Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:06:32.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Overseas Chinese and Economic Nationalization in the Philippines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Sheldon Appleton
Get access

Extract

A key economic, social, and political problem for the nations of Southeast Asia is posed by the economically important and abundantly organized Chinese minorities in their midst. The “economic stranglehold” of the “clannish” Chinese is often cited as the root of all evil by resentful local peoples, and on occasion these feelings have exploded in anti-Chinese demonstrations or riots.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , February 1960 , pp. 151 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1960

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Since this article is based in part on seventy field interviews, most of them with informants whose anonymity must be maintained, it may be assumed that statements not otherwise attributed were made to the writer in the course of these interviews.

1 See Skinner, G. William, Chinese Society in Thailand (Ithaca, 1957), pp. 91–99.Google Scholar

2 Jensen, Khin Khin Myint, “The Chinese in the Philippines During the American Regime: 1898–1946,” Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1956, pp. 94, 254–261.Google Scholar

3 By “ethnic Chinese” is meant in this case immigrants, offspring of two Chinese parents, and those with Chinese father and Filipina mother who did not opt for Philippine citizenship when they reached majority.

4 The Philippine National Bureau of Investigation estimates that about 200,000 Chinese entered the country illegally between the end of the Japanese occupation and the middle of 1956. Committee on Anti-Filipino Activities, Report on Red Threat (Manila, 1957), p. 126.

5 Fei-lü-pin Min-li-la Chung-hua Shang-hui Wu-shih Chou-nien-K'an (Fiftieth Anniversary Publication of the Philippine Manila Chinese Chamber of Commerce) (Manila, 1955). Chinese Section, Statistical Supplement, p. 169.

6 Fei-lü-pin Hua-ch'iao Ching-chi [Philippine Chinese Economic Affairs] (Taipei, 1956), pp. 125, 153. For Chinese holdings in the retail trade, see Table 2.

7 Elizabeth Siy Cheng Chu, “Chinese Contributions to the Philippine Economy,” Unpublished Paper, University of the Philippines, 1955, pp. 37–41.

8 Fei-lü-pin Hua-ch'iao Ching-chi, pp. 153–156.

9 “Filipino, American and Chinese Participation in Philippine Trade,” American Chamber of Commerce Journal (Manila), XXXIII (Nov. 1957), 536–37.

10 “Answer of Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla to the Petition Filed with the Supreme Court by Lao H. Ichong to Declare Republic Act No. 1180, Popularly Known as the Retail Trade Nationalization Law, Unconstitutional,” Brief Presented to the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines in the case of Ichong vs. Hernandez, G. R. No. L-7995 (Manila, 1954), chart following p. 12. Hereafter: Retail Trade Law Defense Brief.

11 Amry Vandenbosch, “The Chinese in Southeast Asia,” Journal of Politics, IX (Feb. 1947), 84.

12 Weightman, George, “The Chinese Community in the Philippines,” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of the Philippines, 1952, p. 71.Google Scholar

13 Hoi-horn, Chu, “The Chinese in the Philippine Economy,” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Manila Central University, 1950, pp. 2–4.Google Scholar

14 Weightman, p. 88.

15 Jensen, pp. 37, 38, 43.

16 Jensen, pp. 46, 65.

17 Hayden, Joseph R., The Philippines: A Study in National Development (New York, 1942), p. 705.Google Scholar

18 Weightman, p. 89.

19 “Petition of Lao H. Ichong, in His Own Behalf and in Behalf of Other Alien Residents, Corporations, and Partnerships Adversely Affected by Republic Act 1180,” Brief Presented to the Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines in the case of Ichong vs. Hernandez, G. R. No. L-7995 (Manila, 1954), p. 8. Hereafter: Retail Trade Law Plaintiff Brief.

20 “Memorandum Regarding Act No. 2972 of the Philippines, Legislation Known as the Bookkeeping Law,” Brief Submitted to U. S. Supreme Court in case of Yu Cong Eng vs. Trinidad, 1926, pp. 12, 18.

21 Weightman, p. 90.

22 Constitution of the Philippine Commonwealth, Article 13, Sections 1, 5, and Article 14, Section 8.

23 Krivenko vs. the Register of Deeds of Manila (44 O.G. 471) (Manila, 1947), cited in Retail Trade Law Defense Brief, p. 10. The majority was 6–4.

24 Fei-lü-pin Hua-ch'iao Ching-chi, p. 218.

25 Purcell, Victor, The Chinese in Southeast Asia (London, 1950), p. 634.Google Scholar

26 Weightman, pp. 91–92.

27 Weightman, pp. 55, 79.

28 Weightman, pp. 96–99, 121–123. Many of the Americans, Chinese and Filipinos interviews confirmed this.

29 Weightman, p. 110.

30 Laguio, Perfecto E., “Progress of Philippine Commerce,” Foolkien Times Yearbook, 1955, (Manila), pp. 37ff. and 181.Google Scholar

31 Retail Trade Law Plaintiff Brief, pp. I and 5. There were at least 70 other cases in the greater Manila area involving similar refusals to renew licenses issued prior to approval of the law.

32 Retail Trade Law Plaintiff Brief, passim.

33 “Answer of Co-Defendant Marcelino Salimiento to the Petition Filed with the Supreme Court by Lao H. Ichong to Declare Republic Act No. 1180, Popularly Known as the Retail Trade Nationalization Law, Unconstitutional,” Supreme Court of the Philippines, Case of Ichong vs. Hernandez, G. R. No. L-7995 (Manila, 1954), p. 3 and passim.

34 Opinion of Secretary of Justice Pedro Tuason, No. 273 s. 1943 (Manila, October 13, 1954).

35 “Philippine Capital Prospering Hong Kong,” American Chamber of Commerce Journal (Manila), XXXIV (Feb. 1958), 54.

36 Ravenholt, Albert, “The Philippine Republic: A Decade of Independence,” Encyclopedia Brittanica Book of the Year, 1957, p. 60.Google Scholar See also Ronquillo, Bernadino, “Effects of Nationalization of Retail Trade in Over a Year,” Fookien Times Yearbook, 1955, P. 114ff.Google Scholar

37 Manila Bulletin, August 13, 1958.

38 Ravenholt, Albert, “Chinese in the Philippines—An Alien Business and Middle Class,” American Universities Field Staff Reports (December 9, 1955), p. 17.Google Scholar

39 The Philippines Herald, August 14, 1954.

40 Manila Chronicle, July 28, 1954.

41 Manila Bulletin, August 16, 1958.

42 Manila Bulletin, October 20, 1954.

43 Rama, Napoleon G., “Our Fearful Businessmen,” Philippines Free Press, XLIX (Aug. 23, 1958), 29.Google Scholar

44 See Nien-pao, Hua-ch'iao Ching-chi [Annual Economic Report on Overseas Chinese], 3rd Ed., (Taipei, 1957), pp. 103–4.Google Scholar Other pertinent figures and discussion are presented in DrLiao, Shubert C., “Investment Employment in Chinese Enterprises and the Economic Development of the Philippines,” Fookien Times Yearbook, 1957, p. 40ff.Google Scholar

45 Saturday Mirror (Manila), January 29, 1955.

46 Tutay, Filemon V., “Those C-R-C Raids,” Philippines Free Press, XLIX (Aug. 23, 1958), 6.Google Scholar

47 Manila Times, July 8, 1958.

48 Manila Bulletin, August 12, 1958.

49 There were 43 nationalization bills pending in Congress as of August 1958. Rama, p. 29.