40.
to undertake it. The work ought to be carried out within uniformity, and under Contract to complete it within a certain time. If the work is done by the Marine Lot Holders, alike points cannot be ensured, unless the work is done under the Control and to the satisfaction of the Surveyor General. It will not do to leave it to the Marine Lot Holders themselves.
As to the second question, if land is reclaimed by a Marine Lot Holder at the expense of ..., he ought to be exempted from rent in respect of it for ever. This I think we were told the Notification of the 10th November, which was rejected by a majority of the Marine Lot Holders, although not by me. I took no part either way, although I agreed with the Majority so far as to think that our individual interests required things to remain as they were for the present, it will be more to the advantage of the Marine Lot Holders. I would make no distinction whether the land so reclaimed is a source of pecuniary profit or not; it ought in either case to be rent-free. If the Government reclaims at its own expense, the land ought to pay a rent, to be assessed according to the ground rent payable upon the last sold Marine Lots (10% per foot frontage).
I would prefer this test to that of the rent payable upon the Marine Lot to which the reclaimed land is annexed, because some Marine Lots are paying out of all proportion to others, and therefore that test would be an unfair one.
326
40.
to undertake it . The work ought
to be carried out withen.
unformity,
and nuder Contract to complete it within
a certain time..
If the work is done by the Marine
: points cannot
Lot Holders Aliese
be ensured, unless the work is
done under the Control and to
the satisfaction of the Surveyou
General. It will not do to leave it to the Marine Lot Holders.
themselves.
ན་
As to the second question, if land is reclaimed
d by
and
a Marine Lot
at the expense of Holder, he ought to be exempted from rent in respect of it for
ever.
This I think we were told the Notification of the 10th November, which was,
by
by a
rejected majority of the Marine Lot Holders, although not by took no part either way, although
me. I
326
Sagreed with the Majority so for
as to think that our individual
interests required things to
wat
ou
ogo more for
& present, it will be more the advantage of the Marine Lot Holders. I would make no distinction whether the land so reclaimed
is a source of pecuniary profitor not; it ought in either case to
be rent.
free. If the Government-
reclaims at its own ex-
expense, the
a rent, to be
laved ought to pay assessed according to the
e ground rent payable upon the last sold Marine Lots ( 10%. per foot frontage).
I would prefer this test to that of the rent
t payable upon the Marine Lot to which the reclaimed land
is anneved, because source Marine
Lots are paying out of all,
tion to others, and
propor
therefore
that test would be an
unfair
one.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.