In the year 1857, 4,232 Chinamen landed in the port of Manila alone, and 2,592 left for China.
Of the extraordinary unwillingness of the women of China to emigrate, no more remarkable evidence can be found than in the statistics of the capital of the Philippines. In 1855, there were in the fortress of Manila 525 Chinamen, but of females only two women and five children. In Binondo, 5,055 Chinamen, but of females only eight, all of whom were children. Now, when it is remembered that the Philippines are, with a favourable monsoon, not more than three or four days’ sail from China, that there are abundance of opulent Chinese settled in the island, that the desire of having children and perpetuating a race is universal among the Chinese people, it may be easily conceived that there must be an intensely popular feeling opposed to the emigration of women.
And such is undoubtedly the fact, and it is a fact which must prove a great barrier to successful coolie emigration. No women have been obtainable either for the British or Spanish colonies, though the exportation of coolies had exceeded 60,000, and except by kidnapping and direct purchase from the procuresses or the brothels, it is certain no woman can be induced to emigrate. This certainty ought to be seriously weighed by the advocates of the importation of Chinese labourers into the colonies of Great Britain. In process of time, Hong Kong will probably furnish some voluntary female emigrants, and the late legalization of emigration by the Canton authorities will accelerate the advent of a result so desirable.
During five years, ending in 1855, there were for grave crimes only fourteen committals of Chinamen in the whole of the provinces, being an average of less than three per annum; no case of murder, none of robbery with violence, none for rape. There were nine cases of larceny, two of cattle-stealing, one forgery, one coining, one incendiarism. These facts are greatly creditable to the morality of the Chinese settlers. Petty offences are punished, as in the case of the Indians, by their own local principalia.
A great majority of the shoemakers in the Philippines are Chinese. Of 784 in the capital, 633 are Chinamen, and 151 natives. Great numbers are carpenters, blacksmiths, water-carriers, cooks, and daily labourers, but a retail shopkeeping trade is the favourite pursuit. Of late, however, many are merging into the rank of wholesale dealers and merchants, exporting and importing large quantities of goods on their own account, and having their subordinate agents scattered over most of the islands. Where will not a Chinaman penetrate—what risks will he not run—to what suffering will he not submit—what enterprises will he not engage in—what perseverance will he not display—if money is to be made? And, in truth, this constitutes his value as a settler: he is economical, patient, persistent, cunning; submissive to the laws, respectful to authority, and seeking only freedom from molestation while he adds dollar to dollar, and when the pile is sufficient for his wants or his ambition, he returns home, to be succeeded by others, exhibiting the same qualities, and in their turn to be rewarded by the same success.
When encouragement was first given to the Chinese to settle in the Philippines, it was as agricultural labourers, and they were not allowed to exercise any other calling. The Japanese were also invited, of whom scarcely any are now to be found in the islands. The reputation of the Chinese as cultivators of the land no doubt directed the attention of the Manila authorities towards them; but no Chinaman continues in any career if he can discover another more profitable. Besides this, they were no favourites among the rural population, and in their gregarious nature were far more willing to band themselves together in groups and hwey (associations) than to disperse themselves among the pastoral and agricultural races, who were jealous of them as rivals and hated them as heathens. They have created for themselves a position in the towns, and are now too numerous and too wealthy to be disregarded or seriously oppressed. They are mostly from the province of Fokien, and Amoy is the principal port of their embarkation. I did not find among them a single individual who spoke the classical language of China, though a large proportion read the Chinese character.
When a Chinese is examined on oath, the formula of cutting off the head of a white cock is performed by the witness, who is told that, if he do not utter the truth, the blood of his family will, like that of the cock, be spilt and perdition overtake them. My long experience of the Chinese compels me to say that I believe no oath whatever—nothing but the apprehension of punishment—affords any, the least security against perjury. In our courts in China various forms have at different times been used—cock beheading; the breaking of a piece of pottery; the witness repeating imprecations on himself, and inviting the breaking up of all his felicities if he lied; the burning of a piece of paper inscribed with a form of oath, and an engagement to be consumed in hell, as that paper on earth, if he spoke not the truth;—these and other ceremonies have utterly failed in obtaining any security for veracity. While I was governor of Hong Kong an ordinance was passed abolishing the oath-taking, as regards the Chinese, and punishing them severely as perjurers when they gave false testimony. The experiment has succeeded in greatly fortifying and encouraging the utterance of truth and in checking obscurity and mendacity. I inquired once of an influential person in Canton what were the ceremonies employed among themselves where they sought security for truthful evidence. He said there was one temple in which a promise made would be held more binding than if made in any other locality; but he acknowledged their tribunals had no real security for veracity. There is a Chinese proverb which says, “Puh tah, puh chaou,” meaning “Without blows, no truth;” and the torture is constantly applied to witnesses in judicial cases. The Chinese religiously respect their written, and generally their ceremonial, engagements—they “lose face” if these are dishonoured. But little disgrace attends lying, especially when undetected and unpunished, and the art of lying is one of the best understood arts of government. Lies to deceive barbarians are even recommended and encouraged in some of their classical books.