July 18.
The Rev. Frank—Rawlinson's thoughtful letter on the subject of the welfare of rickshaw pullers under the Rickshaw Board's scheme, as outlined, will no doubt be read with considerable interest as an important contribution to the consideration of a very pressing topic. It Is possible to agree with great deal that Dr. Rawlinson ad-vanees. But, on the other hand, it is difficult to escape the impression that some of the objections to: which "he gives voice are not. entirely well founded.—Broadly speaking, the efforts of the Municipal Council are directed towards giving the rickshaw coolie an portunity to earn from four to six ten cent pieces more than he is at present earning under the iniquitous system which prevails. From that it is planned to deduct one ten cent piece for the purpose of promoting certain institutions for the welfare of the rickshaw coolies. AS a means of obtaining contro! over the personnel of those engaged in drawing rickshaws, it is proposed to Ucense the pullers at the rate of $1 a year. There may be, it is true, some objection to the amount charged for the license, but it is clear that if licensing practice pre~ valent all over the world is to be followed, some sort of charge will have to be made. Against these Proposals for reform the rickshaw owners have taken a definitely: obstructive attitude, opposing any: reduction in the matter of the hire of the rickshaws to the pullers and offering a sop in the nature of a certain amount of welfare work, the details of which are nebulous and the control undoubtedly not to be vested in cither the Council or any other authoritative body which would see that even these atten-ated concessions were being ade~ quately carried out. Enunciated in these simple terms, there does not appear to be very much question as to-which of the two solutions is: preferable. The rickshaw coolie stands, as from August 1, to receive three ten cent pieces net more per day than he is at present obtaining, or an increase of $9 small money: per month to the miserable pittance of $10 or $12 a month which he is apparently obtaining at present. As' from January 1, 1935, when the full net reduction of five ten cent pieces comes into force, he will be recelv~ ing an addition of approximately $15 small money to his present re~ muneration, which, it will be readily seen, amounts practically to doubling his monthly income.
It is not possible to agree that what the Council proposes to do is, in the light of the foregoing, as inadequate as Dr. Rawlinson " would have his readers believe. It may not be quite as generous as some people would like. But when the interests of everyone are concerned—those of the rickshaw owners, no matter how iniquitous their past behaviour may have been, as well as the pullers, who undoubtedly deserve an amelioration of their lot—the conclusion presents itself with almost overwhelming force that as much as possible is being done to remedy a most unpleasant state of affairs. On the question of the charge of $1 per annum as a license fee for the rickshaw coolies, there is this to be said: While admitting that $1 per annum is no inconsiderable sum to a man drawing somewhere about $16 to $20 a month, it is clear that some charge must be made. A license issued gratis would mean nothing to them and, on the other hand, the labour involved in the medical inspection of applicants, the maintenance of re~ cords and the issuance of licenses involves expenditure which, in view of the improved lot of the licensees which it is designed to secure, is by no means an excessive charge. It might be possible to meet Dr. Raw-unson's views by a reduction in the amount charged for the licenses, but general practice seems to point to: the fact that some payment should be made by the rickshaw coolie for the protection which a license will undoubtedly give him. It will be realized that he will no longer be Jopen to the casual competition of any coolie who happens to drift into the Settlement, the number of men pulling the rickshaws will be limit-led, and the possibility of his making jo regular living consequently very much improved. Dr. Rawlinson is therefore, not entirely correct when he states that this license fee is something in the nature of a camlouflaged revenue tax, for it is obvious that benefits are ferred in return for it which it is contended. more than balance the expenditure which the rickshaw Jcoolie is called upon to make.
With regard to the welfare fund, Jo number of important considera tions appear to have been overlook-led, not the least of which is the fact that any scheme which did not provide self-support from the pockets of the rickshaw coolies would throw an additional burden upon the ratepayers of Shanghai in favour of a very large, even if deserving, class which It is hardly to lbe believed makes any' important contribution to the community's revenue, There are other points which have to be considered, It will be necessary, if the welfare work is to be carried out thoroughly, for whatever institutions are built for the furtherance of such a scheme to be erected within the limits of the International "Settle-iment. It will also be necessary to maintain a very close supervision. Undoubtedly this will done. But when all this "is compared with the triting sop with which the rickshaw owners endea~ youred to placate the uneasy consciences of Shanghai's ratepayers, there can be no doubt which of the schemes is preferable, It is not to be believed for one moment that Jany institution which the rickshaw lowners established would be set up Janywhere within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Council. There is no guarantee under whatever pro-ossals they have put forward either that the individual contributions suggested would be continuously forthcoming, or that. if they were they would be spent in the Lest interests of those it is desired to help. It would indeed be ideal it the' ratepayers of Shanghai could take upon their shoulders the full cost of the welfare work which it is desirable should be carried out Jon behalf of the rickshaw puller. [But there seems very little justtication for the contention, especially in these particularly dificult times, that ratepayers should assume the burden which only by a consider able stretch of imagination can be considered to devolve upon them. the facts are that the rickshaw coolie is to receive a benefit which Ihe has never contemplated in his wildest dreams, His remuneration is to be increased sufficiently, it Is to be hoped, to make him amore self-respecting citizen than he has been able to be in the past. And the provision that out of the increased revenue which is being designed for him he should contribute something towards the betterment of his lot seems neither unjustified nor ungenerous.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.