PY. Enclosure No. 2.
20918 326 13 JUN 07
Crown Solicitor's Report on the Petition of Tong Wan Chiu's Executrixes and Ku Fai Shan dated 12th March, 1907.
Para. 1 to 4.
The statements in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Petition appear to be substantially correct (except the statement in paragraph 2 that Lam Tak Luk and Tam Cheung Puk were the original owners of the said piece of land).
Para. 5.
With regard to paragraph 5, the statement that the Court found the claimants entitled to an area of 40.59 acres is not absolutely correct as a reference to the judgment will show that the Court merely allowed 40.59 acres to the claimants.
The distinction is that the Land Court had no power to confer any rights of property by its judgments. It could only allow claims and report such allowance to the Governor.
Para. 6 to 11.
Paragraphs 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 appear to be substantially correct. Paragraph 8 is a submission and is a matter of argument. Paragraph 12 is also a matter of argument.
The statements in paragraph 13 appear to be correct.
Para. 14.
If the petitioners were advised by their Solicitors in the manner stated in this paragraph, I think they were very badly advised, as, at that time they had no idea as to what kind of title (if any) would be granted by the Government in respect of the land included in the claim.
Para. 15 and 16. The assignment appears from the deed to have been completed in the manner stated.
Para. 17.
As no form of title to the land had been settled, the purchase by the petitioners of the claimants' rights ...
Page 330
Page 331