(33) in 13717/1/33.
1.
SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL OBJECTIONS RAISED TO THE LAST DRAFT OF THE FORESHORE AND SEA BED WORKS ORDINANCE (ENCLOSURE TO
(17) IN 13717/1/33).
15
The Foreign Office in their letter
F.4388/248/10 of the 17th July, 1933, expressed the
fear that the Chinese Government, in pursuance of their
policy of the recovery of sovereign rights and abolition
of foreign privileges, might seize upon the Ordinance
as an excuse to take or affect arbitrarily and without
adequate compensation riparian lands acquired by
British concerns in China for the express purpose of
enjoying and developing the trading facilities afforded
by access to the water. The Foreign Office stated that
in China His Majesty's Government was concerned to
maintain the view against the Chinese Government that
water frontage rights (including the right to accreted
land) were inherent in the ownership of riparian land,
and in support of their attitude have appealed to the
practice and legislation of other countries. They
accordingly feared that Clauses 6 and 7 of the draft
Ordinance, which gave the Hong Kong Government a general
power to extinguish entirely the rights of riparian
owners, would give the Chinese an excuse to justify the
assumption of similar powers in relation to British
riparian owners in China. The Foreign Office recognised
that the Hong Kong draft Ordinance contained provisions
for fair compensation and machinery for giving effect
to them, but thought that the Chinese Government would
ignore or distort this part of the Ordinance in taking
similar