Old Hong Kong-3 — Page 150

NAVAL YARD (Contd.)

that they could not concur in this proposal.

726 جنت

The letter is dated March 9, 1982, addressed to Vice- Admiral George 0. Willes, C. B. Commander-in-Chief, China, and states:

Sir. I have laid before My Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty your submission of the 11th January last, No. 19, forwarding a report from Commodore Cuming on the proposal made by Colonel Crossman R.E. to remove the naval and military establishments at Hong Kong from their present position and concentrate them in a more eastward position at Causeway Bay,

"My Lords have informed the Secretary of State for War. that looking to the decided opinion against the proposal expressed by you and by Commodore Cuming, they cannot concur in the transfer suggested.

"I am, however, to desire that you will report whether in view of the desire of the Colony to obtain the site on which the naval establishments now stand, you would recommend any other site as being more suitable than Causeway Bay."

Apparently no better site could be found at the time.

*

我

*

*

In June 1883, the Governor addressed to Commodore Cuming a plan proposing to carry the Praya extension past the front of the Naval Yard. The Naval Yard officers reported their objections to this scheme, and in their turn proposed suggestions for a modified plan. The following month, July 1883, Commodore Cuming advised the Governor that he could support the project but he might concur with it in a modified form, the question having been referred to the Commander-in- Chief.

not

That same month, Admiral Dowell (then Commaner-in-Chief) forwarded a report on the scheme to the Admiralty. In October 1883 the Admiralty notified the Secretaty of State for lar that their chief objection to the scheme was the lack of room for expansion, and enquired whether the Artillery Barracks, also called the North Barracks, could be handed over to the Admiralty to provide the space required. A reply in December from the Secretary of State for War stated that the military could not hand over the Artillery Barracks unless some other site could be provided. In January following, the Admiralty enquired from Admiral Dowell whether the Colonial Government in Hong Kong could provide another site for the Artillery Barracks and if not, was the modified scheme of the Prays frontage, which they now forwarded, suitable?

Admiral Dowell accordingly in April 1884 addressed the Governor enquiring whether Government cold supply a site for the Artillery Barracks and if not, could they offer alternative schemes. The Governor replied that there were no other sites available, also sending later that month a report of the Surveyor General on the alternative plans, and adding that the cost would be beyond the means of the Colony unless they were assisted by the Naval and Military departments.

In January 1885 the Admiralty pointed out that the extension of the Naval Yard was under way and until that was settled, the decision must be postponed.

Correspondence from April to November, 1885, passed with reference to the proposed acquisition of the North Barracks, the principal object being to provide barrack accommodation for naval men in lieu of a receiving ship. The "Victor Emanuel" was reported as being unhealthy and the proposed acquisition was strongly recommeded by both the Naval

Page 150Page 151