2. All slaves designedly killing, or designedly striking so as to kill, their masters, shall suffer death by a slow and painful execution. If accidentally wounding, they shall suffer 100 blows and perpetual banishment to the distance of 3,000 li; not being allowed, as under similar circumstances in ordinary cases, to redeem themselves from such punishment by a fine. NOTE. This part of the law denouncing punishment even in cases which are admitted to have been purely accidental is in some degree modified in the supplemental clauses. Slaves who are guilty of striking their master's relations in the first degree, or their master's maternal grandfather or grandmother, shall be strangled at the usual period. If more than one are concerned, the principal shall be strangled and the rest suffer the punishment next in degree. All slaves who strike so as to wound such persons shall, without distinction between principals and accessories, be beheaded at the usual period. 3. If accidentally killing, the punishment shall be two degrees less severe than in the case of intentionally striking such person. If accidentally wounding, the punishment shall be another degree less severe than in the case of intentionally striking. All slaves who are concerned in the crime of designedly killing such persons shall suffer death by a slow and painful execution. A slave who is guilty of striking, or striking and slightly wounding, his master's relations in the fourth degree, shall be punished with 60 blows and one year's banishment. If guilty of striking his master's relations in the third degree, he shall be punished with 70 blows and banishment for a year and a half. If guilty of striking his master's relations in the second degree, the punishment shall be 80 blows and two years' banishment. 4. If a slave is guilty of striking any of his master's relations in the fourth degree so as to produce a severe cutting wound, the punishment shall be one degree more severe than it would have been if he had so wounded a free person in ordinary cases. In the case of a master's relation in the third degree, two degrees more severe; and in the case of a master's relation in the second degree, three degrees more severe. 5. If, by these augmentations the punishment in any case become capital, the offender shall be strangled at the usual period; but if the wound occasion death then, whether there was originally a design to kill or not, all the slaves concerned shall be beheaded. 6. If in a case of a slave having been guilty of theft, adultery, or any other similar crime, his master, or some one of his nearest relations in the first degree, or his mas ter's maternal grandfather or grandmother, instead of complaining to a magistrate privately beats to death such slave, the person who so offends shall be punished with 100 blows. 7. If any such person as aforesaid beats to death or intentionally kills a slave belonging to his family, who had not been guilty of any crime, the person so offending shall be punished with 60 blows and one year's banishment; and the wife or husband as well as the children of such deceased slave shall be thereupon entitled to their freedom. 8. The master or relations of the master of a 'guilty slave may, however, chastise such slave in any degree short of occasioning his death, without being liable to punishment. Nevertheless, if a master, or his aforesaid relations, in order to correct a disobedient slave or hired servant, should chastise him in a lawful manner on the back of the thighs or on the posteriors, and such slave or hired servant happen to die, or if he is killed in any other manner accidentally, neither the master nor his aforesaid relations shall be liable to any punishment in consequence thereof. SECTION CCCXXVII. A slave guilty of addressing abusive language to his master shall suffer death by being strangled at the usual period. If guilty of addressing abusive language to his master's relations in the first degree he shall be punished with eighty blows and two years' banishment. If addressing abusive language to his master's relations in the second degree, the punishment shall be eighty blows; if in the third degree, seventy blows; if in the fourth degree sixty blows. In these cases, as well as others, the abusive language must have been heard by the person to whom it was addressed, and such person must always be the complainant. SECTION CCCLXX. All slaves or hired servants who have been guilty of a criminal intercourse with their master's wife or daughters shall be beheaded immediately after conviction; when guilty of a criminal intercourse with their master's female relations in the first degree. or with the wives of the male relations of their master in the same degree, they shall be strangled after remaining in prison the usual period. In the above cases the pun ishment of the woman, if consenting, shall be less only by one degree. When guilty of a ciminal intercourse with their master's more distant female relations, or with the wives of his more distant male relations, they shall be punished with 100 blows and perpetual banishment to the distance of 2,000 li. If guilty of committing a rape upon the latter persons, they shall be beheaded after remaining in prison the usual period; except in the cases of rape the punishment of a criminal intercourse with any of the inferior wives shall, generally speaking, be less than in the case of principal wives by one degree. SECTION CCCLXXIII. A slave who is in any case guilty of a criminal intercourse with the wife or daughter of a freeman shall be punished at the least one degree more severely than a freeman would have been under the same circumstances. On the contrary, the punishment of a freeman for having criminal intercourse with a female slave shall be one degree less than in ordinary cases. When both parties are slaves, the criminal intercourse shall be punished in the same manner as in the case of free persons. SECTION CCCLXXIX. No private individual nor any officer of government, excepting only the princes of the imperial family, shall presume to educate castrated children in order to their being employed as eunuchs in their domestic establishments. Every breach of this law shall be punished with one hundred blows and perpetual banishment to the distance of three thousand li; and the castrated children shall be sent back to the families whence they were taken or to which they belonged. NOTE.-The number of eunuchs employed within the precincts of the imperial palace has ever been considerable; and from the access they must necessarily have at all times to the sovereign, in the capacity of his domestic servants, it is not improbable that they may still continue to exert some degree of undue influence; it does not, however, appear that they are ever likely to enjoy, under a Tartar dynasty, that exclusive and dangerous confidence which, while the government was in the hands of native princes, was sometimes reposed in them. SECTION CCLXXV. The offense of entrapping and carrying off for sale, or persuading to come away voluntarily for the same purpose, the lawful slave of any person, shall be punished one degree less severely than that of kidnaping a free person under similar circum stances. Any person who sells his children or grandchildren against their consent shall be punished with eighty blows. NOTE. Although it would appear from this restriction that the power of a parent over a child, according to this code, is much less extensive than that allowed by the ancient Romans, yet as the adoption of children and the purchase of inferior wives or concubines is a transaction of constant occurrence, and one in which the real parents lawfully may, and usually do, receive a pecuniary consideration, it can scarcely be denied that the sale of children in China is practically allowed. NOTE. It is to be observed, indeed, that the slavery which is recognized and tolerated by the laws of China is a mild species of servitude and perhaps not very degrading in a country in which no condition of life appears to admit of any considerable degree of personal liberty and independence. No. 48.] Mr. Bailey to Mr. Payson. UNITED STATES CONSULATE-GENERAL, Shanghai, October 21, 1879. (Received Nov. 29.) SIR Referring to my dispatch No. 47, dated October 21, relating to "slavery in China," I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy of section cely of the penal code of China, as translated by Sir George Thomas Staunton, Bart., F. R. S., which is the only translation ever made, and which is accepted as accurate and authoritative. As my dispatch No. 47 did not attempt to treat of penal servitude, I did not transmit this section with the inclosures relating to slavery. It is, however, of so much importance at this juncture of Chinese emigration to the United States, and relates so forcibly to the question of the citizenship of this class of emigrants, that I have thought it my duty to transmit it with a special dispatch for the information of the department. In this connection I have to remark that the patriarchal organization of society in China is such as to make the enforcement of this law easy and effective. The elder member of the family, the pater familias, has almost unlimited control and power over every member of the family, and he is held to a close accountability for the actions of all members of his family; not only is he held, but every other member of that family has a responsibility in the matter of the actions of all the other members, and is held accountable for their conduct to a certain degree. The whole system of family relations is so interlocked in domestic life and interwoven with duties and obligations to the state, that it may almost, if not quite, be said that one is responsible for all and all are responsible for one, in all the different branches of the family, even to remote degrees and to remote countries. The whole Chinese philosophy inculcates this absolute power of the pater familias over all the members of the family to the farthest degree, the duty of the most implicit obedience due by them to the head of the family, and of the accountability of all members of the family, as well as the head, for the conduct of any one of the family. When a Chinese subject goes out to any other country, all the other members of his family remaining in China are so many hostages that he will return, and that he will maintain his allegiance to his country. The horrible punishment which may lawfully be inflicted on these hostages is sufficient to account for the rarity of instances of naturalization which has occurred in the history of Chinese emigration to the United States. This is the text and the theory of the law, and no doubt has been the practical operation of the law for ages. I do not assert that the full vigor of this section of the penal code has not been modified by the contact of China with western nations and modern ideas in the last two or three decades. I believe that foreign intercourse with China is gradually effecting great changes, and will in time remove many of the objectionable and repulsive features of her practices and systems; but that change will be very slow, very methodical, for the whole Chinese fabric of society and government is surrounded by so much that is hallowed by tradition, experience, the long duration of the empire, the teachings of her sages and philosophers, as to make her people the most inapt of all people to believe in the efficacy of modern ideas and a new civilization. DAVID H. BAILEY, Consul-General. I have, &c., Hon. CHARLES PAYSON, Third Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. [Inclosure in No. 48.] PENAL CODE OF CHINA. [Translated by Sir GEORGE THOMAS STAUNTON, Bart., F. R. S.] SECTION CCLV.-RENUNCIATION OF ALLEGIANCE. All persons renouncing their country and allegiance, or devising the means thereof, shall be beheaded; and in the punishment of this offense, no distinction shall be made between principals and accessories. The property of all such criminals shall be confiscated, and their wives and children distributed as slaves to the great officers of state. Those females, however, with whom a marriage had not been completed, though adjusted by contract, shall not suffer under this law; from the penalties of this law, exception shall also be made in favor of all such daughters of criminals as shall have been married into other families. The parents, grand parents, brothers and grandchildren of such criminals, whether habitually living with them under the same roof or not, shall be perpetually banished to the distance of 2,000 li. All those who purposely conceal and connive at the perpetration of this crime shall be strangled. Those who inform against and bring to justice criminals of this description shall be rewarded with the whole of their property. Those who are privy to the perpetration of this crime and yet omit to give any notice or information thereof to the magistrates shall be punished with 100 blows, and banished perpetually to the distance of 3,000 lee. If the crime is contrived, but not executed, the principal shall be strangled and all the accessories shall each of them be punished with 100 blows and perpetual banishment to the distance of 3,000 li. If those who are privy to such ineffective contrivance do not give due notice and information thereof to the magistrates, they shall be punished with 100 blows and banished for three years. All persons who refuse to surrender themselves to the magistrates when required, and seek concealment in mountains and desert places in order to evade either the performance of their duty or the punishment due to their crimes, shall be held guilty of an intent to rebel and shall therefore suffer punishment in the manner by this law provided. If such persons have recourse to violence and defend themselves when pursued, by force of arms, they shall be held guilty of an overt act of rebellion, and punished accordingly. No. 59.] Mr. Bailey to Mr. Payson. UNITED STATES CONSULATE GENERAL, Shanghai, 2d December, 1879. (Received January 7, 1880.) SIR: Referring to my dispatch No. 47 of 20th October, 1879, covering a paper on the subject of "Chinese slavery," I now have the honor to transmit herewith some documents, in print, extracted from the HongKong and Shanghai newspapers, relating, to the same subject. Inclosure No. 1 is the decision of Sir John Small, chief justice of the supreme court of Hong-Kong, and shows that as long ago as January, 1845, the British Government notified all residents of that colony by a royal proclamation that Whereas the acts of the British Parliament for the abolition of the slave trade and for the abolition of slavery extend by their own proper force and authority to Hong-Kong, this is to apprise all persons of the same, and to give notice that these will be enforced by all Her Majesty's officers, civil and military, within this colony. That at the present time there are at least 10,000 slaves in the colony, and that the trade in human chattels has been continuously carried on under the very eyes of the officials, and that posters can be seen daily in public places offering rewards for the return of fugitive slaves. Inclosure No. 2 is an editorial from the Hong-Kong Daily Press upon this decision. Inclosure No. 3 is an extract from a recent editorial in the North China Daily News upon the same decision, and contains some references to the family law of China, confirmatory of my expressed opinion that the basis of this slavery is exclusively the patriarchal family organization. Inclosure No. 4 is a memorial by more than ten thousand of the Chinese gentry, merchants, and other people of Hong-Kong, to the governor of that colonly, praying that the British laws relating to the slave trade and slavery be not enforced in Hong-Kong. This petition contains the most complete and convincing proof of all the views set forth in my paper on that subject, and will render nugatory all denials of the exist ence and prevalence of slavery in China, or any apology or vindication relating to its character. Inclosure No. 5 is an editorial from the Hong-Kong Daily Press upon the petition. I have to remark that this is not a new subject to me, and I would refer the department to my dispatches from Hong Kong, printed in the Foreign Relations Correspondence, 1871, pages 194 to 221 inclusive, and in 1873, pages 203 to 208 inclusive, together with others on file in the department, for the views I then held upon the subject. What I have since seen and learned only tends to make my convictions stronger that this is real slavery, and that it prevails in every part of the empire and among Chinese wherever they go. I repeat that Chinese slavery is an outgrowth of the family organization, which, so far as we know, is as old as Chinese society itself. I see no hope for its abolition here but in the remodeling of the whole family organization-a herculean task beyond the vision of the most advanced Chinese statesman of this generation. It is significant to note that the colony of Hong Kong, where it is now settled by a judicial decision of its supreme court and by admissions in solemn memorial of all the leading native residents, that Chinese slavery exists and ever has existed as an essential feature of the Chinese political and social system, is the entrepôt for all the Chinese emigration to the United States. And perhaps it is worth while to query whether that emigration is not thus shown to have in its every lineament the taint of human slavery? I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, [Inclosure No. 1.] SUPREME COURT, 6TH OCTOBER. Criminal sessions. Before the Hon. Chief Justice, Sir John Smale. DECLARATION BY THE CHIEF-JUSTICE THAT SLAVERY IN EVERY FORM IN HONG-KONG IS ILLEGAL AND MUST BE PUT DOWN. Five prisoners were placed in the dock for sentence, having been severally convicted at these sessions of kidnaping a child, of detaining two children with intent to sell them, and of selling and purchasing a child for the purpose of prostitution. The chief-justice, on taking his seat this morning said: "On the criminal calendar for September, 1879, three cases now by adjournment come on for the court to pass sentence on the prisoners convicted. Case No. 1, R. v. Lee A Kau, convicted on the 18th of September last of having (first count) feloniously and unlawfully and by fraudulent means enticed away one A Ngan, a child under the age of 14 years, to wit, 8 years, with intent thereby to deprive one Au A Ho of the possession of such child, on the 21st August, 1879, and (second count) having feloniously detained the same child in the same manner. Case No. 6, R. e. Tsang Sz Tau and U Ain, convicted on the 23d of September last on four counts of (1) having detained against his will a boy named Ho Po Sing with intent to sell him in this colony on the 30th May, 1879; (2) fraudulently detaining same boy at same time with intent to sell him; (3 and 4) like charges as to a boy called Yeung Shing. Case No. 9, R. v. Keung A To and Li A Kak, convicted on the 20th September last; as to Keung A To, of having purchased a female child named Tiu Heng for the purposes of prostitution in this colony on the 4th March, 1879; as to Li A Kak, of having sold the same child for the same purpose at the said time. Various causes have occasioned delay in passing sentence, of which I will only refer to one-the gravity of the fact that these and other cases |