CO129-327 - Individuals - 1904 — Page 176

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

Series Prev Next

in to farther arguments

the

corespondence

case. There must be finality in matter for this time.

the Sariay

of Star regrets that he can add anything

to his printed letter of the converfona...

must now Close

C.Pd.

The Under Secretary of State,

sir,

Colonial Office.

insyttelton

: So proved

AL. 25/7

#BL

7917

173

Castle Terrace,

Cowes,

Isle of Wight.

July 1904.

6. 18 JD D4

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th. Instant No.23985/1904 in reply

to my request to know the reasons put forward by the Hong

Kong Government in opposition to our claim for compensation

in respect of Hong Kong Marine Lot No. 184. In this reply

you state that as we had no legal claim, it would be unusual

to state all the considerations by which the Government

has been guided; and that Mr. Secretary Lyttelton is

satisfied that the sum now offered is adequate and

equitable.

It is not necessary for me to discuss the matter of

the legality of a claim for compensation when rights granted

under a Crown Lease have been taken away; it is sufficient

for me to know that the Governor and his legal advisers

who passed the Reclamation Ordinance admitted the obligation

of the Crown to compensate, and defined the measure of

compensation to be the difference between the value of the

Marine Lot, and the value of the same land converted into

an Inland Lot by the Reclamation in front of it, and

promised that the Government would accord the fullest

justice in respect of private rights; and that the Attorney

General of Hong Kong stated before the Full Court on the

30th. March 1898 that our claim would be fairly and rightly

considered by the Government, even if only morally bound,

and that he would have no objection to me making a further

claim for loss of rents during the period before the

Reclamation Works actually reached the front of our premises.

Edit History

2026-06-02 08:55:50 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

in to farther argumentsthecorespondencecase. There must be finality in matter for this time.the Sariayof Star regrets that he can add anythingto his printed letter of the converfona...must now CloseC.Pd.19The Under Secretary of State,sir,Colonial Office.insyttelton: So provedAL. 25/7#BL791717377Castle Terrace,Cowes,Isle of Wight.July 1904.6. 18 JD D4TYI have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th. Instant No.23985/1904 in replyto my request to know the reasons put forward by the HongKong Government in opposition to our claim for compensationin respect of Hong Kong Marine Lot No. 184. In this replyyou state that as we had no legal claim, it would be unusualto state all the considerations by which the Governmenthas been guided; and that Mr. Secretary Lyttelton issatisfied that the sum now offered is adequate andequitable.2.It is not necessary for me to discuss the matter ofthe legality of a claim for compensation when rights grantedunder a Crown Lease have been taken away; it is sufficientfor me to know that the Governor and his legal adviserswho passed the Reclamation Ordinance admitted the obligationof the Crown to compensate, and defined the measure ofcompensation to be the difference between the value of theMarine Lot, and the value of the same land converted intoan Inland Lot by the Reclamation in front of it, andpromised that the Government would accord the fullestjustice in respect of private rights; and that the AttorneyGeneral of Hong Kong stated before the Full Court on the30th. March 1898 that our claim would be fairly and rightlyconsidered by the Government, even if only morally bound,and that he would have no objection to me making a furtherclaim for loss of rents during the period before theReclamation Works actually reached the front of our premises.

Baseline (Original)

in to farther argumentsthecorespondencecase. There mus. be finality in ∙atter d for this time.the Sariayof Star regrets that he can add anythiyto his printer letter of the converfona...must now CloseC.Pd.19The Under Secretary of State,sir,Colonial Office.insyttelton: So provedAL. 25/7#BL791717377Castle Terrace,Cowes,Isle of Wight.July 1904.6. 18 JD D4TYI have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th. Instant No.23985/1904 in replyto my request to know the reasons put forward by the HongKong Government in opposition to our claim for compensationin respect of Hong Kong Marine Lot No. 184. In this replyyou state that as we had no legal claim, it would be unusualto state all the considerations by which the Governmenthas been guided; and that Mr. Secretary Lyttelton issatisfied that the sum now offered is adequate andequitable.2.It is not necessary for me to discuss the matter ofthe legality of a claim for compensation when rights grantedunder a Crown Lease have been taken away; it is sufficientfor me to know that the Governor and his legal adviserswho passed the Reclamation Ordinance admitted the obligationof the Crown to compensate, and defined the measure ofcompensation to be the difference between the value of theMarine Lot, and the value of the same land converted intoan Inland Lot by the Reclamation in front of it, andpromised that the Government would accord the fullestjustice in respect of private rights; and that the AttorneyGeneral of Hong Kong stated before the Full Court on the30th. March 1898 that our claim would be fairly and rightlyconsidered by the Government, even if only morally bound,and that he would have no objection to me making a furtherclaim for loss of rents during the period before theReclamation Works actually reached the front of our premises.

2026-06-02 08:55:50 · Baseline

View content