CO129-589-15 Crown leases 4-2-1941 - 3-12-1941 — Page 11

HONG KONG GENERAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

SEVENTY-FIVE YEAR CROWN LEASES.

10

austinis

The Special Committeɔ on Crown Leases has real with interest the

despatch addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies by His

Excellency the Officer Aimiristering the Government or the 27th June,

1940, and the Hon. Financial Secretary's comments on the Special

Ccrmittee's Report to the Chamber of Commerce.

2.

It is appreciated that the Hon. Financial Secretary has perform-

ed a useful piece of work in investigating the history of the seventy-

five year non-renewable leases, thereby bringing to light certain

facts which were not within the knowledge of the Special Conmittee

when it made its Report of the 12th January, 1940.

3.

•

In retrospect, the Special Committee is inclined to regret that

this question was referred to the Chamber of Commerce verbally by Sir

Geoffry Northcote. Had the Hong Kong Government's position and the

{ historical fagts (to which only the Government has access) teen placed

before the Special Committee in writing, errors would have been avoided.

To deal in order with the documents now before the Special

Committee, it is doubted whether the first sentence of para.6 of His

Excellency's despatch will te clear to the Secretary of State. It is

urderstood the concession suggested is that the premium claimed to be

due on renewal should be added to the Crown rent in instalments in-

stead of being demanded as a lump sum payment.

5.

It seems to us immaterial that (to quote the Financial Secretary in para. 1), "the seventy-five year leases were confined to

lots in the hill district and kowloon, then a village, and other nɔn-

urban areas". The majority of the lots are in areas which have now

become fully developed.

6. With reference to para 3 of the Financial Secretery's comments,

we do not agree that the omission to which he calls attention is

'peculiar".

The action taken by a few leaseholders in accepting

the Government's terms cannot be binding in law upon other 75 year

leaseholders or their successors in title.