THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE
133
Affairs, and so recruitment for the force was suspended and vacancies caused by death or retirement were not filled.
In 1948 the Secretary for Chinese Affairs wrote that 'even before the outbreak of the Pacific War it was becoming evident that this system of raising money (i.e., by voluntary subscriptions) would have to be abandoned. Plans for the reorganisation of the Force were under consideration at the time when the Japanese invaded the Colony'. By the District Watch Ordinance, No. 15 of 1949, the force became the direct responsibility of government and the pay and terms of service were brought into line, rank for rank, with those of the Police Force. The Committee was not mentioned in the new Ordinance, and the names of its surviving members were no longer given in the Civil Service Lists.
The reasons for this change were never made clear by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs. But it seems reasonable to conclude that the utility of the force declined once the regular police became more professionalised. There was probably some resistance within government and the community to the idea of a few prominent Chinese controlling a private police force and, on occasions, putting it to their own use. It could also be argued that since the returned Governor, Sir Mark Young, had promised a far greater participation of the many rather than the few in public life, the need for a small body of rich Chinese to act as a key advisory body was seen as not quite 'democratic' in the new Hong Kong; moreover, a few prominent Chinese, members of the Committee, had been a little too prominent in the organisations set up by the Japanese. For these and other reasons, then, the District Watch Force and its Committee after eighty-three years of life and service to the public came to an end in 1949.
—
An analysis of the District Watch Committee terminates in a number of broader sociological enquiries: the role of associations in Overseas Chinese communities and the nature of leadership in such societies. It is not my intention to pursue such comparative questions in this short and mainly descriptive paper; but of course some comparisons should be suggested. The system that evolved in Hong Kong was not imposed on the Chinese by a colonial government; there were no Congrégations or Kapitan Chinas in Hong Kong63 nor, for that matter, did secret societies supply leaders as they did in Malaya at one stage.