CO129-341 - Acting Governor May Governor Lugard - 1907 [7-10] — Page 38

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

Conclosure 4. Enclosure 5.

made up of cash in notes (page 2969). Inspector Reidie now states that he received the whole sum of $1,900 from Mr. E. M. Hazeland. I attach copies of correspondence with Mr. E. M. Hazeland on the subject.

Mr. E. M. Hazeland was formerly an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department. He has since 1900 been in private practice and it is reported that such practice has from the first been extensive and remunerative.

The information given by Inspector Reidie in reply to queries (d) and (e) is of an extraordinarily meagre and vague description. The matter of the cheque in 1905 for $200 has been, on enquiry, explained by Dr. F. Clark as covering expenses of repairs to the Pavilions which were carried out by Inspector Reidie on behalf of the former who was granted occupation of these premises for the Winter months that year.

I am advised that there is no specific charge divulged in this evidence on which Inspector Reidie can be brought before the Executive Council, but I consider, and the Executive Council whom I have consulted in the matter agree with me, that the explanations offered by

Edit History

2026-06-04 20:58:13 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

Conclosure 4. Enclosure 5. 36 made up of cash in notes (page 2969). Inspector Reidie now states that he received the whole sum of $1,900 from Mr. E. M. Hazeland. I attach copies of correspondence with Mr. E. M. Hazeland on the subject. Mr. E. M. Hazeland was formerly an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department. He has since 1900 been in private practice and it is reported that such practice has from the first been extensive and remunerative. 6. The information given by Inspector Reidie in reply to queries (d) and (e) is of an extraordinarily meagre and vague description. The matter of the cheque in 1905 for $200 has been, on enquiry, explained by Dr. F. Clark as covering expenses of repairs to the Pavilions which were carried out by Inspector Reidie on behalf of the former who was granted occupation of these premises for the Winter months that year. 7. I am advised that there is no specific charge divulged in this evidence on which Inspector Reidie can be brought before the Executive Council, but I consider, and the Executive Council whom I have consulted in the matter agree with me, that the explanations offered by

Baseline (Original)

Conclosure 4. Enclosure 5. 36 made up of cash in notes (page 2969). Inspector Reidie now states that he received the whole sum of $1,900 from Mr. E. . Hazeland. I attach copies of correspondence with Mr. -- ·E. M. Hazeland on the subject. Mr. E. M. Hazeland was formerly an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department. He has since 1900 been in private practice and it is reported that such practice has from the first been extensive and remunerative. 6. The information given by Inspector ! Reidie in reply to queries (d) and (e) is of an extraordi- -narily meagre and vague description. The matter of the cheque in 1905 for $200 has been, on enquiry, explained by Dr. F. Clark as covering expenses of repairs to the Pavilions which Carried out) Inspector Reidie on behalf of the former who was granted occupation of these premises for the Winter months that year. 7. I am advised that there is no specific charge divulged in this evidence on which Inspect- -or Reidie can be brought before the Executive Council, but I consider, and the Executive Council whom I have consulted in the matter agree with me, that the explanations offered by

2026-06-04 20:58:13 · Baseline

View content

Conclosure 4. Enclosure 5.

made up of cash in notes (page 2969). Inspector Reidie now

states that he received the whole sum of $1,900 from Mr.

E. . Hazeland. I attach copies of correspondence with Mr. --

·E. M. Hazeland on the subject.

Mr. E. M. Hazeland was formerly an

Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department. He has

since 1900 been in private practice and it is reported

that such practice has from the first been extensive and

remunerative.

The information given by Inspector

Reidie in reply to queries (d) and (e) is of an extraordi-

-narily meagre and vague description.

The matter of the cheque in 1905

for $200 has been, on enquiry, explained by Dr. F. Clark

as covering expenses of repairs to the Pavilions which

Carried out)

Inspector Reidie

on behalf of the former who was

granted occupation of these premises for the Winter months

that year.

I am advised that there is no

specific charge divulged in this evidence on which Inspect-

-or Reidie can be brought before the Executive Council, but

I consider, and the Executive Council whom I have consulted

in the matter agree with me, that the explanations offered

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.