CO129-173 - Sir Kennedy - 1876 [1-3] — Page 381

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

378

Sufficiently large, the plan does not "shew the boundaries quite up to the "500 feet contour se x

14. This is the first time I ever heard of a recorded transfer of property or definition of boundaries being held to include more than represented in the agreement and the map annexed thereto, because if the paper on which it was drawn had been larger, a greater area could have been shewn, and would doubtless have been included in the transfer.

15. I do not think it necessary to deal further with such an argument, especially as it has not been advanced till 1866, whilst it is opposed to the direct averment of the Ordnance officers in 1855, that such was not the case, but that on the contrary the Boundary stones were then the actual boundaries :the Ordnance limits, and such they "must continue to the present day because there has been no subsequent arrangement.

16. It remained however that I should ascertain what truth there was in the averment or rather the insinuation that the Ordnance Boundaries contended for were annually perambulated, which would imply general acquiescence in the claim. The difficulty which had been represented

Edit History

2026-05-21 08:32:28 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

378 Sufficiently large, the plan does not "shew the boundaries quite up to the "500 feet contour se x 14. This is the first time I ever heard of a recorded transfer of property or definition of boundaries being held to include more than represented in the agreement and the map annexed thereto, because if the paper on which it was drawn had been larger, a greater area could have been shewn, and would doubtless have been included in the transfer. 15. I do not think it necessary to deal further with such an argument, especially as it has not been advanced till 1866, whilst it is opposed to the direct averment of the Ordnance officers in 1855, that such was not the case, but that on the contrary the Boundary stones were then the actual boundaries :the Ordnance limits, and such they "must continue to the present day because there has been no subsequent arrangement. 16. It remained however that I should ascertain what truth there was in the averment or rather the insinuation that the Ordnance Boundaries contended for were annually perambulated, which would imply general acquiescence in the claim. The difficulty which had been represented

Baseline (Original)

378 Sufficiently large, the plan does not " shew the boundaries quite up to the " 500 feet contour se x 14. This is the first time I ever heard of a recorded for transper of property or definition Cagreeinbet of boundaries being held to include more than represented in the figreement of the wasp annexed heap thereto, because if the papere which it was drawn had been larger, a greater area could have been shewn, and would doubtters have been included in the transfer. 15. I do not think it necessary to deal further with such an refecially as it has not been advanced argumbl till 1866, whilst it is opposed to the direct averment of the Ordnance officers in 1855. that such was not the case, but that on the contrary the Boundary stones were then the actual boundaries :the Ordnance limits, and such they "must continue to the present day because there has been no subsequent arrangement. 16. It remained however that I should ascertain what truth there was in the averment or rather the insinuation that the Ordnance Boundaries contended for annually perambulated which would. imply general acquiescence in the claim . The difficulty which_ had been refentared

2026-05-21 08:32:28 · Baseline

View content

378

Sufficiently large, the plan does not

" shew the boundaries

quite up to the

" 500 feet contour se

14. This is the first time I ever heard of a recorded for transper of property or definition

Cagreeinbet

of boundaries being held to include more than represented in the figreement of the wasp annexed

heap thereto, because if the papere which it was drawn had been larger, a greater area could have been shewn, and would doubtters have been included in the transfer.

15. I do not think it necessary to deal further with such an refecially as it has not been advanced

argumbl

till 1866, whilst it is opposed to the direct averment of the Ordnance officers

in 1855. that such was not the

case,

but that on the contrary the Boundary

stones were then the actual boundaries

:the Ordnance limits, and such they

"must continue to the present day

because there has been no subsequent

arrangement.

16. It remained however that I should ascertain what truth there was in the averment or rather the insinuation that the Ordnance Boundaries contended for annually perambulated which would. imply general acquiescence in the claim . The difficulty which_

CO129-173 - Sir Kennedy - 1876 [1-3] — Page 381

Edit History

Comments

Private Research Note