1893/26 Regina vs. Ghee Gow, Lee Quong, and Wong Ping – burglary and entering, River’s Inlet
GR-0419.49.1893-39p005.jpg
| Revision as of Feb 5, 2017, 4:21:39 PM created by 172.16.1.125 |
Revision as of Nov 14, 2018, 7:52:52 PM edited by 172.16.1.125 |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The book which I produced and refer to is in my own handwriting and the entries were made at that time. The contractors orders were destroyed in due course about a month after the pay day. The day after the money of no 1,4,5,6 was paid. The Chinamen designated by those numbers came to the Company's office and made statements about this. Those Chinese did not receive any money from me for work done | + | The book which I produced and refer to is in my own handwriting and the entries were made at that time. The contractors orders were destroyed in due course about a month after the pay day. The day after the money of no 1,4,5,6 was paid. The Chinamen designated by those numbers came to the Company's office and made statements about this. Those Chinese did not receive any money from me for work done by them in the month of April 1891. The amount paid on account of no5 Chinaman was $28.12. WK Bryant |
Revision as of Nov 14, 2018, 7:52:52 PM
The book which I produced and refer to is in my own handwriting and the entries were made at that time. The contractors orders were destroyed in due course about a month after the pay day. The day after the money of no 1,4,5,6 was paid. The Chinamen designated by those numbers came to the Company's office and made statements about this. Those Chinese did not receive any money from me for work done by them in the month of April 1891. The amount paid on account of no5 Chinaman was $28.12. WK Bryant