BIG
319
327
incur grave and unwarranted risks. That your Petitioners fears are well founded will be instantly seen on a perusal of Section 248 of the proposed Ordinance. That section, in defiance of all principles of justice and equity, and to an extent absolutely unwarranted br the necessity of the case, avowedly arrogates to the Governor the sole and exclusive right of determining what land ought to be "resumed for a public purpose"--a mode of procedure the extent and value of which it is found necessary to define under no less than four se- parate heads, thus showing the difficulties that are likely to arise in the enforcement of it, without any reference to, or safe-guard for. the rights of the property owners coucerned or the general Public of Hongkong. This is a section that cannot be too strongly con- demned as it entirely overrides the well known principal that vested interests must never be disturbed without due and proper compen- sation. In this connection your Petitioners would refer to Part II of the Bill Section and the following Sections, and call attention to the entire absence of any safe-guard not only to property owners but to the Public in general, as to the administration of Sanitary matters by the Sanitary Board, in view of the fact that the vast majority of that Board is composed of Official Members, and that the powers proposed to be delegated to the Sanitary Commissioner are autocratic in the extreme, far more so than is necessary, and also far more so than those of the corresponding officer (the Medical Officer of Health for the various Metropolitan and provincial districts) in England-vide Subsection 5 of the Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890.
9. That the local conditions obtaining in Hongkong are neces sarily peculiar to that Colony, by reason not only of its Geographical! situation but also of its Geological formation--it consisting for the most part of mountains with very few flat levels, and thus rendering the building as well as the location of houses and their sites a most difficult matter--and that bearing these facts in mind, as well as the matters mentioned in paragraph 8 hereof, it may well be said, that the blame of erecting and occupying insanitary dwellings cannot be laid solely or indeed at all at the door of the present land-owners in the Colony, who after all are but the successors of men whose knowledge of sanitation, like that of those then occupying official positions in the Government of the Colony, has been shown by the course of events to have been meagre to a degree. Moreover, sanitary science has made vast strides during recent years, and what was held to be sufficiently sanitary years ago is now-a-days often considered to be woefully deficient, similarly, what is thought to be perfectly sanitary to-day may possibly be regarded as quite insanitary by a future generation.
10. The present land-owners purchased their land with the erections thereon, under the impression that they were making safe and profitable investments of their capital, and they had not faintest notion of suspecting, nor could they have had any reason to suspect. that the houses they then bought, were insanitary or would be de- clared insanitary, in the near future and they themselves rendered
liable on re-erection or alteration to incur the compulsory sacrifice of land and space without adequate compensation. The truth of these statements is borne out by the well known fact that, had matters been otherwise the present land-owners would never have made such investments and landed property in this Colony would never have been sought after by the many confiding investors therein.
11. That whatever is required for the benefit of the public should be paid for by the public is a principle so well recognised as to need no argument for its support, consequently the failure in the present Bill to provide adequate and reasonable compensation for compulsory loss and sacrifice borne by individuals for the benefit of the general public, is the weakest feature of the Bill, and marks it as one of the most arbitrary and objectionable measures that have ever been introduced into any Legislative chamber, whether in England or in its Colonies. In this respect also, the Bill compares very unfavourably with similar enactments in England, as a few quotations of the provisions from the latter will amply show.
"
Section 121.
The Public Health Act 1875.
(38 & 39 Vict. Ch. 55).
Destruction of Infected Bedding, &c.
"Any local authority may direct the destruction of any bedding, clothing, or other articles, which have been exposed to infection from any dangerous infections disorder, and may give compensa- tion for the same."
Section 155.
Power to Regulate Line of Buildings. When any house or building..
has been taken down......
....the urban authority
'may prescribe the line in which any house to be built or rebuilt in
"the same situation shall be created and such house....
shall be erected in accordance therewith."
་་
The Urban authority shall pay or tender compensation to the "owner or other person....
"for any loss or damage he may sustain, the amount of such
compensation.....................
...to be settled by Arbitration
"in manner provided by the Act.'
Section 308.
Compensation in case of Damage by Local Authority. "Where any person sustains any damage.... "full compensation shall be made to such person..
and any dispute............................
tion......
“Jurisdiction."
..shall be settled by arbitra- ..before a Court of Summary