CO129-554-12 Public Reclamations Validation and Clauses Bill (formerly Foreshores Bill) 30-4-1935 - 3-3-1936 — Page 16

16

(38) in 13717/1/33.

Dr

negances

These Ryections,

see th. Naunagan's muinato

of

57.33 in

137711/33.

similar action in China. The Foreign Office therefore

suggested for consideration that the Hong Kong

Government should achieve the end they had in view by

the method of passing a special Ordinance for each

public work that might be contemplated.

2. The China Association in their letter of the

9th August, 1933, objected in principle to the enactment

of general legislation of the type proposed by the Bill

and like the Foreign Office suggested the introduction

of a separate and special Bill for each public work

contemplated. They expressed the fear that the

powers conferred by the Bill would enable Government to

undertake large scale works which might have a highbyr

prejudical effect an existing marine rights and

facilities enjoyed by riparian owners and long

established private enterprises of a similar nature.

3. In the same letter the China Association claimed

that the following minor amendments, amongst others,

should be made:-

(a) That a claimant for compensation whose claim

is referred to a judge should be permitted to amend

in any way he wishes the particulars of his claim as

originally presented to Government.

(b) There should be a right of appeal from a

judge to the full Court amd the Privy Council where any

question of law is involved.

(c) Provision should be made for an extension of

the time within which a claim must be sent in or a

reference to the judge made.

(a)