SIL
نها
ou elurt and
D BROKA gis.
CMA C¥ud vd 1970
* 90 00 Tolle,
0 de pol
U
lo voineg
A
ADH
wine. DevOp 911 (.
a infarkte, and nebuvo 201 sud to y
.9.
*IN
I
يادة
t...
** (^)*
+
(.*)
PROM
I-HARD100 DNC
70)
MTÜ MUI. 107:15
va conduiog
YOUNG 912 10:
0813
vorit base II. ayol 14:3
:
HVA DU JO1 Han
anim quou devra oud (.0)
TU
:
943 $ MIS
Jube
i
10003 134
น
น 30 00
.5008. HM019
100
TO 199
U divu pod nï (.*)
113
existing between His Britannic Majesty's Government and
any other Power, the Governor of Hongkong may take possession of all or any part of the coal stored by the lessee on the said plot of land, and may dispose of
such coal as he may think fit, and the lessee shall be entitled to receive payment for the coal so taken at the rate current in Hongkong prevailing at the time of such
requisition.
3.
The sale of the lot would be subject to the requirements of the Foreshores and Sea Bed Ordinance being com- -plied with and to its being declared expedient by the Governor-in- -Council to grant a lease of the area.
4.
Messrs. Leigh and Orange enquire whether the Government would grant their clients an option of purchasing a further area, having a frontage of 800 feet to the eastward of that shown on the enclosed plan. I submit that they be informed that it is the practice of the Government, in the case of the disposal of areas of Crown Land to private individuals, to put up such areas to public auction and accordingly their clients would almost certainly have an opportunity of acquiring any area to the eastward of the proposed lot which Government might intend to dis- -pose of. Otherwise, no option can be given to their clients.
Kessrs. Leigh and Orange further point out
that, in order to utilize the proposed lot, it will be necessary for their clients to dredge a considerable area of the sed-bed to
a depth of 30 feet below low water and they request that this be
taken into consideration in fixing the premium.
5.
6.
In the case of Fenwick's and Watson's lots to
the westward (Marine Lots 285 and 293), the premium charged was 35 cents per square foot. In the present case, I have recommended a premium of 30 cents per square foot. The difference of 5 cents represents a sum of $22,172 on the area proposed to be sold.
I have etc.,
(Sd.) W. Chatham,
Director of Public Works.