CO129-554-12 Public Reclamations Validation and Clauses Bill (formerly Foreshores Bill) 30-4-1935 - 3-3-1936 — Page 15

(33) in 13717/1/33.

1.

SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL OBJECTIONS RAISED TO THE LAST DRAFT OF THE FORESHORE AND SEA BED WORKS ORDINANCE (ENCLOSURE TO

(17) IN 13717/1/33).

15

The Foreign Office in their letter

F.4388/248/10 of the 17th July, 1933, expressed the

fear that the Chinese Government, in pursuance of their

policy of the recovery of sovereign rights and abolition

of foreign privileges, might seize upon the Ordinance

as an excuse to take or affect arbitrarily and without

adequate compensation riparian lands acquired by

British concerns in China for the express purpose of

enjoying and developing the trading facilities afforded

by access to the water. The Foreign Office stated that

in China His Majesty's Government was concerned to

maintain the view against the Chinese Government that

water frontage rights (including the right to accreted

land) were inherent in the ownership of riparian land,

and in support of their attitude have appealed to the

practice and legislation of other countries. They

accordingly feared that Clauses 6 and 7 of the draft

Ordinance, which gave the Hong Kong Government a general

power to extinguish entirely the rights of riparian

owners, would give the Chinese an excuse to justify the

assumption of similar powers in relation to British

riparian owners in China. The Foreign Office recognised

that the Hong Kong draft Ordinance contained provisions

for fair compensation and machinery for giving effect

to them, but thought that the Chinese Government would

ignore or distort this part of the Ordinance in taking

similar