maforerentation

Extract from Parliamentary Debates B1 much

216

recently received some further reports

together with the faints raid boy

on the subject and that these are

refreed

being sent out to the new Governor for

a further investigation.

You may be assured that the

won if it would

could

Colonial Office not tolerate the

existence of slavery in Hong Kong,

but

with your experience of the East you

will realise that it is necessary to work

warily in upsetting the established customs

an

of the Oriental race and that to

existing arrangements, with the best in-

tentions in the world, may be productive

of great misery and mischief,<if

on the sport in

unduly bathed.

of

As the law

England on the subject is in

force there

P

Lis

Gate

L

(Squl) & Samany

ཋན༽

1:349

Easter Recess

[Lord R. Cecil.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS

(Adjournment).

1850

indeed of the French/nation, for not only are they bound by the Allied pledge, buing to their conception of the meaning of

it is common knowledge, as my ho Friend reminded the House, that the Armenians have actually fought for the French; more than that, the French faised

40

Armenian battalion-or was it a brigade-which fought in other parts of the world. The Armenian decision was only made on the express understanding that they were to be liberated from the Turks; that they were fighting for their own liberation as well as for the general cause of freedom I am gure it is not too much to say that the civilised world has been watching with close attention the action of the Allied Powers, and the French in particular for she has a force in that part of the world. The civilised world is watching what action will be taken to carry out and make effective the pledges we have given to these people. If the Allies in this matter it will be useless to expect that anyone should attach the slightest weight or value to any pledge that may in future be given by any of them on the same or similar grounds. only hope that the Govern- ment will realise this and will realise the great disgrace which will happen to the Allied/cause, and to the British names if there is any failure, and that we shall not again, as has happened on too many occasions, have to write the terrible epitaph, "Too late!" on the efforts of the Government.

Lieut.-Colonel J. WARD: A subject has recently been brought to my attention which I desire to refer to for a little while only, because I do not think 5.0 P.M. that the continued discussion

to-day is really to stick to the rules of cricket. In addition to that, it is not necessary that any Minister should reply to me. But I want to place on the records of the House just a protest in reference to a matter of which I have personal knowledge. It comes, I suppose, under the Department of the Colonies. I have had sent to me a paper-" The Child's Guardian," for April-apparently published in London. The front page deals almost entirely with a subject the heading of which is, "Dose child-slavery exist in a British Colony" Perhaps I had better read one quotation which will explain what I want the authorities to gather. I am now quoting from the "Hong Kong Telegraph" :—

"Whether slavery does or does not exist in Hong Kong is amatter upon which different people have different ideas accord-

the term. One of our Registrars-General once referred in his Annual Report to a state of affairs which he admitted was, at any rate, closely allied. But on one point there can be no dispute, and that is that Chinese children are bought and sold in this British Colony, without their consent being in any way obtained, and no attempt whatever is made to hide the fact. This is a Chinese custom. Whilst we admit that very many of these children are for happier in their slavery than they would be in freedom, we say unhesitatingly it is a custom which ought to be suppressed. We can understand the horror of the English lady who wrote uš yesterday on the discovery of the existence of this pernicious system in a British Colony, and while we agree with the sentiments she oxpressed, we are glad to think she realises the difficulties of the matter. We wish her success in her determination to get the matter brought to the notice of influential persons at home. It may interest her to learn that the very first enactment passed when Hong Kong became British was an anti-slavery Bill, but it was disallowed by the Home Government, as it was considered that the Imperial Statutes for the abolition of slavery extended by their proper force and authority to Hong Kong. That means that the laws against trafficking in humaa beings are still operative."

Then this newspaper asks:

11

"Then why are they not rigidly enforced by His Majesty's officers in this Colony? Just for a moment I will describe my own experience. When I was in Hong Kong, in 1917, by attention was called to this question, and I wrote letters to the Secre tary of the General Federation of Trades Unions, and I gave report of a case which was tried in the High Court of Hong Kong, where for some reason or other the ipse dixit of the Judge was to the effect that as the buying and selling of human beings was a Chinese custom, and that when taking possession of the colonies we had agreed to observe the Chinese customs, and buying and selling of human beings, if included in that custom, could not be interferred with by us. I called the attention of the Federation of Trades Unions to this matter in the latter part of 1917. I asked them to keep it quiet, and I said that while we are fighting and battling with all the forces of our Empire I did not wish it to be known that we were tolerating the buying and selling of people in one of our own colonies. I asked them to go quietly to the Colonia! Office and lay this very case before the Secretary of State for the Colonies and see if the matter could be quietly altered.

Share This Page