[ { "id": 211354, "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": 70, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "46\n\nwithout being confronted at every turn by Acts of Parliament, and systems of espionage, that seem especially designed to restrict individual enterprise and frustrate industrial endeavour.\n\nLetter of 1900 - Hong Kong Telegraph\n\n▬▬\n\nThe effects of this \"freedom\" of the individual to sell his labour but occasionally pricked the conscience of the Hong Kong resident only occasionally. A letter writer using the pen-name \"Balthasar\" observed in the Hong Kong Telegraph, 18 May 1900, that,\n\nAmong the labourers carrying bricks and lime up the Glenealy may be noticed several children whose physique is quite unequal to the toil. These poor young children gasp under their burden. One of them, on being spoken to, answered that his father had died of plague, and if he worked not had no rice. He was thirteen years of age, and yet carried two baskets of lime, usually borne by adults, and which he had to lay down several times along the way.\n\nAfter describing these conditions, the writer asked, \"Is there no law in Hong Kong to regulate the employment of minors?\" The answer, as he well knew, was \"No\".\n\nIt was not that there was no money in Hong Kong for charitable purposes. He reminded the community that a Colony \"that can exceed all expectations in its contribution to the War Fund [the Boer War] may well look to the relief of its own stricken poor\".\n\nBowley's Articles on \"The Children's Charter\"\n\nMr. Francis Bulmer Lyon Bowley, a solicitor practising in Hong Kong since 1893, published a series of articles in a Hong Kong newspaper in 1911 on \"The Children's Charter\", that is, the British Children's Act of 1908. He contrasted its provisions with the situation in Hong Kong. The Attorney General took the matter up and two provisions were subsequently introduced into the laws of the Colony.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211356, "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": 72, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "48\n\nThe proposals indicate that the problem of working children was closely connected with the need of adequate provision for education. This theme runs through all the subsequent discussion on child labour.\n\nAfter Miss Pitts had concluded, Mr. Bowley briefly commented on the absence of laws on child welfare in Hong Kong. The Anglican Bishop in proposing a vote of thanks to Miss Pitts congratulated the Men's Society for tackling social problems.\n\nProposals of Mr. Bowley to open meeting of Church of England Men's Society 1919\n\n—\n\nMiss Pitts' speech was followed a few months later by another made to the same society by Mr. Bowley. It set the legal framework for a general discussion of the subject in open meeting.\n\nMr. Bowley's remarks on \"Suggested Reforms for Women and Children in Hong Kong\" were prompted by the conviction that action should follow Miss Pitts' airing of the problem. He pointed out that Hong Kong was governed by the law in force in England in 1843 as it had been modified by local ordinance since then. In England there had been, in the years since 1843, much agitation which had resulted in social reforms. There was legislation regarding the employment of children in factories, their education, and safeguards to their health. Not much of the legislation passed in Britain had been incorporated into the Hong Kong law code.\n\nHe made various proposals which would bring Hong Kong law closer to that of Britain, bearing in mind that special problems existed where Chinese custom was different from England.\n\nHe referred to the need for registration of adopted children and child servants. The Bastardy Act passed in Britain in 1845 had not been made applicable to Hong Kong, hence fathers of illegitimate children were not liable for their support. Mr. Bowley proposed that the legal age of marriage should be raised from twelve to sixteen. Some action should be taken regarding education, for neither parents nor guardians were then responsible for the education of children. There was need for factory legislation. He pointed out that in Hong Kong \"children and women of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211357, "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": 73, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "49\n\nany age may be employed any length of time at any kind of work, however fatiguing or unhealthy\".' The only provisions relating to conditions of labour were in the Offensive Trades regulations under the jurisdiction of the Sanitary Board, but they only referred to cleanliness and sanitation in places of work. The only provision affecting employment was the prohibition of children under the age of ten from being employed in rag-picking or cleaning hair or feathers. There was no regulation of hours of labour. Some women and children worked twelve hours a day, Sundays included. Such an eighty-four hour week was in sharp contrast to agitation in Britain for a forty hour working week.\n\nMr. Bowley felt the time had arrived for Hong Kong to face these problems, though he admitted local opinion and conditions were not ready for the application of all the laws prevailing in Britain in this area. But as a first step he advocated that factories be licensed by the Sanitary Department and there be some regulations regarding hours and conditions of work, with women inspectors appointed to see the regulations were observed. The total prohibition of child labour was closely connected with the provision of schools if compulsory education was to be instituted. In England education had been compulsory for fifty years and free for eighteen years.\n\nBefore 1914 the Education Department in Hong Kong had no control over any school except Government schools and Grant schools. In that year registration of schools was made compulsory and certain elementary regulations were laid down regarding sanitation and the enforcement of discipline.\n\nA discussion of Mr. Bowley's proposals followed. On the subject of carrying loads to the Peak, a member stated that this was \"a disgusting sight.\" Mr. Schoffield saw it differently. He maintained that \"carrying loads up the Peak is about the healthiest exercise to which a child could be put in Hong Kong\".\n\nA member asked him, “If you were a little child would you like to carry heavy loads instead of going to school and enjoying yourselves as other children do? Would you like to see your mother carrying loads up the Peak?\"", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211358, "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": 74, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "50\n\nBut Mr. Scholfield stuck to his opinion. \"I would not give a single thought to it. The only thing I would think of was the ten cents I would receive at the end of the day.\"\n\nWhen the resolutions proposed by Mr. Bowley were put to the meeting, only Mr. Scholfield voted against him. He told the meeting that if the suggestions were to be implemented it would mean money **and would depend on the maintenance of the opium revenue**. If that was stopped, what would they do?\" Up to that date Hong Kong had depended upon the income from the opium trade to finance itself, now there was heavy pressure from the Home Government to abolish the traffic in opium.\n\nThe editor of the Daily Press commended the small group of Hong Kong expatriates who were concerned about social problems, though his views were expressed in the colonial attitudes of the day.\n\nFar removed from the centres of civilization and surrounded by people alien to us in manners, customs and ideas, there is a natural tendency to lose that sense of communal responsibility which is steadily developing in the land from which we spring. It is well, therefore, that we have in our midst some whose interests are not limited by sport or commerce to remind us of the thoughts and aspirations of our more progressive fellow countrymen at Home.\n\nProposals of the Sanitary Board 1919\n\nMr. Bowley was a member of the Sanitary Board and used his position to try to get passed some regulations on child labour. He used a back door approach by proposing that the regulations be based on sanitary grounds. As the name of the Board suggests such concerns came within its province.\n\nOn the 19 March 1919 Mr. Bowley had posed the following question, **Does the Medical Officer of Health consider it desirable in the interests of public health of the Colony that the ages, hours and conditions of employment of women and children in factories, workshops and work-places in the Colony should be regulated and controlled?** The Medical", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211359, "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": 75, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "51\n\nOfficer, Dr. Hickling, replied that the matter needed a full investigation, and for a beginning certain broad lines might be laid down. She suggested as such (1) the conditions which would constitute overcrowding in work places, (2) the ages at which children be admitted to factories, and (3) regulation of the hours children worked.\n\nAt a meeting of the Sanitary Board on 2 April 1919 Mr. Bowley said that though previous to the meeting he had submitted his intention to place before the Board resolutions concerning overcrowding in factories and child labour, he thought it would be better if the Board first appointed a sub-committee to investigate conditions and thresh the problem out before definite suggestions were placed before the full Board.\n\nMr. Bowley was the natural Chairman for the committee as he had shown special interest in the problem and was acquainted with the corresponding legislation on the subject in England, America and the British Colonies, and as the Chinese section of the community would be chiefly affected by such regulations, Mr. Chan Kai-ming and Mr. S. W. Tso were appointed along with the Sanitary Department's Medical Officer, Dr. A. D. Hickling. As the regulations would be dealing with the working conditions of women and children, it was appropriate that Dr. Hickling, a woman, be on the committee.\n\n―\n\n―\n\nAt a meeting on 27 May, the sub-committee submitted its recommendations. An amendment was proposed to Section 16 of the Public Health and Building Ordinance of 1903 that children under the age of fourteen be prohibited from working in any factory for more than ten hours a day exclusive of meal times and that children under thirteen not be employed in any occupation likely to be injurious to their “life, limb or health, regard being had to his or her physical condition”. The committee also proposed an addition to Bylaw sub-section 13 of Section 16, that factories be regarded as overcrowded and therefore a danger to health if there was less than 250 cubic feet for every person employed, or during overtime after six p.m., 400 cubic feet per person.\n\nThe Sanitary Board had the power to require factories to provide adequate ventilation, cleanliness and latrine accommodation. There was no statutory definition of what constituted overcrowding hence the resolution included such a definition.\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76\n\n52", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211360, "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": 76, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "Introducing a motion for the adoption of the recommendations of the sub-committee, Mr. Bowley stated that in the Peace Treaty then under discussion provisions were made for an International Labour Convention and for a League of Nations. In the proposals for both organizations the welfare of women and children were dealt with. Appended to the section of the Peace Treaty dealing with the Labour Convention was the affirmation of the principle of an eight hour working day and a forty-eight hour week.\n\nMr. Bowley reminded the Board that the matters being proposed were on the agenda of the Labour Convention which was to be held in Washington, D. C. in the United States in October 1919. These developments had a particular meaning for Hong Kong as a British outpost in the East, for if Hong Kong took action as a part of the British Empire it might influence “our neighbouring allies' China and Japan, both of whom were parties to the Treaty and who had accepted both the League of Nations and the Labour Convention.” He continued. “If Hong Kong, China and Japan are to be included in the comity of nations on equal terms, it behoves us and our neighbours to consider these questions very carefully”.\n\nHe contrasted the absence of factory legislation in Hong Kong with Britain where such legislation had been gradually developed and enforced over the past eighty years. One reason for the difference between the two places was that Hong Kong until only recently had not been much of a manufacturing centre, but now there were many new factories. \"The time has come\", he said, \"when some, at least, of most of the elementary principles of the Factory Acts should be introduced into the Colony”. The experience of England had been that factory legislation had to be related to provisions for education and it would be difficult to apply the same laws to Hong Kong if there was no movement at the same time toward compulsory education, but since the Sanitary Board had no jurisdiction over education, the committee had concluded that it was impossible to prohibit employment of children even of the tenderest age, for it was better for children to be occupied with light tasks with their parents than playing in the gutter. Moreover, the criminal law contained provisions for the punishment of parents or masters and mistresses who ill-treated or neglected their children or child servants. So until something was done about universal education, the present measures were as much", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211361, "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": 77, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "53\n\nas could be expected under present conditions.\n\nThe Board felt it could propose, however, that children should not be employed in factories and workshops after 6 p.m. except when special permission had been obtained from the Board, for such employment must be injurious to the health of young children who would certainly be better in bed than working by artificial light in stuffy rooms. As the returns obtained by the committee on working conditions showed that most factories stopped work at 6 p.m., the prohibition of children working after this hour would not interfere to any appreciable extent in \"the better managed factories and workshops”.\n\nMr. Bowley admitted that the fixing of the age limit at fourteen was a compromise. In England a ten hour day was the maximum for women and children of any age. For Hong Kong he would have wished an age limit much higher than fourteen, but the Chinese members of the committee had not agreed and “for the sake of unanimity I accepted the age proposed by them\". The Chinese also urged the lowering of the English statutory age of fourteen for children engaged in dangerous occupations to the age of thirteen. They claimed that Chinese children developed more rapidly than European children.\n\nThere would be another difference between the factory legislation in Britain and in Hong Kong: both had a limit of ten hours, but in Britain there was to be no work on Saturday afternoon or Sunday, thus there was a work week of fifty-five hours, while in Hong Kong, where there were only two holidays every lunar month, the weekly average would be sixty-five hours.\n\nAll in all, Mr. Bowley regarded the recommendation before the meeting as reasonable and moderate and should “commend itself to every fair-minded person”.\n\nMr. Alabaster, the Chairman of the Board, put in a cautionary note. He conceded that everyone would be in sympathy with the proposed regulations, but how were they to be administered? The burden of the Sanitary Department would be greatly increased. One problem for the Inspectors would be to determine the age of Chinese children and it would be difficult for them to state what would be injurious to a child. The", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211362, "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": 78, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "54\n\npassing of the regulations would probably mean that the qualifications of the Inspectors would need to be upgraded. To be really effective they would need to possess medical knowledge.\n\nThe Chairman commented that while all agreed it was distressing to see small children struggling with loads up to the Peak, to prohibit them from doing so would deprive their families of needed income so the children would not have enough to eat and in the end would be worse off. He did point out that in the area around Bridges Street there were places set apart where children from the age of about eighteen months to six years were cared for by old, invalided women, but older children would not remain under the charge of such old women willingly and would wander the streets instead, thus running the risk of getting killed or encountering some other danger. Would it not be better for them to be engaged in some work?\n\nIn view of all these considerations he moved that the last clause in the resolution be deleted. It was not that he had no sympathy with the object of the resolution, he said, but there would be too many difficulties in carrying it out. Mr. Chatham suggested that Mr. Bowley would probably agree to this deletion, but if not, he would second the amendment made by Mr. Alabaster.\n\nMr. Bowley, for his part, was not willing to agree. If the number of inspectors were increased, their duties and tasks under the new regulations should not be excessive. It was merely a matter of money. As to determining the age of a child, the regulations might be changed so that a Magistrate or some other responsible person might estimate the age. He was not willing to support a deletion of the latter part of the resolution. He would be willing, however, to have it amended to the following, and prohibiting the employment of children and young persons under the age of thirteen in factories and workshops likely to be injurious to his or her life, limb or health, regard being had to his or her physical condition\". A list of such trades could be drawn up by medical and other experts for the guidance of the Sanitary Department in implementing the regulations. He was not asking the Board to legislate on the matter, but only to endorse certain principles which would then be forwarded to the Government for consideration. The amendment as changed by Mr. Bowley was then accepted and carried unanimously.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211363, "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": 79, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "55\n\nDr. Hickling suggested that the space required for each worker should be put at twenty square feet floor area. This suggestion was accepted. Another minor change was made by eliminating the word \"overtime\" in reference to work after 6 p.m.\n\n6\n\nThe editor of the Daily Press, in commenting on the proposals of the Sanitary Board, reviewed some of the steps which had led up to them: Miss Pitts' talk, followed by Mr. Bowley's statements at the meeting of the Church of England Men's Society. Their efforts were seen as examples of the good results \"that may flow from the discussion of matters of public concern by private individuals, and should encourage interest in local affairs\". The editor was confident the proposal would appeal to British pride, \"For every Briton in Hong Kong whose pride of race is based upon his country's efforts on behalf of humanity must hope that the resolutions passed by the Sanitary Board will be endorsed by the Legislative Council\". He believed that the enlightened members of the Chinese community would have no objections to them, as, in his opinion, they were extremely modest and were submitted in the interests of public health.\n\nThe editor recognised that the root of the problem lay in the Colony's educational efforts, but he contended that no matter how many schools were provided, there would not be enough “unless we are willing to educate the whole of South China\". A policy of unrestricted immigration made it impossible to make school attendance either compulsory or free.\n\nThe editor restated the views of Mr. Alabaster that it was better for the children to accompany their parents to work, so long as their little bodies are not strained beyond their endurance, as they would thus be both physically and morally better off than left to their own devices, and their earnings provided them with more food than they otherwise would have. He did advocate that some restriction be placed on the load they carried, as this responsibility could not be left to the parents' discretion.\n\nCase of Child Labour before the Magistrate\n\nApril 1920\n\nThe principles in the agitation for child labour laws had been a missionary and a solicitor, but in April 1920 a doctor publicly took up", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211366, "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": 82, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "58\n\nGovernment, but the Government had not at present a plan to create a post of Factory Inspector.\n\nThe Problem publicised in Britain\n\nMiss Pitts and Mr. Bowley both left Hong Kong for leaves in England in June 1919. During their stay they might have pushed the matter of child labour in Hong Kong, for in May 1920 there was published an article in the Child Guardian setting forth the situation of children in Hong Kong. This magazine was the organ of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. The recommendations proposed by Mr. Bowley at the meeting of the Church of England Men's Society already referred to were published on the first page of an issue of the magazine. These were accompanied by the comment, “Judging from the necessity of bringing such proposals forward, it may be imagined this British Colony is a long way behind in its treatment of children”. It was noted, however, that a great many influential people in Britain were worrying the Colonial Office on the subject. The editor surmised, \"the Governor must be having quite a busy time answering the inquiries of the Colonial Office in regard to these questions“.\n\nIn November 1920 a Director of the British National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children asked the Secretary for the Colonies for an interview with Mr. Claude Severn, the Hong Kong Colonial Secretary who was on leave in England, to discuss with him the matter of the welfare of children in Hong Kong.\n\nParliamentary question\n\nDecember 1920\n\nMr. A. Davies in December 1920 asked in a Parliamentary Question if there was any legislation in Hong Kong controlling the type of work done by children, the hours they worked, or their employment in work injurious to their health. The Government spokesman replied that there was none, but the Governor was being asked for a report on the subject of child labour.\n\nAnother question was raised at a session soon after. Mr. Cope asked if the Secretary of State for the Colonies was aware that the resolution of the Sanitary Board passed in May 1919 regarding child labour had", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211367, "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": 83, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "59\n\nbeen thrown out by the Legislative Council and whether it was to be reconsidered. The questioner did not realise that the proposal had never come before the Legislative Council but had only been under consideration in the Executive Council.\n\nIn reply to the question the Government spokesman said the matter had been under consideration by the Colonial Government and the Governor was to be asked what measures, if any, were contemplated.\n\nA comment for the information of the Under-Secretary minuted on a Colonial Office Despatch contained the following history of the progress of the Sanitary Board's recommendation through the Executive Council. In June 1919 the Executive Council in Hong Kong had considered the proposals of the Sanitary Board but had postponed the matter. The next week it asked the Sanitary Board to supply statistics relating to the classes of work in which children were employed and the hours of work. This report was considered on 24 July, but the Colonial Secretary had concluded that if the education problem were solved, then the child labour problem would solve itself. Though the Executive Council side-stepped the problem, pressure for action was continued by interested groups. At the end of December the Council proposed appointing a Commission to enquire into the conditions of the industrial employment of children and to advise as to the desirability and feasibility of legislation. But as the agitation died down the Executive Council in March 1920 decided to postpone the appointment of the Commission.\n\nProposals passed at a Church of England Men's Society Meeting February 1921\n\nThe example Hong Kong could set for China was a theme which ran through the discussions on child labour laws. When Mr. Bowley again addressed the Church of England Men's Society on the subject in February 1921, he took up the theme. “Our Colony is in a unique position as an outpost of Western civilization on the fringe of one of the oldest civilizations of the world, and, if we are to justify our boast that Western civilization is the better, it behooves us to look carefully at the conditions of our own community.' \n\nIt must be noted, however, that he had preceded this by a reference", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211368, "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": 84, "title": "RAS-1988", "content_text": "60 \n\nto a broader ideal, the Dominical Commandment “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself\". It implied that the great active principle of Christianity was its social concern, and the essential of any civilization was unselfishness, or the triumph of Right over Might. \n\nHe made an appeal for the plight of women and children who were exposed to the full operation of the law of supply and demand **in all its ferocity\". \"But\", he asserted, \"the law of supply and demand is not a fetish which we must worship\". Nonetheless, he did not advocate excessive interference with economic forces. After all, he said, \"Freedom of trade and freedom of contract are the foundations of the success of the British Empire, and should not be interfered with when applied to competition\", but ‘a civilized community cannot regard human beings and human life and health as commodities\". \n\nHe then presented a list of proposals to correct the situation. They were for the most part the same as he had set forth in his speech in 1919. He suggested that, as a census was to be held soon, it should include a question on labour which would provide the number, ages and sex of workers in factories and workshops. Such data would assist in drawing up appropriate legislation. \n\nHis proposals were put before the meeting in the form of a resolution. There was some opposition to them. Mr. W. Jackson charged that their endorsement would only stir up trouble. He contended that the Church of England Men's Society was being used to breed industrial dissatisfaction. Mr. Crook contended that the whole matter had been greatly exaggerated. He asked, \"If it was true that so much 'sweating' existed, why was it so difficult to get caddies?” Mr. Jackson supported him stating that there was no 'sweated labour' in Hong Kong. To this Mr. Bowley replied, “I would rather rely on the opinion of ladies and gentlemen who have spent their lives working among the poorer classes in the Colony\" he was referring to Miss Pitts and the Rev. R. H. Wells, both missionaries of long standing who had supported the resolutions. “I think”, he continued, \"they would tell Mr. Jackson that the conditions of labour of the poorest classes in Colony are not satisfactory, I have been accused of cultivating the germs of unrest; they exist already; I am trying to find the best antidote to improve the conditions of the poor\".", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214330, "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-1998", "page_number": 188, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "152\n\nIn the next issue, there is again coverage of Chinese events and background. On 19 January 1861, two half-page illustrations show, \"The Peace with China - Reading the Treaty at Pekin\"27 and \"Close of the War with China: Graves of Lieut. Anderson, Private Phipps, and Messrs. De Norman and Bowlby, in the Russian Cemetery, Pekin.\"2\n\nA brief account of a lunch meeting between Lord Elgin and Prince Kung (the two signatories of the Convention of Peking) highlights what British readers would have perceived as the need for the geography lessons which Frederick Stewart was to introduce into the Hong Kong Government Central School by 1870,29 and which - by 1889 - his successor reported as increasingly being adopted into the Hong Kong Village Schools.30 (Prior to this, according to Stewart, there was no geography taught in Hong Kong's traditional Chinese schools.)31 Apparently, Prince Kung commented that until very recently he had not known, \"that India was merely a province of the British empire; they formerly believed Great Britain to be a very small island, the population of which was so large that more than half were obliged to live in ships.\"32 Even as late as 1902, some students in Hong Kong's \"Vernacular Schools\", influenced by a different set of political circumstances, were reported as being, “at the last examination ignorant that Hong Kong was a British Colony: a number hazarded the opinion that it belonged to Russia.”33\n\nIt seems that the withholding of geographical teaching and its content when given were both decisions coloured by politics, whether on the Chinese or the British side.\n\nIn spite of Prince Kung's tenuous respect for the British land mass, the Editor of The Illustrated London News, as published on 19 January 1861, felt that there was sufficient reason for the expression of cautious optimism for the solidity of the peace that had been won: \"There seems to be good grounds for believing that we have at length fairly impressed the Chinese Government with the necessity of good faith in their dealings with us, and a reasonable hope that the treaty will be rigorously observed, leading to an interesting feeling of good will and confidence between our people and the Chinese.\"\n\n34\n\nOn 26 January 1861, the view that the Chinese were now respecting their promises was supported by a full double page spread showing \"The Chinese Bringing to the British Headquarters the 300,000 Taels [approximately one hundred thousand pounds sterling]35 as Compen-", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214340, "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-1998", "page_number": 198, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "162\n\n(28)\n\n(29)\n\n(30)\n\n(31)\n\n(32)\n\n(33)\n\n(34)\n\n(35)\n\n(36)\n\n(37)\n\n(38)\n\n(39)\n\nClose of the War with China: Graves of Lieut. Anderson, Private Phipps, and Messrs. De Norman and Bowlby, in the Russian Cemetery, Pekin. - From a sketch by our Special Artist\", half-page, The Illustrated London News, 19 January 1861, p. 67.\n\nSee Gillian Bickley, The Golden Needle: The Biography of Frederick Stewart (1836-1889), Hong Kong, David C. Lam Institute for East-West Studies, p. 106.\n\nSee Gillian Bickley, op. cit., p. 91.\n\nSee Gillian Bickley, op. cit., p. 76.\n\nThe Illustrated London News, 19 January 1861, p. 49, c. 3.\n\nSee Edward A. Irving, Inspector of Schools' Annual Report for 1904, Hong Kong Government Gazette, 30 June 1905, p. 1031, quoting a Committee on Education Report on the Vernacular Schools, written in early 1902.\n\nThe Illustrated London News, 19 January 1861, p. 64, c. 1.\n\nThe Illustrated London News, 26 January 1861, p. 83, c. 3.\n\n\"The Chinese Bringing to the British Head-quarters the 300,000 Taels [approximately one hundred thousand pounds sterling] as Compensation to the Released British Prisoners and to the Families of those who were Murdered - From a sketch by our Special Artist\", full double-page spread, The Illustrated London News, 26 January 1861, p. 82.\n\n\"Curiosity-Street, Pekin - From a sketch by our Special Artist\", full-page, The Illustrated London News, 16 February 1861, p. 142.\n\nThe Illustrated London News, 15 February 1861, p. 147, c. 1.\n\nE\n\n\"Peking Cab\", sketch by our special artist, one third page sketch, The Illustrated London News, 23 February 1861, front page.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 } ]