Altogether, the Chinese woman has by no means such a bad time as is
generally supposed to be the case. Even in the eye of the law, she has
this advantage over a man, that she cannot be imprisoned except for high
treason and adultery, and is to all intents and purposes exempt from the
punishment of the bamboo. Included in this exemption are the aged and
the young, the sick, the hungry and naked, and those who have already
suffered violence, as in a brawl. Further, in a well-known handbook,
magistrates are advised to postpone, in certain circumstances, the
infliction of corporal punishment; as for instance, when either the
prisoner or they themselves may be under the influence of excitement,
anger or drink.

The bamboo is the only instrument with which physical punishment may
legally be inflicted; and its infliction on a prisoner or recalcitrant
witness, in order to extort evidence, constitutes what has long been
dignified as "torture;" but even that is now, under a changing system,
about to disappear. This must not be taken to mean that torture, in our
sense of the term, has never been applied in China. The real facts
of the case are these. Torture, except as already described, being
constitutionally illegal, no magistrate would venture to resort to it
if there were any chance of his successful impeachment before the higher
authorities, upon which he would be cashiered and his official career
brought abruptly to an end. Torture, therefore, would have no
terrors for the ordinary citizen of good repute and with a backing of
substantial friends; but for the outcast, the rebel, the highway robber
(against whom every man's hand would be), the disreputable native of a
distant province, and also for the outer barbarian (e.g. the captives at
the Summer Palace in 1860), another tale must be told. No consequences,
except perhaps promotion, would follow from too rigorous treatment in