!
11
4.6
tre renewal fine, the Government does not say (as it does now) that
a mathematical calculation based on the capitalised value of the net
profit rental is to be taken; instead, "the Government will offer
such terms to individual applicants as it may think fit, having re-
gard to the circumstances of each case".
35.
The departure from accepted leasehold practice is further
emphasized in the words which follow: "The fine will be heavier in
the case of land which has never been developed than it will be in
the case of land which is fully built upon". In other words, the
higher the net profit rental the smaller the sum which the lessee
will pay:
exactly the reverse of the rule laid dow ir the text-
bocks. Incidentally, we would point out that the Government would
have some difficulty in charging more than a limited renalty in re-
spect of land which had never been developed, because the lessee
would surrender the lease if asked for more money than the sum for
which he might expect to buy back the land at auction.
36. In the final sentence of its reply to Mr. Bird, the Govern- ment, for the first time, speaks of enforcing its strict legal rights and requiring "an adequate consideration for its reversionary inter-
est in the land". But it is fair to say that, from 1898, when the
Secretary of State's Instructions were received; until 1915, when
those Instructions were reinforced by the reply given to Messrs.
Dennys & Bowley; and from that date until 1925 when a different policy was announced in reply to Mr. Bird's question, a general understanding naturally grew up in the community that the 75 year leeses would be renewed (unless the ground was required for public purposes in particular cases) on payment of a re-assessed Crown rent for the second term.
37.
Solicitors and accountants who arrived in the Colony between 1915 and 1925 have informed us that when 75 year leases first came to their notice in the course of their professional work, they (being familiar with leasehold law) questioned the values of these leases as securities, but were assured by seniors in their firms of a general understanding (based, no doubt, on the Government's letter