CO129-322 - Acting Governor May - 1904 [1-5] — Page 280

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

Wo. will not be required by Wo, but (see par 23 of encl. I in 26943) it will only be necessary to warn people off the ground.

On the other hand, when firing is going on, it will be necessary to warn people off the ground.

If the plan enclosed in 26972/03 is compared with map X enclosed in 22528/02, it will be seen that a considerable part of the land formerly used as rifle ranges, viz., the eastern portion and the southern detached portion, is now covered by King's Park.

It was this area precisely that was surrendered to the colony for King's Park, and it was thought impossible to measure the area, but it was considered a fair compromise.

I therefore submit, as stated in our despatch 7808, that no ground exists for reopening the question.

As to par 9: say (a) that the period of 10 yrs. was inserted, and that the difference being that our proposal does not give the Military any permanent tenure of the new ranges.

As to par. 10, point out that the arrangements regarding Stonecutters Island give the War Dept. more control over the Island than was already secured to them by Ord. #1 of 89.

We might say that they will raise objections to the stone quarries being leased by the Colonial Govt. if arrangements can be made for working the quarries without interference with the defences, etc., ask Wo whether they really require the whole or a portion of the area referred to as A.

Explain that par 6 of our despatch meant that so far as arrangements with Wo were concerned, the colony was perfectly free to abandon the proposal to construct the Park, and to sell it instead for building purposes.

As to the last par., I annex a copy of despatch of 17 June 03, and a copy of the plan referred to therein, showing why the area at Ngao Ian Kok is to be resumed from private owners.

I would reply that we understand that only the small patches coloured green in that plan are to be resumed, and that if hereafter the Govt. want any further area.

Edit History

2026-06-01 16:18:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
Wo. will not be required by Wo, but (see par 23 of encl. I in 26943) it will only be necessary to warn people off the ground. On the other hand, when firing is going on, it will be necessary to warn people off the ground. If the plan enclosed in 26972/03 is compared with map X enclosed in 22528/02, it will be seen that a considerable part of the land formerly used as rifle ranges, viz., the eastern portion and the southern detached portion, is now covered by King's Park. It was this area precisely that was surrendered to the colony for King's Park, and it was thought impossible to measure the area, but it was considered a fair compromise. I therefore submit, as stated in our despatch 7808, that no ground exists for reopening the question. As to par 9: say (a) that the period of 10 yrs. was inserted, and that the difference being that our proposal does not give the Military any permanent tenure of the new ranges. As to par. 10, point out that the arrangements regarding Stonecutters Island give the War Dept. more control over the Island than was already secured to them by Ord. #1 of 89. We might say that they will raise objections to the stone quarries being leased by the Colonial Govt. if arrangements can be made for working the quarries without interference with the defences, etc., ask Wo whether they really require the whole or a portion of the area referred to as A. Explain that par 6 of our despatch meant that so far as arrangements with Wo were concerned, the colony was perfectly free to abandon the proposal to construct the Park, and to sell it instead for building purposes. As to the last par., I annex a copy of despatch of 17 June 03, and a copy of the plan referred to therein, showing why the area at Ngao Ian Kok is to be resumed from private owners. I would reply that we understand that only the small patches coloured green in that plan are to be resumed, and that if hereafter the Govt. want any further area.
Baseline (Original)
wo. will not be recupied by Wo, but (se parr 23 of encl. I m 26943) it will only to warn people off the ground On the other be me necessary when firing is going or hand of closed in 26972/03 is compared with map X enclosed in 22528/02, it will the map of King's Park en- be seen that a considerable part of the Park area. land formerly ranges, viz. Renee is in no A by the rifle covered the eastern partion & the southern detached portion, that impossible to measure thought h but the ive amea It was this area precisely to assume 43 2 acess of that rifle portion of the rifle ranges surrendered to the colony for a Park was my A fair compromise. I therefore submint, minute on 7808 as stated that no ground excrats for reopening the question As to par 9: say. our desp. Om (a) that has of intended to embody the arrangems proposed in dis de Blakes desp. 298 1829 the only 10 yrs. was inserted, & that the period of difference being that our proposal does not give the Mily. any permanent tenure of the new ranges brings the area outside the arrangemta 13 embodied in the care of 30.12 +94 278 As to par. 10, point out that The arrangements regarding stonecutters Island give the Was Dept. more control a very little over the Island than was already secured to them the by Ord. #1 of 89 might say that they but we presume to wo that we will raise objectn to the stone quarries being leased by the bol. Goot if arrangemts can be made for working the quarries without interference with the defences vc, ask wo whether they really require can give the area referred to as A or portion of it. up the whole or a beplain that par 6 of our Par. 12. desh meant that so far arrangt. with W... was OLO four our the concerned bolony was perfectly free to abandon the proposal to construct the Park, & to bel it instead for building purposes. As to last par lo. fr. Joe is wo I annex copy of f 17 June 03, 600 a 8 tarts copy of plan referred to therein, showing why of proposed. the areat at Nog Ian Kok. are to be resumed from private ownero, I wd. reply arrang! that we understand the mean that only the small patches coloured green in to be resumed & that that plan are if hereafter the 100. want any forty
2026-06-01 16:18:46 · Baseline
View content

wo.

will not be recupied by Wo, but (se

• parr 23 of encl. I m 26943) it will only

to warn people off the ground

On the other

be me

necessary when firing is going

or

hand

of closed in 26972/03 is compared with map X enclosed in 22528/02, it will

the map of King's Park en-

be seen that a considerable part of

the Park area.

land formerly ranges, viz.

Renee

is in no

A

by

the rifle

covered

the eastern partion & the

southern detached portion,

that

impossible to measure

thought h

but

the

ive

amea

It was this area precisely

to assume

43 2

acess

of that rifle portion of the rifle

ranges surrendered to the colony for

a

Park

was

my

A

fair compromise.

I therefore submint,

minute on

7808

as stated

that

no ground

excrats for reopening the question

As to par 9: say.

our desp.

Om

(a)

that has of

intended

to embody

the arrangems proposed in dis de Blakes

desp. 298

1829

the

only

10

yrs. was

inserted, & that

the period of

difference being that

our proposal does not give the Mily.

any permanent tenure of the new ranges

brings the area

outside the arrangemta

13

embodied in

the care of 30.12 +94

278

As to par. 10, point out that

The arrangements regarding stonecutters

Island

give the Was Dept.

more control

a

very

little

over the Island than was

already secured to them the by Ord. #1 of 89

might say that they

but we presume

to wo that we

will

raise

objectn

to the stone quarries being leased by the bol. Goot if arrangemts

can be

made for working the quarries without interference with the defences vc, ask wo whether they really require

can give the area referred to as A or portion of it. up the whole or a

beplain that par 6 of our

Par. 12.

desh meant that so far arrangt. with W... was

OLO

four

our

the

concerned

bolony was perfectly free to abandon the

proposal to construct the Park, & to bel it instead for building purposes.

As to last par

lo. fr. Joe is wo

I annex

copy of

f 17 June 03, 600

a

8 tarts

copy of plan referred to therein, showing why of

proposed.

the areat at Nog Ian Kok. are to be resumed from private ownero, I wd. reply arrang!

that we understand the

mean

that only the

small patches coloured green in

to be resumed & that

that plan are

if hereafter the 100. want any

forty

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.