[
    {
        "id": 206537,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1972",
        "page_number": 85,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n79\n\nrelationships between ruler and ruled, proper behaviour according to status. Lockhart was a scholar-administrator in the Confucian sense.\n\nThe profession of Colonial Civil Servant is coming to an end with the dissolution of the British empire. Lockhart, then, is a representative of a stage in the evolution of English society — the stage of imperial expansion that is now over and can never return. In contemporary Hong Kong the European official is not likely to be a Chinese scholar, for the system of language training that produced a Lockhart has been radically curtailed?. Yet if an official is of a scholarly turn of mind, he is now more likely to be found reading history, politics or economics. The scholar-administrator of Lockhart's type is not to be found. He has become a specialist or bureaucrat. There is no doubt that Lockhart would have been saddened by this consummation.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 Sir William des Voeux, My Colonial Service..... London, 1903, vol. 2, p. 211.\n\n2 George Watson's College was founded by George Watson, first accountant of the Bank of Scotland, who died in 1723. It became a day school in 1878. The Senior School has now about 890 boys.\n\n3 Sir Everard Duncan Home Fraser, K.C.M.G. (1859-1922). Educated at Aberdeen University. Passing a competitive examination, he was appointed a student interpreter in China in 1880, being promoted Acting Consul at Foochow in 1886. At the time of his death, Fraser was Senior Consul in Shanghai and, therefore, chairman of the Consular Body.\n\n4 In Britain the first chair of Chinese was created in 1838 at University College London. In 1846 Samuel Fearon, the Registrar General of Hong Kong, was appointed Professor of Chinese Language and Literature in King's College, London. The next incumbent of the chair at King's appears to have been James Summers, who was twenty-four at the time of his appointment in 1852. Summers had been for a few years a tutor at St. Paul's College, Hong Kong; but Hong Kong society was highly critical of the elevation to a chair of a mere stripling (see J. W. Norton-Kyshe, History of the Law and Courts of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 1898, vol. i, p. 348). Summers resigned at the end of the 1872/73 session and apparently departed for China and Japan. He was succeeded by Robert Kennaway Douglas (1838-1913), who was also Senior Assistant in the Department of Printed Books in the British Museum. It was presumably Douglas who first introduced Lockhart to Chinese. (On Douglas see the short obituary in T'oung Pao, vol. xiv, 1913). For a long time the sole chair of Chinese in Britain was that at King's College until a chair was created in 1876 for Dr. James Legge at Corpus Christi College, Oxford. Professor Douglas had few full-time students, only a Frenchman and a Pole; Legge had only one student and Sir Thomas Wade at Cambridge 'n'avait qu'un auditeur: il est vrai qu'il était Chinois'. (See Henri Cordier, 'Les Études Chinoises', T'oung Pao, 1898, p. 48).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207726,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1976",
        "page_number": 114,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "A HAWAIIAN KING VISITS HONG KONG, 1881\n\n99\n\nkindly put me in communication with the British Minister in Rome so that I can command his good offices. . . . In the matter of decorations. Sir John ranks high among the Colonial Governors of England.\" And a Grand Cross of Kalakaua was later conferred on him.\n\nHong Kong Chinese merchants who traded with the people in Hawaii came to call on the King, and told him that their countrymen in his Kingdom appreciated the opportunities in the islands and were loyal to the Hawaiian government.\n\nAt the last State banquet in Hong Kong, as Armstrong reported, \"the lifeless air and heavy food made the King drowsy. The numerous receptions and late hours had deprived the King of sleep. His eyelids dropped . . . The Governor's wife was seated on the King's right, and I was seated next to her. I feared a nasal explosion if the King's doze should deepen, and devised ways of preventing it. It was a case of emergency. I whispered to the Governor's wife what my fears were, and asked her aid in preventing a loss of royal dignity. The clever wife of the Governor whispered to me, 'Will any special piece of music waken him up?' . . . She quietly called the majordomo, and in a minute the military band in the balcony filled the air with the music of 'Hawai'i Pono'i' (the Hawaiian National Anthem).\" The King woke up and the banquet ended.\n\nPage 100\n\nOn April 21, 1881, the Royal group left Hong Kong on the ship Killarney for Bangkok. Acting Consul General F. Bulkeley Johnson sent his report to W. L. Green, \"His Majesty the King and suite arrived here on the 12th [April] and left on the 21st April for Bangkok on a visit to the King of Siam.\"\n\nAnd the King and his party travelled to Singapore, Penang, Calcutta, Suez, Cairo, Rome, London, Brussels, Vienna, Paris, Madrid and Lisbon. King Kalakaua, in his July 12, 1881 letter from London, wrote of his meeting with Queen Victoria, “She came up to me and took my hand and then sat on a sofa asking me to sit down on a chair facing the sofa near her. She said that I was making a very long tour. I answered very fluently asked particularly where I learnt English as my accent was perfect.\" \n\nHomeward bound, the group crossed the Atlantic on the S. S. Celtic to New York. Then to Philadelphia, Washington, where he called on President Chester A. Arthur, and overland to California",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209407,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "42\n\nJ. H. HAAN\n\nThis limited franchise might be called the first characteristic of the voting structure in Shanghai. The second was the existence of proxy voting, that is voting by people present at a Public Meeting acting as agents of and voting for persons not present.\n\nNeither in the 1845 Land Regulations nor in those of 1854 had any provision for proxy voting been made, yet even before 1854 it was widely used, so we might put the question as to when it was introduced.\n\nThe first time the matter was considered at a Public Meeting was on June 14, 1851, when the problem was raised as \"to whether persons holding special powers of Attorney to deal with the land of parties absent could claim a vote on their behalf at a Public Meeting in addition to their own\" 27 It was then argued that \"such a system... had never been adopted at Public Meetings of this nature at Shanghai\" and consul Alcock was not inclined \"to admit the principle on the present occasion”.\n\nHowever, there were apparently some difficulties of a legal nature involved and Alcock thought it wise to consult the Attorney General at Hong Kong, whose advice was negative. Earlier I have drawn attention to the fact that the merchants at Shanghai were very self-conscious as to their self-government and the resolution against the interference from Hong Kong has already been referred to. At the same Public Meeting of May 25, 1852, it was decided, by resolution no. 2, \"That all holders of Land within the British limits may specially appoint an Attorney to act for them in their absence; and further that one person may act as Attorney for several renters, and be entitled to vote for each proprietor he may be duly empowered to represent\".28\n\nAs from that date proxy voting became the established practice at Shanghai and it was incorporated in article XIX of the 1869 Land Regulations.\n\nThere were evident dangers in this mode of voting. The already rather oligarchical procedure at a Public Meeting might be still more monopolized if a great number of votes were collected by some persons who might then be able to corner the meeting. Moreover, less scrupulous voters might be willing to sell their own vote to the highest bidder. It should be stressed",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209442,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 99,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "77\n\nIt is reasonable to believe Chang's claim to the Acting British Consul in Canton that he had no wish for disturbances in Hong Kong, 19\n\nCanton depended on Hong Kong for provisions of arms and ships as well as on loans from banks and contributions from wealthy Chinese there. It is more difficult to believe that he had not desired at least some anti-French activities in Hong Kong. A French invasion of Canton was imminent in the minds of Canton officials, and they believed that non-cooperation of Chinese in Hong Kong could do much to hinder French war efforts.50 It is no surprise that he should appeal to the Chinese in Hong Kong to refuse working for the French.\n\nIn fact, a more pertinent question is why did Hong Kong Chinese of various classes respond to the proclamation? Again, Marsh and the English newspapers were convinced it was fear of retaliation in China, and the Daily Press spoke of agents sent here to make sure that Canton's instructions were followed.51 Perhaps this did apply to parts of the population. But I believe there were other forces at work. One of these was a mixture of strong anti-French and patriotic feelings.\n\nThe war between China and France had been well reported in Hong Kong newspapers, and local Chinese had apparently kept a close eye on its development throughout. In September, 1884 sketches of the siege of Keelung in which the French had been repulsed, were being sold in Hong Kong streets.52\n\nIt was reported by several sources that among local Chinese, there were strong feelings against the French, and the local Chinese newspapers gave vent to similar expressions of public opinion.\n\nIn September 1883, the Hua-tzu jih-pao went so far as to suggest that awards should be offered by the Chinese government for the heads of French officers and soldiers for their evil acts in Tongking and Annam. The Hong Kong newspaper proved more zealous in this respect than the Canton government. The Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, Chang Shu-sheng, became so alarmed at this provocation by the Hong Kong newspaper that he protested to the Acting British Consul in Canton, H. F. Hance. Hance in turn complained to Marsh, who was Acting Governor at that time, and he issued a warning to the paper.54",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209457,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 114,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "92\n\nELIZABETH SINN\n\nportantly, what was not of value in their own. If Chinese nationalism, as Joseph Levenson defines it, could be truly established only when \"nation\" has overtaken \"culture\" as the focus of loyalty, then Hong Kong was understandably a fertile ground for the germination of modern Chinese nationalism. And through this, we can see the role Hong Kong has played in the history of modern China.\n\nThe 1884 episode is only one of many interesting episodes in Hong Kong history which have been overlooked in spite of their significance. If more of them could be studied in depth, our understanding of Hong Kong history would be enhanced.\n\nNOTES\n\nAbbreviations Used\n\nCO129— Colonial Office, Original Correspondence series 129. FO228 Foreign Office, Embassy and Consular Archives, Correspondence series 228.\n\nJHKBRAS― Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society.\n\nShu Pao I—Shu Pao,  (Taipei reprint, 1964). See note 10. Shu Pao II—Shu Pao, extracts in Chin-tai-shih tzu-liao (Sources on Modern History) 57:6 (1957.12) 20-30 see note 10.\n\n(notes on Hu Ch'uan-ch'ao—\n\nTun-mo lui-fen the [Sino-French] War) (Taipei, 1973 reprint, original preface 1898), 2 Volumes, 8 chüan. See note 2.\n\n+ Daily Press, 4th September, 1884,\n\n* Hu Chuan-ch’ao Tun-mo lul-fen (notes on the [Sino-French] War) (Taipei, 1973 reprint; original preface 1898), 2 volumes, 8 chüan; chüan 2:34a. Hu had followed P'eng Yu-lin into Kwangtung and was attached to the Kwangtung military headquarters. He kept a close watch on the war and his notes are an important source on the subject.\n\nA translated version of the proclamation is found in Marsh to Derby, 25th September, 1884, Despatch No. 336: Colonial Office Original Correspondence, Series 129 (hereafter CO129)/127. The lunar date was given as 16th day of the 7th moon which was 5th September, but was wrongly converted in the translation to 15th September. The Chinese original is in Hu Ch'uan-ch'ao, chüan 2:28b-29b.\n\nThe original is in ibid., chüan 2:28a-28b. The translated version is in the Daily Press, 1st October, 1884. For correspondence on this proclamation between Parkes, the British Minister in Peking, Hance, Acting British Consul at Canton and the Tsungli Yamen, see Parkes to Granville, 26th September, 1884, Despatch No. 190: Foreign Office, Embassy and Consular Archives, Correspondence Series 228 (hereafter FO228)/375, Parkes to Granville, 30th September, 1884, Despatch No.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209652,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 309,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "Notes and QUERIES\n\n287\n\nIt is possible to trace the history of Mr. Herton's unhappy experience in the matter of transit passes in the consular correspondence from Kiungchow (H) or Hoihow (now Hai-k’ou), the port of Hainan Island facing the mainland. Briefly, the facts appear to be as follows. On 7th June 1877 the British firm of Herton, Ebell & Co. applied for transit passes to bring sugar from the interior. The reply from the Chinese customs authorities was that regulations for issue of transit passes had not yet been drawn up, so none could be issued. Edward Herton decided nevertheless to go and buy sugar and galangal (or galingale), for which he paid duty at Hai-Ant customs house. Further purchases were made in July and November 1877, on each occasion transit passes being applied for and refused, and duties at a higher rate than would have been due under the transit scheme were paid.\n\nOn 8th May 1878, Messrs. Herton, Ebell & Co. made a formal complaint to H.M. Consul at Kiungchow, claiming $20,000 against the Chinese Government for excess duty paid and losses incurred due to the non-issue of transit passes. The acting consul, James Scott, forwarded this to Hugh Fraser, H.M. Chargé d'Affaires in Peking on 30th May (F.O.228, v.612, p.273-4), with his comment that there was insufficient supporting evidence for such a large claim. Scott had previously submitted to Fraser on 8th May (F.O.228, v.612, p.267-71) a claim on behalf of Messrs. Herton, Ebell for excess duty amounting to $909.57, for which there was supporting documentation. What happened to this earlier claim is not clear, but Fraser forwarded the larger claim, which was in the form of a petition to the Secretary of State with supporting documents, to the Foreign Office on September 25 (F.O.228, v.603, p.262-3) with the comment:\n\n“British traders may perhaps not unjustly ask to be reimbursed the amount actually paid by them as Transit duty over and above that which they would have had to pay had passes been allowed them; but I am not prepared to support any such demand for an additional ‘indemnity’ as that which is made in Mr. Herton's letter to acting Vice Consul Scott of the 8th August last.”",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209656,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 313,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n291\n\n$45 whilst Annisced Oil pays $5 duty and the value is about $145 altho' last year it was about $115.\n\nI am Yours very sincerely David Welsh\n\nIt has not been possible from the China trade directories available in Hong Kong to find out anything about David Welsh. The first quarterly intelligence report from the British Consul at Pakhoi, dated 5th February 1878, states \"There are only two foreign mercantile residents, both British\" (F.O.228, v.616, p.411), and it is probable that Welsh was one of them, report continues that one of these was a general merchant and commission agent, while the other had formerly been a hotel keeper in Canton, now describing himself as an auctioneer, but who had come to Pakhoi without any clear idea of his intentions.\n\nThe\n\nA further report by Acting Consul T. L. Bullock stated that duties had to be paid at both Licuchow and Chiu Chow on Pakhoi goods, and that transit passes were not issued because of the lack of instructions from the Superintendent of Customs at Canton, exactly the same situation as has been described at Kiungchow (F.O.228, v.616, p.432-6). A little later in the file is a copy of a letter from David Welsh to Bullock dated 13 March 1878 (p.443-5), in which he reminded the Consul that he had written three months before (letter not traced), pointing out the desirability of being able to obtain transit passes. In support of this he quotes the rates of Lekin payable at Nanning (南寧) in Kwangsi. \"The result of the issue of Transit passes would of necessity be the opening of Pakhoi to foreigners practically as hitherto it has only been theoretically open.\" He concludes with statistics of the trade, mainly in yarn, piece-goods and cotton, from Macao to Pakhoi.\n\nOn May 14, 1878 there is a despatch from the Chargé d'Affaires in Peking, Hugh Fraser, to J. G. Stronach, H.B.M. Consul in Pakhoi, referring to previous correspondence from Bullock, and saying that the Acting Consul in Canton had been asked to persuade the provincial authorities \"of the inexpediency of withholding a treaty right\" (F.O.228, v.616, p.469).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211331,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1988",
        "page_number": 47,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "23\n\npast patriotism and encouraging them in their resistance to the occupation.\n\nThe developing resistance clearly required a military response. Thus, in early June General van Straubenzee led an expedition beyond Canton’s walls to disperse 1500 to 2000 braves gathered to the northwest of the city. Little was accomplished. Most of the braves had already dispersed when the Europeans arrived and unfortunately several of the soldiers died during the expedition, some of wounds and others from the heat.\n\nWithin the occupation government the situation was beginning to appear more and more dangerous. The initial decision to rely on the mandarins to run the city now appeared to have been a tactical error. Some of the foreign officers claimed it had given a false impression of allied weakness. The Cantonese themselves, reasonably passive during the initial assault, were now increasingly attacking the foreigners. In mid-June a Dr. Turnbull, chief surgeon of the expeditionary force, was decapitated having been captured as he attempted to aid two soldiers wounded in an earlier assault. The surgeon’s death further highlighted the increasing precariousness of the occupation. Each night, under cover of darkness, the situation became much worse. The walls of the city were assaulted by unknown assailants. The foreigners sat through each night as various bombs and fuses were thrown at their positions by the locals. Such attacks were answered by daylight Allied reprisals against the various settlements beyond the walls located in the directions from which the shots had been fired.\n\nBy late June the acting British consul Winchester put out a circular warning British merchants to be wary of the warlike tones of the imperial commissioner’s proclamations and warning them to “secure themselves against the treacherous and stealthy attacks so consistent to the ideas of the Chinese …”. They were also told to expect a reduction of ship traffic in front of the city walls as the allied commanders moved to deal with the growing military threat. Eventually all river traffic by Chinese junks was forbidden in the area near the city.*2\n\n42\n\nThroughout the summer the situation continued to escalate. After the Chinese tried to burn a ship which housed the French vice-consul the French retaliated by torching homes to the west of the city walls.* The\n\n47",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213224,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1994",
        "page_number": 46,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "25\n\nerected on the lot was completed, he moved into temporary offices. Two marine lots were bought in 1858 in Sai Ying Pun on which extensive godowns (ware-houses) were built (Hong Kong Land Office, Memorial 1477, 21 Sept. 1858). He soon after left Hong Kong to assume management of the firm's affairs in Hamburg. There he married in 1859 a Miss Wagner (North China Herald 6 Aug. 1859). He continued to reside at Hamburg until his death on 24 November 1886 aged seventy-one (DP 6 Dec. 1886).\n\nWhen Mr. Siemssen left Hong Kong his partners were Ludwig Wiese and Woldemar Nissen (FC 31 Mar. 1855). Mr. Wiese was a Norwegian by birth but subsequently became a naturalized British citizen. From 1849 to 1855 he had been an assistant in the office of Carlowitz, Harkort and Co. at Canton. At various times he served as Consul for Hamburg, Lubeck, Sweden and Norway and was acting Consul for Prussia and Austria. His connection with Siemssen and Co. ended in 1863 (CM 5 Jan. 1865). He located in London, where in 1871 he joined the Board of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China (CM 24 July 1871). Though no longer a partner he represented the interests of Siemssen and Co. in England. He died in England on 22 March 1887 (GG, Probate Calendar 4 July 1887). His widow Joanna died in the City of Westminster on 10 May 1904 (GG, Probate Calendar 25 Apr. 1906).\n\nAgathon Friedrich Woldemar Nissen — usually known as Woldemar — was a partner from 1855 until his death in Hamburg on 28 December 1896 (DP 7 June 1897). He was a member of the Provisional Committee for the organisation of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in 1864. He was Deputy Chairman of the Board in 1866 and Chairman in 1867. He left Hong Kong in October 1867 (CM 31 Oct. 1867). In Hong Kong he was Consul for the Hansa Towns of Bremen, Hamburg and Lubeck as well as for Sweden and Norway.\n\nThe business of the firm increased rapidly. New branches were opened and new partners admitted. Rudolph Heinsen was transferred from the Canton office to Shanghai to open a new branch there in January 1856 (FC 1 Jan. 1856). He later became a partner and his interest in the company ended in 1868 (GG 9 Jan. 1869). George Wilhelm Schwemann was the managing partner at Foochow in 1861. Friedrich Adolph Joost was a partner from 1864 to 1873 (CM 1 Jan. 1864, Daily Press 28 Jan. 1874). When Messrs. Schwemann and Heinsen retired from the firm in 1868, they were replaced by Ferdinand Nissen and Heinrich Hoppius (GG 9 Jan. 1869).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215983,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 282,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "216\n\nforces of the British and French armies were departing Canton, so that whether these events had any correlation may be an additional issue. Nothing seems to have been consciously planned as an attack on the Governor-General, though he felt threatened by the riot (the events in Poklo being some 40 miles east of Canton). At the very least the vigilantes were acting \"in flagrant violation of the stipulations of the [1860] Treaty,\" \"stirring up the hatred of the people toward foreigners, and their dislike to Christianity.\" Whether they had other \"ambitious ends\" hidden under the banner and their rhetoric remained a serious, but moot, question.\n\nFollowing normal protocol for this kind of emergency, Chalmers acting on behalf of the London Missionary Society presented their complaints to the consul at Canton. The missionaries had been given no indication of the Governor-General's intentions, but Legge specifically adds that, if all else failed, they could refer the matter \"to our Ambassador at Peking.\" His attitude toward the Qing bureaucracy was unqualified and negative: \"The [Qing] Government is effete. The foundations are destroyed.” Although this might seem like an overstatement, the feelings reflected a fairly realistic evaluation of the disarray of an empire overcome by foreign powers in the capital and unable to handle the massive Taiping Rebellion which continued to defy imperial armies and ruled over much of the centre of the empire at the time. Other means for dealing with the crisis were also at hand. Daily prayer about the whole situation and its continuing problems became the self-imposed discipline by the Chinese Christians in Hong Kong, prompting Legge to compare this \"painful and discouraging\" situation in Poklo with the \"primitive forthgoing of Christianity” where persecution was also a stimulus for expansion.\n\nIt was part of the \"cunning of history\" that Legge's life and name for the next decade were identified with two major issues of the year of 1861: Poklo and his Chinese Classics.90 In missionary publications he became \"Dr. Legge of Hong Kong and Poklo,” and in Hong Kong itself, the memories were more vivid and even more powerful in creating around him a kind of aura as a “folk hero\" in the Carlylean sense of the term. At least one major event later in",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216081,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 380,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "314\n\n32T. Adkins joined the China Consular Service in 1854 and was the first Vice-Consul in Zhenjiang, being posted there in May of 1861, preceded by an assistant, Phillips, in February who had been sent to the ruined city to set up the Consulate in a ruined temple. Within a week of Adkins' arrival, he had moved the Consulate a mile down river to safer accommodation away from the Taiping fighting. He remained there, on an island, living a monotonous life alone as Phillips had been transferred elsewhere. He left Zhenjiang in poor health in February 1865 after serving there for three and a half years to return to the UK.\n\n33 This was the Cantonese title by which the bandits were known. In Mandarin it would be Shiwu Zi† £ 'The Fifteen Sons'.\n\n* Parker E.H. John Chinaman and a few others: John Murray: London: 1902\n\n35 Robert Anderson Mowatt, former consular official: acting Chief Justice and Acting Consul-General Shanghai, April - October 1891.\n\n* The Elder Brother Society (Gē Lǎo Huì): a secret society sworn to overthrow the Imperial government, the foreign Manchu Qing dynasty and replace it with a Chinese emperor.\n\nMesny's son would have been about six at the time of this story, whilst his only other child, his daughter, had not yet been born.\n\n**Mason, C. W. (1924) Chinese Confessions. London: Grant Richards Ltd\n\n\"Fairbank, Bruner and Matheson, ed (1975). The I.G. in Peking: Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press\n\n* Transit Passes are discussed in a separate chapter below.\n\n4\n\nAccording to Mason in his Confession, Croskey had told him that Croskey's father was an English baronet in business in Vancouver and his mother a Spanish Creole of San Diego in California.\n\n42 Parker, E.H. (1903) China Past and Present: Chapman and Hall Ltd: London\n\n\"Cook, Christopher (1982) The Lion and the Dragon - British Voices from the China Coast: London: Elm Tree Books.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    }
]