[
    {
        "id": 205128,
        "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-1966",
        "page_number": 84,
        "title": "RAS-1966",
        "content_text": "FOREIGN RELATIONS OF BUDDHISM\n\n79\n\ntions, he spent the first year on language study in Tokyo, then a year at Otani University, and a final year at the Mampukuji outside Kyoto, which is the most Chinese of Japanese Zen monasteries. He was very politely treated. When I asked (perhaps tactlessly) whether the Japanese Government did not have a policy of trying to use Buddhism to subdue China, he replied with some sharpness: \"I was not utilized by them. That was not the way they behaved towards me.\" He said, however, that other monks who had gone to Japan were looked on as collaborators when they returned, and some had had to change their names. Other informants have stated that after victory in 1945 several high-ranking monks in Shanghai were imprisoned for collaboration with the Japanese and one was executed in Canton.18\n\n33\n\nQuaritch Wales in an article written at the height of the war summarized the Japanese use of Buddhism as follows. “Buddhist propaganda has for several years been carried on by the New Asia Bureau of the Dai Nippon Buddhist Association, which is under the joint control of the Japanese Education and War Ministries. It is responsible for all missionary work in East Asia and long before Pearl Harbour was already deeply entrenched in north China. There, the more systematically to further its ends, the New Asia Bureau had established Sino-Japanese Buddhist Associations at Hangchow, Amoy, and Nanking, subsidized by the Special Service Section of the Army, naturally not with purely religious motives.”19\n\nMost of this, sensational though it may sound, is confirmed by the semi-official Japanese source already referred to in the notes, that is, the 1943 Yearbook of the Great Harmony Religious Alliance of Central China. The Great Harmony Alliance had been set up in accordance with a religious work policy formulated by the Japanese Military Intelligence Bureau in October, 1938.20 It was \"under the direction and supervision of the military authorities.\" Throughout a series of bureaucratic changes over the next four years, its purposes remained the same: 1) to coordinate and control Japanese religious groups in central China; and 2) to promote their cooperation with Chinese counter-parts. To this latter end the Alliance set up at least a dozen Japanese-Chinese Buddhist associations, of which those that existed in November 1940 formed the Japanese-Chinese Buddhist\n\n21",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206539,
        "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": 87,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n81\n\n21 'Despatches and Other Papers Relating to the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong', Sessional Papers, no. 32 of 1899, p. 13.\n\n22 Ibid., p. 36.\n\n23 Ibid., p. 65.\n\n24 Ibid., p. 69.\n\n25 'Report on the New Territory during the first year of British Administration', Sessional Papers, no. 15 of 1900, p. 252.\n\n26 'Report on the New Territory for the Year 1901', Sessional Papers, no. 22 of 1902, p. 4.\n\n27 Annual Report on Weihaiwei for 1921.\n\n28 Alfred Hancock and his brother Sydney were partners in the firm of A. and S. Hancock of Queen's Road, Hong Kong. In 1906 Alfred Hancock had resided for over fifty years in Amoy and Hong Kong. In the 1920s the firm had moved to Des Voeux Road and the chief partner was H. R. B. Hancock, Lockhart's brother-in-law. The firm was still active in 1940.\n\n29 The walled city of Weihaiwei, captured by the Japanese in 1894, by the terms of the 1898 Convention was not under British jurisdiction but nominally under a Chinese sub-district deputy magistrate. The British sphere of influence extended for an area of 1,500 square miles east of the Leased Territory.\n\n30 On the Chinese Regiment see: Captain A. A. S. Barnes, On Active Service with the Chinese Regiment, London, 1902; C. E. Bruce-Mitford, The Territory of Wei-Hai-Wei, Shanghai, 1902, pp. 22-24; R. F. Johnston, Lion and Dragon in Northern China, London, 1910, pp. 82-3; and Annual Report on Weihaiwei for 1906. The only servicemen left in Weihaiwei after 1906 were the small body of Royal Marines of the Island Guard,\n\n31 Johnston, op. cit., p. 82.\n\n32 L. K. Young, British Policy in China 1895-1902, London, 1970, p. 73.\n\n33 Johnston, op. cit., p. 80.\n\n34 The Weihaiwei School was opened with only four pupils in 1901 by a Mr. H. J. L. Beer. In 1903 a new school house was built near Port Edward, partly with the aid of a debenture loan subscribed by British subjects in Shanghai. The new school had dormitories for forty boys. The school, which took boys between ages of 8 to 14, was mainly for the sons of British expatriates. Pupils came from places as far apart as Mukden, Canton, Kobe, and Chungking. The school closed in 1925 when it became apparent that the rendition of Weihaiwei was close at hand. Weihaiwei's fine climate contributed to the school's success with expatriate parents.\n\n35 Johnston, op. cit., p. 96.\n\n36 Sir Reginald Fleming Johnston, K.C.M.G. (1874-1938). Johnston was educated at Edinburgh University and Oxford. He arrived in Hong Kong as an Eastern Cadet, fresh from Magdalen, on Christmas Day, 1898. In 1904, Robert Walter, Secretary to Government and Magistrate at Weihaiwei, was seconded for service as Emigration Agent at Ch'iu-wang-tao for the Transvaal Government and Johnston was appointed to take his place. In 1906 he was appointed District Officer and Magistrate and resided in the heart of the Territory. In 1919 when he took up his appointment as tutor he was Senior District Officer. In 1927 he returned to Weihaiwei as Commissioner. After the rendition of Weihaiwei in 1930 he became Professor of Chinese, University of London, and Head of the Department of Languages and Cultures of the Far East, School of Oriental Studies, 1931-37.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207267,
        "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-1975",
        "page_number": 35,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "A HONG KONG SPIRIT-MEDIUM TEMPLE\n\n27\n\n11 Jordan, op. cit., pp. 67-86.\n\n12 For a discussion of \"fairy bones\" see Potter, op. cit., pp. 225-226.\n\n13 For an English translation of the Monkey legend, see Wu, 1942.\n\n14 MacGowan, 1889.\n\n15 It is important that the medium performs this particular act of self-mutilation from time to time because the blood from his tongue is used to make \"powerful\" amulets known as ling chue ✯✯.\n\n16 Lewis, 1971.\n\n17 Feuchtwang, 1974.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\nAhern, E. The Cult of The Dead in a Chinese Village, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1973.\n\nDoolittle, J. The Social Life of The Chinese, 2 vols., orig. Harper & Row, New York, 1865 (Reprint Ch'eng Wen, Taipei, 1966).\n\nElliott, A. J. Chinese Spirit-Medium Cults in Singapore, London School of Economics and Political Science Monographs on Social Anthropology No. 14, Athlone Press, London, 1955.\n\nFeuchtwang, S. \"City Temples in Taipei under Three Regimes\", in M. Elvin and G. W. Skinner eds., The Chinese City Between Two Worlds, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1974, pp. 264-302.\n\nJordan, D. Gods, Ghosts, and Ancestors, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1972.\n\nMacGowan, J. Christ or Confucius, Which?: The Story of The Amoy Mission, London Missionary Society, 1889, London (Reprint Ch'eng Wen, Taipei, 1971).\n\nPotter, J. \"Cantonese Shamanism\", in A. Wolf ed., Religion and Ritual in Chinese Society, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1974, pp. 207-232.\n\nWu, Ch'eng-en. Monkey (Translated by Arthur Waley), Allen & Unwin, London, 1942.\n\nADDENDUM\n\nA run of annual mimeographed Chinese texts on spirit mediumship, covering the years 1933-1942 and produced in or for Hong Kong, was discovered by the Hon. Editor of this Journal in a second-hand bookshop recently and is now held by the Centre of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209104,
        "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-1981",
        "page_number": 7,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "216\n\nA Republican Book of Receipts in United College Library\n\nThe Hong Kong Collection in United College, Chinese University of Hong Kong, acquired this book of receipts several years ago from a local second-hand book-seller. The volume bears no title. As the Chinese characters in the upper margin (tan-chi chan-ts'un pu*) indicate, a collection of receipts are glued onto its pages. The receipts are dated the 9th year of the Republic, that is, 1920.\n\nThe receipts are of two sorts. A substantial number are receipts for payment for telegrams sent from Hong Kong, chiefly to Shanghai and Macau, but occasionally also to Amoy, Chicago, Havana, San Francisco, Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur and Ipoh. The more interesting ones are acknowledgements of sums ranging from several hundred to 40,000 Hong Kong dollars paid by Sun Fo (Sun Yat-sen's son). Chu Chih-hsin**, Ku Hsiang-ch'in\n\nand others (on their relationship to Sun Yat-sen in 1920, see below). It will take someone with a better knowledge of the political history of the Republican era than this writer to identify all the recipients of these payments. Quite a few, however, are undoubtedly military commanders or warlords: Li Fu-lin acknowledged receipt of 10,000 Hong Kong dollars; 20,000 was paid to commander Hsü at the military headquarters in Swatow, in addition to 9,700 acknowledged on a sheet bearing the heading, \"Office for Raising Military Funds in Swatow and Mei hsien, Kwangtung\". A receipt for 30,000 dollars was made out to Sun Fo by the Kwangtung Provincial Treasury, and another one for 5,000 made out to him states explicitly that this sum was derived from donations by overseas Chinese. The fleet at Fu-men (\") received two payments, of 600 and 1,000 Hong Kong dollars respectively. Some receipts were also made out for purchases (several field telephones, 1,000 items of clothing; 2,000 water flasks). Most of these purchases were not substantial, the exception being a deposit for 40,000 dollars for an unspecified machine. Documents pasted on the first page consist of enquiries made about rice-mill-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209666,
        "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": 323,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n301 \n\nsatisfaction of all, both parties agreed to give the disputed piece of land to the experimental farm of the welfare center for furthering the work of agricultural improvement. \n\nThis passage is taken from Chang Fu-liang When East Met West, A Personal Story of Rural Reconstruction in China (New Haven, Connecticut, Yale-in-China Association, 1972) 50-51. It will be seen that whilst the team tactfully used firecrackers in the final solution, it was not in the form originally insisted upon by one of the parties to the dispute! \n\nIn another recorded village case, this time from Amoy in the Fukien province, provision for the use of firecrackers in the settlement of offences against the community was included in the village rules. Describing ownership and management of seaweed growing areas in the early 1930s, the writer, who was one of the professors at Amoy University, stated: \"The rocks are jealously guarded and no one is permitted to pick up a single seaweed from another person's grounds. If such a case is discovered, the person will be fined by the village committee a sum of $50.00 and besides will have to set off a quantity of firecrackers as a means of confessing his offence against the owner\". (Tseng, \"Seaweeds of Amoy”, Lingnan Science Journal 12, No. 1 (1933), 49). \n\nAssociations in urban milieu seem also to have used fire-crackers in the course of disciplining their members. E. T. Williams describes how the Swatow Guild, comprising persons from six nearby hsien, fined those members who failed to participate in the celebration of the birthday of the Queen of Heaven, the guild's patron saint, no less than 10,000 firecrackers. At least, there was provision for this in its rules! (Williams, op. cit. 200). \n\nFar from home, a party of Chinese miners on the phosphate workings on Ocean Island were only placated and a serious riot averted by the offer of fireworks by the District Officer trying to settle a dispute with their employers and the native Gilbertese workers. This happened in the 1920s, and the Chinese were almost certainly Kwangtung men since recruitment was carried out by agents in Hong Kong under the supervision of the Hong Kong authorities. The District Officer was the future Sir Arthur Grimble.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212391,
        "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-1990",
        "page_number": 333,
        "title": "RAS-1990",
        "content_text": "310\n\nDr Elizabeth Sinn explained at intervals during the three-day trip something of the history of Amoy. Together with Ningpo, efforts were made by the British to establish the two towns as centres of trade before Canton secured commercial dominance in 1757. The Canton monopoly was broken in 1842, with the Treaty of Nanking, by the opening of not only Amoy and Ningpo but also the Treaty Ports of Foochow and Shanghai. From and to these ports, among other commodities, were shipped tea, silk, and opium.\n\nBut before then, in the late 17th century, Amoy had been the lair of freebooting, swashbuckling Koxinga (Zheng Chenggong), who not only drove the Dutch from Taiwan to make it an anti-Manchu base but also attempted to wrest power from the Qing Dynasty. Today, the People's Republic is trying to proclaim that Koxinga, who had a Japanese mother, was no common pirate but a national hero.\n\nAmoy also played a big part in the infamous, so-called in Chinese, 'pig business'. The first Chinese contract coolies left Canton in 1845, but they were soon being shipped from other ports in southern China. Recruiters frequently shanghaied labourers who departed for various countries, including Hawaii, Trinidad, British Guiana, Jamaica, and British Borneo. The journey to Peru or Cuba took about 130 days. Conditions aboard, because of overcrowding, were unimaginable. With a lack of food, unsanitary conditions, and harsh treatment, and 500 men crowded into a hull with barely room to lie down, riots and murders sometimes occurred. Over one-quarter of the labourers are said to have died aboard in their 'pens'.\n\nMany others, however, emigrated from Fujian under somewhat better conditions, and today most families in Xiamen have relatives living overseas. But the Province's most famous son has to be Tan Kah Kee (1874-1961), well known for his philanthropy, which is evident in several parts of town, including Xiamen University. This was completed in 1919 on its 100-hectare campus. Tan (pronounced Chan in Cantonese) was born just north of Xiamen to a father who had emigrated to Singapore and was engaged in the rice, pineapple, and rubber business. At an early age, Tan Junior also transferred to the British Colony, as it was then, where he later had four wives and fathered 17 children. Although he spoke neither Mandarin nor English, for business convenience, he became a British subject in",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213047,
        "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-1993",
        "page_number": 115,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "95\n\nThis request set at loggerheads the subscribers, the District Committee and Dr. Gibson. Dr. Gibson took offence at the suggestion that Dr. Sibree was other than a full member of staff, claimed the initiative in the development of the maternity hospital and therefore considered the subscribers' demands unreasonable, as secondary supporters.\n\n63 Further, he refused to concede any transfer of the Nethersole Hospital to the control of the lady doctor, both because that work had been his sphere for ten years, and a loss of students would result. Since at this time discussions about a University for Hong Kong were in the air, a role for the Alice Hospital group in clinical teaching was more than ever important. At the same time, the difficulty of finding a lady doctor who would be prepared to work solely in maternity at low salary was recognised.\n\nThe District Committee vacillated. In October they proposed that a midwife, supervised by a male doctor, be appointed. Dr. Sibree, of course, had claimed all along that her work needed only a midwife's skills. However, the proposal was rejected, since a midwife could not legally perform an operation if that were necessary, nor could any other than a lady doctor fulfill the terms of supervision of the government midwives. Dr. Ho Kai urged speed, and this was conveyed to London by Mr. Pearce. Dr. Gibson, in contrast with his views in 1903, now strongly supported the appointment of a lady doctor, for pragmatic reasons. First, the maternity hospital had grown to a point where he could not resume the work involved. Secondly, he recognised that only a lady doctor could gain access to the 'richer classes of Chinese', whose private medical work was a source of hospital finance, and whose conversion to Christianity was desirable.\n\nBy this time, it seems that Dr. Sibree had lost the support of the District Committee. Her erstwhile supporter, Mr. Pearce, commented that she had not made a way through to do what she wanted: she would have found a way or made it and have kept it unquestioned. If Dr. Sibree had been a Dr. Tribe of Amoy, I do not blame her with no intention on her part save to do her duty faithfully. Life has not been what she hoped and expected, and her share or the lack of it in the medical mission work has been the subject of sharp controversy.\n\n47\n\nIn the same letter, he commented that",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    }
]