Inclosure 4 in No. 1.
Consul-General Scott to Sir E. Satow.
Canton, September 21, 1903. (No. 37.) Sir,
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Circular of the 8th instant, and in reply, beg to inform you that there are only two British subjects of Chinese descent registered in this Consulate-General. These two persons were both born in Australia, and it is said, of English mothers; and they produced certificates of naturalization issued in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Their dress was European; and they wore their hair short and with no queue.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
JAMES SCOTT.
Inclosure 5 in No. 1.
Return showing Number of British Subjects of Chinese Descent registered at His Britannic Majesty's Consulate, Swatow, in the Year 1903.
Children born on British soil of parents who were naturalized British subjects 31 Children born on Chinese soil whose grand-parents were naturalized and whose parents were born on British soil 2 Total 33These British subjects for the most part wear Chinese dress with a brown leather boots, and a foreign-made umbrella.
(Signed)
R. WILE
Inclosure 6 in No. 1.
Memorandum on the Return of British Subjects of Chinese Descent registered at His Britannic Majesty's Consulate, Amoy.
1. THE accompanying Return only shows those registered during the current year, most of them being permanent residents here. Many others registered in former years have since gone back to the Straits or are temporarily absent from the port. Should these return to Amoy, they will reappear on the list, which is thus, strictly speaking, incomplete. The number of those absent, not including those known to have died, is about forty-eight.
2. With regard to the question of dress worn by these Chinese-British subjects, only two of those included in the present Return wear European dress and discarded the pig-tail. The others all wear the dress almost invariably worn by the better class Chinese who have been in the Straits or other foreign country. There is nothing to distinguish them from such genuine Chinese subjects, and all that can be said with certainty is that they have lived abroad.
3. In former years the exact status of the holders of passports issued by the Government of the Straits Settlements was in many cases left very ill-defined, the document stating merely that "this passport is issued to a British subject of Chinese origin born in a British Colony to enable him to travel in foreign parts." Not a few applicants for registration as British subjects seem to have been accepted without further proof of nationality than the passport so worded, coupled with their own declaration that they were born in a British Colony. Those coming within this category, as shown in the accompanying Return, number some twenty out of a total of fifty, and, with one or two exceptions, have proved a very troublesome and undesirable class.
The following Table shows the progressive increase in the numbers of British subjects of Chinese descent registered here since the year 1893 :-
1893 18 1894 28 1895 31 1896 41 1897 17 1898 40 1899 43 1900 46 1901 42 1902 47 1903 51Most of them, on being granted a certificate of registration at once set up in business here, and for this reason it has of late years been necessary to exercise greater stringency in admitting their claims to British nationality. The Singapore Government was therefore recently moved to endorse all passports in the following form :-"The bearer of this passport was born in ..., his father was a British subject, and his mother ...", thus removing as far as possible all doubt as to the status of the claimant.
4. Difficulty frequently arises in the case of applicants who have been previously registered at some other Consulate, where owing to their fewer numbers, there is no such obvious necessity for strict scrutiny. On the other hand, it is difficult to refuse to recognize certificates of registration issued perhaps for years past at another Consulate, and on the other it may and does occasionally happen that an applicant who has been refused registration at one port proceeds straightway to the next port, gets registered there, and then returns to set up in business. The only remedy for this state of things is the adoption of a uniform system of registration at all ports.
6. The question, to what extent should recognition be accorded to a business carried on at the port by an absentee British-Chinese subject also presents some difficulty. In one case the head of a certain firm here went back to Singapore in 1897, and has not registered here since that year. His business is, however, still carried on, nominally under power of attorney held by a foreigner, really by an independent Chinese manager, who is notorious for taking up the most dubious Chinese cases. In another instance, a British-Chinese subject having registered himself and established a firm here, promptly went back to Singapore leaving his business to be conducted by a Chinese agent. There have also been cases in which on the death of the principal, his widow has carried on the business under Chinese auspices for several years. The death was never reported and the facts were only accidentally brought to light long afterwards, when some trouble had occurred. The malpractices such a state of things inevitably give rise to need not be enlarged on; how they are to be prevented is not so obvious. As far as possible I have invariably insisted that no business shall be left in charge of any one who is not a British subject, and in some cases this has proved sufficient to deter the principal himself from leaving the port. The requirement being easily evaded it has in other cases proved only very partially effective.
Amoy, September 26, 1903.
(Signed)
P. F. HAUSSER.