CO129-094 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1863 [11-10] — Page 21

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

18

First explanation, beyond the fact that "the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney General's draft notice) from your Department - a point that was not questioned; there is no reason to doubt, you do doubt, Mr Panncefote's statement offered at the Treasury that the money was in the 3rd Instant, and in terms of the notice over your own signature there was no necessity for offering it before; there are terms, however, I am to observe, are in direct contradiction of the Government notification of 2nd July last, published over and over in the Gazette for 3 weeks in the month of August; again, for explanation you should not have stated that you had "no doubt that the occupant of Lot: 145 was, and is included in the list submitted on the 2nd Instant to the Court," the matter being really irrelevant; but if you conceived it a fact to introduce it, it was necessary your duty to have ascertained the fact so as to place it beyond the doubt not only of yourself, but of the office by which the explanation was required, and this you might have done in five minutes from the documents in your own Office.

So much for your first explanatory paragraph.

In your next you mention an office (the Police and Lighting Rate Office) that does not exist, as the Rates in question are now payable under the Ordinance at the Colonial Treasury.

From your third explanation the only inference is that you signed a blank notice and omitted to exercise the most ordinary supervision of your subordinate to whom you entrusted the delicate duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of a series.

Edit History

2026-05-19 01:16:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
18First explanation, beyond the fact that "the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney General's draft notice) from your Department - a point that was not questioned; there is no reason to doubt, you do doubt, Mr Panncefote's statement offered at the Treasury that the money was in the 3rd Instant, and in terms of the notice over your own signature there was no necessity for offering it before; there are terms, however, I am to observe, are in direct contradiction of the Government notification of 2nd July last, published over and over in the Gazette for 3 weeks in the month of August; again, for explanation you should not have stated that you had "no doubt that the occupant of Lot: 145 was, and is included in the list submitted on the 2nd Instant to the Court," the matter being really irrelevant; but if you conceived it a fact to introduce it, it was necessary your duty to have ascertained the fact so as to place it beyond the doubt not only of yourself, but of the office by which the explanation was required, and this you might have done in five minutes from the documents in your own Office.So much for your first explanatory paragraph.In your next you mention an office (the Police and Lighting Rate Office) that does not exist, as the Rates in question are now payable under the Ordinance at the Colonial Treasury.From your third explanation the only inference is that you signed a blank notice and omitted to exercise the most ordinary supervision of your subordinate to whom you entrusted the delicate duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of a series.
Baseline (Original)
18first explanation, beyond the fact that "the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney General's draft notice) from your Department - a point that was not questioned; there is no reason to doubt,его you do doubt, Mr Panncefote's statement offered at the Treasury that the money mas in the 3rd Instant, and in terms of the notice over your mon signature there wns no necessity for offering it before; there terms however, I am to observe, are in direct contradiction of the Government hotification of set July last, published rework in the Gazette for 3 weeks the month of August; again, for explanationAo youdivingwhen called on" should not have stated that you had you" no doubt that the occupant of Loth: 145 "was, and is included in the list submitted "on the pet Instant to the bout," the matter really irrelevant; but if youAnclived conceived it fact to introduce it, itnecessary was your duty to have ascertained the so as to place it beyond the doubt not only of yourself, hit of the office by which the explanation mas required, and this you might have done in five minutes from the documents in own Office.yourSo much for your first explanatory paragraph.__In next you mention an officeyour (the Police and Lighting Rate Office) thatpre does not exist, as the Rates in are nowquestion payable under the Ordinance at the leolonial Treasury.-From your third explanation the only inference is that you signed a blank notice and omitted to exercise the most ordinary supervision of your to whom you enbordinateentrinated the delicate duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of کارseries,1
2026-05-19 01:16:46 · Baseline
View content

18

first explanation, beyond the fact that "the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney

General's

draft notice) from your Department - a point that was not questioned; there is no reason to doubt,

его

you do doubt, Mr Panncefote's statement

offered at the Treasury

that the

money mas

in the 3rd Instant, and in terms of the

notice over your

mon

signature

there

wns

no necessity for offering it before; there

terms however, I am to observe, are in direct contradiction of the Government hotification of set July last, published

rework in the Gazette for 3 weeks the month of August; again, for explanation

Ao

you

diving

when called on

"

should not have stated that

you

had

you

" no doubt that the occupant of Loth: 145

"was, and is included in the list submitted "on the pet Instant to the bout," the matter

really irrelevant; but if you

Anclived

conceived it

fact

to introduce it, it

necessary was your duty to have ascertained the

so as to place it beyond the doubt not only of yourself, hit of the office by which the explanation mas required,

and this

you might have done in five minutes from the documents in

own

Office.

your

So much for your first explanatory

paragraph.__

In

next

you

mention

an

office

your (the Police and

Lighting Rate Office) that pre

does not exist, as the Rates in

are now

question

payable under the Ordinance at

the leolonial Treasury. -

From

your

third explanation the only

inference is that

you signed

a blank

notice and omitted to exercise the most

ordinary supervision of your

to whom

you

enbordinate

entrinated the delicate

duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of

کار

series,

1

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.