¹ See Ching-hwang, Yen, The Overseas Chinese and the 1911 Revolution (Kuala Lumpur. 1976)Google Scholar; Leong, S., “The Chinese in Malaya and China's Politics, 1895–1911”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 50, 2 (1977): 7–24.Google Scholar

Overseas Chinese Nationalism is defined as: the extension of Chinese nationalism abroad, the active identification of the Chinese overseas with China as the nation to which they belonged.

² See Kuei-ch'iang, Ts'ui, “Hai-hsia chih-min-ti hua-jen tui wu-ssu yün-tung-ti fan-hsiang”, Nanyang hsüeh-pao 3, 2 (1965): 13–18Google Scholar; Akashi, Y., “The Nanyang Chinese Anti-Japanese Boycott Movement. 1908–1928”. Journal of the South Seas Society 23, 1 & 2 (1968): 69–96Google Scholar; Akashi, Y.. “Nan'yō kakyō to Manshü jihen”, Tönan Ajia rekishi to bunku 1 (1971): 52–78.Google Scholar

³ Wang Gungwu, “The Limits of Nanyang Chinese Nationalism, 1912–1937”. in Southeast Asian History and Historiography: Essays Presented to D.G.E. Hull, ed. CD. Cowan and O.W. Wolters (Ithaca, 1976), pp. 405–23; Ku Hung-ting and Chang Chen-tung, “Lun Nan-yang hua-jen min-tsu-chu-i yün-tung-chih yen-chiu”, Nan-yang hsüeh-pao 29, 1 & 2 (1974): 1–10.

⁴ Leong, S., “Sources, Agencies and Manifestations of Overseas Nationalism in Malaya. 1937–41” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 1976)Google Scholar. ch. 2.

⁵ For studies which reveal that the Marco Polo Bridge Incident was not contrived by Japan as a signal for further encroachments into Chinese territory, see Crowley, J.B., “A Reconsideration of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident”, Journal of Asian Studies 22, 3 (1963): 277–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Crowley, J.B., Japan's Quest for Autonomy: National Security and Foreign Policy (Princeton, 1966), pp. 322–42Google Scholar; Kazuo, Horiba, Shina jihen sensō shidō shi (Tokyo, 1962), ch. 3, sect. A.Google Scholar

For conventional Chinese views which blame Japan for instigating the Double Seventh Incident (Ch'i-ch'i shih-pien or 7 July), as the Marco Polo Bridge Incident became known in China, see, e.g., Hua-mei kung-ssu ch'u pan pien-chi, Chung-kuo ch'üan-mien k'ang-chan ta-shih-chi (Shanghai, 1968), pp. 1–3; Feng Tzu-chao, Chung-kuo k'ang-chan-shih (Taipei, 1971), pp. 35–38.

⁶ Nanyang Siang Pau (Nan-yang shang-pao, NYSP), 16 July 1937; Sin Chew Jit Poh (Hsing-chou jih-pao, SCJP), 16 July 1937; Hsin-chia-p'o Chung-hua tsung-shang-hui, Hsin-chia-p'o Chung-hua tsung-shang-hui liu-shih chou-nien chi-nien-k'an (Singapore, 1966), p. 277; Monthly Review of Chinese Affairs (MRCA), July 1937, p. 15.

⁷ Available evidence indicates that the Chinese in Muar (Johore) were the first to set up a relief fund society on 16 July, followed by the formation of a state-wide association two days later. See Hsin-shan hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen-hui, Ma-lai-ya Jou-fo hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui pao-kao (Johore Bahru, 1940), pp. 203; also Jou-fo Chung-hua tsung-shang-hui, Jou-fo hua-ch'iao hsün-nan i-lieh-shih (Johore Bahru, 1947), p. 115.

⁸ Local authorities estimated the number of Japanese residents in Malaya in 1938 to be around 4,200. See High Commissioner's Office, 36/1939. A Japanese source, however, provides a larger figure of 7,030 for 1938. See Nihon keizai kinkyū-kai, Nanshin Nihon shōnin (Tokyo, 1941), p. 26. A more accurate census would fall between 4,200 and 7,030.

⁹ Straits Times (ST), 27 July 1937; Proceedings of the Legislative Council Straits Settlements, 1937, p. B91; Nan'yō 25, 7 (July 1939), p. 27.

¹⁰ ST, 24 July 1937; NYSP, 24 July 1937; SCJP, 24 July 1937; MRCA, July 1937, p. 18; Minami Manshū tetsudo Tōa keizai chosakyoku, Eiryō Marē Biruma oyobi Gōshu ni okeru Kakyō (Tokyo, 1941), p. 582; Taiwan sōtokufu kambō gaijibu, Nan'yō kakyō (Taihoku, 1943), p. 82.

True to the warning given to the news media, the Colonial Government suspended the Penang Chinese daily, the Hsien-tai jih-pao, for a month (17 Aug. to 16 Sept.). According to the English newspaper, the Straits Echo (SE): “The direct cause for suspension is the publication in the paper of a series of Chinese verse likely to inflame the feelings already at a high pitch of excitement and thereby cause a break of public peace.” SE, 18 Aug. 1937; MRCA, Aug. 1937, p. 22. As a matter of fact another reason for the suspension of the Hsien-tai jih-pao was that the newspaper editors had encouraged the Chinese to “remit money to Nanking to help in the struggle against Japan”, SE, 18 Aug. 1937.

¹¹ ST, 20 Oct. 1937.

¹² The Nanyang Siang Pau was founded by Tan Kah Kee (Ch'en Chia-keng) in 1923 and the Sin Chew Jit Poh by Aw Boon Haw (Hu Wen-hu) in 1929. See Leong “Overseas Chinese Nationalism in Malaya, 1937–41”, ch. 2, sect. A.

¹³ Some of the titles of these poems were: “I'm Coming Home, My Motherland!”, “War of Resistance to the End!” and “China Will Never Perish!”, NYSP, 16 Jan. 1938, 10 Apr. 1938, 27 May 1938.

¹⁴ There were 14 Hokkiens, 9 Teochius, 4 Cantonese, 2 Hakkas, 2 Hainanese, and 1 Sanchiang. Dialect group representation was followed by most Relief Fund Associations in other parts of Malaya. Ch'en Chia-keng (Tan Kah Kee), Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu 1 (Foochow, 1950), 42.

¹⁵ SE, 19 Aug. 1937; Pin-ch'eng hsin-pao (PCHP), 19 Aug. 1937; also Shih Hsin, “Ch'üan-mien k'ang-chan sheng-chung Pin-ch'eng ko-ch'iao-t'uan-ti huo-tung”, Hsien-tai jih-pao pien-chi-pu, Hsien-tai jih-pao chou-nien chi-yüan-tan chi-nien k'an (Penang, 1938), p. 27.

¹⁶ See T'ieh min, Li, Hung Chin-ts'ung hsien-sheng shih-lüeh (Singapore, 1940), p. 12.Google Scholar

¹⁷ ST, Sept. 1937; Times of Malaya, 7 Sept. 1937.

¹⁸ See Hua-ch'iao-chih pien-tsuan wei yüan-hui, Ma-lai-ya hua-ch'iao-chih (Taipei, 1959), p. 225; Hsieh Tso-min (ed.), K'ang-chan yü hua-ch'iao (Chungking, 1939), pp. 49–50.

¹⁹ Dance hostesses at Singapore's Great, Happy, and New World Amusement Parks and those at the Eastern Hotel in Kuala Lumpur donated a day's wages to the relief fund. ST, 6 Oct. 1937. A group of amahs or housemaids in Singapore raised S$5,000 for the fund. ST, 9 Oct. 1937.

²⁰ Singapore led with a C$2.5 million contribution, followed by Selangor with C$1.2 million, Perak C$800,000, Penang C$700,000, Johore C$500,000, Negri Sembilan and Malacca C$250,000 each, Pahang and Kedah C$250,000 each, and Kelantan C$80,000. ST, 7 Oct. 1937; Singapore Free Press (SFP), 9 Oct. 1937. The rate of exchange between the Chinese dollar (C$ or yüan) and the Straits dollar (S$) fluctuated from time to time. At the time of the formation of the SCFRA, C$1 was equivalent to about half S$l. See Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, p. 49.

²¹ For the origins of the boyeott movement in Malaya and its use by the overseas Chinese there before 1937, see Ts'ui, “Hai-hsia chih-min-ti hua-jen tui wu-ssu yün-tung”, pp. 13–18; Akashi, “Nanyang Chinese Anti-Japanese Boycott Movement, 1908–1928”, pp. 69–96; Akashi, “Nan'yō kak'yō to Manshū jihen”, pp. 52–78; Leong, “Overseas Chinese Nationalism in Malaya, 1937–41”, ch. 2.

²² ST, 7 Oct. 1937.

²³ Times of Malaya, 19 Nov. 1937.

²⁴ MRCA, Nov. 1937, p. 20.

²⁵ Annual Report on the State of Crime and the Administration of the Police Force, SS, 1938, p. 416; PCHP, 5 July 1937, 6 July 1937, 7 July 1937.

²⁶ Annual Report on the State of Crime and the Administration of the Police Force, FMS. 1938, p. 21.

²⁷ Singapore Chamber of Commerce Report for the year 1937, p. 62; 1938, p. 63; Akashi, Y., The Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, 1937–41 (Lawrence, Kansas, 1970), p. 148.Google Scholar

²⁸ See Kikakuin, Naikaku, Kakyo no kinkyü (Tokyo, 1939), p. 249Google Scholar. Cotton textiles, e.g., were worth 12,220,554 yen and chinaware 1,174,468 yen, tyres 1,151,426 yen, glassware 1,356,943 yen, and toys 631,134 yen. Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, p. 148.

²⁹ Singapore Chamber of Commerce Report for the Year 1938, p. 18.

³⁰ Naikaku Kikakuin, Kakyō no kinkyū, p. 249.

³¹ ST, 9 Dec. 1937; Chang Ch'i-ch'u, “Pen-hui ch'ou-chen kung-tso”, in Pa-chu pa-hsia Chung-hua tsung-shang hui pien-chi wei-yuan-hui, Pa-chu-pa-hsia Chung-hua tsung-shang-hui chin-hsi-chi-nien t'e-k'an (Batu Pahat, Johore, 1960), p. 19.

³² MRCA, Dec. 1937, p. 26.

³³ Ibid.

³⁴ Ibid.

³⁵ SCJP, 14 Dec. 1937; ST, 31 Dec. 1937; Eiryō Marē ni okeru kakyō, p. 565; MRCA, Apr. 1938, p. 39; Jirō, Tatetomo, “Eiryō Marē no hai-Nichi dōkō,” Nan'yo 25, 7 (1939): 25–30Google Scholar

³⁶ British Adviser (Trengganu), No. 743/1938; Gaimusho O-Akyoku, Daisanka, Nan'yō to kakyō (Tokyo, 1939), p. 350.

³⁷ MRCA, Mar. 1938, p. 28; NYSP, 12 Mar. 1938.

³⁸ MRCA, July 1938, p 41.

³⁹ MRCA, Jan. 1939, p. 58; MRCA, Mar. 1939, p. 10.

⁴⁰ Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 47–48; NYSP, 21 May 1938, 2 Aug. 1938.

⁴¹ Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 47–48; MRCA, Aug. 1938, p. 70.

⁴² The exact number of delegates at the meeting is not certain. Akashi (Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, p. 64) says 160 were present. One Japanese source (Eiryō-Marō okeru kakyō, p. 569) puts it at 168. Tan Kah Kee (Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 48), who chaired the meeting said that over 180 were present. The last figure could well include unofficial delegates who were not registered by the Federation. My number of 165 is obtained by adding up the list of names recorded by the Federation. See Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui, Nan-yang ko-shu hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min tai-piao ta-hui (Singapore, 1939), pp. 53–56.

⁴³ Sin Kuo Min Jit Poh (Hsin-kuo-min jih-pao, SKMJP), 11 Oct. 1938.

⁴⁴ See Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min-hui, Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min-hui tai-piao ta-hui i-chueh-an ch ai-yao (Singapore, 1938), p. 3; NYSP, 12 Oct. 1938.

⁴⁵ This is the official English version of the Chinese title Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen isu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui See Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ta-hui i-chueh-an ch'ai-yao, p. 5.

⁴⁶ Ch'en, Nan-chiao hui-i-lu, 1, 85.

⁴⁷ The qualifications were: (1) experience in driving and motor mechanics, (2) some reading knowledge of Chinese, (3) good physical health, and (4) age between 20 and 40. Volunteers should also be approved by the local associations for the latter had to bear the cost of sending the drivers and mechanics to China. Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 86; Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui, Nan-yang ko-shu-hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen tsu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui nien-pao (Singapore, 1940), pp. 38–40.

⁴⁸ Ma-lai-ya hua-ch'iao-chih, p. 267.

⁴⁹ Interviews with Chan Kit Hong (Ch'en Chi-hung), 24 Apr. 1969 and Wong Kum San (Huang Chin-san), 20 July 1969. Chan volunteered his services at Alor Star, Kedah, and Wong signed up in Malacca.

⁵⁰ Sin-chew shih-nien, p. 94.

⁵¹ See Nan-ch'iao chi-kung ts'an-chia Chung-kuo k'ang-ti, p. 17.

⁵² While patriotism was the underlying factor for most of those who went to China, for some of them, the experience of working in the land of their ancestors was regarded as an attractive and new adventure. Interviews with Yap Ah Bee (Yeh Ya-wei), 24 Apr. 1969; Chan Kit Hong, 24 Apr. 1969, and Wong Kum San, 20 July 1969. Yap registered with the Batu Pahat China Relief Fund Society. According to Wong, who signed up in Malacca, duty to the motherland came first even though he had just married.

⁵³ Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 42. In Selangor; Chinese leaders also had to obtain permission from the Government before the Selangor China Relief Fund Association could function legally. It was only after Ang Cheng Chong had satisfactorily assured the Protector of Chinese that the activities of the state organization would be confined to raising funds for war relief and not involve itself in any politics that official consent was acquired. See Li, Hung Chin-ts'ung hsien-sheng shih-lüeh, pp. 11–12.

⁵⁴ Government action was prompted by some members of the public who complained about over-zealous canvassers who constantly harassed them with the sale of flowers and flags, and even accused them of being unpatriotic when they did not donate to the relief fund. ST, 14 Sept. 1937, 25 Oct. 1937, 24 Aug. 1938, and 31 Aug. 1938.

⁵⁵ MOCNSM leaders did not mind the restrictions because they made it easier for the authorities to check unscrupulous members of the Chinese community such as gangsters, who took advantage of the situation to extort donations from others “in the name of China relief”. ST, 18 Feb. 1939, 14 Mar. 1939. Interviews with Ho Pow Jin (Ho Pao-jen), a leader of the Malacca China Relief Fund Association, 7 Nov. 1969, and Lee How Sik (Li-Hsiao-shih), a leader of the Selangor China Relief Fund Association, 18 Mar. 1969.

⁵⁶ Proceedings of the Legislative Council, Straits Settlements, 27 July 1939, p. B59; NYSP, 1 Aug. 1939; MRCA, Aug. 1939, pp. 54–55.

⁵⁷ See Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, pp. 33–43, 51–59, 84–88, and 96–106.

⁵⁸ NYSP, 14 June 1938; SKMJP, 14 June 1938 and 20 June 1938.

⁵⁹ British Adviser (Trengganu), No. 776/1938, “Petition from Mr. Tan Kah Kee, Chairman of the China Relief Fund in Singapore, Regarding Immigration of Chinese Refugees”, Col. Sec., S.S. to Richard C.H. Lim, 10 Aug. 1938, Mr. Lim was the SCRFA's legal counsel. See also ST, 15 Aug. 1938.

At the time of the Sino-Japanese War in July 1937, the monthly quota for immigration into Malaya was 6,000. Because of rising unemployment, however, this figure was reduced to 3,000 per month from January to April 1938. Increasing unemployment led the Government in May to drastically cut down the number to 500 per month. See Supplement to S.S. Gazette (18 Nov. 1938), Notif. 91; MRCA, 1938, p. 39.

⁶⁰ MRCA, Dec. 1937, p. 9.

⁶¹ Proceedings of the Legislative Council, Straits Settlements, 31 Oct. 1938, p. B98.

⁶² Ch'en,Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 84.

⁶³ Ibid.; NYSP, 26 July 1939.

⁶⁴ Proceedings of the Legislative Council, Straits Settlements, 27 July 1939, p. B59; NYSP, 1 Aug. 1939; SKMJP, 1 Aug. 1939.

⁶⁵ Ch'en,Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 89–90.

⁶⁶ Times of London, 23 Apr. 1940.

⁶⁷ Annual Report of Secretary for Chinese Affairs, Malaya, 1939, p. 12. Several wealthy Chinese in Malaya were also reported to have sent their monetary contributions directly to the British Government in London. Times of London, 16 Aug. 1940. The Chinese in Kedah raised S$20,000 towards the purchase of airplanes for Britain and for war relief. See Chi-ch'iao chu ch'ou-chen chiu-chi tsu-kuo nan-min tsung-hui, Chan-shik ti-fang fu-wu kung-tso tung-lin hsi-chao (Penang, 1955), p. 125.

⁶⁸ See Ma-lai-ya hua-ch'iao-chih, pp. 266–67. Other Southeast Asian countries were well below the mark attained by the Chinese in Malaya. Dutch Indies, e.g., had a total of C$5.1 million (plus SS219.268 and 1.4 million guilders), the Philippines with C$5.2 million, Thailand with C$8 million (government bond subscriptions included), and Burma with C$2.1 million. Nan-yang nien-chien, sect. 5, pp. 174–75.

⁶⁹ Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, pp. 127–28. Tan Kah Kee himself (Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 339) admitted that compared to Malaya the Chinese in the Philippines enjoyed much more freedom to pursue their national salvation activities.

⁷⁰ See Selangor State Secretariat, No. 302/1939, “Minutes of Meeting of Perak State Council”, 5 Feb, 1938; Annual Report on the Social and Economic Progress of the People of Perak for the Year 1939, pp. 1 and 30; MRCA, Mar. 1939. p. 25; Annuul Report of Secretary for Chinese Affairs, Malaya, 1938, p. 8.

⁷¹ For the reactions of the Malayan overseas Chinese to the Tsinan Incident (1928) and the Mukden Incident (1931), see Akashi, “Nanyang Chinese Anti-Japanese Boycott Movement, 1908–28”; Akashi, “Nan'yō kakyō to Manshü jihen”; Leong, “Overseas Chinese Nationalism in Malaya, 1937–41”, pp. 72–91.

⁷² See Tieh-ch'eng, Wu, “Contributions from Overseas Chinese during the War”. China Quarterly 5, 4 (1940): 686Google Scholar. Wu T'ien-ch'eng was Director of the Nationalist Party's Overseas Affairs Department.

⁷³ Ch'en, Nan-ch'iao hui-i-lu, 1, 345; Kao, Ma-Lai-ya ch'iao-hui, pp. 5–6.

⁷⁴ Ibid., p. 6.

⁷⁵ Wu, Overseas Chinese Remittances, p. 80.

⁷⁶ See Nan-yang hua-ch'iao Chung-hua hui-yeh tsung-hui, Nan-yang Chung-hua hui-yeh tsung-hui nien-k'an (Singapore. 1948), p. 16; Far Eastern Economic Review, 17 Mar. 1948, p. 254.

⁷⁷ Kyokai, Nanyō, Nan'yō no kakyō (Tokyo, 1942), p. 156Google Scholar; Eiryō Marē ni okeru kakyō, p. 569; Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, p. 126.

⁷⁸ These expenses were broken down by Young into ordinary expenditures (C$391 million), defence and construction (C$277 million), and emergency (C$720 million), all totalling (C$1,388 million.) See Young, China's Wartime Finance and Inflation, 1937–45, p. 16, Table 3.

⁷⁹ Wu T'ieh-ch'eng, “Contributions from Overseas Chinese”, p. 680.

⁸⁰ Meng, C.Y.W., “Overseas Chinese in China's Resistance and National Salvation Reconstruction”, China Quarterly 4, 4 (1939): 622Google Scholar. Also Nan-yang hua-ch'iao ch'ou-chen nan-min tsung-hui, Chiang wei-yüan-chang yen-chiang: Kuo-min ching-shen tsung-tung-yuan yü ch'iao-pao chih kuan-hsi (Singapore, 1939). n. 4.

⁸¹ The figure of C$354 million is obtained from Hua-ch'iao-chih pien-tsuan wei-yüan-hui, Hua-ch'iao-chih tsung-chih (Taipei, 1956), p. 489, and appears to include both voluntary contributions and bond subscriptions. This amount closely tallies with the C$351.2 million which is derived by adding:

C$45.3 million voluntary contributions (July 1937–Oct. 1938) [See Section V1(A) above.]

21.7 million bond sales (July 1937–Oct. 1938.) [See Section V1(B) above.]

177.7 million voluntary contributions (Nov. 1938–Dec. 1940) [See Table 4 above.]

106.5 million voluntary contributions and bond sales for the year 1941 [See Hua-ch'iao-chih tsung-chih, p. 489.]

Total C$351.2 million

Malaya's share of C$157.7 million is determined by totalling:

C$19.5 million voluntary contributions (July–Oct. 1938) [See Section V1(A) above.]

12.8 million bonds (July 1937–Oct. 1938) [See Table 8 above.]

85.4 million voluntary contributions (Nov. 1938–Dec. 1940) [See Table 4 above.]

40.0 million voluntary contributions and bonds for the year 1941 (See Hua-ch'iao-chih tsung-chih. p. 489.)

Total C$157.7 million

⁸² Naikaku Kikakuin, Kakyō no kinkyū, p. 249. In terms of Straits Settlements currency the fall in the value of Japanese imports was from S$40.4 million in 1937 to S$12.4 million for 1938. See Statistics Department, Straits Settlements and the Federated Malay States, Malayan Yearbook, 1939 (Singapore, 1940), p. 122.

⁸³ Singapore Chamber of Commerce Report for the Year 1938, p. 18.

⁸⁴ See F.M.S. Chamber of Commerce Report for the Year 1938, p. 12.

⁸⁵ See Malayan Yearbook. 1938, p. 94; 1939, p. 62.

⁸⁶ Malayan Yearbook, 1940, p. 88.

⁸⁷ Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, 148.

⁸⁸ The Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce exhorted individuals to popularize the use of Chinese manufactures by using Chinese materials for wedding apparel and other goods of Chinese origin when presenting gifts to friends. See Ying-shu Ma-lai-ya Chung-hua shang-hui lien-ho-hui, Ying-shu Ma-lai-ya Chung-hua shang-hui lien-ho hui-ti shih-pa-ch ï i-an (Penang, 1939), pp. 4–6.

⁸⁹ Akashi, Nanyang Chinese National Salvation Movement, p. 145. Because sustained boycotting affected their business, some Chinese merchants resumed trading in Japanese goods in 1940 and 1941. For information on the activities of the ultra-nationalist San Min Chu I Youth Corps in Malaya, see Leong, “Overseas Chinese Nationalism in Malaya. 1937–41”, pp. 621–31.