CO129-197 - Governor Hennessy - 1882 [1-2] — Page 230

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

However, I think he has employed this same item which he allows to be capital, to appear as part of the one account. You will see from another despatch, when comparing the last, See 2672/82, this paper has clearly explained the true principle; more need not be said.

Abolition of freight licenses - No, Mr. Barclay stated, para. 4, that he did not clearly understand what was meant by abolishing "links" - the license fees for native craft, while retaining the licensing system under the Harbour Ordinance. I cannot clearly make out what is meant, whether to make all licensing nominal or simply to abolish the fees which are levied.

It appears from the present despatch that the latter is what is intended. I do not quite know why the Chinese shipping should be more favourably treated than the vessels of other nationalities; but the subject wants further consideration both financially and politically.

No reply to M. Ford's increase to salary - It was wrongly stated that this increase had been made without the fact being notified to the Secretary of State. Sir J. Hennessy points out that he did report it in his despatch of 2nd August 1886, No. 14402. If M. Tonnochy, when commenting on the item in 19431/81, had referred to this despatch, the mistake would not have been made. Apologise and authorise the continuance.

Edit History

2026-05-22 23:26:42 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
However, I think he has employed this same item which he allows to be capital, to appear as part of the one account. You will see from another despatch, when comparing the last, See 2672/82, this paper has clearly explained the true principle; more need not be said. Abolition of freight licenses - No, Mr. Barclay stated, para. 4, that he did not clearly understand what was meant by abolishing "links" - the license fees for native craft, while retaining the licensing system under the Harbour Ordinance. I cannot clearly make out what is meant, whether to make all licensing nominal or simply to abolish the fees which are levied. It appears from the present despatch that the latter is what is intended. I do not quite know why the Chinese shipping should be more favourably treated than the vessels of other nationalities; but the subject wants further consideration both financially and politically. No reply to M. Ford's increase to salary - It was wrongly stated that this increase had been made without the fact being notified to the Secretary of State. Sir J. Hennessy points out that he did report it in his despatch of 2nd August 1886, No. 14402. If M. Tonnochy, when commenting on the item in 19431/81, had referred to this despatch, the mistake would not have been made. Apologise and authorise the continuance.
Baseline (Original)
f Vraws: however I think he he has employed A this same item which he allows to be br capital, Annacl to affear as fout of the one Leocruce You with another The despatch when comparing last See 2672/82. this paper has clearly explained the true principle more need be said Abolition of frent licenses L no dad Rimbarley stated pan-4. that be did not clearly understand what was meant by abolishing finks I native the license craft fees While retai. -hing of the licensing systern wader the Harbour ordinanc how I cannot charly Proposed Mathe out what is but, whether to malle all licensing nominal a simply peculiar to "to abolish the fees which are 229 Ha Junts: the latter appears from the prescut despatch to be what is intended à I do the Chinese shipping not quite Know why Should be more binarily weighted than the vessels of Stack any N 3 lake the heavily otterr nationalitice; but at Sabject wants frutter consi- -duation both financially & politically So reply Increase to M. Ford's M. Ford's salary It was wrongly stated that this in create had been made without the fact being notified to the Sec. of State: Sie. J. Hennessy points out that he did report it in his despatch of 2nd August 1886 14402. If M. Tonnochy when commenting o in 19431/81 the item referred to this despatch, the mistake wonin not have been made Apologise 2 authorise the continuance,
2026-05-22 23:26:42 · Baseline
View content

f

Vraws:

however

I think he he has employed

A

this same item which he allows to

be

br capital,

Annacl

to

affear

as

fout of the

one

Leocruce

You with another

The despatch

when comparing

last

See 2672/82.

this paper has clearly

explained the true principle

more need be said

Abolition of frent

licenses

L no

dad Rimbarley stated pan-4. that be

did not clearly understand what was

meant by abolishing

finks

I native

the license

craft

fees

While retai.

-hing of the licensing systern wader the

Harbour ordinanc

how

I cannot charly

Proposed

Mathe out what is but, whether to

malle all licensing

nominal

a

simply peculiar to

"to abolish the fees which are

229

Ha Junts: the latter appears from the prescut

despatch to be what is intended à I do the Chinese shipping

not

quite

Know

why

Should be more binarily weighted than

the vessels of

Stack

any

N

3

lake the

heavily

otterr nationalitice; but at

Sabject

wants frutter consi-

-duation both financially & politically

So reply

Increase to M. Ford's

M. Ford's salary

It was wrongly

stated that this in create

had been made without the fact being

notified to the Sec.

of

State:

Sie. J. Hennessy points out that he did report it in his despatch of

2nd August

1886

14402.

If M. Tonnochy when commenting o in 19431/81

the item

referred

to this despatch, the mistake wonin

not have been made

Apologise 2

authorise the continuance,

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.