Page
7
December 8, 1897.]
-letter concluded-"The lots are situated on the west of the Peak tramway line and in close proximity to the Union Church. The congre- gation hopes that the terms and conditions will be the same as those on which the Union Church site was sold to the Presbyterian community." On the same day the Director of Public Works replied that His Excellency the Governor approved of the lots being put up for auction on certain conditions. I made use of Mr. Lemm's figures in the letter sent to Mr. J. E. Sassoon with a view of his advancing a large sum of money on those two lots of ground.
In answer to further questions witness said the financial difficulties were with the Jewish community and not with himself. He never at any time communicated with the community what his plans were in regard to the whole of the lots. When he instructed Mr. Danby to apply for the land he did so partly for the Jewish community and partly for himself. He instructed Mr. Danby to apply for the upper sites a few days after he applied for the lower lot.
6th December.
Mr. Francis resumed the cross-examination of Hou. E. R. Belilios, the defendant.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Did they ever complain that they were the aggrieved party in connection with your ap- plication for the land ?—They did.
And that they were considering whether they should take proceedings in reference to the matter ?-I beg your pardon; no proceedings.
Were they or were they not?-No.
Did they write to you in reference to the circumstances under which you had applied for the land P-I do not remember that they asked me for an explanation. I explained it.
Did Mr. Bell Irving, as one of the Directors of the Company, write to you asking for ex- planations on certain points? He did, and I answered him.
What was it you referred to in the extract I have just read?—It was a memorandum showing that I had applied for the land before they did.
Mr. Pollock-That had reference to the two upper lots and not the lower lot.
Mr. Francis-Did you not tell us that Mr. Danby had recommended you to purchase and apply for those upper lots to be put up for sale - Yes,
Did he call your attention to the fact that the Government was going to put them up at cheaper rates than formerly ?-In reference to everything in Kennedy Road and not in refer- ence to the two upper lots.
Mr. Danby did not ever urge you about June or July to purchase either 1,381 or the two lots above?—No; it was solely and purely my own suggestion.
Witness-In reference to my letter of the 3rd July to Mr. Silas asking that the other trustees should attend the sale I said on Saturday that as they did not attend the sale I was under the impression that they had given up the idea of Mr. Francis then continued reading wit- purchasing the property and that I thought I ness's letter to Mr. Bell Irving of the bought it for myself. I meant that I thought 30th July. It stated that witness tola I had bought the whole portion for myself and Mr. Danby sometime in July to apply for that they did not want any portion. No plans the land at once. In so instructing Mr. were sent to me by Mr. Danby; they are still in Danby he knew at one time it had been his office. I have never received any sketch intended to apply a part of it for the plans or reports containing suggestions for the synagogue. Mr. Bell Irving's letter, in reply, method of utilizing the land. Mr. Danby has said that he had seen Mr. Hooper on the sub- made sketch plans, but they are in hisject and he enclosed a statement of facts in office. He prepared an elevation plan. connection with the matter as well as an extract I have seen no plan or sketch showing from Palmer and Turner's diary, and from how the ground might best be utilized. No these it would appear that the Land Investment other architect has acted for me besides Mr. Company were the aggrieved party. He there Danby in reference to this ground. Mr. Danby fore asked for particulars as to the date on has prepared plans to show how the ground which Mr. Danby recommended witness to was to be cut and supported by retaining apply for the land and whether Mr. Danby had walls. I do not remember whether they were informed him that Mr. Chater, on the morning pencil sketches or finished plans. I first of the 16th June, decided to apply for the land saw those plans long before our meeting, I on behalf of the Inyestment Company. In do not remember in what month, but it was reply Mr. Belilios wrote the letter enclosing Mr after I purchased the ground on the 30th July, Danby's memorandum and added that Mr. 1896; it was very shortly after, but I cannot fix Danby did not recommend him to buy the land the month. I do not think it was in September. and that it was purely and solely the writer's I have none of those plans in my posses-idea. For years past whenever walking along sion. I saw a plan, whether a finished one or not I do not know, when we discussed the question in Mr. Danby's office on the 15th March. I think I had seen the plans before that date, but I cannot say for certain, because I called to see him several times to see how he was going on. It must have been this year when I saw a finished plan; it was about January. The plans I saw included all the three lots, and showed terraces, &c. They did not leave any portion for the synagogue. There was no portion marked out for a synagogne. The plans related only to my property. Before the 15th March I did not have a report from Mr. Danby as to the cost of building the retaining walls, &c. I did see unfinished plans before January for utilizing the ground. I cannot recollect the date. Mr. Danby did not give me any written report as to utilizing the ground before the purchase; it was all conversation.
Mr. Francis-In a letter on the 31st July, you wrote to Mr. Bell Irving, one of the Directors of the Land Investment Company
In reply to your letter of the 29th inst., I enclose herewith Mr. Danby's memorandum in reference to the sites." What was it you enclosed, if you never had anything in writing on the subject?
Kennedy Road it struck him that the person who bought the mutilated land would of neces- sity have to buy the upper lots. When he gave Mr. Danby instructions to apply for the lower lot he said that at some future date he would instruct him to apply for the site overlooking it.. The object was to get the Jewish community to build a synagogue there.
Sometime in the latter part of May it came to his ears that some of the members of the Jewish community were averse to have the synagogue on that ground. It then occurred to him that he would be the purchaser of the whole of the property. At the beginning of June he instructed Mr. Danby to apply for the land, and the application was in the hands of Mr. Cooper before the Land Investment Company approached him on the subject. The answer of Mr. Bell Irving was dated 3rd August, 1896, and it concluded by stating that the Company would not bid for the property in question.
Mr. Francis-In that letter Mr. Bell-Irving says that after examining and comparing Palmer and Turner's statement and Mr. Hooper's and Mr. Danby's statement the Company had come to the conclusion that Mr. Danby had gone to you on the 17th to apply for the land, be Witness-I forget what it had reference to. having first heard that the Land Investment Do you remember that the Land Investment Company were going to do it. The question I Company considered that you had treated them have to ask you is this. Having heard that very unfairly with reference to the application? letter read do you still persist in your state- Not unfairly. Mr. Bell Irving's letter will te!!ment that Mr. Danby did not suggest in the you so if you get his answer to mine.
first instance that you should send in an ap- plication for the land?
Don't be in a hurry. Did not the Land Investment Company in the first instance com- plain that you had treated them badly in reference to the application for this piece of land They did not complain that I treated them badly.
Witness-No, emphatically not. His Lordship-Those are the two upper lots P-Yes.
Mr. Pollock-After reading the letter your Lordship will understand what this letter com-
445
plains of: it was simply a question concerning the architects.
In answer to further questions witness said- In a letter dated 23rd December, 1896, Mr. Jacob Sassoon made a special request that a tablet with a certain inscription should be put up in the new synagogue. I objected to that and I resigned my position as trustee and re- fused to have anything to do with the new synagogue. Mr. Silas invariably came to me asking me to keep open the site as they might be able to take it. I agreed to wait becausé I was very anxious for a synagogue to be built in the colony. I did not agree to keep open the site for twelve months. It was not in my power to do so because I had agreed with the Government in regard to all these three sites that I should spend $28,000 in erecting dwellings, to make them habitable, consequently rateable, within eighteen months. If I had agreed to give the community twelve months out of that it would have been impossible to erect those buildings and make my levels within the remaining six months. I agreed to spend $12,000 on the lower lot and $8,000 on each of the two upper lots.
Mr. Francis-Have you spent a cent on one of those upper lots yet?
Witness. Not a cent."
Have you obtained from the Government any extension of your time for building ?-Yes, and I found myself in a fix.
Have you obtained a similar extension with reference to 1,381 ?—Yes, with reference to all three lots.
What date did you apply for the extension ?— Quite recently. I cannot remember writing a letter other than that of the 8th March to Mr. Silas agreeing to keep the land for twelve months.
What arrangements did you refer to in the letter which you wrote stating that your ar- rangements were so far advanced that it would be impossible for you to make any concession ? Financial arrangements. Getting money ready to build the houses.
What arrangements ?-Raising money by converting my securities.
Had you then realised securities to raise money ?-No, certainly not.
And do you think it was the truth you stated in the letter ?—Yes, quite true.
BO
Contining, witness said-I wrote to Mr. Bell Irving that I wanted an approach from the lower to the upper lots, and he circulated the letter amongst the Directors of the Land In- vestment Company, and Mr. Ezekiel, who was one of the Directors, knew of it. At the meeting of the 13th March the trustees proposed to give me a right of way. They were willing to take 25,000 square feet. The question of the cost of building a retaining wall was broached and I was prepared to pay half the cost if the Jewish community paid the other half. An estimate of the cost was made and it amounted to $9,000. The trustees were willing to pay on $1,000. After the division of the ground on lot 1,381 had been agreed to about $23,000 square feet remained for me.
Mr. Francis-If you had undertaken to pay the whole cost of the retaining wall the matter would have been settled?
Witness-Readily, I think.
It was your demand that they should pay half the cost that caused the whole affair to fall through ?-Naturally.
Whose proposal was it that a little bit of the other lot should be thrown in ?—The architects', I think.
Re-examined by Mr. Pollock-In the letter I wrote to Mr. Bell Irving, and which was cir- culated amongst the Directors of the Land In- vestment Company, of whom Mr. Ezekiel was oue, I said that I wanted an approach as I' should be using the upper lots in conjunction with the lower lot. I have paid for the land and since the purchase I have paid for bound- ary stones and the Crown rents out of my own pocket. I have often verbally discussed the question of the laying out of the land with Mr. Danby,
Mr. W. Danby, civil engineer and architect, said that in 1891 Mr. J. S. Moses, of the firm of Messrs. E. D. Sassoon, and Co., interviewed him abunt a new synagogne. Witness suggested a site in the Kennedy Road to the west of the Union Church-the same site as had been previously contemplated for the Belilios Public