CO129-348 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1908 [7-10] — Page 618

614

#

to viajerosƐ sit of habtawtot saw tax of .7ɑ to notnigo edt død

no beand vlogral saw motɛnetnoo vm to Joaqua são ɛa bna 102822

alɗaðivent al st er of beaaerqze noluiqo evolverq a'laX of .TⱭ

edadā to visteroeë adð dółw tilglow bar svar blvora midt Jarð

sɗt wind MOTT JIAGA ,dnevur:avoð aɗd to not÷oa add galvorqqa ni

.steiqmoont saw tax of ."Ɑ of visterosë Latnolo) erið vd duq emas

.10 of awoɗa nood evæd digangersq antwollot edt ni aðost effT

„A†AWOOA Bs mid yd of beinsaam baa laX of

orið meďu rasy taal omið erit ja am asa oð lax o} .rd boxes I

¡berebianos gateɗ aaw mavori va gaåjust gauf oH .TH to moitasup

#noo ed dadi am bertiotat eĦ‚mid ridiw teðčan odd besauoaib bita

»sɗ notéqmxa mít tuang of sauter oð eldanonserm di borshia-

nsawred of emoɔ gutbnaturebnu ord to doaend a ed bluow Ji sauao-

Gutty At ,nolob and ni esamiño gaihasi add bna anacurtavon edt

-rittw bad Ikororo? edt to atecra} [stolttom) mesatɗ0 miż dołɗw to

to subtir at bas (sonaalbro wds of notsinoqqo riad? mwørb«

#ibr0 mốt odal beouborŷni saw equalɔ not:quare edit oala doldu

narisatiɔ wolla of gnted nols (prexa atrit to toatɗo act .sQ!!&#!»

no Xast odd no aearod časy od gmolóð elds mi nożituoq to

to eno asw dư% of .Ti radford a'gauT of .TM .amolasooo Isioeqa

-nos bus emiz erit da 101 Jase arow oftw domoIznoŋ ssentiɔ sit

.od amoo a«w gałbastatebnu altíð eroteď Jaerurtevoð sið yď betiua»

erit welvietat of anengntiLkw atd berømtent neid tax of .*

„Joetdum edź no dnauriavoð

-0%

noon bad I daɗt lax of .1Ɑ berotak I abtawtosta ayah wel A

bar I dart hua,Joatdua adó no Tontovoð add yons!Isaza alf

vlotIduq að Jon blvoda reddam orið tada fiale sid of babapoa

teamiɗ eldvora od don mid bexas I enoterada bus,bensqa,

valtaa of rebro at bas (abrtawraðDA „Teððøn edð að reddurt

“ath bra vistaroeë Iatno100 adt waa ed „Postdua aɗð do TiemmiɗË

sean a'grĩ of .M to weir eff .miri dokw radtam aɗð borgio"

aa tat sa lạX of .* of betnsaerq viajeroeƐ Isimofod edə doldw

-igatwoflot edd yinlan naw Joelloos" blwoo er

¿Last erið mo nwo shi to savori a gbastis bari gaut oĦ,"M_Jad¶

་

that the argument that "therefore it was unreasonable to re-

-fuse leave to Mr. Ho Tung to rent the Eyrie" was not sound

because otherwise there would be no check: he might apply for

5 or 6 houses in other parts of the Peak and the same argument

would be raised.

Having considered this argument to Dr. Ho Kai said that he

agreed with that view.

On my seeing Dr. Ho Kai a short time ago he informed me of this

interview. I then said to him "But did not the Colonial Secreta-

-ry tell you that the reason why Mr. Ho Tung had arranged to .

take my house for himself and Mrs. Ho Tung alone, was that he

had been recommended by the doctor to get some change of air,

as he was suffering from some illness (I forget what); and that

as his own house faced south and lay in a hollow, Mr. Ho Tung

thought that the Eyrie, which was some 400 feet higher up and

much healthier, would be beneficial ?" Dr. Ho Kai told me

that so far as he could remember the fact had not been mentioned

by the Colonial Secretary; I then said, but this was mentioned

in my application to the Executive Council for exemption: I

then asked him this question: If these facts had been mentioned

by the Colonial Secretary would you still have considered the

refusal to grant the exemption reasonable ↑ Dr. Ho Kai's

answer WAS no, I think that in these circumstances and, 188Wi-

-ing no other valid reasons then existing against it, it was un-

-reasonable not to grant it.

→

I desire to say as little as possible with reference to the

action of the Colonial Secretary in the matter. I shall there- -fore content myself with saying that I am astonished at it,

and that it is conduct which, in the case of parties being at arm's length, no Court would approve. But this was a case in -- which from the circumstances the utmost good faith should have been observed. What has been done? One branch of my contention was rested on the fact that in Dr. Ho rai's opinion the refusal to grant the exemption was a violation of the undertaking in virtue of which the exemption clause was introduced into the

Ordinance,