Practicing legal pluralism : applying Chinese law and custom in colonial Hong Kong (1841-1941)

Abstract

This thesis draws on archival resources to study the practical implementation of Chinese law and custom maintenance in Hong Kong's early colonial legal system. The primary focus areas include the handling of succession cases, business operations, and the mui-tsai custom. The thesis argues that colonial officials, including government officials and judges, did not follow a uniform principle or document to determine whether Chinese law and custom could be retained in Hong Kong. Instead, their decisions were influenced by a multifaceted blend of legal and non-doctrinal factors, which were shaped by various local and global historical and political contexts. Furthermore, the thesis challenges the existing literature's overemphasis on the legal significance of Elliot's proclamation and Supreme Court Ordinances in the maintenance of Chinese law and custom in colonial Hong Kong. Instead, it highlights the critical roles played by colonial officials, Chinese residents, and the London government, each informed by their misunderstandings, unfamiliarity, and manipulation of Chinese law and custom. None of their positions was decisive, which explains why some pieces of Chinese law and custom were kept while others were not. This thesis is a valuable addition to the scholarship of legal pluralism, as it provides a case study of how it was practiced on the ground in former colonies.