June 29, 1907.]
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
certain suggestions by the medical experts, and the session 1902, and I wish to quote just a which suggestions as we now see, are totally bad few lines in a speech of mine made at that in effect. The first objection to the scheme was time (quotes). The Government have dis that it involved a very large sum of money, I regarded that recommendation and they have think some eight million of dollars. It was tried some other provisi n. said then that the Government would not, have, after five years, been found to be These provisions and could not, afford such a large sum, inefficacious, and now some new method must not even & proportion of it, a third or a be found, and I put this forward, not because half of it. Now these objections at that it is a pet scheme of mine-not at all, because time seemed to have a very great deal of the scheme was conceived in the first place, I | influence with the authorities because they think, by my hon. friend opposite, the thought compensation was given for the loss of Director of Public Works. It has been ad- cubicles. Under that impression, they justly vocated by myself and several others and 1 said they would have nothing to do with it. think Why should the Government pay compensation Sanitary Board, also advocated something of Mr. Rumjahn, an ex-member of the to landlords who put up illegal ca bicles on the this kind. Now, Sir, let me put the case from floors of their houses? And if these cubicles the opposite side: supposing you disagroc, are insanitary, they say, the Sanitary Board Sir, to this third resolution, I would want to should insist on having them removed. Then know in the peculiar circumstances of this again they asked why the Government should pay Colony, aud the peculiar way in which the compensation for the removal of those cubi houses are constructed, and the peculiar way cles and the loss of them. That is mistaking in which the land is portioned out, a better our scheme altogether. We u-e the word com. solution of the difficulty. As hon. members pensation, or we might use the word contribu- know, and the public know, houses of the tion. We were not, and are not asking the Chinese type are far too long for their Government to give compensation for that width, and air purpose to landlords. We only ask the Govern-introduced into the house only from the front, and sunlight сад be went to contribute a proportion of the money and after a great deal of difficulty, from the required for the resumption of certain property back. In the front there is always a lane or a which will be converted into open space for the public road measuring from 20 perhaps to 30 use of adjacent or surrounding houses. I will feet or more. Thus light can be give an example, and then, I think, hon. mem-
fairly introduced into the front part of the building. bers will be able to understand what I mean. Then, after a great deal of difficulty and a great There are a row or block of houses of five or deal of legislation we have compelled a back six together. Everybody knows the shape of yard to be provided varying from a few feet, to Chinese houses; they are long narrow houses, say, twelve or fifteen feet. each house measuring about 15 feet in width like
When a back yard that, or 8 back lane externally, and about 50 feet in depth. In'er-
exists, then a certain proportion of light and air can nally the depth will be a couple of feet less, be introduced into the rear; but the light say 48 feet and the width would be about 13 will never be able to penetrate to the middle feet 6 inches or 13 feet. Now, these houses of the house. stand on land carved ont to correspond with before, have an average depth of fifty feet These houses, as I stated the size of the house, and that piece of land is with only a narrow frontage, the internal registered in the Land Office as section A or measurement being about 15 feet, B or subsection A or B of that lot. These windows are therefore absolutely necessary in Lateral houses are generally owned by separate order to give sufficient light and air. Indeed, owners, and each house is frequently Sir, I find in the proposals of the Govern transferred and dealt with as a separate lot. ment on the recommendations of the Sanitary Now, how could the landlords of two adjacent Commission, laid on the table at the last meet- houses who might wish to improve their pro. ing. a note regarding the length of these perty and introduce light and air do so without houses. Now, Sir, in houses erected getting rid of the house separating theirs ? 1.nd hitherto Clearly they could do nothing unless the Go. | buildings, your proposal
naoccupied by domestic vernment would step in and resume that house lateral windows
insist upon would be after giving full compensation
all right, but Then they I want to know in other cases, when contiguous could pull it down, either right down or to the houses are being rebuilt, how on earth are we first floor, and provide open space for the to insist on houses on either side. Of course it would be a
the provision of lateral windows opening into external air without resumption of question whether the Government would in fact portion of the land in occupation of particular
think it is quite just the Government shou'd landowners. -insist that the landowners on either side houses, and that alone, that can give you the It is the resumption of third should contribute a proportion-what propor- means of insisting on lateral windows. You may tion I don't want to touch upon just at present insist, but it could not be done otherwise as it --but & proportion of the cost of resuming that is physically impossible, and that is why I say house. Then again, if the third house in a the scheme for pulling down the upper storey block of houses is in the ownership of one of every third house is the only scheme which particular person, compensation is asked for promises to be effective; in fact, the only simply to compensate the landlord. for possible scheme. Aud yet, I should be very sacrificing one House in three for an
open glad indeed if any hon. member, or any unit of space, such open space at only benefits his own the outside public, oanld point out a possible house, but the Colony at large inasmuch as when plan that would do away with the resumption the introduction of light and air into domestic of property already in occupation. dwellings is settled, the sanitation of the Colony resolution 4
As to "That of Hongkong becomes a most simple problem, compensation should be recognised in such a the principle of just so that objection to this scheme, I think, after scheme," this is the crux of the question. The certain consideration,,cannot be strong. it is rejection of the scheme, as I stated before, was not to compensate landlords for the loss of owing to the Government's refusal to graut aoy cubicles, but it is to give a contribution of just compensation, but I have shown you, while money for the resumption of land to be provided speaking on the third resolution, that compen- as open space. Now the second objection to sation is not given for the loss of cubiales, but this scheme formerly was more
or less
for open space-in fact, for the resumption of a by the landowners. They said that the certain portion of land thrown open as open space partition walls as they were built would be too in order to admit air and light into the surround- weak when the intermediate houses were pulled ing houses. Now the Government may say down, and a good deal of expense would have to that even if they accept the price of the be incurred by the landlords of the houses on contribution towards the carrying out of this either side to strengthen these walls. That is, improvement, we have not the means of doing of course, an architectural question. I suppose when we get the third house taken down, or before, an architect will be employed, so I can see neither technical nor practical difficulty in strengthening the walls as desired. However, these two objections, as I say, were so strong at the time that they overpowered tue recom. mandation,、 and the result was that when the Public Health Ordinance No. 1 of 19 3 was passed, it contained no provision to carry out this scheme. I have Hansard in my hand for
·
80.
to
429
twelve years.
Then how much does it cost the Government to carry out a scheme difficult question concerning the which promises to put aд end to a most sanitation
of $4000,000 which we will assume to be a loan of this Colony? Say we are to expend the sum at 3 per cent, for fifty years, and allow one per caat, to go to sinking fand (which I am told would be sufficient in fifty years to pay back the capital bond) that means 4 per cent. Then it costs the Government $ 80,000 a year, and that is all, aud in fifty years the whole of the interest and principal will have been paid off. $180,000 a year? I say there is none whatever, Now gentlemen, is there any difficulty to find this Every year the Government has spent something like $500,000 on its Sanitary Department. have not the exact figures at my finger ends, bat at the same time I see from the report of The Commission, and also in the estimates for
that figure. Now, if we make a final settle- last year, that the average is a little under
improve the lighting and admission of fresh ment of the cubicle question, and if we can air into domestic buildings, then we have done the sauitation of the Colony. a very great deal toward the improvement of We would have no need then to pay large sums of money each year for disinf clauts, and what disinfectants iu the world are litter than sunlight and fresh air. We wouldn't want such a large staff of sanitary inspectors, and we wouldn't want a great number of other things that we deem to be necessary in the present sanitary con- dition of the Colony. I submit, Sir, that we could easily save from one quarter to one half of the annual expenditure of the Sanitary meet the whole or the major part of the Board, Rud this saving would be enough to annual expenditure that we will focur. Sup. raising of a loan, then has it the means to posing the Government is adverse to the
carry out this scheme I say yes, within a very 1903, I think it reasonable time, about ten years or 80. Since resolved by the
was in 1903 that it was Government to lay annually a
aside considerable sum of money for the resumption of insanitary properties, I believe two or three votus amounting to over half a million dollars have been recommended and passed by this Council. The area that is to be re-um-d is still in the hands of the Government-that is to say the Kau U Fong resumption. number of houses at Kau U Fong have been A large resumed aud pulled down, now streets have been constructed, and lots of land have been put up realise the figure they expected, and I believe to public auction but the Government did not
the land still remains in the hands of the Government. Now, Sir, I believe if the
quarter of Government were to devote this money, say a A million dollars, towards the resumption of every third house, or to con- tribute towards the cost of resuming every third house and converting it into open space, the Government would be able to do it within ten years, and without spending as it were, anything extra from the revenue of the Colony. Now, Sir, I think I have covered most of the ground necessary for the support of the resolutions. Resolution five is simply brought forward to have someone to tak, the matter into careful consideration and to report to the Government or make known to the public whether the scheme contained in resolution
have to ask three is desirable and practical or not. I may leave after the discussion to amend No. 1 because I feel that the | limitation to certain members official or official, is undesirable. 86, with leave I will amend that ólause to read that the committee to be appointed should consider on what pr aciple compensation must be awarded and generally as to the manner in which the ach me should be carried out, ask leave to strike out the w rds three officials I
intend, Sir, to occupy the time of this Council and three unofficials of this council.
I do not very loug because I should be delighted indeed to buy a fall dise ssion on this question, sad to hear the remarks of tou, member. vu this subj ol. shal reserve my remarks on tue laud ords' point of view till re to ho..members. With these remarks I b-g to move the resʊin- tions which I have reud.
83,000,000, but the Government could contribute The estimate is a very large amount, either a thi d or half of it, which would amount to about $3,000,000 or $4,000,000. How are the Government ging to get that money Now, Sir, in the fi st place I w uld rem nd hon. members that the money is not required all at once. In fact, the scheme requires a number of years to carry out. The quickest time in which we could accomplish i would be from five to six years, and the logest time from ten to
|
un-
your
The Hon. Mr. WEI YUK-I have mach pleasure in secondingethat resolution,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.