W.104.
Sir,
Magistracy, Hongkong, 28th September 1887
In reference to the case of Le Loi alias Chau Dik Cheung, I desire to state that the discrepancy between the date of the burglary given in the charge and depositions viz.: 7th November 1886, and that entered in the committal warrant and letter W.90 of 29th August 1887 viz.: 17th November 1886, appears to have been the result of a clerical error in the Magistrate's Office. I regret that it escaped my notice at the time.
I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant,
(Signed) M.G. Mitchell-Irnes, Acting Police Magistrate
To: H. Stewart, LL.D., Acting Colonial Secretary
benBo
W.104.
Sir,
care
317
Magistracy Proughou& 28th September 1887
Witte
364
reference to the
Ching Save
"I desire
of Le Loi v8:
alias Chau Dik
Chemez
to state that the discrepancy between the date of the burglary
given in the charge and depositions viz : - 7th november
1886, and that entered in the committal warrant and
letter W. 90 of
in
лиц
29th August 1887 viz: - 1yitto kovember 1886, appears
to have been the result
clerical error in the
бр
Magistrater Office. I regret that it escaped my notice
at the time
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
(Signed) MG Mitchell-Irmes.
Acting Police kragistrate
How: I Stewart LL.D.
Acting Colonial Secretary
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.