public. The check of a bicameral system has been tested, and
 its value proved ; it can stand on its own merits. Its operation in
 British Guiana, therefore, ought not to be prejudiced by being
 introduced under circumstances which would be represented,
 however unfairly, as a Macchiavellian manoeuvre on the part of
 metropolitan authority."
 The Secretary of State for the Colonies accepted this recommendation.
He wrote to the Governor of British Guiana:

 "While it does not follow that nominated members in a new
 single-chamber constitution would lose the independence which
 they enjoy in the present Legislative Council, I fear that their very
 presence would, in view of the state of public opinion on this
 subject disclosed by the Commission's Report, create doubts as
 to whether the new constitution would, in practice, represent any
 great advance on the old, and thus prejudice the chance of obtain-
 ing that degree of public confidence and co-operation in the intro-
 duction of the changes, which is so essential to their success. On
 the other hand, there can be little doubt that a second chamber
 provides a valuable opportunity for revision and for further
 reflection on contentious legislation. On the whole I consider
 that the bicameral system, with a second chamber as an integral
 and enduring part of the constitution, should be adopted in
 British Guiana, and I therefore accept, in principle, the proposal
 for such a legislature."

 The Secretary of State for the Colonies, however, added this rider
to his decision:

 "To avoid any misunderstanding, I should like to make it
 clear that my conclusion in favour of a bicameral legislature for
 British Guiana does not imply that I consider that this is necessarily
 the right type of constitution for other territories. The best type
 of constitution for a particular territory must clearly depend on
 many factors, some of which will inevitably be peculiar to that
 territory, and there can be no suggestion of uniformity in this
 respect."

 This is precisely the trouble in the British Caribbean-that progress
has been made on an ad hoc and piecemeal basis, and that one has to
fight, in territory after territory, for the acceptance of a principle well
tried and firmly established elsewhere. The idea that the circumstances
of Trinidad and Tobago may be so different from those of British Guiana
as to render the bicameral system unsuited here is the purest sophistry.

 The Trinidad Guardian argues that the bicameral system is not
necessary because of the impending Federation. I just cannot understand
this. The bicameral system is necessary precisely because of the impend-
ing Federation, to bring Trinidad in line not only with its future associates;
but with the Federation itself.