would give rise to comment.
On the other hand, he does not mind being overruled on the points in question, and does not think that their being mentioned in published correspondence will lead to embarrassment. He said that if there were to be any deletions he assumed that these would be indicated in the published despatch by asterisks. Clearly we could not contemplate that, and I recommend that his despatch should be published as written. The passages in question will be noted below:-
(i) Paragraph 3 (a) of the draft at 86.
Distribution of seats on the Municipal Council. The words "for the present" have been taken out from the draft at 63 and "arrangements" is replaced by "and other features of the scheme". The effect is, while establishing that there
are aling. will be a revision, to avoid gang with it any obligation that this will necessarily lead to an increase in Chinese seats. On this point, Sir A. Grantham's letter at 77 should be read.
(ii) Paragraph 3 (b). Residential qualification for non-British nationals. This paragraph is now inserted in view of Sir Mark Young's insistence upon retaining paragraph 17 (c) to (e) and paragraph 25 (vi) of his despatch. The question of a shorter residential qualification for non-British nationals other than Chinese will thus be publicly raised, and rejected by the Secretary of State.
(iii) Paragraph 3 (c). Period of Japanese occupation.
This is another paragraph which has been inserted, in this case to deal with paragraph | 25 of Sir Mark Young's despatch, which ithad been proposed to delete.
(iv) Paragraph 3·(f). Nomination of appointed
members of the Municipal Council. The promised memorandum on Trade Unionism in Hong Kong has now been received at 75, and is summarised at 754. In view of this discouraging picture of the present state of Trade Union development, it is suggested that the last sentence of sub-paragraph 1 of paragraph 3 (d) should be curtailed, so as not to call expressly for an increase in trade union seats on the first revision of the distribution. I am sorry that it is necessary to make this recommendation, but I feel that we have no option in view of the situation described in 75.
(v) Paragraph 3(g). In discussing paragraph 3 (e) of the draft at 63 with Sir Mark Young, it became clear that he has envisaged to Municipal Council as being in its own field virtually free from control by the Legislature, and he thinks that unless this is recognised the people in Hong Kong will feel that they have been
fobbed