CO129-341 - Acting Governor May Governor Lugard - 1907 [7-10] — Page 683

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

nclosure 3.

8.

677

conduct of the works". A comparison of Mr. Ives's letter of September 21st., paragraph 12 et sequentia, (copy enclosed) to the Consulting Engineers with the observations I shall make in paragraphs 10 and 11 of this Despatch upon the subjects with which they deal will aptly illustrate my meaning. The following is another instance in point:-

At the second reading of the Appropriation Bill the Unofficial Members expressed in general terms their apprehension that the Railway Construction was not proceeding as rapidly as it ought but no criticism of any technical details was offered. Their remarks were duly replied to on behalf of Government, and I have already forwarded to Your Lordship a report of the debate. I shortly afterwards received a letter from Mr. Ives informing me that he had sent a copy of the speech containing the criticism "privately" to the Consulting Engineers with what remarks I am ignorant. The duty of dealing with such matters appears to me to rest upon the Government which entrusts to the Chief Resident Engineer the control of the technical construction work only.

8.

I have pointed out that in my opinion the Chief Resident Engineer's letter referred to is calculated to mislead the Consulting Engineers as to the

Edit History

2026-06-05 12:54:51 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
nclosure 3. 8. 677 conduct of the works". A comparison of Mr. Ives's letter of September 21st., paragraph 12 et sequentia, (copy enclosed) to the Consulting Engineers with the observations I shall make in paragraphs 10 and 11 of this Despatch upon the subjects with which they deal will aptly illustrate my meaning. The following is another instance in point:- At the second reading of the Appropriation Bill the Unofficial Members expressed in general terms their apprehension that the Railway Construction was not proceeding as rapidly as it ought but no criticism of any technical details was offered. Their remarks were duly replied to on behalf of Government, and I have already forwarded to Your Lordship a report of the debate. I shortly afterwards received a letter from Mr. Ives informing me that he had sent a copy of the speech containing the criticism "privately" to the Consulting Engineers with what remarks I am ignorant. The duty of dealing with such matters appears to me to rest upon the Government which entrusts to the Chief Resident Engineer the control of the technical construction work only. 8. I have pointed out that in my opinion the Chief Resident Engineer's letter referred to is calculated to mislead the Consulting Engineers as to the
Baseline (Original)
nclosure 3. 8. 677 conduct of the works". A comparison of Mr. Ives's letter of September 21st., paragraph 12 et sequentia, (copy enclosed) to the Consulting Engineers with the observations I shall make in paragraphs 10 and 11 of this Despatch upon I think the subjects with which they deal will aptly illustrate A my meaning. The following is another instance in point:- At the second reading of the Appropriation Bill the Unofficial Members expressed in general terms their apprehension that the Railway Construct -ion was not proceeding as rapidly as it ought but no criticism of any technical details was offered. Their remarks were duly replied to on behalf of Government, and I have already forwarded to Your Lordship a report of the debate. I shortly afterwards received a letter from Mr. Eves informing me that he had sent a copy of the speech containing the criticism "privately" to the Consulting Engineers with what remarks I am ignorant. The duty of dealing with such matters appears to me to rest upon the Government which entrusts to the Chief Resident Engineer the control of the technical construction work only. 8. I have pointed out that in my (ance. 3) opinion the Chief Resident Engineer's letter referred to A is calculated to mislead the Consulting Engineers as to the
2026-06-05 12:54:51 · Baseline
View content

nclosure 3.

8.

677

conduct of the works". A comparison of Mr. Ives's letter

of September 21st., paragraph 12 et sequentia, (copy

enclosed) to the Consulting Engineers with the observations

I shall make in paragraphs 10 and 11 of this Despatch upon

I think the subjects with which they deal will aptly illustrate

A

my meaning. The following is another instance in point:-

At the second reading of the

Appropriation Bill the Unofficial Members expressed in

general terms their apprehension that the Railway Construct

-ion was not proceeding as rapidly as it ought but no

criticism of any technical details was offered. Their

remarks were duly replied to on behalf of Government, and

I have already forwarded to Your Lordship a report of the

debate. I shortly afterwards received a letter from Mr.

Eves informing me that he had sent a copy of the speech

containing the criticism "privately" to the Consulting

Engineers with what remarks I am ignorant. The duty of

dealing with such matters appears to me to rest upon the

Government which entrusts to the Chief Resident Engineer

the control of the technical construction work only.

8.

I have pointed out that in my

(ance. 3)

opinion the Chief Resident Engineer's letter referred to

A

is calculated to mislead the Consulting Engineers as to

the

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.