5363-18
19. Sub-section (3) of section 13 will enable the Secretary for Chinese Affairs to make it impossible for an undesirable employer to continue to employ any particular mui-tsai as a mui-tsai.
20. Section 14 provides that no person is to have in his employment an unregistered mui-tsai. This of course is subject to the period allowed for registration. It is also subject to the provisions of section 9, referred to above in paragraphs 10 and 11.
21. Section 15 provides that no one is to have in his employment any female domestic servant under the age of 10 years unless such servant is a registered mui-tsai. This is intended to prevent evasion, as in the case of section 5.
22. Section 16 provides that every mui-tsai of or, over the age of 10 years shall be entitled to such wages as shall be prescribed.
23. Section 18 is the usual penalty clause.
24. Section 19 provides that no prosecution under the Ordinance is to be com- menced without the consent of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs.
25. In my opinion this is an Ordinance to which His Excellency the Governor may properly assent in the name of His Majesty and on His behalf.
J. H. KEMP,
Attorney-General.
66
Enclosure 3 in No.
Extracts from Report of Proceedings in Hong Kong Legislative Council.
(28th December, 1922.)
THE FEMALE DOMESTIC SERVICE ORDINANCE.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : Sir, I beg to move the first reading of a Bill intituled, An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of female domestic service." This Bill is introduced on the instructions of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and is an attempt to deal with the much-discussed mui-tsai question—a question perhaps more discussed than understood. I say that because I think it is only fair to admit at the outset that much of the criticism-though not all---of the custom of employing mui-tsai is confused, ignorant and unsympathetic.
I think that the confusion of mind is largely due to the use of the term "slavery for what is not slavery at all. Mui-tsai are not slaves: the control of the employers is not recognised in any way by law: the girls are members of the family, though humble members of it; and Chinese custom recognises certain obligations of the employer towards the mui-tsai. It is impossible, of course, to argue this point now, and I have no desire to do so, but perhaps I may be allowed to give one illustration that came under my notice the other day. In a recent murder case at the Criminal Sessions one of the witnesses was a little girl of about 13; she was bright, intelligent, well-clothed, obviously well-fed, and she gave her evidence clearly and intelligently except that she very nearly broke down two or three times in speaking of her mother, the murdered woman. It was only nearly at the end of the case for the Crown that we discovered--what none of the police or Court officials had known till then-that the girl was not the daughter of the murdered woman at all, but a mui-tsai. She had referred to the woman throughout as her "mother." I think that class of incident would rather surprise some of the critics of the custom. It would also surprise them to know that our Chinese servants—at any rate in some cases-apply the term "mui-tsai to some European members of our households who have important and honourable duties in connection with the upbringing of our children. The fact that Chinese apply the term to persons of that class shows that the word cannot have for them the connotation of slavery," as so many critics of the system think.
The criticism, too, I am afraid, has often been ignorant. One well-known society of repute which considered it had a duty to go into the question and advise H.M. Government, wrote a formal letter in the belief that there were boy as well as girl mui-tsai-a surprising mistake. Two other societies in addressing themselves formally to the question talked about declaring mui-tsai illegal, evidently ignorant of the fact that mui-tsai is the name of a person and not of a thing. Mistakes of that kind are perhaps only surface mistakes, but I am afraid they do show the existence of a certain type of mind uncritical and rather apt to jump to conclusions without sufficient evidence.
I think that what is more important perhaps than confusion of mind or ignorance of details is lack of sympathy with an alien civilisation. Chinese civilisation has an ancient and an honourable record, and I, for one, think that in some respects it is superior to our own. I do not say that the custom of employing mui-tsai is one of those points. The social structure of that civilisation is very different from ours, and to embark on the task of changing that social structure, even in one detail, is one that may well cause even the boldest legislators to pause. It is recognised, therefore, that we must go slowly and carefully, and we are anxious to avoid doing any violence to sentiments and customs with which perhaps we are not in entire accord.
124
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.