Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:38:50.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Immigrants and Associations: Chinese in nineteenth-century Singapore

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

Maurice Freedman
Maurice Freedman
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The society built up by Overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia has always been remarkable for its wealth of voluntary associations. In the various historical and sociological studies of Southeast Asian Chinese which have appeared the importance of associations has been duly stressed, although in respect of only two settlements have we been given full treatment of their structure and significance. In this paper I shall consider the associations which Singapore Chinese created and modified in the course of the nineteenth century. Studying this earlier period of Singapore history we can see how the Chinese members of the colonial society adapted their social organization to the conditions of a trading settlement in which, while they often amassed great riches, they were not their own political masters. At the end of the paper I shall consider the Singapore evidence within the wider setting of Southeast Asia and put forward certain general conclusions which may be taken up in other papers on the same theme.

Type
Research Article
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , October 1960 , pp. 25 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 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

1 See Ju-k’ang, T’ien, The Chinese of Sarawak: A Study of Social Structure. London School of Economics Monographs on Social Anthropology (London, 1953)Google Scholar; and Skinner, G. W., Chinese Society in Thailand: An Analytical History (Ithaca, N.Y., 1957)Google Scholar, and Leadership and Power in the Chinese Community of Thailand (Ithaca, N.Y., 1958)Google Scholar. For Indonesia see Cator, W. J., The Economic Position of the Chinese in the Netherlands Indies (Oxford, 1936)Google Scholar; and Eng Die, Ong, Chineezen in Nederlandsch-Indië (Assen, 1943)Google Scholar. Some forms of association are discussed in Freedman, M., Chinese Family and Marriage in Singapore (London, 1957)Google Scholar. For the region as a whole see Purcell, V., The Chinese in Southeast Asia (London, 1951)Google Scholar. The general historical background to the material of this paper is to be found in the last work and in Purcell, V., The Chinese in Malaya (London, 1948)Google Scholar. I should like to thank Mr. J. M. Gullick for criticising an early draft of this paper and for making a number of historical and sociological comments, and Mr. W. L. Blythe, C.M.G., for his expert advice on a number of matters, especially those touching the secret societies. Part of the work on which this study is based was made possible by a grant from the Department of Sociological and Demographic Research, London School of Economics and Political Science.

2 U Chin, Siah, “The Chinese in Singapore”, Journal of the Indian Archipelago (Logan's Journal), II (1848), p. 290Google Scholar.

3 Census of the Straits Settlements, 1881 (Singapore)Google Scholar.

4 The Rev. Shellabear, W. G., “Baba Malay. An Introduction to the Language of the Straits-bom Chinese”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Straits Branch, no. 65 (12. 1913), p. 52Google Scholar.

5 See the sour comment of the Acting Protector of Chinese in Straits Settlements Annual Reports for the year 1895 (Singapore, 1896), p. 166Google Scholar and Hare, G. T.'s fascinating monograph, The Wai Seng Lottery. Publications of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, I (Singapore, 1895)Google Scholar.

6 Siang, Song Ong, One Hundred Years' History of the Chinese in Singapore (London, 1923), p. 153Google Scholar.

7 But it would seem that imperial honours were sometimes forced upon Singapore Chinese. Large sums of money were subscribed during the war with France, in some cases because the Singapore Chinese feared reprisals on their families in China. See The Straits Settlements Government Gazette [hereafter cited as Gazette] (02. 12, 1886), p. 131Google Scholar.

8 Cf. Raffles's statement in 1822 that the Chinese were roughly divided into three classes: those who gained their living by handicrafts and personal labour, a “higher and more respectable class engaged in mercantile speculation”, and cultivators. See Song, op. cit., pp. 11f.

9 Among the more recent works on this topic are Blythe, W. L., “The Interplay of Chinese Secret and Political Societies in Malaya”, Eastern World (London, 03 and 04 1950)Google Scholar, and Comber, L., Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya, a Survey of the Triad Society from 1800 to 1900. Monographs of the Association for Asian Studies, 6 (Locust Valley, N.Y., 1959)Google Scholar.

10 Cf. Freedman, M., Lineage Organization in Southeast China. London School of Economics Monographs on Social Anthropology (London, 1958), pp. 117ffGoogle Scholar.

11 Cf. Giles, H. A., Freemasonry in China (Amoy, 1880), p. 27Google Scholar.

12 See Hill, A. H., “The Hikayat Abdullah, An Annotated Translation”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Malayan Branch, XXVIII, part 3 (06 1955), chap. 21Google Scholar.

13 An Old Resident [Read, W. H.], Play and Politics, Recollections of Malaya (London, 1901), p. 91Google Scholar.

14 Buckley, C. B., An Anecdotal History of Old Times in Singapore (Singapore, 1902), pp. 365ffGoogle Scholar.

15 “Chinese Emigrants”, The Chinese Repository, II, no. 5 (Canton, 09 1833), pp. 230fGoogle Scholar. The two societies mentioned here are the Hai San and Ghee Hin of later writings.

16 Song, op. cit., pp. 82ff. Cf. Gazette (04 9, 1880), p. 223Google Scholar, on secret society hostility to Christian Chinese. Christianity did not make great headway among the Singapore Chinese.

17 Read, op. cit., p. 92.

18 Manners and Customs of the Chinese of the Straits Settlements (Singapore, 1879), pp. 92fGoogle Scholar.

19 Administration Report, Straits Settlements, 1858–59, p. 53.

20 Administration Report, Straits Settlements, 1861–62, p. 3, and Cavenagh, 's book, Reminiscences of an Indian Official (London, 1884), p. 255Google Scholar. Cf. Read, op. cit., pp. 105, 107f.

21 Gazette (02 28, 1878), p. 90Google Scholar.

22 Pickering, W. A., “The Chinese in the Straits Settlements”, Fraser's Magazine (08 1876), p. 440Google Scholar.

23 Gazette (02 21, 1879), p. 11Google Scholar, and Pickering, W. A., “Chinese Secret Societies”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Straits Branch, no. 3 (07 1879)Google Scholar.

24 Gazette (04 9, 1880), p. 228Google Scholar. The romanization of the names of the secret societies was very erratic.

25 Vaughan, op. cit., p. 108.

26 Gazette (02 21, 1879), p. 111Google Scholar.

27 Gazette (02 22, 1878), p. 90Google Scholar; (Feb. 22, 1879), p. 111; (April 9, 1880), p. 224; (April 29, 1881), p. 355.

28 Gazette (04 27, 1888), pp. 901fGoogle Scholar.

29 Cf. Comber, L., “Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya, an Introduction”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Malayan Branch, XXIX, pt. I (05 1956), p. 155Google Scholar.

30 Singapore Chinese played a prominent part in the Amoy uprising of 1853. See Hughes, G., “The Small Knife Rebels (An Unpublished Chapter of Amoy History)”, The China Review, I, no. 4 (1873)Google Scholar.

31 Song, op. cit., pp. 7f, 13.

32 See ibid, at many places for the details of the facts referred to in this paragraph.

33 Ibid., p. 174.

34 Ibid., pp. 166, 174, and Pickering, ‘The Chinese in the Straits Settlements’, p. 443.

35 Mills, L. A., British Malaya, 1824–1867 (Singapore, 1925), p. 203Google Scholar.

36 Comber asserts that the Triad Society was the “common ancestor of all Chinese secret societies in Malaya … ” Op. cit., p. 147. Another view was put forward by Wynne, M. L. in Triad and Tabut, A Survey of the Origin and Diffusion of Chinese and Mohamedan Secret Societies in the Malay Peninsula A.D. 1800–1935 (Singapore, 1941)Google Scholar. Wynne's thesis was that there were two groups of secret societies, always at loggerheads, one deriving from the Triad, the other from the “Han League”. The fact that the Hai San society stood apart from the Ghee Hin group for a long period may perhaps mean that some variation of Wynne's thesis may prove on further investigation to be valid.

37 Comber seems to think that the various societies were coordinated, for he speaks of the Triad society in Malaya and Thailand having a headquarters which “only moved to Singapore about 1850”. Op. cit., p. 149.

38 Ward, J. S. M. and Stirling, W. G., The Hung Society or The Society of Heaven and Earth, I (London, 1925), pp. 13ffGoogle Scholar.

39 Pickering, “Chinese Secret Societies”, p. 2.

40 See e.g. Gazette (04 9, 1880), p. 223Google Scholar; (Feb. 12, 1886), p. 129; (April 24, 1890), p. 845.

41 There is one fact on record which shows that even the gulf between the Hai San and the Ghee Hin group could be spanned by one dialect group. In 1874 a street fight took place which arose from a dispute between the two as to which should carry the coffin of a man who had a son in either camp. Song, op. cit., p. 175.

42 Vaughan, op. cit., p. 93.

43 This pattern is still discernible at the present day in the old quarter of the town. See Hodder, B. R., “Racial Groupings in Singapore”, The Malayan Journal of Tropical Geography, I (10 1953)Google Scholar.

44 Gazette (02 22, 1878), p. 90Google Scholar.

45 See e.g. Gazette (02 12, 1886), p. 129Google Scholar.

46 Several texts of the ritual from Malaya, Java, and Sumatra have been published. See especially Ward and Stirling, op. cit., and Schlegel, G., Thian Ti Hwui, The Hung League or Heaven-Earth-League (Batavia, 1866)Google Scholar.

47 Ward and Stirling, op. cit., p. iii.

48 Purcell, , The Chinese in Malaya, p. 167Google Scholar.

49 Campbell, P. C., Chinese Coolie Emigration to Countries within the British Empire (London, 1923), p. 8Google Scholar.

50 Gazette (04 9, 1880), p. 224Google Scholar.

51 A Straits Chinese, “Local Chinese Social Organizations”, The Straits Chinese Magazine, III, no. 10 (06 1899), pp. 43ffGoogle Scholar.

52 Ibid., pp. 44f.

53 Cf. Siah U Chin, op. cit., p. 290 for occupational specialisation by dialect groups in the middle of the century.

54 Straits Settlements Annual Reports for the year 1899 (hereafter cited as SSAR), pp. 318ff.

55 See e.g. SSAR 1897, p. 224.

56 A Straits Chinese, op. cit., p. 45.

57 SSAR 1897, p. 228. And cf. SSAR 1895, p. 344.

58 Op. cit., p. 45.

59 See e.g. Lien-sheng, Yang, Money and Credit in China, A Short History (Cambridge, Mass., 1952), pp. 77fGoogle Scholar.

60 Cf. Song, op. cit., pp. 29, 264.

61 See SSAR 1896, p. 285.

62 Op. cit., p. 47.

63 See Purcell, , The Chinese in Southeast Asia, pp. 221, 224ffGoogle Scholar.; Lafargue, J.-A., L’lmmigration chinoise en Indochine, sa réglementation, ses conséquences économiques et politiques (Paris, 1909), pp. 206ffGoogle Scholar.; and Dubreuil, R., De la condition des Chinois et de leur rôle économique en Indo-Chine (Bar-sur-Seine, 1910), pp. 33ffGoogle Scholar.

64 T’ien, op. cit., p. 21.

65 Ibid., p. 31.

66 Ibid., pp. 35–45.

67 Ibid., pp. 45–57.

68 Ibid., pp. 54–68.

69 Ibid., pp. 17f.

70 Ibid., pp. 10, 24.

71 Ibid., p. 19.

72 See Freedman, , Chinese Family and Marriage in Singapore, pp. 92ffGoogle Scholar.

73 See de Groot, J. J. M., Het Kongsiwezen van Borneo, eene Verhandeling over den Grondslag en den Aard der Chineesche Politieke Vereenigingen in de Koloniën, met eene Chineesche Geschiedenis van de Kongsi Lanfong (The Hague, 1885)Google Scholar; Schlegel, G., “Het Kongsiwezen van Borneo …” (compte rendu of de Groot's book), Revue Coloniale Internationale, I (1885)Google Scholar; Ward, B. E., “A Hakka Kongsi in Borneo”, Journal of Oriental Studies, I, no. 2 (Hong Kong, 07 1954)Google Scholar; and Purcell, op. cit., pp. 489–94.

74 De Groot, op. cit., pp. 1f.

75 Ibid., p. 21.

76 Purcell, op. cit., p. 491.

77 See Ward, op. cit., pp. 365ff.

78 De Groot, op. cit., pp. 172–93.

79 Ibid., p. 177.

80 Cf. Freedman, , Lineage Organization in Southeastern China, pp. 119ffGoogle Scholar.

81 Skinner, , Chinese Society in Thailand, p. 141Google Scholar, puts great emphasis on the “divisive force” of the secret societies in Thailand; I am suggesting that there is another, and opposite, aspect of secret society conflict.

82 Cf.ibid., loc. cit: “Membership was almost exclusively along speech-group lines … ”

83 Cf. the remarks by Hare, op. cit., p. 9 on Kwangtung.