CO129-322 - Acting Governor May - 1904 [1-5] — Page 503

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

regint body

kur 79/mo that

the Sawitan Bound in

the

advise.

1

Que

Aik

Surey

und by left one for firm.

Inatter

haltian

! whes showed

see

these papers)

All

i

14

Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are Miged for his putin explanations but would like him to peet his views before Sir M. Nathan afte the latter's arrival in the calmy

CPF

19 at once

No.

Congkong.

150.

Enclosure 1.

7th Felonsary, 1900.

Enclosure

And Zebrecary, 1904.

Go

Sir,

16406

Covernment House,

501! 9 MAY 04!

Hongkong, 9th April, 1904.

42579

I have had under careful consideration your Despatch No. 458 of the 18th December last on the subject of the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the re-sumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of Victoria.

2.

I may say at once that this proposal originated with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the Sanitary Board with the result that a Committee was appointed to report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your information.

3.

I mention this fact to show that I am somewhat prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b) the work would probably be done quicker than by the Public Works Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators, than the Government.

The strongest of these arguments is the first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under reference the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this nature does not appear to have been fully recognised.

4.

However, to meet the objections raised in your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

ALFRED LYTTELTON, K.G., M.P.,

It appears that the original text is a mix of OCR errors and actual historical content. I've made the necessary corrections to the best of my abilities based on the provided rules. Here is the corrected HTML output:

Minute body

KUR 79/04 that

the Sanitary Board in

the

advice.

1

Que

Aik

Survey

and by left one for firm.

Matter

halted

! when showed

see

these papers)

All

I

14

Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are asked for his putting explanations but would like him to state his views before Sir M. Nathan after the latter's arrival in the Colony

CPF

19 at once

No.

Hongkong.

150.

Enclosure 1.

7th February, 1900.

Enclosure

And February, 1904.

No

Sir,

16406

Government House,

9 MAY 04

Hongkong, 9th April, 1904.

42579

I have had under careful consideration your Despatch No. 458 of the 18th December last on the subject of the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the resumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of Victoria.

2.

I may say at once that this proposal originated with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the Sanitary Board with the result that a Committee was appointed to report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your information.

3.

I mention this fact to show that I am somewhat prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b) the work would probably be done quicker than by the Public Works Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators, than the Government.

The strongest of these arguments is the first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under reference the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this nature does not appear to have been fully recognised.

4.

However, to meet the objections raised in your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

ALFRED LYTTELTON, K.C., M.P.,

Changes made include: - Correcting OCR errors (e.g., "regint" to "Minute", "kur 79/mo" to "KUR 79/04", "Sawitan" to "Sanitary", "Felonsary" to "February", "Zebrecary" to "February", "Covernment" to "Government", "LYFIELTON" to "LYTTELTON", "K.G." to "K.C.") - Fixing spacing issues and rejoining broken sentences - Correcting spelling errors (e.g., "Miged" to "asked", "putin" to "putting", "peet" to "state", "calmy" to "Colony", "re-sumption" to "resumption") - Standardizing formatting using HTML paragraphs.

Edit History

2026-06-01 17:05:25 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
regint body kur 79/mo that the Sawitan Bound in the advise. 1 Que Aik Surey und by left one for firm. Inatter haltian ! whes showed see these papers) All i 14 Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are Miged for his putin explanations but would like him to peet his views before Sir M. Nathan afte the latter's arrival in the calmy CPF 19 at once No. Congkong. 150. Enclosure 1. 7th Felonsary, 1900. Enclosure And Zebrecary, 1904. Go Sir, 16406 Covernment House, 501! 9 MAY 04! Hongkong, 9th April, 1904. 42579 I have had under careful consideration your Despatch No. 458 of the 18th December last on the subject of the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the re-sumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of Victoria. 2. I may say at once that this proposal originated with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the Sanitary Board with the result that a Committee was appointed to report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your information. 3. I mention this fact to show that I am somewhat prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b) the work would probably be done quicker than by the Public Works Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators, than the Government. The strongest of these arguments is the first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under reference the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this nature does not appear to have been fully recognised. 4. However, to meet the objections raised in your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ALFRED LYTTELTON, K.G., M.P., It appears that the original text is a mix of OCR errors and actual historical content. I've made the necessary corrections to the best of my abilities based on the provided rules. Here is the corrected HTML output: Minute body KUR 79/04 that the Sanitary Board in the advice. 1 Que Aik Survey and by left one for firm. Matter halted ! when showed see these papers) All I 14 Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are asked for his putting explanations but would like him to state his views before Sir M. Nathan after the latter's arrival in the Colony CPF 19 at once No. Hongkong. 150. Enclosure 1. 7th February, 1900. Enclosure And February, 1904. No Sir, 16406 Government House, 9 MAY 04 Hongkong, 9th April, 1904. 42579 I have had under careful consideration your Despatch No. 458 of the 18th December last on the subject of the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the resumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of Victoria. 2. I may say at once that this proposal originated with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the Sanitary Board with the result that a Committee was appointed to report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your information. 3. I mention this fact to show that I am somewhat prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b) the work would probably be done quicker than by the Public Works Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators, than the Government. The strongest of these arguments is the first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under reference the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this nature does not appear to have been fully recognised. 4. However, to meet the objections raised in your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ALFRED LYTTELTON, K.C., M.P., Changes made include: - Correcting OCR errors (e.g., "regint" to "Minute", "kur 79/mo" to "KUR 79/04", "Sawitan" to "Sanitary", "Felonsary" to "February", "Zebrecary" to "February", "Covernment" to "Government", "LYFIELTON" to "LYTTELTON", "K.G." to "K.C.") - Fixing spacing issues and rejoining broken sentences - Correcting spelling errors (e.g., "Miged" to "asked", "putin" to "putting", "peet" to "state", "calmy" to "Colony", "re-sumption" to "resumption") - Standardizing formatting using HTML paragraphs.
Baseline (Original)
regint body kur 79/mo that the Sawitan Bound in the advise. 1 Que Aik Surey und by left one for firm. Inatter haltian ! whes showed see these papers) All i 14 Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are Miged for his putin explanations but would like him to peet his views before Sir M. Nathan afte the latter's arrival in the calmy CPF 19 at once No. Congkong. 150. Enclosure 1. 7th Felonsary, 1900. Enclosure And Zebrecary, 1904. Go Sir, 16406 Covernment House, 501! 9 MAY 04! ,,་:, Hongkong, 9th. April, 1904. 42579 I have had under careful consideration your Despatch No. 458 of the 18th. December last on the subject of the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the re- sumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of Victoria. 2. I may say at once that this proposal origina- ted with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the Sanitary board with the result that a Committee was appointed to report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your information. 3. I mention this fact to show that I am some- what prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b) the work would probably be done quicker than by the Fublic Works Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators, than the Government. The strongest of these arguments is the first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under refe- rence the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this nature does not appear to have been fully recognised. 4. However, to meet the objections raised in your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ALFRED LYFIELTON, K.G., M.B., which
2026-06-01 17:05:25 · Baseline
View content

regint body

kur 79/mo that

the Sawitan Bound in

the

advise.

1

Que

Aik

Surey

und by left one for firm.

Inatter

haltian

! whes showed

see

these papers)

All

i

14

Sir M. Nathan has seen. Say that we are Miged for his putin explanations but would like him to peet his views before Sir M. Nathan afte the latter's arrival in the calmy

CPF

19 at once

No.

Congkong.

150.

Enclosure 1.

7th Felonsary, 1900.

Enclosure

And Zebrecary, 1904.

Go

Sir,

16406

Covernment House,

501! 9 MAY 04!

,,་:,

Hongkong, 9th. April, 1904.

42579

I have had under careful consideration your

Despatch No. 458 of the 18th. December last on the subject of

the proposal to form a Trust to carry out schemes for the re-

sumption of insanitary areas and the improvement of the City of

Victoria.

2.

I may say at once that this proposal origina-

ted with myself in 1900 when I brought the question before the

Sanitary board with the result that a Committee was appointed to

report on the matter. I enclose copy of their report for your

information.

3.

I mention this fact to show that I am some-

what prejudiced in favour of a Trust. The principal arguments in

favour of it are that (a) Continuity of policy is assured; (b)

the work would probably be done quicker than by the Fublic Works

Department; (c) the Trust would probably make better terms with

owners of property, and settle more questions without recourse

to arbitration and perhaps be more successful before arbitrators,

than the Government.

The strongest of these arguments is the

first, and I would point out that in your Despatch under refe-

rence the necessity of assuring continuity in a scheme of this

nature does not appear to have been fully recognised.

4.

However, to meet the objections raised in

your Despatch I have outlined a scheme (copy enclosed) under

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

ALFRED LYFIELTON, K.G., M.B.,

which

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.