C8B
worth namabad. I s vairo t
Horsk sier
to fam
+718-
annerster diły niaga woy saetbbs od zvonod eft won evad eW
gnol groĦ to biswolf & enedqed2 .exaseM to Jdgif to`mold ite¶ sát of 10o£ redo±30 d‡BS ed‡ no soitto emol edt ja au yď baybol saw dɔide Notów mi 1001 vadmosⱭ djèl add to ¿\880v2 .4 .oll rstief zwoy of ima quɛasiq sid ytingla of heaseIq ton aaw yjaotsM at tædt æ¤ meroʻtal wor -myotni bra "enob ed idylЛ teJ* beerohre ad blvoda moltijaq edt tstil edi voi Jeruos reqorq edt tædt beatvba aaw y‡aðtæM siH tedt au gal Io settimmob Intokbuk sáð oð víqqs of medt zot ad blwow arenoititi wo☺ sdt to motatoeb sɗt mort Iseqqe of evael tot Lionwoð yvi¶ súb atysmoltide¶ ed‡ to molnigo edð ni Il,reddam edð at gnox gooë to 19q0ng 800 new sɛso sát bus via869090 saw evasi dove wiseivba Lagal .Laeqqa zot
-
two Jadd bestvba grivad .9.X aqqho .A .0 .7M Ísanpoð tvÛ
sramott ide¶ edt,ajmnif to settimaro) Istsibut end of yiqqa biwoda
„rejtei quoy at betseggua es Iseqqe of evasi yot Ilonuoð yvM¶ 34 sɗð hne,#aoqing dadd rol aqeje Visa8esen edt xoot gono ta # ‚dtlweyed eaofont ew doldw to yqoo,a,Ineqqa ot avael yot moitié* dias edi mo sett immoð Islslbut add exoted gatesɗ not do sne beastmalb saw nottiteq adt Legnuoð gatrned rette bra Jasí zadmavo *atnetID wo jantage sisos de
490
The reason why such application for leave to appeal was dismissed appears to be that under the Praya Reclamation Ordinance 1889 of Hong Kong Section 7 Subsection 6 our Clients' legal right to any claim to compensation for the damages they have sustained by the reclamation was in the opinion of the Judicial Committee taken away from them, that the words in that Subsection empowering the Governor, if he thought fit, to award them such a sum of money or such a Crown Lease of new land as he might in his absolute discretion think sufficient as and by way of compensation - constituted the Governor the Executive Officer to award such compensation; but that
his decision being absolute the rules and regulations which bind an Arbitrator over whom the Courts had jurisdiction did not apply to the Governor as such Executive Officer and that consequently no useful result would attend the granting of the application for leave to appeal.
The facts relating to the unfortunate position in which our Clients have been placed and the serious damage they have sustained by the Praya Reclamation appears from the Petition of Right and from the evidence of the Valuers set out in that Petition there seems to have been some error made in the calculations upon which the sum awarded by the former Acting Governor of Hong Kong was based and which they are unable to get rectified because the present Governor of Hong Kong will not interfere in a matter decided by the Acting Governor, although as we maintain, decided wrongly, it only remains for us to draw your attention to the circumstances as they