135
No. 11
95
HONGKONG.
REPORT ON THE RESUMPTION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE TAIPINGSHAN DISTRICT
IN THE CITY OF VICTORIA.
No. 102.
Laid before the Legislative Council by Command of
His Excellency the Governor.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
HONGKONG, 6th March, 1895.
SIR,-Now that the amounts to be awarded in respect of certain properties resumed by the Government under The Taipingshan Resumption Ordinance, 1894, have been decided, I have the honour to submit for the information of His Excellency the Governor the following report.
2. In accordance with the instructions contained in C.S.O. 288, I at once, with as little interference with the work in hand and the ordinary routine work of the department, had the plans prepared, and other information collected, that I deemed desirable for deciding the amounts to be offered by Government in respect of the various properties concerned,
3. This was, of course, a work of some magnitude, and as the claims rapidly came in after the appointment of the Board of Arbitration, a great deal of my time during the last three months has been devoted to the consideration of these claims and attendance before the arbitrators.
4. The total number of claims, excluding those by others than owners, received, was 77, involving 118 distinct Inland Lots and 417 houses. The total area of private property resumed being 6.25 acres. 5. I attach a tabular statement shewing the number of the claim, the lot number, the area of property, the number of houses, the amount claimed, the amount offered, the amount awarded, and the Crown rent payable by the late Lessee in respect of each claim.
6. In many cases, the amounts of the claims were altered on being referred to the Board, and the particulars furnished by the claimants were incomplete, compared with those they afterwards tendered to the Board, which accounts, in some cases, for the difference between the amounts offered and those awarded. In some cases, however, I was approached by the claimants, after an offer had been made, with a view to settlement without going before the Board, and as will be seen from the tabular state- ments, I was able under the authority of C.S O. 43 to obtain that object in several instances.
7. The total number of claims-
329
(a) In which the Government offer was.accepted, was 33.
(b) In which a settlement subject to no order as to costs was effected without going to the
Board, was 6, leaving
(c) 39 claims dealt with by the Board.
8. The following statement shews the amounts claimed, offered, accepted, or awarded in each of the above classifications, (excluding the Tung Wa Hospital claim)
(a) Claimed $297,577, accepted $244,797.
(b) Claimed $94,850, offered $71,444, accepted $74,700.
(c) Claimed $624,773, offered $363,524, awarded $443,600.
9. The Board were therefore only called upon to decide the value of the properties resumed in 39 claims in which the amount claimed was $624,773, offered $363,524, awarded $443,600.
The difference in the amounts offered and awarded being $80,076, or 21% more than the Government offered.
10. Costs were awarded to the claimants in 24 cases, against the claimants in two cases, and no order was made as to costs in the remaining cases.
11. The costs, including those of the arbitration, will no doubt bear a considerable proportion to the difference between the amounts offered and those awarded, and it is to be regretted that in several instances the claimants did not approach the Government with a view to settlement for amounts approximately near those awarded.
12. The only claims, which I wish to draw especial attention to, are numbers 8 and 14 and 77; the first was for a ruined temple in Taipingshan Street, the second for the premises occupied as a school by the Italian Sisters, and the last for a chapel belonging to the London Mission.
95
13. In each of these cases, exceptional terms were claimed on account of the special nature of the occupation, and in the case of the temple on account of the "sacredness of the site." And I would state that I did not feel justified in using the authority granted me in C.S.O. 34 to take such matters into consideration in attempting to settle the claims by going beyond the value of the properties ascertained from comparison with the adjoining properties.