《中國人的性格》第二十三章 株連守法

《中國人的性格》是美國傳教士阿瑟·史密斯（明恩溥）基于1872年赴華傳教期間的社會觀察撰寫的著作，首版英文名《Chinese Characteristics》于19世紀末問世，。作者在華生活逾五十年，書中融合人類學視角與傳教士立場，記錄了晚清民眾的性格特征與文化形態。

全書以27個主題章節剖析中國人行為模式，包含“保全面子”“省吃儉用”等生活哲學，以及“漠視精確”“因循守舊”等社會現象。通過對比西方工業文明，著重探討東方特有的生存韌性，如環境適應力與疼痛耐受性。書中案例多源自山東鄉村生活經歷，涉及衣食住行、孝悌觀念等主題，部分結論因宗教立場存在視角爭議。該著作開創西方研究中國國民性先河，被譯成多國文字，成為近代中西文化互鑒的重要文本。

第二十三章 株連守法

中國人有個典型的特征，可以用“負責”一詞來概括，西方很少有一個詞能像這個詞那樣重要，那樣具有豐富的意義。在西方，個人是社會的基本單位，社會是個人的集合體。而在中國，社會卻是由家庭，村落或宗族等構成，這些通常又是一致的。中國有千千萬萬個村子，每個村子的居民都源于同一個祖宗，同姓一個姓，共享一塊熱土。他們搬到現在居住的地方，可以追溯到幾百年前的一次政治變動，比如明朝滅亡，甚至在明朝建立的時候。在這樣的村子里，堂兄弟幾乎是最遠的關系了，男性長輩，不是父親，就是叔伯，或者什么“爺爺”。有時，一個小小的村子，竟會住著十一代人。他們并不像我們所想像的，壽數越高，輩份越高。中國人年齡很小就結婚，以后甚至到晚年還娶妻納妾，一輩了不斷地生孩子，結果就造成了錯綜復雜的親屬關系。如果不特別詢問或仔細注意名字中表明輩份的字，實在難以分辨出誰是晚輩，誰是長輩。一個年近七旬的老翁會叫一個三十歲的男人“爺爺”。所有的堂兄弟之間都可以互稱“兄弟”，假如外國人對此感到困惑不解，堅持要搞清楚，問他們到底是不是“自家兄弟”，回答經常很有意味：他們是“自家的堂兄弟”。筆者曾經這樣問過，那人幾乎毫不猶豫地說：“嗯，當然，你可以稱他們為自家兄弟。”

這些都是中國人社會團結的具體表現。正是這種團結決定了中國人富有責任心。父親要對兒子負責，不單在兒子“成年”之前，而且永遠負責。兒子也永遠對父親負責，俗話說：父債子還。兄長要對弟弟的一切負責，“家長”——通常是長輩中年齡最大的男人——要對整個家庭或家族負責。不過，這些責任會隨環境的變化而變化。

風俗習慣不同無關緊要，個人是重要的。這一點，理論上很難論述清楚。在一個顯赫的大家庭里，盡管有很多知書達理的人，也有一些是當地的頭面人物，或科班出身的，但“族長”卻可能是個頭腦糊涂的老頭，大字不識一個，甚至一輩子連離家十里遠的地方都沒去過。

家庭中兄長對弟弟或年長者對年幼者的影響，最直接，也最絕對。這與我們所提倡的自由勢如水火。弟弟就像個仆人，整天盼望改變自己的地位，而哥哥偏不許他這樣做。弟弟想買件棉衣，哥哥認為太貴，不給錢。筆者正在寫這本書時，又接到一個報告：一個中國人，手頭上有些罕見的古幣，有個外國人很想買。為防止錢主不愿賣——在中國，一個人手里有另一個人想要的東西，情況常常如此——中間人就建議，送些西洋糖果和小玩藝兒給錢主的叔叔，讓他對錢主施加壓力，最后迫使錢主把古幣賣掉。

有這樣一個滑稽的故事，一位從西方國家來的旅行者，途中遇到一個長著長長白胡子的老人，在傷心地哭泣。旅行者感到很意外，就停下來問老人，為什么哭泣。老人告訴他，自己剛被父親用鞭子抽了一頓。“你的父親在哪兒？”旅行者問他，“那兒。”老人指著前面。旅行者便順著老人指的方向往前走，又遇到了一個胡子更長更白的老人，“那是你的兒子嗎？”旅行者問，“是的。”“你用鞭子抽他了？”“是的。”“你為什么要打他呢？”“因為他對爺爺無禮。如果他再這樣，我還會再用鞭子抽他。”假如將這個故事的背景換成中國，這可不是一個滑稽故事了。

家庭成員應該彼此負責，鄰里之間也應這樣。不管他們是否有親屬關系，都不該例外，因為住處相鄰嘛。中國人認為善良與邪惡會傳染。近朱者赤，近墨者黑。孟母三遷就是為了找個理想的鄰居。而接受了盎格魯-撒克遜民族共和思想的人，對誰是他的鄰居毫不在乎，在城里某個地方住上一年，他甚至還不知道隔壁鄰居的名字。不過在中國，情形就完全不同了。倘若有人犯了罪，其鄰居也逃不脫干系，犯了類似英國法律說的“包庇罪”。因為他們知道罪犯的企圖，卻不向政府報告。說“我不知道”，絲毫不起作用。你是他的鄰居，就應該知道。

對殺死父母案子的處理，很能說明中國人的負責觀念。在“孝悌為先”一章里，我們提到過，這類罪犯一般是瘋子。如不自殺，就應該心甘情愿地接受凌遲之刑。幾年前，北京《邸報》上的一份奏折中，中部某省的總督報告，他在處理一件殺死父母案時，命人推倒了罪犯鄰居的房子，因為他們沒有給罪犯良好的道德影響，以令其改邪歸正。一般的中國人可能認為，這種處理方式合情合理有時，某地方有人犯了罪，除了對人進行懲罰外，還要拆毀一段城墻，或者修正一下城墻的樣式，比如，將方角改成圓角，把城門換個地方，甚至干脆封死。要是一個地方老發生犯罪，據說該城就要被夷為平地，在別的地方另建新城，不過，這種事，我們還未遇到過。

村子里，地位比普通老百姓略高的稱地保，管一個或幾個村子，職責也十分繁雜，不過，總的來說，是充當溝通地方政府與百姓的媒介，地保經常會陷入麻煩中。任何一種糾葛都會給他帶來麻煩。假如遇到一個吹毛求疵的地方官，有時甚至會因為沒有匯報他不可能知道的事情而被打得血肉模糊。

地位比地保再高的是縣官。在百姓眼里，他們是中國最重要的官吏。在百姓面前，他們是老虎；在上級面前，他們又是老鼠。一個縣官至少要處理六大方面的事務，他既是民事、刑事司法官，又是行政司法官、驗尸官、財政長官和稅務官。一個官員要處理這么多事務，當然不能細致入微，明察秋毫。無論從生理上還是心理上說，這都是超負荷的，使得所有的事情都不能處理好。況且，很多縣官只一門心思想著如何撈油水，對任何公務都不感興趣。因為公務繁多，彼此又不協調，即使縣官有良心，也難免犯不少錯誤。一些事情處理失當，他總是難逃其咎。大部分縣官要依靠師爺或隨從來幫助處理日常事務，與所有中國官員一樣，縣官總被想像為對轄區內的一切都了如指掌，也能隨時防患于未然。為做到這一點，每個城市或鄉村中，每十戶劃為一甲，每甲設保甲長。每戶門前掛有一個小牌子，上面注明戶主姓名和該戶人口數目。這種戶藉制度，有點像古代撒克遜人十戶區或百戶區制，它有利于確立責任區，某個保甲區內一旦出現可疑的陌生人物，第一個發現的就迅速報告保甲長，保甲長立刻報告地保，地保再報告給縣官，縣官馬上采取措施，“嚴密搜捕，嚴厲懲處”，這種簡易的保安措施，使所有的地方犯罪，還未發生就被發覺了。這不是靠陌生人長相可疑，而是靠住戶固定。這一制度還使良好的民風代代相傳。

顯然，這一措施只有在住戶固定的地區方能奏效。然而，即使在中國這樣人口最為固定的國家，保甲制度在很大程度上也只是個法律上的假定。有時，在一個城市，以前從未見過門前掛牌子，可突然有一大，每戶門上都掛上了。這就說明縣官來了，他想加強這方面的管理。有些地方，只有冬天才掛上，因為冬天最危險，壞人最多。不過，據我們所知，該措施只是昔日的經驗，現在徒具形式而已。實際上，也幾乎已經完全消失了，連續走幾個月，幾千里路，沿途掛牌子的住居，不足百分之一。

前面可能說過，中國的保甲制度和所謂的人口調查緊密聯系在一起。假如每戶的門牌一直都準確地標明該戶的人口數目；假如每個地保都有一份其轄區內人口的清單；假如每個縣官都準確地將這些清單上的數字匯總——對整個帝國人口的準確統計就會非常容易，只要將這些一連中的數字加起來就行了。可惜，這些都是“假如”，而事實上，幾乎沒有一個可以實現。門牌根本不存在。當某個地方官偶爾需要人口總數時，無論是他自己，還是他完全依賴的眾多地保，都不能保證提供一個準確的數字，他們對此都毫無興趣，因為人口調查沒油水可撈。因此，對中國人口的準確統計，只能從想像中虛構了。即使在文明程度較高的西方國家，人們也總是把人口調查與稅收聯系起來。在中國，它更是令人們疑神疑鬼。如果各地不能持久投入地實行保甲制度，就絕對不可能準確地統計出人口的數目。

地方官犯點小罪，可能平安無事，也可能遇到大麻煩。即便如此，只要找有勢力的朋友說說情，或者明智點，花些銀子，也就完事了。就算丟了烏紗帽，也會把原因歸結為他的轄區內發生了不可避免的事。在中國，這現象極為普遍。

接下來有必要闡述一下官僚階層是如何實行責任制度的。在翻譯過來的北京《邸報》中，這樣的例子每期都層出不窮。幾年前就曾披露過這樣一件事：一個值班的士兵偷了自己看守的大約三十箱子彈，賣給了一個做罐筒盒的。后者認為那些子彈是部隊多余的次品。案發后，士兵被打了一百大板，流放邊疆服苦役；負責倉庫的小官，雖然允許交錢贖罪，減輕處罰，仍被打了八十大板，革去官職；買主因考慮是出于不知情，免于處罰，不過按常規，打了四十小板；管理這些士兵的連長，因為“縱容”犯罪，也被撤職，聽候審判，但這家伙很聰明，及早悄悄地溜走了。上表奏折的刑部受命決定對該部隊最高指揮官的處罰，他對此案也有責任。由此可見，每個人都是這條鎖鏈上的一個環節，誰都不能以不知情或難以防止這類犯罪為借口，逃避責任。

北京《邸報》中，每年都有上報河流泛濫的奏折，像這類事情更能說明中國人互相負責的品質。1888年夏，直隸省附近的永定河泛濫，河水從山上沖下來，一瀉千里。官員們看來是聞訊就趕到了現場，冒著生命危險，奮力搶救。可惜，人難勝天，他們不過像暴風雨中的螞蟻一樣，棲惶無助。盡管如此，李鴻章也不為之所動，仍請求皇帝立即摘去他們的頂戴花翎，或者保留官職，取消貴族身份（這是朝廷不滿時最常用的手段）。直隸總督也一再上表請求將自己交付刑部，依罪處罰。同樣的河水泛濫后來還發生了幾次，每次都有同樣的表章，皇帝也經常命令有司記錄“備案”。幾年前，河南省修復河堤以使黃河回歸故道的工程失敗了，自巡撫以下的大批官員遭到罷黜和流放。

中國人的責任感十分強烈，即使天子本人也不例外。他經常發布詔書，承認自己的缺點，把暴發洪水、饑荒和農民造反的責任歸咎于己，并乞求上天寬恕。他要對上天負責，這和他的臣子對他負責一樣，十分現實。皇帝失去了皇位，就表明他失去了“天意”，上天要將皇位交付應該登基的人。

中國人的責任觀念與西方觀念最相抵觸的是一人犯法、株滅九族，太平天國起義中有許多這方面的例子，最近，土庫曼斯但穆斯林起義的首領雅庫·貝哥也是被滿門抄斬。這種做法并不僅限于鎮壓起義上。1873年，“一個中國人被指控盜取皇陵中的陪葬品，結果全家四代，上至年近九旬的老人，下至幾個月大的嬰兒，全被殺掉。在這個案子中，除罪犯一人外，其余十一人全是無辜的，根本沒有證據表明他們參與了或知曉罪犯的行動。”

中國人的責任觀常被視為其各項制度永恒不變的原因之一。它就像腳鐐手銬，束縛著每個人，各級官員也因之為他們從未參與或根本不曉得的事情受到處罰，這就不能不破壞各種公正原則，并直接導致了上上下下所有的官吏都掌握了一套弄虛作假的手段，如實匯報情況，還要受到嚴厲懲處，完全顛倒了公正原則，違背了人性。因此，官員們發現不能控制犯罪現象或覺察得太遲的時候，即使本該負責，他也要掩蓋真相，以逃避責任，過分要求人們彼此負責足以說明中國為什么會出現弊政和缺乏公正。我們對此一直都很關注。

每個致力于研究中國問題的人都會發現，中國官僚體制中還存在著另一個弊病，那就是官吏的俸祿不能滿足其基本的生活需求，一點微不足道的津貼也很少能全領，并且還要作為各種罰款交回去，最后，連衙門中日常的開支都不足以維持。做官的，沒有其他門路可走，只好貪污受賄，以擺脫困境。

中國人的責任觀不符合公正原則，已是昭然若揭的事實，也令我們時刻難忘。可是，我們并不能因此忽略了其優點。

在西方，一個人被證明有罪之前，是清白無辜的。你也很難將責任強加到某人頭上。一列滿載旅客的火車，因超重壓斷了橋梁，不可能歸咎于某一個人。一座高樓倒塌了，壓死了很多人，盡管建筑師會受到指責，可他表示當時他已做出最大努力，也沒聽說過他將因此受到處罰。一輛裝甲車翻倒，或者一次軍事行動因準備不足，遭到挫敗，人們也只是指責整個體制，從不針對某個人。中國人在社會公正方面遠遠落后于我們，可是，難道我們就不應該學習他們古老的經驗嗎？它可以便我們每個人都嚴格地為自己的行為負責，從而維持國家的安全。

中國人的責任感對居住在那兒的外國人也十分重要。家里的“僮仆”能隨時取出任一把勺子、叉子，任一件古玩；負責家務的總管，除自己可以欺騙你之外，不允許任何人欺騙你；那些買辦，雖有大權，但又對每一分錢，每一個職員負責——只要我們和中國人打交道，就永遠會遇到這類人。中國客店的老板，很少有善良的，尤其對待外國旅客方面。可是，我們聽說一個老板，為了把一個空沙丁魚罐筒盒還給一個外國旅客，竟追了半英里，他以為那是什么重要的東西。他認為應該那樣做，可不像美國的旅店老板，他們總是冷冷地通知旅客：“本旅館對丟在大廳里的臟靴子，概不負責。”

要是舉薦了某人，就要對其品質、行為和欠債負責，中國人普遍承認這是一種社會義務。外國人要想與中國人共事，就不能忽略這一點，一個中國監工，不論處在哪一位置，都會對每一次錄用或解雇下屬負責，這種情況會對事情的各個環節產生特殊的影響。在與中國人相互交往的漫長歷史中，外國人一直本能地對這一點非常欣賞。傳說從前有一個銀行里的買辦頭，因為“男僮”讓蚊子鉆進了經理的蚊帳，竟將他叫去好好說明原因，如果中國人看到外國人對下屬從不負責，或者不重視“應盡的責任”，肯定認為極不適宜，假如想學會，更要花很長時間。

中國人有許多令人贊嘆的品質，其中有一種是天生的尊重法律。我們不知道，是社會制度造就了這一品質，還是它造就了社會制度。但是，我們知道，中國人無論從先天的本性，還是從后天接受的教育上說，都是一個尊重法律的民族。在討論民族的忍耐美德時，這一點已有所涉及，不過，它與中國人責任感之間的聯系值得特別注意。在中國，每個男人、女人和孩子都對他人負責，這一重要事實要時刻牢記。雖然一個人應該“遠走高飛”，可他逃脫不了自己的責任；即使他逃脫了，他的家庭仍不能逃脫，這是鐵的原則，它雖不能保證使一個人改邪歸正，卻常常可以使他不致于變得十惡不赦。

中國人很怕進官府，打官司。它也能說明中國人對法律的尊重。尤其是文人，他們一被召到官府，就嚇得膽戰心驚，噤若寒蟬，大氣也不敢喘一口，即使事不關己，也會如此。我們就確實知道一個文人，被請去作證時，嚇得像患了癲癇病一樣，渾身抖個不停，最后竟昏倒在地，回家不久，就死了。

中國人對法律的尊重，與共和政體所表現的精神構成了鮮明的對比，這種精神是由歷來就追求共和政體的人們創造的，學院法規、市政法令、國家法律，全都遭到默默地抵制，仿佛追求個人自由不是當代最大的危險，反而是最大的需要。不過，個人或社會完全應該把阻止，揭露虛偽和欺騙當成應盡的職責，并將這一點視為對中國人處理各種社會事務之方式的最大抗議。可是，在基督教國家，無論目不識丁的人，還是舉止文雅，有教養的人都有意無意地輕視法律，仿佛不需要法律維護公眾的利益，并且違抗法律要比遵守法律更能體現法律的尊嚴，這難道很光彩嗎？我們的法律既沒有被取消，也沒有貫徹實施——這種既存在又不存在的反常狀態已使所有的法律都遭到了公眾的蔑視，我們對此能作何辯解？還有，在過去三十年，犯罪率迅猛增長，很多地方，人類生活的神圣感已經顯著淡化，我們對此又作何解釋？對于統計學無能為力的事，做出武斷的評價，完全徒勞無益。我們必須承認，中國的城市生活比美國的城市生活更安全——北京就比紐約安全。我們也相信，在中國旅游比在美國旅游更安全。應該記住，從總體上說，中國人和美國移民一樣無知，懷有偏見。他們也容易受盅惑，聚眾滋事。可是，令人奇怪的是，這種事并不經常發生，對外國人也沒有生命威脅。

中國人相信，人的思想、行為會影響上大的意志。為了給父母治病割自己身上肉的做法，就體現了這一觀念。在討論中同人的孝順性格時，我們已經談過了。我們不準備堅持這種觀念是正確的，可有一些支持這一觀念的事實仍值得一提。中國18個省的面積與地理環境和美國落基山以東的地區很相似。美國氣候變化無常，就像小麥喬里.弗萊明對乘法表的評論：“令人難以忍受。”霍桑評價新英格蘭時，也說那兒“沒有氣候，只有各種人氣的范例”將波士頓、紐約、芝加哥的氣候與中國同一緯度地區的氣候相比，就可以看出，同一些地理書對美國氣候的判斷一樣，中國也有“嚴寒酷暑”，因為在北京所處的緯度上，年溫差大約有100華氏度，這必然會產生各種不同的氣候溫度。

可是，在中國，同樣的冷溫變化并沒有導致像偉大的共和國——美國那樣的變化無常、難以預測，而是寧靜平穩、井然有序，很適宜于她那古老穩定的社會體制。欽定的帝國歷書體現了天、地、人三者的和諧統一。我們不清楚，在遼闊的帝國疆域內，是否各地百姓都同樣信服它。不過，在我們所熟悉的地區，它的確能告訴人們有關天氣的信息。“立春”那天，春天會翩然而至。在不同的幾年中，我們都發現，“立秋”一過，氣候會明顯發生變化，再也沒有了夏天的燥熱。而在西方國家，不期而至的霜降會給人們突然造成危害，一年十二個月它都會不定期地出現。為避免這一點，中國歷書將“二十四節氣”之一定為“霜降”，日期為12月23日。在這一天之前，一點霜花都看不見，而到了這天早晨，地上就會蒙上一層薄薄的白霜。以后的每天早晨也都會有霜，我們觀察這個現象好幾年了，很少看到有提前或推遲三天的。

在中國，這些非生物性東西的出現有規律，合乎理性，生物的出沒更是如此。很多年，我們都注意到，在早春的某一天，窗欞上點綴著幾只蒼蠅，已經有好幾個月沒在那兒看到蒼蠅了。每逢這時，只要打開帝國的歷書，就一定會發現這一天是“涼蜇”。

據說，講英語的民族，人的血管中流淌的是肆無忌憚的血液，它使我們蔑視法律，不服約束。布萊克斯頓說：“我們強健的英國祖先認為，只有在特定的時間，人們才能自由的活動。”不過，也正因為我們勇敢的祖先，個人自由觀念和人權經歷了很長時間才得到確立。但是，雖然這些權利已經很好地確立了，難道我們就不需要多強調個人意志服從公眾利益、不需要維護法律的尊嚴嗎？在這方面，我們不是有很多東西應該向中國人學習嗎？

英文原版：

XXIII.MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPECT FOR LAW

NE of the most distinctive features of Chinese society is that which is epitomised in the word“responsibility,” a word which carries with it a significance and embraces a wealth of meaning to which Western lands are total strangers. In those lands,as we well know,the individual is the unit and the nation is a large collection of individuals.In China the unit of social life is found in the family,the village,or the clan,and these are often convertible terms.Thousands of Chinese villages comprise exclusively persons having the same surname and the same ancestors. The inhabitants have lived in the same spot ever since they began to live at all,and trace an unbroken descent for many hundred years back to the last great political upheaval,such as the overthrow of the Ming Dynasty or its establishment.In such a village there can be no relationship laterally more distant than"cousin,"and every male member of an older generation is either a father,an uncle,or some kind of a“grandfather.”Sometimes eleven generations are represented in the same small hamlet.This does not imply,as might be supposed,extreme old age on the part of any representative of the older generations.The Chinese marry young,marry repeatedly,often late in life,and constantly adopt children.The result is such a tangle among relatives that without special inquiry and minute attention to the particular characters which are employed in writing the names of all who belong to the same“generation,”it is impossible to determine who constitute"the rising generation," and who form the generation which rose long ago. An old man nearly seventy years of age affirms that a young man of thirty is his“grandfather.”All the numerous“cousins”of the same generation are termed"brothers,"and if the perplexed foreigner insists upon accuracy,and inquires whether they are"own brothers,"he will not infrequently be enlightened with the reply that they are“own brother-cousins.”The writer once proposed a question of this sort,and after some little hesitation the person addressed replied,"Why,yes,you mieltru.”lars under the general head of are the social solidarity of the Chinese. It is this solidarity which forms the substratum upon which rests Chinese responsibility. The father is responsible for his son,not merely until the latter attains to"years of discretion,"but as long as life lasts,and the son is responsible for his father's debts.The elder brother has a definite responsibility for the younger brother,and the “head of the family”—usually the oldest representative of the oldest generation—has his responsibility for the whole family or clan.What these responsibilities actually are will depend, however,upon circumstances. Customs vary widely,and the“personal equation”is a most important factor,of which mere theory takes no account.Thus in a large and influential family,embracing many literary men,some of whom are local magnates and perhaps graduates,the“head of the clan”may be an addle-headed old man who can neither read nor write,and who has never in his life been ten mles from home.

The influence of an elder brother over a younger,or indeed of any older member over a younger member of the same family,is of the most direct and positive sort,and is entirely irreconcilable with what we mean by personal liberty.The younger brother is employed as a servant and would like to give up his place,but his elder brother will not let him do so. The younger brother wishes to buy a winter garment,but his elder brother thinks the cost is too great,and will not allow him to incur the expense.Even while these remarks are committed to paper,a case is reported in which a Chinese has a number of rare old coins,which a foreigner desires to purchase. Lest the owner should refuse to sell—as is the Chinese way when one happens to have what another wants—the middleman who made the discovery proposes to the foreigner that he should send to the uncle of the owner of the coins a present of foreign candy and other trifles,by which oblique means such pressure will be brought to bear upon the owner of the coins that he will be obliged to give them up!

There is a burlesque tale which relates that a traveller in a Western land once came upon a very old man with a long white beard,who was crying bitterly.Struck with the singularity of this spectacle,the stranger halted and asked the old man what he was crying about,and was surprised to be told that it was because his father had just whipped him!“Where is your father ?”“Over there,”was the reply.Riding in the direction named,the traveller found a much older man, with a beard much longer and whiter than the other."Is that your son?”asked the traveller.“Yes,it is.”"Did you whip him?”“Yes,I did.”“Why?”“Because he was saucy to his grandfather,and if he does it again I will whip him some more!" Translated into the conditions of Chinese life the burlesque disappears.

Next in order to the responsibility of members of a family for one another comes the mutual responsibility of neighbours for neighbours.Whether these“neighbours”are or are not related makes no difference in their responsibility,which depends solely upon proximity.This responsibility is based upon the theory that virtue and vice are contagious.Good neighbours will make good neighbours,and bad neighbours will make others like them.The mother of Mencius removed three times in order to reach a desirable neighbourhood.To an Occidental,fresh from the republican ideas which dominate the Anglo-Saxons,it seems a matter of little or no consequence who his neighbours are,and if he be a resident of a city he may occupy a dwelling for a year in ignorance even of the name of the family next door.But in China it is otherwise. If a crime takes place the neighbours are held guilty of something analogous to what English law calls“misprision of treason,"in that when they knew of a criminal intention they did not report it.It is vain to reply“I did not know.”You are a"neighbour,"and therefore you must have known.

The proceedings which are taken when the crime of killing a parent has been committed,furnish a striking illustration of the Chinese theory of responsibility.As has been already mentioned in speaking of filial piety,in such instances the criminal is often alleged to be insane,as indeed one must be who voluntarily subjects himself to death by the slicing process when he might escape it by suicide.In a memorial published in the Peking Gazette a few years since,the Governor of one of the central provinces reported in regard to a case of parricide that he had had the houses of all the neighbours pulled down,on the ground of their gross dereliction of duty in not exerting a good moral and reformatory influence over the criminal!Such a proceeding would probably strike an average Chinese as eminently reasonable. In some instances when this crime has occurred in a district,in addition to all the punishments of persons,the city wall itself is pulled down in parts,or modified in shape,a round corner substituted for a square one,or a gate removed to a new situation,or even closed up altogether. If the crime should be repeated several times in the same district,it is said that the whole city would be razed to the ground,and a new one founded elsewhere,but of this we have met with no certain examples.

Next above the neighbours comes the village constable or bailiff,whose functions are of a most miscellaneous nature, sometimes confined to a single village,and sometimes extending to many. In either case he is the medium of communication between the local magistrate and the people,and is always liable to get into trouble from any one of innumerable causes,and may be beaten to a jelly by a captious official for not reporting what he could not possibly have known.

At a vast elevation above the village constables stand the District Magistrates,who,so far as the people are concerned, are by far the most important officers in China.As regards the people below them they are tigers. As regards the officials above them they are mice.A single local magistrate combines functions which ought to be distributed among at least six different officers. A man who is at once the civil and the criminal judge,the sheriff,the coroner,the treasurer,and the tax-commissioner for a large and populous district,cannot attend to the details of all his work.This vicious agglomeration of duties in one office renders it both a physical and a moral impossibility that these duties should be properly discharged.Many magistrates have no interest whatever in the business which they despatch,except to extract from it all that it can be made to yield,and,from the nature of their miscellaneous and incongruous duties,they are largely dependent upon their secretaries and other subordinates.Having so much to do,even with the best intentions these officials cannot fail to make numerous mistakes,and many things must go wrong,for which they will be held responsible.The District Magistrate,like all Chinese officials,is supposed to have an exhaustive acquaintance with everything within his jurisdiction which is an object of knowledge,and an unlimited capacity to prevent what ought to be prevented.To facilitate this knowledge and that of the local constables,each city and village is divided into compound atoms composed of ten families each.

At every door hangs a placard or tablet upon which is inscribed the name of the head of the family,and the number of individuals which it comprises.This system of registration,analogous to the old Saxon tithings and hundreds,makes it easy to fix local responsibility.The moment a suspicious stranger appears in the district comprised in a tithing,he is promptly reported to the head of the tithing by whoever sees him first. By the head of the tithing he is immediately reported to the local constable,and by the local constable to the District Magistrate,who at once takes steps"rigorously to seize and severely to punish."By the same simple process all local crimes,not due to“suspicious-looking strangers”but to permanent residents,are instantly detected before they have hatched into overt acts,and thus the pure morals of the people are preserved from age to age.

It is evident that such regulations as these can be efficient only in a state of society where fixity of residence is the rule. It is also evident that even in China,where the most extreme form of permanence of abode is found,t:e system of tithing is to a large extent a mere legal fiction.Sometimes a city, where no one remembers to have seen them before,suddenly blossoms out with ten-family tablets on every door-post,which indicates the arrival of a District Magistrate who intends to enforce the regulations. In some places these tablets are observable in the winter season only,for this is the time when bad characters are most numerous and most dangerous.But so far as our knowledge extends,the system as such is little more than a theoretical reminiscence,and even when observed it is probably merely a form.Practically,it is not generally observed,and in some provinces at least one may travel for a thousand miles,and for months together,and not find ten-family tablets posted in more than one per cent.of the cities and villages along the route.

It may be mentioned in passing that the Chinese tithing system is intimately connected with the so-called census.If each doorway exhibits an accurate list,constantly corrected, of the number of persons in each family;if each local constable has accurate copies of the lists of all the tithings within his territory;if each District Magistrate has at his disposal accurate summaries of all these items—it is as easy to secure a complete and accurate census of the Empire as to do a long sum in addition,for the whole is equal to the aggregate of all its parts.But these are large ifs,and,as a matter of fact, none of the conditions are realised. The tablets are non-existent,and when the local magistrate is occasionally called upon for the totals which should represent them,neither he nor the numerous constables upon whom he is entirely dependent has the least interest in securing accuracy,which indeed from the nature of the case is difficult.There is no "squeeze"to be got from a census,and for this reason alone a male cancer really accurate Chinese census is a mere figment ofthe imagination.Even in the most enlightened Western lands the notion in China the suspicion which it excites is so strong,that for with uniform faithfulness in all places and at all times,an accurate enumeration would be impossible.

For a local magistrate to be guilty of all kinds of misdemeanours for which he gets into no trouble whatever,or getting into it,escapes scot-free by means of influential friends or by a judicious expenditure of silver,and yet after all to lose his post on account of something that happened within his jurisdiction but which he could not have prevented,is a constant occurrence. possibly How the system of responsibility operates in the domain of all the successive grades of officials,it is unnecessary to illustrate in detail. Multiplied examples are found in almost every copy of the translations from the Peking Gazette.A MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPECT FOR LAW case was mentioned a few years ago,where a soldier on guard had stolen some thirty boxes of bullets placed in his care,and sold them to a tinner,who supposed them to be condemned and surplus stores. The soldier was beaten one hundred blows,and banished to the frontiers of the Empire in penal servitude. A petty officer whose duty it was to inspect the stores was condemned to eighty blows and dismissed from the service,though allowed to commute his punishment for a money payment.The purchasers of the material were considered innocent of any blame,but on general principles were beaten forty blows of the light bamboo.The lieutenant in charge was cashiered in order to be put upon trial for his “c onnivance”in the theft,but he judiciously disappeared. The Board to which the memorial was addressed was requested to determine the penalty to be inflicted upon the general in command,for his share in the matter.Thus each individual is a link in the chain which is followed up to the very end, and no link can escape by pleading ignorance or inability to prevent the crime.

Still more characteristic examples of Chinese responsibility are furnished by the memorials annually appearing in the Peking Gazette, reporting the outbreak of some irrepressible river. In the case of a flood in the Yung-ting River in the province of Chihli during the summer of 1888,the waters came down from the mountains with the velocity of a mill-race.The officials seem to have been promptly on hand, and to have risked their lives in struggling to do what was utterly beyond the powers of man.They were helpless as ants under a rain-spout during a summer torrent.But this did not prevent Li Hung-chang from requesting that they should be immediately stripped of their buttons,or deprived of their rank without being removed from their posts(a favourite mode of expressing Imperial dissatisfaction),and the Governor-General consistently concludes his memorial with the usual request that his ow1 name should be sent to the Board of Punishments for the determination of a penalty to be inflicted upon him for his complicity in the affair.Similar floods have occurred several times since,and upon each occasion a similar memorial has been presented.The Emperor always instructs the proper Board to“take note.”In like manner the failure of the embankments built a few years ago to bring back the Yellow River into its old channel was the signal for the degradation and banishment of a great number of officers,from the Governor of the province of Honan downwards.

The theory of responsibility is carried upwards with unflinching consistency to the Son of Heaven himself.It is no unusual thing for the Emperor in published edicts to confess to Heaven his shortcomings,taking upon himself the blame .of floods,famines,and revolutionary outbreaks,for which he begs Heaven's forgiveness.His responsibility to Heaven is as real as that of his officers to himself. If the Emperor loses his throne,it is because he has already lost“Heaven's decree,"which is presumptively transferred to whoever can hold the Empire.

That aspect of the Chinese doctrine of responsibility which is the most repellent to Western standards of thought,is found in the Oriental practice of extinguishing an entire family for the crime of one of its members. Many instances ofthis sort were reported in connection with the T‘aip'ing rebellion,and more recently the family of the chieftain Yakub Beg,who led the Mohammedan rebellion in Turkestan,furnished another. These atrocities are not,however,limited to cases of overt rebellion.In the year 1873"a Chinese was accused and convicted of having broken open the grave of a relative of the Imperial family,in order to rob the coffin of certain gold, silver,and jade ornaments which had been buried in it.The entire family of the criminal,consisting of four generations, from a man more than ninety years of age to a female infant only a few months old,was exterminated.Thus eleven persons suffered death for the offence of one.And there was no evidence to show that any of them were parties to,or were even aware of,his crime.”

The Chinese theory and practice of responsibility has been/ often cited as one of the causes of the perpetuity of Chinese institutions.It forges around every member of Chinese society iron fetters from which it is impossible that he should break loose.It constantly violates every principle of justice by punishing all grades of officers,as well as private individuals,for occurrences in which they had no part,and of which, as in the example just cited,they were not improbably utterly ignorant.It is the direct cause of deliberate and systematic falsification in all ranks of officials,from the very lowest to the very highest. If an officer is responsible for the existence of crimes which he does not find it easy to control,or of which he is ignorant till it is too late to prevent them,he will inevitably conceal the facts so as to screen himself.This is what constantly happens in all departments of the government,to the complete subversion of justice,for it is not in human nature to give truthful reports of events when,in consequence of such reports,the person who makes them may be severely and unjustly punished.The abuse of this principle alone would suffice to account for a large part of the maladministration of justice in China,to which our attention is so often called.

An additional evil connected with the official system has been noticed by every writer on China.It is the absence of Aaan independent salaries for the officers,whose allowances are so absurdly small that often they would not pay the expenses of the yamen for a day.Besides this,the officials are subject to so many forfeitures that it is said that they rarely draw their nominal allowances at all,as it would be necessary to pay them all back again in fines.The absolute necessity for levying squeezes and taking bribes arises from the fact that there is no other way by which a magistrate can exist

Still,while we are impressed with flagrant violations of justice which the Chinese theory of responsibility involves,it is impossible to be blind to its excellences.

In Western lands,where every one is supposed to be innocent until he is proved to be guilty,it is exceedingly difficult to fix responsibility upon any particular person. A bridge breaks down with a heavy train of cars loaded with passengers,and an investigation fails to find any one in fault.A lofty building falls and crushes scores of people,and while the architect is criticised,he shows that he did the best he could with the means at his disposal,and no one ever hears of his being punished.If an ironclad capsize,or a military campaign is ruined because the proper preparations were not made,or not made in time,eloquent speeches set forth the defects of the system which renders such events possible,but no one is punished.The Chinese are far behind us in their conceptions of public justice,but might we not wisely learn again from them the ancient lesson that every one should be held rigidly responsible for his own acts,in order to the security of the body politic?

The relation of the Chinese theory of responsibility to foreigners in China is one of great importance. The“Boy,” into whose hands everything is committed,and who must produce every spoon,fork,or curio;the steward,who takes general charge of your affairs,suffering no one but himself to cheat you;the compradore,who wields vast powers but who is individually responsible for every piece of property and for every one of hundreds of coolies—these types of character we still have with us,and shall always have,as long as we have anything to do with the Chinese.Innkeepers in China are not noted for flagrant virtues of any kind,especially for consideration towards foreign travellers.Yet we have known of( a Chinese innkeeper who ran half a mile after a foreigner, bringing an empty sardine-tin which he supposed to be a forgotten valuable. He knew that he was responsible,unlike American hotel-keepers,who coolly notify their guests that "the proprietor is not responsible for boots left in the hall to be blacked.”

Responsibility for the character,behaviour,and debts of those whom they recommend or introduce,is a social obligation of recognised force,and one which it behoves foreigners dealing with Chinese to emphasise.The fact that a headman, whatever his position,is“responsible”for any and every act of omission or commission of all his subordinates,exerts over the whole series of links in the chain a peculiar infuence, which has been instinctively appreciated by foreigners in all the long history of their dealings with Chinese.There is a tradition of a head compradore in a bank,who in the“more former days"was called to account because the“Boy"had allowed a mosquito to insinuate itself within the mosquito-net of the bank manager! If the Chinese perceive that a foreigner is ignorant of the responsibility of his employes,or disregards it,it will not take them long to act upon this discovery in extremely disagreeable ways.

One of the many admirable qualities of the Chinese is their eeec innate respect for law.Whether this element in their character is the effect of their institutions,or the cause of them,we do not know. But what we do know is that the Chinese are by nature and by education a law-abiding people.Reference has been already made to this trait in speaking of the national virtue of patience,but it deserves special notice in connection with Chinese theories of mutual responsibility.In China every man,woman,and child is directly responsible to some one else,and of this important fact no one for a moment loses sight.Though one should“go far and fly high”he cannot escape, and this he well knows. Even if he should himself escape,his family cannot escape.The certainty of this does not indeed make a bad man good,but it frequently prevents him from becoming tenfold worse.

It is an illustration of Chinese respect for law,and all that appertains thereto,that it often happens that men of literary rank are so terrified in the presence of a District Magistrate that they dare not open their mouths unless compelled to do so,although the case may not in any way concern themselves. We have indeed known of one instance where a man of this class appeared to be thrown into a condition resembling epilepsy by sheer fright in giving evidence.He was taken home in a fit,and soon after died.

Contrast the Chinese inherent respect for law with the spirit often manifested where republican institutions flourish most,and manifested,it must be said,by those whose antecedents would least lead us to expect it.College laws,municipal ordinances,state and national enactments,are quietly defied,as if the assertion of personal liberty were one of the greatest needs,instead of one of the principal dangers of the time.It is rightly regarded as one of the most serious indictments against the transaction of Chinese public business of all kinds,that every one not only connives at acts of dishonesty which it is his duty to prevent and to expose,but that such is the constitution of public and private society that every one ( must connive at such acts. But is it less disgraceful that in Christian countries men of education and refinement,as well as the uncultivated,quietly ignore or deliberately disregard the laws of the land as if by common consent,and as if it were now a well-ascertained fact that a law is more honoured in the breach than in the observance?How shall we explain or defend the existence upon our statute-books of multitudinous laws which are neither repealed nor enforced—laws which by their anomalous non-existent existence tend to bring all legislation into a common contempt?By what means shall we explain the alarming increase of crime in many Western lands during the last thirty years?How shall we explain that conspicuous indifference to the sacredness of human life which is unquestionably a characteristic of some Western lands?It is vain to dogmatise in regard to matters which from the nature of the case are beyond the reach of statistics.Still we must confess to a decided conviction that human life is safer in a Chinese city than in an American city—safer in Peking noQawm than in New York. We believe it to be safer for a foreigner to traverse the interior of China than for a Chinese to traverse en45 the interior of the United States. It must be remembered that the Chinese as a whole are quite as ignorant as any body of immigrants in the United States,and not less prejudiced. They are,as we constantly see,ideal material for mobs. The wonder is not that such outbreaks take place,but that they have not occurred more frequently,and have not been more fatal to the lives of foreigners.

It is a Chinese tenet that Heaven is influenced by the acts and by the spirit of human beings. Upon this principle depends the efficacy of the self-mutilation on behalf of parents, to which reference was made in speaking of filial piety.That this is a correct theory we are not prepared to maintain,yet certain facts deserve mention which might seem to support it. The geographical situation and extent of the Eighteen Provinces of China bear a marked resemblance to that part of the United States of America east of the Rocky Mountains.The erratic eccentricities of the climate of the United States are, as little Marjorie Fleming remarked of the multiplication table, "more than human nature can bear." It was Hawthorne who observed of New England that it has“no climate,but only samples.”Contrast the weather in Boston,New York, or Chicago with that of places in the same latitude in China. It is not that China is not,as the geographies used to affirm of the United States,"subject to extremes of heat and cold," for in the latitude of Peking the thermometer ranges through about one hundred degrees Fahrenheit,which ought to afford sufficient variety of temperature to any mortal.

But in China these alternations of heat and cold do not follow one another with that reckless and incalculable lawlessness witnessed in the great republic,but with an even and unruffled sequence suited to an ancient and a patriarchal system.The Imperial almanac is the authorised exponent of the threefold harmony subsisting in China between heaven,earth, and man.Whether the Imperial almanac is equally trustworthy in all parts of the Emperor's broad domain we do not know,but in those regions with which we happen to be famil-, iar the almanac is itself a signal-service.At the point marked for the“establishment of spring,”spring appears.In several different years we have remarked that the day on which the "establishment of autumn"fell was distinguished by a marked change in the weather,after which the blistering heats of summer returned no more. Instead of allowing the frost to make irregular and devastating irruptions in every month of the year —as is too often the case in lands where democracy rules— the Chinese calendar fixes one of its four-and-twenty“terms” as“frost-fall.”A few years ago this"term”fell on the 23d of October. Up to that day no lightest frost had been seen. On the morning of that day the ground was covered with white frost,and continued to be so covered every morning thereafter. We have noted these correspondences for some years,and have seldom observed a variation of more than the usual three days of grace.

It is not inanimate nature only which in China is amenable to reason and to law,but animated nature as well. For some years we have noticed that on a particular day in early spring the window-frames were adorned with several flies,where for many months no flies had been seen,and on each occasion we have turned to the Imperial almanac with a confidence justified by the event,and ascertained that this particular day was the one assigned for the“stiring of insects”!

It has been remarked that there is in the blood of the English-speaking race a certain lawlessness,which makes us intolerant of rules and restless under restraints.“Our sturdy English ancestors,"says Blackstone,"held it beneath the condition of a freeman to appear,or to do any other act,at the precise time appointed."But for this trait of our doughty forefathers the doctrine of personal liberty and the rights of man might have waited long for assertion.

But now that these rights are tolerably well established, might we not judiciously lay somewhat more emphasis upon the importance of subordinating the individual will to the public good,and upon the majesty of law?And in these directions have we not something to learn from the Chinese?