CO129-294 - Governor Sir Blake - 1899 [10-12] — Page 123

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

120

The contention of the P and O Company is that by the Postmaster General's letter they were entitled to the carriage of all mails to India or at least to those which were sent for the first portion of the journey by British contract packet.

This is shown in the letter from the Superintendent to his Directors of the 7th June, 1888.

This is a matter for expert opinion but I think that, although the Postmaster General's letter is a bit mixed, such a construction can hardly be maintained.

(The agreement was however never formally repudiated by the Postmaster General as ought to have been done in 1894, as a simple matter of precaution).

I may add that both before and after the agreement of 1888 other vessels conveyed mails from Hong Kong to Bombay.

(Signed.) A.M.Thomson.

15-2

Edit History

2026-05-31 09:02:08 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

120 The contention of the P and O Company is that by the Postmaster General's letter they were entitled to the carriage of all mails to India or at least to those which were sent for the first portion of the journey by British contract packet. This is shown in the letter from the Superintendent to his Directors of the 7th June, 1888. This is a matter for expert opinion but I think that, although the Postmaster General's letter is a bit mixed, such a construction can hardly be maintained. (The agreement was however never formally repudiated by the Postmaster General as ought to have been done in 1894, as a simple matter of precaution). I may add that both before and after the agreement of 1888 other vessels conveyed mails from Hong Kong to Bombay. (Signed.) A.M.Thomson. 15-2

Baseline (Original)

.ş 120 The contention of the P and 0 Company is that by the Postmaster General's letter they were entitled to the carriage of all mails to India or at least to those which were sent for the first por- tion of the journey by British contract packet. This is shown in the letter from the Supe- rintendent to his Directors of the 7th. June, 1888. This is a matter for expert opinion but I think that, although the Postmaster General's letter Xis a bit mixed, such a construction can hardly be maintained. (The agreement was however never formally repudiated by the Postmaster General as ought to have been done in 1894, as a simple matter of precaution). I may add that both before and after the agreement of 1888 other vessels conveyed mails from HongKong to Bombay.. (Signed.) A.M.Thomson. 15-2

2026-05-31 09:02:08 · Baseline

View content

.ş

120

The contention of the P and 0 Company is

that by the Postmaster General's letter they were

entitled to the carriage of all mails to India or

at least to those which were sent for the first por-

tion of the journey by British contract packet.

This is shown in the letter from the Supe-

rintendent to his Directors of the 7th. June, 1888.

This is a matter for expert opinion but I

think that, although the Postmaster General's letter Xis a bit mixed, such a construction can hardly be

maintained.

(The agreement was however never formally

repudiated by the Postmaster General as ought to have been done in 1894, as a simple matter of precaution).

I may add that both before and after the

agreement of 1888 other vessels conveyed mails from

HongKong to Bombay..

(Signed.) A.M.Thomson.

15-2

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.