CO129-336 - Governor Nathan & Public Offices - 1906 [11-12] — Page 254

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

249

was involved.

20.

The fact that the user of these buildings for the purposes named constituted a breach of the terms of the Crown Lease appears to have escaped the notice of the Government until their attention was called to it last year. Subsequently to the letter of the Director of Public Works of the 6th March, 1906, already referred to, the Government was advised by the Law Officers of the Crown that the acceptance of Crown Rent subsequent to the erection of the buildings operated as a waiver of the rights of re-entry, although such acceptance appears to have been inadvertent.

Enclosure 3. Enclosure I 4 letters.

21.

I submit to Your Lordship that the Petitioner has no good grounds for complaint, and I would therefore ask Your Lordship to disregard the petition and allow the question of compensation to be referred to the tribunal prescribed by the Crown Lease.

22.

I would further ask that in order to bring the matter to an early conclusion a telegraphic reply be sent intimating Your Lordship's decision with regard to the subject of the petition.

23.

I enclose copies of Mr. Orange's valuation dated 8th November, 1906, and of the correspondence between

Edit History

2026-06-02 11:18:14 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

249 0. was involved. 20. The fact that the user of these buildings for the purposes named constituted a breach of the terms of the Crown Lease appears to have escaped the notice of the Government until their attention was called to it last year. Subsequently to the letter of the Director of Public Works of the 6th March, 1906, already referred to, the Government was advised by the Law Officers of the Crown that the acceptance of Crown Rent subsequent to the erection of the buildings operated as a waiver of the rights of re-entry, although such acceptance appears to have been inadvertent. Enclosure 3. Enclosure I 4 letters. 21. I submit to Your Lordship that the Petitioner has no good grounds for complaint, and I would therefore ask Your Lordship to disregard the petition and allow the question of compensation to be referred to the tribunal prescribed by the Crown Lease. 22. I would further ask that in order to bring the matter to an early conclusion a telegraphic reply be sent intimating Your Lordship's decision with regard to the subject of the petition. 23. I enclose copies of Mr. Orange's valuation dated 8th November, 1906, and of the correspondence between

Baseline (Original)

249 0. was involved. 20. The fact that the user of these buildings for the purposes named constituted a breach of the terms of the Crown Lease appears to have escaped the notice of the Government until their attention was called to it last year. Subsequently to the letter of the Director of Public Werks of the 6th. March, 1906, already referred to, the Government was advised by the Law Officers of the Crown that the acceptance of Crewn Rent subsequent to the erect- ien of the buildings operated as a waiver of the rights of re-entry, although such acceptance appears to have been Enclosure 3. Enclosure I 4 letters. inadvertent. 21. I submit to Your Lordship that the Petition- er has no good grounds for complaint, and I would therefore askYour ar Lordship to disregard the petition and allow the question of compensation to be referred to the tribunal prescribed by the Crown Lease. 22. I would further ask that in order to bring the matter to an early conclusion a telegraphic reply be sent intimating Your Lordship's decision with regard to the subject of the petition. 23. I enclose copies of Mr. Orange's valuation dated 8th. Nevember, 1906, and of the correspondence between

2026-06-02 11:18:14 · Baseline

View content

249

was involved.

20.

The fact that the user of these buildings

for the purposes named constituted a breach of the terms of

the Crown Lease appears to have escaped the notice of the

Government until their attention was called to it last

year. Subsequently to the letter of the Director of Public

Werks of the 6th. March, 1906, already referred to, the

Government was advised by the Law Officers of the Crown

that the acceptance of Crewn Rent subsequent to the erect-

ien of the buildings operated as a waiver of the rights of

re-entry, although such acceptance appears to have been

Enclosure 3. Enclosure I

4 letters.

inadvertent.

21.

I submit to Your Lordship that the Petition-

er has no good grounds for complaint, and I would therefore

askYour

ar Lordship to disregard the petition and allow the

question of compensation to be referred to the tribunal

prescribed by the Crown Lease.

22.

I would further ask that in order to bring

the matter to an early conclusion a telegraphic reply be

sent intimating Your Lordship's decision with regard to the

subject of the petition.

23.

I enclose copies of Mr. Orange's valuation

dated 8th. Nevember, 1906, and of the correspondence

between

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.