What sort of human beings were the guilty men of Pulau Senang? ·
Heng Lian Choon, 30-year-old bachelor. He had four years of English education. He was a vegetable seller. He was found guilty of rioting. · Toh Kok Peng, 24-year-old bachelor bachelor and vegetable farmer. He had five years of Chinese education. His father was dead. No previous conviction. Guilty of murder. · Ang Teck Kee, 24-year-old bachelor. He had worked in a pineapple factory, studied up to Standard Six. Guilty of rioting. · Cheong Kim Seng, 23 years old. Unmarried. Chinese-educated. Worked as a goldsmith, then in a foundry. Guilty of rioting. · Yong Ah Chew, 25-year-old bachelor. Worked in a weaving factory, then in printing works. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting. · Choy Peng Kwong, 23-year-old bachelor. Worked as a labourer for the Singapore Harbour Board. · Teng Ah Kow, 25-year-old bachelor. Father dead, mother without means of support. Worked at a food stall, later in a laundry. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting. ·
Lim Heng Soon, 24-year-old bachelor with four years of Chinese education. Helped parents in farm work. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting. · Lim Thiam Huat, 19 years old. Unmarried, orphan. Five years of Chinese education. A mechanic. Guilty of rioting. · Chin Kiong, 24 years old. Four years of Chinese education. Delivery boy. Father a clerk. Mother in mental home. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. ·
Peh Guan Hock, 28 years old bachelor. Unmarried. Chinese-educated. Cement worker. Father dead. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Chia Geok Chee, 21-year-old bachelor with widowed mother. Left school at seventeen. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Yeo Yew Boon, 22-year-old bachelor. Chinese educated. No previous convictions. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Teng Eng Tay, 23-year-old bachelor. Five years’ English education. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Ong Aik Kwong, 22-year-old bachelor. Three years’ Chinese education. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. Odd-job labourer. No previous conviction. · Lim Teck San, 23-year-old bachelor. Two years’ Chinese education. Mee (noodles) salesman. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Sia Ah Kow, 22 years old. Father dead. Two and a half years of Chinese education. Odd-job labourer. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Chew Yam Meng. 24 years old. Unmarried. Steel worker. Mother very old. Father unable to work. Two years’ Chinese education. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. ·
Teo Lian Choon, 27-year-old bachelor. Father dead. Six years’ Chinese education. Factory worker. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Tan Chin, 23-year-old bachelor. Father dead. Born in China, came to Singapore at the age of 12. Paint sprayer. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Heng Boon Leng, 21 years old. Unmarried. Parents dead. Grandmother in hospital. Six years English education, odd-job man. No previous conviction. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Neo Kim Leong, 30 years old, married with three daughters. No education. Helped grandmother on poultry farm. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Teo Han Teck, 23-year-old seaman. Single. Orphan. Guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Tan Yim Chwee, 20 years old. Single. Father died when he was seven. Mother mad. Left school when he was 10. Guilty of murder. · Teo Han Teck, 23 years old, a seaman, was guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. ·
Aziz bin Salim, 23 years old, was English-educated. His father, until his death 10 years earlier, had been a cinema manager. Aziz’s relatives were all in good positions. Aziz was educated up to Senior Cambridge level. He was guilty of rioting with deadly weapons. · Chua Hai Imm was a cobbler. His mother was a schizophrenic. He was guilty of rioting with deadly weapons.
Why Did The Experiment Fail?
Why did this magnificent experiment fail? Is there a simple explanation? Here was a thoughtful, sincere, well-planned attempt to help unfortunates, a scheme to help young men from broken homes, most of them, persons without the comfort, the restraining influence, of family life, to turn away from crime and to re-enter decent society. Were the ‘scum of Singapore’, as Major James contemptuously described them, utterly beyond help? Were they, for their own reasons, character flaws perhaps, outside the scope of rescue? Could they never be brought back into normal society? Must they forever remain outside? Was the destruction of Pulau Senang evidence of a common intent to demonstrate to the authorities the gangsters’ rejection of this attempt to help them? Or was it, as defence counsel suggested, a terrible example of what could happen when men, justifiably or otherwise, feel that they have been goaded too far? Had they reached the limit of human tolerance? Some witnesses said that the gangsters had been disgusted with allegations of corruption among officials on the island. But this had not been proven, and in any case, corruption, even if true, could hardly be considered a primary reason for gangsters to riot.
Might it have been a contributory factor? After all, it is said that even gangsters expect a certain code to be observed. Is there honour among gangsters as there is supposed to be among thieves?
Sociologists and others have written a great deal about mob behaviour, but many important questions still remain unanswered. For example, it is generally accepted that mob hysteria is usually without logic, yet some mob activity clearly has definite purpose, as apparently the riot on Pulau Senang had a common purpose. This was to destroy all that had been built on the island, and to kill Dutton and others. Why did they want to do this? That is the question which has no satisfactory answer. Some mob activity seems to be without common purpose, except to destroy. What, for instance, except a senseless urgent desire to destroy, transforms an excited group of football fans into a howling mob of wanton destroyers determined to smash everything useful or beautiful within reach-to break chairs, mutilate mirrors, trample on paintings, tear material, rip out telephones, overturn cars, kick in doors, set fire to homes… to scream and destroy? What underlying motive releases this mad, dark passion, this frantic wish to destroy, which the experts tell us, is hidden somewhere deep inside every human being? What is this urge which, suddenly released, swiftly changes even normal decent people into raging beasts capable of the most hideous of crimes? Within seconds an ordinary person can become a rioter, a hooligan, a murderous barbarian. In a flash the stark truth is revealed that nothing but a thin veneer separates civilized man from raging beast.
Terrible tempers can be quickly aroused. Fortunately they cannot be long-sustained. At Pulau Senang, less than an hour was needed to drain all the savagery from the parang — wielding gangsters. By then they had achieved their common purpose. Dutton was dead. Pulau Senang was in ruins. Emotionally exhausted, drained of fury, the mobsters waited docilely for the retribution which they must have known would inevitably follow. Meekly, they marched away under armed escort to meet their fate, leaving behind the unanswered question: why did they want to destroy Pulau Senang?
Major James held the view that the riot was organized so that the detainees could go free. First they would have to destroy the settlement. Dutton had to be killed because he was the hated symbol of government and also because he was the only man they knew to be capable of rebuilding Pulau Senang. With Dutton dead and the place destroyed, everyone on the island would have to be released. There was nowhere to put them. All the jails in Singapore were crammed full. They would have to be freed.