CO537-36 — Page 362

CO537 Colonial Confidential Records 理藩院機密檔案 All

៩៩៩

عي

Clinton

1526.

& Pentre

539

I have heard lately from Hr Woodoook that it was not submitted, but before Xr Woodoock naid no,

the impressior. that it had been.

Did you and Mr Parkine accept it ?

3/0

A.

Yes.

A.

I was under

13106

13107

Did it affect any other members of the Civil Service ↑

It was only between the Building Authority and the

Sanitary Department.

13.108

Mr Lau Chu Pak:-

08

A.

Was it submitted for the approval of the P. C. M. 0. as

Administrative head of the Department ?

I cant tell you exactly at this date by whom it was

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference:-

C.O. 537

36

passed, but I have a very good idea that he know all

about it.

And did the Director of Public Works know about it $13109

Oh, yes, I think so.

13110

Mr Perkins did not arrive in the Colony until May 1904.

Therefore it is within the last two years ?

The Chairman:-

09

A.

Kr Shelton Hooper:-

10

A.

Yes.

The Chairman:-

1311

A.

129.

13

A.

Did you draw it up with Hr Perkins, or after he

arrived ?

I think after he arrived.

13171

Have you any idea of the proportion of time that is 3/12 devoted by the Sanitary Inspectors to the work of the Building Authority? There are a good many things in

the Act examining buildiggs, making reports and so on, which are really on notices sent out by the Building

Authority.

whick

I should say that the greater part of their time, is given to the inspecting of houses, relates to the

Building Authority, and is in part 3. All notices served

under part 3 must, I understand, be served pro Building

Authority.

Roughly speaking, how much time would be devoted to (3773

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH

NOT TO BE

RECORD OFFICE, LONDON OUT PERMISSION OF THE PUBLIC REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHICALLY WITH-

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.