The total foreign electorate of the International Settlement is just about 4,000. Of this, in round figures 1,300 votes are British, 900 Japanese and 400 Americans. Is it too, much to. hope that in the forthcoming election British voters will abandon their usual apathy land show intelligent interest in municipal affairs by registering their votes? In the past they have compared very unfavourably with other communities in this respect.
their material interests are great—far greater than those of any Jother foreign nationality. There is Ino earthly reason why they should take a casual attitude of mock-
{inferiority in their approach to Municipal affairs. It is true, of course, that the elections are' not [conducted on lines to which British [political experience is accustomed. There are no campaigns and the {dea of organizing a block national vote is somehow regarded as "all very well for the Japanese" and perhaps the Americans, but highly undignified for the British. This Jmay be due to laziness. It is often excused by a sort of superior attitude toward the Council and its doings, accompanied by the unsupported belief that the nominees for Jelection are merely the spokesmen Jot "big business". This defeatism Jand ignorance combined does scant justice to the community itself and is absurdly fantastic to anyone who has even a bowing acquaintance with the work of Municipal Councillors. The truth is that the British community has great interests at stake in the elections.
Those interests are seriously damaged, to the eventual detriment of each individual British resident by the continued apathy displayed {in the elections. It Is not sufficient to be content to see five British seats—to every one of which the Jcommunity is fully entitled—precariously preserved by the pictur es que intervention of some whimsical genie.
The British community should mobilize its full voting resources with the clear intention of getting those British seats endorsed with such emphasis that their intrinsic value in British eyes is established without the peradventure of a doubt. In no desire to make {journalistic capital out of a topical event is this exhortation given. Unless the British community in the mass shows that it really values {ts place in Shanghai and attaches importance to its interests here, there Is every prospect of finding unpleasant interpretations placed Jon its crass apathy. The arrangements for the election are simple. They involve the minimum of inconvenience to anyone possessed of the slightest spark of public spirit and it is positively scandalous, jon the polling day, to find only a beggarly handful of 35 per cent. of the British voting strength recorded. This failure on the part fof so many British residents to their duty fs all the more reprehensible because the franchise implies an electorate of substantial civie importance. Boreover, the system under which elections are Mneld has been worked with considerable success by the leaders of. the community in the past. The established convention vhich enables the Council to receive two American and two Japanese re~ presentatives is really the product fof British statesmanship. That part of the task of securing appropriate representation has—with occational lapses—been admirably performed. But the apathy shown by the British voters has actually resulted in making this convention 8 source of possible danger to British representation. In other words it has given quite unnecessary importance to Japanese votes Inot_merely in their support of Japanese candidates but in their influence on the chances of other candidates.
The Japanese can poll 80 per Jcent. of their voters. If the British Jcould achieve the same sense of [public duty they would be able to poll at Toast 1,000 votes and the Jeondition of late years when sucleessful British candidates have in fa large measure owed their election Japanese support -would be radically changed. There is possible ground for criticism of the Japanese. They have quite fairly used the power given to them under the. franchise prevailing. Tu fact, the Japanese should be paid the sincere compliment of imitation by ensuring that every British voter—unless he or she has ]y_ valid excuse—goes "to the poll. This year there is an additional reason for stressing what should be an obvious obligation. The leaders fof the British community are un-}derstood to be recommending support of the present British members who are standing again—Mr. H. E. Ambhold, Mr. W. P.-Lambe and Mr. J. H, Liddell—and of the two new candidates, Mr. V, St. J. Killery jand Mr. Harold Porter. Those five names—Amhold, Lambe, Liddell, Killery, Porter—carry British endorsement. To vote for any other to be throwing away a British vote, albeit the recognized convention which secures the due return Jof two American and two Japanese members must not be neglected, This is not the time for giving playful expression to personal idiosyncrasies or fancied grievances, bby abstention or wayward flirtation with trivialities. The British stake /here is sound. It is honourable and worth preserving. The British name is good and it deserves to be upheld by all British voters in the only practical and logical manner: by giving firm unwavering support to candidates who command confidence and have a reasonable chance of being elected—the names, again, are Arnhold, Lambe, Liddell, Kullery, Porter.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.