Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerMore than a thousand protestors surround Hong Kong's main police headquarters on Arsenal Street in Wan Chai on June 26th following a peaceful rally at Edinburgh Place in Central. Doors to the complex were barricaded by protestors, who left after a six hour siege in protest at police violence at a prtest held earlier on 12 June 2019. Protesters ended a six-hour siege of Hong Kong’s police headquarters – their second in a week over the now-suspended extradition bill – early on Thursday morning. More than 1,000 were involved at the height of the protest, which began after 10pm on Wednesday. Around 100 were left at the end and dispersed without a fight when officers with riot shields emerged from the building in Wan Chai at 4am on Thursday. After a peaceful rally attended by thousands earlier at Edinburgh Place in the Central business district, hundreds descended on Arsenal Street, blocking the junction with Lockhart Road to all traffic and sealing the entrances to the police base. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3016238/hong-kong-police-under-siege-again-protesters-surround )carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerSeven police officers stand guard in front of Hong Kong's main police headquarters on Arsenal Street in Wan Chai as an estimated one thousand protestors surround on 26 June 2019. Protestors take turns to step up and hurl abuse at the officers, in a protest lasting 6 hours before peacefully dispersing. The protesters chanted 'Release the martyrs' and 'Stop police violence' in reference to violent clashes with police in the days previous. ( https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3016238/hong-kong-police-under-siege-again-protesters-surround)carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, police, wan chai

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph crowds gathering on June 16 on the streets of Causeway Bay before an estimated 2 million people take part in march protesting the government's push for extradition laws to China and demanding an apology from the chief executrive Carrie Lam. Nearly 2 million’ people take to streets, forcing public apology from Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam as suspension of controversial extradition bill fails to appease protesters. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3014737/nearly-2-million-people-take-streets-forcing-public-apology )carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph of a crowd or protestors against proposed extradition laws gathering on the streets of Causeway Bay, Hong Kong, leading down to the gathering area. carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph of a crowd on the streets of Hong Kong to protest against proposed extradition laws, heading towards Admiralty. carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, admiralty

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerCrowds mass on Queens Way in Hong Kong as an estimated 2 million people march in protest at the government's refusal to withdraw a controverisal law allowing people to be extradited to mainland China. Chants demanded the chief executive apologise and the legislation be withdrawn, while many held signs protesting police violence. Nearly 2 million protesters flooded the streets of Hong Kong on Sunday, organisers claimed, delivering a stunning repudiation of Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor’s governance and forcing a public apology out of the city’s leader over her campaign to bulldoze a controversial extradition bill through the legislature. A day after Lam suspended her push for the bill, expecting it to defuse a crisis that has seen violent clashes between mostly young protesters and police, the centre of Hong Kong was brought to a complete standstill as the masses marched to chastise her for refusing to withdraw the bill or apologise when first asked to, and declaring that nothing short of her resignation would satisfy them now. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3014737/nearly-2-million-people-take-streets-forcing-public-apology ) carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, admiralty

The telegraph system of sending and receiving messages was developed in the early 1800s and improved as time went on. It sends electronic signals that represent letters and words along a wire. Those signals are then converted back to words at the other end of the wire. Morse code is a similar system. A fee is charged to send a telegraph, per letter or per word. The telegraph greatly improved communication, particularly in a large country like Australia. It was a fast way to send news and send out calls for help for people during a shipwreck. In Warrnambool, it was even used to set the correct time every day; a signal was sent from the time ball in Melbourne, and along the railway line to the Warrnambool Post Office. This 1896 telegraph tells a big story in very few words, only fourteen! The layout of the paper form includes a table with four columns and five rows, set out for writing just one word into each of the twenty spaces. The happy message is the approval to go ahead with the exchange/sale of the title from landowner Rutledge to Wilson. The Melbourne Legal firm Klingender Dickson and Kiddle sent this message on behalf of its client to the Bank of Australasia in Warrnambool. The Bank of Australasia was incorporated by the Royal Charter of England in March 1834. The bank began in Australia on 14th December 1835, opening in Sydney. The Acting Superintendent of the bank at that time was David Charters McArthur. He was Superintendent from 1867-to 1876. The Melbourne branch opened on 28th August 1838 in a two-roomed brick cottage on the north side of Little Collins Street, where two huge mastiff dogs were used at night to guard the bank. The government also provided an armed military sentinel. Due to the bank's rapid growth, a new building for the Melbourne branch was opened in 1840 at 75 Collins Street West. By 1879 the bank had been upgraded to a magnificent two-storey building on the corners of Collins and Queens Streets, with the entry on Collins Street. In 1951 the Bank of Australasia amalgamated with the Union Bank to form Australia and New Zealand Bank, now known as the ANZ. Then in 1970, the ANZ merged with both the ES&A and the London Bank of Australia to form the ANZ Banking Group Limited. The ANZ Banking Group Ltd kindly donated a variety of historic items from the Bank of Australasia. BANK of AUSTRALASIA, WARRNAMBOOL – In 1854 Warrnambool had two banks, the Union Bank and the Bank of Australasia. Later, completely different bank businesses opened; in 1867 the National Bank of Australasia, then in 1875 the Colonial Bank of Australasia. The original Warrnambool branch of the Bank of Australasia was established in July 1854, and operated from a leased cottage on Merri Street, close to Liebig Street. The bank later bought a stone building previously erected by drapers Cramond & Dickson on the corner of Timor and Gibson Streets. Samuel Hannaford was a teller and then Manager at the Warrnambool branch from 1855 to 1856 and the Warrnambool Council chose that bank for its dealings during 1856-57. In 1859 Roberts & Co. was awarded the contract to build the new Bank of Australasia branch for the sum of £3,000. The land was on a sand hill on the northeast corner of Timor and Kepler Streets and had been bought in 1855 from investor James Cust. The new building opened on May 21, 1860. The bank continued to operate there until 1951 when it merged with the Union Bank to form the ANZ Bank, which continued operating from its Liebig Street building. Warrnambool City Council purchased the former Bank of Australasia building in 1971 and renovated it, then on 3rd December 1973 it was officially opened as the Art Gallery by Cr. Harold Stephenson and Gallery Director John Welsh. The Gallery transferred to the purpose-built building in Liebig Street in 1986 and the old bank building is now the Gallery club. Staff at the Bank of Australasia in Warrnambool included the following men but others were also involved: Samuel Hannaford, Teller then Manager from 1855-1856; W H Palmer, Manager from January 1857 until November 1869 when the Teller Basil Spence was promoted to Manager; H B Chomley, Manager from April 1873 and still there in 1886; A Butt, Manager in 1895-1904; J R McCleary Accountant and Acting Manager for 12 months, until 1900; A Kirk, Manager 1904; J Moore, staff until his transfer to Bendigo in December 1908; J S Bath was Manager until 1915; C C Cox, Manager until April 1923; Richard C Stanley, Manager 1923 to April 1928. This telegraph has historical significance as it was sent to the Bank of Australasia in Warrnambool. The parties involved in the message, Rutledge and Wilson, were involved in a land deal in 1896 when the district was importing and exporting goods into and out of Warrnambool Harbour via sailing ships. It is also a historical record of the nature of financial agreements between similar institutions in Warrnambool and the district. The telegraph is significant for its association with the Bank of Australasia in Warrnambool, the first bank in Warrnambool, established in 1854. The bank continued to operate until its merger in 1951 when it became the ANZ Bank, which is still in operation today. The Bank was an integral part of the establishment and growth of commerce in Colonial Warrnambool and throughout Australia.Telegraph RECEIVED: Warrnambool Post Office, Wednesday 3rd June 1896. FROM: Klingender, Dickson, and Kiddle, solicitors, Bank Place, Melbourne FOR :the Manager, Bank of Australasia, Warrnambool, REGARDING: Rutledge to Wilson titleSTAMP: text inside circle "WARRNAMBOOL VIC", and in centre of the circle "JE 3 96" Telegraph No. "23", FROM :"Melbourne", FOR: "The Mgr, Bank of Australasia" MESSAGE (14 words): "Rutledge to Wilson title accepted by Purchaser's Solicitors settlement may be effected with auctioneers" TIME: "9:24" SIGNED: " Klingender Dickson Kiddle, Solrs, Bank Place"flagstaff hill, warrnambool, flagstaff hill maritime museum, maritime museum, commerce, banking, bank of australasia, australia & new zealand bank, anz bank, david charters mcarthur, telegraph, 1896, rutledge, wilson, klengender, dickson, kiddle, warrnambool post office, klengender dickson and kiddle, bank place

Collection McColl,Rankin,Stanistreet. Cast iron handpress company seal for Nell Gwynne Reef, used to seal all official documents pertaining to the legal/business dealings of the mine. Black enamelled body and handle with brass seal. Scratched into the enamel 'N.G.Reef' and written in white paint 'Nell Gwnne Reef'.commerce, office equipment, company seal

Account, dated 1 Aug 1889 and receipt dated 7 Nov 1887 to 16 July 1889 for Kerang Office Rent. Receipt signed by ? Palmer for D Hawthorne Oct 1889. Green Victoria One Penny Stamp Duty attached.business, legal, connelly & tatchell, connelly & tatchell collection - document, d hawthorne, palmer

Handwritten Notice of Foreclosure from Mrs. Elizabeth Wrixon, administratrix to Mr. John O'Brien, dated 20th October 1884. Mortgage registered in the Office of Titles on 7 July 1882. Signed by E. Wrixon, Administratrix of the Estate of Henry Wrixon deceased , registered proprietor of the said Mortgage.business, legal, connelly & tatchell, connelly & tatchell collection - document, notice of foreclosure, mrs elizabeth wrixon, mr john o'brien, henry wrixon

Document. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Nicholai A for Irving H, Kerang, re Hughes. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Martyn James re loan. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Barrett Henry, Runnymede East. 4 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from M? G Roche, Inspector of Liquor, Maryborough re Roche & Why. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Irving & Hughes. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Hawthorne & Brady. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Hawthorne D, Kerang. 8 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Sterry D C re case. 9 - 1886 - Letter from Mendell W, Melbourne re Lazarus B. 10 - 1886 - Letter from Moore Hugh H, Omagh, Ireland re Spittal F? J. 11 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Sterry D C re Trestrail.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, nicholai a, hughes, martyn james, barrett henry, roche m? g, why, bennett & co, irving, hawthorne, brady, hawthorne d, sterry d c, mendell w, lazarus b, moore hugh h, spittal f? j

Document. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Stirling J A?, Bank of New South Wales, Castlemaine re De Garis loan (by executors of the late Stewart D). Mentions Pentreath Mrs. 2 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Pentreath W T? re loan. 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co, Melbourne re Sterry v Trestrail. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Holloways loan. 5 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co re Sterry v Trestrail. 6 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Sterry D C. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Mills Benjamin, Solicitor, 181 Swanston St Melbourne re Mead Jas. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & CO re Lazarus v Lazarus.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, stirling j a, de garis, stewart d, pentreath mrs, pentreath w t?, bennett & co, sterry, trestrail, holloways, sterry d c, mills benjamin, mead jas, lazarus.

Document. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Dunlop A Geo re Sharpe. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Symonds E, Treasury, Melbourne re Baird J O compensation. To Quick J? Dr. 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Mendell W re Affidavit. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Mills B, 181 Swanston Street, Melbourne re Meade Jas insolvency. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Cameron James deceased. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Mendell W, Melbourne re Lazarus B deceased. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Sterry v Trestrail. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Irving & Hughes. 9 - 1886 - Letter from Motteram & Hyett, Solicitors, McCrae Street, Sandhurst re Brown & Sharpe.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, dunlop a geo, sharpe, symonds e, baird j o, quick j? dr, mendell w, mills b, meade jas, bennett & co, cameron james, lazarus b, sterry, trestrail, irving, hughes, motteram & hyett, brown

Document. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett & Co re Hawthorne & Brady. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Morrow Thomas, Inglewood. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Thomson W. B. Solicitor, Bairnsdale re Smith & Butler to Seeber. 4 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Dunlop A Geo re Martyn. 5 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Connelly T. J. 6 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Hawthorne D, Kerang. 7 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Connelly T. J. re Koondrook. 8 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Connelly T. J. re Martyn. 9 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly to Brown Frank re Turner & Mossop.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, hawthorne, brady, morrow thomas, thomson w b. smith, butler, seeber, dunlop a g, martyn, connelly t j, hawthorne d, koondrook, bennett attenborough wilks & connelly, brown frank, turner, mossop

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Connelly T Jefferson re Brady V Hawthorne. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Cleverdon & Westley, Solicitors, 60 Chancery Lane, Melbourne re Turner to Mossop 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co re Hawthorne & Brady. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Crawford W H Ballarat. 5 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Hawthorne David, Melbourne. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, 102 Collins St West, Melbourne re Hindle Hy, deceased.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, connelly t jefferson, brady, hawthorne, cleverdon & westley, turner, mossop, bennett & co, crawford w h, hawthorne david, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, hindle hy

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Cuthbert & Co, Law & General Stationers, Lithographers & Printers, 55 Chancery Lane. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn re Hawthorne & Brady. 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett 7 Co re Hawthorne & Brady. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Solicitors, Melbourne re Nelson C to Executors of Havlin, deceased. 5 - 1886 - Letter form Holding Palph. 6 - 1886 - Letter form Thomson W B, Solicitor, Bairnsdale re Butterfield Thomas. 7 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co re Hawthorne & Brady. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn re Thomas John, deceased. 9 - 1886 - Letter from Holloway Edward, Kerang re loan. 10 - 1886 - Post card from De Garis E C, Ballarat.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, cuthbert & co, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, hawthorne, brady, bennett & co, nelson c, havlin, holding ralph, thomson w b, butterfield thomas, thomas john, holloway edward, de garis e c

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Cohuna Irrigation Trust, Secretary's Office, Wee-Wee-Rup. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Motteram & Hyett, Solicitors, McCrae Street, Sandhurst to Denovan W D C Esq. (William Dixon Campbell Denovan), Town Clerk re Manley Edith. 3 - 1886 - Letter form Bennett & Co, Melbourne re Purves, deceased. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Merrifield G, Solicitor, Castlemaine re Queen? V Telampo. 5 - 1886 - Post card from De Garis E C, Castlemaine. 6 - 1886 - Post card torn in half.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, cohuna irrigation trust, motteram & hyett, denovan w d c, manley edith, bennett & co, purves, merrifield g, queen?, telampo, de garis e c

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Meudell George D re Holloway. Letterhead - Horrell & Meudell (R F Horrell & G D Meudell), Auditors, Secretaries and Accountants, 10 Market Buildings, William Street, Melbourne. 2 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph 4 Nov 1886 for Merrifield S from Bruce T?, St Kilda asking, 'Where is Penders blackboy Pompey'. Reply from Merrifield mentions 'Pompey was remanded Melbourne on Friday last. Enquire at watch tower there.' Also mentions 'I don't know whether Mr Bruce is Pompey's friend or Caesars (Mr Penders)' on Attached handwritten note dated 4 Nov 1886. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Williams A M, Solicitor, 28 Queen Street, Melbourne re Bagot? V Budden 4 - 1886 - Post card to Suffern? Mr William James, Elmore from Lester A,A. Land Officer, re 255 acres, Egerton. Mentions Wardens Court, Sandhurst. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Drues W T, 19 Temple Court re A'Becketts fees. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Barrett Henry, Runnymede East.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, meudell george d, holloway, horrell & meudell, merrifield s, bruce t?, penders, pompey, caesars, williams a m, bagot, budden, suffern mr william james, lester a a, drues w t, a'becketts, barrett henry

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Documents. 1 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co re Sterry & Trestrail. 2 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co re Sterry & Trestrail. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Solicitors, Melbourne. Kilbride re Brown & Ellison. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, 102 Collins Street West, Melbourne re Hawthorne & Brady. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Lamont Herbert, Solicitor, Inglewood re Gibbins.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, bennett & co, sterry, trestrail, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, kilbride, brown, ellison, hawthorne, brady, lamont herbert, gibbins.

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Arnoldt D W, Wedderburn. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Cuthbert & Co, Law & General Stationers, Lithographers & Printers, 55 Chancery Lane. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Pickles Thos P, Railway Workshops, Newport. Letter has letterhead - G F Pickles & Sons, Carriage Manufacturing Company Limited. Manufacturers of Carriages, Buggies, Pleasure & Business Wagons. Importers of American and English Carriage Materials. Sandhurst. Repository & Show Rooms, Latrobe Street West, Melbourne. 4 - 1886 - Letter to Spence James, Gannawarra, Cohuna from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Solicitors, Albion Chambers, Sandhurst. Also contains returned reply from Spence James. Mentions Geugnagel Charles, Baker, Sandhurst. 5 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Kilbride Peter, Rochester to Wilkinson, Albion Chambers re Brown & Ellison case. 6 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Bennett & Co, Market St re Sterry & Trestrail.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, arnoldt d w, cuthbert & co, pickles thos p, g f pickles & sons, spence james, bennett attenborough wilks & connelly, geugnagel charles, kilbride peter, wilkinson, brown, ellison, bennett & co, sterry, trestrail

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Post Office and Telegraph Department, General Post Office, Melbourne to Messrs Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Albion Chambers, Sandhurst. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Arnoldt D G, Wedderburn. 3 - 1886 - Letter from O'Reilly D, George Hotel, St Kilda. 4 - 1886 - Post card from Langtree C W, Secretary for Mines and Water Supply. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Dru?? W T, 19 Temple Court re Lazarus v Lazarus. 6 - 1886 - Letter from C ?, Raywood re Gow from Kamarooka. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Solicitors, Melbourne to Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Solicitors, Melbourne to Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Solicitors, Albion Chambers, Sandhurst re Sterry v Trestrail.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, post office & telegram dept, bennett attenborough wilks & connelly, arnoldt d g, o'reilly d, george hotel, langtree c w, dru?? w t, lazarus, gow, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, sterry, trestrail

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Malleson, England & Stewart, 24 Queen Street, Melbourne re Dr Brierley. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Reid Jas, Raywood re his arrest on the 2nd Oct and fine on the 4th Oct. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Gibbins Alice, Inglewood. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Morrow Thomas, General Mercantile, Auctioneer, Stock Station & Estate Salesman, Inglewood re Gibbins. 5 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Harrison J S & Co. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, 102 Collins Street West, Melbourne re Webb v Holmes White & Co. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, 102 Collins Street West, Melbourne re Sterry v Trestrail. 8 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Blackburn Jas, Heathcote, re case at Heathcote.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, malleson, england & stewart, brierley dr, reid jas, gibbins alice, morrow thomas, gibbins, harrison j s & co, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, webb, holmes white & co, sterry, trestrail, blackburn jas

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Postcard from Highett, McLaughlin & Simpson, Solicitors, Melbourne stating that they are about to open a branch of their business at 60 & 62 Moorabood Street, Geelong, under the management of Simpson, Mr H W C. Dated the 22nd day of October 1886. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Thomas S Harrison & Co, 24 Little Collins St East, Melbourne re McClean. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Davey W J, Proprietor, Observer Office, Kerang. 4 - 1886 - Letter from McKee R M, Koondrook Irrigation Trust, Koondrook re appointment of jobs. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, 102 Collins St, Melbourne re Sterry v Trestrail.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, highett mclaughlin & simpson, simpson mr h w c, thomas s harrison & co, mcclean, davey w j, observer office kerang, mckee r m, koondrook irrigation trust, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, sterry, trestrail

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Notelet from Spence James, Gannawarra. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Solicitors, Melbourne re Gibbins v Morrow. 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph to Dunlop A G from Connelly T Jefferson, Martins Hotel, Echuca. Re Nichol, Gray & Tamlyn? At Byrne & Houlihan. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Mann Thos, Victoria Stores, Latrobe re loan from Mrs Kay. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Gibbins Alice, Inglewood, dated 18 Nov 1886 to Connelly T J Esq, Solicitor, Sandhurst. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Crabbe & Kirby, Solicitors, Sandhurst dated 18 Nov 1886 to Messrs Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Solicitors re De Garis. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Meyer J, Myers Flat re Donnellan v Meyer.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, spence james, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, gibbins, morrow, dunlop a g, connelly t jefferson, nichol gray & tamlyn, byrne & houlihan, mann thos, kay mrs, gibbins alice, crabbe & kirby, de garis, meyer j, donnellan

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Motteram & Hyett, Solicitors, McCrae Street, Sandhurst re City Council Masonic Hall. Mentions Temperance Fire Brigade. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Office of Titles regarding Certificate of Title Vol. 1694, Fol. 338627 and Vol. 1228, fol. 245466. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Office of Titles re Woods to Lake & Knape. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Melbourne to Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Sandhurst re Sterry v Trestrail?cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, motteram & hyett, city council masonic hall, temperance fire brigade. office of titles, woods, lake & knape, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, bennett attenborough wilks & connelly, sterry, trestrail?

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Jenkins & Barger, General Blacksmiths, Horse-Shoers & Agricultural Implement Makers, Leichardt and Bridgewater re McClean. 2 - 1886 - Letter from D Hughes re Adams & Maxwell?. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Crawford W H, 28;7 Clarence St, Sydney. 4 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Portland re McKay. 5 - 1886 - Letter from The London Chartered Bank of Australia re Barwick J. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Bray R J, 19 Lily Street, Sandhurst re his cousin Bray Thomas, deceased. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Inglewood - Gooding. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Registrar of Titles re Gooding.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, jenkins & barger, mcclean, hughes d, adams, maxwell, crawford w h, mckay, the london chartered bank o australia, barwick j, bray r j, bray thomas, gooding, register of titles

Document. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Office of Titles re McKinstry. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Crabbe & Kirby Solicitors, Sandhurst. Re Gunn & Reid. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn re White J E, deceased. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Motteram & Hyett Solicitors, McCrae Street Sandhurst re McClean Edward To Bendigo Bdg Socy. Mentions Rumble Mrs/ 5 - 1886 - Postcard from Langtree C W, Secretary for Mines and Water Supply. 6 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Connelly T Jefferson re Tragowel costs.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, mckinstry, crabbe & kirby, gunn, reid, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, white j e, motteram & hyett, mcclean edw, bendigo bdg socy, rumble mrs, langtree c w, mines & water supply, connelly t jefferson

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Brown G Harp--? 2 - 1886 - Letter from Morrow Thomas, General Mercantile, Auctioneer, Stock Station & Estate Salesman, Inglewood. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn, Melbourne. 4 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph re McClean. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Office of Titles - Gibbs Rich - Registrar of Titles. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn re Brierley Dr. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Scott Henry, Cooma Via Tatura re Scott David, Deceased. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Merrifield G, Solicitor, Castlemaine re Best & North Beehive Co. 9 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn re Budd H H. 10 - 1886 - Postcard from Inspector of Accounts, to Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly, Sandhurst.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, brown g harp?, morrow t, bennett attenborough wilks & nunn, mcclean, gibbs r, brierley dr, scott h, scott d, merrifield g, best & north beehive co, budd h h

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop - Legal Papers. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Tierney Bridget, Moorabbee Hotel re licensing case. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Harrison Thomas S re McClean. 3 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Pickles T P re costs. 4 - 1886 - Letter from Crabbe & Kirby, Solicitors, Sandhurst re Reid & Gunn. 5 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Connelly to Ellis F Esq., Clerk of Courts, Eaglehawk re Bruce v Ellis. 6 -6 1886 - Letter to Bennett & Co, Sandhurst re Hawthorne b Brady. 7 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from McClean G re Flight. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Hughes D T re Adams & Maxwell.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, tierney b, moorabee hotel, harrison thomas s, mcclean, pickles t p, crabbe & kirby, reid, gunn, bennett attenborough, wilks & connelly, ellis f , bennett & co, hawthorne, brady, mcclean g, flight, hughes d, adams, maxwell

Documents. Connelly, Tatchell & Dunlop. 1 - 1886 - Letter from Paterson G W, Secretary for Lands re Neale W lease. 2 - 1886 - Letter from Buddeu A H, Sandhurst. 3 - 1886 - Letter from Taylor F, Decorator, House Painter, Paper Hanger, Sign Writer, High Street, Eaglehawk re apprentice. 4 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Tierney B, Heathcote. 5 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Reid James, Raywood. 6 - 1886 - Letter from Harrison Thomas S re McClean. 7 - 1886 - Letter from Davey, Flack & Co, Public Accountants re McClean of Bridgewater. Mentions Harrison T S. 8 - 1886 - Letter from Bennett, Attenborough, Wilks & Nunn. 9 - Letter from Buddeu A H. 10 - 1886 - Post Office Telegraph from Tierney B, Heathcote.cottage, miners, connelly, tatchell & dunlop, paterson g w, neale w, buddeu a h, taylor f, tierney b, reid james, harrison thomas s, mcclean, davey, flack & co, harrison t s, bennett, attenborough, wilks & nunn