[
    {
        "id": 206285,
        "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": 102,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "96\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\nWong Shing, newspaper editor and manager of the London Mission press; and Cheung Achew, a wealthy carpenter.29 The Rev. Ho Fuk Tong and his family lived at the nearby compound of the London Mission Society. In time this area around Peel, Graham, Gage Streets and Hollywood Road became a centre for Parsee and Indian merchants, as well as European brothels. Some of the old families stayed on, but the opening up of the area bounded by Wyndham, Wellington and Pottinger Streets by the Dents provided a needed location for the houses of the better Chinese. After the Peak was developed in the 1870s and 1880s, the wealthy Chinese moved up to Mid-levels occupying the mansions of the Europeans who moved to the Peak.\n\nOf the individuals who had their family residence in the former Middle Bazaar area were two who were on the organizing committee of Tung Wah Hospital, Wong Shing and Ho Asek alias Ho Fai Yin #alias Ho In Kee. Ho Asek first appears in Hong Kong records in 1849 when he purchased a lot in Tai Ping Shan. At the time he was compradore of the opium firm of Lyall, Still and Company. It failed in 1867 and Ho Asek embarked upon his own business ventures under the firm name of Kin Nam. According to a newspaper account, he was subject to a $2,000 “squeeze” from the mandarins during the second Sino-British War.30 He traded extensively in opium as well as rice, and in 1871 held the gambling monopoly from which within a year he realized a $28,000 profit. In an action brought against him in 1871, he testified that he operated with a capital of $200,000.31 In 1868 two of his employees were brought before the court on a charge of extortion. In the evidence presented it was stated that about September 1866, some influential Chinese started a system of subscription or unofficial taxation to support district watchmen. The city had been divided into two sections, East and West. The West District was superintended by Tam Achoy and Ho Asek, \"a most respectable and honest trader”. A shopkeeper resisted the pressure put upon him to contribute and brought the charge of extortion against two of Asek's employees who had been collecting for the scheme. The court gave judgment in favour of the defendants.32 Ho Asek was still a member of the Kai Fong Committee in 1872. He died in Pang Po (likely Ping Po+), Shun Tak District in 1877. His wife was granted letters of administration on his estate, but she being blind, gave her power",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206303,
        "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": 120,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "114\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\n19 C.O. Series 129-78, No. 113, 24 Aug., 1860.\n\n20 Tam Achoy was survived by five sons: Tam Kung Ping alias Tam Ping Kai, died 1887 at Canton, Tam Mo Seen, Tam Yun Yeen, Tam Kee Chun, and Tam Lin Tai. The latter had been adopted by Achoy's fourth wife in 1865.\n\n21 Tang Aluk was survived by a daughter, the wife of Hu Yu Chan; a son Tang Tung Shang alias Tang Pak Shan, died 1899; and a grandson Tang Yeung Mau, the only son of Tang Shau Shan alias Tang Kau Chun. Some of the court suits revolved around whether the deceased son Tang Shay Shan was a natural or an adopted son of Tang Aluk. The family retained much of its real estate holdings up to the present.\n\n22 C.O. Series 131-2.\n\n23 The China Review, Vol. 1 (1872) p. 171.\n\n24 K. G. Tregonning, Under Chartered Company Rule (Borneo 1881-1946) (Singapore, 1958) Chap. 1.\n\n25 The China Mail, 23 July, 1891.\n\n26 Ibid., 17 Oct., 1861.\n\n27 For details on the Chiu (Hsü) family see: Hsü Jun, (Chronological Autobiography of Hsü Jun), #M. #****†# (1927).\n\n28 See my article \"The Chinese Settlement of British Hong Kong\", Chung Chi Bulletin, No. 48 (May, 1970), pp. 30-31.\n\n29 For notice of Cheung Achew see Chung Chí Bulletin, No. 45 (Dec., 1968) p. 11.\n\n30 The China Mail, 9 Dec., 1858.\n\n31 Ibid., 19 Dec., 1871; 7 Feb., 1872.\n\n32 The Daily Press, 4 Nov., 1868.\n\n33 Li Chin-wei, editor (A History of Hong Kong, 1848-1948) £34. điều (Hong Kong, 1949), p. 271.\n\n34 The Daily Press, 23 April, 1880.\n\n35 Archives of the London Missionary Society, London, South China, Box 8, 23 Sept., 1876.\n\n36 C.O. Series 133-5.\n\n37 The name of Ho Tsin Shin does appear on a list of contributors to the Berlin Missionary Society Chinese Vernacular School Fund in 1868 and 1869,\n\n38 For reference to these various aspects of the career of Ho Shan Chee see The Daily Press 24 July, 1868, 20 Sept., 1878, The China Mail 28 Feb., 1882.\n\n39 For details of the career of Ho Kwan Shan see The Daily Press 4 Oct., 1871.\n\n40 The China Mail, 28 Aug., 1891.\n\n41 A biographical sketch of Ho Kai is found in Wu Hsing-lien, (The Prominent Chinese in Hong Kong) AA, SEP^S^ (Hong Kong, 1937).\n\n42 The Hong Kong Telegraph, 3 Sept., 1891.\n\n43 The information on the family of Wu Ting Fang is from the Archives of Presbyterian Missionary Society, New York. The exact relationship is deduced from probable evidence rather than having been directly stated in the sources, At the marriage of Ng Achoy and Ho Amooy, 14 Jan.,\n\nPage 120\n\nPage 121",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]