Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T07:51:29.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chinese Migration to Singapore, 1896-19411

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2019

Joyce Ee
Get access

Extract

Emigration from China to Singapore in particular and South-East Asia in general during the nineteenth century was not an easy process at all. The Chinese authorities at first frowned on it and sometimes the emigrants were refused re-entry into their homeland. At the same time these emigrants were not well treated on the voyage down and on arrival at their destination. Yet despite this hazardous existence once a person left China, the emigrants increased in number from 2,069 in 1838-1839, to 10,928 in 1849-1850. By 1890 the annual figure had risen to 95,400 and it passed the 100,000 mark in 1895, with 190,901. The reasons for this phenomenal rise in the number of emigrants were to be found partly in the conditions in China which were so bad that the Chinese -were willing to brave any danger to make a new start in life, but mainly in the new attractions of Singapore and South-East Asia which were so promising that they could induce the Chinese, a people naturally conservative and tied to the homeland for ancestral reasons, to emigrate, even permanently in some cases. These may seem to be sweeping statements, but a further analysis of the the facts will confirm them.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , March 1961 , pp. 33 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1961

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.)

Footnotes

1

This paper, somewhat longer, was submitted for an Honours B.A. Degree at the University of Malaya in Singapore.

References

Page 33 note 2. Lattimore, Owen, The Mainsprings of Asiatic Migration in Limits of Land Settlement , edited by Bowman, Isiah, (New York, 1937), p. 129 Google Scholar.

Page 33 note 3. Montague Bell, T.H. and Woodhead, H.G.W., The China Year Book , 1976, (London), p. 37 Google Scholar.

Page 34 note 4. Straits Budget, January 4, 1912, quoting account of the Central China Famine Relief Committee of Shanghai, p. 9.

Page 34 note 5. Chen, Ta, Emigrant Communities in South China , (Shanghai. 1939), Appendix A, pp. 259 260 Google Scholar.

Page 35 note 6. Chen Han-Seng, “The Present Prospect of Chinese Emigration” in Limits of Land Settlement, edited by I. Bowman, p. 137-138, quoting L. T. Gardner, “Amoy Emigration to the Straits”, China Review, Vol. 22, 1897, pp. 621-626.

Page 35 note 7. Lattimore, Owen, “Mainsprings of Asiatic Migration” and Chen Han-Seng, “Present Prospects of Chinese Emigration”, in Limits of Land Settlement, Edited by I. Bowman.

Page 36 note 8. Toynbee, A.J., “Chinese Immigration into Tropical Territories in the Pacific Area”, Survey of International Affairs , 1926, Pt. III B (v), (London, 1928) p. 457.Google Scholar

Page 36 note 9. General Labour Committee, British Malaya, “Report of the Special Committee on Chinese Labour”, The Planters' Association of Malaya, (Kuala Lumpur, 1922) p. 1.

Page 36 note 10. GungWu, Wang, A Short History of the Nanvang Chinese , (Singapore 1959), p. 34.Google Scholar

Page 37 note 11. GungWu, Wang, Short History of the Nanyang Chinese , p. 19 Google Scholar.

Page 39 note 1. Straits Settlements Report of Labour Commission, 1891, quoted bv Blythe, W.L “Historical Sketch of Chinese Labour”, JMBRAS, Vol. XX, p. 83.

Page 39 note 2. Ordinance XVIII of 1896 “Native Passenger Lodging Houses”. Under it any house “kept as a public resort for the boarding and lodging of native passengers” was required to have a license issued by the Protector and the keeper thereof was bound to observe the rules made by the Governor in Council for the management of such lodginghouses. Previously they had been virtual slave camps.

Page 40 note 3. They were often bullied by the depot keepers into accepting employment, the destination and terms of which they had no idea.

Page 40 note 4. Proceedings of the Legislative Council, Straits Settlements, (hereafter cited PLCSS), 13 May, 1897, p. B51

Page 40 note 5. Secretary of State for Colonies to Governor Sir C. B. H. Mitchell, Straits Settle, ments, No. 63, March 5, 1897, Enclosed in C.O.D., 1897.

Page 40 note 6. In the Chinese Immigrants Ordinance of 1902, clause 32 stated that an immigrant whose contract of service is for a definite period, should be entitled to determine such contract at any time on giving one month's notice and on payment to the employer of all advances, if any, made to him or on his behalf, which the immigrant by his contract had agreed to repay. Under the Emigration Ordinance of 1910, it would be an offence for anyone under contract to go to places other than those named on the schedule. The Chinese Immigration Ordinance (Amendment) Bill of 1910 also stated that the period of contract was not to exceed beyond three hundred days. Source: PLCSS 1902, p. A 44; PLCSS March 11, 1910, p. B7.

Page 42 note 7. Parmer, Colonial Labour Policy and Administration, p. 154.

Page 42 note 8. PLCSS, 1914, October 2, No. 25, p. CI08 —Address of Sir Arthur Young.

Page 42 note 9. The origins of the Bill was when Police arrested a large number of Indians who were professional beggars in Singapore. As these were British subjects they could not be dealt with under the Banishment Laws which existed for these gurposes, so they had to be dealt wtih under this Ordinance. It applied to ritish subjects too. The bill was also aimed against other men such as Chinese who had been shipped from foreign countries into Singapore with a view to their repatriation by Governmental authorities. PLCSS, 1906, p. B26.

Page 42 note 10. PLCSS, August 8, 1932, p. B77.

Page 42 note 11. The Singapore Free Press March 14, 28, 1927, described in detail such disturbances as the Kreta Ayer incident and boycott of Trolley Buses.

Page 43 note 12. PLCSS, October 10, 1927, p. C258.

Page 43 note 13. The quota was extended bv short periods to the end of 1932 and the number of immigrants were reduced until, 1,000 per month were permitted to land during the last six months of 1932.

Page 43 note 14. Despatch No. 634 from the Straits Settlements to Secretary of State, December 20, 1932 quoted by Parmer, Colonial Labour Policy and Administration, p. 45.

Page 43 note 15. The term Alien was defined as anv person who was not a British subject nor a subject of a Britisli protected or mandated territory. Of the major immigrant communities here the Indians were thus exempted from the Ordinance, but the Chinese were subject to it and so were Netherlands Indian persons. The Govcmor-in-Council however had the power to exempt aliens from any particular country from this law. Initially all alien women and children and all those from the Netherlands Indies were exempted. The Ordinance thus chiefly affected Chinese entry and residence. As a result charge of discrimination were made on the Government. PLCSS, 1932 and Straits Times, October 27, 1932, Chinese Topics in Malaya.

Page 44 note 16. PLCSS, July 7, 1930, p. B55. (In 1923, 1928 and 1929).

Page 46 note 17. Governor's Despatches to Secretary of State, No. 294, August 4, 1899.

Page 46 note 18. G. D. No. 294, April 4, 1899.

Page 47 note 19. This prohibition affected immigration numbers and Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce tried to persuade the Government here to be less strict about prohibition by promising to be very careful over such matters as fumigation and disinfectant of ships. The Government however, supported bv the Chamber of Commerce here remained adamant. Reports of Singapore Chamber of Commerce, 1901, p. 4 and Appendix D, pp. 21-22.

Page 47 note 20. PLCSS, 29 June, 1925, pp. B80 and B150.

Page 48 note 1. Blvthc, “Historical Sketch of Chinese Labour in Malaya”, JMBRAS Vol. XX. p.' 103.

Page 48 note 2. Thompson, V. and Adloff, R., Minority Problems in South-East Asia, (California, 1955), p. 33. (The Immigration Dept. was created in 1933 when the Aliens' Ordinance was passed).

Page 48 note 3. Del Tufo, M.V., Mahva: A Report on the 1947 Census of Population (London) p. 84.

Page 49 note 4. Vlieland, Malaya: A Report of the 1931 Census of Population.

Page 49 note 5. Song Ong Siang, One Hundred Years of Singapore (London, 1921) p. 540; and see also,

Page 49 note 6. Song Ong Siang, One Hundred Years of Singapore, p. 430.

Page 49 note 7. For some comments on this, see Bauer, P. T. and Yamey, B. S., The Economics of Under-Developed Countries, (Cambridge, 1959), pp. 108-109.

Page 50 note 8. MacNair, The Chinese Abroad, Their Position and Protection, p. 29.