RAS-1981 — Page 120

RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 All AI Reviewed

106

CARL T SMITH

His trusted allies had turned against him.

In his communications with the Colonial Office he was strangely silent about the support for the Bill by the Anti Mui Tsai Society and the labour unions. It seemed to be on the opinion that the only views of Chinese to be taken seriously were those of his long-time advisers, and now they were deserting him. One of the Colonial Office administrations minuted a letter from Governor Stubbs:

It seems to me the advice we have received on the general question of mui tsai has been throughout faulty and incorrect and in certain respects misleading. It seems also the Hong Kong Government does not desire to press the Secretary of State's reform on the Chinese.12

On December 23, 1922 the Mui Tsai Bill was gazetted, and on December 28 it received its first reading in the Legislative Council as "An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of domestic service".

The Editor of the Daily Press, a strong advocate of abolition, felt the remarks of the Attorney General in introducing the Bill reflected the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government to implement the instructions of the Colonial Office:

The Attorney General in introducing the Mui Tsai Bill can hardly be said to have shown... fully sympathy with the object of the Bill... The attitude of the local Government to agitation for abolition has been hostile all along,13

13

Chinese Chamber of Commerce Meeting – January 1923

The members of the Protection Society had second thoughts about the approval given by four of their representatives on the joint committee to assist in drafting a bill (three did not sign the agreement). An extraordinary meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held early in January to air reservations about the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Li Po-kwai (1871-1963), a wealthy property owner, presided. Among the members in attendance the following were named:

The two Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Mr. Chow Shou-son and the Hon. Mr. Ng Hon-tsz

Mr. Ho Fook, a former member of the Legislative Council

Lo Chueng-shiu, a compradore of Jardines and brother-in-law of Ho Fook

His son Mr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo), a solicitor and


Page 120

Page 121

Edit History

2026-05-13 00:19:56 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
106 CARL T SMITH His trusted allies had turned against him. In his communications with the Colonial Office he was strangely silent about the support for the Bill by the Anti Mui Tsai Society and the labour unions. It seemed to be on the opinion that the only views of Chinese to be taken seriously were those of his long-time advisers, and now they were deserting him. One of the Colonial Office administrations minuted a letter from Governor Stubbs: It seems to me the advice we have received on the general question of mui tsai has been throughout faulty and incorrect and in certain respects misleading. It seems also the Hong Kong Government does not desire to press the Secretary of State's reform on the Chinese.12 On December 23, 1922 the Mui Tsai Bill was gazetted, and on December 28 it received its first reading in the Legislative Council as "An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of domestic service". The Editor of the Daily Press, a strong advocate of abolition, felt the remarks of the Attorney General in introducing the Bill reflected the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government to implement the instructions of the Colonial Office: The Attorney General in introducing the Mui Tsai Bill can hardly be said to have shown... fully sympathy with the object of the Bill... The attitude of the local Government to agitation for abolition has been hostile all along,13 13 Chinese Chamber of Commerce Meeting January 1923 The members of the Protection Society had second thoughts about the approval given by four of their representatives on the joint committee to assist in drafting a bill (three did not sign the agreement). An extraordinary meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held early in January to air reservations about the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Li Po-kwai (1871-1963), a wealthy property owner, presided. Among the members in attendance the following were named: The two Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Mr. Chow Shou-son and the Hon. Mr. Ng Hon-tsz Mr. Ho Fook, a former member of the Legislative Council Lo Chueng-shiu, a compradore of Jardines and brother-in-law of Ho Fook His son Mr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo), a solicitor and Page 120 Page 121
Baseline (Original)
106 CARL T SMITH His trusted allies had turned against him. In his communications with the Colonial Office he was strangely silent about the support for the Bill by the Anti Mui Tsai Society and the labour unions. It seemed to be on the opinion that the only views of Chinese to be taken seriously were those of his long time advisers, and now they were deserting him. One of the Colonial Office adminis- trations minuted a letter from Governor Stubbs: It seems to me the advice we have received on the general question of mui tsai has been throughout faulty and incorrect and in certain respects misleading. It seems also the Hong Kong Government does not desire to press the Secretary of State's reform on the Chinese.12 On December 23, 1922 the Mui Tsai Bill was gazetted, and on December 28 it received its first reading in the Legislative Council as "An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of domestic service". The Editor of the Daily Press, a strong advocate of abolition, felt the remarks of the Attorney General in introducing the Bill reflected the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government to implement the ins- tructions of the Colonial Office: The Attorney General in introducing the Mui Tsai Bill can hardly be said to have shown... fully sympathy with the object of the Bill... The attitude of the local Government to agitation for abolition has been hostile all along,13 13 Chinese Chamber of Commerce Meeting January 1923 The members of the Protection Society had second thoughts about the approval given by four of their representatives on the joint committee to assist in drafting a bill (three did not sign the agreement). An extraordinary meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held early in January to air reservations about the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Li Po-kwai (1871 - 1963), a wealthy property owner, presided. Among the members in attendance the following were named: The two Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Mr. Chow Shou-son and the Hon. Mr. Ng Hon-tsz Mr. Ho Fook, a former member of the Legislative Council Lo Chueng-shiu, a compradore of Jardines and brother-in-law of Ho Fook His son Mr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo), a solicitor and ! Page 120Page 121
2026-05-13 00:19:56 · Baseline
View content

106

CARL T SMITH

His trusted allies had turned against him.

In his communications with the Colonial Office he was strangely silent about the support for the Bill by the Anti Mui Tsai Society and the labour unions. It seemed to be on the opinion that the only views of Chinese to be taken seriously were those of his long time advisers, and now they were deserting him. One of the Colonial Office adminis- trations minuted a letter from Governor Stubbs:

It seems to me the advice we have received on the general question of mui tsai has been throughout faulty and incorrect and in certain respects misleading. It seems also the Hong Kong Government does not desire to press the Secretary of State's reform on the Chinese.12

On December 23, 1922 the Mui Tsai Bill was gazetted, and on December 28 it received its first reading in the Legislative Council as "An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of domestic service".

The Editor of the Daily Press, a strong advocate of abolition, felt the remarks of the Attorney General in introducing the Bill reflected the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government to implement the ins- tructions of the Colonial Office:

The Attorney General in introducing the Mui Tsai Bill can hardly be said to have shown... fully sympathy with the object of the Bill... The attitude of the local Government to agitation for abolition has been hostile all along,13

13

Chinese Chamber of Commerce Meeting – January 1923

The members of the Protection Society had second thoughts about the approval given by four of their representatives on the joint committee to assist in drafting a bill (three did not sign the agreement). An extraordinary meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held early in January to air reservations about the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Li Po-kwai (1871 - 1963), a wealthy property owner, presided. Among the members in attendance the following were named:

The two Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Mr. Chow Shou-son and the Hon. Mr. Ng Hon-tsz

Mr. Ho Fook, a former member of the Legislative Council

Lo Chueng-shiu, a compradore of Jardines and brother-in-law of Ho Fook

His son Mr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo), a solicitor and

!

Page 120Page 121

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.