CO129-193 - Governor Hennessy - 1881 [5-7] — Page 406

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

402

and the washing away of earth at or about the front of the house, but it is clear that a large quantity of earth was washed away.

Constructing a drain below the foundations of the house caused damage to the drain, however, this would only occur if there was an overfilling of it with more water than it could discharge.

The acts of the Surveyor General's Department do not appear to support the views that have been expressed by it upon these questions. For if the old Belmont drain was good and sufficient, and if the larger drains leading into it were right and proper and free from danger or obstruction, why did that Department order the disconnection of the house-drain from the Belmont drain, the very water which caused the damage?

The dilemma is evident: – Either an unnecessary expense was incurred, or there was an objection to allowing the connection of the larger with the smaller Belmont drain to remain, which had been required by the Surveyor General's Department.

Stirling visited the scene of the accident in question immediately after it occurred and subsequently during the process of examination, and I think it was a fair thing to form tolerably clear views as to the cause of the accident.

Page 71

Edit History

2026-05-22 11:02:24 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
402 and the washing away of earth at or about the front of the house, but it is clear that a large quantity of earth was washed away. Constructing a drain below the foundations of the house caused damage to the drain, however, this would only occur if there was an overfilling of it with more water than it could discharge. The acts of the Surveyor General's Department do not appear to support the views that have been expressed by it upon these questions. For if the old Belmont drain was good and sufficient, and if the larger drains leading into it were right and proper and free from danger or obstruction, why did that Department order the disconnection of the house-drain from the Belmont drain, the very water which caused the damage? The dilemma is evident: Either an unnecessary expense was incurred, or there was an objection to allowing the connection of the larger with the smaller Belmont drain to remain, which had been required by the Surveyor General's Department. Stirling visited the scene of the accident in question immediately after it occurred and subsequently during the process of examination, and I think it was a fair thing to form tolerably clear views as to the cause of the accident. Page 71
Baseline (Original)
402 and t the washing an array of carth at o } 1 about the fri of the house, but it # 71 £ * pla } L lay out a large Constructing L זיייי 2 1. of t Co be dow w tylniew to divert the how evtratever of lo the side all ai ༩༩་ ་༩་༡༠ covering of the drain, deep Erron below the foundations of the hou26. This damage to the drain, however, would acarity ly a to a le ri 7 2 1 درد در دمر ovogring of it with more water than it evuld discharge. The acts of the Surveyor (4) General's Departe not appear to support the views that havd been expressed by it upon thee) quishies. For if the old, Belmont, draiv 2 2 good and sufficient, and if the le leading "Largen" drains } into it of the right and proper and free from danger or objetos, why did theat Department_ CA the accident to the house- 1 2 1 draine Uletvalet from the Belmont drain, the very water Milch ett Congabrie the damage? The interids did 7 کردی delemma is evident: Either an 1. 7 17 f vec c eeeary experse was incurred, objission to alluring obietie the connection of the larger with the smaller Belinout drain to reware, had bow recoquired by the Surveyor General's Department. (5) Starring visited the is secne of the accident in question t mediately after it preured rubecquently during the A troeces of examinatiw, that I think. was wis a parihin to form L tolerably clear views as They of that accident. nz to ttre caUWO there: lay (a)
2026-05-22 11:02:24 · Baseline
View content

402

and t

the washing an

array of carth

at o

}

1

about the fri

of the house, but it

# 71

£ * pla

}

L

lay out a large

Constructing

L

זיייי

2 1.

of

t

Co be

dow w tylniew to divert

the

how evtratever of

lo

the side

all ai

༩༩་ ་ ་༩་༡༠ covering of the drain, deep Erron below the foundations of the hou26. This damage to the drain, however,

would acarity

ly

a

to a le ri

7

2

1

درد در دمر

ovogring of it with more water than it evuld discharge.

The acts of the Surveyor

(4) General's Departe

not appear

to support the views that havd

been expressed by it upon thee) quishies. For if the old, Belmont,

draiv

2 2

good and sufficient,

and if the le

leading

"Largen" drains

}

into it

of

the

right and

proper and free from danger or objetos, why did theat Department_

CA

the accident to the house-

1 2

1

draine

Uletvalet

from the Belmont drain, the

very

water Milch ett Congabrie

the damage? The

interids did

7

کردی

delemma is evident: – Either an

1.

7 17

f

vec c

eeeary

experse was incurred, objission to alluring obietie the connection of the larger with

the smaller Belinout drain to reware, had bow recoquired

by the Surveyor General's Department. (5) Starring visited the

is

secne of the accident in question

t

mediately after it preured rubecquently during the

A

troeces of examinatiw,

that I

think.

was wis a parihin to form

L

tolerably clear views as They of that accident.

nz

to ttre caUWO

there:

lay

(a)

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.