68
ignores the difficulties of enforcing registration. It also makes the common mistake of assuming the results of registration. For example, it implies that registration would somehow give the government infor- mation as to cases of cruelty. It is, moreover, grossly misleading to say, as did the South China Morning Post, that if a mui-tsai runs away, anyone who shelters her is liable to be arrested and charged with harbouring." The reference is presumably to Section 18 (1) (b) of Ordinance No. 4 of 1897. Every prosecution under this section requires the consent of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs, and his consent would, of course, not be given without adequate reason. Anyone who kidnaps a mui-tsai in order to sell her, perhaps for prostitution, is liable to be arrested and charged, and rightly so; but not a person who harbours a runaway mui-tsai from motives of benevolence. Anyone who sold a mui-tsai to a brothel would be prosecuted under the Protection of Women and Girls Ordinance of 1897, if there were any evidence at all. Again, assuming the guess of the Anti-Mui-tsai Society as to the number of mui-tsai in Hong Kong to be correct, the newspaper article does not contain the vaguest suggestion as to what could be done with the alleged ten thousand young girls if they could be discovered and could be proved to be mui-tsai and were taken away from their employers.
12. This brings me to the question of the number of mui-tsai supposed to be in Hong Kong and to your enquiry whether
in the unlikely event of mui-tsai leaving their houses as a result of any measures taken," it is quite impossible to supplement the accommo- dation in the Po Leung Kuk by temporary arrangements. In the first place I may explain that, if drastic action were taken by the Hong Kong Government with respect to registration of mui-tsai, and it did in fact lead to a large number of mui-tsai leaving their homes it would be completely impossible for the Po Leung Kuk to accom- modate them. I inspected this institution on the 8th May, and found that, although on occasion as many as one hundred girls have been accommodated there, this was only possible by very great over- crowding, and that normally even with a complement of fifty girls the institution is undesirably full. I know of no temporary arrange- ments which could be made for accommodating a large number of young girls in this Colony. The Chinese community could certainly not be expected to assist in such circumstances, and I do not suppose that the Anti-Mui-tsai Society would be at all helpful. It is not possible to say what the exact number or even the approximate number of mui-tsai in this Colony may be; but I have been very definitely assured by the leaders of the Chinese community that the number is not increasing, but is diminishing.
13. It must be remembered that the Po Leung Kuk is not so much a home, as a temporary refuge, where girls can remain until they are restored to their relatives. It would be quite impossible to obtain additional accommodation for this purpose, and many
69
girls of the class now kept at the Po Leung Kuk have no home or relatives to go to, and something in the nature of a school, or even a reformatory, would be required for their accommodation. At present orphanages and convents will accept a limited number of girls of this kind, but even now it often happens that these institutions have no vacancies; and, if the number of homeless girls increases to any extent the problem of their disposal and the difficulty of super- vising them will be extremely serious.
14. You enquire what is the legal position under the Female Domestic Servants Ordinance, No. 1 of 1923, of the mui-tsai acquired outside this Colony and imported since the enactment of the Ordi- nance, whether their employers accompany them or are already resident in the Colony. I am advised, in reply to this question, that Sections 4 and 5 of the Ordinance apply only to acquisition within the Colony. It is impossible to make acquisition in China an offence. Sections 6 to 11 of the Ordinance apply to all mui-tsai within the Colony, wherever and whenever acquired. If Part III of the Ordinance were brought into force, registration would be required of all mui-tsai, whenever entering the Colony.
15. I have so far dealt in this despatch with the 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th and 10th paragraphs of your telegram, which aim at elucidating facts and removing misconceptions. I now turn to those paragraphs in your telegram, which aim at devising some method of further reform.
16. I take first the proposal with respect to registration. You will observe that the Chinese authorities, in the regulations made by them on the 1st March, 1927, required the registration of all mui-tsai existing at that time. These regulations, however, have remained a dead letter. The Hong Kong Government, on the other hand, while enacting Part III of the Female Domestic Servants Ordinance, No. 1 of 1923, which provides for registration of mui-tsai, determined to suspend the operation of that part of the Ordinance until circum- stances permitted its actual enforcement. This, it seems to me, was the more honest course; and I am entirely opposed to any schemes of legislative "eyewash." The objections in practice to any system of registration of mui-tsai are as follows :—-
(a) The practical impossibility of proving that any particular girl is a mui-tsai, except in occasional cases where the facts are inadvertently admitted or come to light accidently. The girl herself may be of little or no use as a witness for this purpose. The problem is to prove that a payment was made, perhaps years ago and perhaps in China. Even then the defendant may set up the defence that the case was one of adoption. If no payment is proved, the defendant may allege that the girl is a daughter. Friends and neighbours will not come forward, even if they know. No critic of the Hong Kong Government has ever suggested a solution to this problem.