Crown Colony, but it has thriven, it is not too much to say. The petitioners mention four colonies to which self-government limits have been conceded. They are Malta, Cyprus, Mauritius, British Honduras. Hongkong differs from all these. It is much smaller, it is much younger, has practically no history, no traditions, and no descendants of old colonists. It has no indigenous population, few permanent residents, and is an outpost in a foreign land, more like Gibraltar than either of the four dependencies mentioned above, though it is much less of a fortress and more of a trade emporium than Gibraltar.
Taking the claims which the petitioners have put forward. The first is Free election of representatives of British nationality in the Legislative Council. They look for an elected Assembly, they ask at the same time that only British nationality should be represented! The words are cleverly chosen. Do they mean that the electors may be of any nationality but that they are to elect only representatives of British nationality? In other words, may Chinamen vote as long as only Englishmen are elected?
Is British nationality synonymous with British Subjects, & does British Birth mean origin? The common sense meaning of the words is that the English residents in Hongkong shall elect representatives to the Legislative Council, and this is probably intended, though the framers of the petition can, if they will, put another construction on their phrase. If this is so, the petitioners ask for a chamber containing an elective element, to be elected on a franchise running along a very narrow line.
It has always seemed to me that the Constitutions of those Crown Colonies, which are not fully self-governing colonies, are the worst features in the English colonial system. They are