Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-xrnlw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T02:06:08.095Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Disease and Disorder in Post-War Malaya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

T.N. Harper
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has become a commonplace of Malayan historiography that the period following the end of the Pacific War witnessed the establishment of a pattern of political life which has persisted in its main features into the present decade. Existing accounts have focused around the restructuring of the British presence in Malaya under a military administration and the introduction of, and opposition to, the Malayan Union scheme in 1946 and the Federal structure which succeeded it in April 1948. These years saw the emergence of an ethnically based nationalist movement and the defeat of a radical challenge to its predominance. The communal and insurrectionary violence which was a feature of the period has been represented as a constraint to subsequent political action — as a limit to what the structure of Malaya's pluralism could tolerate — and the constitutional struggles as a lost opportunity to effect its transformation. Whilst it is hard to exaggerate the importance of these events in shaping the landscape of Malaysian politics, there is a sense in which the sophistication of these political and constitutional preoccupations suggests uneven development within the historical writing as a whole. The social context which stimulated change, and the breadth of the local response which dignified it, has been marginalized in many accounts. There has been a tendency to conceive the state system and the colonial presence in Malaya within the bounds of a paradigm governed by the constitutional settlement, and the various phases of insurrection and political change as primarily the products of the subversive or nationalist imagination.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 88 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1990

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

This is a revised version of a paper presented to the Asian Studies Association of Australia, Centre for Advanced Studies, National University of Singapore, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies Conference, Singapore 1–3 February 1989. I am grateful to Christopher Bayly, Lim Teck Ghee and J.M. Gullick for their comments on an earlier draft.

1 There is a wealth of literature on this period. See for example: Kheng, Cheah Boon, Red Star Over Malaya: Resistance and social conflict during the Japanese occupation, 1941–1946 (Singapore, 1983)Google Scholar; Stockwell, A.J., British policy and Malay politics during the Malayan Union experiment, 1945–8 (Kuala Lumpur, 1982)Google Scholar; de Vere Allen, J, The Malayan Union (New Haven, 1967)Google Scholar; Stenson, M.R., ‘The Malayan Union and the historians’, Journal of Southeast Asian History 10, no. 2 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wah, Yeo Kim, ‘The anti-Federation movement, 1946–8’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies (JSEAS) 4, no. 1 (1973)Google Scholar; Hoong, Khong Kim, Merdeka: British rule and the struggle for independence in Malaya, 1945–57 (Kuala Lumpur, 1984)Google Scholar.

2 Addison, Paul, The Road to 1945: British politics and the Second World War (London, 1983), pp. 182–83Google Scholar: Jefferys, Kevin, ‘British politics and social policy during the Second World War’, The Historical Journal 30, no. 1 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Stockwell, A.J., ‘Colonial planning during World War Two: the case of Malaya’, Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 2, no. 3 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. D.A. Somerville, ‘Notes on the future policy and administration in Malaya’, 5.2.1944, BMA/RP/1/A [Arkib Negara Malaysia].

4 H.A.L. Luckham, ‘Some causes of the loss of Malaya’, 30.3.42, CO865/14 [Public Records Office, London].

5 Stockwell, A.J., British policy and Malay politics, pp.35–38, 73–77Google Scholar.

6 Turnbull, C.M., ‘British planning for post-war Malaya’, JSEAS 5, no. 2 (1974)Google Scholar.

7 The phrase belongs to CaptGammans, L.D., British Malaya, 05 1942, p. 8Google Scholar; for the importance of Malaya to the British economy, see Rudner, Martin, ‘Financial affairs in post-war Malaya: the fiscal and monetary measures of liberation and reconstruction’, Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 3, no. 3 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stockwell, A.J., ‘British Imperial strategy and decolonization in Southeast Asia, 1947–1957’, in University of Hull, Centre of Southeast Asian Studies, Occasional Papers, No. 13Google Scholar.

8 Suggestions by Lord Keynes that colonial Sterling balances in London be cancelled to meet the costs of reconstruction were vigorously opposed by the Colonial Office: ‘it would look extraordinarily odd to be promising a sum of £120,000,000 for Colonial Development and simultaneously to be contemplating a cash surrender of precisely the same amount’, Minute by Sydney Caine, 9.6.1945, CO537/1378.

9 See, for example, Manderson, Lenore, ‘Health services and the legitimation of the colonial state: British Malaya, 1786–1941’, International Journal of Health Services 17, no. 1 (1987)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Kratoska, Paul H., ‘“Ends we cannot foresee”: Malay reservations in British Malaya’, JSEAS 9, no. 1 (1983)Google Scholar.

10 Lee, J.M. and Petter, M., The Colonial Office: war and development policy (London, 1982), pp. 147–63Google Scholar.

11 Furnivall, J.S., Colonial policy and practice (Cambridge, 1948), p. ixGoogle Scholar.

12 Papers on Colonial Affairs, No. 5, Social security in the Colonial Territories (Colonial Office, June 1944); on delinquency, Juvenile welfare in the Colonies: Draft Report of the Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee of the Colonial Penal Administration Committee (Colonial Office, 8.10.1942), especially pp. 5–15.

13 Malayan Union, Annual Report of the Department of Social Welfare for the year 1947, pp. 2, 7Google Scholar.

14 Report to investigate the working of the Social Welfare Department, Federation of Malaya, Legislative Council, No. 41 of 1949, p. B330Google Scholar.

15 Rev. Kinross Nicholson, and reply of Yap Pheng Geek, ‘Singapore Social Welfare Council, Minutes of 13th Meeting’, 8.8.1947, SCA/5/1947 [Singapore National Archives].

16 Harvey, J.A., ‘Establishment of a Social Welfare Council’, Paper No. 15A, Social Welfare Conference, Singapore, p. 296Google Scholar.

17 ‘Long-term policy directive — social welfare’, 2.3.1944, CO865/18.

18 Report to investigate the working of the Social Welfare Department, p. B341Google Scholar.

19 Rawson, C.P., Social Welfare Conference, Singapore, p. 41Google Scholar.

20 Singapore Department of Social Welfare, ‘Social Welfare as a function of government’, Paper 2B, ibid.

21 The fall of Penang and Singapore was the direct stimulus to the formulation of a colonial public relations policy, see CO875/19/9; G.L. Edwett, ‘Colonial Propaganda: II — Aims and policy’, 6.8.1941, CO875/11/1.

22 Edwett, minute, 30.12.1941, ibid.

23 Sir Donald Cameron, ‘Give an account of Thy stewardship’, 15.5.1942, CO875/19/13.

24 Undated minute on CO875/19/13.

25 Minute, 24.6.1943, CO875/5/15.

26 Edwett, minute, 30.12.1941, CO875/11/1.

27 ‘Note by Mr. [Sydney] Caine’, 31.10.1944, CO875/20/8.

28 The B.M.A. lasted until the end of March 1946, and was superceded by the Malayan Union: an official history is Donnison, F.S.V., British Military Administration in the Far East (London, 1956)Google Scholar; Rudner, Martin, ‘The organization of the B.M.A. in Malaya’, Journal of Southeast Asian History 9, no. 1 (1968)Google Scholar.

29 Baker, C.J., ‘Economic reorganization and the slump in Southeast Asia’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 23, no. 3 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gungwu, Wang, ‘Migration patterns in history: Malaysia and the region’, Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 58 (1985)Google Scholar.

30 By 1947, 60.8 per cent of the ‘immigrant’ population had been born in Malaya. The ratio of women to men amongst the Chinese community was 837:1000, as opposed to only 513:1000 in 1931; del Tufo, M.V., Malaya: a report on the 1947 census of population (London, 1949), pp. 57–58, 89Google Scholar.

31 Singapore Social Welfare Department, A social survey of Singapore: a preliminary study of some aspects of social conditions in the municipal area of Singapore (Singapore, 1947), p. 112Google Scholar.

32 Annual Report of the Malayan Union for 1946, pp. 1–2Google Scholar.

33 Many of the Chinese were agricultural colonists sent to Endau in Johore, and others (principally Eurasians) to Bahau in Negri Sembilan; over 30,000 labourers were believed to have died in Siam, figures from B.M.A. Fortnightly and Monthly Reports, CO273/675/50822/56/3 and WO220/564 [PRO]; ‘Report on situation of labourers etc. imported to Siam by Japanese from Malaya, Java and Burma’; ‘Memorandum on repatriation of displaced labour from Siam to Malaya’, 14.11.1945, BMA/CA/52/45 [SNA].

34 ‘Monthly Report for Labour’, November and December, 1945, BMA/DEPT/2/1; ‘Medical Officer's comments, November, 1945’, LAB (Malacca)/45/45 [ANM].

35 HQ, ALFSEA to War Office, 15.10.1945, CO537/1669; Malayan Security Service, Political Intelligence Journal, No. 12 of 1946, 15.10.1946 [Rhodes House, Oxford]Google Scholar.

36 ‘Fortnightly Report No.4, for week ending 31.10.1945’, CO273/675/50822/3; Cheah, , Red Star Over Malaya, pp. 195–240Google Scholar.

37 Secretariat for Economic Affairs, ‘A report on the damage resulting from the war and the Japanese occupation, and on the past and future difficulties which confront the early rehabilitation of Singapore Colony’, 10.12.1946, pp. 2–3, 12–13, CSO/6929 [SNA].

38 Burgess, R.C. and Musa, Laidin bin, A report on the state of health, the diet and the economic conditions of groups of people in the lower income levels in Malaya (Kuala Lumpur, 1950)Google Scholar; on the marked growth of hawking, ‘Annual report of the District Office, Ulu Langat for 1946’, SEL/RC/362/47[ANM].

39 Annual Report of the Malayan Union for 1946, p. 44Google Scholar.

40 For example, J.M. Gullick, ‘My time in Malaya’, pp. 34–35, Heussler Papers [RHO].

41 Powerful accounts of these struggles can be found in Stenson, M.R., Industrial Conflict in Malaya: prelude to the Communist revolt of 1948 (London, 1970)Google Scholar; Camba, Charles, The origins of trade unionism in Malaya (Singapore, 1962)Google Scholar.

42 ‘Labour Department report for May, 1946’; Deputy Director Malayan Security Service, to Chief Secretary, 3.8.1946, BMA/DEPT/2/14 [ANM].

43 Labour Department, Singapore, ‘Monthly report for April, 1946’, CSO/44/46.

44 Enclosures in BMA/CH/48/45.

45 Enclosures in BMA/CH/12/46.

46 Kratoska, Paul H., ‘The post-1945 food shortage in British Malaya’, JSEAS 19, no. 1 (1988)Google Scholar; Rudner, Martin, ‘The Malayan post-war rice crisis: an episode in colonial agricultural policy’, Kajian Ekonomi Malaysia 12, no. 1 (1975)Google Scholar.

47 ‘B.M.A. Fortnightly report for the week ending 31.10.1945’, CO273/675/50822/3.

48 Food Controller, B.M.A.(M). to Hone, 31.12.1945, BMA/DEPT//16.

49 Cheah, , Red Star Over Malaya, pp. 195–240Google Scholar.

50 A.H. Girdler, ‘Report on general conditions in No. 1 District, Klang’, 10.9.1945, C.H.F. Blake Papers [RHO]; ‘Joint Sino-foreign smuggling’, Nanyang Siang Pau, 23.11.1945; H.T. Pagden to S.O.1, Chinese Affairs, 10.11.1945.

51 Hone to F.S.V. Donnison, 1.5.1952, Hone papers [RHO].

52 Onn, Chin Kee, Malaya upside down (Singapore, 1946), pp. 199–205Google Scholar.

53 T. Matthews to V. Purcell, 22.9.1945, BMA/CH/7/45; ‘B.M.A. monthly report for November, 1945’, WO220/564.

54 J.M. Gullick, ‘My time in Malaya’, Heussler Papers.

55 Burgess, R.C. and Musa, Laidin bin, A report on the state of health, pp. 27–29Google Scholar.

56 B.M.A. monthly report for January 1946, WO220/564; I am grateful to Dr. Benjamin Chew for his recollections of health conditions in post-war Singapore.

57 E.D.B. Wolfe, ‘Smallpox in Trengganu, 1946–47’ [RHO].

58 L.E. Vine, ‘Medical Sitrep for weekly signal’, 16.10.1945; Chong-Yah, Lim, The economic development of modern Malaya (Kuala Lumpur, 1967), p. 312Google Scholar.

59 As much as 77 per cent in some areas. Report of the Medical Department for the year 1946, pp. 8, 23, 29Google Scholar; ‘Minutes of a meeting of the Malaria Advisory Board’, F.M.S., 6.3.1946, BMA/DEPT/1/5.

60 B.M.A. Fortnightly report No. 4, 30.10.1945, CO273/675/50822/56/2; Report of the Medical Department for the year 1946, pp. 8, 23, 29Google Scholar. The opening of new land for food cultivation in itself was a factor in the high incidence of malaria, and doctors warned against this: ‘the importance of food cultivation did not justify the opening of land if it was merely to provide a grave for the occupants when they died of malaria’, ‘Minutes of a meeting of the Malaria Advisory Board’, 6.3.1946, BMA/DEPT/1/5.

61 New Democracy, 14.12.1946Google Scholar.

62 Hughes, T. Eames, Social Welfare Conference, Singapore, p. 34Google Scholar.

63 ‘Scheme to be submitted to the Welfare Council by the sub-committee appointed to consider the rehabilitation of women and girls’, BMA/CH/27/45.

64 In first 4 months of reoccupation, the 705 new female cases registered at one centre alone exceeded the total in all the combined centres in Singapore in any one pre-war year: 95 per cent of prostitutes said to be infected. In Penang there were an estimated 2,000 carriers. This was one of the greatest threats to the military position of the Allies. In 1943 the 35,000 casualties due to V.D. in the Eastern Army were sixteen times more than those occurring in battle; in Singapore the incidence of infection amongst the military rose as high as 72:1000 by February 1946, and in the R.A.F. up to 11 per cent. ‘Special meeting held at HQ, SACSEAC to consider methods to combat V.D. in SEAC’, 7.12.1945; C.E.C. Davies, ‘Report on the V.D. situation in Singapore’, 4.3.1946, in BMA/DEPT/1/2.

65 R.E. Vine, ‘Memorandum on the medical aspects of the use of opium and allowed drugs in Malaya’, 5.12.1944, BMA/DEPT/1/14/Part I. Similar arguments were advanced in favour of toddy: ‘All the familiar arguments pro and con are being produced, but in this vitamin-minded era stress is laid on the vitamin content of good wholesome toddy’, John Jeff, ‘Labour conditions in the Malayan Union, April 1946’, LAB/41/45 [ANM].

66 ‘Meeting of Central relief Committee, 15.1.1947, to examine cash relief, SCA/5/47.

67 Report to examine the working of the Social Welfare Department, p. B330Google Scholar; Kratoska, , ‘The post-1945 food shortage’, pp. 41–45Google Scholar.

68 ‘The autobiography of Josephine Foss’, p. 114. I am grateful to J.M. Gullick for this reference and for his reflections on the period.

69 The welfare responsibilities of the Chinese Protectorate, the Labour Department, estate managers and district officers for different sections of the population were to be drawn together under a new Social Welfare Department.

70 ‘B.M.A. Fortnightly Report No. 1, 20.9.1945’; CO273/675/50882/56/3; ‘Chinese public opinion would have been alienated by any premature restriction of the rights of freedom of speech and of association’, ‘Minutes of SCAOs' conference session No. 1 held on 1.3.1946 at H.Q. B.M.A.’, in BMA/SEL/CA/67/46. Kheng, Cheah Boon, ‘Some aspects of the Interregnum in Malaya’, JSEAS 8, no. 1 (1977): 55–56Google Scholar, believes that no such political assurances were given in the agreement between Force 136 and the M.P.A.J.A. There was some confusion over this: Gent, as well as Purcell, evidently felt they had — although no record could be found in Kuala Lumpur. Enquiries to London produced the reply that although Force 136 had been authorized to give such an assurance, ‘we have of course no means of knowing whether any or all of these assurances were given’, Gent to J.J. Paskin, 20.9.1946; Paskin to Gent, 4.10.1946. Paskin was later to assert that registration lapsed because it would be ‘unnecessary provocation’ to China, ‘with the K.M.T. virtually the government’, minute, 3.1.1947, CO537/1533.

71 Malayan Union, Department of Public Relations, review of activities, April to October, 1946, Malayan Union Advisory Council, No.54 of 1946Google Scholar. J.N. McHugh, ‘Draft directive of Department of Public Relations, Malayan Union’, 31.5.46, BMA/SEL/CA/67/46.

72 Memo by M.C. Sheppard, 8.3.1946, in BMA/ADM/8/64.

73 B.M.A. Monthly Report for February 1946, WO/220/564; Sheppard, Tan Sri Dato Mubin, Taman Budiman: memoirs of an unorthodox civil servant (Kuala Lumpur, 1979), pp. 144–45Google Scholar.

74 B.M.A., H.Q., ‘Emergency relief measures in Singapore, 1.10.1945’ and ‘Summary of statistics for December, 1945’, BMA/CH/9/45; ‘Minutes of 4th Meeting of Singapore Social Welfare Council, 25.10.1945’, BMA/CH/127/45.

75 ‘B.M.A. relief measures, 14.9.1945’; ‘Fifth meeting of Emergency Relief Committee, 25.10.1945’; H.A. Lord, ‘Memorandum on emergency relief’, BMA/CH/48/45.

76 T. Matthews, ‘Memorandum on refugees and displaced persons’, 11.8.1945, Matthews Papers [RHO].

77 ‘Minutes of the 3rd Meeting of the Singapore Social Welfare Council’, 27.9.1946, ‘Minutes of meeting of the central Welfare Council, Kuala Lumpur’, 4.12.1945, BMA/CH/7/45.

78 E.D.B. Wolfe, ‘Smallpox in Trengganu, 1946–47’.

79 ‘Minutes of the meeting of the Emergency Relief Committee, 17.9.1945’, BMA/CH/9/45.

80 Another two were administered by the San Min Chu Yi Youth Corps, the Kuomintang youth wing, Sin Chew Jit Poh, 26.9.1945; ‘Number of cases receiving relief and amount of cash issued up to 11.10.1945’, BMA/CA/48/45.

81 Hone to Permanent Under-Secretary for War, 4.10.1945, CO273/677/50957. At the end of August 1946 the Emergency Relief Committee dissolved itself and its functions were handed over to the Singapore Social Welfare Department. The Singapore Social Welfare Council was inaugurated on 26.7.46, to co-ordinate governmental and charitable efforts. A corresponding Central Welfare Council with similar functions was set up on the peninsula in May 1946. ‘Memo-Social Welfare’, BMA/CH/27/45.

82 Dancz, Virginia H., Women and party politics in peninsular Malaysia (Singapore, 1987), p. 235Google Scholar.

83 ‘B.M.A. Monthly Report for November, 1945’, WO220/564.

84 Kwei-chiang, Chui, The response of the Malayan Chinese to political and military developments in China, 1945–49 (Singapore, 1975)Google Scholar; Fatt, Yong Ching, Tan Kah Kee: an Overseas Chinese legend (Singapore, 1987)Google Scholar; H.T. Pagden, minute, 4.12.1945, BMA/CH/67/45.

85 MSS/PIJ, No. 5 of 1947; Ampalavanar, R., The Indian minority and political change in Malaya, 1945–57 (Kuala Lumpur, 1981), p. 25Google Scholar; ‘Report on labour conditions for March 1946, Inland Districts of Selangor’, EACL(KL)/20/45 [ANM].

86 Manderson, Lenore H., Women, politics and change: the Kaum Ibu UMNO, Malaysia, 1945–72 (Kuala Lumpur, 1980). pp. 53–60Google Scholar; Dancz, V.H., Women and party politics in peninsula Malaya, p. 235Google Scholar.

87 This account is extracted from MSS/PIJ, No. 5 of 1946 and subsequent; New Democracy, 23.12.1945Google Scholar; for the range of related organizations see ‘List of societies affiliated to the New Democratic Youth League’, in BMA/CH/19/45.

88 The S.M.C.Y. Youth Corps launched a similar experiment in Kelantan in late 1946, MSS/PIJ, Nos. 15 and 16 of 1946.

89 G.G. Thomson, ‘To stimulate food production’, 17.9.1946, BMA/CH/31/46.

90 R. Broome, minute, 2.2.1946, BMA/HQ.S.DIV/34/46 [SNA].

91 R. Gopal Ayer, ‘Report on labour conditions for February, 1946, in the inland districts of Selangor’, EACL(KL)/20/45.

92 MSS/PIJ, No. 16 of 1946; Kin Kwok Daily News, 26.11.1945.

93 It discussed topics such as ‘Nationalism’, the ‘Banks and their role’, and ‘Finance, capital and financial oligarchy’, MSS/PIJ, No. 7 of 1947.

94 ‘Who's Who’, Supplement No. 3 to MSS/PIJ No. 1 of 1948; Purcell to Hu Yu-Chih, 15.1.1946, CH/1A/45; Hulswe, A.F.P., ‘Survey of Chinese periodicals in Malaya’, in Chinese Press Summary, No. 60Google Scholar; ‘The emanicipation of Chinese intellectuals in Malaya’, Feng-Hsia, No. 8, 21.1.1946.

95 MSS/PIJ, No. 16 of 1946; on the ownership of these two papers, see Supplement to MSS/PIJ No. 6 of 1947, pp. 10–15.

96 Stockwell, , British policy and Malay politics, p. 43Google Scholar. Where papers were already registered, it was admitted that there were no powers to prevent publication until control on newsprint was introduced, J.N. McHugh to J.S. Dumeresque, 19.12.1945; but previous to this officials were very conscious of the need not to be seen giving precedence to English-language papers, G.G. Thomson, ‘Newsprint position in relation to the press’, 30.9.1945, BMA/PR/2/19.

97 G.G. Thomson to Noel Sabine, 25.1.1947, CO875/23/1.

98 Gent to A. Creech Jones, 21.11.1947, ibid.

99 Koon, Heng Pek, Chinese politics in Malaysia: a history of the Malaysian Chinese Association (Singapore, 1988), p. 39Google Scholar.

100 ‘DCCAO's report on the military government of the Malay Peninsula for the period 12.9.1945 to 30.12.1945’; ‘Sitrep for week ending 20.10.1945’, BMA/GEN/51; for an account of one such committee in Negri Sembilan, Siaw, Laurence K.L., Chinese society in rural Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur, 1983), pp. 72–78Google Scholar, Sin Chew Jit Poh, 3.10.1945.

101 C.E. Jackson at ‘Meeting of the Ulu Selangor District Advisory Council’, 25.1.1946, BMA/SEL/CA/66/46.

102 MSS/PIJ No. 8 of 1947 and passim.

103 Abdullah, Firdaus Haji, Radical Malay politics: its origins and early development (Petaling Jaya, 1985), pp. 30–42Google Scholar.

104 C.M. Soosai, minute, 1.2.1946, COS/78/45.

105 Supplement No. 4 of 1948 to MSS/P1J No. 10 of 1948.

106 Blythe, Wilfred, The impact of Chinese secret societies in Malaya (London, 1969), pp. 380–84Google Scholar.

107 Stenson, , Industrial conflict in Malaya, pp. 118–20Google Scholar.

108 G.L.U. document cited in Gamba, , The origins of trade unionism in Malaya, pp. 186–87Google Scholar.

109 MSS/PIJ, No. 8 of 1946; the A.P.I, in fact was the first political party to be banned when societies' legislation was reintroduced, see Gent to Creech Jones, 24.2.1947; 1.7.1947, CO537/2151.

110 See Stockwell, , British policy and Malay politics, pp. 146–61Google Scholar.

111 H.T. Pagden, ‘Sitrep’, BMA/CH/3/45.

112 ‘Sitrep No. 2, 21.9.1945’, ibid.

113 H.T. Pagden, minute, 7.5.1946, BMA/CH/2/45.

114 H.A. Lord, ‘Memo re. meeting with various representatives of resistance army centres’, 30.10.1945, BMA/CH/139/45; New Democracy, 2.10.1945Google Scholar.

115 ‘Fortnightly report No. 3, Chinese affairs’, 4.10.1945; ‘Sitrep, 11.10.1945’, BMA/CH/3/45.

116 H.T. Bourdillon, minute, 30.12.1946; Gent, minute, 4.2.1946, CO537/1533.

117 Wi-wang, Yeh, ‘My personal feelings about the Judgemenl in the Soong Kwong Case’, New Democracy, 7.1.1946Google Scholar.

118 New Democracy, 31.1.1946Google Scholar.

119 HQ, Malaya Command, Weekly Intelligence Summary, No. 17, up to 23.3.1946, CO537/1581.

120 New Democracy, 10.2.1945Google Scholar.

121 P.A.B. McKerron, ‘Minute of the meeting of the Local Civil Labour Employment Committee, Fort Canning, 5.1.1946’, BMA/DEPT/2/4.

122 Mountbatten to British Chiefs of Staff, 11.2.1946, CO537/1579.

123 Mountbatten to J. Brazier, Trade Union Adviser, 9.3.1946, ibid.

124 H.T. Bourdillon, minute, 10.4.1946, ibid.; Mountbatten to Hone, 28.3.1946, Hone Papers.

125 Hone to G. Gator, 2.4.1946, CO537/1579.

126 Gimson to Creech Jones, 2.3.1947, CO537/2171.