CO537-2188 — Page 41

possess a property qualification;

and this despite

the fact that it is accepted as a general principle

that males and females should be equally entitled

to franchise rights and that Chinese is to be

accepted on an equal with English for the literacy

test. If the legislation were put in this way J

Juror

and the requirements for a jeweler being set out in-

stead of being applied by reference, the discrimination

against the infirm, females and persons who could can

only speak Chinese, would clearly be quite inde-

fensible; it seems to me no more defensible to

introduce this discrimination by means of reference

Jury

to the Jewelleby Ordinance.

It is true that there is one further qualifi-

cation mentioned in Section 3 of the Jewellery Jury

Ordinance, namely that a person to serve as a

jeweller

Juror

must means te be "a good and sufficient person",

but what this means I really do not know.

I am afraid I am not in a position to suggest

an alternative, unless it is to be that the properly

qualification should apply to everyone or to

no one,

and I feel confident that neither would be

regarded as suitable.

In these circumstances, paragraph 4 of the draft

telegram is difficult to amend. A system of electoral

colleges would appear to have little merit if it

involved retention of the franchise on

lines so

far contemplated, and it s adoption would, I think,

necessarily therefore mean that the franchise, if

that would be the right word to use, would be

broadened.

I suggest that we should ask Mr. Hazlerigg to

come up and discuss this problem, and I have shortened paragraph 4 of the telegram on the assumption that

this is to be done.

agge

22nd May,

1947.