¹ Hipkins, James R., ‘The History of the Chinese in Borneo’, Sarawak Museum Journal, XIX, 38–39 (n.s.) (07–12 1971), pp. 109–25;Google Scholar and Jackson, James C., Sarawak: A Geographical Survey of a Developing State (London: University of London Press, 1968), pp. 52–61.Google Scholar

² For a contemporary description of this Chinese Rebellion based on the Rajah's letters and an account from his servant Penty, see Jacob, Gertrude L., The Raja of Sarawak: An Account of Sir James Brooke, KCB, LLD, Given Chiefly Through Letters and Journals (London: Macmillan, 1876), vol. II, pp. 237–44;Google Scholar the account of the First Rajah's Secretary who recorded the incident five months later, see John, Spenser St, The Life of Sir James Brooke, Rajah of Sarawak from his Personal Papers and Correspondence (Edinburgh and London: Blackwood, 1879), pp. 294–315;Google Scholar from a visitor's observations, see Helms, L. V., Pioneering in the Far East (London: W. H. Allen & Co., 1882), pp. 164–92;Google Scholar an account from the future Second Rajah, see Brooke, C., Ten Years in Sarawak (London: Tinsiey Bros, 1886), vol. I, pp. 214–25;Google Scholar and from Harriette McDougall's viewpoint as well as that of her husband, the Anglican Bishop Francis T. McDougall, see McDougall, Harriette, Sketches of Our Life at Sarawak (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1882), pp. 120–56.Google Scholar Also Runciman, Steven, The White Rajahs: A Histoy of Sarawak from 1841–1946 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), pp. 119–33;Google Scholar and for a new assessment, Lockard, Craig A., ‘The 1857 Chinese Rebellion in Sarawak: A Reappraisal’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, IX, 1 (03 1978), pp. 85–98;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Saunders, Graham, ‘The Bau Chinese Attack on Kuching, February 1857: A Dilferent Perspective’, Sarawak Museum Journal, XLII, 63 (12 1978), pp. 375–96.Google Scholar

³ S., Baring-Gould and C. A., Bampfylde, A History of Sarawak under its Two White Rajahs (London: Henry Sotheran, 1909), p. 31.Google Scholar

⁴ The Sarawak Gazette first appeared on 26 August 1870 and functioned as a semi-official organ of the Brooke Government, financially dependent on it with a serving Government Officer as its editor. Before the publication of the official Sarawak Government Gazette in 1908, it carried all official proclamations side by side with articles on non-official subjects written by serving officers, especially those from the outstations (government outposts outside Kuching, the state capital), as well as contributions from the general public. It was common to find works that were critical of the Brooke administration. Little by way of censorship was practised, indicating its independent nature and this gave the Sarawak Gazette a lively character that provided a wealth of information about Sarawak's past.

⁵ Sarawak Gazette 1 August and 1 Dec. 1874.Google Scholar

⁶ Purcell, Victor, The Colonial Period in Southeast Asia: An Historical Sketch (New York: Institute of Pacific Relations, 1953), p. 34.Google Scholar

⁷ Pringle, Robert, ‘The Brookes of Sarawak: Reformers in Spite of Themselves’, Sarawak Museum Journal, XIX, 38–39 (n.s.) (07–12, 1971), p. 65.Google Scholar

⁸ Lockard, Craig A., ‘The Government of Rajah Charles Brooke and the Development of the Chinese Community in Sarawak 1870–1889’, Paper prepared for Dr Walter Vella's Seminar in Southeast Asian History. Honolulu, Hawaii: n.n. (July) 1965, p. 12.Google Scholar

⁹ See Liu, Chiang, ‘Chinese Pioneers, A.D. 1900: The New Foochow Settlement of Sarawak’, Sarawak Museum Journal, VI, 6 (12 1955), pp. 536–48;Google Scholar and Tsung, Lin Wen, ‘The First Ten Years of the New Foochow Colony’, The Sarawak Teacher, Special History Issue, II, 2 (1966), pp. 13–14, 28.Google ScholarRajah Charles Brooke signed an agreement with Wong Nai Siong regarding the immigration and settlement of the Foochow Chinese in Sarawak, and a relatively similar contract was made with the Cantonese Company. See Rajah's Agreement Book, April 1893–Dec. 1902, pp. 142–4, 155–6.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Pringle, Robert, Rajahs and Rebels: The Ibans of Sarawak (London: Macmillan, 1970), p. 316;Google Scholarand Sarawak Government Gazette, 1 July 1933, p. 164.Google Scholar

¹¹ Sarawak Gazette, 15 Dec. 1871.Google ScholarThe Sarawak Gazette asserted that the population was in fact more than the published figure (by at least 10 per cent). Another estimate put it at around 7,000. See Spenser St John, The Life of Sir James Brooke, p. 379.Google Scholar

¹² Baring-Gould and Bampfylde, History of Sarawak, p. 33;Google Scholar and Lockard, Craig A., ‘Leadership and Power Within the Chinese Community of Sarawak’, Journal of Southtast Asian Studies, II, 2 (09 1971), p. 100.Google Scholar

¹³ Jackson, , Sarawak, p. 53.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Jones, L. W., Sarawak: Report on the Census of Population, 1960 (Kuching: Government Printing Office, 1962), p. 57.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Ibid. Also Jackson, Sarawak, p. 53.

¹⁶ Leigh, Michael B., The Rising Moon: Political Change in Sarawak (Sydney: Sydney University Press, 1974), p. 10.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Ju-K'ang, T'ien, The Chinese of Sarawak: A Study of Social Structure. Monograph on Social Anthropology, No. 12. (London: The London School of Economics and Political Science, 1956), p. 72.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Sarawak Gazette 13 March 1871.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Address by H. H. The Rajah to Council Negri 2nd July. Original in Malay. Translation by Lewis, John E. A., Clerk to the Council.Google Scholar

²⁰ Sarawak Gazette 1 July 1910.Google Scholar

²¹ Sarawak Gazette 2 January 1903.Google Scholar Besides the Chinese teacher, the Lay School also engaged the services of a Malay schoolmaster from Singapore for the Malay section and a Madras Tamil to teach the few Indian pupils. The latter also taught English. See Letter of 1st November 1902 from Charles Brooke to the Principal Madras College, H. H. The Rajah's Letters 1880–1915; and the Chinese and Native Employees Roll Book, p. 165.Google Scholar

²² Regarding the Government Lay School see Sarawak Gazette 30 July 1961 and 30 Nov. 1962.Google Scholar

²³ Sarawak Government Gazette 16 January 1924, p. 25.Google Scholar Later grants were not given solely on the basis of the attendance records of the schools hut ‘more in accordance with the needs and deserts of the schools concerned’ (Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 28).Google Scholar

²⁴ Sarawak Government Gazette 1 Oct. 1924, p. 451–2.Google Scholar

²⁵ Upon the abolition of the post of the Director of Education in April 1933 due to financial constraints resulting from the Depression, his duties were allocated as follows: the Christian Mission schools came under the Residents of the Divisions; the Chinese schools under the Secretary for Chinese Affairs; and the Government Vernacular Schools which included Malay and Native schools were controlled by the Secretary for Native Affairs. See Sarawak Administrative Report 1933, p. 13.Google Scholar

²⁶ For the list of textbooks considered subversive by the Brooke Government that were banned in the Chinese schools, see Sarawak Government Gazette 16 April 1930; 16 Sept. 1930; 16 Feb. 1931; 1 April 1931; 1 June 1931; 16 June 1931; 1 Aug. 1931; 16 June 1932; 1 June 1933; 16 Aug. 1933; 1 Sept. 1933; 2 July and 16 Nov. 1933.

²⁷ Clark, C. D. Le Gro, Sarawak: 1935 Blue Report (Kuching: Sarawak Museum, 1935), p. 7.Google Scholar

²⁸ Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 28; 1938, p. 27.Google Scholar

²⁹ Sarawak Administrative Report 1929, p. 43.Google Scholar

³⁰ Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 28.Google Scholar

³¹ Sarawak Gazette 1 November 1930.Google Scholar

³² Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 26.Google Scholar

³³ Ibid.

³⁴ Chin, John M., The Sarawak Chinese (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1981), p. 91.Google Scholar

³⁵ T'ien, , The Chinese of Sarawak, p. 72.Google Scholar

³⁶ Purcell, Victor, Problems of Chinese Education (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., 1936), pp. 67–8.Google Scholar

³⁷ See Taylor, Brian and Heyward, P. M., The Kuching Anglican Schools (Kuching: Lee Ming Press, 1973), p. 65;Google ScholarRooney, John, Khabar Gembira: A History of the Catholic Church in East Malaysia and Brunei (1880–1976) (London: Burns & Oates, 1981), p. 152;Google Scholarand Sarawak Gazette 2 Nov. 1925.Google Scholar Also my paper ‘Mission Education in Sarawak During the Period of Brooke Rule, 1841–1946’, Sarawak Museum Journal, XLII, 63 (New Series) (12 1991), pp. 283–373.Google Scholar

³⁸ Sarawak Gazette 1 July 1910, 16 Sept. 1912 and 30 Nov. 1926.Google Scholar

³⁹ Sarawak Gazette 1 Nov. 1929.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ T'ien, , The Chinese in Sarawak, p. 72.Google Scholar Regarding the Kongsi in Sambas and neighbouring districts in Dutch Borneo see Ward, Barbara, ‘A Hakka Kongsi in Borneo’, Journal of Oriental Studies, 1, 2 (07 1954), pp. 358–70, being Appendix II to T'ien's The Chinese in Sarawak.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Paku Monthly Report 1 Oct. 1870.Google Scholar

⁴² The term singsang is the transliteration from the Hakka and Cantonese dialects which denoted the word for ‘teacher’. The Hokkien term singseh was also used. (Conversations with Huang Jian-li Dr, Dr Ng Chin Keong and Dr Lee Ting Hui, Department of History, National University of Singapore, Singapore.)

Apparently there was no standard form for Chinese words in the records and reports of the Brooke Government or in the Sarawak Gazette, and translation was likely to be done in an ad hoc manner depending upon the advice of the Chinese civil servants on hand.

⁴³ Paku Monthly Report 1st October 1870. Also Paku Monthly Report 1st July 1872. Report of Oliver Cromwell St John, Resident of Upper Sarawak.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See Sarawak Gazette 2 Jan. 1892; 1 Sept. 1896; 1 Aug. 1899; and Upper Sarawak March Report 1898, Report of Reginald Audry, Resident of Upper Sarawak.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ For the Chinese school in Bau see Sarawak Gazette 2 June 1892; 1 Sept. 1896; and 1 April 1898.Google ScholarFor the one established in Kapit see Sarawak Education Department, ‘Outline of the History of Education in Sarawak’, Jernal Persatuan Sejarah Malaysia, Cawangan Sarawak (June 1980), p. 13.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Sarawak Gazette 1 Dec. 1870. The term syn-song was likely to be an error in transliteration for singsang as there was evidently no Chinese dialect using the former to denote the word for ‘teacher’. (Conversations with DrHui, Lee Ting and Dr Ng Chin Keong.)Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Sarawak Gazette 18 Sept. 1871.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Sarawak Gazette 15 March 1877.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Sarawak might not be so backward in terms of Chinese education and the opening of Chinese vernacular schools relative to the other countries in Southeast Asia; for instance, there were apparently no Chinese schools in the Spanish Philippines before 1899. See Wickberg, Edgar, The Chinese in Philippine Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965), p. 188.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Sarawak Gazette 1 Dec. 1870.Google Scholar

⁵¹ The Anglican Mission established their school called the SPG School (later adopted the name of ’St Thomas'’) in 1849, while the Roman Catholics who came later started St Joseph's School in 1881. Both these schools were located in Kuching.

⁵² The new interest in the motherland took the form of celebrating important political events in China, for example, like the anniversary of the Republic which was observed with pomp and ceremony, and also contributed to humanitarian causes like the famine fund in North China and the flood relief in Swatow. See Sarawak Gazette 16 March 1912 and November 1920.Google Scholar

⁵³ For a description of the Chinese vernacular schools in the other outstations see Sarawak Gazette 16 July 1908, 1 Feb. 1929, and 1 Oct. 1935 for Bau; 1 June 1908 for Lundu; 2 June 1913 for Bintulu; 1 Nov. 1911 and 2 June 1930 for Simanggang; 1 Oct. 1913 and 1 Oct. 1936 for Dalat and Kapit; 21 March 1931 for Miri; and 2 Jan. 1936 for Baram.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Chin, , The Chinese in Sarawak, p. 87.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Lockard, Craig A., ‘The South East Asian Town in Historical Perspective: A social History of Kuching, Malaysia, 1820–1965’ (Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1973), vol. I, p. 380.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Ibid., p. 226.

⁵⁷ See Sarawak Gazette 17 Dec. 1918.Google Scholar In 1916 a Mandarin school promoter visited Kuching and some of the outstations, trying to encourage the setting up of Mandarin schools. The schools that he managed to open in the outstations of Limbang and Lawas proved to be unsuccessful and eventually reverted to dialect schools. See Sarawak Gazette 1 Dec. 1916 and 16 Dec. 1918. However, Mandarin night classes were established in the 1920s and 1930s by the Chinese organizations to teach the language to adult Chinese ‘who are jealous of the new generation being able to speak it—the equivalent of the “King's English” in China.’ See Sarawak Gazette 1 April 1939; also letter of 27th December 1940, Letters of Richards, A. J. N. from Sarawak, August 1938 to December 1941. Rhodes House Library.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Sarawak Government Gazette 1 October 1924, p. 450.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ See, for instance, Hui, Lee Ting, ‘Policies and Politics in Chinese Schools in the Straits Settlements and the Federated Malay States 1786–1941’ (MA Thesis, University of Malaya, 1957), pp. 125–6, 261–6.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Cartwright, Frank T., Titan Hoover of Borneo (New York: The Abingdon Press, 1938), p. 106.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Hammond, R. W., ‘Report on Education in Sarawak’, Typescript (Kuching: Sarawak Museum, 1937), p. 91.Google Scholar

⁶² Sarawak Gazette 1 Sept. 1947.Google Scholar

⁶³ Cartwright, Tuan Hoover, p. 107.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid.

⁶⁵ Sarawak Gazette 1 March 1935.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Sarawak Gazette 2 August 1915.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Hammond, , ‘Report on Education in Sarawak’, p. 91.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Almost all Chinese-medium schools charged tuition fees, and even those which considered themselves ‘free’ schools ended up levying small amounts. For instance, the Hokkien Free School of Kuching charged fees from two to four dollars per month in 1912, but showed flexibility based on the pupils’ ability to pay. See Sarawak Gaztte 16 Aug. 1912.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Sarawak Administrative Report 1938, p. 27.Google Scholar Although it may be argued that the enrolment figures of the Chinese schools were lower than the Mission schools, the fact remained that proportionately the allocation of grants tended to favour the latter.

⁷⁰ Sarawak Government Gazette 16 Jan. 1924, 25;Google ScholarSarawak Gazette 1 Sept. 1947.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Sarawak Gazette 3 Jan. and 2 May 1927.Google Scholar

⁷² The Kapitan China was a government appointed community leader who acted as a representative and spokesman for the Chinese community.Google Scholar

⁷³ T'ien, , The Chinese of Sarawak, pp. 73, 77;Google Scholar and Chin, , The Sarawak Chinese, pp. 85–6.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Each school had its own management committee. There was apparently no single educational board for all Chinese schools in Kuching during the period of Brooke rule, in contrast with the practice in the post-war years. See T'ien, , The Chinese of Sarawak, p. 73.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ In 1922 the Republican Government of China adopted a new curriculum for elementary schools throughout the country. In the four-year lower primary school morals, mother tongue, arithmetic, handwork, drawing, singing, and physical culture were taught. In the higher primary school, which was a three-year course, the curriculum content included morals, mother tongue, mathematics, Chinese history, geography, physical science, handwork, drawing, singing, and physical culture, with agriculture for boys and sewing for girls. See Hsiao, Theodore E., The History of Modern Education in China (Peiping: Peking University Press, 1932), p. 38;Google Scholar and for an annotated bibliography of the textbooks which the Chinese-medium schools in Sarawak also adopted for use, see Peake, Cyrus H., Nationalism and Education in Modern China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1932), Appendix I.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ The Chinese school management committee changed its membership on an annual basis by way of elections. Many individuals were unlikely to seek re-election as it involved a heavy financial burden of being a board member, and usually they were content with a single year's public service. A common tendency upon taking office was for the new incoming committee to make improvements, genuinely beneficial or otherwise, that usually involved the reshuffling of the teaching staff and the termination of the services of some of them. Such practices were not isolated cases but a common feature in most Chinese schools throughout the country. For instance, in 1937 alone, 33 per cent of all Chinese schoolmasters in Sarawak were either dismissed or gave up their job. See Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 27; and 1938, p. 27;Google Scholaralso Hammond, , ‘Report on Education in Sarawak’, p. 17.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ T'ien, , The Chinese of Sarawak, p. 74.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Sarawak Administrative Report 1938, p. 27.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 28.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Some Chinese schoolmasters compromised their academic integrity for fear of antagonizing their students, especially the senior classes, by accepting work of a lower standard, lightening the workload, and even ‘making the home-work or examination papers easier’. Hammond, , ‘Report on Education in Sarawak’, p. 18.Google Scholar

⁸¹ In 1937 out of 141 Chinese vernacular schools in Sarawak only ten had Junior Middle classes while the rest only taught up to the Higher Primary Standard. See Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 26.Google Scholar The first Chinese teacher-training centre, located at Sihu, started courses in 1957 to train teachers for elementary and Junior Middle Chinese schools. See Sarawak Annual Report 1957, p. 64.Google Scholar

⁸² Sarawak Administrative Report 1935, p. 25.Google Scholar

⁸³ Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 27.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Leigh, , The Rising Moon, p. 8.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Sarawak Government Gazette 16 April 1930, p. 71.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Sarawak Gazette 31 March 1871.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ In 1922, ‘The Outline Standards of the New System Curriculum’ was adopted by the Nationalist Government in China. The curriculum for the elementary schools included mother tongue, arithmetic, hygiene, civics, history, geography, gardening, manual arts, fine arts, music, and physical culture. See Hsiao, , The History of Modern Education in China, p. 38.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Sarawak Government Gazette 16 April 1930, p. 171.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ The geography syllabus for Lower Primary Third Year stated its aims as follows: ‘To understand a map of Sarawak; rivers, roads and towns’; and in the Fourth Year: ‘To understand the map of the Malay Peninsula with the railways and chief towns; the chief imports and exports of Malaya and Sarawak, including their countries of origin and destination’. Sarawak Government Gazette 16 April 1930, p. 171.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ McLellan, D., Report on Secondary Education (Kuching: Government Printing Office, 1959), p. 4.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ibid.

⁹² These efforts evidently paid off, for five of its pupils succeeded in the Cambridge Preliminary Examination of 1935. See Sarawak Gazette 1 April 1936.Google Scholar The English division seemed to have enrolled Malays or Indians in addition to Chinese, for several Muslims represented the school in the Cambridge Preliminary Examinations. See Sarawak Gazette 1 April 1938.Google Scholar

⁹³ Civil servants were expected to be conversant in both English and Malay which were extensively used, particularly the former, in the Brooke Government; for Chinese personnel it would be an advantage to know their own language, preferably Mandarin if possible.

⁹⁴ The Junior Cambridge School Certificate was the equivalent to the Chinese Junior Middle Three Certificate. The Mission schools in Kuching, like that of St Thomas’ and St Joseph’s, also offered candidates for the Senior Cambridge, though the number was often small during the pre-War years. See Sarawak Administrative Report 1937, p. 26; and 1938, p. 27.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Chin, , The Sarawak Chinese, pp. 90–3.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Lockard, , ‘Leadership and Power’, p. 212.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Address by Rajah, H. H. to Council Negri 16th September 1924. Original in Malay. Translation by A. A. Rennie, Clerk to the Council.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ See my paper ‘Education in Sarawak During the Period of Colonial Administration, 1946–1963’, Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, LXIII, part II (12 1990), pp. 35–68.Google Scholar