the Crown represented by the colonial Government but it was one of which the War Department had right of perpetual user for purposes of defence and the "Buildings" on such lands.
Now it seems to me, with all deference, that, looking to the fact the Military Authorities, if possibly bringing themselves within the case, cannot construe the above language.
"This Government agreed not to permit the erection of any buildings which would interfere with the efficiency of the defence, but, subject to that, the user and possession of the Land remained vested in the Government and was not transferred to the Military Authorities at all.
It seems to me, therefore, that the species of easement enjoyed by the Military Authorities could not possibly be regarded as a right of user of the land. It was intended to secure to them a right or privilege, not a perpetual right, but one that was only to last for such a period as the restriction against building continued to be necessary.
In conclusion, I would point out that if the contention of the Military Authorities were correct, the absurd consequence would follow that all the houses in the quarry village of Sai Wan, the inhabitants of which pay rent and taxes to the Government, would have to be considered as Military Buildings and valued as such, and their value would have to be credited to the Military Authorities, if the latter at any time brought fit to dispense with the restriction against building and to release the village from the reserve.
There are all the observations which
"the Crown represented by the colonial Government but
it but of which the War
"Department hos right of perpetual
a
uver for purposes of defence and the "Buildings.
of
on such lands.
#
Now it seems to me, with
all deference, that, looking to the fact
the Military Authorities if possibly bring themwelver within
the case, cannot
the above language .
"This Government a greed not to permit the erection of any buildings which would uiterfere with the efficiency of the defence, but, onlyect to that, the user and possession of the Land remained vested in the Govern. - want and was not transferred to
In thorities at all.
the Mi
Military
It seans to me, therefore,
that the species of ensement enjoyed by the Military Authorities could
I regarded in a right
not possi
possibly be regarded
of user of the land.
It secure to
553
we also that
the right or privilege possessed by the Military Authorities could not be regarded as a perpetual right, but
intended to last for such a was only period
bo
the striction a
ing continued to be
aganist build- necessary.
In conclusion I would point
out that if the contention of the Mili= -tary Authorities were correct, the abourd consequence would follow that all the houses in the
which
quarry village of Sai Waw, the inhabitants of pay rent and taxes to the Government,
would have to be considered as Mili.
and valued as such
and their value would have to be
tary Buildings
credited to the Military Authorities, if the latter at any time brought fit to dispense with the restriction against building and to release the village from
the reserve.
There are all the observations
which
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.