CO129-297 - Governor Sir Blake - 1900 [1-3] — Page 20

the leased limit

19

limitary

It

abfers, havever, that

this assumption

made in ever, as

lmay

the

telegram of the 13th June fuit which

forwarded in the letter from this

7xx.

1/5

the expenses.

caused I

175

Ino 187

XXM 1524

was

Deft of the 9th Jwith to which these tetgrams were an refle, did not specifically refer to the occupation of but Sham Clum,

only to the expenditure

which had been a was

liked the nicured in consequence of the resistance A the Chinese to the occupation of the leased lenitay

3. As it abbean, therefor

1

Hang Kay in refs to the last peragrafts of the tetgray the

was

draft of which encloud in the letterf from this Deflator

refered to

2. Jam to

exflain that when the

letter from this Deflt ot

the 21st

June lasth

was mitte, it was

assumed that the

telegrams of which copies

were enclosed related to

exfenses incured I the Coburial

Gaument of Hay

Kay

in

Consequence

of the occupation of

Sham Chum, as well as of disturbances conected

taking an of

with the

NF

1/50

FA270 & * 194.

However, to follow the instructions more closely and provide a more accurate response, I will reformat the text into Markdown and correct errors as per the guidelines. ## the leased limit 19 limitary It However, it appears that this assumption was made in error, as may the telegram of the 13th June which was forwarded in the letter from this Dept. 1/5 the expenses. caused by 175 Ino 187 XXM 1524 was Dept of the 9th June to which these telegrams were an reply, did not specifically refer to the occupation of Sham Shum, only to the expenditure which had been incurred in consequence of the resistance of the Chinese to the occupation of the leased territory. 3. As it appears, therefore 1 Hong Kong in ref to the last paragraphs of the telegram the was draft of which enclosed in the letter from this Dept referred to 2. I am to explain that when the letter from this Dept the 21st June last was written, it was assumed that the telegrams of which copies were enclosed related to expenses incurred by the Colonial Government of Hong Kong in consequence of the occupation of Sham Shum, as well as of disturbances connected with the NF 1/50 FA270 & * 194. Let's correct and reformat it properly: ## The Leased Territory 19 It appears, however, that this assumption was made in error. The telegram of the 13th June, which was forwarded in the letter from this Department, refers to the expenses caused by the resistance of the Chinese to the occupation of the leased territory. ### Telegram and Expenditure The Department's letter of the 9th June, to which these telegrams were a reply, did not specifically refer to the occupation of Sham Shum, only to the expenditure which had been incurred in consequence. 3. As it appears, therefore, the draft of the telegram, enclosed in the letter from this Department, referred to the expenses incurred by the Colonial Government of Hong Kong in consequence of the occupation of Sham Shum and disturbances connected with it. ### Explanation I am to explain that when the letter from this Department of the 21st June last was written, it was assumed that the telegrams, of which copies were enclosed, related to the expenses incurred by the Colonial Government. NF1/50 FA270 & * 194. Reformatted into HTML as requested:

The Leased Territory

19

It appears, however, that this assumption was made in error.

The telegram of the 13th June, which was forwarded in the letter from this Department, refers to the expenses caused by the resistance of the Chinese to the occupation of the leased territory.

The Department's letter of the 9th June, to which these telegrams were a reply, did not specifically refer to the occupation of Sham Shum, only to the expenditure which had been incurred in consequence.

3. As it appears, therefore, the draft of the telegram, enclosed in the letter from this Department, referred to the expenses incurred by the Colonial Government of Hong Kong in consequence of the occupation of Sham Shum and disturbances connected with it.

I am to explain that when the letter from this Department of the 21st June last was written, it was assumed that the telegrams, of which copies were enclosed, related to the expenses incurred by the Colonial Government.

NF1/50
FA270 & * 194.