CO129-387 - Individuals - 1911 — Page 80

I

favour on the strength of their exparte

statements. If Bowley's my pull

seems to me to dispose f

memo

the contentions mised

both bung

Mens D. L.D. in 20630 !c. Bulkparti

statimento

My Barley's in the so considere

1 M.

the d. t. Las Bjudge to tilla them

the Eridumer produced by M-Aarly is at in Fares of the Gort.

news

iend copy of this litter to the Eor, and

ach mini

to inf the writers that the reply

to their pression's litter was eat through the

for n-aceritance with tol kepp, 214, 213,

Theyy

the invariable practice in the car

communicatio

raide

copes & which he sand and to them at this fruity

the S. S. Las caufully considered this contentions in the Colmi 400.

my that is

they were sigt. by the Sor. he

Led come to the comburion that there was

no med to amend the oras. that he

DEACON, LOOKER & DEACON Solicitors & Notaries.

HERDERT W. LOOKER.

F. BANKINGTON DEACON.

TELEPHONE No. 285.

TELEGRAPHIC ADDRESS:

"OTTERY," HONGKONG,

A. B. C. Code (5th Edition), Western Union (Universa} Edition),

AND

Broomhall's Imperial Combination Coda,

20630

R

52423

Prat 6 OCT !! Des Vieux Road,

Hongkong,

15th September,

-1911.

74

Luo ho budet

modits to change

his decision

چول

"the letter is obviarly intended to to opposin

I would forward

my Robinso

propo

? Puth

(as amended) fil 13 alone,

Dr.

Sir,

We have the honour to refer to our letter to you of

the 18th April last.

2. On the 9th August last we were informed by the Colonial

Secretary of this Colony that the Secretary of State for

the Colonies has received your letter of the 18th of last

April but is of opinion that Ordinances No.39 of 1909 and

No.6 of 1911 should not be amended in the manner suggested

by you".

3.

We

We must strongly but respectfully deprecate this

indirect method of reply. A letter to you from a firm of

Solicitors in England would receive a direct answer.

are unable to see why a similar courtesy should not be

extended to English Solicitors practising abroad.

Our

letter enumerated the various points on which our Clients

contended, they were not getting fair treatment, moderately

and respectfully put forward, and in respect of which our

Clients felt they were aggrieved and justly aggrieved owing

to the Ordinances of the Local Legislature and the decisions

-1-