5363-24
report every intended removal of a mui-tsai from the Colony, even temporarily, and every change of address of the mui-tsai or of the employer. Further, according to the Bill, the employer, whatever his station in life, has to take out an identification ticket, as if (to use the words of a Chinese gentleman) he were a discharged convict who has periodically to report himself to the police. Moreover, registration in this case, if it is to be effective, would necessitate domiciliary visits, which would open a door to all sorts of abuses, such as bribery, thieves masquerading as detectives to gain admission into houses and interference with the privacy of the home; a thing repugnant to all free men. Registration of mui-tsai will not prevent their maltreat- ment any more than registration of shop-fokis will prevent thefts and embezzlements. Rather than have this registration law imposed on them, the employers of mui-tsai would sooner give them up at once, either to the Government or to such institutions as the Government would name. This would mean that the Government has to provide accommodation and find employment for the mui-tsai, of whom there are about ten thousand in the Colony. As a correspondent to the Chinese General Cham- ber of Commerce has said, there are unfortunately very few foundling houses in Hong Kong or in China, and so the present homes of the mui-tsai constitute a sort of foundling houses for them, otherwise a large number of them would have been drowned by their parents or starved to death.
Hong Kong is so bound up with Canton, geographically and economically, that to stop the employment of mui-tsai after the Bill becomes law as prescribed by clause 4 would be impracticable unless China acts likewise. I am of the humble opinion that no real improvement of any time-honoured social custom can be effected by sudden and violent change. The mui-tsai system has been in existence for thousands of years, having grown up under the economic condidions of life. The wide publicity that has recently been give to the question should help materially to bring about the attainment of this object. The best method of this end would seem to be a gradual and careful education of public opinion.
The Anti-mui-tsai Society and the Protection "Society can assist in the carrying out of the present Bill by having all mui-tsai informed of their status as declared in clause 2, and of their right to report at once to the Government in case they are ill- treated; and also by advising employers to treat their mui-tsai well, otherwise they would be punished severely. It should be remembered, as analogous to this matter, that the foot-binding practice which had been in existence in China for nearly two thousand years, and which was, as recently as twenty-five years ago, tenaciously clung to by the people, was eventually abolished, not by legal enactments but by gradual pressure of enlightened public opinion, until we see to-day middle-aged dames and young girls, instead of being carried on the backs of amahs, merrily tripping about in the streets in short skirts and high-heeled shoes, just like their Western sisters. What has happened to foot-binding should happen to the custom of keeping mui-tsai.
Let me now recapitulate the views of my Chinese colleague and myself, which, I think I can say, are also the views of my other Unofficial colleagues, namely, that to make illegal the engagement of mui-tsgai in Hong Kong at this juncture would be impracticable, that, as a preventive of ill-treatment of mui tsai, persons guilty of gross cruelty should be sent to prison for a long term with hard labour. It has been a source of regret to me that, while the case for stopping the employment of mui-tsai has been so ably and widely presented, those who are in favour of retaining the system for the present, with certain radical improvements in their position, have, until only quite recently, remained almost inarticulate. I say this because I wish that both sides had had an equal chance of presenting their respective cases to the Secretary of State. Those in favour of the Bill have undoubtedly been actuated by generous motives and lofty ideals, but I am afraid that their burning zeal has not permitted them to study the problem with that calmness and impartiality which the import- ance of the subject demands. I do not keep, and have never kept, any mui-tsai, but this does not blind me to the unwisdom of trying to sweep away in a day the custom with its good points. My Chinese colleague and I have given this grave problem much careful and anxious thought; and, while we recognise that there is much to be said for the arguments adduced by both sides, we have felt it our bounden duty to state, as I have done, the conclusions we have arrived at, without fear or favour. It remains for us to signify our support to the amendments which will be moved in committee by the Honourable Senior Unofficial Member.
H.E. THE GOVERNOR: Gentlemen, Before we pass on to the next stage of the Bill I desire to make a few general remarks on the subject. I should like, in the first place, to make it perfectly clear that I dissociate myself entirely from the venomous attacks which have been made on the whole Chinese population of this Colony by ignorant persons at Home who seem to assume that because a system is liable to abuse is is therefore essentially bad. At the same time, I think it must be admitted that there is, from the Western point of view, a strong case against the maintenance of a system which, to the unsubtle Western mind, is very difficult to distinguish from slavery owing to the passing of money and the acquisition of services which are subsequently
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.