our property to the public, still non-
-sideration it is matter of greater mo-
-ment than it at first would appear.
In the simple matter of rescinding goods from England, small public thoroughfare could enable the blind to note the quantity received into our godown, which might materially affect our market by depressing prices. By our Marine Lots King & private, we might receive any amount of cargo into our Godown within a short time, producing any of the bad effects such an undue exercise would inevitably bring about.
On the other hand, as a matter of public utility and comfort, it is unquestionable, and our doing so would not shake our property more, but could form hope that the Hongkong Government would consider whether the interests of the mercantile community or those of the public are most important. In Manila the public promenade is without the sea.
See no reason why it should not be the case at Hongkong. Such is our view of the matter, which we submit with all deference to the Hongkong Government. Much might be adduced against the proposed plan as interfering with vested interests, but space will not allow. At present we have contracted for a sea wall for $2000. If the proposed plan be carried out, and the cost of our frontage be $400, we could willingly pay half; but if it exceeded this sum, then we consider it would be fair for the Government to bear the other half.
Page 394
85
...