Apr 1887 (age 46)
17. 28th Nov 1933 - Widow of W. F. Blackman -> birth date 3rd Aug 1877 (age 56)
18. 12th Dec 1933 - Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin -> birth date 12th Jan 1882 (age 51)
19. 2nd Jan 1934 - Widow of William Cameron -> birth date 13th Aug 1869 (age 64)
20. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé -> birth date 8th Aug 1879 (age 54)
21. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes -> birth date 22nd Sep 1903 (age 30)
22. Orphans of Lan Koon -> birth dates: 18th Oct 1918, 5th Oct 1920, 1st Aug 1922, 30th Nov 1924, 16th Apr 1930 (5 dates for 5 orphans). That matches! The last 5 birth dates correspond to the 5 orphans. Good.

So there are 22 pensioners: 21 widows and 5 orphans (but the orphans are listed as a group? Actually each orphan might have separate pension). The commencement date for orphans is not given in the first list. Maybe the commencement date for orphans is the same as the father's death? Not sure.

Now the second part with amounts: After "£ s. d." we have a list of names with register numbers and amounts. Let's match those names to the pensioners:

1. Chan Li Wan - register 1,644? Amount $65.98, date 4th February 1933. But commencement date for widow of Chan Ip Man is 19th Feb 1933. The date 4th Feb 1933 might be the date of birth? No, birth date is 26th Feb 1890. 4th Feb 1933 could be the date pension started? But the list says "Date from which the Pension has been paid" is 19th Feb 1933. Hmm.

Wait, the column "Date from which the Pension has been paid" might be the date in the first list (19th Feb 1933 etc.). The second list might be a different register? Or the second list includes "No. of Pension Register", "Amount in Sterling", "Amount in Dollars", "Date from which the Pension has been paid", "Particulars", "Date of Birth". But the data is jumbled.

Let's look at the second list more carefully:

"Chan Li Wan1,.. 1,644 $ c. 65,98 4th February, 1933."

"Clairę Iris Shaud, (née Mattock) 3,160 130 2 10"

"Cheong Mak Shi, 11 Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248"

"Fan Tin Yuk Heung, 2,309 162.39 153.54 323.06"

"Lady Margaret Annie, Severu,(née Bullock) 1,703 386 0 5"

"Young Man Shi,...................... 1,439 451.10"

"Sophia Milne Wood, (née Boulton) [ 8H 16 9 141 ****** 168 16 5"

"Alice Eliza Holdman, (née Rootes). Kwan Wong-chon, 2,560 118 3 10"

"MA 4,284 GARIAN Kwok Wong Shek Mui,.. 3,175"

"Lo Kwong-shui. 2,986 92.52 294.04 57.00"

"Edith Amy Agassiz, (née Hobhouse) 4,012 223 13 7"

"Shum Kaur, 1,661"

"Chu Chan Sing Cho, 1,273"

"Ho Kong Kain Ming, 1,792 542.10 237.51 J21.68"

"Lilian Ellen Blackmau....... 1,580 73 11 7"

"Lily Franklin, (uéa Aabdown). 906 100 9 2"

"Mary Dewar Cameron, 473 45 I 0"

"Maria José Pincé, 1032"

"Izabel Mendes, 446"

"(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64"

"Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55"

This is extremely messy. It seems the OCR has merged columns. The original table likely had columns: Name, Register No., Sterling (£ s. d.), Dollars ($ c.), Date of Payment, Particulars, Date of Birth.

But the OCR output is a linear stream. I need to reconstruct the table as best as possible.

Given the instruction: "If data is clearly in table format, reconstruct the table using Markdown table syntax." I should create a Markdown table with the columns as per the header.

I have the header: Name of Pensioner, No. of Pension Register, Amount of the Pension in Sterling per annum, Amount of the Pension in Dollars per annum, Date from which the Pension has been paid, Particulars, Date of Birth of Pensioner.

I have 22 pensioners (21 widows + 5 orphans? Actually 5 orphans might be separate rows). The orphans are listed as "Orphans of Lan Koon" but then individual names appear later: Chan Chai-tai, Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan. That's 6 names. But the birth dates for orphans are 5 dates. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is not an orphan of Lan Koon? The text: "Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, 26th February, 1890." Wait, the birth dates list starts with 26th February 1890. That might be the birth date of Lan Koon? Or the first orphan? Actually the birth dates list appears after "Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway," and then the dates. So the dates might be the birth dates of the orphans. There are 24 dates total. The first 19? Let's count: The widows are 21. The birth dates list has 24 dates. If the first 19 correspond to the first 19 widows? But we have 21 widows. Let's match the birth dates to the widows in order of commencement dates.

I'll assume the birth dates are in the same order as the commencement dates list. That gives 21 birth dates for the 21 widows, and the remaining 3? Actually 24 dates, 21 widows = 3 extra. But the orphans are 5. So maybe the birth dates include the widows and the orphans. The orphans' birth dates are the last 5: 18th Oct 1918, 5th Oct 1920, 1st Aug 1922, 30th Nov 1924, 16th Apr 1930. That's 5 dates. The preceding 19 dates would be for 19 widows? But we have 21 widows. Let's count the commencement dates: I listed 21 entries. The birth dates list: let's count them:

1. 26th February, 1890
2. 2nd December, 1897
3. 20th August, 1897
4. 22nd July, 1895
5. 5th January, 1896
6. 2nd April, 1886
7. 13th March, 1882
8. 31st March, 1875
9. 17th July, 1888
10. 31st October, 1898
11. 3rd March, 1905
12. 8th December, 1885
13. 11th November, 1864
14. 24th April, 1894
15. 6th December, 1896
16. 4th April, 1887
17. 3rd August, 1877
18. 12th January, 1882
19. 13th August, 1869
20. 8th August, 1879
21. 22nd Sept., 1903
22. 18th October, 1918
23. 5th October, 1920
24. 1st August, 1922
25. 30th November, 1924
26. 16th April, 1930

That's 26 dates! I missed some. The OCR text: "26th February, 1890. 2nd December, 1897. 20th August, 1897. 22nd July, 1895. 5th January, 1896. 2nd April, 1886, 13th March, 1882. 31st March, 1875. 17th July, 1888. 31st October, 1898. 3rd March, 1905. 8th December, 1885. 11th November, 1864. 24th April, 1894. 6th December, 1896. 4th April, 1887. 3rd August, 1877. 12th January, 1882. 13th August, 1869. 8th August, 1879. 22nd Sept., 1903. 18th October, 1918. 5th October, 1920, 1st August, 1922. 30th November, 1924. 16th April, 1930." That's 25 dates? Let's count: 1-21 as above, then 22-26. Actually 26 dates. But the text shows "22nd Sept., 1903. 18th October, 1918. 5th October, 1920, 1st August, 1922. 30th November, 1924. 16th April, 1930." That's 6 dates after 22nd Sept 1903. So total 21 + 6 = 27? Let's number:

1. 26th February, 1890
2. 2nd December, 1897
3. 20th August, 1897
4. 22nd July, 1895
5. 5th January, 1896
6. 2nd April, 1886
7. 13th March, 1882
8. 31st March, 1875
9. 17th July, 1888
10. 31st October, 1898
11. 3rd March, 1905
12. 8th December, 1885
13. 11th November, 1864
14. 24th April, 1894
15. 6th December, 1896
16. 4th April, 1887
17. 3rd August, 1877
18. 12th January, 1882
19. 13th August, 1869
20. 8th August, 1879
21. 22nd Sept., 1903
22. 18th October, 1918
23. 5th October, 1920
24. 1st August, 1922
25. 30th November, 1924
26. 16th April, 1930

26 dates. We have 21 widows + 5 orphans = 26 individuals. Perfect! So each pensioner (widow or orphan) has a birth date. The orphans are 5 individuals, but the text "Orphans of Lan Koon" might indicate they are children of Lan Koon. The birth dates 22-26 are likely the orphans' birth dates. The first 21 are the widows' birth dates.

Now, the second part with amounts: The names there correspond to the pensioners. Let's list the names from the second part in order:

1. Chan Li Wan
2. Claire Iris Shaud (née Mattock)
3. Cheong Mak Shi
4. Bibi Khair Didda
5. Fan Tin Yuk Heung
6. Lady Margaret Annie Severn (née Bullock)
7. Young Man Shi
8. Sophia Milne Wood (née Boulton)
9. Alice Eliza Holdman (née Rootes)
10. Kwan Wong-chon
11. Kwok Wong Shek Mui
12. Lo Kwong-shui
13. Edith Amy Agassiz (née Hobhouse)
14. Shum Kaur
15. Chu Chan Sing Cho
16. Ho Kong Kain Ming
17. Lilian Ellen Blackman
18. Lily Franklin (née Aabdown)
19. Mary Dewar Cameron
20. Maria José Pincé
21. Izabel Mendes
22. Chan Chai-tai
23. Lau Suiu-ping
24. Lau Sbio-keung
25. Lan Shin-ching
26. Lan Shin-cheung
27. Lau Shiu-kwan

That's 27 names. But we have 26 pensioners. Chan Chai-tai might be an extra? Or maybe Chan Chai-tai is the same as Chan Li Wan? No. The orphans are 5: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan (5 names). That's 5. The widows are 21. Total 26. But we have 27 names in the second list. Chan Chai-tai appears before the orphans. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is another widow? But we have 21 widows already. Let's check the widows list: 21 entries. The names in second list for widows: 1-21 correspond to the 21 widows? Let's match:

1. Chan Li Wan -> Widow of Chan Ip Man
2. Claire Iris Shaud -> Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund
3. Cheong Mak Shi -> Widow of Cheung rok-teni
4. Bibi Khair Didda -> Widow of Syed Batsha
5. Fan Tin Yuk Heung -> Widow of Fan Ling-hong
6. Lady Margaret Annie Severn -> Widow of Sir Claud Severn
7. Young Man Shi -> Widow of Yeung Sing-u
8. Sophia Milne Wood -> Widow of David Wood
9. Alice Eliza Holdman -> Widow of F. H. Holdman
10. Kwan Wong-chon -> Widow of Kwan Kong
11. Kwok Wong Shek Mui -> Widow of Kwok Yin-hing
12. Lo Kwong-shui -> Widow of Lo Kwong
13. Edith Amy Agassiz -> Widow of E. L. Agassiz
14. Shum Kaur -> Widow of Natha Singh
15. Chu Chan Sing Cho -> Widow of Chu Tsan-hing
16. Ho Kong Kain Ming -> Widow of Ho Sheung
17. Lilian Ellen Blackman -> Widow of W. F. Blackman
18. Lily Franklin -> Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin
19. Mary Dewar Cameron -> Widow of William Cameron
20. Maria José Pincé -> Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé
21. Izabel Mendes -> Widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes

That's 21 names. Perfect. Then the orphans: 22. Chan Chai-tai? But the orphans are of Lan Koon. The names: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan. That's 5 names. But there is "Chan Chai-tai" before them. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is an orphan of Lan Koon? Or maybe it's a separate entry. The text: "(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64" then "Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55". So Chan Chai-tai might be another orphan? But the birth dates for orphans are 5 dates. If Chan Chai-tai is an orphan, that would be 6 orphans. But we have only 5 birth dates for orphans (dates 22-26). However, the birth dates list has 26 dates total. The first 21 for widows, the next 5 for orphans. That accounts for 26. So Chan Chai-tai might not be an orphan; maybe it's a separate pensioner? But the commencement dates list only has 21 entries for widows and then "Orphans of Lan Koon" without a date. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is the mother? No.

Let's look at the OCR: "Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway, 26th February, 1890." Wait, the date 26th February 1890 is the first birth date. That might be Lan Koon's birth date? But the column is "Date of Birth of Pensioner". The pensioners are the orphans, not Lan Koon. So the birth dates should be of the orphans. The first birth date 26th Feb 1890 is too early for an orphan in 1933 (would be 43 years old). So that birth date must be for the first widow. So the birth dates are for the pensioners (widows and orphans). The orphans' birth dates are the last 5: 1918, 1920, 1922, 1924, 1930. That makes sense: they are children aged 15, 13, 11, 9, 3 in 1933.

Thus, the 21 widows have birth dates 1-21. The 5 orphans have birth dates 22-26.

Now, the second list includes 21 widows' names (matching) and then 6 names for orphans? But there are 5 orphans. The names: Chan Chai-tai, Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan. That's 6. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is not an orphan; maybe it's a typo for "Chan Li Wan"? But Chan Li Wan is already there. Or maybe "Chan Chai-tai" is the name of one of the orphans? But the surname is Chan, while the father is Lan Koon. Could be a different family. The text says "Orphans of Lan Koon". So the orphans should have surname Lan. The names: Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung. The others: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lau Shiu-kwan have surname Lau. That's odd. Maybe the orphans have different surnames? Or the OCR misread "Lan" as "Lau". "Lau" and "Lan" are similar. Could be "Lan Suiu-ping", "Lan Sbio-keung", "Lan Shiu-kwan". And "Chan Chai-tai" might be a separate entry? But the birth dates only 5 for orphans.

Maybe the orphans are 5: Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lan Suiu-ping, Lan Sbio-keung, Lan Shiu-kwan. And Chan Chai-tai is a separate pensioner (maybe a widow) but we have 21 widows already. Could be that the list of widows has 22 entries? Let's recount the commencement dates: The OCR text: "19th February, 1933, 22nd February, 1933. 6th March, 1933. 5th April, 1933. 9th April, 1983. 15th April, 1933. 4th May, 1933. 9th July, 1933. 16th September, 1933. 18th September, 1933. 19th September, 1933. 24th September, 1933. 1st October, 1933. 4th October, 1933. 9th November, 1933. 10th November, 1933. 28th November, 1933. 12th December, 1933. 2nd Jan., 1934. 13th Jan., 1934. 13th Jan, 1934." That's 20 dates? Let's count: 1.19th Feb, 2.22nd Feb, 3.6th Mar, 4.5th Apr, 5.9th Apr, 6.15th Apr, 7.4th May, 8.9th Jul, 9.16th Sep, 10.18th Sep, 11.19th Sep, 12.24th Sep, 13.1st Oct, 14.4th Oct, 15.9th Nov, 16.10th Nov, 17.28th Nov, 18.12th Dec, 19.2nd Jan, 20.13th Jan, 21.13th Jan. That's 21 dates. The last two are both 13th Jan 1934 (two widows). So 21 widows.

Thus, the second list should have 21 widows + 5 orphans = 26 rows. But we have 27 names. The extra is Chan Chai-tai. Perhaps Chan Chai-tai is the name of the first orphan? But the first orphan's birth date is 18th Oct 1918. The name Chan Chai-tai doesn't match Lan. Could be that the orphans are from different fathers? The text only mentions "Orphans of Lan Koon". So maybe the orphans are all Lan. The names Lau might be OCR errors for Lan. And Chan Chai-tai might be a misread of something else. Look at the OCR: "(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64". The "28.07" could be a date (28 July?) or an amount. "1,632.64" could be dollars. Maybe it's a separate entry for a widow? But we have all widows accounted for.

Given the complexity, I think the best approach is to reconstruct the table as per the original columns, using the data we can use the information we have. Since the OCR is garbled, I'll create a table with the 26 pensioners (21 widows + 5 orphans) and fill in the columns based on matching.

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 create a perfect table if the original is messy; I should present the text in a readable Markdown format, preserving the structure as much as possible. The user said: "Return the proofread text in standard Markdown: Use #, ##, ### for headers found in the original. Use bold for labels, titles, and emphasized text. Use Markdown table syntax to reconstruct tabular data."

Thus, I should output a Markdown document with the header and a table. I'll reconstruct the table with the columns as per the header. I'll use the data from the OCR, correcting obvious OCR errors (like "1983" to "1933", "Slund" to "Slund"? maybe "Slund" is "Slund", but could be "Slund" is a name; I'll keep as "Slund" but note? Better to keep as OCR but fix obvious typos: "1983" -> "1933", "lato" -> "late", "lute" -> "late", "Willow" -> "Widow", "uéa" -> "née", "Aabdown" -> "Abdown"? Actually "Aabdown" might be "Abdown". "Severu" -> "Severn". "Blackmau" -> "Blackman". "Shum Kaur" maybe "Sham Kaur"? But keep as is.

I'll create a table with rows for each pensioner. I'll combine the two parts: the first part gives "Date from which the Pension has been paid" and "Particulars" (the widow of...). The second part gives "Name of Pensioner", "No. of Pension Register", "Amount in Sterling", "Amount in Dollars", and "Date of Birth" (from the birth dates list). The "Date of Birth" is in the birth dates list in order.

But the second part also has some dates (like "4th February, 1933" for Chan Li Wan). That might be the "Date from which the Pension has been paid"? But the first part says 19th Feb 1933 for Widow of Chan Ip Man. Could be different. The first part might be a list of "Date from which the Pension has been paid" and "Particulars". The second part might be a different register? Actually the header says "No. of Pension Register". The first part has "298 ( L 36 )" which might be a register number? Not sure.

Given the difficulty, perhaps the original document is a list of pensioners with the columns. The OCR has read it in two passes: first the left columns (Date, Particulars), then the right columns (Name, Register No., Amounts, Birth Date). But they are interleaved.

I think the best is to present the text as a cleaned-up version of the OCR, preserving paragraphs and correcting line breaks, and then present a table for the tabular data. However, the user explicitly said: "Use Markdown table syntax to reconstruct tabular data." So I must create a table.

I'll create a table with the following columns: Name of Pensioner, No. of Pension Register, Amount of Pension in Sterling (£ s. d.), Amount of Pension in Dollars ($ c.), Date from which Pension has been paid, Particulars, Date of Birth of Pensioner.

I'll populate with 26 rows (21 widows + 5 orphans). I'll use the data from the OCR, matching by order.

Let's define the order as per the commencement dates (first list). That order is:

1. 19th Feb 1933 - Widow of Chan Ip Man, late of Public Works Department
2. 22nd Feb 1933 - Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund, late of Medical Department
3. 6th Mar 1933 - Widow of Cheung rok-teni, late of Treasury
4. 5th Apr 1933 - Widow of Syed Batsha, late of Sanitary Department
5. 9th Apr 1933 - Widow of Fan Ling-hong, late of Harbour Department
6. 15th Apr 1933 - Widow of Sir Claud Severn, late of Colonial Secretary's Office
7. 4th May 1933 - Widow of Yeung Sing-u, late of Imports and Exports Department
8. 9th Jul 1933 - Widow of David Wood, late of Public Works Department
9. 16th Sep 1933 - Widow of F. H. Holdman, late of Post Office
10. 18th Sep 1933 - Widow of Kwan Kong, late of Imports and Exports Department
11. 19th Sep 1933 - Widow of Kwok Yin-hing, late of District Office, North
12. 24th Sep 1933 - Widow of Lo Kwong, late of Sanitary Department
13. 1st Oct 1933 - Widow of E. L. Agassiz, late of Official Receiver's Office
14. 4th Oct 1933 - Widow of Natha Singh, late of Supreme Court
15. 9th Nov 1933 - Widow of Chu Tsan-hing, late of Assessor's Office
16. 10th Nov 1933 - Widow of Ho Sheung, late of Public Works Department
17. 28th Nov 1933 - Widow of W. F. Blackman, late of Police Department
18. 12th Dec 1933 - Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin, late of Medical Department
19. 2nd Jan 1934 - Widow of William Cameron, late of Police Department
20. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé, late of Harbour Office
21. 13th Jan 1934 - Widow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes, late of Post Office
22. Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway (no commencement date given? Maybe the date is missing. The OCR has "26th February, 1890." right after that, but that's a birth date. So perhaps the commencement date for orphans is not listed. I'll leave blank or use the first birth date? Not sure.)

But the orphans are 5 individuals. The commencement date might be the same for all? Or each has their own? The first list doesn't have a date for orphans. The second list has amounts for each orphan. I'll assume the commencement date is the date of the father's death? Not given. I'll leave the commencement date blank for orphans, or use the date from the second list? The second list for orphans doesn't have a date column obviously.

Looking at the second list, for each name there are numbers. For Chan Li Wan: "1,644 $ c. 65,98 4th February, 1933." That could be: Register No. 1644, Amount in Dollars $65.98, Date 4th Feb 1933. But the commencement date from first list is 19th Feb 1933. So maybe the 4th Feb is the date of birth? No, birth date is 26th Feb 1890. So 4th Feb 1933 might be the date the pension was approved? Or the date from which pension is paid? But the first list says 19th Feb. Could be a discrepancy.

Given the confusion, I'll use the first list for "Date from which the Pension has been paid" and "Particulars". For the other columns, I'll use the second list in the same order (assuming the second list is in the same order as the first list). The second list names match the widows in order. The orphans appear at the end of the second list. The birth dates list is in the same order (first 21 for widows, last 5 for orphans). So I can construct the table.

Let's extract data from the second list for each widow in order:

1. Chan Li Wan: Register No. 1,644? The text: "Chan Li Wan1,.. 1,644 $ c. 65,98 4th February, 1933." So Register No. = 1644, Amount in Dollars = $65.98, Date = 4th Feb 1933 (maybe this is the date of payment? But we have commencement date from first list). Sterling amount not given? The "£ s. d." header appears before the list. Maybe the sterling amounts are in the list but OCR missed. For Chan Li Wan, no sterling shown. For Claire Iris Shaud: "3,160 130 2 10" - maybe Register No. 3160, Amount in Dollars 130? Sterling £2 10s? "2 10" could be £2 10s 0d. For Cheong Mak Shi: "11 Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248" - Register No. 11? But then Bibi Khair Didda is next widow. Actually "Cheong Mak Shi, 11 Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248" might be: Cheong Mak Shi, Register No. 11, then next entry Bibi Khair Didda, Register No. 1248? But the names are separate. The list seems to be: Name, Register No., Amounts... but it's messy.

Let's parse the second list more systematically. The text after "£ s. d.":

"Chan Li Wan1,.. 1,644 $ c. 65,98 4th February, 1933.

Clairę Iris Shaud, (née Mattock) 3,160 130 2 10

Cheong Mak Shi, 11 Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248

Fan Tin Yuk Heung, 2,309 162.39 153.54 323.06

Lady Margaret Annie, Severu,(née Bullock) 1,703 386 0 5

Young Man Shi,...................... 1,439 451.10

Sophia Milne Wood, (née Boulton) [ 8H 16 9 141 ****** 168 16 5

Alice Eliza Holdman, (née Rootes). Kwan Wong-chon, 2,560 118 3 10

MA 4,284 GARIAN Kwok Wong Shek Mui,.. 3,175

Lo Kwong-shui. 2,986 92.52 294.04 57.00

Edith Amy Agassiz, (née Hobhouse) 4,012 223 13 7

Shum Kaur, 1,661

Chu Chan Sing Cho, 1,273

Ho Kong Kain Ming, 1,792 542.10 237.51 J21.68

Lilian Ellen Blackmau....... 1,580 73 11 7

Lily Franklin, (uéa Aabdown). 906 100 9 2

Mary Dewar Cameron, 473 45 I 0

Maria José Pincé, 1032

Izabel Mendes, 446

(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64

Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55"

This is extremely garbled. It seems the OCR has lost column separation. The original table likely had fixed columns. The "£ s. d." suggests the sterling column is in pounds, shillings, pence. The "$ c." suggests dollars and cents.

Given the difficulty, perhaps the best is to present the text as a cleaned-up version of the OCR output, with paragraphs and a table for the parts that are clearly tabular. But the user expects a Markdown table for the tabular data. I could create a table with the columns and fill in what I can, leaving unclear cells blank or with the raw OCR text.

However, 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 appears, but formatted in Markdown. The OCR output is essentially a text stream. I can format it as a definition list or a table with the original lines.

But the user said: "Use Markdown table syntax to reconstruct tabular data." So I must identify tabular data and reconstruct it. The header row is clearly a table header. The subsequent lines are table rows but OCR has broken them.

Given the complexity, I'll produce a Markdown document with the header and then a table that includes all the data in a structured way, using the information from the OCR. I'll make a best-effort reconstruction.

I'll create a table with 26 rows (21 widows + 5 orphans). For each row, I'll fill:

• Name of Pensioner: from the second list (the widow's name or orphan's name)
• No. of Pension Register: from the second list (the number next to the name)
• Amount of Pension in Sterling: from the second list (if appears as £ s. d.)
• Amount of Pension in Dollars: from the second list (if appears as $ c.)
• Date from which Pension has been paid: from the first list (the commencement date)
• Particulars: from the first list (Widow of ...)
• Date of Birth of Pensioner: from the birth dates list (in order)

I'll need to parse the second list for each person. Let's attempt to parse the second list sequentially as it appears, assuming it's in the same order as the first list.

The second list starts with "Chan Li Wan1,.. 1,644 $ c. 65,98 4th February, 1933." This corresponds to the first widow (Widow of Chan Ip Man). So:

• Name: Chan Li Wan
• Register No.: 1644
• Sterling: not given? Maybe the "1,.." is part of register? Or maybe the sterling is missing.
• Dollars: $65.98
• Date: 4th February 1933 (but this might be the date of payment? However, the first list says 19th Feb 1933. Could be the date the pension was granted? I'll use the first list date for "Date from which Pension has been paid" and put this date in a separate column? But the table has only one date column. The header says "Date from which the Pension has been paid." So I'll use the first list date.

Second: "Clairę Iris Shaud, (née Mattock) 3,160 130 2 10"

• Name: Claire Iris Shaud (née Mattock)
• Register No.: 3160
• Dollars: 130? Or maybe 130 is dollars, and "2 10" is sterling £2 10s.
• Sterling: £2 10s 0d
• Dollars: $130.00? But 130 could be dollars.

Third: "Cheong Mak Shi, 11 Bibi Khair Didda, 1,248"

This line seems to have two entries: Cheong Mak Shi with register 11, and Bibi Khair Didda with register 1248. But they are two separate widows (3rd and 4th). So:

• 3rd widow: Cheong Mak Shi, Register No. 11, amounts not clear.
• 4th widow: Bibi Khair Didda, Register No. 1248, amounts not clear.

Fourth: "Fan Tin Yuk Heung, 2,309 162.39 153.54 323.06"

• Name: Fan Tin Yuk Heung
• Register No.: 2309
• Amounts: 162.39, 153.54, 323.06 (maybe dollars? Or sterling? Could be multiple amounts)

Fifth: "Lady Margaret Annie, Severu,(née Bullock) 1,703 386 0 5"

• Name: Lady Margaret Annie Severn (née Bullock)
• Register No.: 1703
• Sterling: £386 0s 5d? "386 0 5"
• Dollars: not given.

Sixth: "Young Man Shi,...................... 1,439 451.10"

• Name: Young Man Shi
• Register No.: 1439
• Dollars: 451.10? Sterling not given.

Seventh: "Sophia Milne Wood, (née Boulton) [ 8H 16 9 141 ****** 168 16 5"

• Name: Sophia Milne Wood (née Boulton)
• Register No.: maybe 141? The "8H 16 9" could be sterling £8 16s 9d? "168 16 5" could be another sterling? Very messy.

Eighth: "Alice Eliza Holdman, (née Rootes). Kwan Wong-chon, 2,560 118 3 10"

• This line has two names: Alice Eliza Holdman and Kwan Wong-chon. They are two separate widows (9th and 10th). So:
• 9th: Alice Eliza Holdman (née Rootes), Register No.? Maybe 2560? But then "118 3 10" could be sterling £118 3s 10d.
• 10th: Kwan Wong-chon, Register No. 2560? Actually "Kwan Wong-chon, 2,560 118 3 10" might be for Kwan Wong-chon: Register 2560, Sterling £118 3s 10d.

Ninth: "MA 4,284 GARIAN Kwok Wong Shek Mui,.. 3,175"

• This is messy. "MA 4,284 GARIAN" might be OCR garbage. "Kwok Wong Shek Mui" is the 11th widow. Register No. 3175? "3,175" at end.

Tenth: "Lo Kwong-shui. 2,986 92.52 294.04 57.00"

• Name: Lo Kwong-shui (12th widow)
• Register No.: 2986
• Dollars: 92.52, 294.04, 57.00? Multiple amounts.

Eleventh: "Edith Amy Agassiz, (née Hobhouse) 4,012 223 13 7"

• Name: Edith Amy Agassiz (née Hobhouse) (13th widow)
• Register No.: 4012
• Sterling: £223 13s 7d

Twelfth: "Shum Kaur, 1,661"

• Name: Shum Kaur (14th widow)
• Register No.: 1661
• Amounts not given.

Thirteenth: "Chu Chan Sing Cho, 1,273"

• Name: Chu Chan Sing Cho (15th widow)
• Register No.: 1273

Fourteenth: "Ho Kong Kain Ming, 1,792 542.10 237.51 J21.68"

• Name: Ho Kong Kain Ming (16th widow)
• Register No.: 1792
• Dollars: 542.10, 237.51, 21.68? (J might be $)

Fifteenth: "Lilian Ellen Blackmau....... 1,580 73 11 7"

• Name: Lilian Ellen Blackman (17th widow)
• Register No.: 1580
• Sterling: £73 11s 7d

Sixteenth: "Lily Franklin, (uéa Aabdown). 906 100 9 2"

• Name: Lily Franklin (née Abdown) (18th widow)
• Register No.: 906
• Sterling: £100 9s 2d

Seventeenth: "Mary Dewar Cameron, 473 45 I 0"

• Name: Mary Dewar Cameron (19th widow)
• Register No.: 473
• Sterling: £45 1s 0d? "I" might be 1.

Eighteenth: "Maria José Pincé, 1032"

• Name: Maria José Pincé (20th widow)
• Register No.: 1032

Nineteenth: "Izabel Mendes, 446"

• Name: Izabel Mendes (21st widow)
• Register No.: 446

Twentieth: "(Chan Chai-tai. 28.07 1,632.64"

• Name: Chan Chai-tai (maybe an orphan? But not in widows list)
• Register No.: ? 28.07 could be date? 1,632.64 could be dollars.

Twenty-first: "Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55"

• This line has multiple names: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan. These are the 5 orphans. Register numbers: 3044 for Lan Shin-ching? 312.55 for Lau Shiu-kwan? The "*********" might be a placeholder.

Given this, I can construct a table with the data I have. For missing data, I'll leave blank or put the raw OCR snippet.

But the user wants the proofread text in Markdown. I'll output the header and then a table. I'll also include the page numbers "Page 300 Page 301" at the end.

I'll write the Markdown as:

WIDOWS AND ORPHANS' PENSIONS

(Ordinance No. 15 of 1908)

But we have 5 orphans and 5 birth dates for them. The last birth date 16th April 1930 for the 5th orphan. The table above has 6 orphan rows (including Chan Chai-tai). I'll include Chan Chai-tai as an orphan with birth date 18th Oct 1918. Then the other 5 orphans with the remaining 4 birth dates? Actually there are 5 birth dates for orphans: 18th Oct 1918, 5th Oct 1920, 1st Aug 1922, 30th Nov 1924, 16th Apr 1930. That's 5 dates. If Chan Chai-tai is an orphan, that makes 6 orphans. But the text says "Orphans of Lan Koon" and then lists 5 names (Lau...). Chan Chai-tai might be a separate entry. Maybe Chan Chai-tai is the mother? But the mother would be a widow. However, all widows are accounted for. Could be that Chan Chai-tai is a widow not in the first list? The first list has 21 widows. The second list has 21 widow names + Chan Chai-tai + 5 orphans = 27. The birth dates list has 26 dates. So one person lacks a birth date. Perhaps Chan Chai-tai is the same as Chan Li Wan? No.

Given the uncertainty, I'll include Chan Chai-tai as a separate pensioner with the first orphan birth date (18th Oct 1918). Then the five Lau/Lan orphans with the next four birth dates? That would leave one orphan without a birth date. But there are five Lau/Lan names. Let's count: Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung, Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan = 5 names. Plus Chan Chai-tai = 6. But only 5 orphan birth dates. So maybe Chan Chai-tai is not an orphan; maybe it's a widow from a different list. But the first list ends at 21 widows. The second list has 21 widow names (matching) then Chan Chai-tai then the orphans. So Chan Chai-tai is extra. Could be that the first list missed one widow? The first list has 21 entries. The second list has 21 widow names (1-21). Then Chan Chai-tai is 22nd name. Then 5 orphans = 27 names. The birth dates list has 26 dates. So one name has no birth date. Perhaps the birth date for Chan Chai-tai is missing. Or the birth date for one orphan is missing.

I'll assume the birth dates correspond to the pensioners in the order they appear in the second list (which matches the first list for widows, then Chan Chai-tai, then orphans). The birth dates list has 26 dates. The second list has 27 names. So maybe the first birth date (26th Feb 1890) corresponds to Chan Li Wan, etc. The 21st birth date (22nd Sept 1903) corresponds to Izabel Mendes. Then the 22nd birth date (18th Oct 1918) corresponds to Chan Chai-tai. Then the 23rd (5th Oct 1920) to Lau Suiu-ping, 24th (1st Aug 1922) to Lau Sbio-keung, 25th (30th Nov 1924) to Lan Shin-ching, 26th (16th Apr 1930) to Lan Shin-cheung. Then Lau Shiu-kwan has no birth date. But there are 5 orphans, so maybe Lan Shin-cheung and Lau Shiu-kwan are the same? The text: "Lan Shin-ching, 3044 Lan Shin-cheung, ********* Lau Shiu-kwan, 312.55". So three names: Lan Shin-ching, Lan Shin-cheung, Lau Shiu-kwan. Plus Lau Suiu-ping, Lau Sbio-keung = 5. So five orphans. The birth dates for orphans are five. So Chan Chai-tai is not an orphan. Then why is Chan Chai-tai in the list? Maybe it's a widow that was omitted from the first list? But the first list has 21 widows. The second list has 21 widow names (Chan Li Wan to Izabel Mendes). That's 21. Then Chan Chai-tai appears. Could be that Chan Chai-tai is a widow but the first list has 21 entries, but the second list has 22 widow names? Let's count the widow names in second list: 1. Chan Li Wan, 2. Claire Iris Shaud, 3. Cheong Mak Shi, 4. Bibi Khair Didda, 5. Fan Tin Yuk Heung, 6. Lady Margaret Annie Severn, 7. Young Man Shi, 8. Sophia Milne Wood, 9. Alice Eliza Holdman, 10. Kwan Wong-chon, 11. Kwok Wong Shek Mui, 12. Lo Kwong-shui, 13. Edith Amy Agassiz, 14. Shum Kaur, 15. Chu Chan Sing Cho, 16. Ho Kong Kain Ming, 17. Lilian Ellen Blackman, 18. Lily Franklin, 19. Mary Dewar Cameron, 20. Maria José Pincé, 21. Izabel Mendes. That's 21. Then Chan Chai-tai. So Chan Chai-tai is the 22nd name. Then the orphans (5) make 27. The birth dates are 26. So perhaps the first list actually has 22 widows? Let's recount the first list: The OCR text: "19th February, 1933, 22nd February, 1933. 6th March, 1933. 5th April, 1933. 9th April, 1983. 15th April, 1933. 4th May, 1933. 9th July, 1933. 16th September, 1933. 18th September, 1933. 19th September, 1933. 24th September, 1933. 1st October, 1933. 4th October, 1933. 9th November, 1933. 10th November, 1933. 28th November, 1933. 12th December, 1933. 2nd Jan., 1934. 13th Jan., 1934. 13th Jan, 1934." That's 20 dates? Let's count carefully:

1. 19th February, 1933
2. 22nd February, 1933
3. 6th March, 1933
4. 5th April, 1933
5. 9th April, 1933 (1983 corrected)
6. 15th April, 1933
7. 4th May, 1933
8. 9th July, 1933
9. 16th September, 1933
10. 18th September, 1933
11. 19th September, 1933
12. 24th September, 1933
13. 1st October, 1933
14. 4th October, 1933
15. 9th November, 1933
16. 10th November, 1933
17. 28th November, 1933
18. 12th December, 1933
19. 2nd Jan., 1934
20. 13th Jan., 1934
21. 13th Jan, 1934

That's 21 dates. The particulars list has 21 entries (each date followed by a "Widow of ..."). The OCR shows the dates and then the particulars in a run-on. But the particulars are listed after the dates? Actually the OCR: "19th February, 1933, 22nd February, 1933. 6th March, 1933. 5th April, 1933. 9th April, 1983. 15th April, 1933. 4th May, 1933. | Widow of Chan Ip Man, late of Public Works Department, Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund, late of Medical Department, Widow of Cheung rok-teni, late of Treasury, Widow of Syed Batsha, late of Sanitary Department. Widow of Fan Ling-hong, late of Harbour Department,. Widow of Sir Claud Severn, late of Colonial Secretary's Office, Widow of Yeung Sing-u, late of Imports and Exports Department, 4th May, 1933. | Widow of David Wood, late of Public Works Department,.......... 9th July, 1933. | Widow of F. H. Holdman, late of Post Office, 16th September, 1933. Widow of Kwan Kong, late of Imports and Exports Department,. 18th September, 1933. Widow of Kwok Yin-hing, late of District Office, North 19th September, 1933. | Widow of Lo Kwong, lato of Sanitary Department,.... 24th September, 1933. Widow of E. L. Agassiz, lute of Official Receiver's Office,........ 1st October, 1933. Widow of Natha Singh, late of Supreme Court. 4th October, 1933. | Widow of Chu Tsan-hing, late of Assessor's Office, 9th November, 1933. | Widow of Ho Sheung, late of Public Works Department. 10th November, 1933. | Widow of W. F. Blackman, late of Police Department. 28th November, 1933. Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin, late of Medical Department, 12th December, 1933. | Widow of William Cameron, late of Police Department,........ 2nd Jan., 1934. Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé, late of Harbour Office, Willow of Malachius Antonio de Nogne

WIDOWS AND ORPHANS' PENSIONS.

(Ordinance No. 15 of 1908).

Name of Pensioner.

No. of Pension Register.

Amount of the Pension in Sterling, per

Amount of the

Date from which the

Pension in Dollars, por

Pension has been

paid.

annum.

Annuin.

Particulars.

Date of Birth of Pensioner.

298

( L 36 )

19th February, 1933,

22nd February, 1933.

6th March, 1933.

5th April, 1933.

9th April, 1983. 15th April, 1933.

Widow of Chan Ip Man, late of Public Works Department,

Widow of Joseph Taylor Slund, late of Medical Department, Widow of Cheung rok-teni, late of Treasury,

Widow of Syed Batsha, late of Sanitary Department.

Widow of Fan Ling-hong, late of Harbour Department,.

Widow of Sir Claud Severn, late of Colonial Secretary's Office, Widow of Yeung Sing-u, late of Imports and Exports Department,

4th May, 1933. | Widow of David Wood, late of Public Works Department,..........

9th July, 1933. | Widow of F. H. Holdman, late of Post Office, 16th September, 1933. Widow of Kwan Kong, late of Imports and Exports Department,. 18th September, 1933. Widow of Kwok Yin-hing, late of District Office, North 19th September, 1933. | Widow of Lo Kwong, lato of Sanitary Department,....

24th September, 1933. Widow of E. L. Agassiz, lute of Official Receiver's Office,........

1st October, 1933. Widow of Natha Singh, late of Supreme Court.

4th October, 1933. | Widow of Chu Tsan-hing, late of Assessor's Office, 9th November, 1933. | Widow of Ho Sheung, late of Public Works Department. 10th November, 1933. | Widow of W. F. Blackman, late of Police Department.

28th November, 1933. Widow of Arthur Cawto Franklin, late of Medical Department, 12th December, 1933. | Widow of William Cameron, late of Police Department,........ 2nd Jan., 1934. Widow of Abelardo Antonio Placé, late of Harbour Office,

Willow of Malachius Antonio de Nogneira Meudes, late of Post Office,

13th Jan., 1934.

13th Jan, 1934. | Orphans of Lan Koon, late of Kowloon-Canton Railway,

26th February, 1890.

2nd December, 1897. 20th August, 1897. 22nd July, 1895. 5th January, 1896.

2nd April, 1886, 13th March, 1882.

31st March, 1875.

17th July, 1888. 31st October, 1898. 3rd March, 1905. 8th December, 1885.

11th November, 1864. 24th April, 1894. 6th December, 1896. 4th April, 1887. 3rd August, 1877.

12th January, 1882. 13th August, 1869. 8th August, 1879.

22nd Sept., 1903.

18th October, 1918. 5th October, 1920,

1st August, 1922. 30th November, 1924. 16th April, 1930.

£ s. d.

Chan Li Wan1,..

1,644

$ c.

65,98

4th February, 1933.

Clairę Iris Shaud, (née

Mattock)

3,160

130

2 10

Cheong Mak Shi,

11

Bibi Khair Didda,

1,248

Fan Tin Yuk Heung,

2,309

162.39 153.54 323.06

Lady Margaret Annie,

Severu,(née Bullock)

1,703

386 0 5

Young Man Shi,......................

1,439

451.10

Sophia Milne Wood,

(née Boulton)

[ 8H 16 9

141

******

168 16 5

Alice Eliza Holdman,

(née Rootes).

Kwan Wong-chon,

2,560

118 3 10

MA

4,284

GARIAN

Kwok Wong Shek Mui,..

3,175

Lo Kwong-shui.

2,986

92.52 294.04 57.00

Edith Amy Agassiz,

(née Hobhouse)

4,012 223 13 7

Shum Kaur,

1,661

Chu Chan Sing Cho,

1,273

Ho Kong Kain Ming,

1,792

542.10 237.51 J21.68

Lilian Ellen Blackmau.......

1,580

73 11 7

Lily Franklin, (uéa

Aabdown).

906

100 9 2

Mary Dewar Cameron,

473

45 I 0

Maria José Pincé,

1032

Izabel Mendes,

446

(Chan Chai-tai.

28.07

1,632.64

Lau Suiu-ping,

Lau Sbio-keung,

Lan Shin-ching,

3044

Lan Shin-cheung, *********

Lau Shiu-kwan,

312.55

Page 300Page 301