Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T23:01:17.531Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Anti-Federation Movement in Malaya, 1946–48

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Yeo Kim Wah
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The early postwar years witnessed serious and acrimonious controversies over the constitutional order the British intended to introduce in Malaya (including Singapore). The first set of proposals called the Malayan Union Scheme encountered strong Malay opposition. Partly because of this, the British advanced an alternative known as the Federation Proposals. This in turn was condemned by the non-Malays. Together with leftwing Malay leaders, non-Malay politicians organised an anti Federation movement, consisting of the Pan-Malayan Council of Joint Action (PMCJA) and the Pusat Tenaga Ra'ayat (PUTERA), to oppose the Federation Proposals. This paper examines the origin, leadership and organisation of the PMCJA-PUTERA as well as its agitation against the Federation scheme during the years, 1946–48.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , March 1973 , pp. 31 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Donnison, F.S.V., British Military Administration in the Far East, London, 1956, p. 137Google Scholar.

2 Oxford-trained, Edward Gent was Assistant Secretary (1939–41) in the Colonial Office and Assistant Permanent Under-Secretary, 1942–46. He was Governor of the Malayan Union, 1946–48, and then High Commissioner of the Federation of Malaya. In mid-1948, on his way to Malaya after discussing the Malayan situation with the Colonial Office, he died in a plane crash.

3 House of Commons Parliamentary Debates, vol. 395, 1943, p. 384.

4 Malayan Union and Singapore: Summary of Proposed Constitutional Arrangements, Kuala Lumpur, 1946Google Scholar.

5 The late Dato Onn bin Ja'afar, a Johore Malay, served in the Johore administration in the 1920s and later became the editor of the Lembaga Malaya. As a member of the Johore State Council in the late 1930s, he spoke out strongly for Malay interests. He was President of the UMNO from 1946 to 1951 when he resigned to form the Independence of Malaya Party. He was chairman of the Rural and Industrial Development Authority (R.I.D.A.) in the Federation during the early 1950s.

6 For a stimulating account of Malay agitation against the Malayan Union Scheme, see Allen, J. V., The Malayan Union, Yale, 1967Google Scholar.

7 Straits Times, 16.4.46; Malayan Tribune, 1.5. 46.

8 Means, G., Malayan Politics and Government in Transition, PhD Thesis, Washington University, 1960, p. 152Google Scholar. This thesis has since been published by the London University Press.

9 Straits Times, 12.6.46.

10 For a discussion of the effect of the MCP threat on the constitutional issue, see Stenson, M., Industrial Conflict in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1970Google Scholar; Tan Cheng Lock raised a somewhat similar point in 1951, see Memo submitted to Oliver Lyttelton, Secretary of State, 2.12.51, Tan Cheng Lock's Papers (TCLP).

11 Indian Daily Mail, 14.5.46.

12 Ample evidence of this may be found in the Malayan Press Digest of 1946.

13 Indian Daily Mail, 6.10.47.

14 For a discussion of the MDU, see Wah, Yeo Kim, ‘A Study of Three Early Political Parties in Singapore’, Journal of Southeast Asia History, Vol. X, No. 1, 03 1969Google Scholar.

15 Democrat, 9.3.46.

16 Tan Cheng Lock, a Straits-born Chinese, was a successful businessman. A well-read and highly respected Chinese leader, he was a member of the Straits Settlements Legislative Council during the 1920s and early 1930s. He was knighted by the British Government. In 1949 Tan Cheng Lock founded the Malayan Chinese Association which later joined the UMNO and the MIC in forming the Alliance. He died in 1959.

17 Lock, Tan Cheng, Malayan Problems, Singapore, 1947, p. 127Google Scholar.

18 Soviet Press Translations, September 1950; Straits Budget, 6.3.47.

19 All three persons were active in leftwing politics before the war. After the MNP closed in 1950, Dr. Burharunddin founded the Pan-Malayan Islamic Party and sat in the Malayan Assembly in the 1950s. Ahmad Boestaman, a journalist, was the ‘firebrand' of the militant youth wing of the MNP, the Angkatan Pemuda Insaf (API). After a short period of detention during the Emergency, Boestaman emerged to help found the Malayan Labour Party. He was elected to the Federation legislature in the 1950s and early 1960s. He has apparently retired from politics. Ishak bin Haji Mohamed, after a short stint in the Malay Administrative Service in the 1930s, became a journalist. Like Boestaman, he was detained for alleged communist-front activities in 1949. He was also a founder member of the Malayan Labour Party and a member of the legislature until the early 1960s. He is no longer politically active.

20 Indonesian Intentions Towards Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 1964, pp. 3, 8–9Google Scholar.

21 Democrat, 23.3.46.

22 Malayan Press Digest, 30.5.46–6.6.46.

23 John Eber, a Singapore-born Eurasian lawyer, was educated in Harrow and Cambridge. A brilliant intellectual, Eber was detained by the Government during the years, 1951–53, for alleged participation in communist-front activities. He was released in 1953 on condition he left Malaya. In England since then, he is Secretary to the Colonial Freedom Movement. He is still active among Malaysian and Singapore students in England.

24 Lim Kean Chye, a Penang-born lawyer, was educated in Cambridge. In 1945 he joined his father-in-law, Philip Hoalim, to help found the MDU. He was active in leftwing politics till early 1951 when he left Singapore to escape detention by the British for alleged involvement with the Anti-British League, a subsidiary of the MCP. Since his return to Malaya in the early 1960s, Lim has been a practising lawyer in Penang and Ipoh. He has retired from politics.

25 The People's Constitution, Kuala Lumpur, 1947.

26 Gerald de Cruz, a Singapore-born Eurasian journalist, was educated in Raffles Institution. A founder member of the MDU, he was politically active till the Emergency was declared in Malaya late in 1948. He then went to England where he is believed to have renounced communism. In 1956 he returned to Singapore to become paid Organising Secretary of the Labour Front, then the party in power. After the PAP captured power in 1959, Gerald de Cruz was appointed a lecturer in the Political Study Centre. He is now working with the New Nation, a Singapore English language newspaper.

27 The following were members of the CJA - the MDU, MNP, MIC, Straits Chinese British Association, Singapore Indian Chamber of Commerce, Singapore Tamils' Association, Singapore Women's Federation, Singapore Clerical Union and the General Labour Union (GLU). The GLU later split into the Singapore Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) and the Pan-Malayan Federation of Trade Unions (PMFTU).

28 The additional members were the Clerical Unions of Penang, Malacca, Selangor and Perak, Selangor Indian Chamber of Commerce, Singapore China Association, Malayan New Democratic Youths' League, Ex-MPAJA Comrades' Association, Selangor Women's Federation, and the Peasants' Union. The Straits Chinese British Association pulled out of the Council because it refused to undertake not to discuss the constitutional question with the government.

29 J. Thivy probably chose to leave the country to avoid an untenable position.

30 Interview with Gerald de Cruz, June 1965.

31 Tan Cheng Lock, p. 172.

32 John Eber to Tan Cheng Lock, 31.12.46. (TCLP).

33 John Eber to Tan Cheng Lock, 23.12.46. (TCLP).

34 John Eber to Tan Cheng Lock, 31.12.46. (TCLP).

35 Ibid. 36 See p. 41.

37 The voting system of the PMCJ A (and of the PMCJA-PUTERA) allotted Pan-Malayan organisations such as the MIC o r the MD U one vote each and state organisations of similar nature such as the various clerical unions one vote to be shared among themselves. As the Chinese Chambers of Commerce would fall under the latter category of membership, they would have only one vote. Further, under the existing procedure, a resolution from one association must be seconded by another before it could be adopted for discussion. (See Agenda for the Second meeting of PMCJA, 5.1.47). This meant that like the MDU, MIC and others, the Chinese Chambers of Commerce, had they joined the PMCJA, would not have been able, on their own, to have resolutions discussed by the Council. With four affiliates in the PMCJA, communist-front organisations had an edge over the other members.

38 Even the pro-MNP newspaper, the Utusan Melayu, urged the PMCJA in December 1946 to acknowledge Malaya as a Malay state in order that it might win Malay support.

39 Brimmel, J., Communism in Southeast Asia, London, 1959, p. 203Google Scholar.

40 Agenda of the First Meeting of the PMCJA, Kual a Lumpur, 22.12.46. (TCLP).

41 See pp. 44–45.

42 Minutes of the Third Delegates' Conference of PMCJA-PUTERA in Kuala Lumpur, 3.11.47 (TCLP). (Henceforth cited as Third Delegates' Conference Minutes).

43 Ibid.

44 Membership figures for these organisations are highly exaggerated. The People's Constitution started that the PMCJA had 400,000 members and the PUTERA 100,000. In 1947 the MIC claimed a membership of 20,000, while the MN P 60,000.

45 Minutes of the Annual Conference of Delegates of PMCJA-PUTERA in Singapore, 24/25 April 1948 (TCLP). (Henceforth citied as Annual Conference's Minutes).

46 The other two members cannot be ascertained.

47 Third Delegates' Conference Minutes.

48 Malaya Tribune, 6.1.47.

49 Ibid, 9.1.47.

50 Interview with Lee Kong Chian, former President of the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce, July 1965.

51 In this respect, the memorandum of the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce was the most radical. It suggested that the High Commissioner's veto and reserved powers be restricted to matters of defence and external affairs. The Chamber was prepared to accept popular elections within five to ten years. These proposals were not put forward by the Selangor or the Associated CCC.

52 Obviously, the Consultative Committee did not fully understand the views of the PMCJA-PUTERA.

53 Summary of Revised Constitutional Proposals, Command Pape r 7171, 1947.

54 The 9 Mentri Besars of the State Councils and the 2 representatives of Penang and Malacca were free to vote as they wished. The Working Committee Report proposed an unofficial majority of 34 to 14. Among the 34 unofficials, there were 9 Mentri Besars and 2 Penang-Malacca representatives who should more correctly be considered officials. In this respect the Consultative Committee Report was important since it recommended a large unofficial majority, as mentioned above.

55 Summary of Revised Constitutional Proposals, Command Paper 7171, 1947, However, applicants over 40 years who had lived for 20 years in Malaya were exempted from the language test. This was another recommendation of the Consultative Committee.

56 In 1950, 2,500,000 of the 3,275,000 citizens in the Federation were Malays; only aroun d 500,000 were Chinese. Ratnam, K. J., Communalism and the Political Process in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1965, p. 84Google Scholar.

57 Statement of Policy for the Malayan Union and the Colony of Singapore, Command Paper 6724, 1946.

58 J.V. Allen, pp. 94–5.

59 Straits Budget, 10.4.47.

60 Interview with Gerald de Cruz, June 1965.

61 Third Delegates' Conference Minutes.

62 The contributions of the communist-controlled labour movement to the PMCJA-PUTERA were not recorded in the Third Delegates' Conference Minutes. Likewise, the source from which Gerald de Cruz and the MD U collected more than $1,000 in 1948 were not disclosed; so also another $4,000 collected by the PMCJA-PUTERA. Furthermore, the minutes of the PMCJA-PUTERA did not state that as Secretary-General, Gerald de Cruz drew a stipend of $200 from Tan Cheng Lock. As early as December 1946, John Eber tactfully raised the question of allowances for MD U leaders with Tan Cheng Lock. Letter 23.12.46.

63 Purcell, V., Malaya: Communist or Free, London, 1954, p. 118Google Scholar. The bulk of this sum came from losses incurred by business stoppage on hartal day. Nevertheless, a huge sum must have been spent on the hartal itself.

64 Statement by J. Thivy, Indian Daily Mail, 20.6.47.

65 Interview with Lee Kong Chian, July 1965.

66 Holland, W. (ed), Asian Nationalism and the West, New York, 1953, p. 314Google Scholar.

67 Straits Tunes, 18.9.47.

68 Third Delegates' Conference Minutes.

69 Interview with Lee Kong Chian, July 1965.

70 Indian Daily Mail, 14.11.47.

71 Third Delegates' Conference Minutes.

72 The People's Constitution, Kuala Lumpur, 1947Google Scholar.

73 Tan Cheng Lock, pp. 172–3.

74 See Quok Peng Chiang's article, ‘Anti-British Politicians: An Interpretation’ Straits Times, 17.3.48.

75 John Eber to Tan Cheng Lock 31.12.46. (TCLP).

76 The People's Constitution, Kuala Lumpur, 1947; Straits Times, 16.10.47: MDU Bulletin, January 1948.

77 Memo on Counter-Proposals for the Future Constitution for the consideration of the PMCJA, 1947 (TCLP).

78 In its comments on the draft People's Constitution, the MIC only state d that the proposed citizenship should be a nationaltity, not a Melayu nationality. Out ofthe 117 members it proposed for the legislature, the MIC allotted Malays only 48 seats. (See Amended Proposals by the MIC to the Draft of the New Constitution for Malaya undated.) By 16 September 1947 the MIC had not even received a copy of the People's Constitution, although the constitution had already appeared in the Malayan newspapers. Budh Singh to the PMCJA-PUTERA 16.9.47 (TCLP).

79 Tan Cheng Lock stated that ‘some leading Chinese' criticised him in connection with the People's Constitution. However, in view of the various Chinese memoranda sent to the Consultative Committee and Chinese refusal to endorse the People's Constitution, it may be safely assumed that Chinese leaders in general shared the views of these ‘leading Chinese’.

80 Tan Cheng Lock to Gerald de Cruz, 7.10.47. (TCLP).

81 A Singapore-born journalist, Lim Hong Bee was a founder member of the MDU. In 1947 he went to study law at Cambridge University, and has remained in London ever since. He is believed to be a communist, currently operating among Singapore and Malaysian students.

82 This rabidly leftwing newsletter is still published by Lim Hong Bee. It is banned in Singapore and Malaysia.

83 For a very interesting description of the AMCJA-PUTERA flag, see Indian Daily Mail, 10.12.47.

84 Interview with Philip Hoalim, Chairman of the MDU, July 1965.

85 Interview with Lee Kong Chian, July 1965.

86 Malayan Tribune, 24.1.48.

87 Thompson, V., The Leftwing in Southeast Asia, New York, 1950, p. 149Google Scholar.

88 Goh, Nellie, “Sino-Malay Relations in Malaya, 1945–55”, Unpublished BA Hons. Academic Exercise, University of Malaya in Singapore, 1959, p. 35Google Scholar.

89 Straits Budget, 29.1.48.

90 Ishak was referring to the report by Palayil Gopi (a leader of the MIC) entitled ‘The Failure of the leftwing coalition’ in the Straits Times (15.4.48).

91 Kuantan-born, Eu Chooi Yip, a bi-lingual (Chinese and English) journalist, was a Raffles College graduate. After the MDU was dissolved, he rejected an offer from Tan Cheng Lock in 1949 to become paid Secretary of the MC A because he was opposed to communal organisations. Two years later, he escaped from a British round-up of alleged members of the Anti-British League. He is believed to be a communist now, leading the Peking-based Malayan Liberation Front.

92 Quok Peng Chiang, a Johore-born journalist, was a communist and seemed to have been the owner of the communist-controlled newspaper, Democrat. He initiated a number of persons into politics who later figured prominently in leftwing movement in Singapore. He was killed during the Emergency.

93 Annual Conference's Minutes.

94 Eu Chooi Yip to the AMCJA-PUTERA, 13.5.48 (TCLP).

95 The MCP Review, no. 3, June 1948, p. 7.

96 For a discussion of this point, see M. Stenson, pp. 131, 206.