survey of the area near Lion Rock (later called New Kowloon), Ma Wan, Cheung
Chau and Ping Chau was basically complete; in 1901, the survey extended to
areas such as Pat Heung Gap; in 1902, the survey included Sai Kung, Lek Yuen,
Pat Heung East and Lantau Island; in 1903, the survey entered the final stage
and reached outlying islands such as Lamma Island and Po Toi, and other areas
including Tsuen Wan. In June 1903, the New Territories cadastral survey was
largely completed.25
In 1903, the Government Gazette published details regarding areas that had
been surveyed, of which 40,738 acres (164.9 square kilometres) had already
been cultivated by indigenous New Territories residents, with a surprisingly large
number of landowners, totalling 328,639 people.26 The report showed the results
of the government’s New Territories cadastral survey, such as the number of
registered land titles, total number of maps drawn and measured area in each
surveyed district. In 1904, the government published a survey report for the out-
lying islands. The surveyed land area totalled 40,738 acres (16,486.08 hectares)
(see Table 2.2 for the surveyed area of each island). In 1905, the government
published the comprehensive data of all surveys undertaken over the years. The
measured land area of the New Territories was 175,537 acres (710.4 square kilo-
metres); the area of outlying islands was 51,335 acres (207.8 square kilometres);
the area of cultivated land in the New Territories was adjusted to 40,709 acres
(164.7 square kilometres), which represented 18 per cent of the New Territories’
total area of 226,872 acres (918.2 square kilometres).27 In 1905, the government
announced that it owned and managed 186,134 acres (753.3 square kilometres)
of Crown land in the New Territories. In 1906 and 1907, the government made
some slight amendments to the data. In 1906, the area of cultivated land in the
New Territories was adjusted to 40,717 acres (164.8 square kilometres), while
the total area of the New Territories was adjusted to 226,880 acres (918.2 square
kilometres);28 in 1907, the area of cultivated land in the New Territories was
adjusted to 40,789 acres (165 square kilometres), while the total area of the New
23
‘Report on the New Territory’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1900,
pp.252–253.
24
‘A General Report on the Survey of the New Territory from November 1899 to April 1904’, Hong Kong
Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1904, p.399.
25
‘New Territories: Land Court, Report on Work from 1900 to 1905’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong
Kong, Noronha & Co., 1905, p.146.
26
‘A General Report on the Survey of the New Territory from November 1899 to April 1904’, Hong Kong
Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1904, p.403.
27
Hong Kong Blue Book, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1905, p.U2.
28
Hong Kong Blue Book, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1906.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 75 20/08/2018 16:47
76 · MAKING HONG KONG
Table 2.2 Cadastral survey report for the New Territories and outlying islands (1904)
District Number of Number Number of acres Total number
demarcation of maps surveyed of holdings
districts surveyed (acre demarcated
(hectare))
The Mainland including 388 450 37,524.03 281,352
the following islands: (15,197.23)
Kato, Double Island, Tap
Mun, Pak Lap Chau, Kau
Sai, Im Tiu Tsz and Tsing
I Island
Lan Tao 72 75 2,659.96 37,147
(1,077.28)
Chip Lap Kok Island 1 2 24.87 396
(10.07)
Ni Ku Chau 1 3 16.75 426
(6.78)
Peng Chau (near Lan Tao) 1 2 28.92 239
(11.71)
Cheung Chau 1 3 113.90 619
(46.13)
Mah Wan 1 1 52.26 218
(21.17)
Lamma 10 12 155.09 4,693
(62.81)
Pu Toi 1 6 33.51 1,140
(13.57)
Peng Chau (in Mirs Bay) 1 2 128.66 2,409
(52.11)
Total 477 556 40,737.95 328,639
(16,498.87)
Sources: ‘A General Report on the Survey of the New Territory from November 1899 to April 1904’, Hong Kong Sessional
Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1904, p.403; ‘New Territories: Land Court, Report on Work from 1900 to 1905’, Hong
Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1905, p.145.
Territories was adjusted to 226,918 acres (918.3 square kilometres).29 The differ-
ences in data were minimal following several amendments, and the government’s
cadastral survey of the New Territories was basically complete. The survey results
showed that the total area of the New Territories was smaller than the 369 square
miles (957 square kilometres) indicated in the Convention for the Extension of
Hong Kong Territory in 1898,30 but the area of land under the control of the gov-
ernment was 10.4 per cent larger than Chief Secretary James Haldane Stewart
29
Hong Kong Blue Book, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1907.
30
CO882/5, J. Stewart Lockhart, ‘On the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong’, 8 October 1899, p.36.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 76 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 77
Lockhart’s estimation of 168,640 acres (682.5 square kilometres). Moreover,
much of the land was vast flat land with much potential for development.31 The
1898 Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory gave the government an
opportunity to replan Hong Kong’s development.
Promulgation of the Land Resumption Ordinance
Since as much as 186,134 acres (753.3 square kilometres) of land was available
for the government to develop, long-term planning for the New Territories
had to be carried out. Naturally, the foremost task was to ensure that the gov-
ernment could legally develop the land. In 1900, the government formulated
the Land Resumption Ordinance. According to Ordinance No. 10 of 1900,
the government could resume land ‘for a public purpose’. (The wording in
the English text ‘public purpose’ was translated as ‘public welfare’ in Chinese
(juban gongyi), but actually was not related to philanthropy.) It was also pro-
vided in the ordinance that the government would not need to specifically
state the purpose and details of the resumption in the Government Gazette, as
‘resumption for a public purpose’ alone was a sufficient justification. The Police
Magistrate was responsible for collecting Crown rents.32 The reasons given by
the government for resuming land ‘for a public purpose’ basically covered the
following situations:
1. improving the sanitary conditions of the public environment and buildings;
2. improving the ventilation of buildings so as not to endanger the lives and
safety of the residents;
3. military or naval needs; and
4. that the Governor in Council could elaborate on the definition of ‘resump-
tion for a public purpose’.33
Of the justifications provided by the government, the fourth one was the
most ambiguous, and the government further clarified on it: when the Governor
in conjunction with the Executive Council decided to resume land ‘for a public
purpose’, the government had to reach a transfer of ownership agreement with
the private owner. If the government was unable to determine the ownership
of the land, the location of the proposed resumption had to be notified in the
Government Gazette. The private owner could raise an objection to the govern-
ment’s plan within four months after the notice was gazetted. This meant that
any objection raised would be invalid if the original owner found out that the
government had developed the land only after the four-month period.
In 1910, the government promulgated Ordinance No. 18, which shortened
the period of appeal to one month. The government could resume the land
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.29.
31
‘Report of the New Territories’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1909,
32
p.H1.
33
Ordinance No. 10 of 1900, Historical Laws of Hong Kong Online, pp.627–628.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 77 20/08/2018 16:47
78 · MAKING HONG KONG
after a month if the owners of the acquired land were not in Hong Kong, could
not be found, or could not reach an agreement of resumption with the relevant
authority as deemed by the Governor.34 In an attempt to resolve disputes, the
government established the Board of Arbitrators to adjudicate on compensa-
tion for resumptions.35 The Board of Arbitrators consisted of three members,
with the Chief Justice of Hong Kong as the Chairman. The two other commit-
tee members were an official appointed by the government (often the Director
of Public Works) and a representative appointed by the affected owners. If the
affected owners failed to appoint a representative seven days after the notice was
gazetted, the government would appoint a representative for them. The govern-
ment could also employ someone on a salary basis to act as Secretary to the
Board of Arbitrators.36 After the government implemented the land resumption
policy, the Board of Arbitrators received a large number of applications from
those who were satisfied with the compensation they would receive from the
government on land resumptions. To show impartiality, the government pub-
lished the lists of members of the Board of Arbitrators and its decisions through
the media.37
With the government’s policies on land registration and resumption for a
public purpose, land in the New Territories that was not owned by indigenous
residents was turned into Crown land. Meanwhile, land originally owned by
indigenous residents could also be included in the government’s planning in
the name of public purposes. Although such land was only leased, the planning
of the New Territories land for long-term development was legitimised by such
policies.
Handling land disputes
Prior to the implementation of the land registration policy in 1899, no com-
prehensive land registration was performed in the New Territories. Though the
Qing government collected land taxes, no on-site inspections were carried out
and there were no records of abandoned land, tenant farmers occupying the
land of deceased landlords without permission or farmers developing untitled
land. Following the cadastral survey in the New Territories in 1899, the afore-
mentioned situations began to emerge.38 Therefore, government statistics of
1900 only recognised deeds with an official seal but not land obtained through
private loans or unauthorised development.
An unstable political environment and the Hong Kong government’s
repeated reiteration of political neutrality had made Hong Kong a paradise for
Chinese people escaping from wars since the mid-nineteenth century. Talented
34
‘Ordinances Passed and Assented to: Crown Lands Resumption, No. 18 of 1910’, Hong Kong Government
Gazette, Hong Kong Government, 1910, p.306.
35
Ordinance No. 10 of 1900, Historical Laws of Hong Kong Online, p.628.
36
Ordinance No. 10 of 1900, Historical Laws of Hong Kong Online, pp.628–629.
37
China Mail, 22 August 1907.
38
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.33.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 78 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 79
people and capital seeking refuge in Hong Kong thrived under the government’s
open attitude. Fluctuations in land prices were affected by the political situation
in the Asia-Pacific region, China’s political climate and the local economy. As
land was scarce in the populous city, Hong Kong was persistently short of land
resources for development. Naturally, there was a potential for land prices to
rise. Investors had long noticed that lucrative profits could be earned on invest-
ing in land on a long-term basis.
Land speculation was not a new phenomenon; land in Hong Kong saw a
wave of speculation as early as the late nineteenth century. In 1888, the govern-
ment earned 160,688 Hong Kong dollars on land sales. Not only was this higher
than the 1887 sum of 155,238 dollars, but it was also a record high since the
1840s. The government derived much revenue from the sales of land.39 On 23
July 1900, the government actively acquired private land to expand the city’s
boundaries.40 In 1903, the price of land in the New Territories rose from 1 cent
per square foot the year before to 2.20 dollars per square foot. Speculators began
investing in undeveloped agricultural land in New Kowloon.41 Land in New
Kowloon continued to change hands at high prices.42 (See Table 2.3.)
The number of immigrants in Hong Kong soared amidst the Guangdong
region’s political instability in the 1920s, and the demand for land intensified.43
The government also noticed that some people had become rich through land
speculation; for instance, a clerk spent 3,000 Hong Kong dollars on land specu-
lation and his fortune grew to 80,000 Hong Kong dollars.44 Back then, the New
Territories was the hot spot for speculation, as some Chinese tenant farmers
and Chinese agricultural by-product investors migrating to Hong Kong chose
to invest in the New Territories or the districts along the railway line in New
Kowloon.45 The land price hikes in the New Territories triggered all sorts of
problems in the development of the area. The frequent transactions in land
drove up land prices. In the 1920s, the government surveyed and conducted
planning for land use again, at the same time acquiring land extensively under
the Land Resumption Ordinance.46 In the process of resumption, the govern-
ment had to pay increasing amounts of compensation to affected landowners.
Yet the government was accused of offering compensation lower than market
price.
In an attempt to curb land speculation, the Legislative Council discussed
39
‘Report on the Condition and Prospects of Hong Kong, by His Excellency Sir G. William Des Voeux,
Governor’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1889, pp.290–291.
40
‘Report on the New Territories for the Years 1899–1912’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong,
Noronha & Co., 1912, p.46.
41
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.30.
42
‘Report of the New Territories’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1912,
p.I13.
43
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.30.
44
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.30.
45
‘Report on the New Territories’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1928,
p.2.
46
‘Report on the New Territories’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1923,
p.1.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 79 20/08/2018 16:47
80 · MAKING HONG KONG
Table 2.3 Statistics on land auctions, areas and prices in Hong Kong (1899–1930)
Number of lots sold by auction Area
(sq. ft)
Year Hong Kowloon New New Sub- Hong Kong Kowloon New New
Kong Territories Kowloon total Island Territories Kowloon
Island
1899 43 40 – – 83 640,863 1,358,475 – –
1900 41 45 – – 86 1,937,344 774,811 – –
1901 20 21 – – 41 665,118 161,948 – –
1902 6 6 – – 12 57,861 628,215 – –
1903 28 1 7 – 36 204,997 44,000 89,359 –
1904 19 8 6 – 33 494,825 537,988 2,077,461 –
1905 21 2 38 – 61 262,252 149,637 15,960,712 –
1906 17 4 128 – 149 320,046 225,582 6,517,547 –
1907 11 1 140 – 152 1,068,038 290,000 5,520,065 –
1908 6 1 231 – 238 1,334,320 – 2,639,143 –
1909 7 2 253 1 263 59,737 105,782 7,976,334 31,836
1910 15 – 203 – 218 147,287 – 1,440,150 –
1911 21 2 176 – 199 452,898 20,806 2,982,069 –
1912 27 1 208 – 236 398,300 5,400 1,896,524 –
1913 29 4 181 – 214 560,821 241,342 3,283,017 –
1914 33 5 241 3 282 2,031,625 64,752 2,183,319 503,784
1915 7 – 256 1 264 73,596 – 4,657,940 9,000
1916 12 3 161 – 176 612,603 51,057 63,525,593 –
1917 7 5 189 – 201 133,776 55,957 1,885,761 –
1918 17 10 205 2 234 353,920 234,675 2,457,547 618,000
1919 30 10 245 1 286 525,767 148,539 2,107,220 3,920
1920 38 11 316 4 369 756,634 49,658 3,113,751 1,526,336
1921 12 15 319 – 346 126,323 622,470 17,375,791 –
1922 82 80 328 9 499 2,396,566 574,119 2,137,127 166,834
1923 19 8 415 – 442 155,944 31,799 75,168,686 –
1924 19 6 483 – 508 192,820 46,609 4,359,045 –
1925 38 9 256 10 313 786,617 213,879 20,027,229 71,874
1926 38 8 211 8 265 7,170,492 1,226,209 946,381 1,227,951
1927 34 7 239 5 285 990,605 45,302 2,296,038 65,775
1928 19 6 312 4 341 1,395,003 17,424 1,482,602 106,722
1929 13 11 334 23 381 465,655 75,794 2,439,149 186,872
1930 8 77 255 113 453 142,441 528,816 5,640,344 1,042,822
Sources: ‘Report of the Director of Public Works for the Years 1899 to 1907’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1890
to 1908; ‘Report of the Director of Public Works for the Years 1908 to 1930’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co.,
1908 to 1930.
amendments to the Land Resumption Ordinance in 1922. It was mentioned
that many Chinese hoarded land and drove up land prices, greatly increasing
costs in the government’s resumption for public development and hindering
development plans. It was thus suggested that the Land Resumption Ordinance
should be amended to curb speculation and fight against hoarding so as to
tackle land speculation that attempted to convert agricultural land into building
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 80 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 81
Premium Premiums per sq. ft
(HK$) (HK$)
Sub-total Hong Kowloon New New Sub- Hong Kowloon New New
Kong Territories Kowloon total Kong Territories Kowloon
Island Island
1,994,338 192,651 361,711 – – 554,362 0.3 0.3 – –
2,712,155 451,489 324,119 – – 775,608 0.2 0.4 – –
827,066 100,106 94,217 – – 194,323 0.2 0.6 – –
686,076 6,460 465,910 – – 472,370 0.1 0.7 – –
338,356 457,608 6,652 3,838 – 468,098 2.2 0.2 0.043 –
3,110,274 243,447 168,013 23,325 – 434,785 0.5 0.3 0.011 –
16,372,601 36,328 74,611 17,077 – 128,016 0.1 0.5 0.001 –
7,063,175 57,235 87,968 14,178 – 159,381 0.2 0.4 0.002 –
6,878,093 31,411 72,700 31,341 – 135,452 0.1 0.3 0.006 –
3,973,463 12,914 – 3,932 – 16,846 0.0 – 0.001 –
8,173,689 13,483 15,968 4,580 500 34,531 0.2 0.2 0.001 0.016
1,587,437 12,564 – 4,991 – 17,555 0.1 – 0.003 –
3,455,773 240,190 2,294 5,023 – 247,507 0.5 0.1 0.002 –
2,300,224 126,346 2,160 6,895 – 135,401 0.3 0.4 0.004 –
4,085,180 157,604 68,931 11,710 – 238,245 0.3 0.3 0.004 –
4,803,480 106,725 87,283 12,591 2,723 209,322 0.1 1.3 0.006 0.005
4,740,536 14,750 – 9,806 180 24,736 0.2 – 0.002 0.020
64,189,253 62,992 83,834 66,345 – 213,171 0.1 1.6 0.001 –
2,075,494 47,358 50,087 8,743 – 106,188 0.4 0.9 0.005 –
3,664,142 72,901 83,980 14,894 30,900 202,675 0.2 0.4 0.006 0.05
2,785,446 118,581 75,354 9,763 201 203,899 0.2 0.5 0.005 0.05
5,446,379 168,979 69,845 13,547 204,596 456,967 0.2 1.4 0.004 0.13
18,124,584 21,559 108,328 10,997 – 140,884 0.2 0.2 0.001 –
5,274,646 879,033 269,732 47,958 119,713 1,316,436 0.4 0.5 0.022 0.72
75,356,429 47,317 68,114 138,670 – 254,101 0.3 2.1 0.002 –
4,598,474 43,964 127,978 102,331 – 274,273 0.2 2.7 0.023 –
21,099,599 1,555,742 407,812 14,053 119,279 2,096,886 2.0 1.9 0.001 1.7
10,571,033 750,080 76,018 5,102 60,133 891,333 0.1 0.06 0.005 0.5
3,397,720 1,808,466 127,865 14,003 2,001 1,952,335 1.8 2.8 0.006 0.03
3,001,751 721,838 37,612 7,506 4,928 771,884 0.5 2.2 0.005 0.05
3,167,470 173,290 97,604 9,859 64,836 345,589 0.4 1.3 0.004 0.35
7,354,423 186,756 1,729,505 25,598 311,460 2,253,319 1.3 3.3 0.005 0.3
land.47 The major amendment to the ordinance was that compensation would no
longer be paid for original farmland that was subsequently built upon. It pointed
out that the construction of buildings on agricultural land changed the use of the
land and was inconsistent with the original declaration of it being agricultural land.
This was so even though the landowner had already amended the original land
47
China Mail, 10 January 1922.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 81 20/08/2018 16:47
82 · MAKING HONG KONG
records and paid a higher amount of Crown rent. The Crown Lands Resumption
Amendment Ordinance, 1922 (Ordinance No. 9 of 1922) stated that agricultural
land that had changed its use would only qualify for compensation as agricultural
land.48 The government’s action caused great repercussions in society.49
Disputes between indigenous New Territories residents and the govern-
ment reached a climax in the twentieth century. In the conflicts of the early
1920s, indigenous residents accused the government of not providing reason-
able compensation for resumed land in accordance with the provisions of the
1898 Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory when developing
the New Territories, while the government countered and stated that most of
those who opposed land resumption were land speculators. It therefore pro-
posed that compensation for agricultural land should be calculated according
to crop yields. From 1921 to 1924, people seeking compensation for their land
around Kowloon City could only receive a sum based on the price of agricul-
tural land.50
In 1923, indigenous New Territories residents expressed their utmost dis-
satisfaction with the government’s newly amended land resumption compen-
sation policy. Prior to the amendments, residents who had leased Crown land
and wished to convert agricultural land into building land had to pay additional
Crown rents and a land premium to make up for the difference in land prices.
On the other hand, private owners wishing to build on their agricultural land
were only required to pay higher Crown rents but not land premiums. After
1923, the government also required private owners of agricultural land to pay a
land premium when they built on their land. This was contrary to previous poli-
cies where farmers could build on their own agricultural land by paying a higher
Crown rent without having to pay for the difference in land prices.51 Indigenous
New Territories residents strongly opposed resumed land not being compen-
sated according to the market price, and land premiums and higher Crown rents
having to be paid for altering the use of private land. They considered such
policies broke the promise made by Governor Henry A. Blake in 1899: residents
were entitled to reasonable compensation when their land was resumed by the
government for public purposes.52 In 1922, a committee in charge of town plan-
ning was established by the government not only to plan for the development
of the city, but also to tackle soaring land prices, prevent information leaks con-
cerning locations that the government planned to develop, and closely monitor
land prices.53
In 1924, private owners of New Territories land, through legal represen
48
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.32.
49
‘Ordinances Passed and Assented to: No. 9 of 1922’, Hong Kong Government Gazette, Hong Kong
Government, 24 March 1922, p.126.
50
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, pp.34–36.
51
‘1923 nian shang tiantu guan chengwen’ (Petition to the Land Officer in 1923), in Xinjie xiangyiju, Xinjie
nongdi zhuan wudi wenti youguan wenxian (Archives on Conversion of Agricultural Land to Building Land in
the New Territories), Hong Kong, Xinjie xiangyiju, 1956, pp.4–5.
52
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.9.
53
China Mail, 17 November 1921.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 82 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 83
tatives, appealed to the Supreme Court to challenge the colonial government’s
power to resume private land. Since the New Territories was only leased to the
United Kingdom for 99 years, they questioned if the 1900 Land Resumption
Ordinance and the 1910 New Territories Ordinance violated the Convention of
Peking.54 In 1925, the Supreme Court ruled that the Land Resumption Ordinance
and the New Territories Ordinance were valid, and that the government could
resume New Territories land from private owners for public purposes.55 On 29
April 1925, in a 21-point written petition to the government, New Territories
residents stated their opposition to the government’s forced resumption of
their properties and compelling them to move away. They claimed that the
government used public purposes as an excuse to build on their land. They
also argued that reasonable market prices should be paid to buy their land if
the government wanted to resume private properties to develop roads and
other public facilities, but the compensation given at the time was unreason-
ably lower, utterly out of line with the market price,56 which was unfair to the
indigenous New Territories residents. In June, New Territories villagers peti-
tioned the British government to express their dissatisfaction with the govern-
ment’s resumption of New Territories land.57 The indigenous New Territories
residents established the Association of Workers, Peasants and Merchants
(Xinjie gongnong shang yanjiuhui) to oppose the government’s land resump-
tion policies. The Association was reorganised as the New Territories Heung
Yee Kuk in 1956.58 Since 1925, conflicts between indigenous New Territories
residents and the government have arisen from time to time over land sover-
eignty issues.
Since its first land auction in 1841, the government had begun to use land as
a source of revenue. Land auction income had been a regular source of annual
income for the government since the 1850s. In the ten-year period between
1844 and 1854, the Hong Kong colonial government lacked a stable income,
and the United Kingdom had to cover the fiscal deficit. It ceased to provide
Hong Kong with economic aid from 1855 onwards. To break even, the colonial
government had to find more sources of income. From 1853 to 1867, land sales
and Crown rents were the most important sources of revenue for the govern-
ment. Selling land to boost government coffers and reduce reliance on British
financial aid was thus an effective way to enable Hong Kong to achieve finan-
cial independence. As the speed and scale of infrastructure construction were
dependent on the amount of resources invested, the government could accel-
erate the city’s pace of Westernisation with capital from private developers on
land development. This was the reason why it did not object to pushing up land
prices through auctions (see Table 2.4).
54
Hongkong Telegraph, 22 December 1924.
55
Hongkong Telegraph, 9 January 1925.
56
CO129/489, ‘Memorial from New Kowloon Landowners’, 7 September 1925, pp.30–35.
57
Hongkong Telegraph, 6 June 1925.
58
Xinjie xiangyiju, Xinjie nongdi zhuan wudi wenti youguan wenxian (Archives on Conversion of Agricultural
Land to Building Land in the New Territories), Hong Kong, Xinjie xiangyiju, 1956, p.1.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 83 20/08/2018 16:47
84 · MAKING HONG KONG
Table 2.4 Hong Kong government revenue (1898–1940)
Year Duties Fees of Court, Kowloon–Canton Land sales Licences and
(Jan–Dec) (HK$) etc. Railway (HK$) internal revenue not
(HK$) (HK$) otherwise specified
(HK$)
1898 225,357 133,319 1,459,096
1899 240,084 617,825 1,559,388
1900 285,386 816,223 1,847,273
1901 284,453 240,315 2,270,146
1902 296,709 571,361 2,600,521
1903 352,719 510,166 2,849,936
1904 403,855 486,099 4,509,163
1905 417,417 392,260 4,725,906
1906 470,152 412,941 4,765,228
1907 498,621 159,750 4,530,469
1908 514,790 69,358 4,154,969
1909 538,905 31,596 4,281,133
1910 711,025 25,613 62,686 4,520,428
1911 742,698 153,735 270,006 4,792,952
1912 785,535 251,972 163,785 5,371,420
1913 711,535 325,115 292,286 5,510,561
1914 727,778 381,313 265,186 7,979,440
1915 697,080 316,696 94,278 9,075,359
1916 864,964 366,216 349,572 10,564,180
1917 934,836 428,246 161,014 11,770,514
1918 913,794 433,274 299,289 15,201,189
1919 1,013,208 490,093 263,960 12,865,534
1920 1,126,567 520,176 556,349 10,325,919
1921 1,194,674 603,981 1,634,098 11,644,244
1922 1,412,027 710,296 2,721,804 14,681,056
1923 1,601,281 474,722 3,488,797 16,123,980
1924 1,659,524 420,186 1,909,236 16,701,771
1925 1,571,610 432,847 570,243 17,029,004
1926 1,488,587 538,045 286,342 14,020,851
1927 1,789,799 713,425 143,683 15,248,635
1928 1,945,215 820,995 1,635,236 15,081,430
1929 1,864,955 890,745 1,936,171 14,900,565
1930 2,113,862 973,129 2,864,897 16,169,266
1931 2,621,426 1,095,099 3,177,808 20,934,568
1932 6,597,852 2,296,228 1,295,789 1,370,658 16,503,770
1933 5,833,467 2,210,464 1,630,611 972,861 16,664,799
1934 5,707,389 2,214,627 1,639,775 558,473 14,662,797
1935 5,173,837 2,076,322 1,411,675 244,957 13,781,703
1936 6,928,672 2,261,116 1,245,469 269,231 13,837,183
1937 7,625,411 2,660,076 1,297,940 528,464 14,192,268
1938 9,105,122 2,787,488 1,782,288 1,199,510 15,098,620
1939 11,156,449 3,131,871 912,905 2,139,819 16,454,986
1940 18,261,611 9,049,732 935,356 1,532,438 3,302,879
Total 76,389,810 59,843,397 22,626,982 34,468,179 419,664,534
Note: Details of water revenue for the following years: 1898 ($112,733); 1899 ($126,559); 1900 ($151,035); 1901
($169,120); 1902 ($171,950); 1903 ($235,960); 1904 ($65,948) and 1905 ($90,022); as well as taxes ($9,229,852), war
revenue ($8,582,730) and water revenue ($2,993,098) for the year 1940 are not shown in this table.
Source: ‘Revenue and Expenditure of Hong Kong for the Year . . .’, Hong Kong Blue Book, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1898–1940.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 84 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 85
Light dues and Interest and Post Office Rent of government Total for the year
light dues (special miscellaneous (HK$) property, land and (HK$)
assessment) receipts houses
(HK$) (HK$) (HK$)
51,645 197,716 337,180 401,114 2,918,160
52,407 261,484 317,909 434,487 3,610,143
55,379 238,910 325,603 482,777 4,202,586
58,376 280,101 355,913 555,470 4,213,894
66,107 235,075 387,066 572,286 4,901,075
74,960 184,567 414,867 615,683 5,238,858
72,330 174,873 408,459 688,321 6,809,048
74,234 131,565 414,838 672,162 6,918,404
77,722 61,815 420,454 826,699 7,035,011
80,389 77,982 445,421 809,648 6,602,280
79,976 89,592 412,432 783,092 6,104,209
172,811 533,911 444,047 820,564 6,822,967
181,968 107,700 519,067 832,382 6,960,869
175,380 122,004 399,217 841,239 7,497,231
185,904 147,294 401,054 873,733 8,180,697
198,297 136,845 439,189 898,480 8,512,308
194,066 124,416 398,426 936,648 11,007,273
168,484 129,260 371,081 933,869 11,786,107
162,478 148,380 410,931 966,667 13,833,388
148,467 231,781 427,687 955,560 15,058,105
115,923 239,947 451,586 1,010,246 18,665,248
158,518 231,338 460,893 1,041,431 16,524,975
196,835 359,077 541,295 1,063,455 14,689,673
222,127 606,905 663,914 1,158,189 17,728,132
241,166 696,946 695,655 1,132,117 22,291,067
288,554 861,461 761,120 1,183,847 24,783,762
316,328 1,113,604 825,352 1,263,637 24,209,638
265,444 1,417,269 725,246 1,232,704 23,244,367
238,199 2,528,220 766,540 1,264,799 21,131,583
291,142 983,671 890,947 1,283,235 21,344,537
303,842 2,883,624 966,918 1,331,139 24,968,399
319,126 1,227,715 1,003,665 1,411,533 23,554,475
329,313 2,450,903 1,375,207 1,541,896 27,818,473
658,337 1,035,604 2,035,939 1,587,942 33,146,723
1,992,861 1,964,593 1,527,965 33,549,716
1,391,151 1,883,655 1,512,270 32,099,278
1,313,404 1,829,298 1,648,524 29,574,287
2,335,800 1,759,660 1,646,596 28,430,550
1,809,453 2,058,886 1,632,974 30,042,984
1,911,963 3,254,396 1,725,849 33,196,367
1,945,583 2,918,029 1,899,215 36,735,855
2,517,156 3,120,759 2,044,107 41,478,052
9,018,823 4,439,280 2,829,315 70,175,114
5,957,108 43,260,034 42,440,009 47,462,333 774,041,393
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 85 20/08/2018 16:47
86 · MAKING HONG KONG
It was a challenge for the government to resume land in the New Territories.
The rural communities and religions of the indigenous New Territories resi-
dents were significantly different from those in the city. The concept of feng
shui was important in traditional Chinese society, and it was common for
people to oppose development plans based on feng shui and clan c ustoms.59
Such disputes persisted.60 When the colonial government leased the New
Territories in 1899, it negotiated with two Qing officials: Tan Zhonglin
(1822–1905), then Viceroy of Guangdong and Guangxi provinces, and Lu
Chuanlin (1836–1910), then Inspector-General of Guangdong. In October
1899, the Hong Kong government published a notice in the Government
Gazette to inform indigenous New Territories residents that the Qing gov-
ernment and the United Kingdom had come to an agreement on four main
points:61
1. Indigenous residents were to be treated well.
2. Houses and land were not to be forcibly resumed.
3. Ancestral graves on leased land were never to be moved.
4. Local customs and traditions were to remain unchanged in accordance
with the wishes of indigenous residents.
It was evident from the notice that the Qing government understood that
indigenous residents greatly valued burial grounds, but it seemed that the colo-
nial government was unaware of the importance of burial grounds to them
when it developed the New Territories. The colonial government implemented
the registration of land but not burial grounds. In the early twentieth century,
some villagers were shocked to find their ancestral graves had been demol-
ished when they visited the graves in the Ching Ming Festival and the Chung
Yeung Festival. In 1909, the government started to register burial grounds in
order to prevent future disputes. Indigenous residents had to register at the Tai
Po Land Court if they wished to construct, maintain or repair burial grounds.
The registration fee for new graves and old graves was 50 cents and 25 cents
respectively.62 In spite of registrations, the government did not guarantee that
burial grounds would not be resumed for development. As a result, disputes
over burial grounds persisted.
It was particularly difficult to develop remote areas. Apart from respecting
the customs of New Territories residents, the government also had to over-
come geographical challenges. It needed to allocate large amounts of human
and other resources to improve the shortcomings of the geographical envi-
ronment so that the land would be suitable for development, while the scale
and pace of investment also had to be carefully planned. Excessively rapid
59
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.28.
60
‘Report of the New Territories’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1911,
p.I3.
61
Hong Kong Government Gazette, Hong Kong Government, 7 October 1899, p.1599.
62
Hong Kong Government Gazette, Hong Kong Government, 7 May 1909, p.260.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 86 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 87
development would place an undue burden on transport and ancillary facilities
of neighbouring areas.
Market response was another aspect of which the government had to be
mindful. Owing to a continuously growing population and a lack of land, market
demand for land had been increasing since the nineteenth century. To get a
head start, speculators often acted before the government announced the areas
to be developed. Active development of the New Territories also meant rising
land prices. As rent rose along with the market price of properties, the livelihood
of residents was greatly affected. The government could not and would not put
an end to land speculation, as rising land prices in the newly developed areas
could bring it higher profits. Nonetheless, the government could not shut its
eyes to speculation either, since increased prices of undeveloped land would
also affect the amount of compensation paid to indigenous residents on land
resumption. Aware of increasing land prices, indigenous residents were unwill-
ing to accept land exchange and compensation. Thus, plans to develop remote
areas could not be implemented.63
When developing the New Territories the government not only had to face
opposition from indigenous New Territories residents, but also had to make
huge investments in infrastructure in the remote areas. However, the land was
able to generate significant revenue for the government. After weighing the pros
and cons of the two, the government felt that limiting urban expansion in the
early twentieth century to New Kowloon near the Kowloon urban area was the
best strategy.
New Kowloon
The region which we have come to know as Kowloon today included not only
areas south of Boundary Street such as Tsim Sha Tsui, Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok,
Hung Hom and To Kwa Wan, but also Sham Shui Po, Lai Chi Kok, Cheung Sha
Wan, Kowloon Tong, Kowloon City, Kowloon Bay, Ngau Tau Kok, Kwun Tong,
Cha Kwo Ling and more. As required by the 1898 Convention for the Extension
of Hong Kong Territory, the Qing government leased the area north of Boundary
Street and south of the Shenzhen River to the United Kingdom with a lease
period of 99 years. Thus, the aforementioned areas north of Boundary Street and
Kowloon mountain range with an elevation of 500 feet (152.4 metres) above sea
level should be a part not of Kowloon but of the New Territories. Why did these
areas belong to the New Territories initially but Kowloon later on? When did the
government begin to have the idea of including them as part of Kowloon? How
did the government’s decision affect overall urban planning in twentieth-century
Hong Kong?
It was obvious that the government wanted to expand the Kowloon urban
area, but how was it able to include areas that used to be a part of the New
Territories as Kowloon? To do so, it was necessary to change the name first.
63
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, pp.31–32.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 87 20/08/2018 16:47
88 · MAKING HONG KONG
In 1900, that is, the year after the New Territories was leased, the government
established the New Kowloon district in an attempt to expand Kowloon. It
was estimated that New Kowloon had an area of 15.7 square miles,64 which
had much more potential for development than the mere 3-square-mile
Kowloon.
In 1900, the government pointed out in the report on the New Territories
that the land south of the Kowloon mountain range, with Lei Yue Mun to the
east and Lai Chi Kok to the west, should not come under the jurisdiction of
the Local Communities Ordinance, 1899, as the area bordered British Kowloon.
Unlike the case in other districts in the New Territories, residents in that area
were more familiar with the Hong Kong colonial government’s legal system,
police force, sanitary regulations, and so on.65 In the same year, the government
promulgated Ordinance No. 8 of 1900,66 giving the name New Kowloon to the
area south of the Kowloon mountain range (Beacon Hill and Lion Rock), with
Lei Yue Mun to the east, Lai Chi Kok to the west and Boundary Street to the
south. After Governor Henry A. Blake signed the Convention for the Extension
of Hong Kong Territory, not only did he propose the concept of New Kowloon
in writing, but the Hong Kong government also produced maps on 9 January
1900 that explicitly grouped New Kowloon under Kowloon’s urban area.67 The
boundaries of New Kowloon on the 1900 map and the statutory maps pro-
duced by the government in 1937 were similar, the only difference being that
the north-eastern boundaries of New Kowloon were marked along the ridges
of the Kowloon mountain range on the 1937 maps (see Figure 2.2), while on
the 1900 map New Kowloon included Kau Lung Peak (i.e. Fei Ngor Shan)
and Middle Hill, thus with more extensive planning. Such boundaries were
still adopted in the 1960s. It can thus be seen that the concept of developing
New Kowloon appeared before the comprehensive planning of Kowloon in the
1920s; the idea of expanding the Kowloon urban area dated back to as early as
1900.
On 20 November 1906, the government conducted a by-census on the pop-
ulation of New Kowloon. It was estimated that there were 17,836 Chinese
people in New Kowloon, the majority of whom were farmers, while the ratio
64
‘Report on the Census of the Colony for 1931’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha &
Co., 1931, p.99.
65
‘Report on the New Territory’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1900, p.252.
66
‘Ordinance No. 8 of 1900’, in John W. Carrington, The Ordinances of Hongkong, Prepared under the
Authority of the Statute Laws (Revised Edition) Ordinance, 1900, Hong Kong, Government Printer, 1900,
p.625.
67
MPG 1/796. 1 item (enclosure 1 in despatch number 9 of 9 January 1900 from Governor Sir Henry A.
Blake GCMG) extracted from CO129/297. ‘Map of Hong Kong and of the Territory Leased to Great Britain
under the Convention between Great Britain and China Signed at Peking on the 9th of June 1898’ showing
districts and sub-districts in different colours. Also shows part of Mainland China, with towns, roads, tram-
ways, telegraphs, etc. Reference table. Heliozincographed at Ordnance Survey Office, Southampton, 1899.
A MS note reads: ‘This map has been compiled from existing Intelligence Division maps of Hong Kong,
Admiralty Charts and a map of the Sun On District compiled in 1866 from the observations of an Italian
Missionary.’ 1899.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 88 20/08/2018 16:47
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 89
Source: Survey and Mapping Office of the Lands Department.
Figure 2.2 Statutory map of New Kowloon (1937)
20/08/2018 16:47
90 · MAKING HONG KONG
between male adults and female adults was 54.3:45.7.68 The more populous vil-
lages in New Kowloon included Kowloon City (5,394 people), Sham Shui Po
(2,821 people), Cheung Sha Wan (831 people), Kowloon Tsai (761 people)
and Kowloon Tong (703 people).69 In the 1911 population census, the gov-
ernment deliberately separated New Kowloon from the New Territories and
Kowloon and stated in detail the villages included in New Kowloon. New
Kowloon was mainly divided into two large districts: Kowloon City District
had a population of 7,306 and comprised Kowloon City, Tai Wan, Ngau Tau
Kok, Sai Tso Wan, Lei Yue Mun and Cha Kwo Ling; Sham Shui Po District had
a population of 6,318 and consisted of Sham Shui Po, So Uk, Wong Uk, Shek
Kip Mei, Kowloon Tsai, Cheung Sha Wan, Ap Na Liu, West Point, Kowloon
Tong and others.70 The total population in New Kowloon was only 13,624,
which was 4,212 people down from the 1906 by-census. The government’s
determination to develop New Kowloon was evident from its close monitoring
of the region’s population.
Although New Kowloon was a comparatively large area located next to
Boundary Street, most of it was rural area without convenient transport and
far away from the southern tip of the Kowloon Peninsula or even the City of
Victoria. Much of the land was abandoned hilly or low-lying areas infested
by malaria-bearing mosquitoes. Land formation would require a great deal of
human and other resources and time,71 but it appeared that the government
was well prepared for the task. Not only was the area near Kowloon marked out
to downplay the impression that it was part of the New Territories, but a series
of civil engineering works was initiated to develop New Kowloon. In general,
land formation would be carried out first in the area to be developed, followed
by construction of roads and the transport network to connect the area with
the city’s core districts. The earliest area to be developed in New Kowloon was
Sham Shui Po Village in the west. Development then moved eastwards, with
planning for areas such as Kowloon Tong, Kowloon City and Kowloon Bay
carried out one by one.
Sham Shui Po Village
Sham Shui Po Village was a Hakka village that had a population of around
1,500 in 1899.72 It was evident from government records that the government
first resumed private land in the area to construct roads. In 1902, construction
works for Lai Chi Kok Road commenced in Sham Shui Po Village, which was
68
‘Report on the Census of the Colony for 1906’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha &
Co., 1906, p.261.
69
‘Report on the Census of the Colony for 1906’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha &
Co., 1906, p.276.
70
‘Report on the Census of the Colony for 1911’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha &
Co., 1911, p.39.
71
CO129/494, ‘The Land Resumption in the New Territories’, 4 October 1926, p.29.
72
‘Extracts from Papers Relating to the Extension of the Colony of Hongkong’, Hong Kong Government
Gazette, 8 April 1899, p.560.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 90 20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 91
followed by the establishment of government departments in the area, such
as the Harbour Master complex and a police station. In 1903, the government
made use of the Land Resumption Ordinance and resumed a large amount of land
near Sham Shui Po from the indigenous residents, citing ‘public purpose’ as the
reason. The residents were moved out from their villages through either mon-
etary compensation or land exchange. The agricultural land was then replanned,
and land formation works were carried out, which was followed by road plan-
ning. The result of the planning in 1905 can be found today in the area north of
Boundary Street around the then waterfront, the strip of land from Lai Chi Kok
Road, Yen Chow Street and Cheung Sha Wan Road to Boundary Street. In that
area, the likes of Kweilin Street, Pei Ho Street, Nam Cheong Street, Shek Kip
Mei Street, Wong Chuk Street and Maple Street were perpendicular to Apliu
Street, Yu Chau Street, Ki Lung Street and Tai Nan Street, forming a rectangular
matrix.
The development of Sham Shui Po reached its peak in the 1910s. In 1912, the
government started reclaiming land in the area. The project was implemented
in two phases, including 5.03 acres (2 hectares) for phase 1 and 4.64 acres
(1.9 hectares) for phase 2, totalling an area of 9.67 acres (3.9 hectares).
Following reclamation, the land lots were reassigned new numbers. Road plan-
ning was first conducted on the newly reclaimed land, which resulted in a neat
network of streets that formed a rectangular matrix. In 1914, the government
implemented the Sham Shui Po Improvement Scheme,73 offering to exchange
newly reclaimed land for land owned by indigenous residents of Sham Shui
Po Village to enable redevelopment.74 As the reclaimed land was fairly close to
the original village, the scheme helped the residents to resolve problems that
arose when they were forced to leave their village as a result of the new devel-
opment plan. The newly reclaimed land was reorganised into 41 land lots, 25
of which were used for land exchange with the indigenous residents, including
New Kowloon Inland Lot (NKIL) Nos 64, 68–72, 74, 103–105, 139, 152, 155,
159, 163, 172, 177, 179, 188, 205, 253, 265 and 304. The remaining lots of 26,
46–50, 75, 106–108, 110–113, 176 and 249 belonged to the government and
were reserved for other purposes.
After the land planning, indigenous residents of Sham Shui Po Village moved
to the newly developed area in five batches. The years and locations of land
exchange with the indigenous residents as provided by government records
reflected the government’s development priorities in Sham Shui Po District. In
1912, indigenous residents who lived closest to the then waterfront had their
land exchanged first. In 1914, indigenous residents who lived near Boundary
Street moved to the newly reclaimed area in groups. In 1916, residents who
lived in the north of the village also had their land exchanged. (See Figure 2.3.)
From 1918 onwards, the village was replanned after the indigenous residents
had moved out. With streets and land lot numbers reorganised, the area had a
73
CO129/413, p.436.
74
‘Report of the Director of Public Works for the Year 1912’, Hong Kong Administrative Reports, Hong
Kong, Noronha & Co., pp.60–61.
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 91 20/08/2018 16:47
M4593-HO_9781788117944_t.indd 92
Source: ‘Report on the New Territory during the First Year of British Administration’, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1900, pp.271, 277.
Figure 2.3 Distribution and relocation of Sham Shui Po indigenous residents
20/08/2018 16:47
Expansion of the territory (1898–1941) · 93
new look. In 1920, land that was left after the land exchanges was sold by public
auctions for private development. The government did not designate the land
use in auctions, so investors interested in purchasing land could use the land as
they wished. In the early twentieth century, buildings often had three storeys,
with the ground floor used as a store and the upper floors as dwellings. Thus,
Sham Shui Po District soon became a business-cum-residential area.
Lying in Tai Kok Tsui, Fuk Tsun Heung was located south of Sham Shui Po
Village and was formerly a mountain range. The passage between Mong Kok
and Sham Shui Po was blocked by mountain ranges. The government removed
the hills in 1920,75 which not only improved the transport network connecting
Sham Shui Po, but also released land to increase the area of land that could be
developed. The rock material obtained from the cutting of hills could also be
used for constructing roads. In 1921, the government improved Lai Chi Kok
Road, which at the time was located on the waterfront, making it an impor-
tant passage for heavy vehicles. In 1922, Lai Chi Kok Road was connected with
Castle Peak Road, turning Sham Shui Po District into a hub connecting to
north-western New Territories. To expand development space for Sham Shui
Po, reclamation was carried out at Lai Chi Kok, which was situated on the water-
front. Lai Chi Kok Road was able to reach Kowloon’s urban area directly. (See
Table 2.5.)
Before development, the district only had a population of just over 1,500.
In the 1921 population census, the government included Sham Shui Po in
Kowloon’s Tai Kok Tsui District,76 thus merging Sham Shui Po District, which
was originally part of New Kowloon, into Tai Kok Tsui. The population in the
area grew to 30,000 in the 1920s. The population of Sham Shui Po and Tai Kok
Tsui grew rapidly and reached 67,184 in 1931,77 of whom 37,512 were males
and 29,672 were females. The government made handsome profits on the sales
of land in Sham Shui Po, as it received not only land premiums, but also Crown
rents. The planning of Sham Shui Po gave the government increased confidence
to develop other areas in New Kowloon (see Table 2.6).
Kowloon Tong
Learning from the development experience of Sham Shui Po, the government
in 1920 hoped to develop a comprehensive community with open spaces and
other ancillary facilities, creating a healthy and comfortable living environment