3. Since then further consideration has been given to
the details of Sir Mark Young's proposals, as set out in
his despatch No.145 of the 22nd October, 1946, and I am
now in a position to accept those recommendations in full,
subject to the comments set out below (the references are
to the paragraphs of Sir Mark Young's despatch No.145) : -
(a) Distribution of seats on the Municipal Council
(paragraph 15).
Whilst I accept the recommendation
that the number of seats on the Council should for the
present be divided equally between the Chinese and non-
Chinese communities, I consider that this arrangement
should be regarded as subject to review in the light of
experience and changing conditions.
(b) Minimum qualifying age for Councillors and Voters
(paragrapha 17 and 24). In paragraph 17(a) of his
despatch No.145 Sir Mark Young recommended that the
minimum qualifying age limit for election as a Councillor
should be 30, and, in paragraph 24(1) of his despatch,
that the minimum qualifying age limit for voters should
be 25. Subsequently he felt able to recommend that the
minimum qualifying age for Councillors should be reduced
to 25, and advised that the weight of local opinion would
not at present favour, any further reduction in the minimum
qualifying age limit for both Councillors and voters. In
the light of this advice I am prepared to accept the age
of 25 as the minimum qualifying age for both, but I trust
that a reduction in both cases to 21 will not be long
delayed.
(c) Other electoral qualifications (paragraph 24).
I agree to the proposed literacy and residential
qualifications. As regards the proposal that voters
should, in addition, possess a property or the Jury
Service qualification, I accept the view that these
additional qualifications are desirable at this stage,
except that I feel that persons who can satisfy the
Registration Officer that they are excluded from the
/Jury