592
4. The decision now under consideration has been arrived at under like con- ditions as the first, without hearing us, and Mr. Secretary Lyttelton refuses to state the reasons put forward against our claim.
5. This refusal compels me to bring to your notice the instructions to the Governor in the Charter of the Colony wherein he is commanded to do and execute all things that belong to his said office according to such laws as are now in force in the Colony, and as the laws in force provide for full and fair compensa- tion when rights granted in a Crown Lease have been taken away for a public purpose, and as the Award of $24,367 does not cover the loss of rents no compen- sation for difference in values between the Lot as a Marine Lot and when con- verted into an Inland Lot by the reclamation in front of it has been made, and therefore I submit that the Acting Governor has not only disregarded his instructions, but violated the laws in force in the Colony.
In order, however, to assist Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to settle the matter at issue without further reference, I would suggest that the proviso thought necessary by Her late Majesty's Government in 1857, be adopted, namely:"In no case should more be claimable as assessed damages than the amount realised by the sale of the new Lot."
7. The sale of the New Lot, as you are aware, realised $133,500.
8. Failing this assent it but remains for us to test the question of “ultra vires" of the Reclamation Ordinance, which according to a letter written by Charles S. Murdoch on the 14th December, 1901, under direction of the Secretary of State, ought to have been raised in the local Courts, aud may possibly now be raised if such a step should be thought expedient.
9. We did not deem it expedient to raise the question as we implicitly believed that justice would be done in respect of private rights taken away for a public purpose.
10. I shall feel obliged if Mr. Secretary Lyttelton will let me know at an early date his decision in the matter in order that I may communicate with my partner, Mr. Stephens, in Hongkong, if need arise.
A 9.
[27223/1904.]
THOMAS HOWARD, Esq.
I have, &c.,
(Sd). THOS. HOWARD.
DOWNING STREET,
9th August, 1904.
Mr.
SIR-I am directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelten to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 1st of August, in which you make further representations with regard to your claim to compensation from the Hongkong Government. Lyttelton is unable to admit that the Acting Governor has either disregarded his instructions or violated the laws in force in the Colony, and I would call your at- tention to the words of Section 7, Sub-section VI of the Praya Reclamation Ordinance, 1889, which expressly provides as follows:-"In case any lessee shall not signify his acceptance in the manner and within the time provided in sub- sections (II and III) of this section he shall have no claim to any compensation in respect of any depreciation of his Lot by reason of the said works, but the Governor may if he thinks fit award to him such a sum of money or such a Crown Lease of new land as he may in his absolute discretion think sufficient as and by way of compensation for any injury that such lessee may have sustained by the said works."