36
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: The " erroneous supposers are the Chinese who paid money for mui-tsai.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: And the Europeans who imagined that the sale of human beings was recognised here by English law: they made the same erroneous supposition and they have called upon us to change the law, when, as a matter of fact, there is no need to change the law, because the law has never recognised any rights whatever.
HON. MR. POLLOCK: I am afraid members of Parliament do not recognise them- selves as my friend does-as certain persons."
EX
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: I confess I did not either. What the Hon. Mr. Holyoak has said makes me think it wise to retain the word “ erroneously and I think it must remove the objections of the Hon. Mr. Pollock. There is no question that the opinions of members of Parliament and others at Home to whom he referred were
erroneous.
HON. MR. POLLOCK did not press his amendment, and it was agreed that clause 2 should stand part of the Bill.
HON. MR. POLLOCK: With regard to Clauses 4 and 5 I have to move an amendment. That Clauses and 5 be removed into Part III of the present Bill. As I have already explained, Sir, in my opening speech, the unofficial members of Council have spent a considerable amount of time on this Bill. As regards myself it would be more correct to say that I have spent days than hours on this measure and the construction thereof. And the conclusion the unofficial members have come to on this Bill is that these clauses 4 and 5 are undesirable, unnecessary, and unworkable, but, Sir, whether. we are right or wrong in our views, we think we have the right to demand that our views on Clauses 4 and 5 should be submitted to the Secretary of State for the Colonies before these clauses are rammed through this Council against the unanimous wishes of the unofficial members by use of the official vote. Your Excellency has stated that Clauses 4 and 5 must be passed as they stand, because of the instructions received from the Secretary of State. It seems to me to be imputing an extraordinarily autocratic temperament to that high official to suppose that he desires these instruc- tions to be carried out immediately, instead of with the delay of two or three months only, and I think, Sir, that such a supposition is extraordinarily uncomplimentary to our own Secretary of State. I cannot imagine, Sir, that he has any desire ex- cepting to find out what the views of this Council are on this measure, because to auppose anything else would be to suppose that he intends to turn this Council and its deliberations into a positive farce. I have before me now, Sir, & telegram from London on December 13th in which the Duke of Devonshire, speaking at the Nigeria Club dinner, said he wished the Colonies to regard him not merely as head of the office but also as a friend. Well, Sir, in view of that statement of the Duke of Devonshire, I can hardly suppose that he intended by anticipation to absolutely preclude and bar himself from considering any reasoned opinions made by the unofficial members of the Council with regard to any measure brought before it. He also makes a state- ment to the effect that he will not interfere with the man on the spot, Well, Sir, I think the unofficial members of the Council can claim to be more than one man, and it is an interference with them. It is also, Sir,-if the Head of the Colony is intended -an interference with the Governor of the Colony to say not merely that he wishes a certain measure to be passed but that he will not receive from the Governor any expression of opinion in Council, but insists upon a certain course of action being taken entirely without reference to that opinion. I now, Sir, have to formally move as an amendment, that Clause 4 and 5 be put into Part III of this Bill, and upon this point I feel so strongly the disrespect that is being shown to the considered opinions of the unofficial members of this Council on the subject, I shall have to press for a division.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: I trust that in his last sentence the hon. member is not referring to me as showing disrespect to the views of the Council. It is the last thing I desire to do, but in this matter, I have, as I have already stated, very definite instructions. The hon. member has read certain extracts from a telegram relating
37
to what the Duke of Devonshire said after a lunch on a certain occasion. I have a telegram here, dated shortly before that time, in which he says he considers this law should be passed without further delay, on the following lines: Declaration that payment in respect of a child confers no rights over the child: Prohibition of the engagement of a mui-tsai from the date of the passing of this Ordinance; prohibition of the engagement of a mui-tsai. "In passing a Bill on the above lines there can be no compromise on the first and second provisions, but we will carefully and sympa- thetically consider any representations the Chinese may wish to make before the proclamation, bringing Part III into force, is issued." The telegram was sent after the Secretary of State received from here a full statement as to the objections to the Bill raised by the Chinese community—which cover all the ground which has been taken--and it was pointed out to me I was at home when the telegram conveying these objections was received that the objections put forward were those that the Secretary of State was aware of when his decision was taken. I am positive the Secretary of State has no desire to show any disrespect to the Council and I deprecate the suggestion that because the Secretary of State has prejudged the matter therefore the Council's views will not be considered. It is very rarely that the Secretary of State takes a decisive line of this kind, and in this instance I fear his desire to take the views of the man on the spot has possibly been overruled by his desire to do what he believes to be right and in accordance with British principles. I am clear that the clauses in some shape or form must form part of the Bill and I myself can see no reason why they should not, because it is perfectly clear that the system must end. The hon. member says the system is actually put an end to by Clause 2. In that case why object to say so and prevent recruitment of future mui-tsai ? The Secretary of State has expressed his readiness to listen to advice on any of the minor matters of the Bill and, of course, he will pay due attention to what has been said on this subject. Well, now, what is the use of postponing this clause and putting it into Part III? It only means that the abolition of the system will be delayed, possibly for two or three months. It is not to be supposed that the Secretary of State will alter his opinion on the matter and the only practical difference would be that a certain number of persons would be under the impression that they would be at liberty to engage mui-tsai for the next two or three months. Supposing the Secretary of State does alter his opinion, which is most unlikely; it would always be possible to repeal the clause and no harm would be done, except that for a few months no one would be able to obtain a mui-tsai, and that the hon. member agrees would be desirable. We do not wish people to engage further mui-tsai and I think the more difficult we make it for them the greater the advantage to the community. I am extremely sorry to differ from the hon. member but I feel the clause in some form or other must be included in some part of the Bill which comes into immediate opera- tion. I am quite willing to consider any suggestions for change in the wording.
HON. MR. POLLOCK: Here is a clause which must be passed. I don't see where we shall benefit ourselves by trying to adopt another. If you are bound by instruc- tions you are fully bound.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: I am bound by instructions to introduce some clause which will have this effect.
HON. MR. POLLOCK: I don't think you have quite comprehended the point of the Unofficials, which is that it is absolutely impossible after this Bill has been passed to employ mui-tsai-in the old sense of mui-tsai-at all. It almost wants a new term to describe them.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: In that case the clause is entirely harmless. If there will be no such person there can be no harm in saying she cannot be employed.
HON. MR. POLLOCK: But there will be persons claiming to be identified as mui-tsai and the effect of passing this clause is that after this you will have two forms—the legal and the illegal form of mui-tsai. You will have endless disputes and enquiries as to whether the person is of the legal or illegal standing. Further it will mean that every single, young Chinese girl coming to the Colony will be under suspicion as
B 3
5963