CO129-490 - Public Offices - 1925 — Page 265

262

}

Works Department alone; and they now suggest that the

scheme of development should be under the general

supervising authority of the Consulting Engineers.

I am bound to say that an examination of these

papers seems to show that if the Colony is allowed to

have its own way there may be a danger of Hong Kong being

landed in a predicament similar to that in which the

Federated Malay States have found themselves at Prai and

Port Swettenham. (Cf. penultimate paragraph of Sir H.

Lambert's minute of 8/7 on H.Cr.27155/25 M.S.).

It will be recalled that in connection with the

Port Swettenham wharves, the reference to the C.E.

was made after the Government was committed to the Worke and

had actually started them. As a result, over $2 million

were spent and the wharves have turned out to be practically

useless, the difficulties of navigation (due to erratio currents etc.) being such as to deter ocean going ships

from using them.

It does not seem likely that any particular

work at Hong Kong may become a white elephant quite in this way, though in paragraph 5 of the enclosure to

0.A.51080/22 the C.E. advised as follows:-

The

"The proposed reclamation between N. Point and

and Quarry Bay will be in a somewhat exposed position,

will form a considerable extension of an existing

promontory already projecting into the tide way.

probable result of this will be to accentuate considerably the strength of the tidal currents in the immediate vicinity of the work in such a manner as to

be detrimental to the use of the quays which might there

be constructed.

門

The greater danger however seems to be that

injudicious

injudicious development at one part of the harbour

may very prejudiciously affect a much more desirable

development in another part of the harbour.

The possible effect of the reclamation,

with a vertical sea wall, which is now being

constructed at North Point (36757 and 43293) on the

much more ambitious project of the development of

Hung Hom Bay, is a case very much in point.

As to this the C.E, have advised

(paragraph 6 of enclosure in 51080/22);

"The effect of the reclamation, especially

if faced with vertical wall, would be to direct any

sea coming from an easterly direction into Hung Hom

bay to the detriment of any quays to be constructed

in that locality, whereas at present there exista à

good natural spending beach between N. Point and

Quarry Bay".

In spite of this advice and in spite of the

fact that the Hung Hom Bay scheme is much the most

not only prominent and ambitious part/of the C.E. 1922 scheme,

but also of the present proposals of the Government

the Goverment have concluded an agreement with a

Chinese syndicate to build a vertical deep sea wall

at North Point, and it is proposed to extend this

for a considerable distance Eastwards right into

Quarry Bay(see drawing No. 3 in 36761).

The C.E. (paragraph 4 of 43293) conclude "that

consons. of which we have no knowledge have outweighed

the disadvantage a

which are involved in the

construction of a deep-water wall at this site"

-

and in view of the emphatic nature of the C.E. advice

(51080/22) against this development at N. Point,

one

would