694216-1875-Praya-Reconstruction-Report-of-Commission- — Page 1

DIE

SOIT

ET

QUI

MON

DROIT

THE HONGKONG

Government Gazette.

Published by Authority.

No. 22.

No. 98.

VICTORIA, SATURDAY, 22ND MAY, 1875.

VOL. XXI.

GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION.

The following Report of the Commission appointed to enquire. into the question of reconstructing the Praya, is published for general information.

By Command,

CECIL C. SMITH, Acting Colonial Secretary.

Colonial Secretary's Office, Hongkong, 20th May, 1875.

REPORT.

1. In accordance with the request of Governor SIR ARTHUR KENNEDY, we have enquired into certain proposals regarding the re-construction of portions of the Praya which were destroyed by the late Typhoon, the reclamation of additional ground along the sea frontage of specified districts,--- and the building of a sea-wall and roadway in front of property held by the Naval and Military We Authorities, so as to connect Praya East with Praya Central by one continuous structure. were also desired to report upon the style of work to be adopted in re-building or repairing the Praya Wall, and to express an opinion upon the best means of raising the necessary funds for meeting the expenditure attendant upon the execution of what might be recommended.

2. The enquiry fell naturally under the following heads:-

(a.) The advisability of making a reclamation at Sai-ying Pun, (No. 2 District), vide

Section I. on annexed Plan.

(b.) The advisability of making a reclamation at Sheung Wan, (No. 4 District), vide

Section II.

(c.) The style of sea-wall to be constructed along Praya Central from White's Lane to

Government Wharf, (Cricket Ground.)

(d.) The style of sea-wall to be constructed in other parts of the sea frontage where

reclamations might hereafter be made.

(e.) The advisability of building a sea-wall and roadway in front of the Naval Yard and

adjoining Military buildings.

(f.) Ways and means.

3. From the papers laid before us, we were given to understand that the reclamations on Sections I and II of the plan were urgently desired by the Marine Lot Holders in those neighbour- hoods, and that they were willing to bear the main cost of the work, on the condition that the land. reclaimed was leased to them, but having personally examined the majority of those interested, and having explained to them the necessity of a stronger, and therefore more costly, sea-wall than they appear to have contemplated, we find that, with few exceptions, there was no desire to embark on such an expensive undertaking. Their adhesion to the scheme seems, therefore, to have been given with the idea that the new sea-wall should be built like the last, both as regards design and cost, which we, at any rate, could not recommend, and also because a feeling had been created among the Chinese Lot Holders, that under any circumstances the reclamations were to be made, and no one wished to have the ground in front of his property leased by the Crown to other persons.