CO129-057 - Sir Bowring - 1856 [7] — Page 37

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

34

wever added on what evidence however I know not, for certainly all the evidence before bien went expressly the other way, that he did not ' think there was any unstention to violate the det; - a matter quite unimportant, trives for the proof of ever the if violation is all that the Court of admiralty requires; in such cases and be concluded by adjudicating not the the forfeitur of the ship but the fine of etinguishing 100° thus the last hope of it hope of the defrauded bleinsamen that, out of the of the ship proceeds and tackle they might be repaid source portion at least of the passage money (75 dollars a head, which they had paid in advance, for a voyage become abortive.

Having regard to all these cirenmstances, and that the discretion opinion that which the Chief Justice has Pleief evercised is not the -judicial discretion conferred by the act, and that his order m varied ou way be appeal, by the- substitution of forfeiture of the ship for the insignificant penalty of 1008, I recomment and advise that avr Appeal beat

Edit History

2026-05-18 03:35:37 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
34 wever added on what evidence however I know not, for certainly all the evidence before bien went expressly the other way, that he did not ' think there was any unstention to violate the det; - a matter quite unimportant, trives for the proof of ever the if violation is all that the Court of admiralty requires; in such cases and be concluded by adjudicating not the the forfeitur of the ship but the fine of etinguishing 100° thus the last hope of it hope of the defrauded bleinsamen that, out of the of the ship proceeds and tackle they might be repaid source portion at least of the passage money (75 dollars a head, which they had paid in advance, for a voyage become abortive. Having regard to all these cirenmstances, and that the discretion opinion that which the Chief Justice has Pleief evercised is not the -judicial discretion conferred by the act, and that his order m varied ou way be appeal, by the- substitution of forfeiture of the ship for the insignificant penalty of 1008, I recomment and advise that avr Appeal beat
Baseline (Original)
34 wever added on what evidence however I know not, for certainly all the evidence before bien went expressly the other was way, that he did not ' think there was a any unstention to violate the det; - a matter quite unimportant, trives for the proof of ever the if violation is all that the Court of admiralty requires; - in such cases and be concluded by adjudicating not the I the forfeitur of the ship but the fine of etinguishing 100° thus the last hope of it hope of the defrauded bleinsamen that, out of the of the ship proceeds and tackle F they might be repaid source portion at least of the passage money ( 75 dollars a head, which they had paid in advance, for a voyage become abortive. Having regard to all these being of cirenmstances, and that the discretion opinion that which the Chief Justice has Pleief evercised is not the -judicial discretion conferred by the act, and that his order m varied ou way be appeal, by the- substitution of forfeiture of the ship for the insignificant penalty of 1008, I recomment and advise that avr Appeal beat ر فیلار
2026-05-18 03:35:37 · Baseline
View content

34

wever added on what evidence

however

I know not, for certainly all the

evidence before bien went expressly

the other was

way,

that he did not

' think there was a

any

unstention

to violate the det; - a matter

quite unimportant,

trives for the proof of

ever

the

if

violation is all that the Court

of admiralty

requires;

-

in such cases

and be concluded

by adjudicating not the

I the forfeitur

of the ship but the fine of

etinguishing

100° thus

the last hope of

it hope of the defrauded bleinsamen that, out of the of the ship

proceeds

and tackle

F

they might be repaid source portion at least of the passage money

( 75 dollars a head, which they had paid in advance, for a voyage

become abortive.

Having regard to all these

being of

cirenmstances, and

that the discretion

opinion that

which the Chief Justice has Pleief

evercised is not the

-judicial

discretion conferred by the act,

and that his order m

varied ou

way

be

appeal, by the- substitution of forfeiture of the ship for the insignificant

penalty of 1008, I recomment

and advise that

avr

Appeal beat

ر فیلار

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.