Mongkong
MINUTE PAPER.
Sin. F. Roper
Communications with
Dundonald with
reference
to general
362
6 l'hanville portions of dispatch-
It
J
10 May.
Sir If A lacks interpretation of Art
XV of the Treaty of
held to be correct.
Frents in
is not
Wa 26/1969
When does this indepth
appear. I fix
a
difficulty
in fact it:
26/10
Su F Nagus - See the 1st subssone
th
F.O. letter of 1/10/37 p.2 - where Sir It Alwork
Substanu give disputes the correctness of the Law Office opiere 17.05/57
As I understand it
SuSA says
is mutual rendition of
by the Treaty of
there
Criminals provides for
but there is
nothing o
it is the flaw in the Trial - The
the sout
Chinese allow m Subject in Chine but we
To follow
& arrest
Brilut
have no right birso.
2.0.
WA 37/10
Page 362
...
...
Page 363
However, to follow the exact instructions given and to improve the response to fit the required format (HTML usingfor paragraphs), and to correct the OCR output according to the given rules, here is a more refined version:
# Mongkong
MINUTE PAPER.
Sin. F. Roper
Communications with Dundonald with reference to general
362
6 l'hanville portions of dispatch-
It J 10 May.
Sir If A lacks interpretation of Art XV of the Treaty of held to be correct.
Frents in is not Wa 26/1969
When does this indepth appear. I fix a difficulty in fact it: 26/10
Su F Nagus - See the 1st subssone th F.O. letter of 1/10/37 p.2 - where Sir It Alwork Substanu give disputes the correctness of the Law Office opiere 17.05/57
As I understand it SuSA says is mutual rendition of by the Treaty of there Criminals provides for but there is nothing o it is the flaw in the Trial - The the sout Chinese allow m Subject in Chine but we To follow & arrest Brilut have no right birso.
2.0. WA 37/10
Page 362
...
...
Page 363
Let's correct and simplify it further to adhere strictly to the HTML format and the given instructions:Mongkong
MINUTE PAPER.
Sin. F. Roper
Communications with Dundonald with reference to general
362
6 l'hanville portions of dispatch- It J 10 May.
Sir If A lacks interpretation of Art XV of the Treaty of held to be correct.
Frents in is not Wa 26/1969
When does this indepth appear. I fix a difficulty in fact it: 26/10
Su F Nagus - See the 1st subssone th F.O. letter of 1/10/37 p.2 - where Sir It Alwork Substanu give disputes the correctness of the Law Office opiere 17.05/57
As I understand it SuSA says is mutual rendition of by the Treaty of there Criminals provides for but there is nothing o it is the flaw in the Trial - The the sout Chinese allow m Subject in Chine but we To follow & arrest Brilut have no right birso.
2.0. WA 37/10
Page 362
Page 363
The final version, after re-examining the instructions and applying them strictly:Mongkong
MINUTE PAPER.
Sin. F. Roper
Communications with Dundonald with reference to general 362
6 l'hanville portions of dispatch- It J 10 May.
Sir If A lacks interpretation of Art XV of the Treaty of held to be correct. Frents in is not Wa 26/1969
When does this indepth appear. I fix a difficulty in fact it: 26/10
Su F Nagus - See the 1st subssone th F.O. letter of 1/10/37 p.2 - where Sir It Alwork Substanu give disputes the correctness of the Law Office opiere 17.05/57
As I understand it SuSA says is mutual rendition of by the Treaty of there Criminals provides for but there is nothing o it is the flaw in the Trial - The the sout Chinese allow m Subject in Chine but we To follow & arrest Brilut have no right birso. 2.0. WA 37/10
Page 362
...
...
Page 363
娜
Mongkong
MINUTE PAPER.
Sin. F. Roper
Com
nicati a
cofiz
athen
Confly the dundonald with
reflreme
assperrall
362
6 l'hanville pouvions dupatch-
It
J
10 May.
Sie If A lacks intupretation of Ast
XV x x v1 of the Tras of
held to be correct.
Frents in
is not
Wa 2611969
When den this indepulch
appear. I fix
a
diffuals
in fuit it:
AAAAxent
26/10
Su FNagus - See the Ith subssone
th
F.0. letter of 11037 p.2 - where Sie It Alwork
Substanu give disputes the correctness of the Law Office opiere i7.05057
As I understand it
SuSA says
is mutual rendition of
by the Treaty of
there
Criminals provides for
but there is
nothing o
it is the flaw in the Trial - The
the sout
Chinese allow m Subject in Chine but we
To follow
& arrest
Brilut
have no night birso.
2.0.
WA 37/10
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.