Folios 201-202: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 2. Richard Hall, Samuel Peach,...

Folios 201-202: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 2. Richard Hall, Samuel Peach, F Turnly, James Drummond, George Sparks, [East India Company], Canton, to Captain Dilkes, 18 February 1800. Copy letter. Letter in relation to the incident on the night of 11 February and the subsequent correspondence between Mr Hall and Lieutenant Mayo on the subject. Since Lieutenant Mayo reported that he was proceeding to Lintin[g], the authors have received an indication from Chinqun (the security merchant of the Abergavenny) that he was extremely concerned about the situation: not only is it likely to be taken up by the government, but because the wounded man was carried on board the Earl of Abergavenny for medical assistance, the ship, and therefore the [East India] Company are also implicated. The Chinese have complained to the Mandarin of the Whampoa district that the incident took place on the Abergavenny. The Company denies all involvement in the affair. They also warn that all requests of the Chinese government must be adhered to, and that the schooner should not proceed to Whampoa. As this matter is so serious, they recommend that the Officer who fired the shot should be detained.

Folios 203-208: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 3. Richard Hall, Samuel Peach, F Turnly, James Drummond, George Sparks [East India Company], Canton, to Captain Dilkes, 21 February 1800. Letter to summarise the demands of the Chinese government following receipt of an official notice via the Hong merchant ship. Shortly after Lieutenant Mayo's departure they became aware that a petition had been delivered to the Pou Yu, or Mandarin of the Whampoa district by the owner of the Chinese boat. The detail is set out in the beginning of the Hoppo's Chop. There is also representation from the brother of a Chinese man named Leu-a-chu stating that this man was in the boat at the time of the accident and that he had fallen overboard during the struggle. It is not known whether he is alive or dead. It is stated that the incident took place on Captain Wordsworth's boat, which is strongly refuted. Mr Hall had attempted to defuse the situation and avoid escalation. At this point, they sent a letter (letter 1) to Captain Dilkes. Late on 18 February, Puankhequa (the Head Merchant) was summoned to appear next morning before the Pon-yu in company with Chinqua. Mr Hall assured him that they would cooperate in any inquiry, and Puankequa recommended detention of the man who fired the shot and the man alleged to be involved in the overboard incident. On 19 February, Chinqua reported that the Pon Yu had agrees that a translator would be appointed and that the river would be dragged to find the body. They have received a report from Mr Crichton, the surgeon who rendered assistance, that the wounded man might survive if he is allowed to continue treating him. A written statement of the facts was drawn up on 19 February (letter 5 enclosed). The Company is anxious that nothing should interfere with its trade. The Hong merchants were subsequently summoned to a meeting and presented with an edict from the Hoppo. The Chinese government is demanding that both the man who fired the shot and the man involved in the struggle should appear to answer charges, and that a basket or baskets of vegetables taken from the Chinese sampan be returned. The East India personnel will represent Captain Dilkes. They note that the depositions contain several contradictions, that the hour of the incident strongly suggests that it was a crime, that the cutting of the cable endangered lives, but the charges must be answered to ensure justice is done. Further details are given about possible arrangements for the trial.

Folios 209-210: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 4. Copy of edict of Ky Hoppo of the province of Canton, addressed to Puankequa and Chinqua, merchants trading with foreign nations, 26 May 1800 (1st month of the 5th year of the reign of Kia King). A man named Shue-tray-ling has complained on 24 February that when directing a hire boat on the afternoon of 17 February he had difficulty passing an English vessel captained by Captain Wordsworth. Those on board the English vessel fired on the Chinese and wounded a Chinese sailor. A passenger Leu-a -shee fell into the water and has not been seen since. Further details include description of a struggle resulting in the man falling overboard. The edict requires that the two men (who fired the shot and caused the man to fall overboard) should appear before the Pun yu.

Folios 211-212: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 5. Copy of declaration from the Committee of Supercargoes for Affairs of the Honourable East India Company in China, regarding the incident of cutting the cable of one of the ships and the subsequent wounding of a Chinese sailor. Make it clear that they are not responsible for actions of His Majesty's Officers, and the incident did not involve any ship of the Company.

Folios 213-214: enclosure with folios 184-187. Letter 6. Copy letter. Richard Hall, Samuel Peach, F Turnly, James Drummond, George Sparks, [East India Company], Canton, to Captain Dilkes, 23 February 1800. Notifying Captain Dilkes of three demands: that the two sailors involved in the incident be brought to answer charges against them, and that the basket of vegetables taken from the Chinese sampan should be returned. Suggest a detailed report is made in preparation.