CO129-341 - Acting Governor May Governor Lugard - 1907 [7-10] — Page 685

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

679

722

consultation with Sir M. Nathan the Consulting Engineers proposed to set back the Southern end of the wall in a depth of 2 to 20 feet of water basing their proposal on the grounds that the Railway by the purchase of "Black-head's Wharf" would obtain a deep sea front sufficient for the present. They added that the final decision must rest with the local Government who were better aware of local conditions and necessities. Mr. Eves instead of submitting the plan (for which as I have said I had repeatedly called) submitted his letter of September 16th, in which as he now admits the Consulting Engineers' proposals were entirely misrepresented. Scheme (b) in that letter (which is stated to be the Consulting Engineers' proposal) includes very costly dredging so as to secure a depth of 22 feet to 30 feet and a "permanent" sea-wall of costly design, of all of which the Consulting Engineers not only make no mention whatever but clearly state on the contrary that the depth of water is 2 to 20 feet. The scheme thus distorted cost little less than the original. He submitted a scheme (d) of his own which would cost one-fifth of the other and stated in a minute that "the difference between schemes (b) and (d) lies only in the design of the wall". Hence scheme (d) was to include the dredging.

Edit History

2026-06-05 12:56:23 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

679 722 consultation with Sir M. Nathan the Consulting Engineers proposed to set back the Southern end of the wall in a depth of 2 to 20 feet of water basing their proposal on the grounds that the Railway by the purchase of "Black-head's Wharf" would obtain a deep sea front sufficient for the present. They added that the final decision must rest with the local Government who were better aware of local conditions and necessities. Mr. Eves instead of submitting the plan (for which as I have said I had repeatedly called) submitted his letter of September 16th, in which as he now admits the Consulting Engineers' proposals were entirely misrepresented. Scheme (b) in that letter (which is stated to be the Consulting Engineers' proposal) includes very costly dredging so as to secure a depth of 22 feet to 30 feet and a "permanent" sea-wall of costly design, of all of which the Consulting Engineers not only make no mention whatever but clearly state on the contrary that the depth of water is 2 to 20 feet. The scheme thus distorted cost little less than the original. He submitted a scheme (d) of his own which would cost one-fifth of the other and stated in a minute that "the difference between schemes (b) and (d) lies only in the design of the wall". Hence scheme (d) was to include the dredging.

Baseline (Original)

10. 679 722 consultation with Sir M. Nathan the Consulting Engineers proposed to set back the Southern end of the wall in a depth of 2 to 20 feet of water basing their proposal on the grounds that the Railway by the purchase of "Black- -head's Wharf" would obtain a deep sea front sufficient for the present. They added that the final decision must rest with the local Government who were hatter aware of local conditions and necessities. Mr. Eves instead of submitting the plan (for which as I have said I had repeatedly called) submitted his letter of September 16th. in which as he now admits the Consulting Engineers' pro- -posals were entirely misrepresented. Scheme (b) in that letter (which is stated to be the Consulting Engineers' proposal) includes very costly dredging so as to secure a depth of 22 feet to 30 feet and a "permanent" sea-wall of costly design, of all of which the Consulting Engineers not only make no mention whatever but clearly state on the contrary that the depth of water is 1 to 20 feet. The scheme thus distorted costhittle less than the original. He submitted a scheme (d) of his own which would cost one- -fifth of the other and stated in a minute that "the difference between schemes (b) and (d) lies only in the design of the wall". Hence scheme (d) was to include the dredging }

2026-06-05 12:56:23 · Baseline

View content

10.

679

722

consultation with Sir M. Nathan the Consulting Engineers

proposed to set back the Southern end of the wall in a

depth of 2 to 20 feet of water basing their proposal on

the grounds that the Railway by the purchase of "Black-

-head's Wharf" would obtain a deep sea front sufficient

for the present. They added that the final decision must

rest with the local Government who were hatter aware of

local conditions and necessities. Mr. Eves instead of

submitting the plan (for which as I have said I had

repeatedly called) submitted his letter of September 16th.

in which as he now admits the Consulting Engineers' pro-

-posals were entirely misrepresented. Scheme (b) in that

letter (which is stated to be the Consulting Engineers'

proposal) includes very costly dredging so as to secure a

depth of 22 feet to 30 feet and a "permanent" sea-wall of

costly design, of all of which the Consulting Engineers not

only make no mention whatever but clearly state on the

contrary that the depth of water is 1 to 20 feet. The

scheme thus distorted costhittle less than the original.

He submitted a scheme (d) of his own which would cost one-

-fifth of the other and stated in a minute that "the

difference between schemes (b) and (d) lies only in the

design of the wall". Hence scheme (d) was to include the dredging

}

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.