:
The Unccurred Balances
Ordinance 1888"
I would, however,
hoint out to
that
you appears t
Schedule C. f this
require amendment as it does met Ordine contains the
form of notice, and referred to in the 1t section that it should be
the Winaner.
amended acsmdingly
I have ete:
& 8 (30,410a) sv00 1---88
No.
Veux 69.
Date.
1888.
میں brah
Last previous Paper.
8876
Copy
9937
7.0. cams 26 April
copy ine. Trade com
7.0.
Comm.bg.amx
Next websequent Paper.
18876
No.
đang sống
6896
(Subject.)
RCUP
DESPATCH.
C. O.
6696
REGE 9 APR 99.
Ordinance D. 12 of 1888.
"Nagrancy-
235
Forwards with Atty Lands Beport-
M
(Minutes.)
M. Branstin
In answering their desp. in it
there is
? Point out that there is nothing to Show that this Ord. has been
subject of prev correspon with the I. of State, and that the attone fent report invery meagre giving no nifi
wife as to the points where the Ard. differs from the draft introduced in 1886 or
for
such differences.
[It is very
a
в Не глянит
inconvenient for
an
Ord.
to be sent home like this without
referring to pre.com. which dol by accident remembered
Sug16/4
There is no outstantial difference betwrun the Draft & this
Ordinena Except
for Except in. The prints guter forlow - Ihome and Copy
Page 240Page 241
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.