"addressed to Mr. D'Almada for the information of Mr. Johnston, states that the Land is liable to forfeiture if not built on within 6 months from the date of its being granted!
b. Mr Webster is called upon by the Land office (vide letter from Mr Tarrant of that Department, of the 26½ November 1841, quoted in Mr Webster's letter of 19th May 1842), to remove his buildings then laying and to take away some rubbish on the site of the Road, the direction of which it appears had been altered in consequence of the creation of a Police station. He was also told that he might cut away from the Hill, which seems to be 36 feet in height, his Quarry, and so obtain the same extent of ground previously granted. Mr Webster consequently pulled down his walls and cut away from the Hill, and it is but fair to infer that these measures may have materially retarded the progress of his Buildings.
— On the 2nd December 1842, Sir Henry Pottinger returned to Hongkong, and on the 14th of January 1843, Mr Wacam, his Private Secretary, wrote to inform Mr Webster that the transfer of Captain Meik's ground to him would not be recognised by Her Majesty's Government, as Captain Meik had not fulfilled the terms upon which the ground had been granted; and eventually on the 9th January, 1843, the Chief Magistrate informed Mr Webster that his Buildings were to be stopped from the following morning, in consequence of Instructions to that effect from Sir Henry Pottinger, and they were stopped accordingly.
7. The Buildings erected by Captain Meik and Mr Webster are at this moment on the ground. The ground is close under Cantonment Hill; it is a narrow slip and of no use to the Military: it is occupied by Contractors and Carpenters belonging to the Engineer Department, to whom I can assign equally convenient locations for their purposes.
Page 180
Page 181
6
The Despatches from my Predecessors to which I have made reference in the second Paragraph of this despatch, will have informed Your Lordship of their views of this case; but I may add that Mr. Webster used his best endeavours to complete the Buildings, which he states would have been finished within ten days of the time previously agreed upon; that he had the transfer registered with the approbation of the then head of the Government, Mr Johnston, who merely recognized the transaction transfer without at all granting the ground.
More than this, I do think in common equity Mr Webster should either have the ground restored to him or be indemnified for his outlay; and this conclusion I more readily come to, from being informed that nearly 9 tenths of the owners of Lots did not fulfil the terms of their agreement of building.