482
Hon. F. B. JOHNSON said the objection manifestly arose to the omission suggested that if the Company were in the right they would nevertheless have to pay the expenses.
Hon. J. M. PRICE said that as the Bill stood the Surveyor-General would have to pay the expenses out of his own pocket, That was all he objected to.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said that if the Surveyor-General was defending the interests of the public he did not think he would have to pay the expenses.
Hon. J. M. PRICE said the parties were clearly specified, "the company" and "the Surveyor-General," and then the section said the expenses should be paid by either of the parties. If it was not intended to apply to the Surveyor-General in his private capacity it might read "the Government."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that as a matter of law the losing party ought to pay; whether the Surveyor-General, if he were the losing party, should be recouped or not was another question.
Hon. J. M. PRICE said he must object to being subjected to any such contingency.
HIS EXCELLENCY said he thought that in any case where an officer was defending the interest of the public he was indemnified.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said he thought that if the Surveyor-General was discharging his duties to the public there could be no question as to the payment of the expenses.
Hon. J. M. PRICE said the seat His Excellency now occupied might not always be occupied by one holding the same opinions.
The COLONIAL SECRETARY said he would ask the Attorney-General whether the difficulty might not be met by making the section read "the Surveyor-General on behalf of the Government."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that if the clause was not to stand as it was, which he should have thought was sufficient, he should think the case might be met by inserting words to the effect that in the event of the Surveyor-General being ordered to pay the expenses they should be paid out of the Treasury.
The CHIEF JUSTICE said the Surveyor-General could always protect himself by obtaining the instructions of the Government in the first instance. He saw no necessity for any alteration in the section.
Hon. J. M. PRICE-Perhaps your Excellency will allow the consideration of the section to stand over.
HIS EXCELLENCY-Well, I will put it to the Council, but the opinion seems to be that there is no necessity for any alteration.
Hon. P. RYRIE seconded the motion for the postponement of the consideration of the section. Hon. F. B. JOHNSON said that if the Surveyor-General asked for a postponement he thought it only right it should be postponed.
Consideration of the Section was postponed accordingly.
On section 27, which makes provision for licences to third parties to use tramways,
His EXCELLENCY said the section opened rather a wide question. Difficulties had arisen in Lisbon in reference to a similar matter. He happened to know about that, because he was there last October. He might explain to the Council that there were two Tramway Companies in Lisbon. The rails belonged to one-the older and larger-company and the heavier cars, and so on. There was a second company which had a right to use the rails when the other company's cars were not on the lines, but they were compelled to get out of the way when the heavier cars came. The latter were called maridos, the husbands, and the others amantes, lovers. And the lovers had to get out of the way when the husbands came; so they must see there was no confusion between lovers and husbands in Hongkong.
Hon. F. B. JOHNSON said he thought the difficulty would not arise here as no other company could use the rails.
His EXCELLENCY-It does not provide, then, that any interlopers may come in?
Hon. F. B. JOHNSON--No.
The section was then agreed to. The remainder of the Bill passed through Committee, with the exception of the clauses already mentioned as postponed, and adjourned until Thursday next.
Council then adjourned.