[
    {
        "id": 204746,
        "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": 49,
        "title": "RAS-1964",
        "content_text": "38\n\n10 Linguist purser.\n\nW. C. HUNTER\n\nSee note 39, (J.L.C-B)\n\n11 Elliot's last day. On 25 March Elliot formally requested the Viceroy that passports should be issued within three days for all the English ships and people at Canton and that if passports were not issued he would consider the men and ships of his country as forcibly detained and act accordingly. Blue Book, Correspondence relating to China, 1840, p. 367. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n12 Edward Elmslie. Secretary and Treasurer to the British Superintendents of Trade, Captain Charles Elliot and the Deputy Superintendent, A. R. Johnston, (J.L.C-B.)\n\n13 Houqua. Known to Westerners at Canton as Howqua 7. His family name was Wu Ch'ung-yüeh (1810-1863). He was the fifth son of the famous Hong merchant Wu Ping-chien whom he succeeded as head of the firm in 1843. For his biography see Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period, II, 867-8. (F.L.C-B.)\n\n14 Nam Hoe. Also written Nam Hoi. This means Nan Hai Hsien #i.e. the Magistrate having jurisdiction over the western part of Canton city and the District lying to the westward of the walls which included the area in which the foreign Factories lay. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n15 Kwang Hup. The author may be referring to the Kwangchou hsieh \"the Canton brigade\", and so to its commander. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n16 The Governor. The Governor of Kwangtung province at this time was I-liang (1791-1867). For his biography see Hummel, op. cit., I, 389. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n17 K'an-ch'o (J.L.C-B.)\n\n18 An-tsou (J.L.C-B)\n\n19 Columbia & John Adams. According to the Chinese Repository Vol. 8, p. 56 the Columbia was a U.S. frigate and the John Adams was classed as a sloop-of-war. The Columbia was commanded by Commodore George C. Read. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n20 Johnston, Alexander Robert Johnston, H.M. Deputy Superintendent of Trade. When the Government of Hong Kong was set up he was deputy first to Elliot and later to Sir Henry Pottinger and in this capacity he administered the Government of the Colony on various occasions from 1841 until 1843. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n21 Pwan Kei Kua. Probably the merchant whose name was also spelt by Westerners at Canton at that time Ponkhequa and Puan Khequa. This was P'an Chengwei (1791-1850). See Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period, II, 605, (J.L.C-B.)\n\n22 Saoqua. His family name was Ma Tso-liang and the name of his Hong was Shun Tai Hong A. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n23 Sturgis. Russell Sturgis (1805-1887) of Boston was first named Nathaniel Russell Sturgis, Jr., but he was always known as Russell Sturgis after his name was changed by decree of the Middlesex County Court. He graduated from Harvard in 1823, married in 1828 but was widowed four months later. After an extended tour of Europe he returned to Boston and for a while practised law. He remarried and in 1833 took his family to the orient where he became a partner of Russell & Sturgis of Manila and Russell, Sturgis & Co. of Canton. Later in 1842 when the latter firm became incorporated with Russell & Co., China, he became a partner in 1842. In May 1844 he retired to Boston, his second wife having died in Manila in 1837. Being far too young to give up work altogether he decided to return to China in 1849 but while passing through London he",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204838,
        "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": 141,
        "title": "RAS-1964",
        "content_text": "116\n\nCRANMER-BYNG AND SHEPHERD\n\nwhich lies in the mouth of the Pearl River estuary between Macao and Castle Peak on the opposite headland. However, during the south-west monsoons the anchorages of Kapsuimun門 pq 29, and Hong Kong were used because they provided greater protection. The Kapsuimun anchorage was situated south of Ma Wan island and sheltered to the west by the headland of Lantao and to the east by Tsing I island. Because of the smuggling of opium from depot ships at these outer anchorages the capabilities of the anchorages off Lantao island and between Hong Kong island and Kowloon on the mainland became thoroughly known to British merchants and sea captains. In 1835 a former member of the British East India Company published a book in which he advocated the need for Britain to obtain some island from which trade with China could be carried on because of the uncertain conditions of trade at Canton following the ending of the Company's monopoly30. In a review of this book published in the Chinese Repository the reviewer remarks on the fact that the author pressed the idea of Britain acquiring Macao from Portugal, which he considered ill-advised. He wrote\n\nThe want of a good harbour, and its dangerous position in the season of typhoons and strong north or east gales, unfit it for the possession of a commercial nation, as point d'appui. Lantao is better, and this we should prefer of the places named by our author. It is an island, capable of defence, producing abundant supplies of food, with many good harbours, is not so near the provincial city as to render it dangerous for natives to resort to it, for the purpose of commerce.31\n\nThus in 1835 Lantao was still considered eligible as a possible British settlement. In May 1839 the British Superintendent of Trade, Captain Charles Elliot, and all British subjects, left Canton as a result of the measures taken by the Imperial Commissioner Lin Tse-hsü, and retired to Macao. However, when in mid-August of 1839 the British were forced out of Macao by Chinese pressure it was to the anchorage of Hong Kong that the English ships went. Although Hong Kong was eventually ceded to Britain by the Treaty of Nanking 1842 this had not always been an automatic choice, the possibility of forming a settlement on Formosa, the Bonin Islands, and on Ma Wan and Lantao island had previously been given serious consideration.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205429,
        "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-1967",
        "page_number": 191,
        "title": "RAS-1967",
        "content_text": "184\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nlung, who was concurrently a Grand Councillor and a Grand Secretary.\n\nThis inadequate chapter on the Macartney mission demonstrates the basic weakness of the whole book, namely the author's failure to use the best primary sources both Chinese and Western. The story of the abortive Macartney mission is a fascinating one because it marks the first cultural confrontation between China and a major Western power, and as such has historical overtones which are relevant to a full understanding of the confrontation which we are witnessing today. But Mr. Coates has failed to bring out this significance mainly, I suspect, because of his unfamiliarity with the primary English and Chinese sources. For instance, there is no indication from his account that he has read Lord Macartney's own journal of his embassy which was published in full in 1962. From the bibliography it appears that this chapter was based almost entirely on the official account of the embassy written by Sir George Leonard Staunton which is dull and florid in comparison with Macartney's own private journal.\n\nIt is only fair to say, however, that the last 50 pages of the book are devoted to the events following the death of Lord Napier in 1834 and leading up to the formal cession of Hong Kong in 1843, and that here the author appears to be on more familiar ground. For instance, he brings out clearly the difficulties which faced Captain Charles Elliot as British Superintendent of Trade and he guides the reader towards a fair and balanced judgment of Elliot as a statesman. It is time that the reputation of Charles Elliot, created mainly by the strictures of Queen Victoria and Palmerston, be reassessed.\n\nIn conclusion, Prelude to Hong Kong is not in any way an original work of scholarship and contains almost nothing which cannot be read more reliably elsewhere. It may be of some value to those who have recently become aware of Hong Kong's existence and want to read up, in brief summary, the train of events which resulted in its founding. But for those who already know something of the history of Macao and the development of foreign trade at Canton, this modest little book will be a disappointment since the author has failed to draw sufficiently on the richness of the archives of the period and thus the reader is compelled to view the story through the eyes of the author rather than through",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205743,
        "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": 49,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "MILITIA, MARKET AND LINEAGE\n\n43\n\nbad informal connections with Hong Kong's officialdom and that its activities were a foretaste of the future.\n\nBy March of 1899, British officials began to appear in the territory. A party was busy near the Sham Chun river, marking out the frontier with China. Meanwhile, the officer in charge of the Hong Kong police was touring the territory, considering alternative locations for police stations. This official—Captain Superintendent F. H. May arrived at Ping Shan on 27th March. His first action was to post a proclamation saying that the Hong Kong government would not interfere with the land, buildings, or customs of the people. He then designated a hill behind Ping Shan as the site for a police station. A crowd gathered and the argument began. “It says that land, buildings, and customs will not be interfered with but will remain the same as before. Why should they, therefore, when they first come into the leased area, wish to erect a police station on the hill behind our village? When has China ever erected a police station just where people live? The proclamation says that things will be as before. Are not these words untrue?”\n\n54\n\nThe Resistance Movement -- 28th March to 18th April, 1899.\n\nThe day after May's visit to Ping Shan, discussions were held in the ancestral halls of Ping Shan and Kam Tin. In both instances, agreement was reached that resistance should be offered to the British. Following the two meetings, a third took place in an ancestral hall at Ha Tsuen. Representatives of all three Tang lineages were present and previous decisions to offer resistance were ratified. Messages were sent to leaders throughout the marketing area, asking them to attend a meeting at Yuen Long market the next day.\n\nSteward Lockhart later argued that the resistance leaders feared for their positions of power and privilege. At the Ha Tsuen meeting, a wider range of anxieties were expressed: “... that under English law a poll tax would be collected; that houses would be numbered and a charge made therefor; that fishing and wood-cutting would be prohibited; that women and girls would be outraged; that births and deaths would be registered; that cattle and pigs would be destroyed; that police stations would be erected, which would ruin the Fung Shui [Mandarin: Feng Shui] of the place. In short, that the evils that would arise would be so great",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205746,
        "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": 52,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "46\n\nR. G. GROVES\n\nYee Yuen and donated sums to its resistance fund. The two lineages also comprised two yeuk within the Ts'at Yeuk and, as such, were represented in the fighting at Tai Po.\n\nAt some point after 1st April, leaders from the Yuen Long and Sheung U Divisions went together to the Tung P'ing Kuk at Sham Chun and attempted with little success to enlist wider support for their activities. An agent was sent to Tung-kuan Hsien, where a number of 'bare-sticks' were recruited. In addition, the help of the Tang lineage of Pan T'in, in the northern part of Hsin-an Hsien, was solicited. This lineage appears to have stood in a clan relationship with the Tang higher order lineage within the New Territory. Members of the Pan T'in lineage participated in the fighting within the territory and subsequently felt themselves threatened by the British occupation of Sham Chun.\n\nThe first confrontation between the Ts'at Yeuk and the vanguard of the occupying force occurred at Tai Po. Since late March, contractors had been erecting matsheds for the Hong Kong authorities on a hill near the market. Work had been obstructed by local villagers who claimed that the hill was private land and that the matsheds would disturb the feng shui of the area. On 3rd April Captain-Superintendent May set off for Tai Po, with a mixed party of Sikh policemen from Hong Kong and a detachment of Chinese soldiers, which had been temporarily assigned to him by the Commander of the Chinese military garrison stationed at Kowloon City. He hoped to get work on the matsheds started again and intended to leave the soldiers as a guard for the construction materials, pending assumption of British authority in the Territory.\n\nMay arrived at Tai Po early in the afternoon and went to a nearby temple, almost certainly the Man Mo Miu, where he knew he would meet local leaders. A large crowd gathered, both within the temple and in the narrow street outside. His efforts at persuasion failed and the bystanders \"became very offensive in their language and demeanour.\"59 May thought it wise to leave, but hope of a dignified withdrawal ended as soon as the British party reached the street. They were set upon by an angry crowd, wielding brooms, buckets, and other improvised weapons. An escape was made after the soldiers had threatened the crowd with their rifles and the Sikhs had made a bayonet charge to clear a path.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205749,
        "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": 55,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "# MILITIA, MARKET AND LINEAGE\n\n49\n\nThe resistance movement had now reached a state of readiness. Further subscriptions of silver were obtained and responsibility for provision of rations allocated. On 13th April Ping Shan supplied pigs as food for the militia. By 14th April an advance force was in position on the hills overlooking Tai Po. It was composed of units from Fan Leng, Kam Tin, the Lam Tsuen valley, and Pat Heung. A British party making preparations for the flag raising saw about 150 men on the hills to the northwest. Four or five standards were seen, and the Chinese \"kept up an incessant yelling, beating of gongs, and firing of crackers, or guns, probably jingals ...\" 64\n\nWhen the Governor heard of these events at Tai Po he decided to station a force there immediately. On the morning of 15th April, two units were dispatched from Hong Kong. Captain Superintendent May, in charge of 22 policemen, left by launch for Tai Po. A company of the Hong Kong Regiment* — comprising 125 officers and men — set off overland from Kowloon, with orders to rendezvous with the police that afternoon.\n\nWhen the police landed near the matshed hill they were fired upon by forces from the Lam Tsuen valley, Tai Hang, Pat Heung, and Kam Tin. The militia of Ha Tsuen and Ping Shan had not been committed, although Ha Tsuen was, on this day, responsible for rations. By this time the infantry company was only a short march from Tai Po. Its commanding officer, Captain E. L. C. Berger, could see that the hills were crowded with several thousand militia, displaying six or seven different banners. As they approached the market he noted that the Chinese were uniformed and that the units nearest him occupied good tactical positions.\n\nThe soldiers joined the police on the matshed hill and found their situation difficult. The hills to the west and northwest were occupied by militia. To the east was Tolo Harbour. Twelve pieces of light artillery — probably jingals and mortars — kept up a steady fire on them from two positions. There was also continuous musketry fire. If the aim of the militia had been better, the casualties would have been heavy. Shortly thereafter the militia began an advance but were driven back by volley fire. This was the situation when H.M.S. \"Fame\" arrived late that afternoon.\n\n* A regiment of the Indian Army, with British officers and Indian (Pathan) other ranks, not to be confused with the volunteer unit of this name in present day Hong Kong.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205978,
        "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": 58,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "HONG KONG CADETS, 1862 - 1941\n\n53\n\n19 Sir Francis Henry May (1860-1922), Educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Dublin. Hong Kong Civil Service 1881; Captain Superintendent of Police, 1893-1902; Colonial Secretary, 1902-1910; Governor of Fiji and High Commissioner of Western Pacific, 1910-12; Governor of Hong Kong, 1912-1919. First cadet to become Governor. Altogether May spent 38 years in Hong Kong.\n\n20 Sir Reginald Fleming Johnston (1874-1938), Educated at Edinburgh University (Gray Prize; prox. accessit., Lord Rector's Essay); Magdalen College, Oxford (mentioned hon, causa Stanhope Essay). Hong Kong Civil Service 1898; Assistant Colonial Secretary, 1899-1904, Transferred to Weihaiwai 1904; Senior District Officer and Magistrate, Weihaiwai, 1906-17. Tutor to the Ex-Emperor of China, 1919-1925. Commissioner of Weihaiwai, 1927-30. Professor of Chinese and Head of Department of Languages and Cultures of the Far East, School of Oriental Languages, London University, 1931-1937.\n\n21 Sir Cecil Clementi (1875-1947). Educated at St. Paul's School and Magdalen College, Oxford, Hong Kong Civil Service 1899. Clementi, following his uncle and godfather, Sir Cecil Clementi Smith, preferred an Eastern Cadetship, and was posted to Hong Kong. Land Officer and Police Magistrate in the New Territories, 1903-6, Clementi had the task of recognizing the land titles of over 300,000 claims. Appointed Colonial Secretary of British Guiana 1913-1921; Colonial Secretary, Ceylon, 1922-1925; Governor of Hong Kong, 1925-30; Governor of the Straits Settlements and High Commissioner for the Malay States 1930. In 1934 Clementi retired on account of ill-health.\n\n22 James Legge \"The Colony of Hong Kong\", China Review, Vol. I, 1872-3, p. 173.\n\n23 Dominions Office and Colonial Office List 1939, p. 624, states: \"The average number of cadets appointed to Malaya and Hongkong during the period of 1919-31 inclusive was between 9 and 10. Since 1931 the average has been 5-8, 6 generally. In 1937, 7 cadets were appointed, and 9 in 1938. There were none appointed to Hong Kong 1937, and only 2 in 1938. The demand for cadets in Hong Kong was always small”.\n\n24 For example, Thomas Sercombe Smith (1854-1937) was appointed a Hong Kong Cadet in 1882. In 1883 he was attached to the Colonial Office for a year; and in 1884, after a brief spell attached to the Colonial Secretary's Office, Hong Kong, proceeded to Peking where he studied Chinese, 1884-6. On the other hand, Arthur Winbolt Brewin (1867-1946), proceeded to Canton in 1888. Brewin, who was educated at Winchester, succeeded Eitel as Inspector of Schools in 1897; became Registrar General in 1901 and retired in 1912.\n\n25 Victor Purcell The Memoirs of a Malayan Official, London, 1965, pp. 108-109. The Index to Correspondence (of the Colonial Secretariat), compiled in 1902 by R. H. Kotewall, has a cryptic entry: \"Cadets studying Chinese in China must reside at a place removed from European social surroundings\".\n\n26 Alexander Grantham Via Ports, Hong Kong, 1965, p. 5.\n\n27 I have been able to discover the schools attended by 64 of the cadets: 52 went to schools listed in the Public Schools Yearbook; the other 12 to small private schools. Two cadets (H. E. Wodehouse and A. W. Brewin), it seems, did not go to a university; five I have been unable to trace; and of the rest - 78 in all — 55 went to English universities (Cambridge 25; Oxford 23; London 4; and one each at Leicester University College, Liverpool University, and Manchester University); 10 to universities in Ireland (Trinity College 8); and 11 to Scottish universities (Edinburgh 6,\n\n-55",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206312,
        "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": 129,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "The District Watch Committee\n\n123\n\nDistrict Watch Committee. In 1920 the post of Advisor (Ku Man) was created and the first occupant — and it would seem the only one — was the distinguished Sir Boshan Wei Yuk, the founding father of the Committee.\n\nBy the end of the nineteenth century, relations with the Police had improved. In 1897 the district watchmen on duty in Victoria were placed on police beats and subjected to the supervision of police inspectors and sergeants on patrol duty. This was done on the recommendation of the Captain Superintendent of Police, F. H. May (a Cadet Officer like Lockhart), who remarked in his annual report for that year that 'the object was to improve the efficiency of this very useful auxiliary Police Force, and to bring them into closer touch with the Police'. The reputation of the regular police had improved by that date and the Committee concurred with the innovation. The efficiency of the District Watch was further raised by the secondment in 1918 of a European police officer27 to take charge of and train the detective staff, a practice that continued until 1949. As a result of this change, the number of convictions obtained by the district watch detective force tended to rise from year to year. The force became steadily more professionalised, especially its detective branch. The Secretary for Chinese Affairs claimed in 1922 that 'the connection with the Regular Police has been effectively used to the advantage of both sides, and without interference with the essential character of the District Watch'; and in 1924 he wrote 'the Captain Superintendent of Police was on occasion present by invitation at the Councils of the Committee, and it is satisfactory to note the close co-operation between the two forces'. However, the force did not increase markedly in size over time — there were only 48 watchmen in 1891 and 120 in 194128 — although the area patrolled and the urban population both increased over this period. In 1910 it was found necessary to extend patrols further as the Chinese population spread up to the higher levels of the town; in 1913 the Committee was obliged to raise money for District Watchmen's Quarters in Kowloon; and by 1925 the districts of Yaumati and Mongkok were being patrolled; and by 1930, Shamshuipo. The rate of voluntary subscription was also raised slightly29.\n\nThe District Watch was a Chinese and not a European police force and its duties were more diverse than those normally",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206326,
        "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": 143,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "The District Watch Committee\n\n137\n\nto be the richest man in Hong Kong. When Ho Tung retired as chief compradore to Jardine, Matheson's in 1900, Ho Fook succeeded him. Ho Fook's assistant was Ho Kom Tong, another of Ho Tung's brothers. The members of the District Watch Committee were members of a small circle of businessmen, often related through ties of blood or marriage. When the Tai Yau Bank was established in 1914 with a paid-up capital of $6,000,000, the proprietors were named as Lau Chu Pak, Ho Fook, Ho Kom Tong, Lo Chung Shiu and Chan Kai Ming. Lau Chu Pak was compradore to A. S. Watson and Co., chairman of the Po On Commercial Association and chairman of the Chinese General Chamber of Commerce; Chan Kai Ming was manager of the Opium Farm; and Lo Chung Shiu, assistant compradore to Jardine, Matheson and Co., was Ho Fook's brother-in-law. All were or became members of the District Watch Committee.\n\n22 T. C. Cheng writes that Wei Yuk 'was very much concerned about law and order among the Chinese masses because in those early days riff-raff and political refugees from South China continued to come into Hong Kong. Thus it was at his suggestion that the District Watch Force was founded in 1888. Mr. Cheng appears to be mistaken about the date and is no doubt referring to the ordinance of that year, no. 13 of 1888 rather than to its proper date of origin. Wright and Cartright, Feldwick, and Professor Woo all state that the Committee was formed on Wei Yuk's suggestion. See: T. C. Cheng, 'Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative and Executive Councils of Hong Kong up to 1941', Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 9, 1969, pp. 17-18; Arnold Wright and H. A. Cartright, Twentieth Century Impressions of Hong Kong, Shanghai and other Treaty Ports, London, Lloyd's Greater Britain Publishing Co., 1908, p. 109; W. Feldwick, ed., Present Day Impressions of the Far East and Prominent Chinese at Home and Abroad, London Globe Encyclopedia Co., 1917, p. 576; Professor Woo Sing Lim, The Prominent Chinese in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Five Continents Book Company, 1939, p. 4.\n\n23 Unfortunately all the records in the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs were destroyed or lost during the Japanese occupation and hence anyone trying to reconstruct the history of the District Watch must work mostly from scraps of information found in government publications, newspapers, books.\n\n24 My guess is that a large number were traditional Chinese merchants from the Five Districts operating on a relatively small scale. The Committee after 1891 represented the views of a more westernised and modernised elite with a knowledge of modern business techniques and modern financial manipulations. Dr. Ho Kai, for example, played the stock exchange with great success and speculated in many fields, particularly land development. He was, properly speaking, a financier although his occupation is often given tout court as lawyer. He had also qualified in medicine at Edinburgh but gave up the practice of medicine soon after his return to Hong Kong in 1882 because of Chinese resistance to western medicine.\n\n25 In 1903, for example, the Committee opposed the re-introduction of the night-pass system but suggested other remedial measures (see Index to Correspondence (General Register) 1894-1904, Hong Kong, Noronha and Co., 1909, p. 100). In 1909 'at the request of the District Watchmen Committee, children who are hawking without a licence are on their first offence sent to the Registrar General who cautions their guardians. This procedure seems to have proved effective in each case' wrote the Registrar General in 1909. It is worth noting that both Registrar General and Committee wanted to end the night-pass system and were opposed by the Captain Superintendent of Police, who was unsuccessful. As for hawkers, very few Chinese regarded them as a serious menace although colonial administrators",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206520,
        "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": 68,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "62\n\nHENRY JAMES LETHBRIDGE\n\nhad two meetings with the Chinese delegate, Huang Tsun-hsin1, and an agreement was signed at Government House on March 14. On the 16th Lockhart accompanied by the Director of Public Works left for Mirs Bay and proceeded to delimit the boundaries of the New Territory, which were fixed along a line joining the heads of Deep Bay and Mirs Bay, following the Sham Chun River for most of its course. Lockhart had urged the inclusion of Sham Chun and its valley but this was rejected later by the Chinese authorities.\n\nOn 1 April Lockhart and a party sent by the Public Works Department to erect the posts on the boundaries settled upon were stopped by villagers and informed that if they attempted to get on with their work they would be killed. Understandably, the party withdrew to Hong Kong. At the same time, Wei Yuk# 1 an unofficial member of the Legislative Council, procured a copy of a placard that was being posted up in many villages and market towns; the translation revealed that people in the New Territories were being urged to drill with firearms. This was the first sign that the occupation of the New Territories was not likely to occur without incident.\n\nThe Governor, Sir William Blake, accompanied by his Colonial Secretary, Lockhart, hastened forthwith to interview the Viceroy at Canton and they secured from him a promise of co-operation and the sending of Chinese troops to protect the two matsheds at Taipo that were being erected for the occupancy of police and officials from Hong Kong. On 3 April, however, F.H. May, Captain Superintendent of Police, and his small party of Sikhs and Chinese guards were set upon by 'villagers', the matsheds burned to the ground, and the group forced to retreat to Kowloon. The Governor immediately despatched troops by motor torpedo boat destroyer to Taipo. The troops were accompanied by Lockhart, of whom the commanding officer later said: 'I have to record my sense of the tact and judgment displayed by Mr. Stewart Lockhart in eliciting information most unwillingly given; and the interpreter whom he brought with him was simply invaluable owing to his proficiency in both English and Chinese and his knowledge of the system of dealing with the natives.' The interpreter was Ts'oi Yeuk-shan, First Chinese Clerk in the Registrar General's Department, a former pupil at Queen's College. Lockhart and the troops returned to Hong Kong later in the same day.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206522,
        "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": 70,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "64\n\nHENRY JAMES LETHBRIDGE\n\nFrom his headquarters at Taipo Lockhart was directly in control of the administration of the New Territories from May to July 1899. His first task was to establish law and order and this was achieved through the activity of the able F.H. May, Captain Superintendent of Police, who stationed police at convenient points throughout the area. Steps were then taken to define the Districts and Sub-Districts under section 4 of the Communities Ordinance, No. 77 of 1899. The principle followed was to adhere as closely as possible to the divisions recognised traditionally by the Chinese, which meant in most cases that such divisions followed the natural features of the countryside, so that in the main each sub-district was contained in a valley. The territory was divided finally into eight districts and forty-eight sub-districts. After these had been defined, committee-men were appointed for each sub-district. In Lockhart's words: \"These Committee-men have formed a useful link between the Government and the villagers, and have been of much assistance in explaining to the people the objects of the various measures of Government which have been introduced from time to time. The Committee-men as a rule are those who possess influence in their own immediate neighbourhood, whose advice is listened to, and whose lead is generally followed. The wisdom of affecting with responsibility those to whom the people have been accustomed to look for leadership and of using them to elucidate the objects of Government is evident.\"25\n\nBut the most important task accomplished by Lockhart was the allocation and registration of all privately-owned land. This necessitated, as Lockhart had suggested in his report of 8 October, 1898, a proper cadastral survey. The surveying began in November, 1899, and was completed by May, 1903. In the meantime the registration of land claims was being carried out steadily from July, 1899, at Taipo, Ping Shan, and in the Land Office in Hong Kong. In the following year all the registration work was taken over by the Land Court. The object was to secure the registration of all the owners of cultivated land in the New Territories in order to prepare a Crown Rent Roll.\n\nWhen Lockhart returned to his office in the Colonial Secretariat in July 1899, the day-to-day work of administering the New Territories was carried on by three cadets — E.R. Hallifax, C.M. Messer, and J.H. Kemp. But although Lockhart was no longer physically",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206548,
        "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": 96,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "90\n\nE. G. PRYOR\n\nBesides their wider trading interests, the British in Canton had established a thriving trade in opium brought from India. The Chinese government regarded this trade with considerable concern, on the grounds that it was harmful to human welfare and also a serious drain on the country's finances. Early attempts by the Chinese government to stop the opium trade failed but in 1839 a Special Imperial Commissioner was appointed who forced the British traders in Canton to relinquish their supplies of the narcotic. The British Superintendent of Trade, Captain Elliot, consequently withdrew the English merchants to Macau and later transferred them onto ships anchored in Hong Kong harbour; subsequent events led to open hostilities between Chinese and British forces.\n\nIt was decided by Lord Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary, that a satisfactory settlement of the dispute would require either a commercial treaty with adequate guarantees to protect the interests of British merchants or the cession of one or more off-shore islands from which the traders could operate without restriction. A British expedition was despatched to China in 1840 to back up these demands and in January 1841 negotiations were held in Canton between Captain Elliot and Keshen, a Manchu Commissioner, whereby it was agreed by the Convention of Chuenpi that Hong Kong Island was to be ceded to the British (Figure 1).* A British naval force took possession of the island on 26th January 1841,\n\nThe Chuenpi terms were accepted by neither side. Elliot was replaced by Sir Henry Pottinger and hostilities were renewed. The war was concluded by the Treaty of Nanking on 29th August 1842 by which the island of Hong Kong was ceded in perpetuity to the Crown and four additional ports besides Canton were opened to British traders. The island was formally declared a British Colony on 26th June 1843 and Sir Henry Pottinger was appointed the first Governor. Hong Kong was declared a free port and by the Supplementary Treaty of the Bogue the Chinese were given free access to the island for trading purposes.\n\nThe Housing Problem Takes Root: 1841-1881\n\nAlmost from the day Captain Elliot raised the British flag on the northern shores of Hong Kong Island, a steady stream of artisans and labourers made their way to the Colony from the southern provinces.\n\n*Figures 1-8 will be found at the rear of the text.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208124,
        "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": 163,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "MEMORIES OF THE DISTRICT OFFICE SOUTH \n\n147 \n\nkept the raiders under fire from the slope behind, but they got away with their plunder, including some arms and ammunition. The Captain Superintendent of Police at the time, F. J. Badeley, a cadet officer, retired soon after, and the story went that the Governor, Sir Henry May, who came in July 1912 after about eight years as Colonial Secretary and two years in Fiji, took this opportunity to get rid of him because he was 'persona non grata' to him. (There were said to be several such in the Service). The Government took the hint given by the pirates and built a new police station on a much more commanding site well inland, surrounded by barbed wire.\n\nTalking of New Territory police station siting, the Tai O station was originally to have been built close to the village, but the local elders put up representations against it, and the presence of mosquitoes in the village may have provided an argument for its present siting beyond Shek Tsai Po. Silting of the harbour may also have influenced the Government. But I have heard that what influenced the villagers was the existence of gambling houses which yielded them a good profit, and they knew that with the police among them the hope of their gains would be gone. In 1925 they had their reward. A boatload of 60 pirates from the Delta landed at Po Chu Tam, marched along the creek-side road and plundered the village, murdering a woman and kidnapping two men. They got away without interference. Government promptly 'locked the stable door' by stationing an armed Indian police guard - later replaced by village scouts in a matshed close to the mouth of Po Chu Tam creek for several months, about 50 yards from the site of an old Chinese stone-built guard station dating from the era of Japanese piracy in South China. Apparently the Police knew nothing of the raid till all was over. I think all that happened was that the sergeant in charge was transferred to another station.\n\nWhen I first took charge of the District Office, the 'black gold' rush had been over for three years, the bottom having dropped out of the tungsten market with the coming of peace; but the lime-burning and sand-digging boom was in full swing because of the roadmaking and building then going on in Hong Kong and Kowloon. (These were times of anarchy in China). Thus I had to deal with one or two applications for land for limekilns. These kilns were thickest on Ping Chau; but Nei Kwu Chau and Tsing Yi also had kilns, and another was put up at Hang Hau. This distribution is due partly",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210704,
        "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": 55,
        "title": "RAS-1986",
        "content_text": "38\n\nWALTER GREENWOOD\n\nThe members elected in 1899 resigned in April 1901 on the ground that the Board could do nothing effective until it received adequate and independent powers, a view that Francis always held. Hong Kong had to wait until 1936 and the creation of the Urban Council for any further advance toward democratic local government.\n\nThe passing of the plague was followed not only by a post-mortem but also by a consideration of who should be rewarded, and how, for services rendered during the plague. The two outstanding candidates were F.H. May, the Captain Superintendent of Police, who served on the Permanent Committee, and Francis. In September 1894 at a public meeting a committee was appointed, with Edward Ackroyd as chairman, to decide on awards to be made on behalf of the community. In December Ackroyd wrote to the Governor \"The Committee consider that to Mr. Francis their best thanks are due for all his exertions and the time he devoted to the wants of the Colony for so many weeks. As Chairman of the Permanent Committee Mr. Francis had a heavy, troublesome and laborious task to perform, and throughout the duration of the epidemic he was unremitting in his devotion to his duties and gave up a great portion of his time, no doubt to the detriment of his extensive practice, to carry on the work he had voluntarily undertaken. Your Excellency is too well acquainted with his services for any need of further mention. Our Committee decided that his actions are deserving of the fullest recognition, that the best thanks of the community, with a good medal, should be tendered to him, and that his valuable services and useful work should be brought, through Your Excellency, to the special notice of the Secretary of State\". Meanwhile the Government was considering what recommendations it should make. It was chiefly concerned with officials but also considered non-officials including Francis. In September the Governor in writing to the Secretary of State expressed the hope that the latter had not failed to notice the untiring and energetic effects on behalf of the public weal of the medical staff and of Francis. However he seems to have been lukewarm to the suggestion, apparently favoured by May, that Francis should have the C.M.G. saying that he had no objection but \"it was easily earned\". He appears to have suggested that silver inkstands be given to the Colonial Surgeon and Francis but to no",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212768,
        "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": 77,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "62 \n\n1874 April \n\nJuly October \n\n1874 \n\n1874 December Late 1874 \n\n1875 Summer? 1875 Winter \n\n1877 February \n\nKueichou, but Mesny had already departed \n\nTo Ch'engtu (six month stay] \n\nVisited the temple dedicated to Tu Fu the poet in Ch’engtu Returned by very large houseboat via Sui-fu, Chungking and I-ch'ang to Hankow. Mesny entertained at the palace of General Viscount Pao Chao in K'uei-chou en route on the Yangtze. In Hankow he met Rev. David Hill \n\nPublished 'Tungking' [date in the book itself: Mesny however, claimed later that it was published in 1875] \n\nOfficially married Nien Suey-tsen in Hankow \n\nTravelled overland from Chin-kiang, through Shantung [Chi-nan], en route for Peking. Spent winter in Chi-nan at invitation of Ting Pao-chen, the Governor of Shantung, to whom he claimed he had been an adviser \n\nPeking \n\nReturned to Kueichou via Shanghai [November]. Hankow and Human [1876] Re-appointed Superintendent of the Kueichou Armouries, an appointment he held until March 1877 \n\nMesny entertained two British Protestant missionaries in Kuei-yang \n\nOverland Trek to Western China, through Burma to India and by sea to England \n\n28 May \n\nJune 1878 8 January \n\nNovember \n\n26 December 28 December \n\n1879 February \n\n9 March 4 June \n\nDeparted Kuei-yang for Szechuan [his third visit to the province (en route for England, via Tibet, Burma and India, with Captain Gill)] Arrived Ch'engtu \n\nArrived in England from Calcutta \n\nVisited Channel Islands \n\nReceived telegram from Chinese Minister in London desiring Mesny to accompany the returning Chinese Minister at Berlin to China: departed! Marseilles for Hong Kong aboard the Irrawaddy Arrived Hong Kong from England \n\nDeparted Hong Kong for Canton \n\nVisited Amoy \n\nDeparted Canton for Kueichou, via Kuei-lin (Kuangsi] Arrived Kuei-lin \n\n25 July \n\nArrived Tu-yun Fu \n\n4 August [1880/1881] \n\n1880 February \n\n15 March \n\nAugust \n\n1881 January \n\nFebruary \n\nArrived Kuei-yang \n\nPossibly visited Hanoi? \n\nGovernor of Kueichou province recommended Mesny to the Throne for the bestowal of posthumous honours for three generations [San-tai Erh-p'in Kao-feng] \n\nSet out for Lan-chou via Chungking [where he had remained six months] \n\nMesny spent the night at Ch'ien-hsi Chou, some 90 kms NNW of Kuei-yang, where he was attacked by an armed mob Departed Chungking [after 'delay due to unexpected contretemps\" which Mesny did not clarify] \n\nArrived Lanchou \n\nDeparted Lanchou, crossed Gobi to Ham taking six to seven weeks",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213081,
        "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": 149,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "130\n\nTo eradicate this focus of infection, it was resumed by the Government the following year. In the subsequent re-development, the old houses were demolished and replaced by new ones provided with windows, privies and space in front and behind as required by newly enacted legislation. Many other actions were taken to deal with the situation. The whole of Hong Kong was subjected to a thorough cleaning up. The laws related to public health were amended to impose strict measures against the Epidemic, including compulsory reporting and removal of patients. To enforce this, house-to-house search was conducted by British soldiers, against the violent objection of the Chinese community who regarded it as unwarranted intrusion into the privacy of their homes. Additional hospital facilities for the isolation of patients were hastily made and as the epidemic progressed, more had to be opened up from time to time.\n\nWithin the administration, responsibility for the health of Hong Kong was divided between the Sanitary Board and the Colonial Surgeon at that time. The membership of the Sanitary Board was as follows: the Registrar General, the equivalent of a Secretary for Chinese Affairs, as Chairman, the Surveyor General, the equivalent of a Director of Public Works, the Captain Superintendent of Police, the Colonial Surgeon, and five other members. After the Epidemic broke out, a Permanent Committee was appointed to recommend necessary legislation and bye-laws for taking vigorous action. In the post of Colonial Surgeon, the equivalent of the present-day Director of Health, was Dr. P.B.C. Ayres who had held it since 1872. Under him was Dr. J.A. Lowson, whose diary we are going to look into.\n\nJames Alfred Lowson was born in 1866. He graduated from Edinburgh University in medicine in 1888 at the age of 22. He came to Hong Kong, probably in or before 1892, because in October that year he represented Hong Kong at interport cricket in Shanghai. On the return trip, his ship, the S.S. Bokhara, was sunk off the Pescadores in a typhoon. He and one other member of the cricket team were among only twenty-five survivors out of about 150 passengers and crew on board. In 1894, at the age of 28, his posting was medical superintendent of the Government Civil Hospital, at the onset of the Epidemic. At that time, in the medical and health service, there were only three full-time medical officers, Dr. Ayres, Dr. J.M. Atkinson and Dr. Lowson, in that order of seniority, assisted by some private practitioners on a part-time basis. In the March 1st entry of his",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213086,
        "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": 154,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "135\n\nBoard but both the Governor and the Colonial Secretary intervened. Consequently the Glass-works hospital was operated as a branch of the Tung Wah. It should be noted that the tradition at the Tung Wah Hospital was broken later during the Epidemic. Western medicine was introduced and a graduate of the Hong Kong College of Medicine was appointed as its superintendent.\n\nMeanwhile the situation took a different turn. At first it was thought that Europeans would escape from the infection because of their better living conditions and cleaner habits. The belief was shattered soon, Lowson recorded on May 29th: 'the first Shropshire case.' The Shropshire Regiment was stationed in Hong Kong at the time. Three hundred troops under eight officers were brought in to help in the cleaning up operation, including house to house search. Some soldiers caught the disease. One of the victims was an officer, Captain Vesey. 'Vesey got it,' wrote Lowson on May 31st. On June 2nd he went to see Vesey, on the 3rd Vesey was said to be better but he died at 9:45 p.m. on the 4th. In an annotation, Lowson wrote:\n\nMay 31st\n\nCaptain Vesey's attack was a serious business as up to this time we had everyone thinking Europeans would not get it and there was much consternation. The flight from the Colony to Japan and home was now almost a panic.\n\nOn June 7th he wrote that he offered to take sole charge of the sick at a meeting of the Sanitary Board but the offer was turned down. On June 10th there was some talk about the doctors refusing to work. In annotation on the entry on the 11th, he explained why.\n\nJune 11th\n\nThe trouble on last page regarding refusal to work arose from not one of the Permanent Committee knowing the state of affairs in town - May knew something but others did not but complained and made idiotic suggestions. The doctors were led up to having all the dangerous work to do and never one minute off duty, hence rebellion.\n\nMay was F.H. May, the Captain Superintendent of Police, who was a member of the Sanitary Board. In the diary, three names appeared a few times: Dr Penny, a naval surgeon, Dr. James, a major in the Army Medical",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213094,
        "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": 162,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "143\n\nnewspapers were to recall that 'he was an exceedingly courteous and popular official and earned the respect of all with whom he was brought into contact' all except Lowson perhaps.\n\nJohn Jonathan Francis was first admitted as an attorney and solicitor in 1870 and called to the Bar in 1877. In 1887, he became the third barrister in Hong Kong to become a Queen's Counsel. He had served as a police magistrate and a puisne judge. For public service, he was once a captain in the Hong Kong Volunteers Corps, standing counsel for the Hong Kong College of Medicine when it was being established, and Chairman of the Permanent Committee of the Sanitary Board. There is an amusing and unflattering story about him told by Norton-Kyshe which gives us an insight into his character. He was presented with a silver ink-stand in 1895 in recognition of his services during the Epidemic but he returned it because he considered himself slighted by the treatment he received as compared with Mr. May who had been his colleague on the Committee.' May was awarded the CMG which Francis thought should also be given to him instead of a mere ink-stand.\n\nHowever, two other government officials, the Colonial Surgeon and the Captain Superintendent of Police, whose parts were of great importance, apparently escaped Lowson's wrath. Dr. Phineas Ayres held the office for twenty-four years, from 1872 to 1897, the longest ever in the history of the medical service. After he took up his post, he had been very critical of the sanitary conditions in the native quarters in his annual reports. Despite his warnings, it was almost ten years later than Osbert Chadwick was asked to conduct a survey. In his Report published in 1882, Chadwick made many recommendations to improve the conditions. Although a Sanitary Board was constituted to take action, still not much was done for another ten years until the Plague Epidemic burst upon the scene. Endacott wrote that Ayres criticised the Sanitary Board for its 'long, wordy, windy, desultory rambling discussions, ending in nothing being done' in 1895, the second year of the Epidemic. One can see why Lowson had some respect for him. Again quoting from Endacott, Robinson described Ayres as 'having a rather foolish manner, but he is in perfect possession of his senses', and acknowledged that 'he had warned the Colony continuously of the evil sanitary conditions.'\n\nMr. May won universal acclaim and admiration for the drive and energy he showed in carrying out his duties as head of the police force. Sayers",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214379,
        "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": 237,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "203\n\n'it is not paid by the European community. The chief object of the Chinese in paying these Watchmen is to drive away thieves, the cardinal evil of a Shop-keeping population.' The success of the Watchmen was 'not only in arresting actual offenders, but also in keeping away those who live by pilfering.'\n\nDue to an administrative oversight 'no records were kept of the doings of the Watchmen until 27th August 1867. Thereafter data was collected and in the following six months the Watchmen were involved in the prosecution of fifty-three cases some of which were serious. By the end of 1868 another ninety-eight cases had been prosecuted due to the actions of the Watchmen and these resulted in the conviction of 117 defendants. Although the number of cases dropped to forty-one in 1869, data collected for the following two years showed that there were eighty-one and seventy-nine cases in 1870 and 1871 respectively. These returns compare favourably with similar data from the following century. As an example, in 1914 there were 109 convictions when the strength of District Watchmen had risen to one hundred.\n\nThe difference of opinion which had existed in Government circles in 1866 when the Watchmen scheme was introduced continued as the Watchmen went about their business. Cecil Smith was unstinting in his praise but, since he had been responsible for introducing the scheme, he could hardly be regarded as an impartial witness. Others, however, like the Police Magistrate Mr J. Russell and the Coroner Mr F. Stewart commended the Watchmen for their actions. At the other end of the spectrum were political heavyweights such as the perennial Mr Charles May and Chief Justice Smale. May had served as Captain Superintendent of Police between 1845 and 1862 before being appointed Police Magistrate and his low opinion of Chinese constables, whom he considered to be 'utterly untrustworthy,' was well known. His opinion of the Watchmen was similar and, according to Smith in December 1871, May showed 'an antipathy to the Corps which has had a very unfortunate effect.' This unfortunate effect manifested itself in a decline in the Watchmen's activity and energy with a corresponding decrease in the number of arrests. Smith maintained that the Chief Justice, who should have known better because of his legal background, objected not so much to the individual watchmen who appeared before him in Court, as to the whole system which apparently he did not know was established by law.\"9",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214388,
        "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": 246,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "212\n\nThe following year the Government exercised its authority by withdrawing the $2,000 grant which had been awarded annually to the District Watch Force since 1870. The purpose of this small grant was to augment the contributions from the Chinese merchants for the running of the Force. However, Mr A. M. Thomson, the Acting Registrar General, considered that, because of the large surplus which the Committee had accumulated by 1893, there should be no need to resume the grant until 1905. The background to the distribution of this grant is of interest since it shows once again the interaction between the District Watch Force and the Hong Kong Government. During the years 1870-1873 an annual grant of $1,600 was paid to the 'Native District Watchmen' from a Miscellaneous services vote.18 In 1874 this amount was raised to $2,000 p.a. and remained listed as a miscellaneous expense until 1879. However, an important administrative change occurred the following year when the annual grant payable to the District Watch Force became a Police expense and remained as such until it was withdrawn in 1894.\n\nIncreased Government Influence\n\nIn mid-1897 the control exerted by the Government over the District Watch Force increased still further. Francis May, the Captain Superintendent of Police who had become a member of the District Watch Committee in 1894, had recommended that the District Watchmen on duty in Victoria between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. should be placed on Police beats and be 'subjected to the supervision of Police Inspectors and Sergeants on patrol duty.' In his Annual Report for 1897 May took pleasure in informing its readers that this scheme had been introduced in June 1897 'to improve the efficiency of this very useful auxiliary Police Force, and to bring them into closer touch with the Police.'\n\nAs time went by the number of the District Watchmen increased gradually. Before the creation of the District Watch Committee the number had remained static with six Head District Watchmen and thirty-seven or thirty-eight District Watchmen. In 1892 and 1893 this grew to forty-two and fifty-seven District Watchmen respectively and the following year the addition of a further five District Watchmen and a detective bought the total number to sixty-nine men. In 1895 four new posts of Assistant Head District Watchmen were created and by 1903 the Force had grown to eighty-two men including six Head District Watchmen.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214396,
        "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": 254,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "220\n\n1906 the Government used these men as enumerators and during the 1929 water shortage, it was District Watchmen who undertook the thankless task of maintaining order amongst the queues of people waiting at street fountains.\n\nIn 1938 the District Watchmen were called upon to accompany vaccinators on a door-to-door campaign during the smallpox epidemic of that year and, as the clouds of war gathered, it was the District Watchmen who ensured the security of the refugee camps. When these extra duties are considered, it is easy to explain the decrease in the number of Court cases in 1938 from a high of 2,067 the previous year. In 1939, the last year for which detailed figures are available before the Japanese invasion, the strength of the District Watch Force stood at five Head District Watchmen, six Head Assistant District Watchmen, twenty-six Detectives and 103 uniformed men. The District Watch Force continued to be funded by local Chinese business men augmented by a small annual donation of $1,600 (later $2,000) which Government made to the Fund between the early 1870s and 1893 and from 1903 to 1936. There had been no change in this important financial principle since its inception in 1866.\n\nConclusion\n\nThe District Watch scheme is an important example of how the Hong Kong Government, over a very long period of time, successfully controlled a private security enterprise whilst ensuring that the colonial authorities contributed no more than a token amount towards its upkeep. Given the political climate prevailing in the colony during its formative years, it would have been naive to expect a completely Chinese organization of this nature to operate without some kind of interference from the Government. Security has always been - and continues to be - a topic which can make normally placid people become very nervous. However, from its inception, the District Watch Force's ties with the Registrar General and the Captain Superintendent of Police were more restrictive than had been envisaged by its founding fathers. To some extent the Chinese merchants were their own worst enemies because of their inability to overcome petty internal bickering. However, the merchants who proposed the District Watch scheme may have been thankful that they had been able to persuade the Hong Kong Government to grant them even the limited degree of autonomy which",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214397,
        "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": 255,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "221\n\nthe 1866 Ordinance allowed them. The non-confrontational attitude identified in the pre-1920 Chinese merchant class by Ku Hung-ting,1 coupled with a pragmatic belief that half a bowl of rice is better than none, could also explain why the merchants were prepared to go along with the Government's decision. Whilst they would have preferred to have complete control over their security force and did not relish having their businesses scrutinized more than was already the case, a limited degree of control was preferable to none.\n\nThe 'hijacking' of the whole of the District Watch Force for three years 1883-85 to work on non-security sanitary duties following Osbert Chadwick's Sanitary Report has been discussed at length and this change in direction of the Force need only be mentioned again to emphasize the point that, whilst the Chinese merchants may have been paying for this Watch Force, the latter's duties could be, and were, decided by the colonial authorities. The fact that the Chinese merchants continued to fund this scheme during these years whilst the Government contributed a mere $1 per person per month illustrates the lack of a level playing field in this particular game between the colonial power and the local community. Although it is possible that some Chinese people in Hong Kong may have wanted improvements in their sanitary conditions, it is by no means certain that this number would have been substantial. Even if some Chinese residents placed great store on improved sanitary conditions, it is unlikely that the local merchants would have wanted this to be done at their expense particularly if this sanitary work stopped their security force from performing their duties.\n\nThe years following the creation of the District Watch Force showed how certain ultra-conservative factions within the European community would have preferred the District Watch Force to disappear or, failing that, at least be merged with the regular police. That this did not occur is a testament not only to the Chinese merchants who stood their ground but also to some of the first young Cadet officers who were more open-minded than their less enlightened colleagues. With the introduction of the 1888 ‘Registration of the Chinese Ordinance,' the establishment of the District Watch Committee in 1890-91 and the appointment of the Captain Superintendent of Police as a member of the District Watch Committee in 1894, Government influence became even more effective and continued to grow during the twentieth century. Furthermore, the addition of duties such as the house-to-house checks\n\nPage 255\n\nPage 256",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    }
]