(67)
159
Hon. E. R. BELILIOS—Your Excellency, although I have pronounced in favour of the resumption and destruction of the closed houses in Taipingshan, I do not hesitate to support the proposal of my honourable friend opposite for the appointment of a commission to inquire into the condition of the condemned property. I am in favour of destruction rather than of repair or patching up, not because in my opinion the latter course would not prove efficacious for the purpose, but because the former mode of dealing with the district would, I believe, act somewhat favourably towards the sanitary condition of Taipingshan.
Now, of course, the locality is well known to a great number of people, perhaps more to the Chinese than to the Europeans. I have been there thousands of times myself. I have given this subject my thorough consideration and my whole attention, and my opinion remains as confirmed now as it was before. I feel there is no chance for me to-day to escape doing a disagreeable thing—that is, to vote against the senior unofficial member and the member who represents the Chamber of Commerce.
I was on the Sanitary Board and the Housing Committee and heard the expert evidence on Taipingshan. I was hearing evidence given on a locality that I have personal experience of, and with the condition of which I have been well acquainted for the last 15 years. And after hearing all that evidence, and notwithstanding the opinion of others that they were not capable sanitary engineers, or that our opinion is not of the best kind still, exercising my best judgment, I assisted the others in arriving at the conclusion that the whole of Taipingshan should come down and be destroyed.
There is no doubt that a few houses might stand, but considering that the majority of the houses are of a very bad and insanitary character, we came to the conclusion that the few good ones must be sacrificed. Since that opinion was formed after a great deal of consideration and deliberation, I can assure your Excellency that I think that every member of the Housing Committee and also every member of the Permanent Committee of the Sanitary Board is prepared to stand on that same opinion this very day and this very hour.
There were remarks that some of them had changed their opinions. But I may say that I am not one of them. I have seen many of the houses day after day and certainly I have never heard that. In advocating this measure, we are constantly charged with advising the Government to a very expensive course, and we are often taunted with the question, "Can you make it sure that by this enormous sacrifice of money and trouble we are to be free from the plague next season?"
Now, to that I would simply say that it is to the best of our knowledge and belief that by improving Taipingshan in the way suggested, and by improving other isolated localities in the same manner, I say by so doing we firmly believe the plague will be got rid of. We are mortal men. That is all we can say; we cannot say anything more. We cannot be certain of anything, but what we can be certain of is that to the best of our power and ability, and on the best evidence we could get, we are of opinion that this is the surest way of getting rid of it.
Of course, we are prepared to take that responsibility. I admire those men who would dare to come out and do their best for the public even at the risk of being charged afterwards with having given bad or wrong opinions. There are always some who try to shelter themselves behind something, saying, "In the multitude of counsellors, there is wisdom."
There is the responsibility which, as public men, each of us should take, and if we do our work with clear conscience, even if we fail, our error will be excused. As I have said before, the expenditure involved in destroying and rebuilding two or three hundred houses, serious as it would prove, would be small compared with the loss which another six months' quarantining would entail.
I am in favour of destruction, as practised in Naples, when it was found that cholera had become endemic in that city. In 1886-1887, it was decided by the Neapolitan Authorities to raze a large section of the slums and rebuild it. The district was ten times the size of the Taipingshan closed area. They pulled down and rebuilt all the houses, except those having historical value, which were sanitary and suffered to remain. Since that improvement has been effected, cholera has ceased to be an annual scourge to Naples.
Now, I see no reason why in Taipingshan, where there are no buildings possessing any historical interest, the new tenements should not be allowed to take their place and remain standing. So far, I believe the weight of evidence before the Government is in favour of destruction by fire, but there is a strong feeling in the Colony that the employment of this agent, or total destruction of the houses by any other means, would be a mistake.
Personally, I am opposed to the employment of fire, as it would entail great expense in the removal of the debris and would ruin the streets and side channels, which are almost new. The appointment of the commission could do no harm and it need not even cause delay. Another report on the closed area in Taipingshan, from practical men, would be sure to add somewhat to our knowledge of the local conditions.