CO129-551-2 Mui Tsai system 30-11-1934 - 22-11-1935 — Page 50

-5-

In my memorandum, I stated that "there have been

Ano new mui-tsai since 1923." The Committee finds that

Its explanation of my

herein I have fallen into error.

error is that I had wrongly assumed that Section 4 of Part

II of the Ordinance (which provides that "no person shall

"hereafter take into his possession any mui-tsai") had had

practical effect when the law came into legal operation,

namely, on the 23rd February, 1923. The Committee's finding

is that this Section, though legally operative, was,in

practice,inoperative until another part of the law (Part III.)

was brought into operation on the Ist December, 1929.

Moreover, the Committee has serious doubts whether the

Section is yet in operation.

My assumption that the law

was operative may perhaps be excused.

-

The Committee propounds, but does not answer, the

question "What is the position of a mui-tsai not

"registered as such ?". When the answer to this question

is found, it may provide another factor to show that the

problem relates to "female domestic service" as a whole.

Incidentally, I would mention that the law relating to the

mui-tsai is entitled "The Female Domestic Service Ordinance,

"1923,".

Fourth Question. I merely invited attention to

the matter of the statutory minimum wages.

In its

observations on the subject, the Committee appears to be

under the impression that I have "su gested the recognition

of the Mui-Tsai System" This is not so: the system is

•

recognized by the Ordinance, which carefully defines the

word "Mui-Tsai", and uses it throughout:it is recognized in

the Rules under the Ordinance, and in the half-yearly

reports of the Governor. The Committee,itself,in its

13th conclusion, on page 25,refers to the "True Mui-Tsai

Asystem", and refers to the "Mui-Tsai System" in its 14th

conclusion.

50

Page 50Page 51