[ { "id": 206288, "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": 105, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "CHINESE ELITE IN HONG KONG\n\n99\n\nOn the 1859 contribution list for Chinese textbooks he appears under his usual name, Leong On.\n\nIn 1876 the London Missionary Society wished to raise funds for a proposed school in Wanchai. The Rev. Mr. Eitel called a meeting of the leading Chinese compradores to present his Society's plans and enlist their financial support. However, he encountered the opposition of Leung On at the meeting. Eitel wrote to Mission Directors in London,\n\nI explained the whole subject, especially dwelling on the point that as soon as our native church is able to provide for all the expenses connected with the chapel it shall be handed over to the native church, and that I intended to insert the same stipulation in the deed for the school building. Unfortunately there\n\na very loquacious compradore present, who lately at an interview with the Governor made himself notorious by his narrow self-conceit, a Mr. Leung On, compradore to Gibb, Livingston and Company. He proposed that we should teach the boys no religion but confine ourselves to exclusively secular teachings. When I positively declined doing any such thing, he coolly proposed that I should hand over the piece of ground to him, saying he would build the school himself and keep it going if the Bible and Christian books were excluded. Of course, I declined this proposal, and stuck to my own plans.35\n\nIt is not surprising that Rev. Mr. Eitel does not mention Leung On as one of the contributors to the school fund, though he quickly raised $585 from other compradores and felt confident that the amount could be increased to $2,500 with more extensive solicitations.\n\nIn 1883 Leung On encountered business reverses and the court appointed Trustees to administer his bankrupt estate. He died in 1890 at Canton, leaving an estimated estate in Hong Kong of $20,000. His son and his grandson succeeded to his position as compradore for Gibb, Livingston and Company, the latter dying in 1962; thus the Leung family served the company for well over a century.\n\nPage 105\n\nPage 106", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206775, "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-1973", "page_number": 52, "title": "RAS-1973", "content_text": "46 \n\nA. D. BLUE \n\nsteamships in India operated on the Hoogly in the early 1820s, mainly as tug boats. \n\nThe first steamship in the Dutch East Indies was the Van der Capellen, a paddle steamer of 230 tons, designed to operate a coastal service in Java. The Van der Capellen was built by a consortium of British merchants in Sourabaya in 1825, and equipped with engines built by Fawcett and Company of Birmingham. \n\nDue to the close association between British India and Canton through the East India Company, it was not long before steamships were introduced on the Canton River. Although he did not live to see his scheme carried through, a Mr. T. J. Robarts of the Company's Canton staff is the pioneer of steam navigation in China. When on leave in London in 1821, just nine years after the Comet was launched on the Clyde, he suggested to the Court of Directors that a steam tug could be usefully employed on the Canton River. Because it was thought that the Chinese might object, his scheme was turned down, but Mr. Robarts decided to go ahead on his own. He ordered two 16 horse-power engines and a copper boiler from Henry Maudslay and Company of London, and a hull of oak frames; all of which arrived at Canton in 1822 and aroused great curiosity and admiration. Unfortunately, bad health caused Mr. Robarts to retire prematurely, and there was no one at Canton able, or willing to continue with his scheme. Everything was therefore sent to Calcutta, and arrived there in June 1822. \n\nThe parts were assembled at Kyd and Company's yard at Kidderpore, and the vessel, known as the Diana, was launched on 12th July 1823. However, the original oak hull was discarded in favour of a new hull built locally of teak. The name Diana was taken from the figurehead which had accompanied the original hull. The total cost of the Diana was 70,000 rupees, and the government declining to take any part in the enterprise--this was financed by a group of Indian agency houses. \n\nThe Diana ran successfully, but not profitably, on the Hoogly for a year, and was then sold to the government for use in the Burma War, 1824-1826. It was Captain Marryat, then the senior naval officer in India, who recommended her purchase to the government. The Diana took part in the first expedition to Rangoon, and proved so useful that she was retained on the Irawaddy for the whole of the war. She suffered at times from overloading, as not", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1973.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8910rj06r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207902, "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": 290, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n275 \n\n(Lethbridge, 1971, p. 147). It was only when a \"respectable\" class of rich Chinese merchants and compradores emerged that a group existed which the colonial authorities could properly recognize as speaking for the Chinese community. The Chinese account states that the two patrons of the Temple \"judge the people (there) in public assembly\". In 1851 a proper Temple Committee was elected. It met at the Kung Soh (Public Meeting Hall), attached to the Temple, where all cases of public interest were decided. This judicial function by a self-organized Chinese institution is confirmed by the British Magistrates sending complainants to the Temple authorities for their arbitration of the disputes. For instance, in 1870 a case is mentioned in which the Kai-fong had imposed a fine upon a coolie for breaking a pane of glass.\n\nA year after the opening of Tung Wah Hospital the judicial proceedings formerly held at the Kung Soh of the Temple were moved to the Hall of the Hospital. This is reported in an editorial comment in the Daily Press (Jan. 2, 1873):\n\nThe old Joss House Court the Kung Soh in the Hollywood Road has, we hear, been given up in favour of another building not far off, and it seems that there a vast number of disputes are settled, and that it is an understood rule that matters should be brought to the cognizance of the proper authorities only if they cannot be arranged in this manner. We understand the committee of the Chinese Hospital is the same body of men who head the Kaifong, and that they discuss municipal and semi-political matters in the hall of the Hospital.\n\nInasmuch as the two committees apparently overlapped and as the Hall of the new Hospital was more spacious and imposing than the Kung Soh, the transfer in Chinese eyes would seem appropriate. On a visit of the Governor to the Hall he remarked that it was a much better meeting place than the Council Chambers of the Hong Kong Government. Isabella Bird (Mrs. Bishop) the famous Victorian lady traveller who visited Hong Kong in 1879, describes the building:\n\nThe hall where the directors meet (has) one side open to the garden. It has a superb ebony table in the middle with a handsome chair for the chairman and six carved ebony chairs on each side -- a most stately \"board room\".*\n\n* Photocopy of original manuscript letter in possession of John Murray, publishers, London.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209270, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1981", "page_number": 173, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "28.48\n\nJUAN YUAN'S MANAGEMENT OF SINO-BRITISH RELATIONS IN CANTON, 1817-1826\n\n159\n\nThe Topaze crisis, lasting from late 1821 into 1822, was the most serious confrontation between the Chinese and the British to that day, especially since the controversy involving all the significant issues of the day, including naval presence, jurisdiction over foreigners, and opium smuggling, came so close on the heels of the Terranova crisis. British trade at Canton was stopped for several months. The British factory, fearful that they would be held responsible for the misdeeds of sailors from the frigate Topaze, fled to their ships at Chuenpi on 11 February 1822. At the end of the crisis Juan Yüan made a compromise by not insisting on the surrender of the already departed criminals, but the British capitulated by abandoning the policy of using \"threat of force as a means of protecting or forwarding British interests in China\" at least for the time being. The Court of Directors of the East India Company \"advised the First Lord of the Admiralty to stop all peace-time visits of His Majesty's ships to the China coast unless assistance was urgently requested by the Governor-General of India\". An Order in Council was subsequently issued to this effect in 1823,\n\n1\n\n$\n\nIn December 1821, rancour from the Terranova case had hardly died down. Foreign traders realized that they could not escape completely the newly reinstituted stringent anti-opium laws even by sacrificing Terranova. The Emily, Terranova's ship, as well as three British ships, all with opium on board, were sent away from their Whampoa anchorage to Lintin, where they remained for three years without discharging or taking on cargo. During this period, two British warships, HMS Curlew and HMS Topaze, had sailed into the Pearl Estuary to \"protect\" these commercial vessels. Sailors had gone ashore \"to fetch fresh water\" from time to time. On 14 December 1821, a group of sailors from frigate Topaze came ashore. Only this time they brought along their pet goat. Unfortunately, the goat dug up potatoes, eating a number of them, and damaging the potato patch. A Chinese peasant, Huang I-ming, owner of the patch, then called upon his wife, brothers and neighbours to trample upon the sailors with sticks and stones, and in the fracas two urns of wine on the side of the hut were broken. When the sailors were driven aboard their ship, they discharged the cannon to disperse the pursuing and cursing villagers. During the skirmish among the potatoes a number of British sailors were injured, but none died. The next morning, the sailors, reinforced, went ashore again to revenge their mates. They chopped down the door of the hut of Huang I-ming, and fired a musket, killing him instantly. His son-in-law, also injured by the fusillade, died a", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209271, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1981", "page_number": 174, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "160\n\nWEI PER-TI\n\nfew days later from his wounds. Upon being told of the news, Juan Yuan \"suspended the Company's trade and required the surrender of the man whom he termed the 'Foreign Murderers'\"*\n\n+\n\n63\n\nTo Juan Yuan, the Select Committee's reaction to his demand was in contravention to Chinese regulations. He was told by the Committee to communicate directly with Captain Richardson of the Topaze instead of going through the hong merchants and the Select Committee. Had Juan Yuan done as he was asked, he would have implicitly consented to change the Canton system. This he refused to do. He continued to hold to the principle that the supercargo of the British factory be responsible for the conduct of all British nationals in China. While the hong merchants, British traders at Canton, and Captain Richardson debated various possible courses to take, Juan Yuan suspended all British trade and held steadfast to his principles. On February 3, 1822, a Chinese official was permitted to board the Topaze and was understood to have said that he would make a report to the Governor-General. On 8 February, using as the excuse that as he had not heard from Chinese officials everything must be satisfactory, Captain Richardson took the Topaze to sea.\n\nIt was at this point the crisis really became serious. The British factory left Canton within three days. The language used by both sides in their communications was inflexible and threatening. The Committee insisted upon disclaiming responsibilities for the British navy. Another two weeks passed without any sign of solution. The Committee then explained to Juan that Captain Richardson had returned to Britain to \"report to his sovereign\" and that \"copies of all the papers would be sent to the Court of Directors [of the Company]\". Juan Yuan, noting that since the Topaze had already left Chinese waters, so that it was impossible for the supercargo to surrender the criminals even if he had been willing, and as the entire account was being sent back to both the sovereign and the Company, permitted the resumption of British trade at Canton. This compromise in order to resolve a difficult case reflected Juan Yuan's willingness to make the best of a bad situation.\n\nJuan Yuan did not negotiate with the British except through the intermediary of the hong merchants, and, it was the Company that was to be held responsible for finding the criminals to be remitted to Chinese justice, although no such promise had actually been made.55 And, most important of all, the British navy was removed from the China seas. On the surface at least, the principles of the Canton system were preserved.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209276, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1981", "page_number": 179, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "JUAN YUAN'S MANAGEMENT OF SINO-BRITISH RELATIONS IN CANTON, 1817-1826\n\n11 Ti-tzu chi, 5:11.\n\n165\n\n12\n\nFour men were known by the name (or title) of Howqua. They were Wu Tung-yüan (Puiqua or Howqua II), his father Wu Kuo-yung (Howqua I) before him, his two sons, Wu Shou-ch'ang (Howqua III) and Wu Chung-yao (Howqua IV).\n\n13\n\nWai-chi-tang, (hereafter cited as WCT), n.p. Copy of memorial from Juan Yüan, Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, dated TK 1/11/19 (1821/2/21).\n\n14\n\n+6\n\n16\n\nMorse, Chronicles, III, 334.\n\nLiang-kuang yen-chik, chuan on Chia-ch'ing.\n\nIbid.\n\n17 Morse, Chronicles, IV, 57.\n\n18\n\nCopy of memorials from Juan Yüan, Governor-General of Kwangtung and Kwangsi, in Shih-liao Hsun-k'an 4:126a-b.\n\n19 W. C. Hunter, The \"Fan Kwae\" at Canton Before Treaty Days, 1825-1844, (Shanghai, 1911), p. 40.\n\n20 H. F. McNair, Modern Chinese History: Selected Readings, (Shanghai, 1913), 1:42.\n\n21 Chinese Repository, V:2:422 (January, 1834).\n\n22\n\nMorse, Chronicles, III, 377.\n\n23 Extract of letter from the Select Committee to the Court of Directors, East India Company, as reprinted in Parliamentary Papers, 21:104.\n\n24 Morse, Chronicles, III, 318.\n\n26\n\nIbid., 320.\n\n26\n\nWai-chiao shih-liao, Chia-ch'ing 6:57.\n\n27\n\n28\n\nLetter from the Select Committee, Parliamentary Papers 21:537. Wai-chiao shih-liao, Chia-ch'ing 6:57b.\n\n20 Letter from the Select Committee, Parliamentary Papers, 21:537.\n\n30 Morse, Chronicles, III, 381. In the listing of Company ships at Canton 1805-20, however, the security merchant for the London is given as Kinqua, Ibid.\n\n31 Letter from the Select Committee, Parliamentary Papers 21:537.\n\n32\n\nIbid. After the crisis was over, it was revealed that Pigott had been hiding on a British warship, the HMS Liverpool, then moored at Lintin. He could not return to the London when it left China because of bad weather, but managed to return to England at a later date, Morse, Chronicles, III, 382.\n\n33 Letter from the Select Committee, Parliamentary Papers 21:539; Morse, Chronicles, III, 380.\n\n34 Morse, Chronicles, p. 380.\n\n35 Eliot to Palmerston, as cited in Chinese Repository IX:406 (August, 1842).\n\n**WCT-TK1/11, Chinese Repository, V:5:223.\n\n37\n\n*7 WCT-TK 1/11.\n\n38\n\nMorse, Chronicles, IV, 23.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210683, "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": 34, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "17\n\nJOHN JOSEPH FRANCIS, CITIZEN OF HONG KONG, A BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE\n\nWALTER GREENWOOD\n\nV.H.G. Jarret writing about Francis in the South China Morning Post in the 1930s commented \"It seems strange that so well known a man should not be commemorated in any way”. When one considers the number of streets and roads in Hong Kong named after less prominent Government officials and businessmen the force of that comment will, it is hoped, be appreciated by the end of this essay.\n\nFrancis was born in Dublin in 1839, the eldest son of William Francis Aylward, an Inspector of Irish National Schools, and\n\nMr. Walter Greenwood J.P., M.A. (Cantab.), Barrister of Gray's Inn and the North Eastern Circuit, a Permanent Magistrate in Hong Kong\n\nAUTHOR'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:\n\nThis essay was hurriedly researched and written in snatched hours and does not claim to be comprehensive, much less to do justice to Francis. I hope it may lead to interest in his life and career and I should be grateful if anyone who finds new information about him would send it to me at 26, Great Bounds Drive, Southborough, Tunbridge Wells, Kent TN4OTR. It is based mainly on skimming through newspapers and dipping into the standard histories of Hong Kong. I have also received generous help from many quarters. First I should like to acknowledge my gratitude to the staff of the Hong Kong Public Records Office for their ever friendly and willing help; my thanks go also to the staff of the Supreme Court Registry and University Library, the Secretaries of the Bar Association, the Law Society, the Jockey Club and the Volunteers, Mrs. Lisa Chee, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Po Leung Kuk, Fathers Naylor, Pagani and Pittavino (for searching church records), Mr. Michael Clancy (for information about “Stonyhurst”), Mr. Carl Smith (for information about Francis' marriages) and Mr. Colin West (for arranging the cleaning of Francis' tombstone) in Hong Kong; the Parish Priest of All Saints Church, Borella, Colombo; Father Turner of Stonyhurst College; the staff of the Public Records Office, Genealogical Office and Public Registry in Dublin; Mr. Julian Walton of Dublin and Waterford (for supplying me with material about the Aylward family which he also presented to Dr. Ken Smith of South Africa for use in his biography of Alfred Aylward); the Editor of the Irish Ancestor, the staff of the Public Record Office, Royal Artillery Institution, University and Crown Agents in London; Mrs. Theresa Thom, Librarian of Gray's Inn; Mr. Leo D'Almada Q.C. in Portugal; Dr. Walter Mautsch in Germany; Mr. Nigel Osner in London; Pamela and Eric Russ in Bournemouth; my wife (for her patience whilst I practised my drafts on her); and Mrs. Mary Whitticase for her great kindness in typing my manuscript.\n\nCopyright Walter Greenwood 1986.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210863, "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": 214, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "197\n\ndisturbance. Tong A-chick was in charge. Some of the combatants of the previous night were present. They were from the E Shing Society which was a bitter enemy of the Yeung Wo Association, of which Tong A-chick was one of the directors.\n\nThey questioned his impartiality. Tempers flew, threats were made, and blows exchanged. The climax came when a group of armed men rushed into the meeting from the street attempting to break it up. A-chick sought the nearest exit, a window. Flying through it, he landed on a sheet iron awning which collapsed with a terrible clatter.\n\nHis unceremonious exit and consequent clatter stopped the turmoil inside the building, but it roused the neighbourhood.\n\nIn due time the police arrived. The whole lot were hauled into court for disturbing the peace and riotous behaviour.\n\nThe E Shing group tried to claim that it was all due to the presence of Tong A-chick, who had tried to act as mediator. He, as usual, ably defended himself, “reciting every circumstance of the occurrence in a clear and impartial manner, in the English language, with which he was perfectly conversant.”\n\nOccasionally the associations were given a favourable notice in the press. In 1853 a band of desperadoes had been harassing the countryside. A Company of Rangers had captured the leader of the gang, a man named Joaquim, and thus brought an end to the terrorising.\n\nTong A-chick, as representative of the Chinese district associations, presented a cash gift to the Rangers in appreciation. The San Francisco Herald commented: “The Chinese here, although in no manner bound, have with commendable liberality come forward with this contribution of $1,000 in token of their appreciation of the Rangers' services. They have proved themselves in this city on many occasions a liberal and public-spirited people.”\n\nTong A-chick as leader in the Chinese community during its first decade in California guided it through a difficult period. His", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211160, "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": 221, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "196\n\nCHINESE GET A COMMUNITY HALL\n\nAFTER LONG BATTLE\n\nThe opening of the hall of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in 1895 was the culmination of many years of agitation for such a community centre.\n\nBefore it was built the Tung Wah Hospital served as a place for public meetings. Its past and current directors were the recognised leaders of the Chinese in Hongkong and had assumed responsibility for matters which affected their community.\n\nAfter the opening of the hospital in 1872, the committee was frequently criticised for assuming functions beyond that of hospital management.\n\nStrong objections were raised against alleged quasi-governmental functions undertaken by its directors. It was also charged that it was not appropriate for the main hall of the hospital to be used for public meetings where matters of general interest to the Chinese community were discussed.\n\nIn September 1881, the editor of the China Mail expressed his growing exasperation at the state of affairs. \"The Tung Wah Hospital subject we have worn nearly threadbare, but with little result.\" He felt it was time that the proper role of the hospital was defined.\n\nHe combined criticism of Tung Wah activities with the animosity the expatriates in Hongkong felt towards Governor John Pope Hennessy's liberal policy toward the Chinese.\n\nThe editor believed that what he called the presumptions of the directors could be blamed on the Governor:\n\n\"When the directors act as a sort of Small Cause Court, Chamber of Commerce, Tribunal of Arbitration, Hongkong Association and Advisers General of the Government, it cannot be said they are much to blame. His Excellency, the Governor, has recognised the 'good offices' of this admirable institution in his despatches", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211161, "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": 222, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "197\n\nand in his public utterances, and during the course of his much lauded conciliatory and considerate policy towards the Chinese, the Governor has unduly accentuated the political power assumed by this eleemosynary institution.”\n\nThe paper had time and again drawn the attention of the public to the dangers the activities of Tung Wah posed to the legitimate authority of the Government.\n\nOnce again it warned of the \"dangerous mischief calculated to result from the action of a native corporation possessing no guide or check” and urged the “necessity for either prohibiting the directors from acting as extra judges or jurymen, or for recognising certain powers in them limited by clearly defined rules.”\n\nTheir acting as \"a sort of Small Cause Court, Chamber of Commerce, Tribunal of Arbitration, (and) Hongkong Association\" was the natural result of the composition of the directorship of the hospital,\n\nIt was made up of elected representatives from the major commercial guilds. There was usually a member from the pawnbrokers, the compradores, the rice merchants, the nam-pak hongs (trading firms dealing in goods between the northern ports of China and Southeast Asia), the California-Australia importers and exporters, the piece-goods merchants, the cotton yarn merchants and the opium dealers.\n\nThe directors were quite aware of the tenuous position they were in, due to their being charged with the management of a hospital and at the same time undertaking to act as a board of arbitration over disputes that could not be settled within a guild.\n\nThey also could not escape the fact that the Chinese in Hong Kong looked to them as their natural leaders and entrusted them with the general overseeing of the welfare of the community.\n\nAs long as the hospital was used for the management of general community affairs, the directors realised they would be criticised. For this reason they requested a grant of land from the Govern-", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214966, "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": 62, "title": "RAS-2000", "content_text": "17\n\n⚫ M. Greenberg (see bibliography).\n\nX\n\n0\n\n10\n\nIt was mentioned in the Egyptian Papyrus of Ebers, c.2000 BC, and by the Greek Theophrastus, 3rd century BC.\n\nM. Booth: Opium: A History, London 1996, p.104.\n\nAn inferior quality opium was grown in Zhejiang Province. Chinese government made efforts to suppress it (1831).\n\nH.B.Morse: Trade and Administration of the Chinese Empire, New York, 1908, p.341.\n\n'Imperialism' is used to describe the system whereby one nation acquires political and economic control over another less technologically developed nation. \"Colonialism\" is more difficult to define. Originally the term applied to a settlement of the subjects of a country in lands beyond its boundaries who remain subject to or connected with the parent state. However, in recent times the two terms have been used synonymously,\n\nGreenberg, M., British Trade and the Opening of China 1800-42.\n\n13 American firms Olyphant & Co, and Nathan Dunn & Co.; their strict Quaker moral principles prevented them from trading in opium.\n\n14 Another, highly improbable, anecdote relates that Macartney asked the Emperor to enter into an alliance with Britain against the French, to which The Emperor allegedly replied that he was not concerned with the \"barbarians' petty squabbles\" outside his domain.\n\nS\n\n15 Secretary to the Court of Directors of the East India Company.\n\n16 S. Bard: Traders of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 1993, p.30.\n\n17 Anon.: China: Pictorial, Descriptive, and Historical, London 1853, p.231.\n\n18 Reproduced by courtesy of Charlotte Horstmann & Gerald Godfrey Ltd., Hong Kong.\n\n19 The belief probably had its origin in the prevalent practice in Europe of a 'seasonal", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n", "rank": 0 } ]