355
Parliamentary franchise, the system which obtains in this Colony is an increasingly absurd and unjust anachronism. What, it may fairly be asked, are the conditions peculiar to Hongkong which require that as soon as he sets foot in this Colony a man from Home shall be denied all those elementary rights of citizenship which he is entitled to exercise in the United Kingdom? He does not cease to bear the burdens of citizenship; he provides by his in- dustry funds for carrying on the public services, be discharges his duty as a juror, and, as we have seen in the recent war, he is called upon to take part in the defence of the Colony and the Empire. Nor is he less enterprising, lesa intelligent, or less loyal than those who stay at home and are considered com- petent not merely to manage their own domestic affairs but also to control Imperial policy. Surely, it is a curious anomaly that the Imperial Gov- ernment, while showing the most tender solicitude for native customs, should be so indifferent to British traditions, and that a readiness to introduce our democratic institutions as fast as circumstances permit to people previously subject to despotic rule should exist side by side with a stubborn reluctance to withdraw a bureaucratic-or, rather, autocratic-form of Government from people who have been nurtured in the lap of democracy.
The injustice and incongruity of the present state of affairs becomes more striking in contrast with the changes that have taken place elsewhere, in- cluding the Crown Colonies. Unofficial majorities have been granted to the Legislative bodies of some of the West Indian Islands, to Cyprus, British Honduras, Malta and Ceylon-in some instances within the last two or three years; a more representative character has been given recently to the Government of the East Africa Protectorate; while in the Straits Settle- ments which, possess municipalities to perform certain functions which in Hongkong are monopolised by the Government-a committee composed of Official and Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council has just re- commended an Unofficial majority. Yet for upwards of half-a-century Bo increase has been made in the representation of the European community in Hongkong on the Legislative Council, which remains at four, the same as in the year 1869.
This is the fault of successive Secretaries of State, who have laboured under the delusion that political sagacity exhausted itself when the present constitution of the Colony was drawn up. That opinion has never been held locally. Indeed, dissatisfaction with the unrepresentative character of the Legislature was expressed as early as 1845, when, as Dr. Eitel informs us, "In spite of the continuous demands of the British community for adequate re- presentation on the Legislative Council, at least through nomination by the Crown of an equal number of Official and Unofficial Metnbers, this burning question was temporarily decided by Sir John Davis refusing all popular re-
!!
presentation.' Four years later, as a result of a petition to the House of Commons, the public were granted two nominated representatives on the Legislative Council. It is worthy of remark that at that time the Official Members were free to vote as they chose, and continued to exercise this free- dom until 1858, when it was withdrawn.
Eventually, as a result of protests made from time to time-notably in 1865, 1869 and 1880-the number of Unofficial Members was permanently raised to four while the number of Official Members was fixed at six, giving an Official majority of two, which has been retained ever since. The numbers were increased respectively to five and seven in 1884, one seat being accorded to the Chinese. That this change did not meet local aspirations was shown by the speech delivered at the first meeting of the enlarged Council by the Hon. Mr. F. P. Johnson, who expressed the opinion that there should be six Official and six Unofficial Members, and added: "What we really want is that the Council should adequately represent the intelligent public opinion of the Colony." That want remains unsatisfied to this day.
The next demand for reform was made ten years later, in 1891, wh en
Fifty 4?? a petition was addressed to the House of Commons by residents of the Colony asking for :--
(1) The majority of the Legislative Council to be composed of elected
representatives of British nationality.
(2) Perfect freedom of debate for the Official Members with power to
vote according to their conscientious convictions.
(3) Complete control by the Council over local expenditure.
(4) Management of local affairs.
(5) A consultative voice in all questions of an Imperial character.
The only result of this was the addition of another Chinese member to the Legislative Council in return for an increase of the Official element by the inclusion of the General Officer Commanding the Troops, and the introdue- tion of two nominated Unofficial Members into the Executive Council-a questionable benefit from a popular point of view inasmuch as the Council meets in private and its members are sworn to secrecy so that they cannot be called upon to render any account of their stewardship.
The subject was revived in January, 1916, and a petition, prepared by the Hon. Mr. H. E. POLLOCK, K.C., and hearing upwards of 500 signatures, was submitted to the Secretary of State in favour of :—
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.