Sessional_Paper_1900 — Page 120

116

( 10 )

believe that the houses were burned and the money contribution levied because of the murder, so we must conjecture that these punishinents were awarded because of the armed resistance to the British occupation. But we regard it as extremely unfortunate that any room for doubt should be left in the minds of the people of the New Territory as to the offences against British law that brought on this punishinent. There is also this difficulty about the monetary levy. If it were in the nature of a fine, why was it not paid into Court in the usual way? But if, as the natives allege. it was compensation to the murdered man's relatives, under what British law was it levied, and by whose authority? Even Chinese villagers do not rise in armed opposition, or, at a meeting of village elders, decide to kill men deliberately, without some motive, and the most obvious motive in this matter was that their fears had been worked upon to such an extent that they believed their tenure of the land would be disturbed unjustly, and the effect of these fears on any Chinese rural community is similar in poking a stick into a wasp's nest. That these fears are not removed, the attack upon Mr. Danby's party quite recently is sufficient proof. It may be that land jobbers and speculators are at the bottom of the trouble, but if so, it was and is clearly the duty of Her Majesty's adminis- trators to disabuse these people of their erroneous impressions and to remove their fears, just as much as it is the duty of the Government to put down disorder and to punish murderers.

However much we may disagree with Sir Henry Blake's general policy in regard to the New Territory-because it is impossible to say how far he is res- ponsible for that policy, as we are given to understand that he is enacting the rôle of the parliamentary sand bag"-yet we must give him credit for his latest attempt to enlighten the inhabitants on their relation to the British Crown. Had he done so in the first instance, instead of making his ridiculous pilgrimage to Canton, he would have enacted the wiser part. Relegating that to the limbo of irremediable blunders, we are pleased to observe that the Chinese land-holders are to be secured in their holdings. We hope this also implies that all the land and property already sold or contracted to be sold between the date of Mr. Stewart Lockhart's visit to the Hinterland in August, 1898, and the present date will be subject to the most searching enquiry. Without doubt a good deal of land was sold under threats that if not handed over peaceably the British Government would take it forcibly without compensation. The name of one minor Govern- ment servant, which must be known to the Government, i.e., to Mr. J. H. Stewart Lockhart, the Administrator of the New Territory, is being mentioned freely enough in Hongkong and in the Hinterland in conjunction with that of a Chinese gentleman, whose land speculations in the New Territory have evidently been carried on with a view to future purchases by the Government for sites of public buildings. It is, of course, a mistake to assume that all dealings in land in the New Territory are unfair or unjust, or that the term “land jobber" is synonymous with "thief." Hongkong has suffered, and suffered pitifully, from the land jobber. He is chronic. But where land has been obtained under misrepresentation, the Government, we imagine, if British law upholds righteousness and fair dealing, will be justified, after enquiry, in annulling all sales, should the original holders desire it. In his speech at Táipó-hü, His Excellency the Governor, in his desire to convince the villagers and Committee-men of his good intentions, seems to have gone too far and mixed up Chinese custom with British law. That, however, will not inutter much if the Government really stands by the people, and sees that crimes and offences are not punished both according to British law and Chinese custom. That mistake appears to have been made in respect of the Táipó-hü murder; but His Excellency will see that rectified, of course, and will also see to it that similar mistakes do not occur in the future administration of the New Territory.

Page 120Page 121