CO129-339 - Acting Governor May Governor Nathan - 1907 [1-3] — Page 201

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

the unsupported evidence

Chan Fain.

2 dloßß).

Change to was weerty 663 the proved. It

list

Conolly states that the Ch. Justice had told the jury (presumably in another case?) that his endem + the Cor. does _? Wards') hot Reliable not challenge this.

Allg Conolly calend Las cook T (alowas not presents. During & Chares endemus the con handelli Chan & supports Conolly's proved.

I consider that the change is not

In his clasps. The Gov. (85) maken pouch the fact that Conolly did we report the offer of preach, tthand committed. breach of fund Order to 28. This orcher tagnin June за bribe being offered con Gost servant, the latter shall hälle the bribe & the person offering it to the nearest Police Station Acharge the person thand tommy the Inspector in charge". I don't are that this Order is applicable to the fails, or that any loveh 2 (I the wind) Comand + a Trebe winches can int offered to a person o do ir abstain from doing his duty; and it Camust cover the case of Che a coote if Bang La thing Xuy present.

Afor 198 The Inspector could not have complied literally with the Order, and a man against whom other ground of Complaint. wanting whardly be reproached for not reporting that Accept Sortido had asked if Xmas present that bean b The for. in each not proved; Cata solid that the he theme woted for the mais suspension; and has j'custifies his recommendatio qoismaisal solely Ver case.

Ediencial Gy ay it by importing prejudice int る I the winder lent the dispensin be comprimed.

Sie Hopwood 21/3 showed not In both the charges which have been held to be parsed by a majority of the Council diet liidence gactual payment by the chinamen who gave the bribe to the inspector was given

The question then becomes the witmeme д the credibility of The Council saw their demeanon hear their evidence they were & decided that to be believed.

It is I think

Edit History

2026-06-03 13:20:04 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
the unsupported evidence Chan Fain. 2 dloßß). Change to was weerty 663 the proved. It list Conolly states that the Ch. Justice had told the jury (presumably in another case?) that his endem + the Cor. does _? Wards') hot Reliable not challenge this. Allg Conolly calend Las cook T (alowas not presents. During & Chares endemus the con handelli Chan & supports Conolly's proved. I consider that the change is not In his clasps. The Gov. (85) maken pouch the fact that Conolly did we report the offer of preach, tthand committed. breach of fund Order to 28. This orcher tagnin June за bribe being offered con Gost servant, the latter shall hälle the bribe & the person offering it to the nearest Police Station Acharge the person thand tommy the Inspector in charge". I don't are that this Order is applicable to the fails, or that any loveh 2 (I the wind) Comand + a Trebe winches can int offered to a person o do ir abstain from doing his duty; and it Camust cover the case of Che a coote if Bang La thing Xuy present. Afor 198 The Inspector could not have complied literally with the Order, and a man against whom other ground of Complaint. wanting whardly be reproached for not reporting that Accept Sortido had asked if Xmas present that bean b The for. in each not proved; Cata solid that the he theme woted for the mais suspension; and has j'custifies his recommendatio qoismaisal solely Ver case. Ediencial Gy ay it by importing prejudice int I the winder lent the dispensin be comprimed. Sie Hopwood 21/3 showed not In both the charges which have been held to be parsed by a majority of the Council diet liidence gactual payment by the chinamen who gave the bribe to the inspector was given The question then becomes the witmeme д the credibility of The Council saw their demeanon hear their evidence they were & decided that to be believed. It is I think
Baseline (Original)
} the unsupported evidence Chan Fain. Ъ } 2 dloßß). Change to was weerty 663 the proved. It list Conolly states that the Ch. Justice had told the jury (presumably in another case ? that his endem + the Cor. does _? Wards') hot Reliable not challenge this. Allg Conolly calend Las cook T (alowas not presents. During & Chares endemus the con handieli Chan & supports Conolly's proved. I consider that the change is not In his clasps. The Gov. (85) maken pouch the fact that Conolly did we report * the offer of preach, tthand committed. breach of fund Order to 28. This orcher tagnin June за bribe being offered con Gost servant, the latter shall hälle the bribe & the person offering it to the nearest Police Station Acharge the person thand tommy the Inspector in charge". I don't are that this Order is applicable to the fails, or that any loveh 2 (I the wind) م نے Comand + a Trebe winches can int offered to a person o do ir abstain from doing his duty; and it Camust cover the case of Che a coote if Bang La thing Xuy present. Afor 198 The Inspector could not have complied literally with the Order, and a man against whom other ground of Complaint. wanting whardly be reproached for not reporting that Accept Sortido had asked if Xmas present that bean b The for. in each not proved; Cata solid that the he theme woted for the mais suspension; and has j'custifies his recommendatio qoismaisal solely Ver case. Ediencial Gy ay it by importing prejudice int I the winder lent the dispensin be comprimed. Sie Hopwood 21/3 showed not In both the charges which have been held to be parsed by a majority of the Council diet liidence gactual payment by the chinamen who gave the bribe to the inspector was given The question then becomes the witmeme д the credibility of The Council saw their demeanon hear their evidence they were & decided that to be believed. It is Ithink
2026-06-03 13:20:04 · Baseline
View content

}

the unsupported evidence

Chan Fain.

Ъ

}

2 dloßß).

Change to was weerty 663 the proved. It

list

Conolly states that the Ch. Justice had told the

jury (presumably in another case ?

that his endem

+ the Cor. does

_? Wards')

hot

Reliable

not challenge

this.

Allg

Conolly

calend

Las cook

T

(alowas not presents. During & Chares endemus the con handieli Chan & supports Conolly's

proved.

I consider that the change is not

In his clasps. The Gov. (85) maken

pouch the fact that Conolly did we report

*

the offer of preach, tthand committed. breach of fund Order to 28. This orcher tagnin

June

за

bribe being offered con Gost servant, the latter shall hälle the bribe & the person offering it to the nearest Police Station Acharge the person thand tommy the Inspector in charge". I don't are that this

Order is applicable to the fails, or that any

loveh

2

(I the wind)

م نے

Comand

+

a

Trebe

winches can int offered to a person o

do ir abstain from doing his duty; and it

Camust cover

the case of

Che

a

coote if

Bang

La thing

Xuy

present. Afor

198

The Inspector could not

have complied literally with the Order, and

a

man against whom other ground of Complaint.

wanting whardly be reproached for

not

reporting that

Accept

Sortido had asked if

Xmas present that bean b

The for. in each

not proved;

Cata

solid that the

he theme woted for the

mais suspension; and has j'custifies his

recommendatio qoismaisal solely

Ver case.

Ediencial

Gy

ay it

by importing prejudice int

I the winder lent the dispensin

be comprimed.

Sie Hopwood

21/3

showed not

In both the charges which have been held to be parsed by a majority of the Council

diet liidence

gactual payment by the chinamen who gave

the bribe to the inspector

was given

The

question then becomes

the witmeme

д

the credibility of

The Council saw their demeanon

hear their evidence

they

were

& decided that

to be believed.

It is Ithink

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.