CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5] — Page 455

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

The Hongkong Telegraph, Sunday, Aug 19, 1888

Correspondence.

[We do not necessarily endorse the opinions expressed by Correspondents in this column.]

To the Editor of the "Hongkong Telegraph"

Sir,

In the case of "Stanton v. Falconer" reported in yours of yesterday, Miss Harriet v. Falconer, the defendant is reported to have stated that she had a claim against Falconer and Company? This may be true in a sense, but whether it is a just claim or not is the real question. I think from the fact that Mr Sharp of Sharp, Johnson, and Stokes, had for two years and a half considered the case, without being able to advise her to take legal proceedings to establish her alleged rights, it is evident that she had no case.

Miss Falconer in her statement omitted an important fact, namely, that she had obtained the signature of Mrs Marion Falconer of Chicago to a document under which she now claims, and that Mrs Marion Falconer has since stated that when she signed, she was sick, and did not know the nature or effect of the document. This interesting document purports to be an assignment by Mrs Marion Falconer to Miss Harriet P. Falconer of all her interest in the business of Messrs Falconer & Co. in consideration of one dollar.

Edit History

2026-05-28 18:01:21 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
The Hongkong Telegraph, Sunday, Aug 19, 1888 Correspondence. [We do not necessarily endorse the opinions expressed by Correspondents in this column.] To the Editor of the "Hongkong Telegraph" Sir, In the case of "Stanton v. Falconer" reported in yours of yesterday, Miss Harriet v. Falconer, the defendant is reported to have stated that she had a claim against Falconer and Company? This may be true in a sense, but whether it is a just claim or not is the real question. I think from the fact that Mr Sharp of Sharp, Johnson, and Stokes, had for two years and a half considered the case, without being able to advise her to take legal proceedings to establish her alleged rights, it is evident that she had no case. Miss Falconer in her statement omitted an important fact, namely, that she had obtained the signature of Mrs Marion Falconer of Chicago to a document under which she now claims, and that Mrs Marion Falconer has since stated that when she signed, she was sick, and did not know the nature or effect of the document. This interesting document purports to be an assignment by Mrs Marion Falconer to Miss Harriet P. Falconer of all her interest in the business of Messrs Falconer & Co. in consideration of one dollar.
Baseline (Original)
j (Copy) 451 The Hongkong Peligraph, Sunday, Aug 192, 188 Guredbondence. [We do not necessarily endase the opinions expressed by Correspondents in this column. I To the Editor of the "Stongkong Leignask? Pa,- In the case of "Stanton w. Falemer" reported in you? some yesterday, mor harried & Falcone, the defendant is reported to have stated that she had a claim apanisi Falconer. and Company? This may be tue in a sense but whether it is a just claim or not is the real question think from the fact that Mt Sharp of Sharp Johnson, and Stokes, had for two years and a half considered the case, without being able to advise her to take legal proeedings to establish her alleged rights, it is evident than she had no ease. Ono Falconer in her statement omitted an important fact, namely, that she had obtained" the signature of Mrs Marion facerer of chicass to a document under which she now claims and that Ms. Marion Falcone, has surice stated that when she scomed, she was sick, and did med know the nature of effect of the document. This interesting document purports to be an assignment by mo? Marion Falconer to no Harriet P. falconer of all her interest in the business of mess? Falconer to in consideration of and dollar,
2026-05-28 18:01:21 · Baseline
View content

j

(Copy)

451

The Hongkong Peligraph, Sunday, Aug 192, 188

Guredbondence.

[We do not necessarily endase the opinions expressed

by Correspondents in this column. I

To the Editor of the "Stongkong Leignask?

Pa,-

In the case of "Stanton w. Falemer" reported in you? some yesterday, mor harried & Falcone, the defendant is reported to have stated that she had a claim apanisi Falconer. and Company? This may be tue in a sense but whether it is a just claim or not is the real question think from the fact that Mt Sharp of Sharp Johnson, and Stokes, had for two years and a half considered the case, without being able to advise her to take legal proeedings to establish her alleged rights, it is evident than she had no ease.

Ono Falconer in her statement omitted an important fact, namely, that she had obtained" the signature of Mrs Marion facerer of chicass

to a document under which she now claims and that Ms. Marion Falcone, has surice stated that

when she scomed, she was sick, and did med know the nature of effect of the document. This interesting document purports to be an assignment by mo? Marion Falconer to no Harriet P. falconer of all her interest in the business of mess? Falconer to in consideration of and dollar,

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.