CO129-316 - Governor Sir Blake - 1903 [1-4] — Page 86

i

**

81

11 of 1902. I venture to suggest therefore that it may be

preferable to amend the provisions of Section 1(1) of Ordi-

inance No. 11 of 1902 so as to render it free from objection,

rather than to repeal the sub-section entirely.

3.

With regard to sub-section (2), I may

point out that piers are necessary in large numbers for the

shipping of this port. There are at present no less than 110

permanent piers for which permission has been granted. These

piers are in many instances very valuable structures and are

no more obstruction to navigation and fishing rights than are

vessels lying alongside quays or even ships at anchor. There

seems therefore no adequate reason for dealing with such

structures under the Foreshores and Sea Bed Ordinance.

A.

Licences only for varying periods up to

one year are issued for temporary piers, and the objections

to applying all the formalities of the Ordinance relating to

Foreshores and Sea Beds to such structures are obvious. They

are erected for every kind of purpose, reclamation works,

building, in substitution for piers under repair, to give

temporary access to the shore in front of which reclamations

are contemplated and many other objects.

5.

You have suggested that licences terminable

at will would not come under the Foreshores and Sea Bed Ordi-

nance, but such tenure is too precarious, in view of the

considerable expense entailed in the erection of these piers

and would not justify the large investment of capital required.

Should you, however, after the perusal

6.

of these explanations he still disposed to advise His Majesty

to disallow sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 1 of Ordinance

11