104
THE PROPOSED TYPHOON SHELTER.
GOVERNMENTS RE^LY TO THE
SHIPING FIRMS.
The correspondence regarding the Typhoon Shelter at Mongkokteni and the proposed tem. porary increase in light dues has been printed and will be laid on Thursday before the Legis- lative Council by command of H. E. the Governor.
THE BONGKONG WEEKLY PŘESS AND
received from Mr. Chamberlain when Secretary of State for the Colonies does not convey an accurate idea of the views expressed by him. In the last paragraph of the Despatch referred to he wrote:-
We note that the correspondence includes the Government's reply to the letter of the bip- ping Firms addressed to the Chamber of Com- merce on the 28 d June and forwarded by that body to the Government on the 3rd July with a covering letter in which it was stated that the Committee of the Chamber wished to associate themselves with the views of the Shipping Companies. Following is the reply returned by
the Government:-
Colonial Secretary's Office,
Hongkong, 25th July, 1908. SIE-I am directed to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 3rd instant with its enclosures. relative to the construction of & Typhron Shelter and the means of raising funds for the work.
2. Your Committee urge that a new Shelter is unnecessary and that Causeway Bay is suff. cient for all purposes. The Government is somewhat at a loss to understand this change of opinion on the part of the Committee of the Chember in view of their letter of the 16th of July, 1904, in which the provision of an addi- tional helter either at Mong Kok Tsui or Cheung Sha Wan was strongly advocated. A copy of the letter in question is appended for convenience of reference together with copy of a letter from the Typhoon Relief Committee dated the 25th of March, 1907, in which that Committee endorsed the proposal for a Shelter at Mong Kok Tsui. 1 append a list of the names of the Committee in question on which the Chamber of C mmerce was strongly repre. sented. It is to be noticed that Mr. W. J Gresson and Mr. D. R. Law, representing two of the largest Shipping Firms which now dis- sent from the proposal, were on the Committee. To make the record complete I am also to append the reports of the Public Works Committee who considered and reported on this question
in 1906 and 1907.
3. Judging by the speeches of un-official Members of Council in September last, and by other expressions of public opinion it would seem that the view now put forward by the Chamber is not shared by the community out- side the shipping interests. His Excellency on the occasion referred to endorsed the pledge given by his predecessor that Government would undertake the provision of an additional Shelter without delay, and the regrettable delay which has already occurred is due to circum- stances, as will be explained, over which the Government has had little or no control.
that 4. Assuming therefors
the large majority of the Community of Hongkong consider that the provision of an additional Typhoon Shelter is an urgent and paramount necessity, the first matter to be settled was its location and cost. Prolonged investigation into these two questions has been responsible for the greater part of the delay which has taken place, and finality was at last reaobed on the report of the Public Works Committee of the Legislative Council (No. I of 1908). It was then decided the reports of experts that the best site was Mong Kok Tsui, and that the scheme roposed by Mr. Boulton at an estimated cost 1 million dollars should be undertaken. His Excellency does not propose to re-open this discussion, which would merely result in further *delay.
5. Adverting now to your remarks regard. ing the deepening of Causeway Bay, I am to inform you that a tender has already been accepted for deepening the Southern portion of the Causeway Bay Shelter to a depth of 1 foot below low witer of ordinary Spring Tides and work will com venge on this at once,
Q
In this
6. The next question at issue is the means by which the funds required for the new Typhoon She'ter are to be raised. connection I am to point out that the quotation given in your letter under reply from & Despatch'
"I desire to add, that if at any time hereafter urgent necessity should ariss for increasing the general revenue, I should be prepared to consider any proposal for again raising the shipping dues, as I have no reason to think that the present charge has borne very hardly on the shipping interests.
7. In all the circumstances the Governor with the advice of the Executive Concil decided that the proposed temporary increase in Light Dues was a reasonable one for the purpose pro. posed, and that past experience showed that it would not injuriously affect the Port. His Excellency has, however, read with interest the facts you adduce to show that the conditions of the present day are not identical with those of the past and that in your view the experienos of the past may prove to some extent fallacious when applied to the conditions of today. He proposes therefore to limit the temporary in- crease to 2 cents instead of 24 cents per ton, and to exclude the cost of deepening Causeway Bay from the special fund towards which the additional dues are to be devoted.
8. His Excellency is not prepared to raise a loan for this work in view of the fact that inclusive of the Loan of 1902 the Colony has already raised a sum of £1,485,733 for Railway Construction and other purposes. The interests and sinking funds on these Loans will probably reach 10 per centum of the Colonial Revenue and in these circumstances no additional Loan is feasible, nor would it meet with the concurrence of the Secretary of tata. The proposal of your Committee to borrow from a local Bank at 6 per centum as an overdraft whatever funds are required to meet the excess of expenditure over the annual amount raised by the addition of a half cent Light Dues and an equivalent sum from Government Funds would, on the assump tion that the total cost amounted to $1,500,000 and was equally expended each year during a period of five years, result in a debt to Bank by the shipping interest of a sum of $857,285; (assuming that the half cent extra due would produce & sum of $40,000 per annum) to cancel this debt with continued payments of $40,000 per annum would involve the con- tinuance of the extra half cent for a further period of 73 years. His Excellency proposes in lieu of this that advances should be made by the Crown Agents or from the Colony's reserves at 4 per centum to meet the early deficits With the proposed increase of the Light Dues to 2 cents, the amount paid by the shipping interest would be $81,000 and the debt remaining to be extinguished by the shipping interest at the end of the 5 years construction period would be $394,808 which at the same rate of 2 cents would be extinguished in about 5 years. It is therefore calculated that the temporary increase in the Light Duss would extend over a total period of eleven years. His Excellency concurs in your view that the funds for the construction of the Shelter should be kept separate entirely from current Revenue and has recommended to the Secretary of State in this sense.
His Excellency is at the same time prepared to give the assuranos that the Government has no intention of continuing the proposed increase to Light Dues after the cost of the Typhoon Refuge has been met, and that this cost will be shared equally by the Funds of the Colony and the produce of the additional cent Light Does It must, however, be clearly understood that His Excellency cannot bind himself or his successors in office not to again |įncrease Light Dues should argent occasion arise, but in such a case a new Resolution would be proposed to the Legislative Council and the matter would be considered on its own merits,
I am, &o.,
F. HL MAY,
Colonial Secretary. The Secretary,
Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce
Arrangements have been concluded for the transportation of reliefs and time-expired men of the German garrisons in North China, via the South Manchuria Bailway and Siberia instead of via Suex as heretofore,
[August 8; 1908.
THE SHIPPING FIRMS' REJOINDER.
Hongkong, 5th August, 1908. To the Hon. Mr. F. H. May, C.M.O,
Colonial Secretary, SIB,-With reference to our letters of 23rd April and 23rd June last addressed to the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce on the subj-ot of the proposed typhoon harbour of refuge at Mong Kok Tsui, copies of which were forwarded by them to the Government, and to the last of which we have not yet officially received a copy of the Government's reply, although we notice a copy of same in this morning's Daily Press, we beg to state that we most emphatically protest against the resolution to be proposed in the Legislative Council on the 6th instant to raise the Light Dues lèviable on steamers entering this port from 1 cent to 2 cents per net register tou, for the purpose of of refage at Mong Kok Tsui at a cost of partly financing the scheme to build a harbour
$1,500,000,
From the oopy in the Daily Press of your letter to the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce replying to our communication of 23rd June last, we notice that the Govern. ment have made some ospital out of the fact that two members of the 1906 Tyhhoon Relief Committee, whose firms represent large ship- ping interests here and who are signatories to our letters of 23rd April and 23rd June last, acqui-sced in the recommendation made by that Committee to the Government that the harbour of refuge at Mong should be proceeded with at once.
Kok Tsui
While this statement is correct as far as it goes, we would direct the attention of the Government to the fact that the question of financing the proposed harbour of refuge at Mong Kok Tsui was never discussed by that Committee who understood that it was to be paid for by the Government out of the funds promised by them to the Relief Fund, but which were not required for that purpose.
Further we should like to state that the present proposal by the Government to spend $1,500,000. on a Harbour of Refuge at Mong Kok Tsui-half of which has to be provided by the Shipping Companies—is quite and had such proposals another matter, been made by the 1906 Typhoon Relief Com. mittee, it is safe to assume that both the gentle- men mentioned in your letter of 25th July last to the Hongkong General Chamber of Com- merce would have strongly protested against the proposal.
Bat putting that matter on one side, it has been again clearly demonstrated to us in the recent unfortunate typhoon of the 27th/28th July that there is no necessity for the construe- tion of so large and costly a harbour of refuge as that proposed by the Government.
With only 5 hours' notice from the Observa- tory of the approach of the typhoon within the 300 miles radius, comparatively little damage was done to small craft, and the loss that did oocar might have been greatly reduced had the Observatory been able to ascertain the near proximity of the storm, which they were apparently unable to do, judging from the fact that the black signals were not hoisted until 6 p.m. and that the guns were fired about 11 p.m.
the port. when the typhoon was actually upon
Further, we beg to state that we are prepared to prove :-
(a) That Causeway Bay refuge was not by any means fully doccupied by craft on the night of the late typhoon and that there was room for many more boats.
(b) That the Government's theory that there is always sufficient water at Causeway Bay in 's typhoon is misleading, for while this may be the case in the height of a typhoon we are prepared to prove that there was great congestion on the afternoon of the 27th July at the entrance to the refuge after the typhoon was signalled outside 300 miles*- . boats desiring to enter being prevented by the inability of those already in from moving further inshore owing to the shallowness of the refuge.
It has been hinted that it is the intention of the Government to fill in Causeway Bay refuge when the proposed Mong Kok Tauf’scheme is completed, and we should be glad to have the Governments surance thì thi sir côn t
Li 20 mah mar
Page 10Page 11