SCMP 13 Sep 1918, p. 6
Fung Yuk-nam, one of the witnesses in the Chan U-man partnership action created a small sensation yesterday in the Supreme Court, when he disclosed to the Chief Justice, Sir William Rees Davies K.C., an alleged attempt by a witness for plaintiff to bribe him.
...
Mr C. G. Alabaster, O.B.E., (instrcuted by Mr F. C. Jenkin, C.B.E. (instructed by Mr D. J. Lewis, of Messrs Johnson, Stokes and Master), for defendant.
...
Witness continued: I solemnly say that every word is true and if any word is not true I am willing to suffer all kinds of calamity, even the death of everyone of my children and may all kinds of bad luck befall me. And I am willing to go to Man Mo Temple and chop off a cock's head."
Mr Alabaster: You will probably have to. We are going to make the suggestion that all do it.
His Lordship: This gentleman seems rather of superior education and character and perhaps would not attach much importance to the superstition.
Mr Jenkin: He offers to cut off a cock's head for what it is worth.
Mr Alabaster: So do we. Hiu Chik-wa is willing.
...
Witness: I say I am not and am willing again and again to go to the Man Mo Temple and go through the ceremony of chopping off a cock's head.
...
Mr Alabaster: Will de defendant Chan U-man go to the Man Mo Temple and perform the ceremony of cutting off the cock's head? - I for my part certainly will.
Mr Alabaster: Will Chan U-man? I put the challenge out.
The question was put to Chan U-man, who said "Yes, I am willing to cut off a cock's head for everything in the action."
Mr Jenkin: We shall probably be where we are I suppose.
His Lordship agreed to allow the test and asked if counsel proposed to attend.
Mr Jenkin: I should like to.
Mr Alabaster: I didn't propose to but I have no doubt it will be interesting.
Mr Jenkin: Perhaps you can't get a free for it.
Finally it was agreed that Hiu Chik-wa, Fung Yuk-nam and the defendant Chan U-man should undergo the ordeal of the cock's head and the case was adjourned until Monday.
--- --- ---
SCMP 26 Sep 1918, p. 3
According to arrangement the parties in the antimony ore case at the Summary Court went to the Man Mo Temple on Tuesday, where defendant's principal witness took an oath by decapitating a cock that his books etc. were genuine. As the result Mr P. W. Golding, representing the plaintiff (the Hung Tai firm, of King's Building, Compradores) agreed to judgement for defendant (Ho Yik Piu, alias Ho Shau, of 7 Temple Street, Yaumati) represented by Mr W. B. Hind. The amount sued for was $500, said to have been deposited with the defendant for organising an antimony ore business.
The ordeal explained.
The frequency with which the cock's head ordeal has been invited of late by Chinese litigants and the curiosity thereanent among foreigners make interesting a few particulars of the ceremony and its portent.
It seems that not many people have actually seen the test carried out, for a number of reasons. In the first place no one particularly wants to see it. Secondly the participants naturally desire privacy and only those immediately interested are admitted to the temple; and the third and perhaps principal reason is that the ceremony seldom takes place. Some Chinese of higher class scorn to do it, holding that when a man has to resort to those means to establish his veracity it must be that he is a person regarded as not above suspicion and to descend to such a demonstration is to lose face. They prefer to lose the money involved, even up to a considerable sum. Others of course have become westernised and for them the decapitation of a rooster conveys only a feeling of regret for the rooster. Furthermore, even when the challenge thrown out is accepted, there are always forces working to prevent its culmination. To the superstitious Chinese mind the penalties for perjury or mistake are so real and terrible that the party taking the oath is often beset with doubts, and even when his excess of indignation or confidence carry him right up to the temple his relatives are ever ready to stop him, since the calamities he dares will affect them and their descendants for ever. As an instance the case of a woman is recorded. Her face paled and her hand trembled when the chopper was given to her. She laid it on the cock's neck, but there her strength failed. The cock freed himself and walked away. The lady made a feeble slash at it, and then the relatives, fearing the portent and glad of the excuse, interfered and the ordeal was abandoned.
Locally almost all of the tests are carried out at the Man Mo temple, which is the principal temple in the Colony and the only suitable one in central district. Although the time honoured "joss pidgin" enshrouds the proceedings to some extent the programme is simple enough. The arrangements are made with the Temple keeper, who receives a fee. The oath which is the affirmant is to make is written out on yellow paper with the penalties for swearing falsely. In effect he "swears by the cock" the inference, being: "As I sever this cock's head may my own be severed if I swear falsely in this matter," and a similar fate is invited for all the pilgrim's children right down the generations. Sudden death, regarded as a punishment, is abhorred by a Chinese and there is the additional prospect of having no descendants to pray for him. Joss sticks are lighted and a kow-towing ceremony gone through, after which the temple keeper beats the drum and gong. The oath is sometimes read next, and then it is burnt, that it may be wafted to the knowledge of gods. No particular deity is invoked, any who happen to be listening will note the matter. Then the party adjourns to the courtyard of the temple where stands a new chopping block, a new chopper, and the fowl, all provided by the attestant. The reason for the change of scene is that the deed must not be concealed in any way from the god's sight and therefore may not b performed under a roof. The rooster's legs are tied, and the affirmant kills him apparently as best he is able, with one stroke, sometimes seizing its head and sometimes its body. Since no one cares about the corpse it becomes the perquisite of the temple keeper.
That is the ceremony as observed in Hongkong. Exactly why a rooster is selected as the victim is not clear, except that it figures generally in Chinese sacrifices. There seems danger that the ordeal is becoming too common and that its value as an adjuct to the dispensation of justice will be lost. We understand that the Court exacts a tax for each oath of the kind administered; and the increase of this might keep the challenges and the rooster mortality within bounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment