Sessional_Paper_1887-1888 — Page 375

( 37 )

contends that the shore may silt up from natural causes, or it may-with the con- currence of himself-be reclaimed by the Government, and that the land thus silted up or artificially formed may be absolutely the property of the Government, but that the Government, cannot without trespass on the legal rights acquired by him under his marine lease, utilize such land for building or put it to any other uses.

7. If there be anything in the contention of Mr. FRANCIS it is clear that the Governor would not have the power to carry out the Reclamation at the public expense for the public benefit, and His Excellency would have no option but to adhere to the present plan and give the lot-owners whatever benefit may accrue to them under the scheme after reserving one half their reclamation for public roads. Would it not be desirable in these circumstances to obtain the Attorney General's opinion on the opinion of Mr. FRANCIS?

It seems to me that before the Governor can be in a position to make any specific recommendation to the Secretary of State in the matter of these Recla- mations His Excellency must have this point as to the alleged rights of marine lot-owners thoroughly cleared up.

8. I entertain a strong view in favour of the proposed scheme as a whole for the reasons set forth at such great length in my Report to the Acting Governor (General CAMERON) dated the 18th of July, 1887, (C.S.O. 1887) and in view of the dearth of building sites in the town and of the appalling yearly inundation of Chinese from the mainland which is likely to culminate in an epidemic that will engulph the Colony unless steps are taken to build more houses, I consider that the Colonial Government should not stop short at a mere acquiescence in the scheme but that it should-in its wisdom-go much farther and hold out such inducements to the marine lot-owners as will secure the earliest possible realization of the scheme by private enterprise in the manner proposed.

9. For reclamations from the sea made hitherto at the expense of the marine lot-owners the Government of Hongkong has never charged premium in money. It has contented itself with premium in land. In the proposed Reclamation, the total area proposed to be recovered from the sea will be nearly 58 acres, of which five will be Government property and the remaining 53 will be private property. Of these 53 acres of private reclamation the Government proposes to take for public roads 26 acres and will leave the marine lot-owners nearly 27 for their own use.

For the filling in of the 26 acres to be taken away from them, these people will have to expend no less a sum than $1,000,000. Of course it may be said that in devoting this million of dollars to the construction of roads and streets the lot-owners are benefiting themselves equally with the public, inasmuch as wide and hand- some streets will be sure to enhance the value of their reclamations. On the other hand does not the Public benefit very largely by the creation of these proposed roads reclaimed for them from the sea at enormous cost but towards which they contribute nothing?

10. It may be that in order to secure the early realization of this scheme at the expense of the marine lot-owners and not of the Colonial Treasury I may have counselled over liberal terms. If I have done so it has been because of the great urgency of new building sites for the relief of a population congested to a degree that cannot but cause anxiety to thinking minds, and because of the risk of the scheme being deferred to an indefinite date in the future if claims and litigation come to interpose between the intention of the Government to do the work on its own account and the actual realization of that intention.

11. As however it seems to me that the question as to who shall carry out the work and reap the full benefits from it, wholly pivots on the correctness or otherwise of the contention of the marine lot-owners as explained by Mr. FRANCIS, His Excellency will no doubt wish to have this point cleared up before going further in the matter and I would therefore advise that the papers be referred to the Attorney General for his consideration and opinion on this particular point.

J. M. PRICE.

28th June, 1888.

Page 375Page 376