162
J
of $25.00 on the estimates in 1873, unfortunately I then found it did not appear in 1874.
appear in 1875, but in 1876 a vote was taken, on the suggestion of the Surveyor-General, for double that sum, namely $50,000, for the improvement of the water supply. However, none of that money was expended, and nothing was done during 1876 to effect that object. I find the professional assistance required for the proposed Tytam works survey was supplied to Mr. Price, and on the 24th October he wrote that he proposed commencing the survey on the 21st proximo, and that it would now be a matter of impossibility to complete it within the financial year.
With reference to the reservoir and the improvement of the water supply in that way, I find a letter dated the 27th August, 1875, in which he says:-- "During the rainy months of the year the great advantage of the conduit would be apparent in bringing into the town a supply practically unlimited.” As far as that is concerned, gentlemen, nothing gave me greater satisfaction on my arrival here than to carry out the intention of the Legislative Council and spend the $50,000 upon that work.
It was stated more than once that though the $50,000 had appeared upon the estimates, nevertheless, somehow or another, that and some other votes—votes for improving the water supply, for the sewage of the town, and for a gaol on a separate system—had not been expended. The consequence was that a despatch was written to me on the 28th May, 1879, by Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, which, as it is very short, I will read to you:--
I am not aware whether the $50,000 for water supply and $20,000 for sewerage in the Estimates for 1877 have been expended, or what has been done in reference to the $10,000 voted for the Gaol in the Estimates for 1878 and I shall be glad to be informed how much (if any) of these several sums is still in hand as part of the unexpended balance to credit of the Colony.
My answer was:--
I beg leave to point out that sums voted in the Estimates, even if entirely unexpended, have never been treated by me as parts of the unexpended balance to the credit of Colony. They are simply, if unexpended, treated as unexpended votes. The unexpended balance is a reality, made up of the actual balance in hand from the preceding year and the difference between the excess of current revenue and current expenditure.
As regards the three votes in question, the following figures have been furnished to me in the returns from the Auditor-General's Office:--
Votes in Estimates for 1877.—Improvement to Water Supply, $50,000. Actually spent, $47,000.27.
Sewerage, $20,000. Actually spent, $3,962.73.
Vote for 1878.—Gaol—separate system, $10,000. Actually spent, $5,965.60.
From the above figures you will see that the large votes for water supply and sewerage works were not neglected, and that out of $70,000 voted in 1877 $67,061 were laid out within that year on those items.
As regards the vote of $10,000 taken in 1878 for making some separate cells in the existing gaol, more than half that vote was spent. Having, however, received your despatch No. 43 of the 5th of June, 1878, and concurring with you in the opinion that the erection of a new prison on a new site would be the best solution of the gaol extension question, I stopped the expenditure on the temporary conversion of the present building, after $5,965.60 had been laid out on constructing some separate cells.
Whereupon the Secretary of State briefly said---
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No. 68 of the 27th May, submitting explanations which appear to me quite satisfactory respecting certain sums voted in the Estimate for 1877 and 1878, for gaol, water supply, and sewerage.
Now the practical question arises, what has been the effect of that sum of $47,000 actually laid out in improving the water supply? The best answer to that is to read to you a minute which has just been put into my hands by the Acting Surveyor-General. He says--
During the last dry season the quantity of water drawn from the Pokfulam Reservoir averaged 474,218 gallons per day. From the 12th to the 28th April the supply was increased to 990,484 gallons per day, and from the 26th April to the 20th May to 1,248,300 gallons per day. During the present month, owing to dryness of the season, the supply has been reduced to about 1,000,000 gallons per day, to which must be added the water drawn from No. 1 Dam, Pokfulam road, and the Glenealy nullah, which estimate approximately at 100,000 gallons per day during the wet season and at half that quantity during the dry season.
In addition to the above there is the Slaughter Dam, which supplies the western portion of the Stekenteng District and the Wong-noi-chung and Mint Dams; the former supplies the Bowrington, Wong-nei-chung, and Wanchai Districts, and the latter, yielding an average daily supply of about 68,000 gallons, is consumed by the Sugar Refinery, Rum Distillery, and the Ice Manufactory. The Military have a separate water supply of their own, as also the Naval Hospital at Wanchai.
Therefore, assuming the total number of inhabitants at present residing in the central portion of the city and drawing their supply of water from the general service tanks at 90,000, exclusive of those supplied from Wong-noi-chung and Slaughter House Dams, would give an average quantity of about 11 gallons per head of inhabitants per day during the wet season, and a little over 5 gallons per day during the dry season, exclusive of the water drawn from private wells, springs, strains, and other sources, such as the supply purchased from the water boats by the Chinese merchants and others residing in the neighbourhood of Bonham-strand, Praya West.
This, I believe, is the first time that the Legislative Council has received information of this kind—authentic information from the Survey Department as to the effect of the outlay of this money on the improvement of the water supply.
Now you have in your possession the actual facts. In connection with this subject I am bound to say we have to consider a question which my hon. friend on my right (Mr. Ryrie) has constantly pressed on my attention—that is a water supply for the purpose of extinguishing fire.
I laid before the Council last year some despatches on the subject, and I shall lay on the table to-day some further despatches which will be briefly to this effect. You will see that the question of water supply for extinguishing fires was one brought to my notice by an influential deputation, and some suggestions were made as to utilising certain streams which run down the side of the hills for this purpose.
I may mention that, in original scheme which Mr. Price drew up, and which was not only considered by the members of Council here, but also well considered—as it deserved to be—by the Colonial Office, there were some statements with respect to the rainfall in the Colony, and the state the Colony was sometimes in, which were practically to this effect, that sometimes for 210 days the Colony was in a state of drought. I have never yet experienced that, but whatever conclusion gentlemen in London, who read our rainfall statistics, may arrive at from the number of days when rain falls or does not fall, there is one thing they ought to bear in mind, and which I cannot find any reference to in any papers but one by Mr. Rawlinson, namely, that there is going on at all times in this Colony a certain condensation from the clouds upon the higher levels, and when for a considerable period no rain falls the streams trickling down the hills continue to run in consequence of the condensation that takes place, especially at night, and in large quantities, along the hills.
I mention that fact because it is one of those points that may escape those who only look at the statistics of the actual rainfall. But what was said by Mr. Whittall—and my hon. friend Mr. Ryrie made the same remark—is a matter of great importance, and that is, are we to give to the whole of this community the number of gallons per head men, women, and children—that are given to the inhabitants of Liverpool or London?
Now I find in one of the letters of the Surveyor-General that he frankly states that his scheme of water supply for Hongkong was framed by him for a European community, and subsequently he dwelt upon the fact that it would teach the Chinese very good habits. He states that it would be well for them to have their house sewers flushed with water, and he even goes the length of suggesting, in one of his reports, that the public latrines that the Chinese so much use required pure water in the greatest plenitude.
I found when I came to deal with the question that that was not the opinion of the Chinese themselves, and in a letter of his, which you will find before you in the last issue of the Gazette, he complains that the Chinese—who will have to pay a good deal of the cost—should have been consulted. The idea of consulting them appeared to him to be extraordinary.
However, I did consult them, and they expressed the opinion that with their system of latrines anything like trying to flush them with water would be a mistake, and that the drier they were kept the better.
With respect to the statement of the Surveyor-General that the house refuse is generally kept in buckets on the premises, he goes on to say that in all this lurks the germs of disease, that this urgently demands reform, and that this reform is to be found in effective house and street sewerage, capable of being flushed with an ample supply of water.
He goes on to describe where their house...
Page 163