له
2592.
in Chatham in
474
20917
rumphreys: -
2071
He had lost his $20,000 directly following Government
legislation
A.
Yes.
20.918
Thhainan:-
ર
A.
*
As a consequence of the legislation, he loses what is practically his margin, looking at the purchase from a banking point of view. He loses a fifth of the value of
his property, doesnt he?
There is this of course that the nan might, in the first instance, in laying out the property have laid it out in a more sanitary manner. If it were not consider- ed to be insanitary, this sacrifice of space would not
be required from him.
20119
ve Fureyri-
17
A.
Put that would apply to the original owner. It would not apply to the man who bought the property.
That is BO.
209 20
20 9.
And of course I suppose you admit that it is a perfectly leɛ 1 and lawful transaction for a man to buy property and sorrow 4/5tha of the money on mortgage ?
A.
Ch yes.
41
27
Therefore if v 3 a lawful at, through the direct
uction of th Tovernment e 1.ses all of anything he
has put in to that properly, it must amount to
confiscation
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
זי
Reference:-
GO. 537
37
OUT PERMISSION RECORD OFFICE, LONDON REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHICALLY WITH- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH - NOT TO BE OF THE PUBLIC
I presume you might designate it so.
20422
The Chairmann : -
22
Any way the cas", you mus' admit Mr Chatham, I think, is one that might easily arise ?
A.
4.5 0.0
It might arise I cant of course pretend to vouch for
the accuracy the figures.
2052
It might arie. We will suppose conditions as they existed at t beginning of 1903, and as they existed
af ar the passin of the present Ordinance, after a vary iceange vas made in the sanitary condition of { 18 property, that the owner might, under such conditions which appear to be perfectly possible,