CO129-033 - General Stavely - Lieut. Governor - 1850 [5-8] — Page 371

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

305

1

14. The recommendation of the entire abatement of that portion of Rent at present applicable to the ground IDKB, which was unavailable for building, offered for sale by Government.

2ndly. "The placing of those portions of the original Lot comprised within AIFB and CFGH on the terms of a Town lot", and with reference to the tenure of land in general bought it to the adoption of an upset price, which question also bears particularly upon my Lease.

Whether the upset prices originally based on correct data and a fair principle.

All the original purchasers of land bought a Lot, without particular reference to the number of square feet therein. And their buildings would doubtless be influenced as much by the formation and capability for building thereon, the accommodation they had in view, as by the location and the then present value.

They had every advantage, the lots being of convenient shape, and in situations where circumstances might create a competition that would not occur elsewhere. In regulating an upset price per square foot, based upon the early purchases, some consideration, it appears to me, ought therefore to have been had for localities, and the formation of lots, since, whilst a lot, as originally marked out, might be well worth the price obtained by competition, from the position and capability of the available building ground or square feet, being materially increased, the one at a distance might be dear in comparison, if bought at the same rate per square foot, from it not only being incapable of increase in available building ground, but being encumbered with angles which increased the number of square feet chargeable with the upset price.

As a proof that the upset price was heavy per square foot for my lot, I may instance the circumstance of all my neighbours in Spring Gardens paying much under the upset price at which my lot was originally put up per square foot. Many of the lots as bought, and according to which Rent is paid, I apprehend have been materially increased by reclamation from the harbour. Thus, though these

Edit History

2026-05-17 17:15:03 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
305 1 14. The recommendation of the entire abatement of that portion of Rent at present applicable to the ground IDKB, which was unavailable for building, offered for sale by Government. 2ndly. "The placing of those portions of the original Lot comprised within AIFB and CFGH on the terms of a Town lot", and with reference to the tenure of land in general bought it to the adoption of an upset price, which question also bears particularly upon my Lease. Whether the upset prices originally based on correct data and a fair principle. All the original purchasers of land bought a Lot, without particular reference to the number of square feet therein. And their buildings would doubtless be influenced as much by the formation and capability for building thereon, the accommodation they had in view, as by the location and the then present value. They had every advantage, the lots being of convenient shape, and in situations where circumstances might create a competition that would not occur elsewhere. In regulating an upset price per square foot, based upon the early purchases, some consideration, it appears to me, ought therefore to have been had for localities, and the formation of lots, since, whilst a lot, as originally marked out, might be well worth the price obtained by competition, from the position and capability of the available building ground or square feet, being materially increased, the one at a distance might be dear in comparison, if bought at the same rate per square foot, from it not only being incapable of increase in available building ground, but being encumbered with angles which increased the number of square feet chargeable with the upset price. As a proof that the upset price was heavy per square foot for my lot, I may instance the circumstance of all my neighbours in Spring Gardens paying much under the upset price at which my lot was originally put up per square foot. Many of the lots as bought, and according to which Rent is paid, I apprehend have been materially increased by reclamation from the harbour. Thus, though these
Baseline (Original)
305 1 14. The recommendation of the the entire abatement 4 of that portion of Rout at present applicable to the ground IDKB, which was unavailable for building. offered for sale by Government. " on when 2ndly. "The placing of those portions of the original Lot comprised within AIFB and CFGH on the terms of a Towrs lot", "and with reference to the tenure of land in general bought it to the adoption of an upset. price, which question subsequent to also bears particularly upon my Leate. Avere 30 dy. " Whether the upset prices fair principle. originally based ow correct data and a All the original purchasers of land bought #Lot, without particular referenced to the number of squaw fact therein. And their buildings would doubtless be influenced as much by the formation and capability for building thereon, the accommodation they had in view, as by the location and the then present. Life . They had every advantage, the lots being convenient shape, and in situations where circumstances might creates a competition marked out in many that would not occur elsewhere . In regulating an upset price pet- A square foot, based upon the early purchases, some ____ consideration, it appears to mo, ought therefore to have beow had for localities, and the formation of lots, since, whilst a lot, as originally ovarked out, might be well worth the price obtained by competition, from the position and capability of the available. building ground or squard feet, being materially increased, the one at a distance might be adjoining lot and still less comparison, if bought dear in ht at the same rate f-square foot, from it not only be incapable of increate in available building ground, but being encumbered with, angles which increased the number of square feet chargeable with the upset price. As a proof that the upect price heavy per square svas foot for my lot, I may instaned the circumstance of all my neighbours in Spring Gardens paying) onuch under the upset price at which my lot was 1 originally put up p. square foot . Many of the lots as bought, - and according to which Rent is paid, I __ apprehend have been materially increased by reclamation from the harbour . Thus, though thes
2026-05-17 17:15:03 · Baseline
View content

305

1

14. The recommendation

of the

the entire abatement

4 of

that portion of Rout at present applicable to the ground

IDKB, which was unavailable for building. offered for sale by Government. "

on

when

2ndly. "The placing of those portions of the original Lot

comprised within AIFB and CFGH on the terms of a Towrs

lot", "and with reference to the tenure of land in general bought

it to the adoption of an upset. price, which question

subsequent to

also bears particularly upon my

Leate.

Avere

30 dy.

" Whether the upset prices

fair principle.

originally based

ow correct data and a

All the original purchasers of land bought #Lot, without particular referenced to the number of

squaw fact therein. And their buildings

would doubtless

be influenced as much by the formation and capability for building thereon, the accommodation they had in view, as by the location and the then present. Life . They had

every advantage, the lots being convenient shape, and in situations where

circumstances might creates a competition

marked out in

many

that would

not occur elsewhere . In regulating an upset price pet-

A

square foot, based upon the early purchases, some ____ consideration, it appears to mo, ought therefore to have beow had for localities, and the formation of lots, since, whilst a lot, as originally ovarked out, might be well worth the price obtained by competition, from

the position and capability of the available. building ground or squard feet, being materially increased, the one at a distance might be

adjoining lot and still less

comparison, if bought

dear in

ht at the same rate

f-square foot, from it not only be incapable of increate in available building ground, but being encumbered with, angles which increased the number

of square feet chargeable with the upset price. As a proof that the upect price

heavy per square

svas

foot for my lot, I may instaned the circumstance of all my neighbours in Spring Gardens paying) onuch under the upset price at which my

lot was

1 originally

put up p. square foot . Many of the lots as bought,

- and according to which Rent is paid, I __ apprehend have been materially increased by reclamation from the harbour . Thus, though thes

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.