CO129-514-2 Mui Tsai system- suggested regulations and possible abolition 9-1-1929 - 16-5-1929 — Page 76

10.

76

observations on other allegations in the same article. In

reply I may say that it has for some time been the settled

policy of the Hong Kong Government not to assist any person

in any way to recover money paid for the purpose of acquiring

a mui-tsai. Cases have occurred in the past in which

individual officers, including magistrates, have adopted a

different practice in order to punish deliberate fraud. The

Chinese committee of the Po Leung Kuk, under the influence

of Chinese custom, and actuated also by a desire to secure

fair treatment, has frequently arranged for the repayment of money paid to secure the services of a mui-tsai; but in such

cases the child was not left in the custody of her employer,

but kept in the Po Leung Kuk until the vendor had returned the money claimed under false pretences. I consider,

however, that such procedure cannot be justified, even though

it is natural that an official should feel reluctant to allow

himself to be made an instrument to assist in the perpetrat-

ion of a fraud, and I have given definite orders to the executive officers of the government and to the Directors of the Po Leung Kuk that the practice must be entirely

abandoned.

11.

As regards the other points in the article

of the "South China Morning Post" to which you refer, I may observe that the article 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 information 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, any one who shelters her is liable to be arrested and charged with harbouring". The reference is presumably to Section 18 (1) (b) of Ordin- ance No.4 of 1897. Every prosecution under this section

requires