径启者：查潮州八邑会馆，乃本邦潮人之最高机关，而义安公司，则为我潮之慈善公益枢纽。此二团体虽名称不同，章程各异，然究其渊源，则相生相成，浑然一体，互惠互助，水乳交融。迩年以来，主其事者，多系后起俊秀，对于彼此之关系，未尽明了，假以时日，诚恐隔阂渐生，鸿沟寖现，终非我潮之福，抑亦有负先贤之殷望也。    

    鄙人不敏，于潮州八邑会馆及义安公司之创立，均曾忝附骥尾，追随诸乡贤，参与其事，而数十年来，复连续担任此二机构之职员，故对其经过情形，以及具有密切关系之原委，知之颇详，兹特为董事诸君一陈之： 

      义安公司之前身为义安郡，创设迄今，已达多年。当时系由本邦潮籍巨商振兴号佘有进先生，联合潮州十二姓人士所组织，并共同捐资，购买东陵泰山亭等处山丘园地，以为同乡不幸在此间身故者安葬之所，同时兼理粤海清庙义安郡每年酬神事务，成立伊始，由佘有进先生自任总理，而十二姓则每姓由其指派一人为佐理，即后人称为十三头家是也。洎佘有进先生逝世后，总理一职，由其哲嗣佘石城、佘连城，及其孙佘应忠诸先生相继传袭；而其它所谓十二姓头家者，则始终由佘氏指派，并非公开推选。 

    一九二七年，澄邑革命巨子林义顺先生，以佘家维护义安公司，虽厥功甚伟，惟对此潮州公共机关之总理世袭相传及指派各姓佐理等办法，深为不满。恒在醉花林俱乐部与鄙人及诸友谈论此事，并极力主张促其改善，以适应现代环境及需要。乃征得李伟南、沈霭塘、郭廷通、林雨岩、陈源泉、吴扬屏、蓝伟烈、刘正兴、周瑞麟、陈立植、陈秋槎及鄙人与舍侄书典等十四人同意，联名致函佘应忠先生，请其将义安公司资产等事权，交由潮州同乡公开推选负有声望之人士，共同管理，并将该函刊诸报端。同时复倡组潮州八邑会馆以增强进行交涉之力量。嗣因未获佘应忠先生等接诺，乃聘律师寄发哀的美敦书，预备与之涉讼；更由十一人共捐七千九百元作为讼费，声明此事苟能和平解决，则该款拨充为潮州八邑会馆基金。 

    正值双方剑拔弩张之际，华民政务司兀民氏，认为潮人素极和睦，凡事尽可磋商，何必相见法庭。遂自告奋勇，愿作鲁仲连，调停其事，即邀双方代表，同到华民政务司署议事厅会商，义安公司旧管理人方面，由佘应忠先生与王邦杰、刘炳先、张恭铭、沈教授、陈绵隆诸先生代表出席，潮州八邑同乡方面，则公推林义顺、李伟南、陈源泉、林雨岩、陈秋槎诸先生及鄙人等为代表，兀民氏于会间盛意拳拳，措词恺切，力劝双方应宜和解，不可各走极端，庶免有损潮人荣誉。各代表咸受感动，相继发言解释，谓彼此均系多年好友，并无私怨及权利之争，所有异议者，仅为义安公司之组织及管理方法而已，几经讨论后，佘应忠先生等同意辞职，并将资产交出，移归公开推选之新职员接理，除原有酬神及管理庙宇坟山两宗旨外，加入兼办潮州八邑人士公益及慈善教育等项，以非营业公司性质，请施申里礼律师订立完善之章程，其中规定潮州八邑会馆每届正副总理三名为义安公司当然董事，（潮州八邑会馆章程，亦规定聘请义安公司总理为当然董事）俾此后两机构永久获得联络，并呈交立法议院三读通过，即为现行之法定章程。而潮州八邑会馆向政府申请豁免注册，亦获批准，于是两机构相继依章推选董事及职员，订期就职。此后潮人对外各事，皆由潮州八邑会馆出面负责，至于有关同乡公益慈善教育等项，则多由义安公司办理，双方充满融洽愉快之气氛。凡属潮人，莫不兴高采烈，共申祝贺之忱。 

    综观以上所述，足见义安公司所有事务，能获今日之公开措理，可谓悉赖潮州八邑会馆之力，而倡办潮州八邑会馆，固冀联络乡谊，但其最主要之动机，则为争取义安公司之公开管理，且两机构历届所选出之职员，又多数兼任双方董事，因此表面上其名称虽异，实际上亲如兄弟，并无彼此之分。进一步言之，当年若非格于法律问题，两机构必已实行合并矣。由于双方具有如斯特别渊源，其关系至为密切，兼之义安公司拥有公产及入息，而潮州八邑会馆因无充裕基金，及征收会员年捐，故潮州八邑会馆历年经费不敷，均请义安公司拨助，三十余年来，咸如是办理，已成惯例。义安公司董事部既深明大体，认为义不容辞，从无异言；而潮州八邑会馆董事部，亦丝毫未有耻于依赖义安公司之感觉。盖以潮人之公共资产，用于潮人之公共机构，办理有关潮人之事业，固名正言顺，理所当然也。又如近年竣工之潮州大厦，除拆卸端蒙学校之原址外，潮州八邑会馆亦毅然将所购之隔邻屋宇门牌七十三，七十五，八十三，八十五，八十五A至八十五I及八十七号等间，无条件献交由义安公司主持建筑，此种不分彼此，和衷共济之优良措施，不但深可赞扬，且正系先贤创办两机构时所殷殷之期望，现虽环境略有变迁，益宜发扬光大，为本邦潮人历史，写下更辉煌灿烂之一页。

     潮州八邑会馆之成立与义安公司获得公开管理，倏逾三十载，当年苦心孤诣，牺牲宝贵时间及精神之乡贤，大多数已归道山。鄙人则因足疾，不良于行，久未与诸君接触，故不惮词费，略为述明，俾两机构董事诸君，获悉其梗概，仰体先贤意旨，精诚团结，齐心协力，共谋潮人福利事业之进展，是所盼幸。此致 

董事先生 

杨缵文谨启 

一九六五年十月廿八日

Letter from Mr Yeo Chan Boon to all directors of

 Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and Ngee Ann Kongsi

Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan is the apex organization of the Teochew community in Singapore while the Ngee Ann Kongsi is a charitable and social institution for the Teochews. Although both the organizations are named differently and each has its own by-laws or governing constitutions, they share the common root, origin and objectives to help each other under one umbrella of the Teochew community.

In view of the fact that more and more capable younger people have been elected to serve on the Committee of Management for both the organizations in recent time, I feel obliged to place on record the inter-relationship between the two bodies, lest they would be forgotten due to lapse of time. This would be in the interest of the Teochew community and should also be the objectives in setting up both the organizations by our forefathers.

Although I am not sagacious, I have, however, been actively involved in the setting up of both the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and Ngee Ann Kongsi, together with other prominent leaders in the Teochew community. I have also been serving on the Committee of Management of both the bodies over a few decades. I, therefore, have insight knowledge on how the two organizations are so closely knitted. I wish to place on record my understanding for information of all concerned.

Ngee Ann Kongsi was formerly known as Ngee Ann County. It was formed many years ago by Mr. Seah Eu Chin, a very prominent Teochew businessman of Chop Chin Heng and 12 other prominent members representing the 12 Sehnhs (surnames) of the Teochew community. They donated funds to purchase land in Orchard Road (Tanglin) for burial grounds for the Teochews. The Kongsi also looked after the annual worshipping affairs of the Hock Hai Cheng Bio. Since its inception, Mr. Seah Eu Chin has become the Kongsi’s president, assisted by 12 others prominent Teochews, each nominated by the 12 surname groups of the Teochew community (known later as the 13 Kowtays – bosses). After the demise of Mr. Seah Eu Chin, his sons, Seah Chiok Siah, Seah Lian Siah, and grandson, Seah Eng Tong succeeded as president of the Kongsi. The representatives from the 12 surnames of the Teochew Clans were also nominated by the Seah’s family, not openly elected.

In 1927, Mr. Lim Nee Soon, a revolutionist from the Theng Hai District was highly dissatisfied with the practice of dominating the presidency of the Kongsi and nomination of the 12 representatives from the Teochew community by the Seah’s family although Mr Lim had expressed his appreciation for the good work done by the Seah family. He convened a meeting at the Chui Huay Lim Club at which a few of his friends and I were present to discuss the issues. He strongly felt that the system of running the Kongsi must be improved in meeting the current requirements. His proposal was supported by Mr. Lee Wee Nam, Sim Ai Tng, Quek Theng Thong, Lim Woo Ngam, Tan Guan Chua, Goh Yeng Pheng, Nah Wee Liat, Low Chia Heng, Chew Swee Ling, Tan Lip Sek, Tan Chew Char, myself and my nephew Cher Tian (14 persons altogether). A letter signed by all the supporters was sent to Mr Seah Eng Tong informing him that the assets of the Ngee Ann Kongsi should be jointly managed by reputable Teochews to be elected openly by the Teochew community. A copy of the letter was published in the newspaper. At the same time, efforts were stepped up to activate the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan to put more pressure to the Seah’s family.

Failing in obtaining the consent from Mr. Seah Eng Tong, legal action was contemplated against the Seah’s family. They have raised an aggregate fund of $87,900 from 11 persons to meet the legal costs. This fund would be given to Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan as its foundation fund, in the event that the issue is settled out of court.

At the crucial time, Mr. Wu from the Chinese Secretariat volunteered to become the mediator. He felt that the Teochews were friendly people. All differences could be settled amicably out of court. He asked both the parties to send their representatives to attend a meeting at the Chinese Secretariat. Ngee Kongsi was represented by Seah Eng Tong, Heng Peng Keat, Low Peng Soy, Teo Keong Meng, Professor Sim and Tan Kim Leng while Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan was represented by Lim Nee Soon, Lee Wee Nam, Tan Guan Chua, Lim Woo Ngam, Tan Chew Char and I. Mr Wu tactfully persuaded both parties to exercise constraint and to refrain from any anguish act which might damage the image of the Teochew community. Convinced by Mr. Wu, all the representatives resorted to merely explaining their views on the issues. They indicated that they have been good friends for many years. They have no grudge against each other, nor any conflict of interests. They were only concerned about the interest and management of the Kongsi. After deliberations, Mr. Seah Eng Tong and his associates agreed to step down from the Kongsi and agreed to deliver the assets involved for management by the openly elected new Committee of Management, excluding the original objectives of worshipping affairs and management of the burial grounds.

Legal firm would be invited to draft the constitutions for administration, organization, charitable, educational and other businesses of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan which would be operated as a non-profit organization. It was also agreed that the president and two vice presidents totaling 3 persons from the Poit Ip Huay Kuan would automatically become the ex-officio directors of Ngee Ann Kongsi after each election. The constitutions of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan would also stipulate that it would invite the president of Ngee Ann Kongsi to become its ex-officio director. This would enable both the organizations to maintain close contact and co-operation. The constitutions for both the organizations would be submitted to parliament for enactment after three readings. They would become their prevailing constitutions. The application by the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan to waive its registration had also been approved by the authority.

Henceforth, the directors of both the organizations would be elected based on their respective constitutions. They would be accountable for the duties and responsibilities entrusted to them.

The Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan would be responsible for all external affairs, while all charitable, educational and all other related matters would be carried out by the Ngee Ann Kongsi. They should work in harmony and create a happy and conducive working environment. All Teochews should be proud of such arrangements and have good cause for celebrations.

From what I have narrated above, it is apparent that Ngee Ann Kongsi has been entrusted to manage all the assets openly, due largely to the efforts of the Poit Ip Huay Kuan. On the other hand, the accomplishment of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan in promoting cordial relationship amongst the Teochews, has been attributed largely to the fact that Ngee Ann Kongsi has been entrusted with the responsibilities in managing its assets in an open concept. Moreover, many of the directors in Ngee Ann Kongsi are concurrently serving as directors of the Poit Ip Huay Kuan and vice-versa. In fact, the two organizations although named differently, are as cordial as brothers. There is no barrier in the two organizations. They could have merged into a single organization, if not for the technical legality. Although they operate as separate legal entities, they remain closely related because of the common root. Ngee Ann Kongsi has income derived from its assets while Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kwan has always been short of funds. Its main source of income is the members' subscriptions and has to depend on Ngee Ann Kongsi for funding any shortage. This has been the case over the last 30 years. Realising the situation the directors of Ngee Ann Kongsi felt obliged to provide the require funds for the Huay Kuan where necessary. The directors of the Huay Kuan did not feel shy in asking the Ngee Ann Kongsi for any financial assistance in carrying out its activities. The general consensus was that it would be logical for Ngee Ann Kongsi to utilize its funds for the benefits of the Teochew community. As a gesture of co-operation, Poit Ip Huay Kwan had readily surrendered recently all its properties at nos. 73, 75, 83, 85,85A to 85I and 87, Tank Road for joint development of the present Teochew Building which also occupied the site of the Tuan Mong School. The project was developed by Ngee Ann Kongsi. The co-operation of the two organizations illustrated a traditional good value in helping each other, where necessary. Such traditional value was most probably what our forefathers were expecting us to promote when they founded the two organizations. We should endeavor to maintain and promote the good value so as to enable the Teochews in Singapore to write a more colourful page in the history of Singapore.

Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kwan has been established and Ngee Ann Kongsi has managed the assets of the Teochew community on an open basis for more than 30 years. Most of the leaders who had contributed significantly have passed away. I have difficulty in walking because of leg problems. Consequently, I have lost touch with my friends in both the organizations for sometime. However, I earnestly hope the directors in both the organizations will continue to preserve the spirit of unity, co-operation, assistance and welfare development for the mutual benefit for the Teochew community in Singapore.

Best regards,

To    : All Directors

From: Yeo Chan Boon

           28 October 1965