10
We canuct go into the question of whether the property will be more valuable at some other day or was more valuable sometime in the past. What fairer test can there be than the returns handed in by the man himself to the assessor? And, furthermore, your Lord- ship, the task of reconciling the rentals sent to the assessor with the amounts received is almost hopeless, the discrepancies being so great.
fis Lordship —Yes, that would be desirable, but our difficulty comes here, in that we must allow for forced sale. Even assuming have the right to act as you argue, there is still no provision for compulsory sale.
we
The Attorney-General.—Yes, but your Lord. ship will also please remember, the condition in which the property and surroundings were at the time they were taken and that the owner instead of reiving extra compensation was liable to punishment and in cases even to con. fiscation of his property as the natural out- nome of the law I have cited, and cases can
he oited where not only the property has been confiscated, but pinalty has been imposed in addition, and where a man has neglected to send in his rentals for the three years he ought not to complain if the assessor's valuation is taken as a basis of compensation.
His Lordship-The rents at the time the houses were cloud were at their lowest and it is very difficult to decide what is the fair thing to do under the circumstangos!" That he plagio broke out is pschips not the fault of the land. lord and whose fault it is no one can tell,
:
-
H
ཟ
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
on property in amount for a man to earn Taipingshan? There were no cocklofts in the premises at the time he let them and when he received $30 a month for them, and mezzanine floors have been in buildings practically without restriction ever since the begining of the It is barely possible the floors may colony. ~xtend a foot or two foo much, but that is easily remedied. The learned counsel says that the Government is not responsible for the wide prevalence of this state of things; but, if it is not, I should like to know who is responsible: | These buildings, too, are alinost new and it is not fair and reasonable compansation to value, them at such figures as the Government has seen fit to do. The landlord does not wish to have this property taken from him; he prefers to keep it, but, if he must part with it, he is entitled to a fair and reasonable compensation. He paid 320,000 for it when the dollar was worth nearly twice as much as it is to-day. If the houses were, as the Government claims, in au insanitary condition, he should have been notified, but he has never received any such in- timation There is a period of depression now that extends more or less over the entire civilised world and that has been emphasised here by our special disasters, bat in a reasonably short tim these bard times will pass away and better days come, and property is sure to enhance in value. Such property owners as have means and can wait especial y when they are earning a fair return on their investmout, think they have an excellent chance for a good speculation in holding and have no desire to sell. It is therefore manifestly un- fair to take the property at the lowest valua- tion. It is a sori-us refiction on the future This landlord has been twelve of the colony. years in this colony and has made the valuation of property and the buying and selling of same his special study. Is it then reasonable to sup. pose that he did not know what he was doing when he purchased this pieci and that he paid an excessive prios for it? It was evidently a carefully considered investment on his part and he believed the property would have a steadily increasing value.
|
His Lordship-Yes, but you must remember that your argument cuts both ways. If he is to expect 8 per cent., the number of years allowed in the compensation will be correspondingly diminished.
Mr. Denys I noderstaud that, and we are not asking for 8 per cent net. He gets only 8 per cent gross now, As your Lordship will member. I made this claim on a different principle from that generally discussed here in the presentation of claims.
to
The Attorney-General — Granting, your Lord- ship, tha e në botuess of that position the owner would still not be entitled to additional com, pensation, for irrespective of what penalty he would subject himself to by a continuance of his illegal practices, the minute the Sani tary Board put its hands on these objectionable places the rents would certainly go down, and That is the main reason that this class of property holders is so bitterly opposed to sanitary restric tions. I again respectfully call the attention of the Board to the Public Health Ordinance 24 of 1887, section 67, which makes an overcrowded domestic building a public nuisance, and also tó section 75, where those who số overcrowd are liable to a fine not exceeding $50 and, in defa 1t of payment, to imprisonment not exceeding one month.>
I know it has been intimated that the officials are to blame for allowing these abuses to continue, but, while I dispute that statement, I call the attention of the Board to the fact that we had not sufficient authority until now to carry out the spirit of the law, although much might be said on that subject at another time. In the future, however, a different state of thồngs
Mr. Deacon-I also object, your Worship, will prevail and the law will be enforced provided
some of the theories advanced by the we have the support of the courts, and the first Attorney-General. The Government cannot thing in the accomplishment of this desired ond
claim overcrowding and then claim deduction is the curtailment of the overcrowding, since the
for vacandies. They cannot blow hot and only way to reach these individuals is throngh cold. It may be the private opinion of their pockets. When they realise that their entire
the learned counsel for the Government that the property and income may be endangered they Government is not obliged to exercise supervision will have to be coutent with smaller returns and in such matters, but, certainly, so far as I have live within the law. In all these discussions I ever been able to see, the law has long been har no personal interest whatever to serve and otherwise. The Government by its laches has I wish there were some other way out of the permitted this overcrowding to grow up and con- difficulty, and, while I am here to help the Board tinue here from the earliest days of the colony in every way I can, yet I must say that I see no
and now all at once, without any notice to land- justification in e ther law or justice that these lords, it proposes to initiate reforms and to laudlords should receive more than the value of punish as it were these men of property who have their land and of the materials in their buildings done so much to build the city, for having done I recall to your Lordship and hou. members of that which the Government did not object to. the Board the 53rd and 54th of Victoria, section
Mr. Maitland (whose na.ne by mistake was 41, which says the compensation shall be a fair amount of damages without any ex ra allowance. given in the report of the first session of the evidently the spirit of the law here being that the Board as Mr. Nathan) was then recalled as a man shall in a sense be punished for maintain-wituess and was asked if he knew of the existence ing a public nuisance. And he would be stopped of a second agreement made by Mr. Palmer, but from disputing the fairness of the returns, for they were sout in by himself at a time when there was no object in his trying to create a false impression.
Mr. H. L Dennys-Your Lordship, I must take exception to some of the inferences of the learned counsel. The section of the Ordinance should be read to the end, where special em, phasis is placed on the words "full and fair compensation. Now that means" full and fair,” not something essentially unfair. My client purchased the property for $20,000 hard cash and that fact is beyond dispute. He also earns thereon 8 per cent, and we have no right to im- peach his veracity in regard to these state- ments, that were so clearly shown to be cor- rect. Now is 8 per cent. an unreasonable
:
January 3, 1895.
for last year, but for the year before they amounted to $140, or about $11 a month,
Mr. Leigh was then called and said that he had examined the property and that he esti- mated the small house to be worth $2,420, exclu- sive of the 10 per cent, for forced sale, and that he arrived at the valuation in the following man- ner. He did not think the ordinary method of procedure applied in this case because the proper- tv on which the small house stood was not fully developed, and to arrive at a proper, value it should be compared with surrounding property, and then add the value of the old material on the ground, taking the value of the square foot at $1. To find what would be a fair value of the property if developed, he compared it with the property of Mr. Palmer near by, of which he had ascertained the rentals and knew the purchase price, and felt that Mr. Palmer, in making such investment understood what he was doing and would only bay where he felt sure there was a bargain. Mr. Leigh valued each of the five honses of Mr. Palmer at $1.200, although he said they might to-day be built for much less, making $6.000. The land he valued at $14,000, it con- taining 2,900 square feet, which would make the value of the square-foot $4.86. But, he said, let us say $4 a foot for this claim 10 and add $100 for old material. The area is 580 square feet, which at $4 a foot would ba $2,320 and, adding in the $100 for old matter, would make a total of $2,420. Now if the owner puta in about. $900 more, for that money he could build another four storey house and would have a good income bearing investment.
His Lordship-Just what do you mean by undeveloped and over-developed property?
.
Mr. Leigh-I call property undeveloped whicoh in its present condition is not earning a fair return on the investment but which byajudicious expendi ture of a reasonable amount of money could be put in condition to earn a proper return on the invest- ment; and, on the other hand, I consider a pro- perty over-developed when it has more bricks and mortar and finishings on it than can be made to yield a reasonable return. The $900 estimate I have made in this case is what I should consider a fair and sufficient outlay for the purposes in tended. The second honse of this claim, the larger one, I valne at $1,300. It is in good con- dition and is 171 feet wide. It is lighted on three sides and has a shop on the ground floor and the upper portion is used for dwelling pur- poses, The house is exceptionally well built and is, I should say, about ten years old. The rent, as returned by the assessor, was for 1892 $35 and for 1893 $3 per month; there was no re- turn made for the smaller house. Tha Assessor assessed the rentals for the thres ears at $340, $320, and $300. I have averaged the rent at $31.66 a month, which gives for the year $373 92. Deducting for re- and fire in- pairs, Crown rent, taxes, surance, and capitalising at per cent. for lå years, although really it ought to be 1423 years, we should arrive at a value for the house tion by the wear of the house during the years of $4.300. I make no deduction for deprecia- of the capitalisation, for that is allowed for in the value given to the property to-day. And that is just where the value of a surveyor's services comes in. Almost any one can value a new house, but a house that is in good condition is good, it makes no difference whether it is old or now. Some people, in fact, much prefer a house that is well dried out and has stood the test of a few years' trial. If a house is in good con- dition and is properly cared for it will last the fourteen years of the compensation and probably even much longer. Adding then the 10 per cent. for compulsory sale gives $4,730, which. added to the $2,62, makes $7,392, including the 10 per cent. The house is in a thoroughly sanitary condition. In making the valuation of 57 Square Street, I follow the same method and make the same deductions as I have in the other ordinary cases and as has been followed in the colony for years. In some houses, it would make no difference whether there were meszanine floors or not, where one person takes a whole floor, for he then subdividžia This is a claim for lits 7 and 95 Square it to suit the conveniences of his family; Street, The claim is $68:30, based on th› report it only affects honses used for conlie lodgings, of their own valuator of the property, who values and in those it will be very difficult to prevent it at $7,392, The Government offer is $3,339. The overcrowding, for they will put in banks. owner refused $3,000 for the land soon after pur-cubicles, and other devices. No Chinaman will obasing it and since then had declined an offer of sleep on the floor, not even under the new Ordin- $3,600 from Mr. Palmer. The rentals of the ance. I do not allow in these estimates for con- small house were not returned to the assessor creting the floors. The property now belongs
he said he did not.
CHAN KWAI, CLAIM NO. 10. The next case, called was that of Chan Kwai Claim No. 10. represented by Mr. C. D. Wilkin
son.
In answer to some of the preliminary qas. tions raised by counsel for the claimant, tis Lordship said the Board would decide them on Monday when they took up the other matters they then expected to decide.
+
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.