1 God Sent
29/12
Fequests authorlig to deduct the Cost D. the removal & an
Ropeway from
from the
ممبر من كه گھر دم
The Admuralling
б
ciescal
2
4k 6.
Sout
the final instalment due from the
19.33.
It is clear that the question of this
ropeway ought to have been raised during the
negotiations which culminated in the agreement of
the Hong Kong Government to pay $2,000,000 for the
land vacated by the Admiralty. Instead, it
appears at that time to have been tacitly assumed
that the ropeway would become superfluous on the
romoval of the military magazine, which removal
has now been indefinitely postponed.
Given the agreement in the 1921 memorandum
of transfer, entioned in the second paragraph of
the despatch, that, when no longer required for
Admiralty purposes the Naval Arsenal Yard should
revert to the Colonial Government, and should not in
any case be re-transferred to the War Office without
Colonial Government consent, it seems to me
that the Hong Kong Government has taken up the only
reasonable attitude. The decision to pay $2,000,000
was taken on the assumption that the development of
the area in question would yield at least that
amount in land sales. Such an assumption would be
entirely falsified if the ropeway were to remain in
its present position.
The local Naval and Military Authorities
appear to share the llong Long Government's view,
that the ropeway must be diverted;
such difference
of opinion as exists relates to the apportionment
of the cost of removal, etc.
I