Sessional_Paper_1898 — Page 489

( 35 )

To what extent? -I do not think Chinese like to live with their families in a house one floor of which is used as a coolie house. As a rule the whole house is a coolie house or a family house.

That one floor would be unoccupied and so one-third of the rent would be taken away?—Yes; 33 per cent., really.

The CHAIRMAN-It would be possible to use it as a shop, I presume?-There are not many shops in the narrow streets.

Mr. EDE-From a sanitary point of view, quite apart from the question of value, would you recommend that cubicles be allowed on the lower floors?—I should say no from a purely sanitary point of view.

Hon. C. P. CHATER-You know section 66 of Ordinance 24 of 1887 ?—Yes.

If that was made compulsory and applicable to all houses, whether purchased before or after that Ordinance, what effect do you think it would have ?--It would distinctly tend to make landlords keep up their old houses as long as they could; they would patch then over and over again. If they once pulled them down they would come under a more stringent law and have to make a backyard and so lose ground.

Suppose a fire took place and it had to be done would the owner be put to a large expense if he had to give up 10 feet?-As far as I remember the Ordinance goes further than 10 feet; it goes up to 15 feet. Of course he would lose all that ground.

Suppose there was to be compensation would a large sum be necessary to enforce this rule, supposing it were wanted ?—Yes, it would be a very large sum.

Are you in favour of resumption of large areas by the Government?—No, certainly not, especially if they are carried out in the manner of the Taipingshan resumption.

Are you in favour of the Government taking over private lanes ?-I am certainly against any compulsion for the owner to give up a lane.

The CHAIRMAN--Do you think the owners should maintain the lanes in a sanitary condition?—I should like to say why I am not in favour of an owner being compelled to give up a lane. Suppose a lane goes through the middle of some property the owner of that property can no longer do what he likes with it, if resumed. He can only rebuild it just as it was before. He could never relay out the property or build godowns or anything else covering the whole lot.

Do you not think he should be compelled to maintain it in a proper sanitary con- dition and pave and channel it?—And metalled. That is a very important word in the Home Act and there is a great deal of difference between paving and metalling. There are very few of the public streets here which are more than indifferently metalled and I do not see why an owner should be compelled to put his lane in a more expensive condition than a public street.

You are of opinion that the lanes should be in a sanitary condition ?-Certainly.

With regard to paving and channelling you are in favour-?—No, not if you put it like that.

What do you think he should be called upon to do?—I think if he lays it with good decomposed granite, which is the same as many of the public streets are made of, he is doing as much as the Government.

And the channelling of it?—Certainly, there must be surface water drainage.

You take exception to his being called upon to pave it?-Certainly; paving is very expensive and it would run into a very large sum of money.

Hon. C. P. CHATER-You have also said that the lanes should be kept in a sanitary condition?-Certainly.