81
22
(2) Mui-tsai are slaves, because they are deprived of their rights and liberty,
are not paid for their labour, and can be re-sold at any time.
tsai.
(3) There have been innumerable cases of ill-treatment and neglect of muí- There have also been some cases of employers seducing their mui- tsai, or selling them for immoral purposes. In all such cases it is very difficult for these girls, owing to their ignorance, to defy their employers. (4) Child-drowning bears no relationship to the mui-tsai system inasmuch as in child-drowning the victim is invariably one or two days old, while girls sold as mui-tsai have generally attained the age of five or six years, an age at which they can be useful to their purchasers.
(5) The argument that the abolition of the system would lead to the starva- tion of a large number of poor children can be met by the argument that when employers lose the services of their mui-tsai they would have to em- ploy paid servant-girls to take their place; and so the daughters of the poor, instead of being sold as chattels, would become paid servants.
(6) Mui-tsai keeping is not charity but, on the contrary, tends to encourage selfish and mercenary men to part with their children in order to enable themselves to be more self-indulgent.
(7) To pass a law with the object of merely preventing cruelty would mean the preservation of the poison in the system by neglecting the source of the disease.
(8) Registration should not cause undue inconvenience and trouble.
At pre- sent, schools, companies, births and deaths, and medical practitioners have to be registered, and no inconvenience has been experienced by the parties concerned.
(9) The system was abolished by law in China towards the end of the Manchu regime, and again at the beginning of the Republic; and if such could be done in so vast a country as China, there is no reason why it should not be done in this small Colony.
(10) Even if there were some flaws in the draft Bill, the proper way would be to point them out in order to have them remedied, instead of asking that the whole Bill be withdrawn.
The arguments of the other side for the withdrawal of the Bill are, roughly, as follows:-
(1) Mui-tsai are not slaves, and have never been so regarded in China either by law or by custom. When a mui-tsai is married, she is allowed to look upon the home of her former employer as her own home and is treated as a member of the family.
(2) The lot of the majority of the mui-tsai in Hong Kong is far better than that of the children of poor families in the interior of China, the former being much better fed and clothed. Their parents, if they so wish, are allowed to see them at regular intervals.
(3) Mui-tsai are not always sold; some poor people, having too many children and being unable to support them all, may present some to well-to-do families in order to enable them to be properly brought up and married off.
(4) It can truthfully be said that about ninety or even ninety-five per cent. of the mui-tsai in Hong Kong are well-treated, Those employers who overwork or otherwise ill-treat their mui-tsai would not be deterred by re- gistration, and the only remedy would seem to be imprisonment without the option of a fine in case of gross cruelty. If there are cases of ill- treatment of mui-tsai there are also cases of ill-treatment of one's own children; a cruel hearted person in a rage loses the sense of discrimina- tion. Ill-treatment of children is not the fault of a system, but of in- dividuals. The illustration that to take measure merely for preventing cruelty to mui-tsai, without abolishing the system, resembles leaving the
23
poison in the system, is not as convincing as the one that to get rid of a boil on the head one does not cut off the head.
(5) Before the Bill, with its present irksome provisions, becomes law, some people may send their mui-tsai to the interior to be sold, or given away. or kept with friends. With the already over-populated state of the coun- try, the condition of the mui-tsei would become worse, as a direct out- come of the legislation.
(6) If mui-tsai of or over the age of eighteen are suddenly released from con- trol, when control is more than ever desirable, they may misuse their freedom in all sorts of ways; and so to free them would in reality mean the removal of necessary and salutary control.
(7) The abolition of mui-tsai would not do away with kidnapping of children. but, on the contrary, would increase the sale of girls to evil-disposed per- sons as "daughters". These girls are brought up as "daughters" without being required to do domestic work; some with such tender care that their hands are not exposed to hard labour in order not to coarsen them! The object is obvious.
(8) If the Bill is passed, the Government will be faced with the stupendous task of finding accommodation or employment for the large number of mui-tsai who may seek emancipation, or whose employers may voluntarily surrender them to the Government. If the Government does not take charge of all these girls, they must perforce make their employers con- tinue to keep them. Thus, whatever may be the change in the name of the mui-tsal, they can have no change in their position, and it may further be said that they are kept in such a position with the approval or even the authority of the Government.
(9) To enforce the provisions of the Bill particularly that part relating to in- spection and registration. means the employment of a large army of in- spectors and detectives for domiciliary visits, and for inspection work upon the arrival and departure of all the trains and steamers which bring in and take out thousands of people every day. This would be costly to the Government, and vexatious to the people.
These, Sir, are the views of those who ask for the withdrawal of the Bill. There is, besides, another section of the Chinese Community who, while advocating the ulti- mate abolition of the mui-tsai system, consider that the time is not yet, and in any case strongly deprecate registration. Now, I have given, to the best of my ability, the argu- ments put forward by the various parties, for and against the measure. The English Secre- tary of the Anti-Muitsai Society has also sent me a letter giving a gist of the views of bis Executive Committee on the Bill, which I have handed to the Honourable the learned At- torney-General for his consideration. I am, however, asked to say here that what they recommend constitutes the irreducible minimum. In effect, they support the Bill, with cer- tain proposed amendments which, they consider, should strengthen it. My Chinese col- league and I have also received from the Chinese Labour Inions, the Chinese Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A., the Chinese Christian Union, and the Chinese General Chamber of Com- merce written representations which we have likewise turned over to the Government.
Having divested myself of the task imposed upon me by the two sides, of restating their opinions here, I will endeavour to express the views of my Chinese colleague and myself. We feel that where there is a divergence of opinion it is not enough for a mem ber of this Honourable Council merely to express the views, however impartially, of the people whom he represents. He should also weigh the value of the conflicting arguments endeavour to unravel the web of confusion woven by the disputation, and form his own judgment. In expressing our own conclusion our honest convictions it would be necessary for me to go over some of the grounds already traversed, but I know I can count upon a patient hearing. The crux of the matter seems to us to be whether a mui- tsai is a slave or not. If she is, we should not tolerate the system for even one day longer in this Colony; but this point is disposed of by clause 2 of the Bill. Still, in spite of such a definite pronouncement from the Government, we cannot get away from the fact that cases of cruelty have from time to time come to light. We therefore consider that the mui-tsai need special protection by the Government. While I abhor cruelty to children
*2