CO129-514-6 Question of legality of sale of water to Tai Koo Sugar Refining Co. Ltd.- from... 6-12-1928 - 23-12-1929 — Page 42

1

40

user of the water, although the construction of a reservoir

was expressly contemplated by clause 9 of the conditions

of sale. After all it must not be forgotten that some

person other than the Company might have bought the land,

& under such circumstances the Government would have had

no right, either morally or legally, to limit the user of

the water. agree that the possibility of a purchaser

other than the Company was remote. But the possibility

was there, & I merely mention it as emphasising the

necessity for the insertion of a condition limiting the

use of the water, should such limitation have been intended,

as part of the bargain between the Government and a pur-

chaser.

It is also to be noted that the supplemental deed

expressly grants the water rights to the Company or its "assigne". Suppose, therefore, the Company sold the

reservoir it might be to a Company formed for the

purpose of selling water how could it be contended that the purchaser's rights would be in any way limited except

as expressly provided in the lease or deed.

-

In my opinion any attempt to attach to the lease or deed a condition limiting the user of the water must fail as offending the rule that written documents cannot be

varied by extrinsic evidence.

For the moment leaving out of considerating the pipe

line, I am of opinion that the Company may sell the water

to whom & as it deems fit. The Company has been granted

the right of impounding the water in a certain area, & the

water there by becomes the property of the Company, subject

only to the right of the representatives or assigns of the

late Sir Paul Chater to a supply of fifty thousand gallons

a day.

2.