80
We returned to England, and with the help of the Anti- Slavery and other societies, urged the matter before Parlia- ment. A number of questions were asked in the House, and the Colonial Secretary made this statement:-
There is no buying and selling of human beings in Hong Kong. A custom does exist by which a Mui Tsai is handed over by her natural guardian to an employer in return for a money payment." This reply did not satisfy the British public.
The Colonial Office then circularised a statement to the effect that the whole thing was a campaign of misrepre- sentation in this country as to the custom of adopting girl domestics in Hong Kong. But this did not convince the British public either.
On March 31st, 1920, Mr. Amery stated in the House that there is no form of slavery in force or recognised in Hong Kong. There are no persons who have not perfect liberty over their own bodily self to do what they like, and they are not bound by any permanent contract as to service."
On April 26th, 1920, Colonel John Ward, M.P. demolished this statement by his reference to an incident which took place when he was in Hong Kong in 1917. He addressed the House.
'During 1917 he said, "when stationed at Hong Kong as a military officer, I was invited one day to lunch at the Governor's house, the occasion being a reception to the Chinese Mandarin who was the Governor of Canton. All British officers and officials of the colony were present. A discussion took place on one side of the table about a matter which had just been before the courts- -a case of selling two girls, and as to whether it was legal in a British colony to buy or sell human beings. The Chief Justice laid down an obiter dictum which was strange to the ears of an Englishman who had not been long in the Colonies. It was to the effect that it was extremely doubtful as to whether slavery, and the buying and selling of human beings was not legal in Hong Kong.
"
After the conversation was over so far as the British replies were concerned, the Mandarin silenced the whole discussion by making the following observation; 'It is true that under the old Manchu dynasty slavery was a legal institution in China, but the moment that dynasty was swept away, and a Republic established, its first declaration, and its first most stringent law was the abolition of slavery, and the buying and selling of human beings even for adop- tion, or any other purposes, or in any other guise. Now one of the strangest things is that the only place where this can be done is Hong Kong, the possession of England.'"
While the British people were fighting this evil in England, there was formed a Society to fight it in Hong Kong, compose very largely of Chinese, with a British Secretary. As a result of the continued efforts at home of the Anti-Slavery Society, and of all those who backed my husband and me in getting English people to realise what was happening in this British colony, Mr. Churchill an- nounced to this country in the House of Commons, on March 21st, 1922, that the Mui Tsai slavery should be abolished. The assurance given by Mr. Churchill during question-time in Parliament lacked nothing in precision:-
"I desire to make it clear (to the House) that both the Governor and I are determined to effect the aboli- tion of the system at the earliest practicable date, and I have indicated to the Governor that I expect the change to be carried out within a year."
A proclamation was issued in the colony in the following month to this effect :-
"Inasmuch as slavery is not allowed in the British Empire, it must be understood that Mui Tsai are not the property of their owners. Those wishing to leave their em- ployers must be allowed to state their case to the Secretary for Chinese affairs. Masters and mistresses are warned against any attempt to prevent the Mui Tsai doing so."
For two years, as a result of this, the Anti-Slavery Society were informed that there was a little less cruelty shown to the victims of this system, but no serious effort
81
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.