CO129-121 - Sir MacDonnell - 1867 [3-4] — Page 133

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

129

IX. Was there any difficulty attending a signature by the Colonial Secretary under the repealed Ordinance 1 of 1838 and what? If this query have any relevancy to the reply, the case in dispute is very simple - that the Ordinance being repealed, the signature of the Colonial Secretary would be worthless. If it be not this case, its relevancy is hardly perceptible.

But as matter of fact I may note that Ordinance No. 1 of 1858 makes mention of, or provision for, the signature of the Colonial Secretary. Presuming that the repealed Ordinance No. 8 of 1845 is intended, I may further note that I have not been able to find any instance of the Colonial Secretary's signature having been given under that enactment.

410

Edit History

2026-05-19 17:07:03 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
129 IX. Was there any difficulty attending a signature by the Colonial Secretary under the repealed Ordinance 1 of 1838 and what? If this query have any relevancy to the reply, the case in dispute is very simple - that the Ordinance being repealed, the signature of the Colonial Secretary would be worthless. If it be not this case, its relevancy is hardly perceptible. But as matter of fact I may note that Ordinance No. 1 of 1858 makes mention of, or provision for, the signature of the Colonial Secretary. Presuming that the repealed Ordinance No. 8 of 1845 is intended, I may further note that I have not been able to find any instance of the Colonial Secretary's signature having been given under that enactment. 410
Baseline (Original)
" 129 IX. Was dive any and what difficulty attending a signature by the Colonial Secretory under the repeated Ordinance of 1 of 1838 Awun. If this query the reply CaerAVL The. case in dispute, vay simple- that the Ordinance bring repeated, the signature of the Colonial Seculary world be worthless. If it de it de not this case. relevancy is handly peruptible. Birt as matter of fact I may ib- nite 410 that Ordinance. M.) of 1858 makes mention of, or provision for, the signature of the Colonial Secretary. Presuming that the repeated Ordinance 1: 8 of 1845 is intended, I ́rnay failus note that Thave methuneledy furiler of the Colonial Seculary's signaturs having bun evu... given under that enactment. a
2026-05-19 17:07:03 · Baseline
View content

"

129

IX. Was dive

any and what difficulty attending

a signature by the Colonial Secretory under

the repeated Ordinance of 1 of 1838

Awun. If this query

the reply

CaerAVL

The.

case in dispute,

vay simple- that the Ordinance

bring repeated, the signature of the Colonial Seculary world be worthless.

If it de

it de not

this case.

relevancy is handly peruptible.

Birt as matter of fact I may

ib-

nite

410

that Ordinance. M.) of 1858 makes mention of, or provision for, the signature of the Colonial Secretary. Presuming that the repeated Ordinance 1: 8 of 1845 is intended, I ́rnay failus note that Thave methuneledy

furiler of the Colonial Seculary's signaturs having

bun

evu...

given

under that enactment.

a

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.