87
949
Supply: Committee—
[Mr. Amery.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS
of doubt in the Ordinance of 1923, but was concerned with ancient social customs immensely deep-rooted and immensely difficult to deal with.
My right hon. Friend, in an interruption in the course of the speech of the Under- Secretary of State, referred to the parallel of Prohibition in the United States, in some ways a very true parallel. We can see there how difficult it is to enforce a law, even though it is supported by the strong moral conviction of a large number of people if it does not appeal to another large part of the community.
That kind of difficulty in Hong Kong was gravely accentuated by the geo- graphical position of Hong Kong and the fact that there is a continual going to and fro by tens of thousands daily between Hong Kong and Canton, which is just up the river, and also by the peculiar circum- stances of the years following 1923. They were years of unrest and disturbance all over China, and more particularly in Southern China, and during those years there was a continual and heavy exodus of Chinese refugees into Hong Kong, Under the conditions existing it was almost impossible to ascertain the exact status of the children who came in with those people. The difficulty of ascertain- ing who were and were not mui-tsai was a small matter compared with the greater problem of knowing what to do with mui- tsai when you have traced it. A very large part came from the mainland of China under the conditions of the time, and it was impossible to ascertain where their parents were, if they were still alive, or in a position to keep their children and look after them if they were returned. Of course, the alternative of turning young girls into the streets of Hong Kong was unthinkable. In the circumstances of 1923, it was by no means an unreasonable thing for the Hong Kong Government to feel that the best thing it could do, while watching closely to prevent any ill-treat- ment or cruelty, was to see whether the mui-tsai population could not be brought to an end in a reasonably short time by preventing the creation of mui-tsai.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) has emphasised the conditions under which the transfers are made under Chinese customs. Of course, while the transfers
Colonial Office.
950
are habitually made at a tender age, the mui-tsai, according to Chinese custom, remain with their owners, if I may use that word, up to the age of 18 or 19, when, according to the Chinese custom, it is their duty to endeavour to secure a good marriage for them if they can do SO. The mere mention of these facts showing a population of 9,000 mui-tsai, ranging from 18 to 19 years, indicates that half of them must have been of the age of 14 or over, and that every year there would be a considerable diminution, which I think has in fact occurred, and no doubt is desired by Europeans and Chinese who are just as anxious as we are for a speedy reform. It is for these reasons, and the intense strength of Chinese feeling against interference in the affairs of their homes, a feeling which has in fact prevented us dealing with what I regard as the far worse evil, namely, child marriage in India, which has made the Government of Hong Kong feel doubtful about putting into force the 1923 Ordinance. I should like to say that I know of no one who has been a Governor in any of our colonies in recent years who has had more sympathy, based upon profound knowledge and study and true affection for the people with whom he has had to deal, than Sir Cecil Clementi.
а
I am quite sure that it was
no in- difference to the welfare of these children and girls, and certainly no bureaucratic unwillingness to take action, but genuine conviction as to the profound difficulties of the situation and a belief that the best results could be obtained by degrees and by enlisting Chinese opinion on the side of the Government- that that and nothing else was respon- sible for the counsels of delay in action which weighed with me while I was Colonial Secretary, and which to-day think have been successfully overcome, but overcome in very large measure because one indispensable factor in the whole situation is gradually being built up. By that I mean the support of educated Chinese opinion. You have to-day what you certainly had not eight or nine years ago-a very large body of Chinese opinion, not only in Hong Kong, but in China, which is recognising that the system is a scandal and ought to be brought to an end, and which is support- ing the Government in what they are
951
-
11 MAY 1931
be
Supply: Committee— doing in Hong Kong to-day. It is by appealing to that sentiment, by enlist- ing it on our side, that I believe that to-day we can feel that, however diffi- cult the situation has been, however serious the obstacles, we have reached a stage where action can be progressively rapid and effective. I unreservedly con- gratulate the Government on what they have been able to do so far, and I would equally unreservedly join in expressing the hope that their action may increasingly effective in the future.
Miss PICTON TURBERVILL: 1 think the Committee owes a deep debt of gratitude to the right hon. and learned Member for Spen Vailey (Sir J. Simon) for his speech to-night on the subject of mui-tsai; but the feeling is, perhaps, mixed with one of profound disappoint- ment that such a speech could have been made after 10 years' Debate almost every year on this subject in the House of Commons. The Under-Secretary began his speech with a reference to inaccurate statements and allegations. I think that every one who is interested in this sub- ject will regret any inaccurate statements or any exaggerations; but the hon. Gen- tleman was replying to the right hon. and learned Member for Spen Valley, and I do not think that the right hon. and learned Member made a single statement in his long speech which was not sub- stantiated and thoroughly well docu- mented. [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!" I am glad to find that I have the approval of hon. Members in regret- ting that the opening speech of the Under-Secretary should have contained references to inaccurate statements when his speech was a reply to the right hon. and learned Member for Spen Valley. The Under-Secretary proceeded to quote continuously from the Ordinance which was passed in 1923; but the very fact that that Ordinance has remained a dead letter, and that Lord Passfield himself two years ago said that it had remained a dead letter for six years, surely, to a certain extent, must rob some of the reply that we have received of its weight and value. Lord Passfield, writing in August, 1926, said:
(+
"It appears that, after six years from the passing of the Ordinance, the most that can be said is that there is no reason to believe that the number of mui-tsai has increased.'
88
952
Colonial Office.
Lord Passfield himself was not content with the working of that Ordinance, and everyone knows that it was a dead letter. With regard to the question of inspec- tors, Lord Passfield says:
"It will be necessary for you to appoint inspectors,"
That is to say, that they should be officially appointed by the Government, not that the Government should rely on philanthropic bodies to do this important work. We are, however, assured by the words of the Under-Secretary that now an inspector will be officially appointed, but the fact that Lord Passfield in his letter two years ago gave instructions that the Governor himself should appoint an inspector shows that the inspection has been a dead letter. I think we are
justified in asking for a categorical reply. Are mui-tsai sold to-day or not? Do they get wages for the work they are doing or not? The Under-Secretary spoke of the great difficulties. I do not think anyone would wish to make little of those difficulties. Yet he went on to say the employers were now putting no difficul- ties in their way. It seemed almost as if one statement contradicted the other.
I could not help smiling when we heard that the Governor himself went to in- spect the mui-tsais' homes. It was almost as though the Lord Mayor went to inspect factories. I should not think much of a factory manager if he could not throw a little dust in the Lord Mayor's
the eyes. The fact that Governor of Hong Kong went to inspect mui-tsais' homes made me think that the inspection was probably not very perfect. I have read the Governor's re- ports very carefully and what troubles me was that they were so extraordinarily complacent. They said the girls were fairly well treated, but that is not the point. We want to know whether they are virtually slaves or not. Slaves were often well treated. The letters of the Governor refer continually to the fact that they are not so ill treated as some people suppose and that many of them are well treated. I had not made up my mind to take part in this Debate, but it is the complacency of the report that troubles us. We do not deny that a great deal has been done, but we are immoveably persuaded that a great deal more could be done to put an end to this evil.