CONFIDENTIAL
6.
3.
I do not think that we need be too concerned about the first paragraph of the 1883 letter. The composition of a legislative body, whether this is achieved by law or by administrative methods, is not inviolate. The composition of our Legislative Council has been altered several times since 1883 and we are about to amend the Royal Instructions again to this effect. Obviously, if the constitution can be altered, so can any practice of appointing a couple of members in a certain way. Otherwise, the custom would have a greater force than the constitution.
It is
To sum up. There is no objection in law to the abrogation of the custom, therefore a political decision.
Provided you and the Department uphold
this view the legal position at least is clear.
7.
With regard to the historical validity of the convention of these nominations, which is of venerable age, it seems to me to be rooted in the totally different pre-1949 situation. Then the community in Hong Kong had the example of the Shanghai Municipal Council before it, and aspired to manage a large slice of its own affairs in its own interests, and it was the object of Government to ensure that different elements, such as the Chamber of Commerce, the J.P.s and the Chinese community (the latter with some soul- searching) all had a look-in. Now, of course, it is the duty of Government to govern in the interests of the Colony as a whole, and it is generally accepted that, apart from a fully elective system, the best way of producing the right type of Legislative Council to do this is by the Governor's discretion to nominate for the Secretary of State's approval.
CONFIDENTIAL