58
I believe at the mentioning their names. They are Mr. HOPPIUS, Mr. FORBES and Mr. RUTTUNJEE. Meeting at which the division took place and the proposal to come to terms with the Government was rejected by a majority of one, my honourable friend was in the chair, Messrs. HOPPIUS, FORBES and RUTTUNJEE Voting against Messrs. RYRIE and SASSOON. Now, a good deal has been said about the City Hall Committee and the action of the Government. I think I had better read, for the information of the Council, a passage from Her Majesty's instructions, which Her Majesty was graciously pleased to address to me, and which, as the Council will at once see, governs, in spirit, every transaction of this kind. In the Queen's instructions I am told, with respect to the work of this Council, that is the legislation of the Colony--
"You are not to assent in Our name to any Bill whereby persons not of European birth or descent may be subjected or made liable to any disabilities or restrictions to which persons of European birth or descent are not also subjected or made liable.”
The Royal instructions declare that I am rendered incapable of giving my assent to any such bill. The commission and Royal instructions give the Governor of a Crown Colony a good deal of power, no doubt, but for reasons which Her Majesty and the Queen's advisers thoroughly understand the advantages of, the Governor is precluded from giving his assent to any such bill. Now, the Royal instructions are the chief guide of the conduct of a Governor of a Colony, and in accordance with the spirit of that clause I see that Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL acted as a loyal Governor when he insisted upon that condition, and gave effect in that condition he imposed on the Committee to the clause of the instructions I have read. Is it to be said that Mr. HOPPIUS, and Mr. FORBES, and Mr. RUTTUNJEE are to teach the Governor of this Colony on this all-important question of the relations between persons of European birth and those not of European birth? That, indeed, these gentlemen are to upset the conditions framed by Governor MACDONNELL and instruct the present Governor how he is to conduct the Government with respect to the Queen's subjects? Perhaps Mr. HOPPIUS may say, "What do I care about Queen Victoria's instructions? The conduct of the Governor may be in accordance with the Royal instructions, but I am a German." And perhaps another gentleman, Mr. FORBES, may say, "What do I care about this? I think it well to impose invidious restrictions on the Chinese. I am not bound by the spirit of Her Majesty's instructions. They are not the instructions of the President of the United States." Well, my honourable friend was the Chairman of the City Hall Committee. He cannot say that. But it is not merely the question of the Governor acting in accordance with the law, with the conditions laid down by his predecessor and the spirit of the Royal instructions. That is not the only question. What about a reference made to the Secretary of State? What about the suggestion of the Secretary of State, and the way in which it has been received by the City Hall Committee.
I don't believe that in the history of Hongkong any body of gentlemen, whether they were subjects of the Queen or not, whether they were Germans, Americans, or British subjects, have taken the responsibility that the present committee have assumed in rejecting the suggestion of the Secretary of State. This is a question affecting the grant of public money, money of the ratepayers this Colony. Perhaps the most illustrious man who preceded me in this Government, Sir HERCULES ROBINSON, he it is who has said: "The Chinese pay 98 per cent. of the taxes in this Colony." I am quoting from a despatch laid before Parliament and laid upon the table of this Council.
I know myself that they contribute considerably over 90 per cent. And the City Hall Committee come to these ratepayers and say to them, "Give us $1,200," knowing well that $1,100 of these dollars are Chinese dollars, and the Committee say, "We will endeavour in some little way to gibbet you on our notice board and make a distinction of nationalities," though the Governor, when the grant was made, stipulated there should be no such distinction. But with respect to the Secretary of State, an appeal was made. I was requested by my honourable friend to submit the correspondence to Sir MICHAEL HICKS BEACH. I did so—what was the result? Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH wrote a despatch, and he referred to the objection made by the City Hall Committee to the admission of Chinese on a par with Europeans—the objection, that is, that Messrs. HOPPIUS, FORBES, and RUTTUNJEE made—that is, to use their words, "there was some likelihood of disturbances arising between the lower class of Chinese and the answering strata of Europeans." Well, I must say I thought that very unlikely: Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH thought it very unlikely. If the Chinese go to the City Hall to look at a dried snake in the Museum, why should they be prevented, when they can go to the Gardens to look at a live snake or go to the Library and call for a book with pictures of snakes? Where is the distinction? The Library is open to them, the Public Gardens are open to them, but, forsooth, Messrs. FORBES, HOPPIUS and RUTTUNJEE are to prevent the Chinese subjects of the Queen from having free access to the City Hall Museum.
One would have thought when the despatch came from Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in which he expressed grave doubt of these collisions occurring, and says he has never heard of such collisions occurring, that the Committee would have acted on his suggestion that for six months the entire free opening of the Museum should be tried, and then, if collisions occurred, some modifications could be considered. When that despatch came, what was done with it? It was referred with the trust deed, with Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL'S minutes and all the correspondence to the new Attorney-General, who expressed a very clear opinion—an opinion coincident with that of all his predecessors—that the legal estate vested in Mr. RYRIE, that the money, if any were to be paid, should be paid to Mr. RYRIE. A letter was written by the Acting Colonial Secretary to the City Hall Committee, in which he said: "The Governor desires me to say he is authorised by the Secretary of State to suggest the free opening of the Museum for a period of six months. In doing so I am to express the hope of His Excellency that the Committee will see its way to the adoption of the suggestion, and so remove all cause of difference between themselves and the Trustee."
The answer is: "The new regulations were so fully considered, and the majority were so clearly in favour of them, that the Committee are unable to see that any useful end could be served by trying the experiment suggested." So it comes to this, that these gentlemen, the majority of whom are not British subjects, are, forsooth, to exclude the Queen's Chinese subjects from the City Hall, for which land worth $70,000, or more, was granted by the Crown to all the inhabitants—that these gentlemen are to set aside the trusts of that deed, the conditions of Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL, the resolution that was passed by the present Governor in Council, and the suggestion of the Secretary of State. Of course, they can't do so. However powerful these gentlemen may be, they are not strong enough to do that. The spirit of the Queen's instructions will be carried out. The conditions imposed by Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL in respect of this ground will be fulfilled, and the law will be strictly enforced with respect to the payment of any money; any money again has to be paid to the Trustee.
Gentlemen, I observe it was said also, at a place where I was not present, at a meeting at the City Hall, that there was some agreement come to by the Governor with regard to these new rules, and that from that agreement the Governor had deviated. I don't know that it was said very distinctly, but whether said distinctly or not, it was a mistake. In 1879, my attention was called to the matter, and a letter was written to the City Hall Committee. When they refused to accede to the wish of the Governor of the Colony, I received a letter. It is not marked private, and I will quote a passage from it. It is from a member of this Council, His Honour the Chief Justice. He says -- "Could you not let the vote for the year be passed conditionally that the rules meet your approval, and thus give time for arrangement?" That letter of Sir JOHN SMALE'S was written to me on 27th October, 1879. To that I at once agreed, namely, that the vote, which had been struck out of the Estimates for 1880, should be put back again under the condition that the Committee proceed to revise their notice and that the rules were to meet my approval. Well, the Committee met. The gentlemen who were not British subjects managed—again I intimated at once by a small majority—to exclude a number of British subjects from the Museum. I said that the rules did not meet my approval; nevertheless, I kept the vote on the Estimates for 1880, and directions were given to the Colonial Treasurer to pay the money in accordance with Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL'S minutes and in accordance with the counsel of my law adviser, that is, to the trustee. Therefore, I did my duty.
The question now arises, whether we are to pay the ratepayers' money to these gentlemen who have no legal position whatever as far as the City Hall is concerned, who are violating every engagement they have made to the Government, but above all, who are endeavouring at this time, in the nineteenth century, to retain in Hongkong the last little remnant of intolerance in the shape of their notice. There is no other notice in this Colony in which a distinction is made between Chinese and Europeans except that notice in the City Hall Museum; and, forsooth, it is to be kept up there, and the public money to be paid to gentlemen who, by a narrow majority, still retain that foolish and intolerant notice. I need not say it cannot be done. I am not surprised that my honourable friend, when he made his interesting statement as to what was omitted in the Estimates for 1881, avoided all reference to this subject in my presence. I have now given all the facts of the case. The papers from which I quoted are upon the table. My honourable friend had an opportunity long since of perusing them. He knew the case thoroughly. But for the first time, now, the essential facts for the right understanding of the question have been laid before the public.
Honourable W. KESWICK—Your Excellency, I am not prepared, not having expected this attack, nor would I think it desirable, to occupy the time of the Council, to go through in detail all that you have said, but as you have declared that that report does not contain all the facts, so do I, as emphatically as words can express it, declare my conviction that the statements you have made are not borne out by facts, that these papers that are put on the table as representing what was the understanding between Governor Sir RICHARD MACDONNELL and the trustees or those who got up the City Hall, do not bear out the construction you put upon them, and that the conditions have not been violated. There is no distinction in the way of the exclusion of Chinese from the City Hall; they are as free to visit the Museum within certain hours as any other nationality. The English are excluded during a certain time, and for reasons clear and well-defined, and the rules are supported by those whose opinion we have good reason to respect, and these rules are said to be in accordance with the requirements of the community, both Chinese and Europeans.
As regards the title-deed of the property, it is a pure and simple ordinary title-deed such as is granted in similar ordinary cases. It contains no more conditions necessary for the opening of the Museum and the terms on which it should be kept open than does any book of ancient Sanscrit. And I would state with regard to these papers, when before the Associated Committee—they were before that Committee—that the Committee duly considered and attached to them such weight as they thought the minutes referred to by Your Excellency deserved. They gave them due weight, and the result was an alteration in the rules such as no sensible practical man can for a moment doubt is in accordance with the best means of making that institution useful. There is no exclusion of the Chinese in the sense of exclusion. There is a regulation for making the institution useful. As to the Library, there is no inducement for the
Page 60
Page 61