CO129-161 - Public Offices - 1872 — Page 72

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

Land Po

4.

tement Mr. Jairus. Both, however, undertake the defence of the department and comment on the Evidence at the inquest. The main question is as to the goodness of the provisions - their insufficiency towards the end of the voyage, considering that it exceeded by 24 days the period for which the Law required that the ship should be provisioned, would not necessarily have implied any fault on the part of the clearing Officer.

4. In respect to the condition of the provisions, Mr. Thomsett quotes the description given of them by the Master, which is contradictory on some essential points, and his observation that the crew had precisely the same food as the Emigrants. But the Master also states, as Mr. Thomsett does not quote, that "the crew's meals were better preserved and are now quite good". As regards the evidence of John Hennessy, the store keeper, Mr. Thomsett argues that it is contradictory because while he says that the beef and fish were not good from the first, he admits that "when put on board" the beef looked pretty well and the "fish good". I do not think there is any evidence, especially contradiction in this witness's statement, as he adds "I should judge that it...

70

...miscellaneous...

B

H

Edit History

2026-05-20 22:52:01 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Land Po 4. tement Mr. Jairus. Both, however, undertake the defence of the department and comment on the Evidence at the inquest. The main question is as to the goodness of the provisions - their insufficiency towards the end of the voyage, considering that it exceeded by 24 days the period for which the Law required that the ship should be provisioned, would not necessarily have implied any fault on the part of the clearing Officer. 4. In respect to the condition of the provisions, Mr. Thomsett quotes the description given of them by the Master, which is contradictory on some essential points, and his observation that the crew had precisely the same food as the Emigrants. But the Master also states, as Mr. Thomsett does not quote, that "the crew's meals were better preserved and are now quite good". As regards the evidence of John Hennessy, the store keeper, Mr. Thomsett argues that it is contradictory because while he says that the beef and fish were not good from the first, he admits that "when put on board" the beef looked pretty well and the "fish good". I do not think there is any evidence, especially contradiction in this witness's statement, as he adds "I should judge that it... 70 ...miscellaneous... B H
Baseline (Original)
Land Po 4. tement Mr. Jairus. Both, however, undertake the defence of the bepartment and comment on the Evidence at the inquest. The to the goodness of the provisions - their incufficien main question is as to the con= towards the end of the voyage, -sidering that it exceeded by 24 days the period for which the Law required that the ship should be provisioned, would not neep- -arily have implied any pault the part of the clearing Jiron 4. In respect to the condition of the provisions bw. Thomsett quotes the description given of them by the Master, which is apential points con = on in some 70 = tradictory, and his observation that the crew had precisely the same food as the & be added, what Mr. Thomeelt does Emigrants. But the Master brot quote, that "the crew's meal- was better preserved and is now "quite good" As regards be the roidsuce of John Hennesy, the store kaper. m. Thomsett argues M. that it is contradictory! because while he lvere says that the beef and fish not good from the first be admits that "when put on board " the beef. looked pretty wall and the "fish good " I do not think there is any Evidence - répecially contradiction in this adds the witness "I should judge that it Pellaneous tüzer P B H
2026-05-20 22:52:01 · Baseline
View content

Land Po

4.

tement Mr. Jairus. Both, however,

undertake the defence of

the

bepartment and comment on the Evidence at the inquest. The

to the goodness of the provisions - their incufficien

main question is as to the

con=

towards the end of the voyage, -sidering that it exceeded by 24 days the period for which the Law required that the ship should be provisioned, would not neep- -arily have implied any pault

the part of the clearing Jiron 4. In respect to the condition of the provisions bw. Thomsett quotes the description given of them by the Master, which is apential points con =

on

in some

70

= tradictory, and his observation that

the crew had precisely the same food

as the &

be

added, what Mr. Thomeelt does

Emigrants. But the Master

brot quote, that "the crew's meal- was better preserved and is now "quite good" As regards

be the roidsuce

of John Hennesy, the store kaper. m. Thomsett argues

M.

that it is

contradictory! because while he

lvere

says that the beef and fish not good from the first be admits that "when put on board " the beef. looked pretty wall and the "fish good " I do not think there

is any Evidence - répecially

contradiction in this

adds

the witness

"I should judge that it

Pellaneous

tüzer

P

B

H

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.