22
SUNDAY LABOR IN HONGKONG HARBOUR.
SUNDAY LABOUR.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE "DAILY PRESS."
STR-Last year the Postal Anthorities at home ventured to inflict on Bombay what was then denounced as a social calamity, viz., that the P. & 0. mail steamers should leave there every Sunday for London. Immediately this report was out all Bombay and his wife was mighty indignant, and a loud howl was raised on all sides. The agitation took the form of a very large public meeting, attended by thousands of people, including the Bishops, Judges, Magistrates, lawyers, doctors, merchants and clerks; in short, all sorts and conditions of men made a common cause of it, and rose to a man for a firm and emphatic protest against the proposed change. They telegraphed their proceedings to London, and they quite overpowered the authorities in Downing Street. So signal was the success that the proposed change had to be abandoned wholly and entirely, there and then. But, in the colony of Hongkong. who is it that suffers? Oh! only sailors and seamen, and "posas" to some degree. The taipans do have their Saturdays (one half) and Sundays for picnics and pleasure, then why should they bother their heads in the matter?
A LOOKER-ON,
Hongkong, 28th October, 1890.
THE SUNDAY LABOUR QUESTION.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE "DAILY PRESS,"
SIR, Some of the agitators, finding themselves in a corner, make what seems to me the grossly unjust, but fortunately wholly impracticable, proposal to enforce Sunday idleness (Satan will find some mischief for the idle hands to do) on the Chinese crews of junks and necessarily on thousands of shore hands, and say that they have to submit to it in the Treaty Ports. This is altogether a mistake, and as many persons in Hongkong are unaware of the arrangements at the Treaty Ports, I think it ought to be made fully known that the junks there do not come under the foreign Customs, only vessels of foreign type, and that the discharging and loading of cargo goes on every day. To put the Colony at so great a disadvantage compared to the Treaty Ports, would be interfering with Chinese customs with a vengeance, Whatever is done, there should be no misrepresentation; let us have no half truths.Yours faithfully,
LAOU SHANGHAL
Hongkong, 22nd October, 1890,
SUNDAY LABOR IN HONGKONG HARBOUR.
23
themselves, by simply declining to do what their employers have neither a legal nor a moral right to demand of them, as a man is bound to obey only just and lawful commands. But is the command to Would any perform such duties as loading or discharging cargo on Sunday a just or lawful command? Magistrate in Hongkong-putting the force of public opinion aside-consider it a lawful command? I think not. So that I would again repeat: "where there is no right there can be no duty." A man is entitled to one day's rest in seven, as he is entitled to twelve hours' rest in the twenty-four: by custom and usage it has become a necessity of nature to him. According to par ideas, unless under exceptional circumstances, even voluntary labour on Sunday is wrong. Involuntary Sunday labour is morally criminal; the difference is the difference between the labour of a freeman and a slave,
The Government would seem to be wise in abstaining from legislating on the subject; the time for a hard and fast law has not yet arrived. Let strict observance of Sunday as a day of rest from labour be recognised as the custom and usage of the port of Hongkong and it will be as easy to enforce it here as elsewhere. A short time since it became necessary to increase the light dues for a particular purpose and they were raised one hundred and fifty per cent. The Government can likewise, with as little difficulty, put a tonnage tax on Sunday labour afloat that would press equally on all classes of sicamers. A privilege not worth paying for is not worth having, Ashore, the solution of the question mainly lies with the representatives of our two principal British shipping houses in the Colony; let them stop working their steamers on Sunday, and the rest will follow easy. Why not graciously concede as a favour to their employés what must assuredly come to pass before long, with their consent or without it. Not so very long ago the departure of the mails on Monday was considered a hardship to merchants and their clerks, because it entailed attendance at their offices on Sunday to write their correspondence. result was, the mail day was altered and the merchant enjoyed his Sunday undisturbed. the aphorism about Sauce for the goose," &c.
The Let me recall
The arguments in favour of Sunday labour seem strained and somewhat frivolous. The difficulties conjured up may turn out imaginary. The Chinese bogey will not do. The question resolves itself down to whether for the mere purpose of utilizing Sunday, shipowners will be allowed a privilege in Hongkong which is refused them without heavy payment in most ports of the world, and denied them altogether in
others.
As a ship's officer, I would demand as a right the cessation of labour on Sanday so far as I was myself concerned; as a shipowner, in the sense of being a shareholder in our three local shipping companies, and with other shipping interests of equal importance, I would advocate as a matter of sound policy the total cessation of Sunday labour on board ship, on the grounds of its being mostly unnecessary and called for simply by excessive competition.
R. TALBOT.
Hongkong, 20th October, 1890.
THE SUNDAY LABOR QUESTION.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY PRESS,"
St.--The question of Sunday labour on board ship in Hongkong Harbour by European officers has become confused and mixed up with that of Chinese labour on shore--with which in my opinion it has little to do -until the hardworked ship's officer has arrived at the, to him, flattering conclusion that the whole social and commercial system of Hongkong depends upon whether he works or does not work on Sunday,
and not the rule.
Now so far as the question extends to Chinese I think it is susceptible of proof that the balk of the Chinese afloat, cargo boatien, coolies, &c., are against Sunday labour. hardly be engaged on Sunday, they are prompt to tell you: "B'long Sunday, no wauchee work." Coolies or cargo boats can Chinese merchants seem mostly indifferent. It certainly does not seem a question of much importance to them. They certainly cannot be said to be strongly in favour of Sunday work; their conversation does not lead one to conclude they are so. That Chinese of all classes both here and at Shanghai and the out-ports enjoy and appreciate Sunday as a day of rest from business and work can hardly be denied. It is a mistake to assume that Sunday work is general on board all steamers. It is the exception Sailing vessels seldom or ever work on Sunday, and a large proportion of the Sunday labour going on is avoidable. The steamers trading to Manila are persistent Sunday workers, but for no other reason than to utilize Sunday. For the same reason they would work all night as well as all day but that there is a limit to their officers' endurance. Competition compels them to take advantage of this vicious custom which is recognised all over the world as a moral crime except in Hongkong. They invariably discharge cargo on Sunday, but as they seldom receive much cargo it must be accepted as some proof that Chinese shippers do not place very much value on the privilege of Sanday labour, What little is shipped could easily be avoided by some little forethought on the part of the steamers' agents. A steamer arrives on Saturday morning and very often does not discharge a package of cargo that day; shipping clerks are indifferent-they know she can discharge on Sunday- it never enters their heads to consider the ships' officers, that they may probably have as strong an objection to working on Sunday as they themselves invariably have when personally concerned. Shipping offices are closed on Sunday, but if they were kept open and clerks compelled to attend when steamers were working the necessity for Sunday work would not be so often evident.
To the ship's officer it is undoubtedly a hardship; it destroys his self respect, creates dissatisfac- tion and discontent, and is fatal to discipline. The Chinese sailors will not work on Sunday, and look with contempt on their officers, who are morosely and unwillingly carrying on their duties, while protesting strongly, if silently, against such a state of affairs. If there is truth in the axiom that "where there is no right there can be no duty," then the solation of the question seems to lie with the officers
TO THE EDITOR OF THE "HONGKONG TELEGRAPH."
SIR,--Having just returned from a voyage I have only now had an opportunity of reading the report of the Conference between the Chamber of Commerce and Capt. Ashton and a delegation of the Marine Officers' Association. I am very pleased indead to see how well Capt. Ashton maintained his canse in the face of such an evidently biassed, adverse, interested body of capitalists and shipowners represented by Messrs. Mackintosh, Keswick, Byrie, etc. With all their professed desire for the cessation of Sunday labour it is palpable to the most casual observer that their great care was evidently to protcet the shipowner from a possible loss of one day's earnings.
Mr. Mackintosh asked for data regarding the number of officers employed on Sunday. Now I think that no one is in a better position than himself to provide this information, seeing that the lines known as the "Blue Foanel" and "Butterfield & Swire's" are the great offenders in this respect; however, in passing, I might romark for Mr. Mackintosh's edification, that there are on an average from fifty to sixty officers employed on steamers in this port on Sundays. Farther, I may add, as regards compradores on board steamers, it in no wise affords the Europeau officers greater liberty; as in steamers carrying compradores there are usually only two Enropean officers carried one of whom is expected to sign all receipts and superintend all necessary deck work, while the other is supposed to be below looking after the stowage of cargo.
Mr. Mackintosh seems anxious to discover some method by which the Sunday labour of officers might be minimised. This is simple, "stop Sunday labour."
As regards Mr. Keswick's statement of the strong objections of the Chinese to the law, I should like to know in what way these strong objections have been shown. I have heard of no action on the part of the Chinese in opposition to the proposed legislation on Sunday labour. With respect to his statement of the danger of making 150,000 Chinese idle on Sunday, I think the numbers stated very ridiculous, and I am quite satisfied that not more than 15,000 people would be affected by the cessation of Sunday labour in the harbour, With respect to Sunday labour in treaty ports I can say that the British are the greatest sinners. And if I condescended to specialize local lines, I have no hesitation in naming the China Nagivation Steamship Company and the Indo-China Steamship Company as the greatest offenders in this respect, Ships sailed under the Chinese flag compare most favourably in respect to Sunday observance." I have no doubt the I. M. Cuatoma statistics would prove what is here stated.
My sympathies are with "old Ryrie" in his anxiety with respect to a hot Sunday dinner, but, as I understand the question, the Mercantile Marine Officer's Association are asking for "cessation of Sunday labour in the Harbour only."
158
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.