fest and does not exceed 25 foot, the limit of height of buildings should be 46 foot. On all the other clauses in this section I am prepared to give way to the Government.
The DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS-This aluse will certainly, as Mr. Chator has pointed ont, to some extent affot the buildings in the streets between Qesu's Road and the Praya, but I am not prepared to go the length he has gons in the matter. There is not the slightest doubt many of the narrowest streets of the colony hava baildings on them too high for sauitation and I have no doubt a great deal of the insani- ry condition of the Chinese quarter has been broaght about by this cironinstance. Wars persous construct private lanes they must bo prepared to increase the width of the street or be doutent with lower buildings; it rests with the owner to say which. There are similar regala- tions affecting the height of buildings in Eng. land. If a fire does occur amongst these build- jags then is the time for the owner to set back the building frontage. I may say this section was considered by the Sanitary Board, which thought the heights therein mentioned should not be exceeded, with the proviso, however, that where in the opinion of the Board a departure from the rules may be permitted without detriment to the public health the Board may authorise such departure. I am sorry to say I cannot agree with the amoud. ment proposed by the hon. member,
Hou. C. P. CHATER-Remember that this is not Crown land, but land that you have parted with long ago, and now you impose this obliga. tion on the lunogent landholder, a man who has perhaps purchased the property only a week ago And had no idea such a thing was in contempla- tion. He buys it in good faith on the basis of the rental it is producing to-day. I say it is pot right, I say it is not just, and I say that ag far as sanitary arrangements are concerned, I think hon. members will hear me out that there is no overcrowding in that part of the town. This property contains the most expensive and most respectable 4on130s. Land there is worth about $15 to $20 a foot. The hon. the Director of Public Works said a landlord could put back his house and make the street wider. By doing so he would make the street irregalar; besides in my opinion he pould not do it. The lats sold originally were 100 feet lots. They have two houses built on them and the houses are 45 feet deep. Tako a cook-house off that and there is only 35 fest left; take another 15 foot off and there is nothing left. It iqsaus making the Government a pre- sent of a street, paying Crown ront on it, and getting a bonse 30 fost in depth.
Hon. E. R. BELILIOS-Suppose we say cept private lanes.'
** ex-
Hon. C. P. CHATER-That is what I said about the defuition of "street." At present it jaoludes private lanes.
It was agreed to leave the section over until Monday.
Section 18-Sanitary Board empowered to make by-laws.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-By sub-section 3 all by-laws are to be subject to the provisions of section 15 of the Public Health Orlinauce and quder that section such by-laws cannot become operative until they have been approved by this Council,
Section passed.
Sections 14 and 15 were passed without dis pussion.
Section 16.-Suits not to lie against the Sanitary Board.
The ATTORNEY-GENERALI move that this section stand part of the Bill. I think that if this section is not passed we are not giving that aid and protection to persons who have acted according to the best of their ability in great orisis and that is usually given to persons so acting. I recollect that in the case of Governor Byre, for instance, there was a bill of indemnity passed. That was an extreme case. But where you come to the case of a Sanitary Board, or its Permanent Commit- tee, which is the same thing, who are not paid men, who are giving their time in a great emer- geucy to the colony; after they have done their best even if they have made a slip, which I sm far from saying they hava, I think it only right they should be indemnified. If you do not do that you may be very sare nobody will be willing to act on another occasion when a great crisis arises and great powers have to be given. The Permanent Committee, in what they have done, have been acting under by-laws sang- tioned by this Council and made permanent antil they are revoked by proclamation, and which, as I said in my opening address, had equal validity given to them as if they had been em-
bodied
bodied in an Ordinance. Therefore it seems to me the Permanent Committee had statutory au- thority for what they did. I do not know whether they have done anything outside that statytory authority. I have not heard of any instance. I am inclined to think that what they did was en- tirely within the law and within the powers con- ferred upon them by this Council; but lost thera should be auy slip that I do not know of it is only right they should have a clause put in this Bill which would prevent than from being ha rassed by any mau who insisted on going to law with reference to what they did in the crisis. Whether it will be of any use to the Board I do not know, but in any case I think it only right and proper to extend proper protection.
Hou. J. J. KRSTICE-I have heard of no mistakes having been made by the Sanitary Board in the recent arisis for which they are likely to be held accountable, yet it is possible guch mistakes may have been made. There is, however, no guarantee that at some time or other the Sanitary Board may not have made mistakes and it appears to me desirable this clause with all its sub-seatious should be deleted from the Bill. Supposing a mistake has been made, it would be contrary to both reason and justies that those who had suffered by that mistake should have go redress. I propose as an amendment that the alause be struck out.
Hon. C. P. CHATER-I beg to second that, and in doing so I would like to make a few ro marks. The hon. and learned Attorney-General says the powers wore conferred upon the Sani- tary Board by us to do what they did. At the time they were conferred the plague was rampant and unless energetic stops had been taken, we would never have got rid of it as we did; therefore overy praise is due to the Sanitary Board. In seconding the amendment of my hon. friend opposite, I do so, not because I an of the opinion that in anything they have done they have acted wrongly; but, after all, the acts of the Sanitary Board as a Board are really indirectly the acts of the Government and at the time we were asked to give them the powers by which they did those acts we wera told a Bill would very shortly be brought before us, giving compensation to those who suffered by those acts.
HIS EXCELLENCY-NO.
The ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY-There was no promise of compensation.
Hoo. C. P. CHATER-If the hon. member had waited he would have seen what I was alinding to. We were told & Bill would be brought be- fore us by which compensation would be given for the resumption of property and the closing up of these houses.
The ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY-I have no recollection of any such statement having been made in this Council.
Hon. C. P. CHATEE-I am coming to that, six. We conferred those powers, as far as my knowledge goos, on that understanding. That Bill has been before as and has been passed. It enables the Government to resume the Taiping. shan property, and it gives compensation for Joss of routal from that date to the date the money is paid over to the owners. That is what I alluded to, and if further evidence is wanted on that point I will ho prepared to produce it. I say if the Government treat one set of landlords in one way by closing their houses and paying them seven per cant. for los of rent, why not give the same compensation to others in other districts? Why treat one set of landlords in one way and another set in a different way? We were told by the gentleman who was then acting for the hon. and learned Attorney-General that compensation would ba
given.
The ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY—I should like to make a correction on that point. What the Acting Attorney-General said was that the question of compensation was under considers. tion.
Hon O. P. CHATEK-Well, at all events, there was mention made of it, and I say, why should one set of men be placed in a different position from another? You are going to give com- pasation to people who own property in Taipingshan, and that being so I say let this section be deleted and both sets of landlords ha treated alike. I know the section will be carried against us, but we cannot be parties to carrying au Ordinauss by which you depriva people of rights, as I say, most unjustly, because if you give compensation to one set of landlords you ought to give it to the other. That is the reason why my hon. friend opposite has proposed that this section should be deleted, not because we are of opinion the Permanent Committee acted wrongly, bat because we think gompousation for the closing of these houses
should
37
榮
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.