CO129-171 - Acting Governor Austin - 1875 [7-11] -- Sir Kennedy - 1875 [12] — Page 182

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

112.

surely, his personal Attornies Messrs Stephens and Holmes having first approved the draft, Mr Holmes in Court stating that he was already acting for him as well as defending for the King. The King's share of the Compromise that His Majesty was a party to the arrangement, was not to be considered a dealarning lest he should weaken his Claim for Compensation; and to his officers remaining in Command of the Fangwee upon the dissolution of the arrangement, this acknowledging him as the debtor, and in admitting that the proceedings against the King were wrong from beginning to end. The submissions by the King are said to be seven in number.

Submission 1. The appearance by Mr. Stephens for the King without protest in November 1873. Mr. Stephens appeared on behalf of Un Sai Kwan who claimed to have a better right than Homan Chung to represent the King in the suit. Mr Stephens however did not contest the attachment: It surely would seem that any argument as to about the King's liabilities to Mr Landstein a private trader would have been out of time and out of place after Paulus Due Hau had admitted in Court that he and not the King had incurred the liabilities and after the plaintiff had agreed never was unable to obtain the conduct of the case for his client, who had the costs of his attempt, and the Chief Justice was not well satisfied with this misguided attempt to supersede Mr Brereton as the defendants' Attorney. It is very much to be regretted that

Edit History

2026-05-21 03:53:26 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
112.surely, his personal Attornies Messrs Stephens and Holmes having first approved the draft, Mr Holmes in Court stating that he was already acting for him as well as defending for the King. The King's share of the Compromise that His Majesty was a party to the arrangement, was not to be considered a dealarning lest he should weaken his Claim for Compensation; and to his officers remaining in Command of the Fangwee upon the dissolution of the arrangement, this acknowledging him as the debtor, and in admitting that the proceedings against the King were wrong from beginning to end. The submissions by the King are said to be seven in number.Submission 1. The appearance by Mr. Stephens for the King without protest in November 1873. Mr. Stephens appeared on behalf of Un Sai Kwan who claimed to have a better right than Homan Chung to represent the King in the suit. Mr Stephens however did not contest the attachment: It surely would seem that any argument as to about the King's liabilities to Mr Landstein a private trader would have been out of time and out of place after Paulus Due Hau had admitted in Court that he and not the King had incurred the liabilities and after the plaintiff had agreed never was unable to obtain the conduct of the case for his client, who had the costs of his attempt, and the Chief Justice was not well satisfied with this misguided attempt to supersede Mr Brereton as the defendants' Attorney. It is very much to be regretted that
Baseline (Original)
112.surely, his personal Attomies Mefs? Stephens and Holmes having first approved the draft, mr Hohnes in Court stating that he ivas1- already acting for hai Tive well as defending for the King. The King's share ofconfined to his Conseldealarningwas not to be considered a the Compromise that His Majesty was to the arrangement, party lest he should weaken his Claim for Compensation; and to his officers reaming Command of the Fangwee upon the dissolution of-179effectin Court to accept payment from Pantus, this acknowledging him as the debtor, and in achmitting that the proceedings against the King were wrong from beginning to end. The submissions by the Kingbe seven in mumber. are said to Submission 1. The appearance by Mr. Stephens for the1873. King without protest in November 18 Mr. Stephens appearect on behalf of Un Sai Kwan who claimed to have a bettera better right than Homan Chung to represent the thing in the suit. Mr Stephens however the attachment: It surely would seem that any argument asa to- about the Kings liabilities to Mr Landstein | private trader would have been out of time andحمرا out of place after Paulus Due Hau had admitted in Court that he and not the King had imeuned the liabilities and after the plaintiff had agreed vever was unable to obtain the conduct of the cancepayJusticecance for his client, who had the costs of his attempt, and the Chief was not well satisfied with this manstaned attempt to supersede Mr Brereton as the defendants'Attorney It is very much to be regrettedregretted thatthe
2026-05-21 03:53:26 · Baseline
View content

112.

surely, his personal Attomies Mefs? Stephens and Holmes having first approved the draft, mr Hohnes in Court

stating

that he

ivas

1- already acting for hai Tive

well as defending for the King. The King's share of

confined to his Consel

dealarning

was not to be considered a

the Compromise that His Majesty

was

• to the arrangement,

party

lest he should weaken his

Claim for Compensation; and to his officers reaming

Command of the Fangwee upon

the dissolution of-

179

effect

in Court to accept payment from Pantus, this acknowledging him as the debtor, and in achmitting that the proceedings against the King were wrong from beginning to end. The submissions by the King

be seven in mumber.

are said to

Submission 1. The appearance by Mr. Stephens

for the

1873.

King without protest in November 18 Mr. Stephens appearect on behalf of Un Sai

Kwan who claimed to have a better

a better right than

Homan Chung to represent the thing in the suit.

Mr Stephens however

the attachment:

It surely would

seem

that

any argument

as

a

to

- about the Kings liabilities to Mr Landstein

| private trader would have been out of time and

حمرا

out of place after Paulus Due Hau had admitted in Court that he and not the King had imeuned the liabilities and after the plaintiff had agreed

vever was unable to obtain the

conduct of the cance

pay

Justice

cance for his client, who had the costs of his attempt, and the Chief

was not well satisfied with this manstaned

attempt to supersede Mr Brereton as the defendants'

Attorney

It

is

very much to be regretted

regretted that

the

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.