User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
hulu_1920-an

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
hulu_1920-an [2025/11/30 07:40] – [1928-07-14: Agamawan Dakwa Difitnah] sazlihulu_1920-an [2026/01/13 16:20] (kini) – [1929-09-02: Kes Ugut di Jenderam Estate] sazli
Line 4: Line 4:
  
   * [[jenderam_hulu|Kampung Jenderam Hulu (1870-an)]]   * [[jenderam_hulu|Kampung Jenderam Hulu (1870-an)]]
 +  * [[hulu_1910-an|Kampung Jenderam Hulu: 1910-an]]
 +
 +**SAMBUNGAN DARI: [[hulu_1910-an|Kampung Jenderam Hulu: 1910-an]]**.
  
 ====== Kronologi ====== ====== Kronologi ======
Line 93: Line 96:
 religious instruction to the people of Sungei Jendram, alleges that on December 15th., 1927, the defendants and others presented a petition to the Chief Kathi of the State of Selangor, which set out inter alia: "In the village of Sungei Jendram at the present time have sprung up the doctrines of 'Quam Mudå,' who are otherwise called the sect of 'Wahabis.' Their teacher who has taught those doctrines is Tuan Guru Haji Jalaluddin, together with all his friends." It was also asserted that the plaintiff prayed without uttering the "Usalli," and prohibited teaching of Talqueen to the dead and the praising of the Sultan during the sermon of the Friday prayers - meaning therefore that he was preaching unorthodox and heretical doctrines and imparting teaching calculated to foster feelings of disloyalty to the Sultan. An inquiry into the complaint was held by the Chief Kathi of Selangor, and after evidence had been recorded the complaint against the plaintiff was dismissed. As a consequence of the libellous statements, the plaintiff declares that he has been virtually excommunicated and has lost many pupils. The defence pleads denial, truth and justification, and privilege."// (The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser (1884-1942), 14 July 1928, Page 12: {{ :akhbar:singfreepressb19280714-1-2-76.pdf ||}}[[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/singfreepressb19280714-1.2.76|"MALAY LIBEL ACTION"]]). religious instruction to the people of Sungei Jendram, alleges that on December 15th., 1927, the defendants and others presented a petition to the Chief Kathi of the State of Selangor, which set out inter alia: "In the village of Sungei Jendram at the present time have sprung up the doctrines of 'Quam Mudå,' who are otherwise called the sect of 'Wahabis.' Their teacher who has taught those doctrines is Tuan Guru Haji Jalaluddin, together with all his friends." It was also asserted that the plaintiff prayed without uttering the "Usalli," and prohibited teaching of Talqueen to the dead and the praising of the Sultan during the sermon of the Friday prayers - meaning therefore that he was preaching unorthodox and heretical doctrines and imparting teaching calculated to foster feelings of disloyalty to the Sultan. An inquiry into the complaint was held by the Chief Kathi of Selangor, and after evidence had been recorded the complaint against the plaintiff was dismissed. As a consequence of the libellous statements, the plaintiff declares that he has been virtually excommunicated and has lost many pupils. The defence pleads denial, truth and justification, and privilege."// (The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser (1884-1942), 14 July 1928, Page 12: {{ :akhbar:singfreepressb19280714-1-2-76.pdf ||}}[[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/singfreepressb19280714-1.2.76|"MALAY LIBEL ACTION"]]).
  
-//"Guru Claims Damages. Allegations of Heresy and Unorthodoxy. \\+//"**Guru Claims Damages. Allegations of Heresy and Unorthodoxy.** \\
 \\ \\
 The Kuala Lumpur Supreme Court was packed with Malays from all parts of the State on Wednesday, when an action was begun before the Chief Justice (Sir Henry Gompertz) in which Haji Jalaluddin Bin Ismail, a religious instructor, of Jendram, Uln Langat, brought an action against seven other Malays - Buyong alias Nicham, Haji Siam alias Haji Abdullah, Sura, Sarin, Kasat, Kahan and Mandok - for publishing a libel against him, says the Malay Mail. He claimed $3,250 as damages, and prayed for an injunction against the defendants restraining them from publishing similar libellous statements to that complained of. Mr. M. N. Maliik appeared for the plaintiff  The Kuala Lumpur Supreme Court was packed with Malays from all parts of the State on Wednesday, when an action was begun before the Chief Justice (Sir Henry Gompertz) in which Haji Jalaluddin Bin Ismail, a religious instructor, of Jendram, Uln Langat, brought an action against seven other Malays - Buyong alias Nicham, Haji Siam alias Haji Abdullah, Sura, Sarin, Kasat, Kahan and Mandok - for publishing a libel against him, says the Malay Mail. He claimed $3,250 as damages, and prayed for an injunction against the defendants restraining them from publishing similar libellous statements to that complained of. Mr. M. N. Maliik appeared for the plaintiff 
Line 101: Line 104:
 feelings of disloyalty to the Sultan. An inquiry into the complaint was held by the Chief Kathi of Selangor, and after evidence had been recorded the complaint against the plaintiff was dismissed. As a consequence of the libellous statements, the plaintiff declares that he has been virtually excommunicated and has lost many pupils. The defence pleads denial, truth and justification, and privilege. \\ feelings of disloyalty to the Sultan. An inquiry into the complaint was held by the Chief Kathi of Selangor, and after evidence had been recorded the complaint against the plaintiff was dismissed. As a consequence of the libellous statements, the plaintiff declares that he has been virtually excommunicated and has lost many pupils. The defence pleads denial, truth and justification, and privilege. \\
 \\ \\
-Chief Kathi's Evidence. \\+**Chief Kathi's Evidence.** \\
 \\ \\
 The first witness called was the Chief Kathi of Selangor, who said that the plaintiff was appointed by him as a religious teacher at Sungei Jendram about five years ago. The witness had the power to appoint from H.H. the Sultan. The first occasion on which he had a doubt as to whether the plaintiff was discharging his duties satisfactorily was on his receiving the petition in December, 1927, and in February he held an inquiry. Twenty-three witnesses were examined. The decision recorded was that there was insufficient evidence to convict the plaintiff and revoke his authority as a teacher. Mr. Ivens pointed out that H.H. the Sultan had appointed a committee to investigate the case, and that as a result the plaintiff was dismissed. In reply to his Lordship, the witness stated that H.H. the Sultan appointed the Raja Muda, the late Dato Stia di Raja, the Raja Haji Abdullah and himself as the committee. In reply to Mr. Mallik the witness said that the decision was that the plaintiff should permitted to continue in his capacity as a teacher for six months. Further evidence was given regarding the difference between Sunni Mohammedans and Wahabis. A Sunni Mohammedan who acted like a "Wahabi,"  The first witness called was the Chief Kathi of Selangor, who said that the plaintiff was appointed by him as a religious teacher at Sungei Jendram about five years ago. The witness had the power to appoint from H.H. the Sultan. The first occasion on which he had a doubt as to whether the plaintiff was discharging his duties satisfactorily was on his receiving the petition in December, 1927, and in February he held an inquiry. Twenty-three witnesses were examined. The decision recorded was that there was insufficient evidence to convict the plaintiff and revoke his authority as a teacher. Mr. Ivens pointed out that H.H. the Sultan had appointed a committee to investigate the case, and that as a result the plaintiff was dismissed. In reply to his Lordship, the witness stated that H.H. the Sultan appointed the Raja Muda, the late Dato Stia di Raja, the Raja Haji Abdullah and himself as the committee. In reply to Mr. Mallik the witness said that the decision was that the plaintiff should permitted to continue in his capacity as a teacher for six months. Further evidence was given regarding the difference between Sunni Mohammedans and Wahabis. A Sunni Mohammedan who acted like a "Wahabi," 
 the witness said, would be acting contrary to the religious rules in the country. It would be objectionable for a man to be termed a 'Wahabi' if he belonged to the Sunni sect. Yesterday morning the plaintiff was called and was subjected to examination by Mr. Mallik. The hearing is proceeding."// the witness said, would be acting contrary to the religious rules in the country. It would be objectionable for a man to be termed a 'Wahabi' if he belonged to the Sunni sect. Yesterday morning the plaintiff was called and was subjected to examination by Mr. Mallik. The hearing is proceeding."//
  
-(Sumber: Pinang Gazette and Straits Chronicle, 12 July 1928, Page 7: [[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/pinangazette19280712-1.2.35|"MALAY LIBEL ACTION"]]).+(Sumber: Pinang Gazette and Straits Chronicle, 12 July 1928, Page 7: {{ :akhbar:pinangazette19280712-1-2-35.pdf ||}}[[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/pinangazette19280712-1.2.35|"MALAY LIBEL ACTION"]]).
  
-//"Judgment Given for the Defendants. ... At the Supreme Court this morning the Chief Justice gave judgment in the famous Guru libel case in which Haji Jalaluddin Ismail (a religious teacher of Jendram, Ulu Langat) sued seven other Malays for publishing an alleged libel against him, claiming $3,200 damages, and prayed for an injunction rest(r)aining the defendants from publishing similar libellous statements. His Lordship (Mr. Justice Gomperty) in the course of a lengthy judgment found for the defendants. The question of costs is to be argued in chambers to-morrow."// (Malaya Tribune, 1 October 1928, Page 8: [[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/maltribune19281001-1.2.37|"GURU LIBEL CASE"]]).+//"Judgment Given for the Defendants. ... At the Supreme Court this morning the Chief Justice gave judgment in the famous Guru libel case in which Haji Jalaluddin Ismail (a religious teacher of Jendram, Ulu Langat) sued seven other Malays for publishing an alleged libel against him, claiming $3,200 damages, and prayed for an injunction rest(r)aining the defendants from publishing similar libellous statements. His Lordship (Mr. Justice Gomperty) in the course of a lengthy judgment found for the defendants. The question of costs is to be argued in chambers to-morrow."// (Malaya Tribune, 1 October 1928, Page 8: {{ :akhbar:maltribune19281001-1-2-37.pdf ||}}[[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/maltribune19281001-1.2.37|"GURU LIBEL CASE"]]).
  
 ===== 1929-09-02: Kes Ugut di Jenderam Estate ===== ===== 1929-09-02: Kes Ugut di Jenderam Estate =====
  
 //"Four Chinese coolies, Cheng Kei, Ong Yew, Chang Kai and Mook Ying were produced by the O.C.P.D., Mantin (Che Abdul Jalil) before the Magistrate on Thursday on a charge that they at Jenderam Estate, Nilai, committed criminal intimidation by threatening to do harm to the Chinese coolies on Jenderam Estate. The O.C.P.D. in  //"Four Chinese coolies, Cheng Kei, Ong Yew, Chang Kai and Mook Ying were produced by the O.C.P.D., Mantin (Che Abdul Jalil) before the Magistrate on Thursday on a charge that they at Jenderam Estate, Nilai, committed criminal intimidation by threatening to do harm to the Chinese coolies on Jenderam Estate. The O.C.P.D. in 
-outlining the case said that the accused were coolies working in Jenderam Estate. They said that the kapala of that estate had not treated them fairly. They instigated the other coolies to stop work. The hearing has been postponed to Wednesday. Bail of $50 each was allowed. "// (Malacca Guardian, 2 September 1929, Page 5: [[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/malaccaguardian19290902-1.2.11.12|"SEREMBAN COURT"]]).+outlining the case said that the accused were coolies working in Jenderam Estate. They said that the kapala of that estate had not treated them fairly. They instigated the other coolies to stop work. The hearing has been postponed to Wednesday. Bail of $50 each was allowed. "// (Malacca Guardian, 2 September 1929, Page 5: {{ :akhbar:malaccaguardian19290902-1-2-11-12.pdf ||}}[[https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/malaccaguardian19290902-1.2.11.12|"SEREMBAN COURT"]]).
  
-1929-12-23: APPLICATION BY KALAM BIN AHMAD NATHIR MAJID AT JALAN BAHRU, JENDRAM, FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE OF $400/- TO ENABLE HIM TO GO TO MECCA  +**BERSAMBUNG: [[hulu_1930-an|Kampung Jenderam Hulu: 1930-an]]**.
-https://ofa.arkib.gov.my/ofa/group/asset/321112+
  
hulu_1920-an.1764459646.txt.gz · Last modified: by sazli