Claim 1 is exactly Continuous Functions on a Closed Interval are Riemann Integrable. Write I=∫abh(x)dx for the Riemann integral of Riemann Integrability on a Closed Interval: for every ε>0 there is δ>0 such that every Riemann sum of h over a tagged partition of mesh less than δ differs from I by less than ε.
Step 1 (measurability and integrability). Fix t∈R. By continuity, for each x∈[a,b] with h(x)>t there is δx>0 with h>t on (x−δx,x+δx)∩[a,b]; with G=⋃x(x−δx,x+δx) (union over such x), an open set, {x∈[a,b]:h(x)>t}=G∩[a,b]. Hence {x∈R:h~(x)>t} equals G∩[a,b] if t≥0 and (G∩[a,b])∪(R∖[a,b]) if t<0; in both cases a Borel set. The rays (t,∞) generate B(R): every open interval with rational endpoints is obtained from rays by countable set operations (e.g. (c,d)=(c,∞)∖⋂k≥1(d−1/k,∞)), and every open set is a countable union of such intervals by density of the rationals; so h~ is Borel measurable by the generator criterion there, and so is ∣h~∣=h~++h~− (positive and negative parts as in Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral). By Extreme Value Theorem on a Compact Interval, h attains a maximum and a minimum on [a,b], so M=sup[a,b]∣h∣ is a finite real number and ∣h~∣≤M1[a,b] pointwise. Since the simple function M1[a,b] has integral Mλ([a,b])=M(b−a) — Lebesgue measure assigns each interval its length — monotonicity (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral) gives ∫R∣h~∣dλ≤M(b−a)<∞, so h~ is integrable. This proves Claim 2.
Step 2 (reduction to a nonnegative integrand). Let k=h+M. Then k≥0 on [a,b] (since h≥−∣h∣≥−M there), and k is continuous on [a,b] (the sum of h and a constant, by limit arithmetic in Continuity on a Closed Interval). On the Riemann side we work directly with Riemann Integrability on a Closed Interval: every Riemann sum of k over a tagged partition equals the corresponding Riemann sum of h plus M(b−a), because ∑i(h(ξi)+M)(ti−ti−1)=∑ih(ξi)(ti−ti−1)+M(b−a); hence (with the same δ for each ε) k is Riemann integrable with ∫abk(x)dx=I+M(b−a). On the Lebesgue side, the zero extension of k is h~+M1[a,b], whose integral is ∫h~dλ+M(b−a) by linearity for integrable functions (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral). So Claim 3 for k implies Claim 3 for h, and we may assume h≥0.
Step 3 (sandwich, valid for every partition). Let P:a=t0<t1<⋯<tm=b be a partition, and let mi and Mi be the infimum and supremum of h on [ti−1,ti], so that the lower and upper sums are L(h,P)=∑imi(ti−ti−1) and U(h,P)=∑iMi(ti−ti−1). The nonnegative simple functions φ=∑imi1(ti−1,ti] and ψ=∑iMi1(ti−1,ti] satisfy ∫φdλ=L(h,P) and ∫ψdλ=U(h,P): the displayed representations need not be the standard representations of Simple Function and Its Integral (several i may share a value), but grouping the disjoint intervals (ti−1,ti] by value and using finite additivity of λ (from Measure, Measure Space, and Probability Measure) together with interval lengths gives exactly these sums. Pointwise
φ ≤ h~1(a,b] ≤ ψ,
since mi≤h≤Mi on [ti−1,ti]⊇(ti−1,ti]. Moreover ∫h~1(a,b]dλ=∫h~dλ: the difference h~−h~1(a,b]=h(a)1{a} is a simple function with integral h(a)λ({a})=0, since the interval [a,a] has length 0; apply linearity. Hence by monotonicity (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral),
L(h,P) ≤ ∫Rh~dλ ≤ U(h,P)for every partition P.
Step 4 (Darboux–Riemann bridge and conclusion). Let ε>0 and choose δ>0 as in Riemann Integrability on a Closed Interval for h and ε. By the Archimedean property pick a natural number m with (b−a)/m<δ and let P be the uniform partition ti=a+i(b−a)/m, of mesh less than δ. By the definition of the suprema Mi there are tags ξi∈[ti−1,ti] with h(ξi)>Mi−ε/(b−a); the corresponding Riemann sum S+=∑ih(ξi)(ti−ti−1) satisfies ∣S+−I∣<ε and
U(h,P)=i∑Mi(ti−ti−1) < S++b−aεi∑(ti−ti−1) = S++ε < I+2ε.
Symmetrically, by the definition of the infima mi there are tags ηi with h(ηi)<mi+ε/(b−a), giving L(h,P)>I−2ε. Combining with Step 3 applied to this particular P,
I−2ε < L(h,P) ≤ ∫Rh~dλ ≤ U(h,P) < I+2ε.
Since ε>0 was arbitrary, ∫Rh~dλ=I. Undoing the shift of Step 2 gives Claim 3 in general. ■