[
    {
        "id": 204465,
        "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-1962",
        "page_number": 97,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "86 \n\nJ. W. HAYES \n\nDespite the presence of troops, military posts and police of two types in the Territory, besides the assistance of the local kuk, the magistrate's power to prevent crime appears to have been limited. Piracy, in particular, was rampant at different times, and ranged from the anti-dynastic activities of Koxinga in the mid-seventeenth century on behalf of his former masters the Great Ming, (which occasioned the removal from the coast) through the widespread depredations of large pirate bands at the beginning of the nineteenth, to the milder but still disconcerting activities of the period under review. \n\nIt is necessary to emphasise the prevailing unrest, since until quite recently the only striking difference between the New Territory in 1898 and the territory we know to-day was the imposition of the pax britannica. Until the British Government got into the saddle and established its police stations and patrolling launches, the people were subject to piracy, robbery and other forms of violence as from time immemorial. The Governor mentioned specifically in a despatch to the Secretary of State in April 1899 that “the (Tai Po) district is well known in Canton (i.e. to the Viceroy) to be turbulent, that to the N.E. of Mirs Bay being noted for piracy, and so ill-disposed that I am informed no Customs Official dares to land there except with the support of a revenue cruiser”.30 He probably had this from \n\nLockhart, his main source of reliable information at this time. Of course, the local population were sometimes not averse to such efforts themselves, and as a British Consul wrote at the time \"The old free-booting spirit still survives among many who are now apparently peaceful traders and fishermen [of which] we occasionally get startling proofs in some unexpected daring act of piracy on the high seas or along the coast\".31 Smuggling was also common, whether of salt or opium.** \n\nLooking outside the district to the province and its capital city Canton, the political scene, as revealed by the Trade Reports to the Foreign Office of consuls in the several British treaty ports of Canton, Amoy, Samshui and Pakhoi was the reverse of satisfactory. Though written by a succession of men of obviously varying temperament and outlook they reveal a sad state of affairs. Everywhere there were disturbances which the civil authorities were slow, or incapable to correct, and clear signs that the dynasty was held to have exhausted its mandate from",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204479,
        "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-1962",
        "page_number": 111,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "100\n\nJ. W. HAYES\n\nexerts itself with unprecedented vigour and hardihood in local affairs. No dispute arises but one or more of these social pests thrusts himself forward between the contending parties, and no fraud on the revenue or wholesale extortion is free from their similar influence\". Lockhart (through Governor Blake) says that the New Territory's literati \"have hitherto lived by irregular \"squeezes\" from the people\" and he blamed the opposition to British rule to them and to \"gamblers and bad characters banished from Hong Kong\" and not to the people who were incited by the gentry and elders. See Papers 1899 pp. 520 and 554.\n\n26 Papers 1899 p. 194.\n\n27 Papers 1899 p. 554.\n\n28 Arthur H. Smith Village Life in China (Edinburgh, Oliphant, Anderson and Ferrier, about 1900) p. 121.\n\n29 These affected the coastal and riverine regions of Kwangtung. See C. F. Neumann's Translations from the Chinese and Armenian with notes. 1. History of the pirates who infested the China Sea from 1807 to 1810, (London, John Murray 1831). This includes, pp. 97-125, a very interesting account of an enforced stay of eleven weeks and three days with the pirate fleet in 1809 by Richard Glasbrooke, the mate of an East Indiaman. The pirates spent a considerable time on and near Lantau, which must have suffered from their depredations. The clan record of the HO family of San Tsuen, Pui O, on the south side of the island mentions pirate raids and a decision to fortify the village with walls which can still be seen, with several embrasures for cannon.\n\nPiracy continued until a much later date. The Cheung Chau police station was attacked and burnt in 1912, necessitating its removal and enlargement, one of the Cheung Chau ferries was pirated in 1923, and in 1925 a band of sixty robbers from the Delta entered Tai O by way of Po Chue Tam creek, killed a woman and made off with young men and a fair amount of booty without any difficulty. The Police Station is situated at the other end of the town and knew nothing of the attack until it was over. See Administrative Reports, District Officer, New Territories 1912, 1923 and 1925.\n\n30 Papers 1899 p. 528.\n\n31 Foreign Office Report 1606 on Trade of Canton 1894.\n\n32 Salt was smuggled into China from Tai O as the government monopoly and price ring made it profitable to do so. See also Enclosure D to Sir Matthew Nathan's despatch No. 59 of 11 January 1905 in Correspondence relating to Kowloon-Canton Railway which mentions rice smuggling from Shum Chun and Deep Bay into Hong Kong. The export of rice from China was forbidden, and checked by the Imperial Maritime Customs.\n\n**F O Trade Report No. 1778 for 1895.\n\n34 F O Trade Report No. 1983 for 1896.\n\n33 Papers 1899, p. 540.\n\nBrenan, with his thirty-two years' service wrote feelingly \"The Chinaman is happiest who never sees an official, who does not even know the name of one\". J N CBRAS XXXII (1897-98) 37.\n\n31 Foreign Office Trade Report for Canton No. 1606 for 1894.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204531,
        "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-1963",
        "page_number": 12,
        "title": "RAS-1963",
        "content_text": "The keen and active interest in the Society shown by our patron, Sir Robert Black, and members of his family is very gratifying and is warmly appreciated. Despite the exacting calls on their time they have been attending our meetings, and this is a noble example to other busy people in the Colony. We appreciate also the zeal of many other prominent personages including the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Hogan, and the Hon. W. C. Knowles who is a member of the Council and whose business house has provided us with both an Honorary Treasurer, Mr. T. J. Lindsay, and an Honorary Librarian, Mr. John Le Mare. I should like also to refer to the interest in the Society taken by members of H.M. Forces and particularly to the interest taken by Col. Halliday and Col. Mackenzie, both of whom have now left the Colony, but it is greatly hoped that this interest will be sustained by their successors. In this connection it may be interesting to mention the first office-bearers of the Society in 1847:\n\nPresident: Sir John Francis Davis (Governor); Vice-Presidents: Major-General D'Aguilar, Major H. P. Burn, John Stewart, Dr. Kinnis; Council: Lt.-Col. Brereton, Peter Young (Colonial Surgeon), W. T. Mercer (Colonial Treasurer), J. C. Bowring (Son of Sir John Bowring); Secretary: A. Shortrede; Corresponding Secretary: Capt. Clark Kennedy; Chinese and Foreign Secretary: Thomas Wade;* Treasurer: F. Bevan; Curator: C. T. Watkins.\n\nIn conclusion I wish to thank all the officers and members of the Society for their loyal and wholehearted support. I am probably in a better position than anyone to appreciate and also to pay tribute to my colleagues on the present Council, in whom you have a hard working and active body, and each of whom pulls his or her full weight in the furtherance of the objects of the Society.\n\n* Afterwards Sir Thomas Wade, K.C.B., G.C.M.G., British Minister at Peking from 1871 until 1883, and later first Professor of Chinese in the University of Cambridge.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204591,
        "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-1963",
        "page_number": 72,
        "title": "RAS-1963",
        "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n61\n\nacquire at Peking a site for Building, or may hire Houses, for the accommodation of Her Majesty's mission, and that the Chinese Government will assist it in so doing\". Then, when the Imperial Government appeared to procrastinate over the ratification of these treaties, another English and French force fought its way to the capital and compelled the Manchu authorities to ratify them by the Convention of Peking. This was signed by the British envoy, Lord Elgin,1 and by Prince Kung,2 the chief Chinese representative, on October 24th, 1860 in the Hall of Ceremonies situated in what was later to be called Legation Street. The second clause of the Convention stated that \"Her Britannic Majesty's Representative will henceforward reside permanently, or occasionally, at Peking, as Her Britannic Majesty shall be pleased to decide”. \n\nLord Elgin proposed that Prince Kung's own residence should be rented to the British, but Prince Kung memorialized the throne as follows: \n\nAs regards the matter of the English residing at the capital in the near future, we have been discussing it with them during the past few days. The chief barbarian official [Lord Elgin] considers that the quarters in Prince I's [Prince Kung] palace are spacious and he insists that it is to be their future residence at the capital. Moreover, he stated that there were still open spaces in the palace and that he wants to build houses there himself. It seems to your ministers that to \n\n1 James Bruce, eighth Earl of Elgin. He served as Governor-General of Canada 1846-1854. In 1857 he was appointed envoy extraordinary to China and signed the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858, returning to England early in 1859. In 1860 he was again sent to China as special envoy, and signed the Convention of Peking. He returned to England in 1861 and was appointed Governor-General of India in the same year. He died in India in 1863. \n\nHis younger brother Frederick William Bruce held the post of Colonial Secretary at Hong Kong from 9 February 1844 until 27 June 1846. In 1857 he accompanied his elder brother to China as principal secretary. He was appointed minister plenipotentiary to the Emperor of China in December 1858, but had to wait until March 1861 before actually taking up residence in Peking. He left China on his appointment as British Minister to Washington in 1865. \n\n2 I-hsin (1833-1898), the first Prince Kung, was the sixth son of Emperor Tao-kuang. When the joint French and British forces approached Peking in September 1860 the Emperor Hsien-feng fled to Jehol leaving his half-brother, Prince Kung, to make peace with the allies. When a prototype Chinese foreign office, the Tsungli Yamen, was set up in 1861, Prince Kung was in charge of it, and he played an important part in Chinese affairs for the next fifteen years.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204595,
        "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-1963",
        "page_number": 76,
        "title": "RAS-1963",
        "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n65\n\na daily diary of events he was naturally encouraged to continue, and thus we have a very readable account of the first year at the Legation.\n\nRennie had reached Peking on the evening of March 25th, going on ahead with the French suite and staying the night at the French Legation. The next morning he was up early. \"Before breakfast I visited the Leang-koong-foo, the building which has been selected for the British Legation, and in charge of which Mr. Adkins has resided at Peking during the winter. The Leang-koong-foo, or palace of the Duke of Leang, was originally an imperial residence, given by the Emperor K'ang-hsi (who died in 1722) to one of his thirty-three sons, whose descendants are known as the Dukes of Leang. The present representative of the family, and owner of the Leang-koong-foo, holds a command in the neighbourhood of the great wall. The Duke of Leang has let his family residence in perpetuity to the British Government, at an annual rent of fifteen hundred taels (500 £.), no rent to be paid for the first two years, owing to the extensive repairs and alterations required.\" A visitor at that time described it as “a straggling, dreary, dilapidated building, which time and money might convert into a tolerably habitable barrack for a brigade of infantry, but which can never become a comfortable or suitable residence for a Minister and the few members of his suite.\" Time was to prove him wrong.\n\nMeanwhile the British party arrived on March 26th 1861 and Rennie describes the formal entry into the British Legation. “At three o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Bruce, Colonel Neale, and the other members of the English Legation, arrived in Peking, escorted by the detachment of Sikh Cavalry. This morning the French flag was hoisted over the gate of the Tsin-koong-foo, and on Mr.\n\n'Ibid., I, 28-9. A language-student at the Legation, writing in 1885 stated: \"A rent of 1,500 taels, or between £400 and £500, is paid into the Tsung-li Yamen (the Chinese Foreign Office) every year. It is the duty of the senior student to make this payment, and, in order that he might appear at the Yamen respectably attired, a box-hat was, it is said, provided sometime about 1861, and is still at his disposal. But it is not often worn.' \"Where Chineses Drive\". English Student-Life at Peking. By a Student Interpreter, 27. See footnote 16 below.\n\n10 E. B. de Fonblanque, Niphon and Pe-che-li; or Two years in Japan and Northern China (London, 1862). 217.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204598,
        "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-1963",
        "page_number": 79,
        "title": "RAS-1963",
        "content_text": "68\n\nJ. L. CRANMER-BYNG\n\nand shown the sights of Peking. This became an agreeable task for the members of the Legation, and there was a constant stream of visitors to Peking enjoying the hospitality of the old Legation right up until its closure in 1959. One of the earliest of these visitors was Sir Robert Hart, the Acting Inspector-General of the Chinese Customs. Meanwhile the business of engaging Chinese clerks, gate keepers, and language teachers proceeded. At various times Rennie mentions such familiar things as burglaries within the Legation, and the virulence of the mosquitoes. By now the Legation was the haunt of curio dealers, many of the things they had to offer being of real value, since the destruction of part of the old Summer Palace by the British and French forces had occurred as recently as the previous autumn, and a great deal of loot was now in Chinese hands. In fact, what with buying antiques, conducting visitors round the sights of Peking, and going to the Western Hills in the summer the members of the foreign legations had already set a pattern during their first year in Peking which has continued much the same until the present.\n\nThe local craftsmen found nothing beyond their capacities, and one Chinese tailor made a fine new Union Jack with the old one to copy from. Rennie remarks: \"The Peking tailors have already mastered the making of European clothing, and several members of the Legation have had things made by them\". The total number of Europeans in the three legations (English, French and Russian) was twenty-two. The first American minister to reside at Peking did not reach the capital until July, 1862. On 23 August, 1861 Rennie records: \"We have been busy to-day getting ready for Her Majesty's Foreign Office a large bird's-eye view of the Leang-koong-foo, made by a Chinese artist. Figures for reference have been painted on it by Colonel Neale, and a key also made. The drawing is very exact, every building being carefully depicted.\" In October buildings next to the Legation on the south side were bought by the British Government from a brother of Duke I-liang. This new area was leased to a medical missionary, William Lockhart, who wanted to set up a medical mission in Peking. By January 1862 the extensive alterations to the Legation had come to an end, and the Chinese interpreter, who had made a good harvest of 'squeeze' out of it, now resigned and departed for Tientsin where the foreign troops were stationed. The time ran out.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204603,
        "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-1963",
        "page_number": 84,
        "title": "RAS-1963",
        "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n73\n\nthe western side, is a bare space occupied in winter by Mongol traders, and known in consequence as the \"Mongol Market\". On the south side, a congeries of little Chinese shops. The whole is surrounded by a massive wall, which on the west, as being the wall of the Carriage Park and enclosing Imperial ground, is topped with yellow tiles. The principal gate of the Legation is in the centre of the eastern side, facing the canal. The gate-house has an upper storey surmounted by a flag-staff, and carrying the royal arms. ...\n\nNorth of the doctor's house is the Fives Court. From this, under the wall of the Carriage Park, runs the Bowling Alley. Opposite the Fives Court, again, is a converted Chinese building, now divided into a billiard-room, a reading-room, and a small stage. North of this are the garden and buildings of the Students' Quarters.\n\nThe Quarters consist of a long row facing south, having an upper storey, and containing ten sets of rooms, five above and five below. The whole block is in the common style of foreign architecture out here, with verandah and balcony. Each set consists of a sitting-room about fourteen feet by ten, with a small store-closet, a bed-room, say ten feet square, and a bathroom. In the upper rooms the store-closet becomes a cupboard, the bathroom being lengthened to allow the door to open on the stair-head. There is a stern disregard of ornament in the interiors at any rate, but they were comfortable enough on the whole.\"7\n\n+\n\nThe only furniture supplied to the incoming student was a bed, a chest of drawers with a looking-glass, a wash-stand, and three cane-bottomed office chairs for his sitting-room. Wilkinson mentions mess fees. \"On first joining the mess the student pays an entrance fee of $25. We contracted with the cook to supply us with breakfast, tiffin, and dinner at 50 cents 1s. 10d. a day. All stores, such as condiments, jellies, tea, coffee, we provided ourselves in regard to wine, each man had a separate account with the cellar.\" From time to time they gave a mess dinner, the largest one being for forty men, students and guests included.\n\n17 Ibid., 24-5; 27-8. For a plan of the buildings see over.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204747,
        "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-1964",
        "page_number": 50,
        "title": "RAS-1964",
        "content_text": "JOURNAL OF OCCURRANCES AT CANTON\n\n39\n\nwas persuaded to join the firm of Baring Brothers & Co. In 1873 he became senior partner of the house, finally retiring in 1882. (L.T.R.)\n\n24 Lin Tse-hsü's fate. Hunter long survived Commissioner Lin. Lin Tse-hsü was dismissed from office in 1840 and later sentenced to exile in Ili in Chinese Turkistan, where he remained for three years. He was allowed to return to Peking in 1845. He later served as Governor-General of Yunnan and Kweichow, and retired from office in 1849. He died in 1850 at the age of sixty-seven. (J.L.C.B.)\n\n25 Heang-shan (Heungshan). Former name of the District in which Macao lies. Re-named Chung-shan in honour of Sun Yat-sen. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n26 Morrison. John Robert Morrison (1814-1843) was born in Macao, the second son of Dr. Robert Morrison and his first wife Mary (née Morton). He had some schooling in England but at the age of twelve he came back to Canton with his father in 1826. He became a fluent Cantonese speaker as well as a Chinese scholar, and on the death of his father in 1834 was appointed Chinese Secretary to H.M.'s Commission in China. In 1838 he became, in addition, Interpreter, and in 1841 succeeded Elmslie as Secretary and Treasurer to the Superintendent of British Trade in China. In 1843 he was appointed Chinese Secretary and member of the Executive Council of the newly founded Colony of Hong Kong and was recommended for appointment, by the Governor, as Colonial Secretary. Before the appointment was approved, however, he died in Macao in August 1843, and was buried in the Old Protestant Cemetery there. (L.T.R.)\n\n27 Kwang Chow Foo. Kuang-chou fu The Prefect of the Prefecture of which Canton was the chief city. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n28 Kam Hay Hue. No such title. But I suspect Hunter intended to indicate the Namhoi Hien which title was sometimes written Nam Hoy Hien. See note 14. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n29 Pwan Yu Hue. Also written Punyu Hien. The magistrate having jurisdiction over the eastern part of Canton city and the District lying to the westward of the walls which included Whampoa and the foreign shipping there. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n30 Fearon, Samuel Turner Fearon was the second son of Christopher Fearon and Elizabeth Noad who were married on 14 May 1818 at the Streatham Parish Church. His father served as a midshipman at the Battle of Trafalgar and after being discharged from the Royal Navy he joined the Honourable East India Company's marine service. In this service he made a number of voyages to Canton and when he decided to take a shore posting there he brought his wife and family out with him. Samuel became a fluent Cantonese speaker and in 1838 was appointed Interpreter to the Canton General Chamber of Commerce. After the cession of Hong Kong he was appointed interpreter and clerk of the Chief Magistrate's Court and a couple of months later were added the duties of Notary Public and Coroner. Three years later he was appointed Assistant Magistrate of Police and on 1st January 1845 he became Registrar General and Collector of Revenue. In July 1845 he was granted a year's sick leave and while in England he was appointed Professor of Chinese at King's College, London, an appointment which he held from December 1846 until December 1852. (L.T.R.)\n\n31 Van Basel. Magdalenus Jacobus Senn van Basel, born in Groningen, Holland on 27 September 1808, was appointed clerk in the Dutch Consulate at Canton in 1826, and Vice-Consul in November 1831. He was later in partnership with G. M. Toe Laer and P. Tiedenan in the firm of Senn van Basel & Toe Laer & Co. In 1848 he became Collector General of Taxes",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204977,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 85,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "76\n\nA. D. BLUE\n\nthe countryside for miles from the coast. The leaders of such fleets were often opposed to the ruling dynasty, sometimes being disaffected former high officials. Koxinga, the greatest of all Chinese pirates, comes into this category. Koxinga was a supporter of the fallen Ming Dynasty against the Manchus, and the Chinese honour him to this day as a great patriot. His greatest exploit was the capture of Formosa from the Dutch in 1661. This type of rebel cum bandit cum pirate continued to appear down to modern times.\n\nThe expansion of the China trade, and the opening of Japan to foreign trade resulted in a great increase in British naval forces in the Far East. The first naval ships to operate in the China seas were based on the East Indies station, but very soon China became an important sphere of naval operations on her own. The suppression of piracy was only one of the Navy's responsibilities. The distance between Britain and China meant that unusual and interesting duties were often entrusted to naval officers, especially before telegraphic communications were established and when senior Foreign Office or Diplomatic officials were unavailable. Hong Kong became the headquarters of the China station, which extended from Singapore to Shanghai, and later to Japan. It continued as such until, as the result of a reorientation of naval policy in the inter-war period, Singapore became the major British naval base in the Far East. Even after that Hong Kong continued to be the headquarters of the anti-piracy forces.\n\nUntil France sent naval forces to co-operate with the Royal Navy in the Second China War, the Royal Navy was the only effective naval force in the China seas, and undertook the protection of all shipping. Even after the United States and France stationed naval forces permanently in these waters, the major responsibility for the suppression of piracy remained with the Royal Navy. It was British policy to station a warship at or near each treaty port, whether it was a coastal or a river port. This meant warships of two distinct types. There were the larger ships and their auxiliaries, which only saw action on rare occasions, and which were based in Hong Kong, with a summer cruise to Wei-hai-wei. Then there were the shallow-draft river gunboats, specially designed to operate on the Yangtze and the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205073,
        "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": 29,
        "title": "RAS-1966",
        "content_text": "24\n\nJOHN J. NOLDE\n\n20 The Canton Register, October 24, 1833.\n\n21 The Chinese Courier, September 14, 1833.\n\n22 Nan-hai hsien chih (*), 1910 ed., chuan 2, p. 52a. Hsum-teh hsien chih (MRA), 1853 ed., chuan 31, p. 20b.\n\n23 The Canton Register, May 20, 1834.\n\n24 The Chinese Repository, April, 1838, pp. 593-605.\n\n25 Italics mine,\n\n26 For the standard treatment see J. K. Fairbank, Trade and diplomacy on the China Coast, 1842-1854, Cambridge, 1953; Tong tekong, American Diplomacy in China, Seattle, 1964; E. Swisher, China's Management of the American Barbarians, New Haven, 1953.\n\n27 For details see pertinent British Blue Books such as Papers relating to riot at Canton in July, 1846..., 1847; Papers relating to murder of six Englishmen, 1848; Correspondence respecting insults in China..., 1857; etc. For the episode of 1849, see J. Nolde, \"The False Edict of 1849\", Journal of Asian Studies, May, 1961, pp. 299-315.\n\n+\n\n-\n\n28 Papers relating to murder....\n\n... PP. 17-18.\n\n29 The Chinese Repository, June, 1847, p. 320.\n\n+ 1\n\n30 The Foreign Office archives in the Public Record Office in London contain much material on this case which is not included in the published documents.\n\n31 G. W. Cooke, China: ..., London, 1858, p. 435. This is a translation by Thomas Wade of a memorial by the Chinese official Tseng Wang-yen 曾望颜.\n\n32 Ibid., p. 436.\n\n33 Ibid., p. 439.\n\n34 Ch'ou-pan i-wu shih-mo (*), Peking, 1930, chuan 75, pp. 11a-12b, 13a-14b; The Chinese Repository, January, 1846, pp. 51-52.\n\n35 Kwang-chou fu chih, 81, p. 43b.\n\n36 Cooke, p. 440.\n\n37 I-wu shih-mo, 79, pp. 46b-47a,\n\n38 G. Fox, British Admirals and Chinese Pirates, London, 1940, p. 92.\n\n39 Ibid., p. 94-95.\n\n40 J. C. D. Hay, The Suppression of Piracy in the China Sea, London, 1889, passim.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205148,
        "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": 104,
        "title": "RAS-1966",
        "content_text": "FOREIGN RELATIONS OF BUDDHISM\n\n48 Ts'en, Hsü-yün ho-shang nien-p'u, Hong Kong, 1962, pp. 21-22.\n\n49 Ts'en, Hsü-yün, pp. 40-43.\n\n99\n\n50 Ts'en, Hsi-yün, pp. 47-48. I have been unable to get confirmation of this story in Thailand; nor have I been able to confirm the related episode, in which Hsü-yün on his way to Bangkok that year met an Englishman who had been British consul in Teng-yüeh and Kunming and who gave Hsü-yün 3,000 pounds Sterling towards the expense of transporting a set of the Tripitaka back to Yunnan. The records of the Foreign Office in London do not appear to reveal who this may have been.\n\n51 White marble images from Burma and Thailand, termed in Chinese \"jade buddhas\" (yi-fo) have been popular in China during the past century. In the late 1890's a set of such images was made in India for a Chinese monk from P'u-t'o Shan, who spent the better part of three years at Oudh overseeing the work. So popular were these particular images that when they arrived in Shanghai, they were kept on exhibit in nearby Woosung at the request of the authorities as a large number of Chinese visit them daily, which was quite profitable for the railway.\" See Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 31 (1896-1897), 203. These may well have been the jade buddhas installed during the reconstruction of the Fa-yü Ssu on P'u-t'o Shan,\n\n52 Ts'en, Hsi-yün, p. 66.\n\n53 Cheng-lien, Ch'ang-chou T'ien-ning ssu-chih, Shanghai, 1948, 7:102. Cf. Chou Hsiang-kuang, History of Chinese Buddhism, Allahabad, 1955, p. 214,\n\n54 See Eastern Buddhist, 3.3 (October-December, 1924), p. 274. This is the earliest instance I have encountered of a Chinese Buddhist going abroad to study Theravada. Unlike Huang Mao-lin he is not stated to have had the goal of spreading Mahayana as well.\n\n55 For example in 1916 the head of the Chi-le Ssu, Pen-chung, led a group of his Refugee disciples to Ku Shan to receive the lay ordination: they numbered five out of the six upasakas and forty out of the 114 upasikas. This information comes from the 1916 ordination yearbook.\n\n56 See Yüan-ying fa-shih chi-nien k'an (Memorial volume for Yüan-ying), Singapore, 1954, pp. 13-14.\n\n57 However, they came from around Amoy rather than around Foochow, where Ku Shan was located.\n\n58 Chinese Year Book 1937, p. 74.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205709,
        "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-1969",
        "page_number": 15,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "CHINESE UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS OF COUNCILS\n\nAs things turned out, Gibb did not return to Hong Kong, and Ng Choy was therefore appointed on a three-year term. This appointment was unfortunately interpreted by some members of the British community as an attempt to create an anti-English party feeling in Hong Kong.\n\nIn May 1880 when one of the magistrates went on leave, the Governor replaced him temporarily by Ng Choy who thus became the first Chinese to hold a senior appointment in the Hong Kong Government. This led to a question in the House of Commons as to why Ng Choy should combine a paid official post with an unofficial seat in the Legislative Council; but by the time these explanations were required the original holder of the post had returned to the Colony.\n\nThe attitude of the British community towards him and the Governor as a result of his appointment to the Legislative Council as well as this parliamentary question must have embarrassed Ng Choy very much. During this time, China having suffered repeated defeats from the hands of foreign powers, there was a movement in China to promote western technology and to modernize China, and any Chinese who had been trained or educated abroad would be welcome back to China. Thus when an invitation came from China for him to serve China, Ng Choy accepted it gladly. He left Hong Kong in 1882 before the expiry of the 3-year term in the Legislative Council, and later sent in his resignation from Tientsin.\n\nNg Choy became Secretary and Legal Adviser to Viceroy Li Hung-chang, one of the most important Chinese political figures of the time. Now known as Wu Ting-fang, he soon rose to become Chief Director of Railways and later Ambassador to the U.S.A. After the founding of the Chinese Republic in 1911, he held important appointments respectively as Minister of Judicial Affairs, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Financial Affairs. In 1917, when China entered the First World War, he was for a short time nominated as Premier. In 1922 he became Governor of Kwangtung and died the same year in office, soon after General Chan Kwing-ming's revolt in Canton.*\n\n* In his The Chinese (Indianapolis, The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1909) p. 196, John Stuart Thomson praises Wu and styles him \"the Chesterfield of China in all the graces of speech and manners.\" Ed.\n\nPage 15\n\nPage 16",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205794,
        "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-1969",
        "page_number": 100,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "94\n\nR. BRUCE\n\nnecessary for the late King? He would be welcome then, that is in 1852. At the same time he took the initiative in improving trading conditions. Monopolies were partly removed and duties on imports and exports reduced. For a moment it seemed that Siam's foreign relations could be improved without formal treaty and the British Government did not press the matter. But in fact there was much to be done, and with a new British Plenipotentiary at Hong Kong it was opportune to resume discussions.\n\nSir John Bowring was a very different diplomat from his three British predecessors, Crawfurd, Burney and Brooke or the American envoys Roberts and Ballestier. He was an intellectual, a radical reformer, a disciple and editor of Jeremy Bentham, a linguist who could prattle in a dozen languages, an ex-Member of Parliament and a writer of hymns, an inveterate talker, a man with limitless energy and a Victorian capacity for pomposity and self-glory. After a career of business, politics, writing and self-appointed diplomacy in the courts of Europe, Bowring, being short of money, accepted public office as Consul at Canton. That was in 1849 when he was fifty-seven. Some five years later he became Governor of Hong Kong, Superintendent of Trade and, most glorious of all, Her Majesty's Plenipotentiary responsible for relations with China, Japan, Siam and all countries in the Far East.\n\nBowring's five years' Governorship of the island colony on the coast of China was anything but successful. Some of his senior officials were incompetent and even corrupt, and he was unpopular among the British merchants. Worst of all he precipitated the second Anglo-Chinese war by sending warships to bombard Canton over a quite unworthy incident. But he was completely successful when he sailed to Bangkok in March, 1855, to negotiate a treaty with the Siamese.\n\nMost of the detailed business of the negotiations was done by Bowring's young assistants, his son John C. Bowring, an employee of Jardine, Matheson and Co. in Hong Kong, and Harry Parkes, his secretary, who was later to have a distinguished career as Consul at several ports on the China coast, (Mongkut referred to the young men as \"Mr. Parkes and Your Excellency's upspring\".) But it was Bowring and King Mongkut who created the favourable atmosphere which allowed progress to be rapid and the discussions congenial. It was clear from the start that the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206080,
        "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-1970",
        "page_number": 160,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "HONG KONG BEFORE THE BRITISH\n\n155\n\nnot a general practice, it was probably due to the easiness of running before the wind that the ships could become such large hulks. Unfortunately, we do not know who built them.\n\nBy the eighth century, the boats had become huge. \"Ladders several tens of feet high had to be used to get on board.\" The trade was organised. Foreign captains had to be registered with the Office of Trading Ships, which inspected manifests and collected export and import duties. These captains had legal powers to deal with offending passengers when at sea.\n\nIn 758, the Mohammedans had so much the upper hand in Canton that they yielded to the temptation of sacking and burning the city and making to sea with the loot. However, trade continued to flourish, the principal imports being, according to Soleyman, ivory, frankincense, ingots of copper, turtle shells, and rhinoceros horns (with which the Chinese used to make girdles), and the principal exports: silk and porcelain.\n\nThe foreign ships also carried as passengers Chinese Buddhists visiting the holy places in Java and India. In the biographies of sixty pilgrims composed by I Ching,12 37 of them took the sea route to India. Some of these went from the Tonkin delta region, but the majority started from Canton or returned thither. The compass was still unknown in those days, and the first mention of its use for navigation in Chinese literature occurs at the beginning of the 12th century.\n\nV. T'UN MUN\n\nIn the preceding sections, a picture has been given of the elements which made up the population of South China up to the end of the T'ang dynasty. We now come to our region — the peninsula South East of the Canton delta, and we must do our best to piece together such fragments of historical knowledge that we can find into a sequence which will indicate how its population developed and thrived.\n\nThe first historical reference to any place in the region occurs in a list of itineraries from China to the Persian Gulf collected\n\n11 Tang Kuo Shih Pu, by Li Chan.\n\n12 義淨,大唐西行求法高僧傳",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206290,
        "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-1971",
        "page_number": 107,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "CHINESE ELITE IN HONG KONG\n\nTHE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS GROUP\n\n101\n\nA life-long career by a Chinese in Government service usually would not have provided opportunity for the accumulation of sufficient capital to enable one to enter the élite group. The highest paid positions were the interpreterships, but a Chinese who had sufficient competency in English to be appointed to this position could earn more in the employment of the foreign firms. However, many of the young men who received an English language education, at first in the Mission schools or the Morrison Education Society School and after 1860 at the Government Central School (now Queens College), upon leaving school became interpreters and clerks in Government for several years. But normally they did not make a life career of Government service.\n\nThere were, however, two individuals who appear on our lists who had been employed by the British Government even before its removal to Hong Kong and who continued as Government employees until their retirement. These were Tso Aon and Cheong Assow.\n\nWhen the British established their Government offices in Hong Kong the man who became responsible for all the Chinese staff in Government offices, as well as serving as compradore to the Treasury, was Tso Aon alias Cho Yune Choong alias Cho Wing Chow. His family had lived in Macao for several generations, and in 1834 he entered the service of the British in the office of the Superintendent of Trade. By the time of his removal to Hong Kong he had accumulated enough capital to invest in real estate. When he retired from Government service in 1857 without pension, he lived off the income from real estate, pawn shops and other business ventures. He died in 1874 at Macao, survived by several sons. One of his grandsons was the Rev. Tso See Kai (**) 曹思楷) Vicar of St. Paul's (born 1895, died 1928). Tso Aon's brother, Chow Yik Chong (5) alias Chow Yin Yin alias Chow Yau () alias Chow Kam Ming (alias Chow Wai Chun (R), was a large land owner and capitalist in Macao. He was knighted by the Portuguese Government, made a member of the Macao Legislative Council, and was a leader of the Chinese community in Macao. He died in 1896. His son Tso Seen Wan came",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206491,
        "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": 39,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "RAJA JAMES BROOKE AND SARAWAK\n\nNo one dissented, whereupon\n\n33\n\nMuda Hassim then drew forth his sabre, and raising it, proclaimed in a loud voice, that any one who contested the Sultan's appointment, his head should be split in two. On which ten of his brothers drew their krisses and flourished them\n\n+\n\nAs we have seen James Brooke acquired Sarawak as a private individual; but there is little question but that elements within the Brunei court, centered upon Hasim and Bedruddin, which came to be known as the \"English party\" wished to bring the British into an alliance with them to further their own political ends, and they saw Brooke as an agency by means of which this goal might be pursued. Although given a pseudo-political mission by the Singapore authorities Brooke undertook no official duties for Britain until 1844 when he was appointed \"agent near the person of the Sultan of Borneo\", a \"special and temporary office\", and was commissioned to find a site for a naval station along the northwest coast of Borneo.\n\nWhen Labuan was purchased from Brunei and created a British colony Brooke became its first governor in 1847. The same year he negotiated a consular treaty with the Sultan and was named consul to Brunei. His dual appointment from the Foreign and Colonial Offices came largely as a result of the reputation he enjoyed in England as a result of his successful battles against Borneo pirates. Not only was he popular with officers of the Royal Navy in the East who aided him in his anti-piracy warfare on the coast. His exploits had also been well publicised at home. In 1847 he returned to England, the hero of the day. He was fêted, given the freedom of the City of London, presented at Court at Windsor Castle, where the Prince Consort found him an interesting conversationalist, and was knighted.\n\nAt the end of the 1840s, then, Brooke found himself the possessor of three posts. He was Raja of Sarawak in his own right, and an officer of the Crown as Governor of Labuan and Consul to Brunei. The nature of his responsibilities in the three positions very soon created a conflict of interest situation and in 1854 he resigned his crown appointments.\n\n5 Aberdeen to Brooke, 1 November 1844, Foreign Office Series 12, Volume 2 (FO12/2).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206492,
        "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": 40,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "34\n\n!\n\nLEIGH R. WRIGHT\n\nThe issue of Brooke's status revolved around, firstly, the question of whether or not a subject of the Queen could hold the position as a sovereign prince of a foreign state; and, secondly, whether Brooke was in fact an independent ruler or a vassal of the Sultan of Brunei.\n\nThe issue, however, was not a burning one in the ministries of Whitehall. Despite the fact that Borneo was of concern to Britain as the guardian of the eastern flank of the South China Sea route to the China coast, and was to assume, gradually, more strategic value as first France and later Germany began colonial operations in the area, at mid-century Britain possessed a colony and naval station at Labuan and a (“good strong”) consular treaty with Brunei which gave her a certain measure of control, if she chose to indulge it, in Brunei's relations with foreign states. Most of the Colonial and Foreign Secretaries in London, until the 1870s were not very interested in defining precisely Raja Brooke's status,\n\nFor the most part, Whitehall grudgingly approved of Brooke's “civilizing influence\" in Borneo. Lord Palmerston, Foreign Secretary in 1846, offered naval support for the suppression of piracy, and during a later term of office gave standing orders to the Eastern squadron to visit Sarawak at regular intervals. But the Foreign Office generally held to the view that \"it is not the policy of Her Majesty's Government that British subjects should possess territory on the mainland of Borneo\".\n\nLord Clarendon, when Foreign Secretary in the mid-1850s, came close to disavowing Brooke's position in Sarawak. In 1853 the Raja took issue with a Foreign Office statement that seemed to assume that Brooke was a vassal of Brunei. Clarendon minuted,\n\nIt seems to me that the various documents tend to prove how cautiously the government abstained from recognizing his (Brooke's) independence although in various ways the anomalous character of his position has been admitted.\n\nBut Clarendon did not leave it at that. When in 1855 Spencer St. John succeeded Brooke as Consul in Brunei he suggested to the Foreign Office that he also be accredited to Sarawak as an independent state. The Raja agreed and insisted that the new consul must receive his exequatur from him. This act would render the desired\n\n6 FO to Admiralty, 24 July 1846, FO 12/4.\n\n7 Clarendon minute upon Brooke to FO, 27 September 1853, FO 12/13.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206495,
        "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": 43,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "RAJA JAMES BROOKE AND SARAWAK\n\n37\n\nFrance, and in 1859 he \"broke off\" relations with Britain, upon which the Foreign Secretary, Lord Russell commented,12\n\nTell Brooke that the people of Sarawak are welcome to any independence they can achieve and maintain but that a British subject cannot throw off his allegiance at pleasure.\n\nAnd Spencer St. John noted13 that \"the Raja's correspondence during this year with Her Majesty's Government was not pleasant, and ended, apparently, in complete estrangement”.\n\nOver the years Brooke had acquired a respectable following of supporters in Britain and Singapore, among whom were some influential figures such as Lord Grey, Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford, and the late Victorian philanthropist, Miss Angela Burdett-Coutts, later Baroness Burdett-Coutts. His friends now took up his cause and lobbied Whitehall from the Prime Minister's office down.\n\nBritain refused to extend a colonial or protectorate status to Sarawak on practical political grounds. Henry Layard, an under-secretary in the Foreign Office, wrote that a protectorate was declined because of the \"inconvenience of such relations between this country and a foreign territory\", because Sarawak “would not be of sufficient value politically and commercially\", and because Brooke's title was not \"sufficiently clear\"14\n\nBrooke's friends persuaded the Government to have another look at Sarawak, and in 1861 Lord Elgin, who was about to depart as the new viceroy of India, was instructed to investigate the prospects and potential of Sarawak. He delegated the task to Colonel Cavenagh, Governor of the Straits Settlements. In due course Cavenagh and Elgin provided an optimistic assessment of Raja Brooke's state and suggested making Sarawak a lieutenant-governorship under Singapore. \"I am disposed to think\", wrote Lord Elgin,15\n\nthat the acquisition of Saigon by the French and the persistent endeavor of the Dutch authorities to cripple British trade... give enhanced importance to the preservation of the independence of Sarawak as a matter affecting British interests.'\n\n12 See correspondence between the Foreign Office and Raja Brooke between 26 November and 17 December 1859, FO12/35.\n\n13 Spencer St. John, Life of Sir James Brooke, Rajah of Sarawak, (Edinburgh, 1879) p. 327.\n\n14 Layard memorandum to Lord Elgin, 2 January 1862, FO12/35.\n\n15 Elgin to Russell, 8 January 1863, FO12/35.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206496,
        "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": 44,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "38\n\nLEIGH R. WRIGHT\n\nIn the meantime Brooke's friend St. John, the Consul in Brunei, provided strong evidence to support Sarawak's claim of independence. In correspondence between the Sultan and the Foreign Office, Raja Brooke's relations with Brunei were the subject of discussion. Lord Russell in 1861 asked the consul if it was true that Brunei looked upon Sarawak as an independent state. He had been told that the Sultan honoured the Raja with a twenty-one gun salute whenever he visited Brunei Town. St. John replied that the Sultan did indeed consider Sarawak independent of Brunei. St. John also produced minutes of an interview he had had with the leading chiefs of Sarawak in which they unanimously confirmed that they had chosen the Tuan Besar, James Brooke, to rule over them in place of the harsh and tyrannical chiefs of Brunei, and that they owed no allegiance to the Sultan of Brunei.16\n\nWhen, then, St. John's tour as Consul in Brunei ended in 1862 Brooke's friends, with a concerted lobbying effort, prevailed upon the Palmerston government to appoint a consul to Sarawak as distinct from Brunei. In August 1863 the Cabinet approved the appointment \"as the most direct and least formal method of recognizing it as an independent state\". Whatever in the way of reservations Lord Russell may have held concerning Brooke and Sarawak he was aware that the appointment meant recognition. He minuted some time earlier,17\n\nIf we appoint a consul I suppose he must be appointed to reside in the territory of the rajah of Sarawak as an independent sovereign.\n\nAnd later, when Russell was urged to inform Raja Brooke \"that the Cabinet had consented to recognize Sarawak by appointing a consul there\", the Foreign Secretary instructed his undersecretary, \"We may write to Sir James Brooke to say that he has reason to believe it\". The Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, concurred.\n\nHowever, bureaucratic procedures now took over, and the Consul's instructions directed him to procure his official acceptance from\n\n16 See L. R. Wright, Origins of British Borneo, pp. 75-76; and St. John, \"Minutes of an interview with Sarawak Chiefs\", 25th October 1855, FO 12/22.\n\n17 Russell minute on a memo, by Brooke, 13 August 1863, in the Layard Papers (British Museum), ADD.MSS. 38989, f. 244,\n\n18 Russell minute, Layard Papers, ADD.MSS. 38989, f. 245.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206497,
        "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": 45,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "RAJA JAMES BROOKE AND SARAWAK\n\n39\n\nthe \"local authorities\" rather than from the sovereign prince of Sarawak, as was usual. Thus the anomalous status of Sarawak in the view of some officials remained, and this technicality provided an opportunity for a subsequent permanent undersecretary in the Foreign Office to declare that Brooke had not been recognized as a reigning prince. Julian Pauncefote opined in 1877,19\n\nRaja Brooke has not forfeited his claims of British nationality by accepting the position of ruler of Sarawak and as a matter of constitutional law it is competent to Her Majesty to recognize him as a sovereign prince but no such recognition has yet taken place.\n\nJames Brooke died in 1868, happy at having received his country's recognition, and confident that it was merely a step toward the desired British protectorate. In this he was prophetic. Although a formal protectorate was not granted until 1888, Britain made it quite clear by a pronouncement late in 1868 that her paramount interests on the northwest coast of Borneo constituted it a British sphere.20\n\nRaja James Brooke was presented at court on two occasions, in 1847, and again in 1857. His nephew and successor, Charles Brooke, visited England in 1869 and asked to be received officially. He was told that he might write on his card and be presented as \"Mr. Brooke, Raja of Sarawak\". The second white raja was incensed and refused to appear until finally, in 1874, he was presented as \"His Highness, the Raja of Sarawak”, and granted a place just below the Indian maharajas in the order of precedence at Court.\n\nUntil 1888, Britain's empire building in Borneo was done largely by proxy, by Englishmen indeed, but by the agency of political structures and vehicles outside the direct control of Whitehall. That was the role of the Brooke raj, and later of the chartered company that ruled North Borneo, so far as they were a part of the British empire. One of Brooke's friends, John Abel Smith, M.P., was quite accurate when in 1866 he noted rather sourly,21\n\nThe English government is quite alive to the importance of Sarawak to British interests, but as long as Raja Brooke\n\n19 Pauncefote minute, 2 January 1877, FO12/43.\n\n20 FO to Hennessy, 2 December 1868, FO12/34A.\n\n21 Owen Rutter (ed) Rajah Brooke and Baroness Burdett-Coutts, London, 1935, p. 272.\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207651,
        "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": 39,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "24\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\n43 See Ono Giichi, War and Armament Expenditures of Japan (New York, 1922), 57-58, 70-71, 140-144, 273-277, and Ono's Expenditures of the Sino-Japanese War (New York, 1922), 120-126; also Oshima, 372-375, 376, note 18.\n\n44 Smith, \"Foreign-Training,\" 219-220; Yamagata, \"The Army,” 107-108; British Public Record Office, W.O. 33/34, Captain Trotter, \"Some Remarks on the Army of Li Hung-Chang;\" Rawlinson, 190.\n\n45 Smith, \"Foreign-Training,\" 219, 221; see also Rawlinson, 202-203; Thomas William Ayers, Chang Chih-tung and Educational Reform in China (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), 164-189, 204-215.\n\n46 Smith, \"Foreign-Training,\" 218-219; Cavendish, 721.\n\n47 Cavendish, 711, 713-715, 719-723.\n\n48 Smith, \"Chinese Military Institutions,\" 157, note 135.\n\n49 See Fairbank, et. al., “Economic Change,\" 20-21; Hsü, The Rise of Modern China, 527-534. On the more positive side of the ledger, consult Ernest Young, \"Nationalism, Reform and Republican Revolution: East Asia: Essays in Interpretation, 160-162; Hsü, The Rise of Modern China, 535.\n\n50 See, for example, Hatano Yoshihiro, \"The New Armies,” in Mary Wright, ed., China in Revolution: The First Phase, 1900-1913 (New Haven and London, 1968).\n\n51 Paul Cohen, Between Tradition and Modernity: Wang T'ao and Reform in Late Ch'ing China (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), 4, 148-149.\n\n52 See Kublin.\n\n53 Smith, \"Foreign-Training:\" Ralph Powell, The Rise of Chinese Military Power, 1895-1912 (Princeton, 1955), 245-246, 262. An interesting question is whether the Manchus could have preserved their power, and even enhanced it, by undertaking meaningful military reform at the central government level. Although vested interests in the army were pervasive and solidly entrenched, one cannot assume that what happened to the dynasty in 1911 would necessarily have happened in the same way had the Ch'ing government initiated reforms in the 1860's and 1870's comparable to those undertaken by the dynasty in the early 1890's. By the beginning of the twentieth century, anti-Manchu sentiment was a powerful ideological weapon, at least in part because the Manchus had proven so totally incapable of protecting Chinese interests against foreign encroachments. But during the Tung-chih period, anti-Manchuism was no real issue at all.\n\n54 Dwight Perkins, \"Government as an Obstacle to Industrialization: The Case of Nineteenth-Century China,” Journal of Economic History (1967), esp. 486, 492.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207725,
        "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": 113,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "98\n\nTIN-YUKE CHAR\n\nat the main mast of every war ship. . . . It was a pretty sight, very noisy and warlike.”* \n\nThe Hong Kong Government Gazette of April 16, 1881, published the announcement with the Chinese and English placed side by side:\n\nGOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION-No. 131.\n\nHis Majesty the King of HAWAII arrived in Hongkong on Tuesday evening, the 12th instant, and was welcome to the Colony by the Governor, in the name of Her Majesty Queen VICTORIA. His Majesty, the King KALAKAUA, was accompanied by His Excellency W. N. ARMSTRONG, Minister of State, and Colonel JUDD, Chamberlain,\n\nBy His Excellency's Command,\n\nFREDERICK STEWART,\n\nActing Colonial Secretary.\n\nColonial Secretary's Office,\n\nHongkong, 16th April, 1881.\n\n號一十三百一第報憲\n\n署輔政使司史\n\n爲篩論事照得現有\n\n浩德護送前來於本月十二日卽禮拜二晚抵港 夏威儀國大君主加拉嘉華隨帶宰臣士當及司儀長參將\n\n香港總督郎敬用\n\n大英后帝城克多壢阿名迎接登岸爲此特示俾衆週知\n\n一千八百八十一年 四月 十六\n\n示\n\nA tiffin (luncheon) party was given by Mr. Chater, a rich merchant.† Men of all nationalities came to meet the King and his party at this magnificent affair. The King asked Armstrong to take his place and propose a toast to the Governor who later asked Armstrong to write out the speech for transmission to the Home Government in London. Armstrong in his letters back to Foreign Minister Green mentioned, \"I must admit having a glorious time with Sir John Pope Hennessy, as he is a man of immense information, great experience, and liberality. . . . Governor Hennessy will\n\n* The Hawaiian flag was designed by Capt. Alexander Adams, Englishman, in 1810, with eight stripes for the islands and the British Union Jack in the upper left corner.\n\n† See Plate 16.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207763,
        "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": 151,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "136\n\nW. A. REYNOLDS\n\nport for the work came from American United China Relief (UCR) funds through the American Friends Service Council (AFSC); there were members from Canada, U.S.A., New Zealand, as well as China itself; and the self-sufficiency required was much greater than that of other FAU groups.\n\nThe original plan, worked out in late 1940 and early 1941, was for a group of forty men, equipped with 20 trucks, a mobile operating theatre and mobile workshop, to undertake two tasks. The first was the transport of medical supplies into China from Burma and the second provision of medical teams to work with civilian and military hospitals. The proposals had the support of the British Fund for the Relief of Distress in China under Dr. H. Gordon Thompson, the Foreign Office, the U.C.R. and the AFSC. The trucks and equipment were purchased in the US and shipped to Rangoon where they were assembled and driven up to China. Dr. R. B. McClure, a Canadian medical missionary born in China, was appointed to lead the Unit.\n\nIt will be remembered that in 1941 Japan occupied all the coast of China, transport up the railway to Kunming from Hanoi had ceased and the only land routes into the western provinces still held by the Government of the Republic of China under Marshal Chiang Kai Shek were the Burma Road and the road from the USSR via Sinkiang. When the Sino-Japanese war widened into the Pacific War on December 8, 1941, about half of the FAU group had arrived in Burma and China, the first trucks were being assembled in Rangoon and the rest of the party and equipment were on the high seas. All arrived safely and the Unit undertook a number of interesting tasks during the Burma fighting of 1942.1\n\nMedical Services and Supplies in China\n\nDespite the diversion of manpower and loss of trucks and fuel in Burma the work of transporting medical supplies in China got underway in 1942. In 1941 there were four organizations concerned with military and civilian medical services:—\n\n1) the Army Medical Administration (AMA)\n\n2) the Chinese Red Cross (CRC)\n\n3) National Health Administration (NHA) Weishengshu (衛 生 署) with its civilian hospitals and clinics.\n\n4) Over 100 mission hospitals, responsible to their own Mission Boards.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208000,
        "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-1977",
        "page_number": 39,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "BRUNEI: A HISTORICAL RELIC\n\n23\n\nSpaniards. She worried about the presence of France in Indochina on the opposite side of the South China Sea at mid-century; and later on she suspected imperial Germany of coveting northern Borneo and the Philippines.\n\nThe British sphere was initiated by the private efforts of an English adventurer, James Brooke, a former officer in the Bengal Army. In 1840, he helped bring an end to an insurrection in the Sarawak River, in the southern-most area under the nominal rule of the Sultan of Brunei, and was rewarded by being granted the province. In 1845 Brooke was appointed diplomatic agent to Brunei and supervised the transfer of the island of Labuan to Britain as a colony and a naval station. He also, in 1847, negotiated a consular treaty with the Sultan which effectively gave to Britain control over Brunei's foreign relations. The colony of Labuan languished but the quasi-protectorate over Brunei served as the de facto and legal base for Britain's sphere of influence in Borneo. Such a sphere was proclaimed in 1868 as a warning to all European nations to keep out.\n\nThe real carving-up of the carcass of Brunei began in earnest in 1878 with the founding of another private venture, that of a syndicate of City of London businessmen which later became the British North Borneo (Chartered) Company. The syndicate was under the control of Dent Brothers Company. Alfred and Edward Dent were sons of the owner of the former Hong Kong firm of Dent and Company. Raja Brooke had annexed, by treaty with the Sultan, additional chunks of territory before 1878. In 1853 he purchased northward to and including the large district of the Rajang River. And in 1861 he purchased the five so-called “sago rivers” as far north as Kidurong Point. When that point was reached, the Governor of Labuan objected to any further northward encroachment of Sarawak and Labuan's wishes were supported by Britain.\n\nWhen, however, the British North Borneo Company purchased the large area of Sabah, the whole of the island of Borneo to the northward of Brunei Town, with strong support from the Foreign Office, both Raja Brooke and the Colonial Office protested. It is interesting to note that the permanent undersecretary at the Foreign Office who midwifed the company charter through officialdom in Whitehall was Julian Pauncefote, who was a former attorney-general.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208001,
        "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-1977",
        "page_number": 40,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "24\n\nLEIGH WRIGHT\n\nof Hong Kong (1866) and who acted on occasion as legal representative of Dent and Company in that Colony.14\n\nThe Colonial Office by 1879 was favourably disposed toward Sarawak's expansionist plan in Brunei. A compromise was eventually achieved between the Colonial and Foreign Offices whereby Brooke was allowed a further cession of Brunei territory, the Baram River district, while North Borneo was confirmed to the company and it was allowed to acquire several territories on the north and east of Brunei Bay.\n\nAs to the attitude of Brunei toward the carving-up of its territory, few of the rajas of Brunei Town objected, for they were paid handsome cession monies from both Sarawak and North Borneo. In general, the temptation of a considerable monetary payment in hand overrode any desire to retain nominal title to territories over which Brunei sultans had long since ceased to rule and from which little, if any, revenue was obtained. That the presence of the British and the monetary payments tended to bolster a declining court and infuse it with vigour, if but superficially, was not lost upon the sultan and his rajas.\n\nThe keen competition which arose between Sarawak and North Borneo over the charter issue and the cession of Baram created a strong and bitter rivalry between the two states. Their attention was soon drawn to the remaining territory of Brunei. It seems clear that both Raja Brooke and the Company fully expected the demise of the sultanate, and each was determined to obtain as large a share of the remaining territory as possible. Raja Brooke had, for example, as early as 1874, offered to take over the administration of Brunei.\n\nIn 1890, Raja Brooke did annex the Limbang River district at the invitation of its Kayan chiefs, who had carried on a long rebellion against the extractions of corrupt Brunei rajas. After some on-site investigations, Britain reluctantly agreed to the acquisition. The raja was on firm legal ground, for he had obtained the chop of the sultan to the cession. But the loss of the Limbang was bitterly objected to by the rajas, who at almost the eleventh-hour began to realize that their individual selfishness and rivalry was bringing about the gradual extinction of the sultanate. The Limbang issue remains to this day a point of controversy between Brunei and Sarawak.15 No one at the time seemed to notice that Sarawak's",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208005,
        "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-1977",
        "page_number": 44,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "28\n\nLEIGH WRIGHT\n\nThe state of Brunei annual report for 1956 describes the water city, Kampong Ayer, this way,\n\nSet in a wide sweep of the river, this river town is in its way unique. At high tide under favourable conditions of light it takes on quite a remarkable beauty; viewed at close quarters it is even more remarkably ramshackle. The houses are grouped together in small villages, being connected by precarious plank walkways, and there the inhabitants carry on their multifarious activities in much the same way as if they were on land.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 See e.g. O. W. Wolters, Early Indonesian Commerce; a study of the origins of Srivijaya, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1967); and D. E. Brown, Brunei: the structure and history of a Bornean Malay sultanate, (Brunei: Brunei Museum, 1970).\n\nThese works have drawn upon the earlier studies of such scholars as W. P. Groeneveldt (1880) and Lien Sung (1919).\n\n2 See Brown, op. cit., Ch. XI.\n\n3 The fullest account of the Moro wars is in E. H. Blair and J. A. Robertson, The Philippine Islands, 1493 - 1898, (Cleveland, 1903 -09).\n\n4 Lord Stanley of Alderley (ed.), The first voyage round the world by Magellan, by Antonio Pigafetta, (London: Hakluyt Society, 1874).\n\n5 J. Hunt, \"Some particulars relative to the Sulo islands in the Archipelago of Felicia”, in Malayan Miscellany, I, (Bencoolen, 1820).\n\n6 James Horsburgh, Directions for sailing to and from the East Indies and China, (London, 1811), the navigational handbook for generations of British sea captains. This work drew heavily upon the surveys of eighteenth century seafarers such as Alexander Dalrymple (1774) and Thomas Forest (1780).\n\n7 S. B. St. John, Life in the forests of the Far East. (London, 1862), Vol. 2, pp. 248-49.\n\n8 British Parliamentary Papers, 1854-55, XXIX (253),\n\n9 Sarawak Gazette, 26 April, 1872.\n\n10 Henry Keppel, The expedition to Borneo of H.M.S. Dido for the suppression of piracy, with extracts from the Journal of James Brooke, Esq. of Sarawak, (London, 1847),\n\n11 S. Baring-Gould and C. A. Bampfylde, A History of Sarawak under its two white rajahs, (London, 1909), pp. 82-83.\n\n12 Lennox Mills, British Malaya, 1824-67, (reprint: Kuala Lumpur, 1966), p. 248.\n\n13 British interests in Borneo are treated extensively in, L. R. Wright, The Origins of British Borneo, (Hong Kong, 1970).\n\n14 See L. R. Wright, \"The Foreign Office and North Borneo\", in Journal of Oriental Studies, Vol. VII, No. 1, (January 1969).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208574,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 31,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "CHAN KIT-CHENG\n\nOstensibly for medical reasons, at the end of 1942 and early in 1943, to pass unutilized. No effort was spared to make the visitor feel welcomed and cherished. She was a guest at the White House and at President Roosevelt's home at Hyde Park. She was invited to address the Senate and the House, and was welcomed by huge gatherings at all the stops she made from the east to the west coasts.13 A further and significant gesture of American friendliness was embodied in the United States' renunciation early in 1943 of her extraterritorial rights in China,14 a subject to be further dealt with later. One last example of the American compensatory effort during the first two years of the Pacific War was the passing of an act in December 1943, by large majorities of both Houses of Congress, repealing the longstanding Chinese exclusion laws, establishing an annual Chinese immigration quota, and making legally admitted Chinese eligible for naturalization as American citizens.15\n\nIt is imperative to spell out in some detail the general American attitude vis-a-vis China, not only to serve as background to the subject under discussion, but also because such attitude unavoidably influenced Britain in her dealings with China, including those over the question of Hong Kong. Ever since Pearl Harbour, China had made no secret of her resentment of Britain for having rejected China's offer of assistance in the defence of Hong Kong and Burma, for having been so catastrophically defeated by Japan in such a short time, and for, according to Chou En-lai who was then representative of the Chinese Communist Party at Chungking, having “discriminated against and treated as inferiors the Chinese who fought with the British at Hong Kong and in Malaya.”16 Britain, on her part, was anxious to improve relations with China and to collaborate closely with the United States in relation to their Far Eastern ally. She was, not unlike the United States, \"obsessed” for the greater part of 1942 with the fear that China might \"throw up her hands.\" The Foreign Office decided that all that Britain could do was to \"adopt an apologetic and ingratiating attitude towards the Chinese.\" However, the United States, much to Britain's annoyance, stole the limelight from all the major British attempts at appeasing China. Britain's offer of a loan of £50,000,000, with stringent regulations regarding expenditure to maintain equilibrium in her post-war balance of payments, was a clear anti-climax to the Chinese after the unconditional American loan.18 Although Britain renounced her extraterritorial rights in China simultaneously",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208576,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 33,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "6 \n\nand support.24\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\nThe first time the American government was called upon to act on the question of Hong Kong occurred towards the end of 1942 in connection with the extraterritoriality negotiations which the United States and Britain were conducting simultaneously with China. The initiative of the negotiations clearly belonged to the United States.25 Britain, however, was anxious that her treaty would as far as possible be identical with the American one, and that she would not lag behind the United States in signing the treaty. In this Britain keenly felt the pressure of time in that the United States, eager to please the Chinese, attempted to have the matter settled as fast as possible. Negotiations, which began early in October, were well advanced by about mid-November when disagreement remained on three questions which involved America and Britain alike: national treatment for commerce, coastal trade and inland navigation, and the right to acquire real property in China. Britain, however, had the additional problem of having to face China's demand, made on 13 November, for the rendition of concessions and to provide for the termination of the territory leased to Britain in 1898, i.e. the New Territories of Hong Kong, which included the area known as New Kowloon.\n\nBy the beginning of December 1943, the United States had given way over all the three questions with which she was concerned. Britain's disappointment and exasperation were thus summed up by Sir John Brenan: \"The Americans have now let us down on the three subjects to which we attached the greatest importance, namely national treatment for commerce, coastal trade and inland navigation, and the right to acquire real property. Moreover, by their rush tactics they have deprived us of any opportunity of real negotiation with the Chinese. We could hardly have done worse for ourselves if we had acted alone. It now remains to be seen if the Chinese, having got all they want from the United States, will hold up our treaty over the Kowloon question.\" Eden made a strong remonstrance to the United States on the way she had treated Britain in the latter phase of the extraterritoriality negotiations.27\n\nBy then the British Foreign Office had already reached a decision with regard to the Chinese demand for the return of the New Territories. Britain did not want to accede to the Chinese proposal, in that the New Territories were interdependent with, and economically and strategically vital to, Hong Kong and Kowloon. She",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208577,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 34,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "THE U.S. AND THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG 1941-45\n\n7\n\ncould not refuse point blank either because, significantly, no American support could be expected in taking this stand, and the Chinese were likely to refuse to sign the treaty under the circumstances. The only alternative left was to endeavour to obtain postponement of the question by using the formula laid down by, surprisingly, the Colonial Office for the future status of Hong Kong earlier in August: \"should the post-war reconstruction of the Far East to be undertaken jointly by all the United Nations require special contributions from Hong Kong, the British government would not 'regard the maintenance of British sovereignty over the Colony [here applied only to the New Territories] as a matter beyond the scope of... discussion.\" Such, plus the argument that the New Territories were leased territories and therefore unrelated to the question of extraterritoriality, was the British reply to the Chinese at the beginning of December,28\n\nBy mid-December, all outstanding obstacles in the American-Chinese negotiations had been removed, but the problem over the New Territories persisted in the Anglo-Chinese talks. The Chinese would not accept a settlement which did not include the cancellation of the Kowloon lease. The United States indicated that she would sign her treaty with China on New Year's Day 1943. Obsessed with the desire to sign the Anglo-Chinese treaty simultaneously, Britain informed the Chinese government through her ambassador at Chungking that \"the future of the New Territories was outside the scope of the extraterritoriality treaty, but if the Chinese government desired [my italics] that 'terms of the lease of these territories should be reconsidered'\", this should be done when war was over.29 Thus the British had clearly conceded to China the initiative to raise the question in future.\n\nThe Chinese, however, remained adamant. On 28 December the Foreign Office decided to omit the words \"terms of\" before \"lease\" in her statement to China, having learned earlier of the suspicion of T.V. Soong, the Chinese foreign minister, of the words in question. But it was to be Britain's very last concession, even at the risk of sacrificing the treaty as a whole.30\n\nAt the war cabinet meeting that day Eden obtained permission to ask for the support of the United States, in deference to whose opinion Britain had conceded a number of important points in her negotiations with China, as a last attempt to save the situation.31 The State Department, however, did not comply with the Foreign",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208578,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 35,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "8\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\nOffice's wish. The Far Eastern division in the department believed that \"the sympathy of the American public would lie almost entirely with China and would be strongly critical of this Government,”32 The American government was fortunately spared the embarrassment of having to reject the British request in that the Chinese, for some still unknown reasons, agreed on 31 December not to raise the question of the New Territories in connexion with the extraterritoriality treaty.33 Under the changed circumstance, Lord Halifax, British ambassador to Washington, was given to understand that the American government would have been prepared to indicate its displeasure had China been obstinate over the inclusion of the New Territories in the treaty.34 The interesting question remains as to what attitude the United States would have adopted had China requested her support.\n\nMeanwhile, the Institute of Pacific Relations was actively preparing for a conference to be held at Mont Tremblent in the United States at the beginning of December. The conference attracted the serious attention of all those countries concerned with Pacific affairs because of the increasingly wide publicity enjoyed by the Institute since Pearl Harbour through its large publishing programme of books, pamphlets, and periodicals. From late spring onwards, earnest preparations for attending the conference were made by Chatham House, the British national council of the Institute of Pacific Relations, together with the Foreign Office which, despite its earlier apprehension of \"the risk of a lot of washing of dirty linen in public' ”, had now decided to make full use of the conference as a platform from which Britain could educate the American opinion about the British empire. From the beginning the Foreign Office was alive to the danger that the question of Hong Kong would arouse great attention at the conference. However, it was decided that the British delegation would not be briefed on Hong Kong because it was feared that the idea of returning Hong Kong on terms after the war, a point the British government had conceded after much painful inter-departmental consultation and deliberation, would be badly received by the Americans and Chinese who would denounce anything short of an outright retrocession,35\n\nThe Chinese delegation was equally well prepared. Pressure coming from the Chinese delegates, who explicitly expressed their desire for Hong Kong, was so intense that Sir John Pratt, the British delegate charged with the duty to speak on China, Japan, and",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208579,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 36,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "THE U.S. AND THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG 1941-45\n\n9\n\nHong Kong, stated without authorization but from his \"knowledge of the movement of opinion in England\", he felt confident that when the time came to deal with Hong Kong, the Chinese would be completely satisfied.\" The Foreign Office was naturally most displeased by such an utterance,36\n\nBy contrast, the American behaviour at the conference was dis-coordinated. While much of the criticism of British imperialism and skepticism regarding the British attitude and intention in respect to the Atlantic Charter were expressed by the American participants, and while they generally supported the Chinese stand on Hong Kong, the pressure they succeeded in exerting was considerably discounted because they failed to function as a closely coordinated team. Stanley Hornbeck, a delegate to the conference, commented specifically on the organization of the American group in a memorandum on his observations of the conference: \"It needs to be kept in mind with regard to I.P.R. Conferences that, whereas, as a rule, the Groups from most countries... attend and function as “delegations” (with a certain amount of guidance if not definite instructions from their Governments), the members of the American Group attend the function simply as members (without a \"group\" organization and without express guidance and with no instructions from their Government.)\" This disjointed approach was to largely characterize the American stand regarding the question of Hong Kong during the war,\n\nSuch an approach did not long escape Britain's attention. In March 1943 Anthony Eden, the British foreign secretary, paid a visit to Washington, apparently on Churchill's prompting. Eden's conversations with Roosevelt and senior American officials only \"provided an exchange of views with regard to such matters as cooperation between the Governments with respect to political questions arising in connection with the prosecution of the war\"; there was no intention of commitment on either side.38 Early in Eden's visit Harry Hopkins, special assistant to Roosevelt, made the general remark, in front of the president, to the British visitor that he \"thought no useful purpose would be served at this stage of the war, and surely no useful purpose at the Peace Table, by Great Britain and [the United States] having no knowledge of [their] differences of opinion” regarding Hong Kong, Malayan Straits, and India.39 Eden could do no harm in agreeing to this comment.40 Roosevelt, however, was much more direct about Hong Kong. He",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208580,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 37,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "10\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\nhad, according to Hopkins, urged Britain on more than one occasion to give up Hong Kong as a gesture of “good will”. To this suggestion Eden, who had originally objected to agreeing to the return of the New Territories on terms after the war in connection with the extraterritoriality negotiations with China but eventually bowed to the majority opinion of the Foreign Office, returned a cold shoulder.41\n\nBritain's attitude regarding Hong Kong steadily stiffened in the course of 1943. She talked less and less about returning the colony on terms. It was partly because pressure from China decreased markedly since the beginning of the year, presumably because she assumed the retrocession of Hong Kong as a matter of course judging from Britain's behaviour in the extraterritoriality negotiations and at the Institute of Pacific Relations' Conference. More significantly, perhaps, Britain became increasingly confident in her relations with the United States and China with the improvement in the European war situation. By the end of the year a final Allied victory in Europe was no longer seriously in doubt.42\n\nIt was under such circumstances that Stanley Hornbeck's visit to London, as a return gesture to Ashley Clarke's visit to Washington the previous year, took place in November 1943. Hornbeck spent much of his time in London on consultation with the Foreign Office and other offices concerned with Far Eastern affairs. At the final conference at which most interested British officials were present, Hornbeck, “entirely on his own responsibility”,43 remarked as follows: \"I felt that we had covered much ground and had explored a good many subjects, [but] there was one additional matter to which we perhaps might need, not at the moment but as the situation unfolded, to give thought. That matter was ... the future of Hong Kong.\" \"The effect was electrifying\", observed Hornbeck. He immediately regretted it: \"I had had no thought of injecting a discordant note. I felt at once that discretion in that context would be the better part of valour.”44\n\nHornbeck's regret came too late. That very evening the British arranged that he would, before his departure for home, call on Churchill the following morning. At the meeting Hornbeck received a long and emphatic lecture from the Prime Minister on Hong Kong: \"What about Hong Kong? I will tell you. [The rest retold in Hornbeck's words] He then described the acquisition by Great\n\n+ + + +",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208587,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 44,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "THE U.S. AND THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG 1941-45\n\n17\n\n◄ Hornbeck to Cordell Hull, secretary of state, 20 May 1942, Hornbeck Papers (Hoover Institute, Stanford University), box 465.\n\n* Generally see Thorne, op. cit., p. 163, and note 51 on pp. 168-9, referring to Leahy's diary and the King Papers. Also Hornbeck's memorandum, 3 October 1942, Hornbeck Papers, box 180.\n\n• Ballantine's diary in Ballantine Papers (Hoover Institute, Stanford University), box 1. Also see Tung Hsien-kuang, Chiang Tsung-t'ung ch’uan (Biography of Chiang Kai-shek; Taipei, 1954), II, pp. 343-4; and B. W. Tuchman, Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911-45 (New York, 1971), p. 352.\n\n'Hornbeck's memorandum, 20 May 1942, op. cit.\n\n8 The two sets of statistics are available in Hornbeck Papers, box 466 and box 467 respectively.\n\n\"Thorne, op. cit., pp. 175-6.\n\n1o Announcement of the loan was made on 1 February, but the agreement was not signed until 21 March. For details of the loan and its use during subsequent years, see Department of State, United States Relations with China (hereafter US and China; Washington, 1949), pp. 470-71.\n\n11 Hornbeck's autobiography, Hornbeck Papers, box 497.\n\n12 For more details, see US and China, p. 37,\n\n1a Madame Chiang, however, was intensely disliked by Roosevelt's household staff at Hyde Park who found her \"arrogant and overbearing\", W. D. Hassett, then aide to President Roosevelt, Off the Record with F.D.R. (Rutgers University Press, 1958), pp. 181-2, 288.\n\n14 For text of the relevant treaty between the United States and China, see US and China, pp. 514-7.\n\n15 For more details, see ibid., p. 37.\n\n1 Chinese leaders freely expressed their anti-British sentiments to the Americans; see, for example, H. Morgenthan, Morgenthau Diary (China; Washington, 1965), II, pp. 862-895.\n\n17 Minute of Sir John Brenan, a veteran official in the Far Eastern Department of the British Foreign Office, on Anglo-Chinese relations since the outbreak of the Pacific War, 3 November 1942, Foreign Office (hereafter FO) 371/31627.\n\n18 For elaboration on this point, see author's article, \"The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942-43: A Study of Anglo-American Chinese Relations\", Modern Asian Studies, 11, 2 (1977), pp. 262-3.\n\n19 Thorne, op. cit., p. 195.\n\n20 Details of the British discussion leading to the invitation are available in FO 371/31627. The British government was understandably embarrassed by the Chinese response. Ashley Clarke, an official in the Far Eastern Department, confided this point to Stanley Hornbeck, his opposite number in the Department of State. See Hornbeck's attempt to explain for Madame Chiang, Hornbeck to Clarke, strictly confidential, 27 February 1943, Hornbeck Papers, box 467.\n\n21 Thorne, op. cit., p. 161.\n\n22 \"The Hong Kong Question during the Pacific War (1941-45)\", p. 58.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208588,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 45,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "18\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\n23 W. Range, Franklin D. Roosevelt's World Order (University of Georgia Press; 1959), p. 105.\n\n24 This is according to the observation of Ashley Clarke, head of the Far Eastern Department in the British Foreign Office, during his one month visit to the Department of State early in the summer of 1942; see his report on his visit to A. Eden, secretary of state for foreign affairs, 11 June 1942, FO371/31804. See also Ministry of Information to Colonial Office, 22 October 1942, communicated to the Foreign Office, FO371/31774.\n\n25 \"The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942-43: A Study of Anglo-American-Chinese Relations\", pp. 266-272.\n\n26 Brenan's minute, 3 December, on J. G. Winant, American ambassador to London, to Eden, 2 December 1942, FO371/31664.\n\n27 Eden to Winant, 7 December 1942, in Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (hereafter FRUS), China, 1942 (Washington, 1956), p. 390.\n\n28 \"The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942-43: A Study of Anglo-American-Chinese Relations\", op. cit., pp. 284-5.\n\n29 Ibid., pp. 287-8.\n\n30 Ibid., pp. 288-9.\n\n31 War cabinet conclusions 173 (42), 28 December 1942, Cab65/28. Also Eden to Winant, 29 December; and Eden to Lord Halifax, British ambassador to Washington, tel. 8264, immediate, 29 December 1942, FO371/31665.\n\n32 Thorne, op. cit., p. 179, and note 53, p. 198, referring to G. Atcheson to Hornbeck, 29 December 1942, Department of State, Decimal and Other Files, National Archives (Washington D.C.) 793.003/12-2942.\n\n33 W. L. Tung in his book V. K. Wellington Koo and China's Wartime Diplomacy (New York, 1977), based on the Wellington Koo Papers deposited with Columbia University, gives a possible explanation: \"Koo was then Chinese Ambassador to Great Britain and returned to Chungking for consultations. As an experienced diplomat well familiar with the attitude of British official and unofficial circles, he counselled the government to conclude the treaty on the relinquishment of extraterritoriality but reserve the right of later negotiations on the Kowloon question”, p. 53.\n\n34 Halifax to Eden, tel. 6310, immediate, 31 December 1942, FO371/35679.\n\n35 \"The Hong Kong Question during the Pacific War (1941-45)\", pp. 58-68.\n\n34 Ibid., p. 68.\n\n*7 See memorandum in Hornbeck Papers, box 466.\n\n** Cordell Hull, secretary of state, to United States chargé d'affaires in London, tel., 4 April 1943, in FRUS, The British Commonwealth, Eastern Europe, The Far East, 1943 (Washington, 1963), III, pp. 46-7. Also see R. E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins (New York, 1948), p. 707.\n\n30 For American interest in India, especially early in the war, see for example, M. S. Venkatramani and B. K. Shrivastava, \"The United States and the Cripps Mission\", India Quarterly, XIX, no. 3 (July-September, 1963), pp. 214-65. See also author's article, \"Britain's Reaction to Chiang\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208590,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 47,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "20\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\n62 \"The Hong Kong Question during the Pacific War (1941-45)”, p. 72.\n\n63 Brigadier A. J. H. Dove of the War Office to C. H. M. Weldock of the Admiralty, 12 August 1945, communicated to the Foreign Office, FO371/46251, and Admiralty to commander-in-chief, British Pacific Fleet, tel. 131957A, important, 13 August 1945, communicated to the Foreign Office, FO371/46252.\n\n64 Seymore to Ernest Bevin, foreign secretary, tel. 857, most immediate and top secret, 16 August; tel. 865, most immediate and top secret, 17 August; tel. 909, most immediate and top secret, 23 August; and Bevin to Seymore, tel. 984, 25 August 1945, FO371/46252.\n\n**Harry S. Truman, Memoirs by Harry S. Truman (New York, 1965), I, p. 492.\n\n**Thorne, op. cit., p. 649.\n\n67 General Hurley, now United States ambassador at Chungking, to secretary of state, tel. 1414, 21 August 1945, in FRUS, The Far East, China, 1945 (Washington, 1969), VII, pp. 507-8.\n\n**Truman, op. cit., pp. 493-4.\n\n*Hurley to secretary of state, tel. CFB$633, 23 August 1945, in FRUS, The Far East, China, 1945, op. cit., p. 511.\n\n70 Truman, op. cit., pp. 494-5.\n\n71 Truman, ibid., p. 496.\n\n72 G. B. Endacott, A History of Hong Kong (Oxford University Press, 1958), p. 302.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208679,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 136,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "THE MARYKNOLL MISSION, HONG KONG 1941-46 \n\n109\n\n20- Another community meeting but no further developments on repatriation. At 11 o'clock this morning we were agreeably surprised to learn that Sister Paul and Sister Corazon were on \"The Hill\" and that we could go up and see them. Again Sister Paul moved the adamant hearts of the Japanese and secured permission to enter the Camp to say goodbye to her departing Sisters. We learn that our own names have been handed in to the Foreign Office in Hong Kong for release from the Camp, and our hopes are high. We also learn that Father Tennien is in Chungking, and that Father Briggs and Father Hater are both quite ill. Since Sister Paul and her Sisters have been in Hong Kong, we have been enabled to receive weekly parcels of foodstuffs, and this has helped a great deal. For some weeks a league of softball has been in progress, and today the last game of the season was played between the British and Americans, the score being 15 to 6 in favor of the latter. A Stanley Cup was fabricated by Camp artisans and presented to the winners.\n\n22-The first anniversary of our newly ordained Maryknollers, and they enjoy a Camp lunch at the Maryknoll Sisters' apartments at 7:00 p.m. The repatriation ship, the Asama Maru has been further delayed. Due to some circumstance or other, our rice ration on the 23rd and 24th was very meager, but Father Meyer came to the rescue with his toasted rice which he has been saving for such a rainy day.\n\n25-Rumor hath it that our papers or forms are now on “The Hill,” and that we may get final word any day now to pack up and leave for Hong Kong. Mr. Gunn, an American, and seven others, British and Portuguese, are advised they may leave Camp tomorrow.\n\n26-We were delighted today to receive a visit from His Excellency, Bishop Valtorta, who asked permission to come out and say goodbye to the repatriates. He could remain but a short time, and bade the rest of us to have hope, as he felt we would be released in due time. He is also trying to secure the release of the Canadian Sisters. The Asama Maru is now scheduled to leave on the 30th, the repatriates going on board the 29th. The British are still incredulous about repatriation of the Americans. There is now some talk about possible repatriation of British women and children and old men, but nothing definite.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208684,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 141,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "114 \n\nREVS. J. SMITH AND WM. DOWNS \n\n12-Sunday. Masses as usual, with Father Meyer preaching a course of sermons on the Mass. Another good tiffin with roast beef, sweet potato, spinach and NO rice for a change. Supper, rice pudding with raisins only. Either we feast or we fast these days. \n\n13—All Americans, except Maryknollers, are to report to “The Hill\" tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. The four Americans who have already signed up are still waiting for final word. \n\n14----The Americans called up were asked why they wanted to go to Hong Kong, and how they could support themselves. Were told that they would hear further from the Foreign Office. Father Murphy baptized an adult catechumen. \n\n15 Sister Henrietta Marie celebrates her feast day by giving us a piece of chocolate cake. We seem to be getting very few vegetables these days. The water spinach is wormy and getting tough and the chives—well, 'nuf said! And we are supposed to pay for all this FOOD after the war is won, for we get a monthly bill therefor. The rice, too, is beginning to get poor, being broken cargo rice and full of worms. (The Chinese would never think of eating this.) The British now have nothing but this poor rice, but we seem to have a limited supply of the good rice yet. The Camp seems very quiet these days and even our own quarters have quieted down considerably. We have much more satisfactory arrangements for Mass now, with two altars in our little chapel. The Blessed Sacrament is also reserved. Heavy rain continues. \n\n16-A wedding this morning at 8:00 in the Maryknoll Chapel, Father Murphy officiating. He also has another baptism in the afternoon. Mr. Dick Munsey, an American ex-seaman, dies in Tweed Bay Hospital, after a very short illness. Rain all day. \n\n17--Mr. Munsey buried at 10:00 a.m. He has a wife and family in Hong Kong. \n\n19-Sunday. Vacation religious classes begin. Catholic Action meeting after Benediction. Father Hessler is now chaplain to the Hospital, succeeding Father Toomey. At last swimming permission is granted. We are now allowed to go to Tweed Bay beach in groups, between 9 and 11 in the morning and from 2 to 5 in the afternoon. \n\n20-Delay on swimming. Rain continues.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208689,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 146,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "The Maryknoll Mission, Hong Kong 1941-46\n\n119\n\nwith a tie game between the Americans and the Police, with a score of 5 to 5. Darkness and the eight o'clock curfew prevented the game from being played out. Some of the British teams are beginning to get quite good and the Americans will have to look to their laurels! Before the Americans left on the Asama Maru, since they were not allowed to take much U.S. currency with them on the boat, Father Troesch very wisely arranged to take their cash and gave them a note to Maryknoll, New York. This gives us some ready cash for our living in Hong Kong, and for our travel expense to the interior if we shall be allowed to leave the Colony.\n\n22----Minstrel show on the Green—quite good. The evenings are beginning to get cool and blankets are brought out,\n\nSunday - uneventful.\n\n24 — Americans, 5; Police, 3. More packages from town, via \"The Hill\". This extra food, which Sister Paul is sending in for us and for the Sisters, is very much appreciated.\n\n25-Usually after signing one's papers for release, one is allowed to leave within four days, but to date we have received no further word, so we sit and wait until the Foreign Office gets good and ready to allow us to walk the streets of Hong Kong as free men again.\n\n26-29 Police, 34; College, 10; a very good crowd and lots of fun. Entertainment in the evening on the Green.\n\nSunday Weather cool. Swimming still popular, though the crowds are thinning out on the beach. From two to five hundred at one time.\n\n31-High wind and quite cool. Against the uncertainty of our departure, language school classes begin again. Our rations continue as hitherto, though our cooks are striving valiantly to dish it up in as appetizing a style as possible with the material to work with. Water spinach is still our standby, and has been dubbed by someone \"rubber plant.\"\n\nSEPTEMBER\n\n1-The wind and the rain continue, playing havoc with the soft-ball schedule. More speculation about British repatriation. The days continue to come and go, and yet we have no word about our departure.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208696,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 153,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "126\n\nREVS. J. SMITH AND WM. DOWNS\n\nevery foreign enemy building, whether public or private property, and those which have escaped confiscation have not escaped the looting by Chinese. Curiously enough, there was an almost total absence of English signs on streets and over buildings and stores, the Japanese having taken all these down, and in many instances, replacing them with Japanese signs. In the lobbies of office buildings all the tenants' names were in Chinese or Japanese, and it was often very difficult to find one's own family doctor, unless one happened to be familiar with his Chinese name. It seemed that everything reminiscent of the hated foreigner had to be effaced. Placarded all around the town, too, were flaming posters depicting the New Order in the Far East, showing smoking chimneys of busy factories, smiling Chinese gathering grain in the fields, and other indications of what Japan expected to do for the downtrodden Chinese. At various conspicuous places were also huge maps showing the conquests in East Asia of the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy. The streets were fairly clean, though here and there might be seen some piles of rubbish, and I understand that in the beginning, the Japanese kept in office some of the officials of the Sanitary Squad, that is, British officials. Just to show the effect of Japanese progress, now some of the streets in the downtown sector were actually being washed daily!\n\nHowever, along the side streets, one could find more sordid scenes--emaciated and dying beggars lying on the pavement, and others looking pretty thin and hungry. Before we left Hong Kong, most of these beggars had disappeared and I suppose it is not hard to imagine what became of them, for the Japanese are not very often moved to pity. There are many tales of cruelty inflicted on the Chinese, and one significant fact is that the huge Prison at Stanley is practically empty. It is said that often offenders against the laws were thrown off the bund into the sea; others were tied up and left standing in the broiling sun until they died, and some of us have seen the police dogs which the Japanese have trained to hunt down Chinese who cut wood on the mountain sides. A friend of mine was an actual eye-witness of a Chinese woman whose flesh was literally torn by these dogs and who ran screaming down the mountain. These brushwood gatherers are often shot at, too.\n\nThe Japanese have retained both the Indian and the Chinese police and they patrol this city and the roads. The Indian police",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208766,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 223,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "The Tung Chung Fort\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nTung Chung15 is a valley which lies on the north coast of Lantau Island. It is surrounded by hills on three sides,16 facing the sea on the north. The valley is well-drained by streams, giving fertile farmlands to the people. A century or so ago, there was a walled area, called the Tung Chung Walled City; and a fort which guarded the coast, the Shek She Fort A6.\n\nThe Tung Chung Walled City was erected between the Sheung Ling Pei village #17 and the Ha Ling Pei village 下嶺皮村 T## 18. During the early years of K'ang Hsi period, there was only the Tung Chung Shuen (post)✯✯ under a Tsin Tsung +(or lieutenant) of the Tai Pang Battalion 19. However, the post was quite isolated, and it was far from Tai O where there was the Tai Yue Shan Shuen 大嶼山汎20.\n\nAfter the surrender of Cheung Po-tsai in the 15th year of the Chia Ch'ing reign2, foreign intercourse and influence increased; and fortifications along the coast were strengthened. In the 22nd year of the Chia Ch'ing reign (1817), the Tung Chung Walled City and the Shek She Fort were erected 22.\n\nThe Walled City and the Fort remained strongholds on the island until 1898, when the New Territories were leased to the British. Then the Walled City was used as the Police Station and later as the Wah Ying School **** during the Second World War.23 It is now the site of the Tung Chung Rural Committee's office and the Tung Chung Public Primary School.\n\nThe Walled City measures 225 feet by 265 feet. It is backed by the Tai Tung Shan. It has three rubble walls: its front wall is about 15 feet thick. The building stone of the walls came from Chik Lap Kok Island.24\n\nThe Walled City has three gateways: The East Gate was called Chip Sau ✩✩, the West Gate was called Luen Kun, and the Main Gate, Kung Sun. The East and West Gates are now blocked by bricks, and the main gate is used as the entrance to the Rural Committee and the Public School.\n\nInside the Walled City, there is a playground. Behind the playground, there are two old houses, which are the remains of the guardhouses built during the 22nd year of the Chia Ch'ing reign.25 These houses are now used as the office of the Tung Chung Rural Committee.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208800,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 257,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "230\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nThe years following the change-over were not peaceful. The western relations with China were not, on the whole, harmonious. This was largely because a tradition-bound and conservative bureaucracy, loosely ruled from Peking, was reluctant to allow contact with outsiders except within the long established tributary relationship by which the \"middle kingdom\" dealt with foreigners.\n\nProfessor Graham uses mainly western (and almost completely British) sources in his research. His extensive use of Foreign Office, Colonial Office, Admiralty and Indian Office Records in London and New Delhi has given him the expertise with which to assess British policymaking and the multifarious problems arising in its implementation in the imperial period of the nineteenth century. He uses private papers to complement official sources, delving into such well known collections as those left by the \"actors\" of the story, among them Palmerston, Wellington, Russell, Pottinger, Aberdeen, James Matheson, William Jardine. And he does not neglect the less well known diaries and journals left by common seamen and admirals who were participants in the action of the book.\n\nThe purpose, then, as the author admits, is to see the conflict between China and the west \"through European eyes” (p. viii). But here the author is rather modest for he does make excellent use of the best available translated sources to attempt to understand the conflicts from Chinese views.\n\nThe chapters are roughly chronological, beginning with a discussion of the Canton \"system\" of trade in tea, silk, opium and silver, and tracing the \"campaigns\" of the naval skirmishes in 1839-41 and 1856-60. Inserted, at appropriate places, are chapters on the founding of Hong Kong as a colony, the problems of administration and command in the Royal Navy (the China Station was not actually established until a division of the East Indies Station occurred in 1844), and the impact of the Crimean War, Russia and the Indian Mutiny upon events in China.\n\nIt is curious that rather limited naval skirmishes leading to consular treaties should be denominated by historians as “wars”. Professor Graham defines three separate Anglo-Chinese Wars, viz. 1839-41 (\"the Opium War\"), 1856-58, and 1860. These limited campaigns were found necessary, according to the preponderant British view, because Chinese officialdom was largely ignorant of western armed strength and must be shown by a demonstration of",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209446,
        "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": 103,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "81\n\nment's bias toward France than to try and understand that it would be an infringement of British sovereignty to blow up French ships in Hong Kong waters.\n\nEven the Colonial Office staff objected to the Hong Kong Government's apparently pro-French stance. Their impression was that the French would not be able to get any Chinese labour there if the Government did not put pressure on the Chinese. The conclusion was that \"It seems to me dangerous to British residents in China and to the peace of the Colony to help the French in this way.' 1905 How much more things would appear that way\n\nto the Chinese.\n\nThus the fines became a symbol of moral and legal injustice, of pro-French sympathies and disregard for the feelings of the predominant majority of the population. The fines were the last straw! It is significant that the Foreign Office strongly recommended that the fines be refunded.66\n\nThe strike apparently split the ranks of the labouring classes. If we assume that some had struck out of a sense of righteous indignation and nationalism, or out of fear of retaliation, there were perhaps just as many who did not share these feelings and would much rather have got on with their business. This split would aggravate the already excited atmosphere created by the war and by the strike itself.\n\nOn the 30th when the strike became general, there were already signs of trouble when those boats which continued working were stoned from the Praya, but things did not get out of hand. On the 3rd however, they did. The outbreak of the riot appears to me one of those historical events which \"just happened\". I believe it was not premeditated because the “rioters\" carried no real weapons, only stones and bricks they could pick up from the road. If there had been a conspiracy the men would have come better armed. The accounts in the newspapers and by Marsh in his despatches to the Colonial Office indicate the police over-reacted. The police rushed to the scene fully armed with carbines, which compared to the stones of the rioters, clearly suggests over-reaction. The police fired a large number of rounds of ammunition into the crowds. In fact there was so much firing that a newspaper expressed surprise that only one dead man",
        "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": 209658,
        "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": 315,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n293 \n\nThe final happy twist to this story is that the Foreign firm which took over Welsh's contract for Cassia, thus restoring the good name of the foreigners, was almost certainly Herton's. Earlier in Piry's report he wrote: \"Messrs. RUSSELL & CO's steamer Hainan will be remembered here as having proved the means of breaking the ice in Pakhoi. She made her first appearance here on the 28th of September, with a Foreign merchant on board\". As we have seen above, the Hainan came to Pakhoi especially to fetch the consignment of Cassia, and the Foreign merchant on board was equally probably Mr. Herton, perhaps come to take up residence as indicated by Stronach.\n\nWhat use, if any, William Keswick made of the two letters has not been ascertained. It is of interest, however, to note that soon after Russell's Hainan inaugurated the Hong Kong - Pakhoi run, Jardine, Matheson's Conquest began to include Pakhoi on her Hong Kong -- Haiphong route.\n\nH. A. RYDINGS \n\nNOTES \n\nThe large collection of China Maritime Customs publications in the Library of the University of Hong Kong were donated by the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce in 1937. William Keswick was at one time Chairman of the Chamber. When the letters were found in the 1879 volume it was unfortunately not noticed between which pages they had been left, but it is probable that it was at the beginning of the report from Pakhoi.\n\n* Contained in Great Britain, Foreign Office, Embassy and consular archives: China: correspondence (F.O.228), now in the Public Record Office, London: microfilm in the University of Hong Kong Library. Correspondence on the Herton claim is in vols. 612, 630 and 654.\n\n4.\n\nTransit passes were instituted under the Treaty of Tientsin, 1858, in Article XXVIII of which it is stated:\n\n\"It shall be at the option of any British subject, desiring to convey produce purchased inland to a port, or to convey imports from a port to an inland market, to clear his goods of all transit duties, by payment of a single charge. The amount of this charge shall be leviable on exports at the first barrier they may have to pass, or, on imports, at the port at which they are landed; and on payment thereof, a certificate shall be issued, which shall exempt the goods from all further inland charges whatsoever.\"\n\n(Hertslet's Treaties, &c., between Great Britain and China, London, 1908, v.1, p. 27-8).\n\nHai-An (M) is the port on the mainland opposite to Kiungchow,\n\nPage 315\n\nPage 316",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210873,
        "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-1986",
        "page_number": 224,
        "title": "RAS-1986",
        "content_text": "207\n\nwife. He began his career as a teacher of English in Government Chinese schools. After two years, he was appointed an interpreter in the Police Magistrate's office. His brother-in-law, Ng Mun-sow, was already in the office and when he was dismissed, A-lloy stepped up into his position.\n\nHe left Hongkong Government service in 1867 and accepted a position under the Viceroy of Kwangtung.\n\nHe was to be in charge of an opium tax collecting office in Hongkong for the Chinese Government. Much opposition to this was voiced in the English language press, and A-lloy was attacked as a tool used to subvert British authority in Hongkong.\n\nHe then left Hongkong to become legal adviser on foreign affairs to the Governor of Fukien. He had received no formal legal training, but his years as interpreter in the courts of Hongkong gave him, as a newspaper account mentioned, “a surprisingly intimate knowledge of the forms and routines of our country.”\n\nHis activities in Fukien roused the indignation of the Hongkong papers. One of them characterised him as \"this peripatetic conglomeration of legal imposture and contemptible impudence.\"\n\n**\n\nWhatever his reputation in Hongkong, in China it had been enhanced by his acquiring, either by purchase or conferment, the degree entitling him to wear a white button on his hat.\n\nIn 1879 a change of policy in the Fukien provincial government resulted in the dismissal of most of their English-speaking Chinese employees, Ho Shun-chee, as A-lloy was then calling himself, left and joined the Chinese diplomatic mission to the United States. The Ambassador, Chen Lan-pin, was a Canton man and had recruited most of his staff from the Canton-Hongkong area. Ho Shun-chee served as interpreter.\n\nIn 1880 he passed through London. He took the opportunity to send a note to Dr. Legge, saying: \"Shortly before leaving Hongkong for America to join the Chinese Embassy under His Excellency...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211000,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 62,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "37\n\nment, when attempting in April to occupy the New Territory (as the New Territories were then called), encountered much more ferocious resistance than anticipated. At this juncture, 600 men were sent into the Kowloon Walled City by the Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, and the British authorities, convinced that they were there to support the resistance, demanded their withdrawal. The Colonial Office went so far as to threaten starving out the garrison at the City until troops were removed.41 The Chinese, however, claimed that the troops had been sent by special request of the Hong Kong government to preserve order, and though some of the men were withdrawn, by 4th May, 200 were still stationed in the City.42\n\nThis prompted the British to take action to attack Shumchun and Kowloon City as punishment for the Governor-General's duplicity in abetting the local resistance. On 16th May, at 3:00 p.m., a force of 300 men consisting of Royal Welsh Fusiliers and 100 Hong Kong Volunteers proceeded to Kowloon and occupied it, apparently meeting little resistance.43 All Chinese civil and military officials were ordered to depart as the British claimed that their continued presence and the retention of Kowloon Walled City in Chinese hands had proven inconsistent to British military requirement. To “legalize” the situation, an Order-in-Council was issued in December, announcing British jurisdiction over the Walled City which was to be administered in the same manner as the rest of the Colony.44 Yet this remained a unilateral revision of the Convention which the Chinese government never recognized.\n\n44\n\n45\n\n46\n\nThe Chinese naturally responded bitterly to the development. T'an Chung-lin, the Governor-General, protested vehemently to the court of the undignified manner in which the military officers and soldiers were cast out.45 At Peking, the Tsungli Yamen complained to the British Minister.46 Chinese eagerness to recover jurisdiction at Kowloon is best revealed in the letters from Lo Feng-lu****, Chinese Minister at St. James, to the Foreign Office.Yet, paradoxically, this eagerness was not accompanied by action; no attempt was made by the Chinese to reinstate an administration in the Walled City.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211007,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 69,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "44\n\n37 Krone, p. 132.\n\n18 Bruce Shepherd, The Hong Kong Guide (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1982; 1st published, Shanghai, 1893) pp. 117-118; R.C. Hurley, Tourists' Map of 8 Short Trips on the Mainland of China (Neighbourhood of Hong Kong) including Principal Places frequented by Sportsmen (Hong Kong: R.C. Hurley, 1896) enclosed in Blake to Chamberlain, April 28, 1899, #107: CO129/290, p. 7.\n\n39 Shepherd, p. 117.\n\n40 The Convention is appended in Wesley-Smith, Unequal Treaty, pp. 191-192. The negotiation of the Convention is dealt with in detail in the book.\n\n* Colonial Office draft telegram to Sir H.A. Blake, enclosed in Colonial Office to Foreign Office, April 27, 1899, despatch #130: CO882/5/66, p. 136.\n\n42 Blake to Chamberlain, May 4, 1899, telegram: CO882/5/66, p. 140; Consul Mansfield to Bax-Ironside, April 20, 1899, enclosed in F.O. to C.O., July 13, 1899: ibid., p. 304.\n\n43 Wesley-Smith, Unequal Treaty, p. 73.\n\n44\n\nThe Order-in-Council, dated 27th December, 1899, is appended in ibid., pp. 196-7.\n\n45\n\nT'an Wen-chin kung tsou-kao, XUSA (Memorials of Tan Chung-lin) 2 volumes, (Taipei: Ch'eng-wen Co., based on 1911 edition) vol. 2, 248-26a.\n\n46\n\nTranslation of a telegram from the Tsungli Yamen, dated Peking May 20, 1899, enclosed in F.O. to C.O., May 22, 1899: CO882/5/66, p. 160.\n\n47 Lo Feng-luh [sic] to the Marquess of Salisbury, October 17, 1899, enclosed in F.O. to C.O., October 28, 1899: CO882/5/66, p. 364; Lo Feng-luh to the Marquess of Salisbury, November 14, 1899, enclosed in F.O. to C.O., November 25, 1899: ibid., p. 369.\n\nPeel to Cunliffe-Lister, January 9, 1934, confidential: CO129/546.\n\n49 Stubbs to Amery, June 26, 1925, despatch #275: CO129/488.\n\n50\n\nSheng San-i l'ang tsuan-hsi t’e-k'an 1890-1965 ——A (Special bulletin to commemorate the diamond jubilee of the Holy Trinity Church, 1890-1965) (Hong Kong: the Church [1965]) p. 34.\n\n51 Ibid., p. 33.\n\n52 Ibid., p. 34.\n\n$3\n\n$4\n\nHong Kong Government Gazette, 1901, p. 1401,\n\nPeel to Cunliffe-Lister, January 9, 1934, confidential; Chiang-shan ku-jen, \"feng-t'u\", parts 106-107.\n\n55 Stubbs to Amery, June 26, 1925, despatch #275; Chiang-shan ku-jen, “Pen-ti feng-kuang\" (Local sights) part 163. These are articles appearing in the Hua-ch'iao jih-pao in 1931 and an album of them is in the University of Hong Kong Library, Jarrett, vol. 3, p. 609.\n\n56 Stubbs to Amery, June 26, 1925, despatch #275.\n\n57\n\nPeel to Cunliffe-Lister, January 9, 1934, confidential: C. Van Leo, “A Little bit of China in the Heart of Hong Kong\", Hong Kong Telegraph, January 18, 1937. R.C. Hurley, Handbook to the British Crown Colony of Hong Kong and Depen-\n\n58\n\n¦",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211109,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 170,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "145\n\nThe question arose again in 1897. At that time the pass requirement was abolished, except when invoked under special order by the Governor in Council, but the light requirement remained. This gave rise to confusion among the Chinese, for many thought both requirements had been abolished.\n\nIn commenting on the misunderstanding the Daily Press suggested that all regulations should be done away with. The abolition would be a gracious act in the year of Queen Victoria's Jubilee. The editor felt that ‘if this were done as a concession to the Chinese on the occasion of the Diamond Jubilee, it would afford extreme pleasure to the native community, in fact it would not be easy to find any form of Jubilee Memorial that would afford the Chinese more genuine satisfaction than the repeal of a law which they regard as obnoxious.”\n\nImmediately after, the requirements were repealed. This long delayed move could only serve to improve relations between the various sections of the Hongkong community.\n\nWHY EARLY EXPATS FEARED CONSUL MOVE\n\nAnother issue on which Ho A-mei expressed his opinion publicly was the appointment of a Chinese consul for Hongkong.\n\nIn July 1891, when the matter was under discussion, he wrote a letter to a Chinese paper published in Hongkong advocating the appointment. A translation of his letter was published for English readers in the China Mail.\n\nIt was a long-standing issue, having first been raised by the Chinese in 1868. The request became involved in negotiations for the revision of the Tientsin Treaty between Britain and China. The treaty was signed in 1858, but it provided for a review after ten years.\n\nAt times the Chinese request for a consul in Hongkong was given favourable consideration by the British Foreign Office, but it was consistently opposed by the Hongkong Government and the foreign merchants trading with China.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211111,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 172,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "147\n\nHongkong opposed the request for two basic reasons. Any check to smuggling would deprive opium importers of substantial profits. This reason was seldom openly acknowledged. The other reason was frequently stated.\n\nIt was the ever-present fear that the Chinese population of Hongkong would be influenced or controlled by the officials in China and British prestige and sovereignty would be affected.\n\nThe dispatches, memorials and letters of the Hongkong Government, the General Chamber of Commerce, the Foreign Office, the Colonial Office, the representatives of the Chinese Government, the British Consul at Canton, and the British Minister at Peking, as well as the editorials and correspondence in the local papers, such as the letter of Ho A-mei in 1891, point up the issues involved.\n\nThe matter was first raised in 1868. At that time, Prince Kung on behalf of the Chinese Government was discussing the revision of the 1858 Treaty of Tientsin with the British Minister at Peking, Sir Rutherford Alcock.\n\nThe Prince asked Sir Rutherford if China would be permitted to station one of its officials in Hongkong to look after the collection of duties China levied on goods conveyed in junks from Hongkong to the mainland. Much revenue was slipping away because of the ease by which Hongkong exporters could evade the custom taxes. China wished to plug the leak. The simplest and least expensive method was to check it at its source.\n\nSir Rutherford thought that Britain should not permit a Chinese Government official to reside in Hongkong in any official capacity other than that of consul. This would bring his position in line with general diplomatic usage.\n\nIt was the practice for consuls of foreign nations to reside in British possessions to look after the interests of the country they represented.\n\nThe British Minister in Peking was aware that China had a real",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211113,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 174,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "149\n\nThese local views were expressed in the dispatch of the Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, to the Colonial Office in London and in a memorial from the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce. Both reflect, as we shall see, the uneasiness underneath the comfortable life of the expatriate in nineteenth century Hong-kong.\n\nCOLONIAL PRESSURE STOPS CONSUL MOVE\n\nIn 1891, Ho A-mei wrote to the newspapers supporting a proposal of the British Foreign Office that a Chinese Consul be appointed for Hongkong. It was an issue which in the past had sharpened differences between Hongkong and the Home Government.\n\nThe matter had first been raised in 1868. When news reached Hongkong at that time that it was being considered by the Foreign Office in London, there was an immediate outcry.\n\nThe Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, rushed off a protest to the Colonial Office. He objected not only to the proposal, but also to the manner in which the British Minister at Peking had ignored Hongkong.\n\nThe Governor was not on good terms with the Minister, Sir Rutherford Alcock. He complained that it had been his experience that Sir Rutherford was not concerned about the interests of Hongkong and in his negotiations with China paid little attention to Hongkong opinion.\n\nThe Governor wrote to the Secretary of the Colonies that it was no surprise to him that Sir Rutherford had sent the suggestion of a Chinese Consul to the Foreign Office without consulting or informing the local government, nor had he given Hongkong an opportunity to register its opinion on the matter.\n\nWhen the Governor had eventually heard the British Minister's suggestion, he immediately called together his Executive Council to consider the issue. At that time all the members of the Council were Government officials.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211117,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 178,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "153\n\nclaimed: “We believe that such a creation of an imperium in imperio would produce alarm and dissatisfaction among the Chinese residents here; and by unnecessarily pressing on the Chinese the adoption of such a measure, Her Majesty's Government would be taking the surest course to develop, during times of peace, the worst vices of Chinese rule in a population under British protection; and, on the other hand, in the event of approaching disturbances, or the cessation of friendly relations with Peking, we would be creating in our midst a dangerous centre of rebellion, plots and hostile actions.”\n\nThe basic insecurity of a small group of colonials dwelling in the midst of a large population, whose customs and language were unfamiliar and strange, welled up at the prospect of the approval by Britain for a Chinese consul to assume duties in Hongkong.\n\nPressure from Hongkong and from merchants in Britain interested in the China trade caused the matter to be dropped.\n\nIt was revived in 1875 and again in 1891. It was in the latter year that Ho A-mei spoke out on the matter.\n\nCONSUL NEEDED ‘FOR FAIR TREATMENT\n\nThe suggestion that a Chinese consul be appointed for Hongkong reappeared periodically. The idea was first advanced in 1868.\n\nAt that time the Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, sent a strong protest to England.\n\nTwo years later the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce expressed its views on the subject.\n\nThe Treaty of Tientsin between Britain and China was signed in 1858. It contained a provision that it should be reviewed after 10 years. These revisions were embodied in the Chefoo Convention.\n\nThe Foreign Office asked the various Chambers of Commerce",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211133,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 194,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "169\n\npublic. Its conclusions were considered not acceptable and its tone would have aggravated differences between China and Britain.\n\nIn December 1873, the Governor of Hongkong had appointed a three-man commission to investigate the alleged interference by China with the trade of Hongkong. Its members were Phineas Ryrie, a businessman and chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, H. G. Thomsett, the harbour master, and M. S. Tonnochy, his assistant. They submitted their report in April 1874.\n\nThe General Chamber of Commerce requested a copy, but it was told that as the Colonial and Foreign Offices were still considering the report, it could not be released to the public.\n\nThe merchants felt that the Government was deliberately withholding the findings of the commission. To draw attention to their views, which were similar to those expressed by the commission, the merchants encouraged a group of aggrieved Chinese to petition Her Majesty. They then followed this up with their own public meeting.\n\nThe commission had taken the position that the method China was using to enforce its revenue collection was seriously hurting Hongkong trade. The main premise of the report, that China had encroached on Hongkong's sovereignty, was rejected by the representatives of the British Government at Canton and Peking.\n\nAlthough the Foreign Office in London, Sir Thomas Wade, the British Minister in Peking, and Sir Brooke Robertson, Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, were not in complete agreement about the various points raised by the commission, they all agreed that the commission had greatly overstated the case.\n\nIt was conceded that the employment of a low type of foreigner by the Chinese was objectionable, that in the nature of the case there must have been some violation of Hongkong waters when a junk was being chased by cruisers, and that no doubt there had been instances of squeezing.\n\nIn commenting on the report of the commission, Sir Brooke",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211135,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 196,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "171\n\nIn his memorandum to the Foreign Office, the British Minister at Peking, Sir Thomas Francis Wade, reviewed the whole problem of customs collections as it related to Hongkong from the time of the treaty revision in 1868.\n\nHe remarked: \"The sum of my propositions from first to last was that we should either retrocede Hongkong to the Chinese Government or that we should allow the Chinese Government to establish a branch of the Customs Inspectorate in Hongkong; either concession, of course, to be purchased of us by a counter-concession to the general advantage of British trade with China, the particular advantage to Colonial Trade being the reduction to a minimum of the interference of the Chinese Revenue Service with native craft.”\n\nHongkong residents naturally would have considered the British Minister's suggestion of giving Hongkong back to China as a betrayal and sell-out. In their view it would totally discredit British prestige. One wonders if Wade was really serious in his suggestion.\n\nHe interpreted the conclusions of the Hongkong Commission as a denial of the right of the Chinese Government to search vessels of its own people on the high seas, or in its own waters if such vessels were within 10 miles of Hongkong.\n\nAs a diplomat, Wade believed some concessions were needed. Britain should do what it could to ensure that China received whatever duties it might levy on goods leaving or arriving on its shores, even though they passed through Hongkong.\n\nRobertson at Canton also advocated conciliation. He charged Hongkong with viewing the problem too narrowly: \"There are other interests of more importance than the interests of local trade which seem to be forgotten in the battle for local interests, and I fear if the report of the committee be published the Chinese authorities, knowing it was appointed by the Colonial Government, may consider that the strong expressions of opinion it contains are sanctioned by the Executive, and this may tend to interrupt the entente cordiale which is so important to maintain.\" He was",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211136,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 197,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "172\n\nspeaking as a diplomat and not a merchant.\n\nIn the instructions Wade had sent to Robertson, he had strongly urged the establishment of a branch of the Chinese Imperial Customs in Hongkong.\n\nThe Governor of Hongkong, Sir Arthur Kennedy, endorsed this proposal as a possible solution to the problem. In a despatch to London he stated that he was “convinced that the shortest, best and only remedy for disputes and differences which have existed for years, endangering our good relations with the Canton Government is the recognised establishment of a branch of the Chinese foreign inspectorate in Hongkong itself.\"\n\nIt was not until 1886 that provisions were made for establishing a Maritime Customs collecting station at Kowloon and the Hong-kong Government allowed its Commissioner, a British national, to reside in Hongkong.\n\nWAR OF WORDS OVER CHINESE CONSUL CONTINUES\n\nThe manner in which the appointment of a Chinese consul for Hongkong was announced in 1891 provoked a demand from the expatriate merchants that they be allowed a greater voice in determining policies that affected Hongkong.\n\nThey resented that they had not had an opportunity to express their opinion before the decision regarding the appointment had been made.\n\nThe Colonial Office had informed the local government of its intended decision and had received in reply the opinion of concerned government officials in Hongkong, but the mercantile community had not been consulted.\n\nIn November 1890, the Governor was asked if he had any objections to the proposal. This was followed by a telegram in January 1891 informing him that the Chinese had proposed that Mr. Tso Ping-lung, consul at Singapore, be transferred to the new office in Hongkong.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211257,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 318,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "293\n\nPamela Atwell had taken it for granted that her readers had not needed any such historical background information. The story of Weihaiwei under British administration during this highly turbulent era as well as its return to Chinese rule was the focus of her research, embracing hundreds of documents in the Public Records Office in London, a number of unpublished private papers in England and Scotland, as well as sources in Japanese and Chinese but not Chinese archival documents.\n\nA meticulous researcher and skilful writer who also provided the readers with clear and interesting photographs, Dr. Atwell has produced a book that is a joy to behold indeed, both for the specialist reader and the non-specialist. She has shown admirable understanding of Chinese institutions and British thinking, and thus has recreated an area that had needed a thorough examination by historians looking at imperialism in China. Dr. Atwell has found, for instance, that the leasing of Weihaiwei was not a simple and straightforward matter. The Chinese had first proposed the leasing through Robert Hart of the Imperial Customs Service and Ambassador MacDonald at Peking to a reluctant British cabinet. Then, even as the British cabinet were being convinced of the value of leasing Weihaiwei, the Chinese had second thoughts. Together with other diplomatic and political complications, it was not until 24 May 1898, after the Japanese forces withdrew, that the British ensign was finally hoisted over the port.\n\nResearching as a political scientist, Dr. Atwell's major interests resided in the juxtaposition of government authorities. She had observed that the British administration at Weihaiwei was noteworthy in several ways. The British never claimed sovereignty over the port. They had maintained that Weihaiwei \"remained part of a foreign country within which Britain exercised legal jurisdiction, but it was not a colony and the Chinese living there were not British citizens.\" (p. 12). British administrators were simply superimposed over traditional Chinese rural community elders and magistrates who represented the central government in these localities.\n\nEarly conflicts over such issues as taxes and militia were resolved when Britain began to send civilian commissioners experienced...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211259,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 320,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "295\n\non 1 October 1930. The Chinese, in the opinion of Dr. Atwell, had not done their homework. The administrator sent by the central government was a naval officer. Instead of working within the framework of local traditions, the central government chose to embark on a programme of immediate modernization and reform, doing away with practices of many centuries, leading to deprivation and resentment. Economic and social conditions continued to deteriorate. The area was again occupied by Japanese forces when the second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937.\n\nIf Dr. Atwell's work had to be faulted at all, it would be on her preponderant reliance upon British documents. Even what Chinese policies were and how people felt about them were discerned from Foreign Office records. Motivations and reasons for adoption of certain policies, therefore, were not exactly taken from the horse's mouth, so to speak. Dr. Atwell has a more than respectable command of Chinese, and could have investigated more Chinese sources in greater depth. Perhaps her mentors at the University of London did not encourage consultation of Chinese historical archives. Perhaps the documents were not accessible. In addition, it must have been a disappointment to Dr. Atwell and a loss to the readers that she was denied access to some important personal papers of Lockhart.\n\nIt must also be noted that Chinese central governments did not normally look at localities except as a small part of the whole. Policies and programmes were adopted for the entire country, and Weihaiwei came only as a part of it. It was, as Dr. Atwell has pointed out, T. V. Soong, Minister of Finance, therefore, rather than the local administrator, who determined fiscal policies for Weihaiwei. The National Government was following the time-honoured tradition of giving priority to the total policy over individual localities. Perhaps, had British administrators followed modernization programmes adopted elsewhere in China, Chinese rulers after 1930 would not have needed to use such drastic means. Scholars in future may examine Chinese materials more fully, including extant archival sources which are becoming routinely consulted in Chinese historical research, and may find some of the answers raised by Dr. Atwell's investigations.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211338,
        "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": 54,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "30\n\nhad already departed. Of the original allied commissioners, only Harry Parkes was still there for the final ceremony which included a tri-national group of Chinese, French, and British dignitaries.\n\nIf the allied occupation of Canton was not as uneventful as some historical accounts record, it nevertheless had very successful elements to it and may have had an influential impact on future Sino-European relations. At least two employees of the Allied Commission, Robert Hart and Prosper Giquel, both young men at the time, went on to play major roles in future Sino-European co-operative ventures later in the century, Robert Hart as the famous director of the Chinese Maritime Customs Service and Prosper Giquel as the future European Director of the Foochow Dockyard and eventually head of several Sino-European Educational Missions of the 1870s and 1880s. That their earlier experiences had been in the somewhat more co-operative world of the Sino-European police forces and the Sino-European coolie emigration inspection teams is certainly likely to have proved significant in the careers of these two men who were later so much more able than most of their countrymen to work with the Chinese on an equal basis.\n\nNOTES\n\nAbbreviations\n\nAE Archives de la Ministère des Affaires Etrangères\n\nCCC Correspondence consulaire et commerciale\n\nCP Correspondence politique, Chine\n\nArmee Les Archives de l'Armee de Terre, Vincennes\n\nFO British Foreign Office\n\nPRO British Public Record Office\n\nSHM Service Historique de la Marine, Vincennes\n\nAN Archives Nationales\n\nRanbir Vohra, China's Path To Modernization: A Historical Review from 1800 to the Present (New Jersey, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1987) citing Christopher Hibbert, The Dragon Awakes. China and the West 1793-1911 (N.Y., Harper and Row, 1970), p. 229.\n\n2 Douglas Hurd, The Arrow War, Anglo-Chinese Confusion 1856-1860 (New York: Macmillan Company, 1967), pp. 121-125 and Immanuel C.Y. Hsu, The Rise of Modern China, 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), p. 121-125.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211498,
        "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": 214,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "190\n\nof Mr. Bolton of the Atheneum of Boston, U.S.A.\". This catalogue was dictionary in format and it included 2,125 catalogued items, grouped as follows:\n\nGeneral Works 324\n\nPhilosophy 278\n\nReligion 54\n\nSociology 65\n\nPhilology 120\n\nNatural Sciences 52\n\nUseful Arts 133\n\nFine Arts 84\n\nLiterature 340\n\nHistory 675\n\n(13) on Chinese languages)20\n\nThe need for a new and larger building became a regular topic of discussion, and the Shanghai Municipal Council became a frequent, if unpredictable, supporter of its causes, including the funding of the renovation of its building in 1909.2\n\nIn a guidebook written about this time, the Rev. C. E. Darwent wrote:\n\nThe building in which the society is housed is situated in the Museum Road, just behind the British Post Office. There is a good library of books, on Oriental subjects mainly; a good supply of the proceedings of learned societies and learned magazines is kept. There is an exceedingly comfortable lecture hall; upstairs is a museum. The fathers of the settlement did well for it; their successors do nothing.2\n\nBy 1910 the library was open seven days a week, and no longer closed for tiffin as it had in earlier times. Donations were increasing, thanks largely to its new honorary librarian, Florence Wheelock Ayscough. A **suggestion book** was put out. A Chinese “assistant librarian” was engaged, first a \"Mr. Woo\" and later a \"Mr. Wong\", the latter described as “hard-working and attentive”. These people presumably did the routine checking out of materials, shelving, and record keeping. The library remained essentially an institution serving the foreign community although there was some Chinese membership in later years.\n\nA bequest from Thomas Kingsmill, a long-time society member, enriched the library. Duplicate works were sold and the funds used to",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211500,
        "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": 216,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "192\n\nreports; and even the reports of such associations as the Red Cross and the Paper Hunt Club of Shanghai. There were printed catalogues of pertinent collections in such foreign libraries as the Newberry and John Crerar Libraries of Chicago, the Morrison Library of Hong Kong, the Bibliothek zu Berlin, the universities of Leiden and Upsala, and the Raffles Museum of Singapore. In spite of all this bibliographic wealth, the librarian maintained the Society's tradition of complaining about what was not there:\n\nIt still suffers from forgetfulness,\n\n―\n\nnot the willing neglect\n\nof authors. Refusals to requests for books are rare, but unfortunately unsolicited presentations are not as numerous as might be wished.2\n\nUse statistics were seldom mentioned in early annual reports, but they became a regular feature in the 1920's. In 1926, for example, 3,124 people used the reading room, and 543 volumes were checked out to members.29\n\nBy 1928 a campaign was mounted to raise Tls 100,000 for a new building, and two years later the British government donated the land it had formerly leased to the society, thus enabling the society to borrow funds against it. The British Tobacco Company, Sassoon and Company, and other enterprises made significant contributions. An official of His Majesty's Foreign Office called the society \"the one bright spot in Shanghai*.\" In 1931 the library collection was crated and stored while the old building was torn down and a new one constructed in its place. It reopened in 1934 with the library occupying the second floor. It included a “private office for the librarian and a well-lighted Reading Room. The storage space for books is amply designed to provide for future expansion\".3\n\nYet another recataloguing of the collection took place in 1936 in preparation for the sixth edition of the catalogue. The count was 11,350 titles. That year also saw the beginning of the keeping of an accession book,32\n\nAs the political situation in China became more unstable, the library became more heavily used. This was in part owing to the destruction",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211599,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 14,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "hope to catch up soon, with the aid of the Editorial group which includes Dr. Betty Wei, Dr. Thomas Lau and myself!\n\nFinally, a word of thanks to our printers, Messrs Yee Tin Tong, and especially to their Mr. Henry Law who is the soul of courtesy and cooperation.\n\nEvents in China\n\nI turn now to a world event which it was impossible to ignore, especially in Hong Kong. Like other associations in Hong Kong, the RAS Council felt it had a plain duty to write to the British Government, leading Parliamentarians and other influential figures in public life, expressing concern for Hong Kong's future in the light of the repressive action taken in Beijing in May-June 1989. A copy of this letter was sent to all local and overseas members of the Society, and many of us circulated it more widely among friends or sent copies to persons who they felt ought to know that a letter had been sent.\n\nBoth as President and as an individual, I received a number of responses from Members at home and abroad. These were all supportive of the action taken by the Council. I regret to have to say, however, that there was no response from the Foreign Secretary's Office, to whose head the letter was addressed, not even a printed acknowledgement slip, despite a courteously worded reminder enclosing a copy of the original letter. Surely two copies could not have gone astray?\n\nIn my personal capacity as President, I also sent a private submission to the Basic Law Drafting Committee last autumn, before the period allowed for submissions expired. It gave my own statement on how this Society has been able to operate without let or hindrance, fear or favour, and relying upon the open, willing cooperation of others for almost thirty years, and how essential it was for us, and Societies like us, to be able to continue operating in this way after 1997. A copy of this letter has been tabled at this meeting, and the text will be annexed to this report when it is published in the appropriate number of the Journal,\n\nThe Council\n\nYou will have noted that David Gilkes has been nominated as President for the coming year. No other nominations have been received, and this is a very appropriate appointment in view of his 23 years on the Council\n\nxiii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211677,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 92,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "67\n\nanti-British propaganda, which the facile Eugene Chen* was then addressing to a gullible American press.\n\nSet back from the Bund behind a heavy hand-wrought iron fence of ugly design, the Consulate building was typical of those erected in the 1860s, when the Concession was first opened. The two-storied thick brick walls, shaded all round by wide arched verandahs, in the style affected in India, housed both the office and the residence of the Consul. Upstairs, parts of the verandah had been boarded in to provide bathrooms in accordance with modern practice. From the bedroom windows the view carried across the Yangtze to the flat north shore, a mile away, where the farmers were already cutting down for fuel the tall reeds, which yearly grew along the banks of the river. We would often cross over at this season with our guns and our dogs to beat the pheasant out of the smaller clumps left by the reed-cutters.\n\nHaving completed their inspection, the plotters moved on down the Bund, past the godowns of Messrs. Butterfield and Swire, past the Customs House, past the Roman Catholic Church to the Bund gate, through which they trouped a little self-consciously under the eye of the steel-helmeted gentleman, who stood there with his rifle at the slope, in the blue uniform, the khaki webb equipment, and the spats of the Royal Navy.\n\nTheir plans soon matured. Some afternoons later a political meeting was called on the foreshore outside the Bund gate, which the Navy had left open to avoid any accusation of provocation. By the offer of a ten cents inducement to the loafers and riff-raff of the Chinese city an adequate attendance was ensured. Orators stood on the Bund wall whipping up the temper of the crowd: they shouted slogans in which the words \"Beat down” and “Kill\" echoed frequently. The crowd soon responded and parties began trickling into the Concession. Stones flew through the air. The sentry at the gate discreetly withdrew and sounded the alarm. The British Naval guard turned off: they had strict orders not to fire, but to protect themselves by dropping their rifle butts on the toes of any rioters who pressed them too closely. This method of defence is not very effective against stones. Reinforcements were brought ashore from the meagre crew of the destroyer; they were joined by some dozen\n\n* (Trinidad born journalist. At this time Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kuo Min Tang Revolutionary Government.)",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211687,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 102,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "HONG KONG, DECEMBER 1941 — JULY 1942\n\nA. D. BLACKBURN*\n\n77\n\nThe following is an account of the personal experiences of my wife and myself at Hongkong during the Japanese attack and afterwards.\n\nI was still in Queen Mary Hospital when hostilities began. My leg had so far recovered that I was able to hobble about on crutches and the doctor had decided that he could now safely proceed to operate on my ear which had become completely obstructed with scar tissue. The operation was fixed for 8 a.m. on December 8th. I was waiting to be taken to the theatre when, almost exactly at 8 a.m., the wailing of the sirens and the noise of planes announced the beginning of the blitz and the operation had to be abandoned.\n\nMeanwhile my wife was at the War Memorial Nursing Home recovering from an operation for appendicitis. All patients whom it was possible to remove were evicted from the hospitals to make room for war casualties. My wife was turned out on December 10th and I on December 12th and Witham (Tea Adviser to the Chinese Government and a friend of ours) arranged for us to be billeted with him and his wife in their flat on the Peak, which the Hongkong Government had declared an evacuation area. There we stayed throughout the hostilities.\n\nThere was fairly heavy artillery fire and air bombing but the Japanese seemed to be concentrating on military objectives (particularly Mt. Austin barracks and two field gun batteries in our neighbourhood), and civilian property around us was not\n\n* Editor's Note. Sir Arthur Blackburn was Counsellor of the British Embassy in Chungking in 1941. On June 29th, 1941, his house there was totally destroyed by a Japanese bomb. Two people were killed, and fifteen injured, including Sir Arthur, who received injuries to his knee and ear. The injury to the ear required operation, as did the injury to the knee, which had become infected. Sir Arthur and his wife were evacuated to Hong Kong to enable these operations to take place, arriving at the end of November, 1941. Sir Arthur was a witness to the Japanese attack on Hong Kong in December, 1941, and he and his wife were interned from January 22nd to the end of July 1942 in Stanley Camp. He and his wife with other captured diplomatic staff were then repatriated, leaving Shanghai on August 17th, 1942. Sir Arthur was asked by both the Foreign Office and the Red Cross to report on conditions in Hong Kong and in Stanley Camp. These reports were completed by the end of September, 1942, even before the Blackburns docked in England. Because of the general interest of these reports, and particularly because of their contemporary character and absence of post-war hindsight, it is felt useful to print them here. The Journal owes copies of these interesting documents to the kindness of Mr. C. Blackburn.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211691,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 106,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "81\n\nwhich had been allocated for that purpose, but as they had to start with exactly nothing it was difficult. I was dumped off my lorry in front of the hospital-to-be at about 1 o'clock, and it was 5 p.m. before the staff had cleared a room and found enough beds to get the most elementary of wards going. There I stayed exactly two months. Meanwhile my wife had found a corner for herself in a room with three other married couples and a baby. She got on very well with two of the other couples (and the baby), but the third couple were very disagreeable and behaved in an almost incredibly disgraceful way towards the other people in the room, but particularly to my poor wife. So when I was fit to be moved from the hospital we tried to get quarters elsewhere but the billeting committee couldn't fix us in anywhere and the Japanese Chief Supervisor was unhelpful, so I just had to make one more in an already overcrowded room. And there we stayed, with one brief excursion to the French Hospital to have my knee X-rayed, until the Americans were repatriated early in July when we were moved into the block vacated by them where we shared a room with Mr. and Mrs. Witham and their baby and one other couple. Here we were perfectly happy and were facing with equanimity the prospect of internment for the duration when on July 20th we were told that we could, if we wished and if we paid our own fares, go to Shanghai. No further explanation was forthcoming and the permission did not extend to the rest of the Embassy and Consulate personnel in the camp. Of course I said we would go (the Swiss Consul sent in enough money for the fares) and we were shipped to Shanghai with some 60 other people who had also been allowed to leave the camp. I assumed that once I was in Shanghai I would be entitled to be repatriated with the rest of the Embassy people; but as soon as the ship berthed in Shanghai a Japanese Vice-Consul came on board and told me that though I had been allowed to come to Shanghai I was not going to be repatriated. It looked as if I was going to share with Sir Mark Young (who is interned at Woosung) the melancholy distinction of being the only British officials in Japan and occupied China. We were taken to the Cathay Hotel where the outport Consulate staffs and other persons destined for repatriation were being collected. We were given a comfortable suite and, except for the restriction in our movements, had nothing to complain about. I telephoned to Mr. Le Rougetel who had not been told that we were coming. He got the Swiss Consul-General to inform the Foreign Office and it seems that a special exchange agreement was made for me and my wife. So on August 17th we embarked on the \"Kamakura Maru\".\n\nAs regards conditions in Stanley Internment Camp I wrote a few notes,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211692,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 107,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "82\n\nand left copies with the Swiss Consul-General in Shanghai for his own information and for that of the Red Cross representative. In their original form I showed them to three responsible British subjects who left the Camp at the same time as I did, and they agreed that the notes gave a fairly accurate picture of the situation, though perhaps the colours were not dark enough. A copy of these notes, somewhat amended, is attached. A point which perhaps ought to have been made is that prior to internment at Stanley most of the \"enemy nationals\" in Hongkong and Kowloon had already been interned in Chinese hotels for periods varying from two weeks to six weeks in conditions of great discomfort and hardship and that they were seriously debilitated when they reached the Camp. They, and all the other \"enemy nationals\" who had so far escaped internment, were then thrown into the camp without adequate preparations having been made for their reception. In the Science Block of St. Stephen's College men, women and children found themselves herded together in large class rooms without beds, mattresses or furniture; there was only one lavatory for the block and no arrangements had been made for cooking food. Though the Japanese never actively ill-treated the civilian internees their whole attitude was unhelpful and unsympathetic. Consequently conditions were very bad during the first 2½ or 3 months. Then the Japanese began to realise the seriousness of the situation and conditions improved considerably, as I have indicated in my notes. Conditions were about at their worst in the middle of April, and when I was taken to the French Hospital on April 21st to have my leg X-rayed Dr. Selwyn Clark and Dr. Court both impressed on me that the food situation, not only in the camp but in the Colony generally was extremely serious since the Japanese were shipping all foodstuffs to Japan and were bringing nothing in. They said they expected the crisis to come at the end of July and they urged me to represent to the Foreign Office that if no relief was forthcoming the whole of the foreign community ought to be removed before the end of the Summer. I accordingly wrote a short message on these lines to H.M. Consul at Macao, which Dr. Selwyn Clark said he would be able to send through.\n\nI did all I could to get the Japanese to admit my diplomatic status and to include the whole of the Embassy and Consulate group in any exchange arrangements but, except for Mr. Yano's original assurance, they took the attitude that, as we had not been at our posts we had no special status, and beyond that there was a blank wall; we were not allowed to know even what had become of the Embassy and Consular establishments in occupied China.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212024,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 439,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "414\n\nThe British stayed at Weihaiwei until 1930, when it was returned to Chinese administration. During the interim, the Kaiser and the Tsar had collapsed and China had gone through the Boxer uprising, a series of reforms, a revolution that toppled the Ch'ing dynasty, a period of disunity and warlord rule, and, finally, the establishment of the National Government at Nanking led by Chiang Kai-shek in 1927. The rise of Chinese nationalism increased demand for return of all foreign concessions in China, including Weihaiwei.\n\nPamela Atwell has taken it for granted that her readers do not need any historical background information. The story of Weihaiwei under British administration during this highly turbulent era as well as its return to Chinese rule was the focus of her research, embracing hundreds of documents in the Public Records Office in London, a number of unpublished private papers in England and Scotland, as well as sources in Japanese and Chinese but not Chinese archival documents.\n\nA meticulous researcher and skilful writer who also provided the readers with clear and interesting photographs, Dr. Atwell has produced a book that is a joy to behold, both for specialist readers and non-specialists. She has shown admirable understanding of Chinese institutions and British thinking, and thus has recreated an area that had needed a thorough examination by historians looking at imperialism in China. Dr. Atwell has found, for instance, that the leasing of Weihaiwei was not a simple and straightforward matter. The Chinese had first proposed the leasing through Robert Hart of the Imperial Customs Service and Ambassador MacDonald at Peking to a reluctant British cabinet. Then, after the British cabinet were convinced of the value of leasing Weihaiwei, the Chinese had second thoughts. Together with other diplomatic and political complications, it was not until 24 May 1898, after the Japanese forces withdrew, that the British ensign was finally hoisted over the port.\n\nResearching as a political scientist, Dr. Atwell's major interests were in the juxtaposition of government authorities. She had observed that the British administration at Weihaiwei was noteworthy in several ways. The British never claimed sovereignty over the port. They maintained that Weihaiwei \"remained part of a foreign country within which Britain exercised legal jurisdiction, but it was not a colony and the Chinese living there were not British citizens\", (p. 12), British administrators were simply superimposed over traditional Chinese rural",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212026,
        "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-1989",
        "page_number": 441,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "416\n\nOctober 1930. The Chinese, in the opinion of Dr. Atwell, had not done their homework. The administrator sent by the central government was a naval officer. Instead of working within the framework of local traditions, the central government chose to embark on a programme of immediate modernization and reform, doing away with practices of many centuries, leading to deprivation and resentment. Economic and social conditions continued to deteriorate. The area was again occupied by Japanese forces when the second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937.\n\nIf Dr. Atwell's work has to be faulted at all, it would be on her preponderant reliance upon British documents. Even what Chinese policies were and how people felt about them were discerned from Foreign Office records. Motivations and reasons for adoption of certain policies, therefore, were not exactly taken from the horse's mouth, so to speak. Dr. Atwell has a more than respectable command of Chinese, and could have investigated more Chinese sources in greater depth. Perhaps her mentors at the University of London did not encourage consultation of Chinese historical archives. Perhaps the documents were not accessible. In addition, it must have been a disappointment to Dr. Atwell and a loss to the readers that she was denied access to some important personal papers of Lockhart.\n\nIt must also be noted that Chinese central governments did not normally look at localities except as a small part of the whole. Policies and programmes were adopted for the entire country, and Weihaiwei came under them only as a part of the whole. It was, as Dr. Atwell has pointed out, T. V. Soong, Minister of Finance, therefore, rather than the local administrator, who determined fiscal policies for Weihaiwei after 1930. The National Government was following the time-honoured tradition of giving priority to the total polity over individual localities. Perhaps, had British administrators followed modernization programmes adopted elsewhere in China, Chinese rulers after 1930 would not have needed to use such drastic means. Scholars in future may examine Chinese materials more fully, including extant archival sources which are becoming routinely consulted in Chinese historical research, and may find some of the answers to the questions raised by Dr. Atwell's investigations.\n\nIndividual treaty ports in China as well as other parts of Asia, large and small, are receiving attention from scholars. Meanwhile, British Mandarins and Chinese Reformers should be read by all who are",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212195,
        "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": 137,
        "title": "RAS-1990",
        "content_text": "14\n\nThe business section of Hongkong is compressed into so small an area that the hotels are just round the corner from any office. It would often be convenient to meet for cocktails before a meal, and in this way the habit had grown of doing business outside the office, either seated at a small table, or with one foot on a brass rail.\n\nWhen the Chinese Government evacuated Nanking in November 1937, the various Purchasing Departments moved to Hongkong, which, with the closing of the Yangtze, had become the main port of entry for supplies into China. The ships docked alongside at Kowloon, or discharged their cargoes into lighters in mid-harbour.\n\nThe railway between Hongkong and Canton had been completed nearly forty years previously, but the railway from Hankow on the Yangtze to Canton was only opened to through traffic in March 1937. That was before the war with Japan broke out, and in line with its anti-foreign policy, the National Government refused to connect the Hankow railway at Canton with the line from Hongkong. The intention was to inconvenience transhipment of cargo at Hongkong on to the railway and to favour use of the small steamers which sailed up the shallow waters of the Pearl River to Canton. This shortsighted policy was now quickly reversed and a connecting loop put in so that cargo loaded onto rail at Hongkong could go straight through without further handling to Hankow.\n\nMy business was mainly with the Chinese Government Purchasing Departments, and very efficient they were. They drove such hard bargains that the staff might have been Scots, though most claimed to have been trained in the States. The Hongkong government gave every facility for the traffic and there can be no question but that the existence of Hongkong as a British colony at this time was a great help to the hard-pressed Chinese.\n\n―\n\nAs regards the administration of Hongkong by the Colonial Office, by almost any western standard it was good. It was essentially better than anything that could be found in China or in Chicago but it was by no means perfect. The administration suffered from the defects of bureaucracy.\n\nThe civil servant who enters the colonial administration must pass a stiff examination; but once he has passed it, he can expect regular",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212477,
        "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-1991",
        "page_number": 31,
        "title": "RAS-1991",
        "content_text": "11\n\nthat all men must die and not knowing when I may be called away, I deem it right while still in bodily health and full possession of mental faculties to make my will.\n\nWei A Kwong, the father of Wei Yuk, had a typical story of success. He was a Zhongshan native; he left his hometown and worked in Macau as a teenager. His father was a comprador to two American merchants, Benjamin Chew Wilcocks and Oliver H. Gordon. It was known that Wei was forsaken by his family and had to resort to begging on the streets of Macau. He was later sent to Singapore where he studied under the auspices of the Morrison Education Society in a school of the American Board of Commission for Foreign Missions. This changed his life. He returned to Hong Kong and began his career. He served as comprador in Bowra & Co. and then in the Mercantile Bank of India, London and China until his death. Wei wrote his will in 1866. He prefaced it with a brief account of his life, particularly mentioning that he was the first student of the Morrison Education Society and that he first came to Hong Kong in 1843. He had \"ever since lived under the just and equitable rule of the British Government.\" Though we cannot prove to what extent his exposure to Western culture was related to his Christian education, he succeeded in becoming a leading member of Chinese society in Hong Kong. This contrasts with the will of Sung Chin Tseung, which reads.\n\nSung Chin Tseung, otherwise literary appellation Sung Ching, otherwise Ngok Shan, native of Kat Tai village, of Kong Sheung Division, Heung Shan District. I followed my deceased father, Mr. Shau U, to Hong Kong in 1842 to trade in foreign business as compradore. Further, in 1854, thanks to the kind support of Mr. Ryrie and others of Messrs. Turner and Co., Hongkong, I took over the office of compradore and up to the present thirty odd years.\n\nBoth Wei and Sung were natives of Zhongshan. They came to Hong Kong for business in the early 1840s when Hong Kong was already a British colony. Though they lived in Hong Kong, they maintained connections with their hometown, as Sung's father, Soong Ke, stated in his will written in 1864:\n\nIn the 21st year of Tao Kwong (1841), I came to Hong Kong and employed myself in business all the time with foreigners, always being diligent and making little profit sufficient to",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212497,
        "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-1991",
        "page_number": 51,
        "title": "RAS-1991",
        "content_text": "31\n\nLo was suspected to have cheated an amount of 20,000 taels as bad debt from the Bank See Group Archives of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, Comprador Files Law Pak Sheung\n\n|| Ibid. Lo Hok Pang was said to be involved in certain bankruptcy cases See Comprador Files Lo Hok Pang\n\n12\n\nFor an important article that explores the studies on early Chinese in Hong Kong, see Carl T Smith (1993), Hong Kong Chinese Wills 1850-1890\n\n13 See HKRS#144-98. Cheang Hoong (December 1856), 245 Wong Kong (August 1867), 254 Kwong A Hang (January 1872), 268 Ng A Cheong (October 1870), 349 Law Pak Sheung (February 1877), 368 Wei A Kwong (October 1866), 457 Law Sai Nam (December 1881), 470 Lau Cheong (June 1880), 661 Au Yeung Shing (December 1886); 733, Wong Shi Lai (June 1888), 734 Sung Chin Tseung (January 1888), 1161 Tong Mow Chee (December 1894), and 1465 Choa Chec Bec (June 1890)\n\nHKRS#134-144; Soong Ke (December 1864)\n\n15 See Zheng Guanying. Da Guangzhou shangwu zonghu yi bingting zhuamban zhangcheng ershisi tiao (To draft the twenty-four opening ordinances of the General Chamber of Commerce of Canton), in Xia Dongyuan (1988a), pp 593-6\n\n16 HKRS#144-273 O Kee Cheong (October 1872)\n\nHKRS#144-1504: Leung Kiu (April 1887)\n\n18 HKRS#144-394 La Hing (January 1879)\n\n19 See Carl T Smith (1993), p 11, 15-6\n\n20 For Western merchants who came with their Cantonese compradors to Shanghai, see Hao (1970), pp 51-3\n\n21 According to Leung Yuen-sang's study, Wu Jianzhang came to power because of the rise of mercantile power in post-1843 local politics when there was an absence of official-gentry leadership during the British invasion and capture of Shanghai in 1842 The vacuum was filled by Cantonese merchants and compradors They were sought because of their foreign language skill and foreign knowledge During Wu's office, nearly all the jobs in the government were filled by Cantonese See Leung (1990), pp. 53-6, 147-50, Toyama Gunji (1994), Shanghai dotai Go kensho (The Shanghai Taotai Wu Jianzhang), pp 45-54. and Zhang Wenqin (1989), Cong fenguan guanshang dao maiban guantiao, Wu Jianzhang shilun (From Feudal Official Merchant to Compradorial Bureaucrat), pp 31-54\n\n21 Leung Yuen-sang (1982), Regional Rivalry in Mid-Nineteenth Century Shanghai: Cantonese vs Ningpo Men, pp 34-6.\n\n21\n\nThough Li Hongzhang was a central bureaucrat, through the guandu shangban enterprises in Shanghai and Tianjin, he had successfully extended his influence in this region discussed through the \"Shanghai-Tianjin Connection\" See Leung Yuen-sang (1986), The Shanghai-Tientsin Connection: Li Hung-chang's Political Control over Shanghai during the Late Ch'ing Period, pp 315-30\n\n24 Ibid, pp. 45-6\n\n24\n\nWang Gungwu (1990). China and the Chinese Overseas, pp 175-6\n\nHKRS#144-1152 Li Chu (December 1896)\n\n27 HKRS#144-1087. Lee Chak (May 1894)\n\n8 HKRS#144-1093 Chan Kin Tong (April 1896)",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212739,
        "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-1992",
        "page_number": 48,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "33\n\nbefore Mesny reached Hami,\n\nDuring the Franco-China War of 1883 when Tso was Governor-General of the southern provinces of Fukien and Chekiang, which included Formosa [Taiwan] where the French did much of their fighting, Mesny was invited by Tso's private secretary in Foochou to come to that city to see Tso with a view to undertaking some of the 'progressive' works he, Mesny, had recommended years beforehand, including telegraphs, railways and mining. Mesny was involved at the time transacting some business in Shanghai for Viceroy Chang Chih-tung and replied that he would call at Foochou on his return from Canton. Viceroy Tso, however, died before Mesny arrived in Foochou.\n\nMesny appears to have revelled in including short tabloid-style titbits usually revealing some appalling or unspeakable act by a Chinese official. One such was the tale of the Manchu bannerman who became such an intolerable nuisance as a Chinese government spy at the British Legation in Peking, where he had been employed as a teacher for many years, that he was expelled from his job. Mesny added that as a reward for the efficient secret services he had rendered his government he was given the rank of Expectant prefect of Kueichou, in about 1874, where he did much mischief and was then transferred to Kuangtung where he remained as an ‘incorrigible anti-foreign mischief maker under the protection of the notorious anti-foreign Tatar, General Chang-shun.'\n\nMesny went into a little detail on the subject he called \"Traitors in Camp' [Nei-ying or li-ying]. These he noted were greatly depended upon in all official (and most other) undertakings. He supposed that there was not a Yamen or office in which there was not some individual paid by a rival to disclose the affairs of that place. Writing in 1905 he accused some of the anti-Christian Chinese of sowing discord amongst Christian missionaries. The latter he claimed 'are so bigoted yet simple that they are very easily imposed upon by designing mischief makers who wish to embroil the missionaries and bring them into evil repute'.\n\nAlthough the majority of titbits on Chinese culture, the social scene and personalities, consisted of one or two paragraphs, Mesny occasionally",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212931,
        "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-1992",
        "page_number": 240,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "225\n\nparallels Hong Kong's, petitioned the British government to acquire 'an insular possession near the coast of China... beyond the reach of future despotism and oppression,' Matheson, who did not have Hong Kong specifically in mind, thought of British merchants as 'princes of the earth,' and despised the Chinese, ‘a people characterized by marvellous degree of imbecility, avarice, conceit and obstinacy... [in] possession of a vast portion of the most desirable parts of the earth.'\n\nChinese officials were no less culture-bound: Commissioner Lin Zexu, the Emperor's man in Canton, confronted the British just before the 1839-1840 Opium War by burning 2,613,879 pounds of British opium, 'surely the largest drug haul ever collected,' says Welsh. The British had been smuggling opium into China, hoping to balance off the large amounts of money they were spending for tea and other products exported home to Britain. Lin Zexu advised punishing the British traders by withholding exports to them of rhubarb and tea, without which they could not exist. Because 'their legs were too tightly bound to permit them to box or wrestle,' British soldiers, he said, were not suited to fighting on shore. Unfortunately for the Chinese, their confiscation of opium was followed by attacks by British gunboats on their port cities. They were forced to open Shanghai and other coastal cities to the British and cede Hong Kong to them.\n\nNot until Chris Patten was appointed governor in 1992 did Hong Kong become a high British priority. While publicly demanding that the garrison lay down their lives for it, says Welsh, Churchill privately considered the colony not worth defending against the Japanese. During World War II, the Foreign Office regarded Hong Kong as 'something of a thorn in the side' - a view some of its diplomats still hold — and wanted to return it to China; the Americans wanted this too. In 1946, the first postwar governor, Sir Mark Young, drafted a plan for a 'Municipal Council' constituted on a fully representative basis, but this was consistently turned down. Later, the colonial secretary, Oliver Lyttelton, commented, \"The electorate of Britain didn't care a brass farthing about Hong Kong.' Welsh says this remains true, but he also reminds us that, in 1992, Chris Patten was proposing a more democratically elected Legislative Council not for the British voters but for the people of Hong Kong. As Welsh suggests, in 1946 China would have been in no position to object. But Hong Kong has since become more valuable than anyone could have dreamed in 1946.\n\nPage 240\n\nPage 241",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212939,
        "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": 7,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "CONTRIBUTORS\n\nKarina Lam Wai-Ling, M.A., is the Marketing Communications Manager SE Asia for Philips Semiconductors. The article is an edited version of her master's dissertation.\n\nJanet George, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer at the Department of Social Work and Social Policy, University of Sydney. She has researched deeply into various aspects of Hong Kong's early maternity services.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office before his retirement in 1991. He has an abiding interest in Chinese deities and temples and has written numerous articles for the Journal.\n\nGerald Choa, M.D., was a former Director of Medical & Health Services of the Hong Kong Government and Pro-Vice Chancellor of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He has written extensively about early Hong Kong medical figures and services.\n\nPatrick Hase, B.A., Ph.D., is a council member of the Royal Asiatic Society (Hong Kong Branch) and a former editor of the Journal. He has written extensively on early life in the New Territories.\n\nMary Pang, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Business and Management at the City University of Hong Kong.\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil., Ph.D., is a retired Assistant Director of Education of the Hong Kong Government and a council member of the Royal Asiatic Society (Hong Kong Branch). He has written extensively on the history and culture of Hong Kong.\n\nGeoffrey Roper, is a retired Assistant Commissioner of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force. He chairs the Activities Committee of the Royal Asiatic Society (Hong Kong Branch).\n\nvi",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213203,
        "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": 25,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "4\n\nincluded (CO129/414, p. 177).\n\nThe three German females in the 1921 census are mentioned in a report Canon Bannister sent to the Church Missionary Society in 1914. The Berlin Foundling House had 150 children and the two Blind Homes had 120 children. \"The Government has allowed three German ladies to remain in each home and the writer was asked to take general oversight”, (Archives of the Church Missionary Society, University of Birmingham, England, CH1/P/4 No. 149, Bannister, 5 Nov. 1914).\n\nThe German community gradually reestablished itself in Hong Kong, but in 1931 it was less than half of what it had been in 1911.\n\nHong Kong being a British colony, the British were the largest non-Chinese community. Next was the Macanese-Portuguese. The third were the Germans. They were followed by the Americans,\n\nGermans in the Canton trade\n\nGerman-speaking merchants participated in the China trade in the eighteenth century. The trade was confined to Canton. In 1729, the Holy Roman Emperor, the Emperor of Austria, chartered the Imperial East India Company to trade in the East using the port of Ostend in the Netherlands as its home base. At that time Netherlands was a part of the Austrian Empire. This company did not use German ships, but chartered British vessels which were principally manned by British crews. This was a stratagem to get around the efforts of the British chartered East India Company to control the European trade with China. Over the years there were usually two or three ships each season from Bremen or Hamburg arriving at Canton.\n\nBritish free traders used the protection of the office of Consul for foreign states to acquire the privilege of permanent residence in China. These free traders were large importers of opium of India, a trade the British East India Company ships did not engage in as it was prescribed by Chinese Imperial Edict and the company wished to maintain a good relation with the Dragon Throne. It feared that if it was too closely identified with the opium trade the Chinese authorities would curtail the company's lucrative and traditional trade in tea.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213204,
        "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": 26,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "As a chartered monopoly the East India Company had the right to exclude British subjects who were not members of the company from residing permanently in China. Their presence was tolerated for only the few months of the trading season. Consuls representing a foreign country could claim exemption from this rule. In 1783, John Reed was commissioned as head of the Austrian Imperial Factory at Canton - the trading establishments were called factories. He had been born in Britain but subsequently became a naturalised subject of the Austrian Emperor. Another Englishman, a subject of Austria, arrived in Canton in 1787, carrying a certificate of naturalisation from Austria. There was, however, a dispute about the national status of Edward Watts and the British East India Company demanded he leave at the end of the trading season, but he stayed on for several more years ignoring the attempt to get rid of him.\n\nDaniel Beale, a British subject who had been in the employ of the East India Company, in 1787 was appointed the Prussian Consul at Canton. This post was held by subsequent partners of the firm of which Beale was a member. The firm eventually became Jardine, Matheson and Co. The present Rua Pedro Nolasco da Silva in Macao is called by Chinese Bak Ma Lo, or in translation White Horse Road. Father Manuel Teixeira, the Macao historian, states that the white horse was on the Prussian flag which flew over what was then No. 1 Rua Hospital, a building occupied by Jardines for some years.\n\nIn the lists of residents on the China coast published in the Chinese Repository and the Anglo-Chinese Commercial Directory, the first name I have identified as German is Edmund Mueller in 1835. He was from Hamburg but arrived at Canton from Manila. He became the editor of the Canton Press, holding this position from 1836 to 1844. In the latter year he went into trade at Macao. He appears to have left China by 1847.\n\nGustav Christian Schwabe is listed as a German residing at Canton in 1837. He had arrived from Calcutta in November 1836 and sailed for Manila in October 1837. The firm of Sykes, Schwabe and Co, which later became Boustead and Co., had its head office at Liverpool with overseas branches at Singapore, Manila and Canton. Mr. Schwabe was manager of the Liverpool office from 1845 to 1853. He then returned to China to head the firm of G.C. Schwabe and Co. at Shanghai. This firm was dissolved by lapse of time in 1859 and was succeeded by Bower, Hanbury and Co, Shanghai.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213229,
        "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": 51,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "30 \n\nMrs. T.C. Meyrick of Fareham, Hants, England. He was educated at University College School, London, from where he went to Brasenose College, Oxford in 1900. He arrived in China in 1907 to join Arnhold, Karberg and Co. He was a keen supporter of racing with his brother Harry Arnhold. They ran a stable in Shanghai for many years under the nom-de-guerre of \"Winsome and Hasty\". He was the last Chairman of the Shanghai Race Club before the change of régime in China. At one time he was a member of the Shanghai Municipal Council and Vice Chairman of the British Chamber of Commerce, Shanghai. He came to Hong Kong in 1949 and the head office was then transferred here. He had been interned at the Haiphong Road Internment Camp in Shanghai. He supported the British Orchestra and the Hong Kong Concert Orchestra. He was born in London in 1881.\n\nSince 1888 a member of the firm of Arnhold, Karberg and Co. had been on the Board of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank though, of course, after 1914 German firms were not represented. The firm also represented German financial interests in the negotiation of foreign loans to China. Its \"Teutonic thoroughness\" is shown by the number of offices the firm had in China in 1908 — Hong Kong, Shanghai, Canton, Hankow, Tientsin, Tsingtau, Wuhu, Kiukiang, Newchwang, Chungking, Mukden, Peking, Tsinanfu, Kirin etc. It had buying offices in London, New York and Berlin. Dr. Frank King in his history of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation designates the firm as an \"Anglo-German\" company. Like other large China-based German firms it found it advantageous to establish strong links with Britain. It was about the only German firm able to continue its trade after 1914, principally because the two Shanghai partners were born in England.\n\nBourjau, Hubener and Co.\n\nAdolph Bourjau and Carl Albert Hubener were authorised to sign for L.E. Lebert and Company at Canton in 1858 but by the next year they were in business in Hong Kong under their own name (FC 18 Mar. 1858, 31 May 1859). They are mentioned as emigrant agents in 1866 (DP 1 Nov. 1866). Mr. Bourjau continued as a senior partner until his death on 14 February 1873 (DP 5 Apr. 1873).\n\nArthur Booth was a partner in 1862/3 and Oscar Booth from 1866 to 1869. Ernest Behre was the managing partner at Shanghai in the 1860s.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213235,
        "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": 57,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "36\n\nPaul Ehlers opened an office in Macao in September 1858 as a general agent and commission merchant (FC 9 Sept. 1858). This was during the Second Opium War when foreign merchants who had been trading at Canton had to locate in Hong Kong or Macao. After the British forces occupied Canton, some of the merchants moved back; Paul Ehlers moved on 9 December 1858 (FC 9 Dec. 1858). In January 1859, he and Theodore Hesse entered into partnership as Hesse, Ehlers and Co. (GG 8 Jan. 1859). Mr. Ehlers returned to Europe in 1865 and withdrew from the firm. It continued under the name of Hesse and Co. (GG 18 Nov. 1865). Five years after his departure from China, Mr. Ehlers returned and began conducting business under his own name at Hong Kong (GG 14 May 1870). In 1872, Paul Ehlers and Carl Robert Meuser formed a partnership. Meuser had been doing business on his own account since October 1871 (CM 3 Jan., 20 Oct. 1872). The firm went into liquidation in 1874. The business was taken over by a former employee, Justus Peter Lembke of Hamburg (CM, 29 Sept. 1875). He continued doing business in Hong Kong as Justus Lembke and Co. until 1890, when he transferred the business and goodwill to the China Export and Import Bank Compagnie. Mr. Lembke was appointed the manager of the new Hong Kong office of the Hamburg-based firm, and Hermann Witte and Ernest Brubitz were authorised to sign for the firm (HKT 3 Mar. 1890). Since writing this article, I have received from Mr. Alfred Schmitt, of Hoechst China Ltd, a history of the firm entitled Die China Export-Import-und-Bank-Compagnie, undated but recently published. After the First World War, the company was re-established in Hong Kong with its head office in Shanghai and branches also at Canton, Tientsin, Osaka, and Tokyo.\n\nWhen Paul Ehlers returned to Europe in 1865, the business of Hesse, Ehlers and Co. was continued by Theodore Hesse under the name of Hesse and Co., with Herman Peter Hase in charge of the Canton office. Under his full name, Anton Hermann Peter Hase, he was admitted a partner in 1867 (GG 5 Jan. 1867). Six months later, Mr. Hesse withdrew, and it was continued under the same name by Mr. Hase. Hase died at Marseilles in December 1873. He named Hermann Stolterfoht, an assistant in his firm, as the executor of his will (PRO Will File No. 221 of 1874 [4/274]). Leonard Stael became a partner of Hesse and Co. in 1869 and retired in 1879 (GG 3 July 1869, DP 1 Jan. 1880).\n\nHermann Stolterfoht was admitted a partner in Hesse and Co. shortly after the death of the senior partner in 1873. Charles Joseph Hirst joined",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213410,
        "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-1995",
        "page_number": 6,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "CONTRIBUTORS\n\nEdwin Haydon is a retired Registrar of the Hong Kong Supreme Court. D.H. Liu is a member of the Society with a deep interest in Chinese opera.\n\nAlfred Y.K. Lau is a member of the Society with an interest in early colonial Hong Kong.\n\nDavid Faure is a member of the Society, a noted sinologist and a former Editor of the Journal. He is now with the University of Oxford.\n\nAnne and Stephen Selby are members of the Society and noted sinologists. Stephen is currently Director of Intellectual Property of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.\n\nRichard Webb is a member of the Society and a former Administrative Officer of the Hong Kong Government now in business in the Republic Of Ireland.\n\nJohn Hodgkiss, Ph.D is a member of the Society and the Head of the Department of Ecology and Biodiversity at the University of Hong Kong. He is a noted authority on mangroves and kindred flora.\n\nR.G. Horsnell is a member of the Society and a Chief Property Services Manager with the Architectural Services Department of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A. served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office before his retirement in 1991. He has an abiding interest in Chinese temples and deities and has written numerous articles for the Journal.\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil, Ph.D is a retired Assistant Director of Education of the Hong Kong Government. He is a long-time Member of Council of the Society, and became President in 1997. He has written prolifically on the history and culture of Hong Kong.\n\nPeter Vine, LL.D (Hons) is a solicitor in private practice and a prominent resident of Hong Kong since 1947. He is currently, inter alia, President of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Society of Notaries.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213631,
        "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-1995",
        "page_number": 227,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "201\n\n'Will some kind hand in a foreign land place a flower on my son's grave.' \n\nAvril Williams has answered that call countless times. She looks upon the departed, including of course the two Chinese, as members of her extended family. It is important they all have visitors.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 J Keith Stevens, 'British Chinese Labour Corps' Labourers Buried in England', Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society vol. 29, 1989 (1991), p 390 and Plates 24 and 25\n\n2 Michael Summerskill, China on the Western Front, Britain's Work Force in the First World War, published by Summerskill (1982), passim\n\n3 The Register at Foncquevillers Military Cemetery\n\n*S M Bard, Report on Survey and Study of old Service Graves at Stanley Military Cemetery, Antiquities and Monuments Office (Hong Kong, c 1990), p.10, and S M Bard, Annex to Board Paper Antiquities Advisory Board/21/91, Study of Military Graves and Monuments Hong Kong Cemetery (Hong Kong, 1991), p 17\n\n4 In large Chinese families children are still sometimes known by numbers eg 'Number Four Sister'\n\n5 British soldiers in World War Two each wore two identity discs on a cord around their necks. On these plastic discs were stamped their army number and their name. If a soldier was killed one disc was buried with the body and the other was sent back to base for record purposes\n\n6. Four proverbs were used. The other two were, 'A noble duty bravely done', and 'Though dead he still liveth'. All four have a hint of a Christian message\n\n7 Tim Sebastian, 'Haunted by the Ghosts of Heroes', South China Morning Post (1 July 1995), Features p.3\n\n8 Ibid\n\nPLATES\n\nPlate I Although an army number is inscribed, this grave of a Chinese labourer in Foncquevillers Cemetery is unnamed. This is not uncommon\n\nPlate II The inscription on this grave shows the name of the labourer and his native place in China",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213883,
        "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-1996",
        "page_number": 235,
        "title": "RAS-1996",
        "content_text": "209\n\nmembers of the Alumni Association. All of them had at one time or another worked as compradores for foreign firms; the two Eurasian families, Ho Tung and Lo Changzhao (E) had almost monopolized the compradoral posts of Jardines and the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank up to the 1940s. Liu Zhubo, He and Lo's sons were at one time or another appointed Legislative Councillors of the Colony. When the First World War broke out in Europe, these three partners contributed a huge sum of money to the British Government for the purchase of an aeroplane. The plane, as requested by the donors, was named \"Da You Bank of Hong Kong\".\n\nThe wealth of this western-educated group did not derive from the joint-stock company. They owned their own native bank despite the fact that they were compradores in western firms. It seems likely that this was an attempt to avoid the disclosure of financial accounts as required by the company ordinance. As these Eurasian families monopolized the compradoral posts of many of the foreign firms, including the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank, it is highly likely that capital was transferred between their accounts in the compradore offices and those in their private businesses.\n\nAs they had exclusive access to capital, they did not rely on a capital market in the same way as the overseas returning migrants did, though we cannot tell whether this capital market was governed by the invisible hand of the economy or the invisible hand of political intimidation, as the governor suggested.\n\nFollowing the example of the Siyi men, Hong Kong-born, western-educated groups participated in the political arena in China. In 1913, the Governor reported to the Colonial Office that \"several leading Chinese\" in Hong Kong had informed him that they would welcome the reorganization of the administration of the Canton Province under \"tactful and conscientious British supervision.\"\n\nAccording to Liu Zhubo's proposal, a loan of 25,000,000 taels was to be raised in Hong Kong to redeem unsecured currency in Canton. In return, Liu requested of the Beijing Government the privilege of establishing a central bank in Guangdong \"with a monopoly of the Provincial Government business\". To guarantee the smooth functioning of this arrangement, Liu suggested \"inviting the Government of Hong Kong\".",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1996.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/3n209j641",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213940,
        "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-1997",
        "page_number": 10,
        "title": "RAS-1997",
        "content_text": "A. Trevor Clark, C.B.E., L.V.O., M.A., F.S.A.Scot., served in Her Majesty's Overseas Civil Service in Nigeria, and then in Hong Kong from 1960 to 1977, being seconded to the Western Pacific for constitutional duties from 1972. Since retirement to Britain he has been an elected local government councillor, and a member of non-departmental public bodies and trusts, especially museums, and has contributed book reviews on Hong Kong affairs to various publications.\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil., Ph.D is a retired Assistant Director of Education of the Hong Kong Government. He is a long-time Member of Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (HKSARBRAS) and became President in 1997, having acted since the year before. He has written prolifically on the history and culture of the HKSAR.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office before his retirement in 1991. He is an authority on Chinese temples and deities, and Chinese history generally, and has written prolifically on these subjects.\n\nJennifer W. Welch, M.A. now lives with her husband in Hong Kong having spent a number of years in Singapore, Sri Lanka, Nigeria and Australia. Her interests are varied and include French culture and language, China and the Chinese, porcelain and history.\n\nKwok-shing CHAN is a post-graduate student at the Department of Anthropology, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.\n\nThomas Kvan, M.A., M.Arch., is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Architecture, University of Hong Kong.\n\nJustyna Karakiewicz, A.A. Dipl., F.R.S.A., is an Associate Professor in the Department of Architecture, University of Hong Kong and an urban designer who has designed towns and landscapes in Malta, France and England, amongst others.\n\nix",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1997.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/wp98g7579",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214154,
        "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": 12,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "council member of HKBRAS.\n\nRobert Nield, F.C.A., F.H.K.S.A., is a certified public accountant with PricewaterhouseCoopers, and the Hon. Treasurer of HKBRAS.\n\nPenny Robbins and Meredith Tong-Draper are longstanding members of HKBRAS who have taken a very active role in recent activities, both locally and on the mainland.\n\nGeoffrey Roper, B.A., is a retired Assistant Commissioner of the (Royal) Hong Kong Police Force and a former long serving council member of HKBRAS.\n\nRonald Bishop Smith, lives in Portugal and is a private researcher into 16th century Portuguese history, notably the exploits of the Portuguese into the Middle and Far East, and China. He has written prolifically on this subject and is one of the very few people familiar with 16th century Portuguese paleography.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office before his retirement in 1991. He is an authority on Chinese temples and deities, and Chinese history generally, and has written prolifically on these subjects.\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil., Ph.D., is a retired Assistant Director of Education of the Hong Kong Government. He is a long-time council member of HKBRAS and has been President since 1997. He has written prolifically on the history and culture of the HKSAR.\n\nJennifer Welch, M.A., now lives with her husband in Hong Kong having spent a number of years in Singapore, Sri Lanka, Nigeria and Australia. Her interests are varied and include French culture and language, China and the Chinese, porcelain and history.\n\nxi",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214307,
        "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": 165,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "129\n\na few wavered in the face of student rioting they all stood firm and Sowerby's tense moment passed.\n\nIn 1935 he was elected president of the North China Branch of the RAS until illness forced him to resign in late 1940. He was also elected honorary director of the Shanghai Museum, one of the major activities of the RAS, an office he held until 1946. The RAS had a new building in the early 1930s and the China Society of Science and Art of which he was president was incorporated into the RAS with all its funds and interests passing to the RAS.\n\nLife in Shanghai was quite busy what with his business company directorships and his membership of several councils including the Foreign Residents' Association and the British Residents' Association of Shanghai.\n\nHe and Clarice lived in comfort in Shanghai with their collection of Chinese pottery and porcelain and all their books on China until her death in May 1944. These were all donated to the Heude Museum in Shanghai before he left China in 1946 and placed into a large room named \"The Sowerby Hall.\" During the first part of the Japanese occupation he and Clarice were granted exemption from internment and were allowed to remain at home categorised as sick and elderly. However, after Clarice's death he was taken into an internment camp where he became so ill that he spent the last eight months of the war in hospital. He was fortunate in that his belongings were safely stored with friends.\n\nHe remained on in Shanghai for a further year, enjoying his garden and studying animals, insects and flowers. Then, in the autumn of 1946 he brought Alice Cowens, the nurse who had cared for his brother in France, out to Shanghai where they were married and left for England. They stayed in London for some months, through the bad winter of 1946-7 and after a short trip around parts of England they decided to retire to Washington DC, partly because so much of the material he had collected during his expeditions in China was kept there but mainly because he thought that it would be better for his health.\n\nThen a problem arose. Though his wife as a British citizen could stay, he had been born in China and the quota for that category to settle in the States was\n\nPage 165\n\nPage 166",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214918,
        "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-2000",
        "page_number": 14,
        "title": "RAS-2000",
        "content_text": "Charles and Diana Slater are active members of HKBRAS.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office before his retirement in 1991. He is an authority on Chinese temples and deities, and Chinese history generally, and has written prolifically on these subjects (keith.stevens@chgods.freeserve.co.uk).\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil., Ph.D., is a retired Assistant Director of Education of the Hong Kong Government. He is a long-time council member of HKBRAS and has been President since 1997. He has written prolifically on the history and culture of the HKSAR (benefit@netvigator.com).\n\nJennifer Welch, M.A., now lives with her husband in East Yorkshire having spent a number of years in Hong Kong, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Nigeria and Australia. Her interests are varied and include French culture and language, China and the Chinese, porcelain and history.\n\nxiii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214965,
        "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-2000",
        "page_number": 61,
        "title": "RAS-2000",
        "content_text": "PROUDFOOT, W.J.: Notes from Biographical Memoir of James Dinwiddie, LL.D, embracing his account of travels in China as a member of Macartney's Embassy, Edward Howell, Liverpool, 1886.\n\nWALEY, A.: The Opium War Through Chinese Eyes, Allen and Unwin, London, 1958.\n\nWONG, J.Y.: Deadly Dreams: Opium and the Arrow War (1856-1860) in China, Cambridge University Press, 1998.\n\nWOODWARD, N.H.: Teas of the World, Collier Macmillan, London, 1980.\n\nThis paper was presented at the \"International Conference on Lin Zexu, the Opium War and Hong Kong,” held at the Hong Kong Museum of History in December 1998.\n\nAmong his many other accomplishments, Dr. S. M. Bard, OBE, ED, is also a historian.\n\nHis published works include the following: In Search of the Past: A Guide to the Antiquities of Hong Kong (Urban Council Hong Kong 1988); Traders of Hong Kong: Some Foreign Merchant Houses, 1841-1899 (Urban Council Hong Kong 1993); and Garrison Memorials in Hong Kong: Some Graves and Monuments at Happy Valley (Antiquities and Monuments Office, Hong Kong: Occasional Paper No. 4, 1997).\n\nSome scholars prefer to divide the Wars into the Opium War, 1839-1842, and the Arrow War, 1856-1860.\n\n* A Dutchman, Dr Cornelius Decker, advocated 40-50 cups a day.\n\nPortuguese Princess Catherine is credited with introducing tea to Britain when she married King Charles II.\n\nA story is told of German Radio, during the 2nd World War, which announced that due to shortage of tea in Britain, the British were ready to sue for peace, not having access to their 5-o'clock tea. It only served to amuse the British, for the Germans got the time wrong!",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215239,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 16,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "Imperial Ideals and Chinese Practical Common Sense in Chan Lau Kit-ching and Peter Cunich (eds.), An Impossible Dream: Hong Kong University from Foundation to Re-establishment, 1910-1950 (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 2002). Governor Frederick D. Lugard and the Hong Kong Chinese featured prominently in this article (ahylin@hkucc.hku.hk).\n\nProfessor Norman Miners, was the former Head of the Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Hong Kong. He is probably best remembered for his seminal work The Government and Politics of Hong Kong, first published in 1975, which ran to five editions.\n\nRobert Nield, F.C.A., F.H.K.S.A., is a certified public accountant and was a former partner with PricewaterhouseCoopers (Hong Kong). He is a Vice-President and the Treasurer of HKBRAS (hiflyer@netvigator.com)\n\nKirsty Norman is an active member of HKBRAS.\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., served with the British Army and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office until his retirement in 1991. He is an authority on Chinese temples and deities, and Chinese history, and has written prolifically on these subjects. His articles are noted for the splendour of the illustrations (keith.stevens@chgods.freeserve.co.uk).\n\nDr Elizabeth Kenworthy Teather gained her B.A.(Hons) and Ph.D. in the Department of Geography at University College London. She is a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society. Born in Britain, she spent some years overseas as a teenager (Iraq and Cyprus), emigrated to New Zealand in 1973 and moved to Australia in 1984. She joined the Department of Geography and Planning at the University of New England, NSW, Australia, in 1988. She has a second Honours degree in Theatre Studies completed in 1986, and is also a Licentiate of the Royal Schools of Music (Singing - Performance). From 1995-1997, 1999-2000 and 2001-2002 she was Scholar in Residence, David C Lam Institute for East-West Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University\n\nDan Waters, M.Phil., Ph.D., is a retired assistant director of education of the Hong Kong Government. He has written prolifically on the culture and history of Hong Kong. He is the immediate past-president of HKBRAS (benefit@netvigator.com).\n\nJenny Welch, M.A., now lives with her husband in Hong Kong having spent a number of years in Singapore, Sri Lanka, Nigeria and Australia. Her interests include French culture and language, China and the Chinese, porcelain and history.\n\nxiii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215277,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 54,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "2\n\nThere is one exception to these generalisations, a deviant case which has never been analysed by the economists who deplore the underdevelopment of the colonial empire. The amazing economic growth of Hong Kong since its liberation from the Japanese occupation in 1945 is well known, but it is widely assumed that before the war the Hong Kong economy was almost entirely based upon the entrepôt trade transporting goods to and from China and that its transformation from a trading mart to a manufacturing centre began with the post-war arrival of industrialists from Shanghai fleeing from the chaos of China's civil war. In fact, the development of industry had begun in the nineteenth century and by 1939 Hong Kong had built up a flourishing export trade in manufactured goods to China and neighbouring Asian countries and was even successfully competing with British firms in a few items in the British home market.\n\nThe growth of Hong Kong industry was accelerated in the 1930s by decisions taken at the Imperial Economic Conference which met at Ottawa in August 1932. The conference was called to find ways of combating the worldwide economic depression by stimulating trade between the countries of the empire after the British government had decided to abandon its long-standing commitment to free trade and to impose a ten per cent tariff on foreign imports. The conference was mainly occupied with bargaining between Britain and the dominions over the terms on which agricultural products from the dominions would enter the British market and the access of British manufactured goods to the dominions.\n\nThe ministers meeting at Ottawa also decided to impose stringent restrictions by tariffs and specific duties on imports of textiles and other goods from Japan which were beginning to penetrate empire markets, displacing British and Canadian manufactures. Chinese businessmen in Hong Kong took advantage of this attempt to exclude Japanese goods from dominion and colonial markets to export large quantities of cheap footwear and textiles to the empire. This provoked indignant complaints from industrialists in Britain and Canada who demanded that restrictions should be placed on the supercompetitive Hong Kong manufactures.\n\nHong Kong's successful penetration of empire markets forced the British government for the first time to consider what its policy should be towards the industrial development of the colonial empire. Two interdepartmental committees of civil servants were set up in 1933 and 1937, but no authoritative decision was reached by the cabinet before the outbreak of war in 1939. Officials at the Colonial Office defended the right of the colonies to diversify their economies by moving into manufacturing, but the Board of Trade and the Treasury were generally unenthusiastic about such schemes where they might result in a reduction of British exports.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215282,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 59,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "where the territory was not debarred from doing so by treaty. In preparation for the negotiations at Ottawa the colonies were also asked to consider what preferences might be accorded them by the dominions and what preferences they might give to the dominions in return on the lines of the Canada-West Indies agreement.”\n\n34\n\nThe governor, Sir William Peel, discussed Hong Kong's position while visiting the Colonial Office in June 1932. Officials agreed with him that Hong Kong's status as a free port made it impossible to impose anything like a general tariff. Any such tariff would ruin the entrepôt trade which was vital to Hong Kong's existence and no practicable means could be devised of landing goods in bond for re-export without involving so much inconvenience as to drive the entrepôt trade to other neighbouring ports. Peel was prepared as a gesture to give a preference to empire products on articles such as spirits and tobacco which were subject to excise duty and to impose a higher rate of first registration tax on foreign motor cars than on cars imported from Britain and Canada. He did not ask for any preference from the dominions in return since in his view the bulk of Hong Kong exports consists of foreign goods the proportion of the cost of which, due to treatment in Hong Kong, was not large enough to secure a preference...” This showed a surprising ignorance of Hong Kong's growing trade in domestic manufactures which were largely exported to neighbouring Asian countries.\n\nThe Ottawa conference convened in July 1932. The British delegation was led by Stanley Baldwin, the former prime minister, and four other cabinet ministers. Canada, Southern Rhodesia and Newfoundland were represented by their prime ministers; Australia and New Zealand by former prime ministers; South Africa and the Irish Free State by their finance and trade ministers. India, which had been given the freedom to establish protective duties in 1923, was represented by Sir Atul Chatterjee and other members of the Viceroy's Council. The interests of the colonial empire were safeguarded by the secretary of state for the colonies, Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister and one civil servant from the Colonial Office, G.L.M. Clauson.\n\nThe conclusions of the conference were embodied in agreements between the United Kingdom government and the governments of the dominions and India. Britain consented to continue the free entry of goods grown, produced or manufactured in any part of the empire, and to impose additional duties on specified foreign goods which would give empire produce a preferential margin higher than the 10 per cent tariff already imposed by the Import Duties Act. Britain also agreed to 'invite' the non-self-governing colonies and protectorates to extend to all the dominions any preference at present extended to any part of the empire, and to increase the margin of preference or impose specific duties on a long list of items requested by the dominions. In return the dominions confirmed the existing",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215283,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 60,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "preferences granted to British goods, to increase the margin of preference on a few specific items and to review the level of existing tariffs which protected dominion manufactures against British goods. The dominions approved tariff preferences on specified colonial goods, mostly tropical agricultural products, asphalt, rum and cigars. Each dominion offered a different list of concessions to the colonies and not all were equally generous. South Africa granted preferences only on raw coffee and asphalt. Canada gave little more than the preferences already embodied in the 1920 trade agreement with the West Indian colonies.\" New Zealand was the only dominion which agreed to grant preferences at the same rates as were accorded to Britain to all the colonies and protectorates. The agreements with the dominions provided that the preferences accorded to British goods might be extended to the colonies, protectorates and mandated territories ‘if His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom so request'. All these preferences were for British manufactured goods. The development of manufacturing industry in the colonies was not anticipated by the governments represented at Ottawa. If it had been foreseen it is probable that the dominion governments would have raised strong objections to admitting goods manufactured under oriental conditions to their markets under a tariff designed to benefit British manufacturers.28\n\nAfter the Ottawa conference a circular despatch was sent to all colonies and dependent territories setting out the tariff preferences which would be granted by the dominions to colonial exports of foodstuffs and raw materials.\" These preferences would give the dependencies a reasonable prospect of replacing foreign imports by imports from empire sources in the dominion markets concerned. In return the dependent territories were 'invited' to grant to the dominions the preferences which the colonial secretary had negotiated at Ottawa. Cunliffe-Lister made clear that it was a matter of the highest importance that the Ottawa settlement should be put into effect as an integral whole.\n\nI should feel that I had been guilty of a breach of faith if the legislature concerned refused to grant the preference in question, unless I could put to the dominion government concerned clear evidence that there were really substantial reasons for not granting the proposed preference. It would not be an adequate ground of objection to say that the desired preference might increase the local cost of living, so long as the increase was only moderate and did not cause hardship to a particularly poor class of the community.\n\nGovernors prepared the necessary legislation for introduction into the colonial legislatures, but a number warned the Colonial Office that they\n\nPage 60\n\nPage 61",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215287,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "creation of protected local industries could be justified only where the colony had natural advantages for the development of an industry and where it was likely eventually to be profitable without protection. However, regard should also be paid to the principle of trusteeship and where the commercial interests of Britain and the general economic well-being of the colony were in conflict, colonial interests should prevail. These ambiguous recommendations gave the Colonial Office a considerable area of discretion to determine whether or not a colony should be allowed to institute a protective tariff or provide other assistance to a proposed new industry.\n\nThese recommendations did not affect the situation in Hong Kong and Singapore, where Chinese entrepreneurs were successfully exporting shoes and other goods manufactured from imported raw materials without the assistance of any protective tariff. Their home market was small compared to their export markets and they could easily undercut any foreign competitors. The committee regarded the invasion of the British and dominion markets by cheap rubber shoes produced by oriental labour as an evil, but it opposed the imposition of import duties on colonial manufactures since the Ottawa agreements had granted entry free of tariffs to all imports from the dominions and India; discrimination against colonial products would undermine the principle of free trade within the empire and call into question the preferences and privileges which the colonies had extended to imports from Britain. Instead of tariffs on colonial manufactures the committee recommended that efforts should be pursued to assimilate conditions of employment and factory and workshop regulations to those in force in Britain by the adoption of the International Labour Conventions by the colonies. The committee also suggested the encouragement of negotiations between manufacturers in Britain and in the colonies to divide the market by the assignment of quotas between them.\n\nCunliffe-Lister welcomed the report in spite of the rejection of his idea of protection for British manufactures against colonial competition. The report was circulated to the cabinet for the information of ministers but objections were unexpectedly raised by the secretary of state for India and the chancellor of the exchequer. The main doubt was whether the report went far enough in recommending the discouragement of new industries in the colonies. So the report was remitted for further consideration by another committee, but nothing was done for three years. In the meantime the Colonial Office proceeded to act on the principles recommended in the report. Instructions were sent to all colonies that any proposal to protect a local industry must be referred to London at the earliest possible stage and no bill to impose or increase a protective tariff should be introduced into the legislative council without prior authorisation by the colonial secretary. Telegrams were sent to the governors of Singapore and Hong Kong asking\n\nPage 46",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215289,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 66,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "14\n\nCanadian products. To counter this competition the British government in 1934 instructed the colonies to institute a system of quotas for 'piece goods containing 50 per cent or more of cotton or of artificial silk, or of cotton and artificial silk combined'. The annual quota allowed in any colony should be the average imports over the years 1927 to 1931.\" This covered the period before Japanese textiles began to flood into colonial markets. British textiles and empire textiles were excluded from quota, provided that they had 50 per cent imperial content. This measure aroused considerable opposition in many colonies since the poorest customers would be deprived of their only source of cheap clothing for the benefit of the British textile industry. The official majority was used to carry the bill through the colonial legislatures in the face of opposition from the unofficial members. In Ceylon, where elected unofficials had a majority in the legislative council, quotas were imposed by an Order in Council issued by the British government. In spite of its long history as a free port Singapore agreed to impose quotas on imports retained in the colony. Hong Kong refused because of possible damage to its entrepôt trade, much to the annoyance of the colonial secretary, Cunliffe-Lister.52\n\nIn 1936 the Colonial Office asked for reports from all colonies on the effects of the quotas imposed two years earlier. The replies from governors indicated that quotas had been generally successful in excluding Japanese and foreign textiles, but this had had very little effect in increasing the trade of Britain and Canada. As happened when discriminatory duties were imposed on rubber shoes the chief beneficiary was Hong Kong. Imports of shirts, singlets and hosiery from Hong Kong had made their appearance for the first time and were now the dominant supplier at the cheaper end of the market.\" The governor of Jamaica complained that imports of ready-made apparel were driving the local garment industry out of business and suggested specific duties or quotas on Hong Kong textiles on the same lines as the restrictions against Japan.\n\n34\n\nAfter the Ottawa conference other Hong Kong goods besides rubber footwear began to appear in the British market. The Import Duties Act 1932 had allowed free entry into Britain to imports provided that at least 25 per cent of their value was derived from materials grown or produced or from work done within a part of the empire. This provision enabled a number of small manufacturers in Hong Kong who had previously exported their products to China and Asian countries to turn their attention to the British market. Exports of wearing apparel to Britain increased from HK$2,000 in 1932 to HK$498,000 in 1933, and HK$1,169,000 in 1935. Exports of electric torches went up from none in 1932 to HK$30,000 in 1933, HK$128,000 in 1934, and HK$131,000 in 1935.\" The Board of Trade feared that foreign manufacturers such as Japan were shipping goods substantially",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215290,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 67,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "15\n\nmanufactured in foreign countries to factories situated in the empire for the completion of the manufacturing process in order to become eligible for imperial preference. So in 1933 new regulations were issued which required most manufactured goods to show 50 per cent empire content of materials and labour in order to qualify for preference. A circular despatch was sent to all colonies requiring them to do the same and a model ordinance to effect this was enclosed. The 15 torch factories in Hong Kong used foreign brass to make the torch casing since it was cheaper than brass exported from Britain. The British Customs and Excise Department ruled that since brass constituted at least 40 per cent of the value of the finished product, unless British brass was used, torches should be classed as foreign and so be ineligible for admission to Britain free of duty. In 1935 the British Customs imposed a specific duty of 14 pence per pound on flashlight torches. This roughly doubled the cost of Hong Kong torches making it difficult for them to compete in the British market. Protests were made, but the British Customs refused to trust the costings supplied by Hong Kong showing a 50 per cent empire content and suggested that the factories should use empire brass exclusively for certain months of the year; if this was satisfactorily authenticated by an accountant's certificate Customs were prepared to allow Hong Kong torches to enter free of duty. Such arrangements were too complicated and expensive for most of the Chinese workshops involved, so they decided to do without imperial preference. Exports to Britain constituted less than 6 per cent of their total production.\n\n58\n\nThese and other moves to limit Hong Kong's manufacturing exports provoked the governor to make a strong plea in unusually forthright terms to the Colonial Office for favourable treatment on the ground of Britain's imperial interests.\n\nWe are a tiny place and have no sufficient home market to support industrialization on any large scale. Between us and China there is a customs barrier and I do not see (with the rising tide of Chinese nationalism) any chance of their lowering the barrier for Hong Kong products. So if there is to be future for industrialization in Hong Kong its market must be a cheap and distant one, a protected market within our colonial empire. From an imperial point of view the question boils down to this. Is Hong Kong to be left just as a fortress port with a dwindling entrepot business or is it to be allowed to make up for what it loses on the entrepot swings by its takings on the industrial roundabout? Hong Kong has (except in the case of rubber) no near or cheap source of empire raw material, and so the empire content of its products will generally not greatly exceed the percentage which the cost of manufacture bears to the cost of material. If this is not",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215291,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 68,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "16\n\nsufficient to qualify for preference in colonial 'native' markets then it is a very bad outlook for us as I cannot see how the growing population of Victoria and Kowloon are going to find employment without industrial development,\n\nI therefore consider it as politically important as it is, from our point of view, economically advantageous to give the Hong Kong Chinese a commercial attachment to the empire. Our military and naval defences are designed against external aggression, but if relations with China ever became antagonistic there would be an enemy totalling over one million within the fortress gates, unless their bread is liberally spread with Empire butter.\n\nThe governor's plea for Hong Kong's manufacturing industry was warmly supported by all the Colonial Office officials who wrote minutes on this despatch. It was quickly passed up to the colonial secretary, W. Ormsby-Gore, who endorsed it as 'an admirable letter' and gave instructions for copies to be sent to the Foreign Office and the Board of Trade.\" Officials made frequent use of Caldecott's argument of imperial interests when attempting to repulse proposals from the Board of Trade and other departments to place further restrictions on Hong Kong's manufactures in the years that followed.\n\nBritish textile manufacturers continued to protest that they were suffering from unfair competition in the British and colonial markets and demanded that Hong Kong exports should be excluded by tariffs or quantitative restrictions. In order to fend off these pressures the Colonial Office suggested to the governor of Hong Kong that all cotton and artificial silk piece goods exported to Britain and the colonies should be accompanied by a certificate that they had been made from cloth which had been spun, woven and finished within the empire. This proposal posed difficulties for Hong Kong. There were no spinning mills in the colony and more than half the cotton yarn used in the production of piece goods and hosiery was imported from Japan and Shanghai. In order to continue to enjoy the benefits of imperial preference, the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce secured the manufacturers' agreement to switch their purchases of yarn from China and Japan to cotton mills in India which were within the empire. But the manufacturers of goods made from artificial silk protested strongly that the only alternative to yarn from Japan was British yarn which was double the price ($1.70 a pound compared to 85c). This would destroy their competitiveness with Japanese products in British Malaya, the African colonies and the West Indies and drive them to bankruptcy. The Colonial Office put its case to the Board of Trade which refused to compromise, asserting that if Hong Kong was to continue to enjoy the advantages of the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215297,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 74,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "22\n\n22. The requirement of an empire content of 25 per cent to qualify for preference was set in consultation with the Board of Trade, which pointed out that some British manufacturers using foreign sources of raw material would not qualify for preference if the empire content was set at 50 per cent. CO323/1192/11.\n\n23. L.M. Drummond, British Economic Policy and the Empire 1919–1939 (London, 1972), 92; Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on the Industrial Development of the Colonial Empire, Colonial Office Confidential Print 445, CO885/40.\n\n24. Secretary of State to all colonies and protectorates, 4 Feb. 1932, DO35/242/4, PRO.\n\n25. Minutes of a conference at the Colonial Office, 27 June 1932, CO323/1193/2.\n\n26. The texts of the agreements are in Imperial Economic Conference at Ottawa Cmd4175 (London, 1932), 19–76.\n\n27. Canada agreed to extend to the colonies and protectorates the preferences accorded to Britain, but in practice raised objections when requested to do so by the British government. See for example CO323/1099/16, CO852/51/9 and CO852/251/10. Cunliffe-Lister minute, 22 Oct 1933, CO323/1232/8, 'Canada has done less than nothing to implement the most essential part of the Ottawa accords.'\n\n28. See the comments in paragraphs 18 and 30 of the Report of the Interdepartmental Committee.\n\n29. Confidential Circular Despatch, 29 Sept. 1932, CO854/174. Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister is better known by his later title, Viscount Swinton.\n\n30. Secretary of State to Governor of Ceylon, 27 Sept. 1932; S. of S. to High Commissioner, Federated Malay States, 30 Sept. 1932; S. of S. to Barbados, 24 Oct. 1932; S. of S. to Jamaica, 10 Oct. 1932; S. of S. to Windward Islands, 24 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5. A clause was drafted for inclusion in the 1933 Finance Bill to allow Britain to withdraw preferences from any colony if it did not grant the Ottawa preferences to empire products, CO323/1230/3.\n\n31. Officer Administering Government, Leeward Islands to Secretary of State, 19 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n32. Governor Barbados to Secretary of State, 17 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n33. Governor Windward Islands to Secretary of State, 21 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n34. Stevens to Cunliffe-Lister, 17 Nov. 1932, CO323/1193/11.\n\n35. Cunliffe-Lister to Stevens, 8 Dec. 1932, CO323/1193/11.\n\n36. Hong Kong Trade Returns show exports of rubber shoes to the British West Indies as follows: 1932 - HK$4,894; 1933 - 116,670; 1934 - 643,337; 1935 - 574,376; 1936 - 1,071,932; 1937 - 1,427,634.\n\n37. High Commissioner for Canada to Cunliffe-Lister, 15 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n38. Cunliffe-Lister to High Commissioner, 27 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/8. Canada later succeeded in excluding Singapore shoes by setting a fictitious high rate of exchange for the Singapore dollar. See minute by Calder, 8 June 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n39. Peel to Cunliffe-Lister, 13 Nov. 1933, CO323/1231/16.\n\n40. Minute by Vernon, 21 Dec. 1933, CO323/1231/16. R.V. Vernon was an Assistant Secretary who joined the Colonial Office in 1900. He had previously expressed his disapproval when Cunliffe-Lister refused to approach India and South Africa to ask for imperial preference for Hong Kong's rubber shoes: 'The Secretary of State is placed practically in the position of a trustee who is bound to act with the sole regard to the interests of the colonies and is not at liberty to abstain from any claim on the account of the interests of U.K. industry or the susceptibilities of dominion industrial interests.' Minute, 9 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/3. The attitude of Cunliffe-Lister may be contrasted with that of Alan Lennox-Boyd (Colonial Secretary 1954-59) who threatened to resign if Hong Kong was forced to accept a limitation on its textile exports to Britain. Harold Macmillan, Riding the Storm, 1954–1959 (London, 1971), 739-43.\n\n41. CO323/1294/3.\n\n42. Hong Kong Trade Returns 1932, 1933, 1934.\n\n43. Minute by Cunliffe-Lister, 7 June 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n44. Edgcumbe (Department of Overseas Trade) to Eastwood (Colonial Office), 18 April 1936, CO323/1298/10.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215387,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 164,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "TERAKR Bar: A XXS NAVAR\n\n2001 * 12 9 14ÜIADAVKUGAN\n\nCharles Pinker RL.\n\nDavid Blur (Anne) A A\n\nAlexandra Blair' AL\n\nAndrew Blau\n\n113\n\nThe descendants of Sir Frederick Lugard, the Pinker and Blair families, have generously agreed to present The Tribute on permanent loan to the University of Hong Kong. Members of the family attending the presentation ceremony on Friday December 14, 2001, and representing Major Richard Pinker, include (with their relationship to Sir Frederick Lugard):\n\nMr Charles Pinker (great great nephew)\n\nMrs David Blair (Anne) (great great niece)\n\nMiss Alexandra Blair' (great great great niece)\n\nMr Andrew Blair (great great great nephew)\n\n盧押在香港\n\nLugard in Hong Kong\n\n1858 年 1 月 22 日\n\n(Fort St George, Madras)\n\n教士,他出任香港總督一職前,擔任英國\n\nRoyal Niger Company 工作的經歷,使他在 1900 年至 1906 年間出任尼日利亞高級專員。\n\n## 1902 年 Flora Shaw 與 Lugard 結婚\n\n...\n\n旅行家、作家,曾擔任倫敦《泰晤士報》殖民地編輯。\n\n由於 Flora 的健康問題,盧押辭去尼日利亞高級專員的工作,離開當地,並於 1907 年後接受任命為香港總督。\n\n盧押在香港的工作及功績並不屬於本文介紹的範圍。但值得一提的是九廣鐵路通車和香港大學的成立,是他任內發生的重要事件。\n\nFrederick John Dealtry Lugard, Baron Lugard of Abinger, was born of missionary parents on January 22, 1858 at Fort St George, Madras, India.\n\nBy the time he arrived as Governor of Hong Kong, his work and exploits in Africa on behalf of the British Army, the British East Africa Company, the Royal Niger Company and the Colonial Office were legendary. He was High Commissioner of Nigeria from 1900 to 1906. In 1902, he married Flora Shaw, herself a great traveller and writer and Colonial Editor of The Times of London until the end of the 19th century.\n\nBecause of Flora's health and her inability to be with him in his colonial posting, Lugard resigned his post and left Nigeria. However, he accepted the Governorship of Hong Kong in 1907.\n\nLugard as perceived by the cartoonist \"Spy\" in Vanity Fair's \"Men of the Day\" series, December 19, 1895\n\nThe events which followed and Lugard's role and achievements in the life of the Colony are mostly beyond the scope of this introduction to The Tribute. They would, however, include the opening of the Kowloon-Canton Railway and the foundation of The University of Hong Kong.\n\nMiss Blair, who is the assistant foreign editor of The Times of London, continues a family association with the newspaper begun by Flora Lugard.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215827,
        "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": 126,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "59\n\n11\n\n3; \"Naval Group China Papers,\" RG 38; NA, Washington, DC (hereafter referred to as \"G-2 Estimates\").\n\n(1) KWIZ 66/52, 6 Jul 44; Series 10/17, KWIZ (Kweilin Intelligence Summary) nos. 66-69, September-October 1944; Ride Papers. (2) \"Enemy Press Extracts: 17 Mar 45-14 Apr 45,\" 31 May 45, p.1, 4, 7; Series 2/37, Contains Correspondence Relating to the Closure of BAAG and Intelligence Reports, December 1942-November 1945; Ride Papers. (3) Stella L. Thrower, Hong Kong Country Parks (Hong Kong: Government Printing, 1984), p.97.\n\n12 Navy Department, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OP-30), Bureau of Yards and Docks, \"Joint Preliminary Study for Advanced Base: Hong Kong Including Port Shelter and Mirs Bay,\" Nov 44, p. 10-11, 14; Foreign Publications and Reports, 1940-50, Guatemala-Hong Kong; Office of Naval Intelligence; Records of the Chief of Naval Operations, RG 38; NA, Washington, DC (hereafter referred to as Navy Department, \"Advanced Base: Hong Kong\").\n\n13 \"G-2 Estimates,\" p.5-6.\n\n* CPS 107/1, \"Plan of Campaign Within China,\" 24 Apr 44, p.15; ABC 384 China (12-15-43), Sec. 1-A; Top Secret \"American-British-Canadian\" Correspondence (known as the \"ABC\" File) Relating to Organizational Planning and General Combat Operations During World War II and the Early Postwar Period, 1940-1948; Office of the Director of Plans & Operations; Records of the War Department General and Special Staffs, RG 165; NA, Washington, DC.\n\n15\n\nis Hong Kong Royal Observatory, Tropical Cyclones and Aircraft Operations in Hong Kong (Hong Kong: the Observatory, 1976), p.2 (hereafter referred to as HKRO, Tropical Cyclones).\n\n\"The case for the barrage balloon is made in Major Franklin J. Hillson's (USAF), \"Barrage Balloons for Low-Level Air Defense,\" Aerospace Power Journal (Summer 1989). The author said that barrage balloons were still a viable concept in 1989, by which time technology had progressed and the Cold War was winding down. (Article is available online at http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/girchronicles/api/apj89/hillson.html.)\n\n#7 The \"Climate of Hong Kong (China)\" study did not state how low humidity had to be to have an adverse effect on chemical warfare, although it seemed to imply that Hong Kong's 58-62 per cent relative humidity from October to December",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215930,
        "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": 229,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "163\n\na new breed of intelligence officer. Grimsdale recalled his admiration with the ease with which Boxer could gain the trust of the Japanese.\n\nWhen the Japanese conquered Guangdong in 1938, Boxer arranged an invitation for himself and Grimsdale to visit the Commander of Japanese Forces, General Ando, whom he had known socially in London. To Grimsdale's amazement, Ando showed them round Japanese installations in his own staff car. They were able to inspect troop positions, aerodromes and see the power of the Japanese army at first hand. Perhaps that was Ando's subtle point, but it benefited both parties. At one stage, the general joked to Boxer that the British should stop supporting the Chinese 'then we could finish off this bloody war and all go home.' In the same jesting vein, Boxer answered that the Japanese should stop supporting the Germans.\n\nBoxer and his colleagues made a point of travelling and meeting people. Through personal contacts they were able to extract more information, and get an understanding of context. Boxer and his colleagues were articulate and fluent in Chinese or Japanese, and above all sensitive to the cultures, aware of the place of Hong Kong in the overall Chinese scheme of things. They illustrated the concept that \"well informed is well armed.\" Nor were they the only ones. In 1937/8, the Japanese Army in central China had agreed to take a young Japanese speaking British officer \"on attachment\" for nine months. Although his detailed report was misinterpreted (the atrocities in China were deemed a 'temporary lapse') is the then Military Attache and Foreign Office agreed that a non confrontational approach was more effective in getting information and defusing potential incidents.\n\niv\n\nAlert to the nuances of Japanese politics, Boxer sensed in July 1939, a sharp deterioration in Japanese attitudes towards the British. He interpreted this as a move by the Japanese Army to find a scapegoat for their lack of progress in the China campaign. He reported 'at present there can be no greater error than to assume as is so often done that Japan's military machine is too bogged down in China to prevent it being turned towards us...the only thing likely to restrain the Japanese Army....is the fear of possible complications with the United States of America.\" His warnings however went unheeded: Europe was itself just about to plunge into war, and to the Foreign Office, Hong Kong seemed very far away. Indeed, the note covering Boxer's letter",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215942,
        "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": 241,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "175\n\nHong Kong shipyards to do marine engineering could also be used to make armour cladding for ships and vehicles. Hong Kong was also the base from which British aircraft manufacturers wanted to penetrate the Chinese market - the Far East Flying School wanted to train Chinese to fly so they would buy British rather than American or German planes. Hong Kong was also a centre for financial transactions both within and outside the banking system, a source for remittances and money transfers, more secure than Shanghai after the Japanese conquest. A large KMT community operated out of and lived in Hong Kong: almost a parallel government. While there was sympathy for the Nationalists, the colonial administration was uncertain how to maintain a balance between the Japanese and the Chinese Government. Riots against Japanese living in Hong Kong had been suppressed, and no protests made against Japanese attacks on the junk fleet. When the St Johns Ambulance wanted to send an ambulance to bombed Canton, the Colonial Office refused permission. Groups of Chinese 'terrorists' were arrested and deported from time to time. As late as May 1941 the colony's police force raided premises at 98 Robinson Road and destroyed a wireless transmitting station which had been operating for three years. The leader of this group was Chan So, an agent of General Wu Te Ching. When Governor Northcote sought guidance, the Colonial Office was advised by the Foreign Office that British policy had to vary according to circumstances, and support for China should be rendered 'compatible with the safety of Empire and avoidance of actual hostilities with the Japanese.'xix Nonetheless, there was a significant understanding between the Goumindang and the British when it came to matters of mutual benefit. When war officially broke out, their clandestine relationship could come out into the open. When Phyllis Harrop,\n\na civilian consultant working with the police reported for duty right after the outbreak of hostilities, she was assigned to work with the KMT who had already started to occupy offices with the police.\n\nThe Japanese were all too aware of the importance of Hong Kong to the KMT. The Japanese Foreign Minister had softly but firmly reminded the British Ambassador to keep the KMT under control. Even before their push to the south, the Japanese had identified KMT activists and targeted educated, articulate overseas Chinese as a threat and source of resistance. In Malaya and Singapore, they were to massacre thousands of Chinese in the wake of their advance, a fact obscured by the emphasis on the sufferings of Europeans interned in camps. In Hong Kong, on",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216051,
        "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": 350,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "284\n\nopposite extremity of the foreign settlement. Some years passed before the site was occupied. On 5th February, 1889, the Consulate building was burnt in a riot together with several neighbouring houses. The final Consulate of a main building and four houses was erected on the same site in 1890. Built predominantly of red brick with white and grey bricks forming the decoration, it had double windows to keep the rooms warm during the bitter winters and a royal reign tablet on the rear wall. This white oval plaque bearing the enjoined letters VR is still in place a century or so later.\n\nAll the British consuls serving in Zhenjiang from its opening in 1860 found time hanging heavily and a number became medically unfit within a short time of taking up their posts. Adkins, the Consul writing to his father in December 1861 wrote in passing that 'the office of Consul at a thriving port is no sinecure I can tell you. He is judge, bishop, police magistrate, coroner etc. etc etc.' As is usual his own countrymen give him the least possible support and abuse him like a pickpocket.' It was also soon realized just how unimportant Zhenjiang had become to foreigners and by 1867 it was decided to post a junior consul to the port under the aegis of the senior consul at Shanghai. However, ten years later the number of British residents had increased sufficiently to warrant a return to the consular post being restored to its former independent status. It was by no means a comfortable place to live though PD Coates wrote that all in all Zhenjiang would have been a pleasant enough post had the [foreign] community been more congenial.24 One incident in the history of the consulate in Zhenjiang related by Coates, tells how in 1879 the Chairman and Treasurer of the Zhenjiang Concession Council, Bean, a British merchant who held several of the nineteen concession leases, physically assaulted H. J. Allen, the British consul, in the Club when the latter as Consul had asked to examine the Council's books before approving its accounts. Duff, another merchant, was the Secretary to the Council. Coates describes the constant and major friction between Bean and Duff, Bean and the Consul, and between other foreign residents of the Concession and this was reiterated by William Mesny as we shall soon see. Oxenham, a subsequent Consul in 1886, described Bean as a coarse, cantankerous, uneducated man of low tastes and malignant disposition who had insulted practically every Consul and Customs commissioner serving at the port.\n\nAdkins described in one of his letters to his father how English",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216065,
        "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": 364,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "298\n\nhad been destroyed and burned down. Thousands of rioters had arrived there in boats and destroyed foreign property. These enigmatic statements suggest that Mesny believed that ‘charity funds for famine relief' were being misused by the Viceroy and others to buy off bandits, even if he does not actually spell it out. There is no indication in his Miscellanies to whom he reported after his fact-finding mission or what he did with his information about the famine, or whether he actually provided physical relief for some of the unfortunate victims.\n\nAs so often happened a very minor incident, in this case concerning a Sikh policeman, grew in a matter of hours into a major riot. It was riots in 1889 referred to by Mesny, when the Sikh, a member of the municipal police force of the Zhenjiang Concession, was alleged to have struck a Chinese. According to Arlington it was started by the Concession Chief of Police, an Indian, accidentally killing a coolie who 'dared' to have his head shaved on the Bund [a terrible thing to shave the head on the Bund!]. The events followed a not unusual pattern with the mob throwing stones and the Europeans managing to escape to a ship on the Great River but not before telegraphing for assistance to Shanghai. The Chinese authorities too had been called upon for help and though both Chinese police and soldiers arrived they simply stood around and did nothing. Both the British and American consulates were destroyed; meanwhile Shanghai replied requesting additional information and advising the westerners in Zhenjiang that a gun boat was being prepared. Order was restored by Chinese troops on the following day. Three days later the British gunboat arrived and was boarded by the Consul who was greeted by a gun-salute. The very first report of the guns sent every Chinese off the Bund and out of the Concession like a cloud of smoke being dispersed by a typhoon. A benefit arising from the riot was the construction of a new consulate office and house with its own garden. A slightly different picture of the cause was given by Consul Parker which he had obtained from hearsay.*4 The Zhenjiang municipal police had arrested a Chinese military officer for 'reckless riding'.\n\nAfter the riots of the 1880s strong, double riot gates of stout iron bars were constructed, each with a span of some twenty feet, so that the whole of the width of the Bund, some forty feet, would be barred when they were closed. The Concession police during the first decade of the 20th century consisted of some sixteen Shandong men from the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216074,
        "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": 373,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "307\n\npost on the Yangzi,' a place where John Mesny, William's brother, had also been employed in the Imperial Customs, 'If you belonged to the Duff faction you couldn't speak to a clerk of Bean's if you passed him on the Bund; if you belonged to the Bean faction (and Bean was the drinking, swearing, concubine-keeping Scotsman) you were taboo in three houses where there were wives, and therefore decent entertainment.' But if you frequented Starkey, the hospitable, or Emery with his lawful Chinese wife, you were ostracised by the wealthy faction.\"\n\nTransit passes\n\nYou will recall that Mason, according to the Inspector General of Customs, had a grip on the subject of Transit Passes. E. H. Parker, who retired in 1895 to become the Professor of Chinese in Manchester, had been Consul in Zhenjiang in about 1877/78 and he explained that \"from the first day of his arrival piles of mysterious documents came pouring into the office which demanded immediate attention.42 These were 'Bonds to be signed by British merchants, guaranteeing that the goods brought down under transit-pass were their own property, and undertaking to export them at once. The chief staples were 'donkey-skins, lily-flowers and melon-seeds'. The question he asked his predecessor during the hand-over was 'What do we do with donkey-skins in England?' The reply was that it was no business of the Consul : the British merchant swears they're his, and that's all the Consul has to do with it. After the departure of his predecessor Parker asked one of the British merchants the same question. He replied that he had not the remotest idea what was done with the donkey-skins, but that they were certainly his, 'in a way,' the question of joint interest being a 'custom of the trade'. The export of donkey-skins at the time was enormous, certainly several hundred tons a week. The Daotai was a fine, tall, gentlemanly old man, who had been a Peking Foreign Office clerk. He knew nothing of anything, and only wanted peace and quietness. He, like Parker, thought that donkeys never died, neither had ever seen a dead donkey anytime during their lives, and was quite unable to explain the mystery. He added, however, that he understood from the merchants that the well-to-do classes in England took donkey-skins and tea as a tonic. Parker told him that he did not believe a single donkey-skin ended up in England to which the Daotai added that he had a shrewd idea that melon-seeds and lily-flowers don't go there either'.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216259,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 18,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "Roderick O'Brien, LL.B. (Adelaide), M.A. (Hong Kong), Postgraduate Certificate in Ethics (Griffith), has been a life member of HKBRAS since 1976. He is an Australian lawyer, and currently teaches international law at the Northwest Institute of Politics and Law in Xian, China, where he lives. He travels widely in China.\n\nJonathan Parkinson, was born in Trinidad in 1939 and educated in England. He started his maritime career in the shipping business in Sarawak between 1960 and 1964, and thereafter was based in the Bahamas, South Africa, Belgium and the U.S.A. He retired to Johannesburg in 1987 where he spends many hours a week happily engaged in aspects of Naval research (jmp@iafrica.com).\n\nKeith Stevens, B.A., was born in 1926 on Merseyside, Great Britain where he lived until he enlisted in the Royal Navy during World War II. He later transferred into the Indian Army and then in 1948 joined the British Army as a career soldier. He read Chinese at both London and Hong Kong Universities, before going onto a second career with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office serving, altogether, more than 25 years in the Far East. He first became interested in Chinese iconography in 1948 and has been compiling a Who's Who of Chinese deities for more than 30 years. He has visited around 3,500 temples in Mainland China, Taiwan, the Hong Kong and Macau Special Administrative Regions, and across South-East Asia, gathering material. His personal collection includes more than 1,000 images (statues) of Chinese deities, 30,000 photographs of temples and their images, and he has documented the legends and folk law surrounding approximately 2,500 gods. In addition he has written prolifically on modern Chinese history. His publications include Chinese Gods: The Unseen World of Spirits and Demons and Chinese Mythological Gods (chgods@btopenworld.com).\n\nElizabeth Kenworthy Teather, Ph.D. (Lond.), LRSM, FRGS, was previously Senior Lecturer in the School of Human and Environmental Studies, University of New England, Australia. She was Scholar in Residence in the David C Lam Institute for East-West Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University (1995-97, 1999-2000 and 2001-02). She now lives in Canberra, Australia, where she is enjoying the delights of the University of the Third Age (courses on the Silk Route in 2003 and Chinese History in 2004). A summary of her research into deathspace \n\nxviii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216324,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 83,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "32\n\ncould see, and it seemed as if it were one vast garden'.\"\n\nParkinson, Trade in the Eastern Seas (1937) writes: \"When the whole [EIC] China fleet was collected there, twelve or sixteen of the largest merchantmen in the world, together with the country ships, the spectacle must have been magnificent.\" He records that sometimes the Viceroy at Canton would come down to visit the fleet. The ships would be decked to receive the great man, with yards manned and officers in full dress.12\n\nCanton\n\nCanton was, and is, the capital of the Guangdong Province. One of the larger and richer cities of the Chinese Empire, and dating back to pre-Han times, it had long been a major sea port for overseas trade, notably in the Tang Dynasty when it had a significant Arab and Muslim population. During the turmoil which accompanied the change of dynasty from Ming to Qing, it upheld the Ming, endured an eleven-month siege in 1650, and suffered a wholesale massacre of its inhabitants. However, it recovered, and by the mid-nineteenth century was credited with a population of around one million persons. It was renowned for its manufactories, carried on by human industry, without the aid of machinery, particularly in silk and cloth, women and children included, whilst trade - international and regional trade - was described as being 'the great business of life'.13\n\nCanton was a walled city (actually two walled cities in one, the Old and the New) with major suburbs along the Pearl River, and to the West.14 As befitted its status, it contained the yamens (office-residences) of many senior government officials, including those of the governor-general of the two linked provinces of Guangdong and Guangxi, the governor of Guangdong, the Canton prefect, two county magistrates, the Tartar general, the provincial naval commander, and the like, as well as those officials with charge of other, specialised concerns, and (of special status, since he was responsible directly to Beijing) the Hoppo or Superintendent of Maritime Customs, who oversaw the foreign trade and its accruing revenue.\n\nThe Foreign Factories (British, French, Swedish, Spanish, Danish and Dutch) of the river suburb were so-called from their being the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216328,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 87,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "36\n\npeople and goods over and along the river. They also helped to load ships in the river and carry goods to the European merchantmen at Whampoa. Their presence was useful to the occupants of the Foreign Factories during periodic conflagrations. For instance, a painting of the Great Fire of 1822 shows residents viewing the fire from these boats, their main refuge in time of such emergencies.28\n\nInterestingly enough, people of this type - perhaps even from the Canton group accustomed to foreigners - were of immense help to the British when they first established themselves in Hong Kong as providers of many essential services.29\n\nOther groups of Tanka constituted the sea fishermen whose craft, large and small, were to be found all over the Delta and the islands outside it; and as we shall see further on in this talk, they provided the 'outside pilots' who assisted foreign merchant vessels to get safely into the Macau Roads.\n\nPersonnel directly connected with the China Trade\n\nWe may now consider seriatim, the various personnel encountered by foreign merchants and ships' officers during their time in China over the trading season of the year.\n\nThe Hoppo30\n\nThe Hoppo was the official at the head of the maritime customs, controlling the revenues accruing from the foreign trade. Representing the ministry of finance in Beijing (hu pu) he was dubbed with this title in error by the foreigners. This lucrative office was often filled by a Manchu. The Guangzhou Custom House is shown in Plate 5.\n\nThere were Hoppo in other maritime provinces of China, but the Canton Hoppo was the most important owing to the foreign trade being confined to Canton. His circuit eventually included five sub-stations and some sixty other collection points, the catchment for the coastal and inter-national trade. International trade was itself divided into Chinese, Asian and European, each taxed at a different rate; the Governor was left with control over internal trade.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216407,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 166,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "116\n\nJapanese cruiser YAHAGI11 was due to arrive at 2200 hours that evening.\n\nIn the interim the freighter MADRAS MARU2 arrived. She attempted a rescue operation but this was not successful. Indeed the seas were so high that it was not even possible to contemplate sending the nine survivors across to her for repatriation to Japan.\n\nSince all these Japanese flag ships had appeared or were due to appear at the scene of the grounding Captain Mackinnon informed NASHI that he would sail for Hong Kong that afternoon, and take with him the nine men. Later he was to write:\n\n'Many friendly and complimentary flag signals were exchanged with all ships present, including the wreck. At 1700 I proceeded to Hong Kong leaving the Japanese destroyer NASHI in charge of the situation.'\n\nOn Saturday 7 November HERMES returned to her buoy at Hong Kong and a short while later the nine rescued seamen were landed ashore.\n\nIt is pleasant to be able to record that in due course official thanks were rendered by the Japanese minister of foreign affairs, Baron Kijuro Shidehara. His letter was addressed to the British ambassador to Tokyo, H.E. Sir Francis Oswald Lindley who forwarded these thanks to the Foreign Office in London from where, in turn, they were passed to the Secretary to the Admiralty.\n\nA year later, on 6th December 1932 at Hong Kong, the C. in C. came onboard our ship to present Lloyds Silver Medals to the three officers, and Bronze Medals to the six ratings who had taken part in the rescue. Also a bronze shield, mounted on a wooden base, was presented to the ship by the Committee of Lloyds.\n\nIn December 1931 an epidemic of diphtheria struck Hong Kong. Amongst those taken ill was Captain Mackinnon. Commander Baxter temporarily assumed command until the arrival of the ship's new commanding officer, Captain W.B. Mackenzie, on 25th February 1932.\n\nCaptain Mackinnon duly returned home and on 21 January 1933",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    }
]