Críticas a las Advance Care Planning (ACP)

other less influential brokers, used the membership of dialect groups,

especially newly arrived immigrants who had yet to establish themselves, as a pool of potential labour for the coolie trade. 94

Chinese coolie brokers were able to take advantage of their connections with dialect/occupational groups to enlist skilled labour required for specialist

91

Lee Poh Ping, Chinese Society In Nineteenth Century Singapore. p.39. 92

. Cheng Lim-Keak, Social Change and the Chinese in Singapore. pp.89-99. As well, each dialect group contained one or more secret societies

93

. Yen Ching-Hwang, `Secret Society and Social Structure in the Chinese Immigrant

Communities in Singapore and Malaya before 1911', an unpublished paper presented to the International Symposium on Chinese Emigration, University of HongKong, 14th-17th December, 1984. p.2.

94

. Yen Ching-Hwang, `Secret Society and Social Structure in the Chinese Immigrant Communities'. pp.9-13.

tasks such as domestic work, carpentry and gardening. 95 _{To some degree,}

occupation specialisation and language group association was reflected in the demography of the Chinese population in Western Australia in that certain dialect groups occupied specific jobs.

Table 2.1. demonstrates that Hainanese, in particular, were predominant in the cook/waiter and indoor labour categories. Cantonese speakers dominated the carpenter/builder category although most were involved in general and outdoor labour. The majority of Hokkien and Teochew contract labourers were also employed in general and outdoor work.

Table 2.1: Major language groups and occupations of Chinese indentured labourers in Western Australia, 1881 - 1891.

Occupation Hainanese Cantonese Hokkien Teochew Others Total

General labour 34 39 57 19 21 170 Outdoor labour 8 15 24 3 2 52 Indoor labour 14 3 12 0 3 32 Cooks/Waiters 45 7 1 4 5 62 Pearling 3 1 10 0 1 15 Carpenters/Builders 0 12 0 0 2 14 Gardeners 3 4 1 2 0 10 Other 1 8 4 4 6 23

Total Chinese per

Language group 108 89 109 32 40 378

95

. Yen Ching-Hwang, `Secret Society and Social Structure in the Chinese Immigrant

Communities in Singapore and Malaya before 1911', an unpublished paper presented to the International Symposium on Chinese Emigration, University of HongKong, 14th-17th December, 1984. p.2.

* Occupations contained in the `Other' category include indoor/outdoor labour, builder, shop assistant, timber cutters and unrecorded.

* Language groups contained in the `Other' category include Huichiu, Kanchiu, Kheh, Hakka, Tcheh and unrecorded.

Source: SA: Acc.527; Lists of Registered Contracts, 1881 - 1891.

Coolie brokers worked on commission, receiving so much for each man who signed a contract. This was usually $S2.00 per head, about one third of a labourer's monthly wages in Western Australia. This system of payment encouraged the use of deception, fraud and `illegitimate persuasion' in

recruiting coolies.96_{Chinese in Western Australia reported instances in which} They send all their bad man here. They sign good men in Singapore

and these good men sell their agreements to the bad men who are sent here.

A ship wants so many men. They don't care whether good men or bad men, [they] get five ten shillings a head.97

The introduction of the Crimping Ordinance, 1877, to protect coolies from the illegal activities of brokers, did little to discourage these practices. Tan A Chion, a coolie imported to work as a general outdoor servant in 1885, signed a contract in Singapore which stated that he had received an advance of $S32.00 and that he was 36 years of age at the time. Tan A Chion claimed that

I got 17 dollars in Singapore from Im Hee. Im Hee is a Chinaman who gets the coolies. He only gave me 17 dollars. I told the Doctor my age was 43, but Im Hee told me better make it a few years short, say 36. All the Chinamen get less than the full advance; white fellow master pay Im Hee and he only give part to coolies.98

96

Persia Crawford Campbell, Chinese Coolie Emigration, pp.13-14. 97

. SA: Acc.527; File 4417/1886. 98

Despite attempts to limit the power and influence of coolie brokers through measures such as the Crimping Ordinance, 1877, they remained forceful figures in the coolie trade.

The Singapore Office of the Protector of Chinese

The often illegal activities of Chinese coolie brokers and their association with secret societies concerned the British in the 1870s because of the deceptive methods and `illegitimate persuasion' used in recruiting coolies and because the British had little or no control over the rapidly growing and unstable Chinese population in Singapore at that time. 99 _{As one solution, W.A.}

Pickering, a British official and experienced `China hand', was appointed Protector of Chinese in 1877, an office established to provide an avenue for governing the Chinese population, including the operations of coolie brokers.100 _{The Protector was responsible for monitoring the coolie trade}

through the compulsory registration of labour contracts, regular inspections of `lodging-houses' where coolies were held until shipment and the licensing of coolie brokers.101

To overcome criminal elements in the recruiting process, the British authorities ruled that all brokers had to be licensed and all prospective coolies had to have the terms and conditions of contracts explained to them before signing in the Protector's office. One account explained the procedure.

The engagement of these men is done thro' a "licensed Chinese procurer" and the agreements are signed in the office of the "Chinese

99

. Lee Poh Ping, Chinese Society In Nineteenth Century Singapore. p.86. 100

. Donald and Joanna Moore, The First 150 Years of Singapore, Donald Moore Press, Singapore, 1969. pp.411-430.

101_.

protector" who also inspects the accommodation, and the provisions provided.102

Despite the intentions and efforts of the Protector of Chinese, corruption continued leading to ongoing complaints from Western Australia. Cases of men unfit to work and others who had been substituted in Singapore continued into the 1890s were evidence that Chinese coolie brokers were still operating deceptively regardless of official restriction and legislation.

In 1890, the Resident Magistrate at Roebourne wrote to the Protector of Chinese reporting that

A coolie named Chan Fung No.235 was signed before you on 6 Jan 1890.

A man arrived, who on arrival passed by that name but has since made the statement that his name is Ah You.

That the man Chan Fung absconded from his residence after signing the agreement before you and that he (Ah You) was induced by the Brokers to come in Chan Fung's place. This statement is corroborated by Yung Gin who came by same opportunity and who signed the same agreement.

I would ask you to investigate the matter as you will so that if the mans statement is a true one he must not have come under agreement nor was there a medical certificate for his health. (cont.)

Figure 2.2: List of Chinese for Western Australia registered by the Protector of Chinese in Singapore in 1881.

Permission has not been obtained from the copyright owners to include a facsimile of the material in this Figure. However, the source details have been included to indicate to the reader where this can be located.

I am asking Mr Lindsay of Galbraith & Co. as he acted as agent in the matter.

There is in the certificate no means of identifying this man by marks or otherwise.103

To overcome criminal elements in the recruiting process, the British

authorities ruled that all brokers had to be licensed and all prospective coolies had to have the terms and conditions of contracts explained to them before signing in the Protector's office. One account explained the procedure.

The engagement of these men is done thro' a "licensed Chinese procurer" and the agreements are signed in the office of the "Chinese protector" who also inspects the accommodation, and the provisions provided.104

Despite the intentions and efforts of the Protector of Chinese, corruption continued leading to ongoing complaints from Western Australia. Cases of men unfit to work and others who had been substituted in Singapore

continued into the 1890s were evidence that Chinese coolie brokers were still operating deceptively regardless of official restriction and legislation.

In 1890, the Resident Magistrate at Roebourne wrote to the Protector of Chinese reporting that

A coolie named Chan Fung No.235 was signed before you on 6 Jan 1890.

A man arrived, who on arrival passed by that name but has since made the statement that his name is Ah You.

That the man Chan Fung absconded from his residence after signing the agreement before you and that he (Ah You) was induced by the Brokers to come in Chan Fung's place. This statement is corroborated

103. _{SA: Acc.527; File 1905/1890.} 104

by Yung Gin who came by same opportunity and who signed the same agreement.

I would ask you to investigate the matter as you will so that if the mans statement is a true one he must not have come under agreement nor was there a medical certificate for his health.

I am asking Mr Lindsay of Galbraith & Co. as he acted as agent in the matter.

There is in the certificate no means of identifying this man by marks or otherwise.105

The position of the Protector is illustrated in his reply.

2. I regret to inform you that I cannot get any evidence to prove that the man Chan Fung you refer to is Chan Fung or as he states another man Chan (Ah) You.

3. There are no means of identifying this cooly [sic] as no photograph was taken here by the agents.

4 The accused broker J. Poll who brought this emigrant to the office states he was medically examined by Dr Triffs in Singapore and that this man Chan Fung did leave the Colony for Western Australia according terms of his contract.

5. At the same time the broker produces no evidence of any kind to corroborate his statement and I am somewhat disposed to doubt it.106 The Western Australian colonial government, while endeavouring to maintain control over the recruitment and entry of Chinese indentured labour, was obviously unable to directly supervise various aspects of the process and, therefore, the selection of fit and healthy workers depended on the authority and attendance of the Protector of Chinese in Singapore.

Western Australian colonial government controls.

105

. SA: Acc.527; File 1905/1890. 106

The Western Australian government sanctioned the importation of Chinese labour as a temporary expedient which would not lead to the permanent settlement of Chinese or to Chinese becoming a `burden on the state' through illness, incapacity or unemployment. However, as the numbers of imported Chinese labourers increased, so did the incidence of Chinese requiring welfare assistance. The negligent treatment of Chinese by private local agents and the deceptive and fraudulent methods by which coolie brokers enlisted Chinese labourers resulted in an increase in the numbers of Chinese either too old or too ill to work. Such cases became what the

government had feared - `burdens on the state' - requiring admission to colonial government institutions as patients, paupers or prisoners. 107

During the early stages of Chinese labour importation - 1847/48 and the early 1870s - few Chinese required admission to colonial institutions or were returned to Singapore for reasons other than that their contracts had expired.

Chinese who were likely to become long-term `burdens on the state' were returned to Singapore which was cheaper than maintaining them indefinitely. The colonial government aimed to ensure that Chinese labour entering Western Australia was fit, young, healthy and useful and would leave the colony - at no expense to the government - if these requirements were not met. It was imperative, therefore, that the colonial government controlled the conditions of entry of Chinese imported labour. This was achieved through amendments to the Imported Labour Registry Act which determined the terms of contracts, the selection criteria of imported labour and the conditions under which labour was to be employed.

107_.

In 1881 the Resident Magistrate at Roebourne sent two Chinese to the Mt Eliza Invalid Depot in Perth requesting they be certified as paupers. The cost associated with one Chinese borne by the government was as follows:

Passage from Roebourne to Fremantle £6.00.00 Maintenance at Mt Eliza 159 days at 9d £5.19.03 £11.19.03 Passage to Singapore £6 (SA: Acc.527; File 1394/1881)

This was because the colonial government had complete control over the selection of labour through the public importation scheme and the number of Chinese working in the pearling industry was small. Moreover, the physical isolation of pearling banks placed Chinese beyond the reach of colonial

government institutions and medical services. Contracts between Chinese and the Western Australian government - in the case of the public importation scheme - were simple, specifying the period of employment, wages, food allowance, medical attendance and advance payments.108 _{This form of contract}

was similar to that used for most Chinese labour recruited in Singapore in this period.109 _{As far as the Western Australian colonial government was}

concerned, there was little need for anything more than this. Even when the volume of Chinese labour immigration increased in the early 1870s, the Imported Labour Registry Act, 1874, was sufficient to keep a check on the numbers of contracted Chinese entering the colony. 110

As the volume of imported Chinese labour increased in the late 1870s to enter the general labour market as well as the pearling industry, the numbers of Chinese depending on colonial government welfare services rose. This was compounded by numbers of Chinese who, after their contracts expired, were forced to remain in Western Australia despite a clause in their contracts ensuring a return passage to Singapore. Typical of contracts issued in the late 1870s was one signed by a Chinese labourer recruited in 1879 which stated that;

The Act, supposedly designed to protect imported Asian labour from abuse in the pearling

industry, required masters of vessels to keep a record of all labour shipped by them which could be inspected by customs officers and police on command.

108. _{SA: Acc.49; Vol.24/72-76. 1848.}

109 _{Ta Chen, Chinese Migrations, With Special Reference To Labour Conditions, Washington} Government Printing Office, Washington, 1923. pp.180-181.

110

4th On the expiration of the said contract or contracts of service the parties hereto of the second part [employees] shall severally be entitled to a passage from Western Australia to Singapore free of cost.111

This clause, however, failed to nominate who was responsible for the cost of the return passage and sometimes employers refused to acknowledge their responsibility to return labourers to Singapore. This question was resolved in 1882 when, after two Chinese were certified as `paupers' and admitted to the colonial invalid depot after only several months in the colony, the Imported Labour Registry Act, 1874, was amended to incorporate clauses relating to the terms of contracts and the procedure for recruiting in Singapore.

112_{Included were the requirements that all Asian labour imported into the}

colony be employed under a contract, that all labour pass a medical

examination before signing a contract, that a stipulated form of contract be used which specified the nature of employment, period of service, terms and nature of remuneration, that the employer was responsible for the return passage to Singapore on completion of the contract and that any medical expenses incurred by the employee be chargeable to the employer. 113

Contracts used by employers and Chinese labour in Western Australia were based on the standard `Form of Contract for Emigrants to Countries Under the Netherlands Government' but with several clauses altered to make them applicable for Western Australia. Contracts were in both Chinese and English.

111

. SA: Acc.527; File 1195/1885. 112_.

Western Australian Parliamentary Debates, 1882. pp.109-110, 115-119, 145-147, 195-198 and 395-398

Figure 2.3: Examples of Contracts in Chinese and English.

Permission has not been obtained from the copyright owners to include a facsimile of the material in this Figure. However, the source details have been provided to indicate to the reader where this can be located.

Source: SA: Acc.527; File 1195/1885.

Despite the Western Australian government's attention to the exact wording of contracts and the requirement that all prospective coolies pass medical examinations, both were open to abuse by coolie brokers, agents and labourers in Singapore. In particular, definitions for categories of labour were often misunderstood either deliberately, when Chinese claimed to have skills which commanded a higher pay rate, or unintentionally when there were conflicting interpretations of a category. 114 _{For example, the category of}

general servant was used in Singapore to describe a servant whose duties were to be performed indoors.115

labourers who were expected either to work entirely outdoors performing general station work, such as fencing and shepherding, or to work both in and outdoors.

In Western Australia, however, the term referred to

116

114_{. SA: Acc.36; Vol.181/171. 1848. One settler requested a gardener, another a cook. Both} received 'carpenters', a category of labour that commanded £2.0.0 a month rather than £1.5.0 for `house-servants' and `coolies'.

This misunderstanding led to considerable discontent among both employers and imported Chinese. In 1887 the Resident Magistrate at

115

SA: Acc.527; File 2750/1887. 116

Roebourne, in recommending changes to the methods by which the terms of contracts were explained to Chinese and the nature of the work required of them, noted that

these Chinese are mostly good cooks and therefore all expect to be employed as such - whereas the employers generally require their services as shepherds or for fencing and such like general station work. 117

The issue was resolved by redefining the category of `general servant' to the satisfaction of all parties involved.

A major concern to employers and the colonial government was that of medical certificates. Although the Western Australian government could insist that Chinese possess a medical certificate, it had no control over the

procedures for carrying out examinations. This allowed ill and elderly Chinese to be substituted for by fit and healthy men for the examination. The

government complained from time to time to authorities in Singapore of the `serious burden to the colony of the arrival of lunatics and cripples from Singapore'. 118 _{Cases were also reported of inadequate examinations in which}

obvious symptoms went undiagnosed and diseases unreported. One Chinese labourer, who was found to be suffering from skin disease, suspected syphilis and the effects of excessive opium smoking on arrival in Western Australia in 1885 claimed that he

was engaged in Singapore by Ah Cheon a Chinaman [coolie broker], to come to this place, I had a copy of the agreement. I saw the Doctor before I came. He saw my face but did not examine my body. He saw