560
THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT CAZETTE, 23RD NOVEMBER, 1878.
1
But before proceeding further, I think it only right to express my great regret that I should not have been able to be present in my seat on Monday last, to reply to any questions that Honourable members might have wished to address to me. I hope that my absence did not cause any inconvenience; in fact I venture to hope it may have been of some advantage in giving us another week to consider this matter with greater deliberation. I read with great interest the reports of the debate, and noticed particularly the very natural objection of the Honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. KESWICK), who appeared disinclined to enter into the discussion of any project until we had before us the estimates of the probable cost. Well, the document I have just had the honour of laying upon the table contains those estimates, and, with the concurrence of the Council, I would venture to review these figures very briefly, so that we may leave nothing behind us to be mis- understood hereafter. I hold in my hand the despatch to your Excellency from Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, dated 5th of June, and which your Excellency caused to be published in the Government Gazette. In that despatch, after condemning the proposal which I had the honour to submit pursuant to instructions from Lord CARNARVON, Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH goes on to suggest to your Excellency three alternative projects which he requests may be investigated, their relative merits -first, the high level project and comparative cost carefully weighed, and a further report made to him. These projects are-- of extending the Gaol up to the Caine Road; second, the project of extending the Gaol on to the Police precincts, and removing the Central Police Barracks; and third, that of erecting a new Gaol on an entirely new site. With regard to this last suggestion, Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH enjoins that particular care should be taken to compare that at Stone Referring to the schedule in their hands, Cutter's Island with any available sites we may possess on this side of the water. Honourable members will see that the cost of realising the first alternative scheme proposed by the Secretary of State comes to $150,940. These figures pretty clearly set forth the cost of the project, and admit of no question except perhaps in the case of the item of $66,440 which represents the cost of the land. With regard to the cost of land in Hongkong, it may be convenient I should explain the principles on which the Government Assessor bases his valuations. The system is one that has been adhered to for many years past in the Department over which I have the honour to preside. First the gross annual rent of the land is taken and from that gross annual rent the assessor deducts such items as insurance, ground- rent, depreciation of buildings, and a landlord's ordinary yearly building repairs, and, making a sum of these deductions, he arrives at the net annual income of the proprietor. This net annual income he capitalises at fifteen years' purchase. In England it is generally twelve years, but here in the East it has always been fifteen years. This capitalisation is set down as the value, plus ten per cent. for forced resumption by the Crown. I do not know of any system that could be fairer. At the same time it must be confessed that as often as not, proprietors of land say, "I have no objection to your valuation; you are correct in your valuation of my net income, yet at the same time if I were to adapt my premises to Chinese tenements I would be able to double the proceeds from my land." That may be true or not, but the Government Assessor cannot proceed to value on speculative intentions. It is for the Government afterwards to investigate the proprietor's claim and allow by way of compensation what the facts may justify. That system has been applied to the high level scheme; also to the low level which necessitates the resumption of four lots of land on which the hospital stands. I am led to understand Honourable members believe these items for the purchase of land are insufficient. That I repeat is a matter for discussion, but all I have to say is, if they are insufficient so much the worse for the extension projects, for they are already very expensive projects, and, if we have to pay more for the land than I have estimated bar one would not be prepared to recommend your Excellency to entertain them for a moment. Proceeding to the low level scheme, or the extension of the Gaol on to the Police precincts and the removal of the Police barracks on to Hollywood Road or some other site, we find the cost there still higher and less commensurate with the advantages to be attained. It entails the erection of new Police Barracks, at a cost alone of $73,000, and the total cost of the project is $195,700. And, again, the same questions apply to this as to the first scheme with regard to the price of the land, which is here valued roughly at $50,000. There remains only one other alternative to be considered, and that is the erection of an entirely new Gaol on some other site. The cost of this is put down at $159,900. The estimate provides for a structure with 500 Separate Cells at Stone Cutter's Island. From the estimate of $183,200 is deducted, in accordance with the recommendation of the Secretary of State, the sum of $50,000, proceeds of the sale of a portion of the present Gaol and site. This figure, $50,000, for the land is perhaps low, but it is based on the same scale of assessment as the item that appears on the opposite side of the account for the cost of land; it will be a question for discussion, whether this project recommends itself to Honourable members. In conclusion, I would call your Excellency's attention to a fourth alternative, which is not mooted at all in Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH'S despatch, but which appears in the schedule before us; it is that of a proposed extension on the present premises themselves. My instructions from your Excellency were to examine this question exhaustively, and, favourable or unfavourable, to include all possible alternatives in the comparative estimates. Your Excellency will recollect that a project much of the same nature has been recently rejected by the Secretary of State, and this is simply an improvement on that rejected project, inasmuch as it leaves a large airing yard between the old Gaol and the proposed new buildings, and Central Police Barracks, but it also means the sacrifice of the site of the present Police Courts. I have no site to offer you for these in exchange. I do not know where they may be conveniently placed. My learned friend opposite (the Acting Chief Justice) seems to think they might, perhaps, without inconvenience to the Law Courts, be placed in the Supreme Court building. There is also the plan of placing them on the site purchased in 1872 for $10,000 opposite the Civil Hospital. But I am not altogether prepared to recommend at the present moment, they should be located here, because I am not certain that the space would suffice for the very large requirements and increasing archives of the Police Courts. However, these are all questions to be considered by the light of the estimates setting forth the cost of the different schemes.
Honourable W. KESWICK.-Your Excellency, the discussion which took place when we last met was unexpected by the majority of Honourable members of the Council, but the statement that your Excellency then made, and the remarks which followed, I think, were of great use in bringing forward the subject of Gaol accommodation in a manner calculated to have the merits of the question at issue fully ventilated. The few remarks I made on that occasion must have convinced your Excellency that my views on the question were very decided ones, though at the moment I was rot prepared to enter Its situation has been described by my into details. The present Goal is, in my opinion, one of a most excellent character. Honourable friend on my right (Mr. HAYLLAR) as being in the midst of a crowded town. It is in a town certainly, but not in a crowded part of this city. It is placed on the slope of a terraced hill, and I do not believe that more pure air, or more invigora-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.