[ { "id": 205761, "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": 67, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "33 Ibid., p. 113.\n\nMILITIA, MARKET AND LINEAGE\n\n61\n\n34 This event has a tangled academic history. The establishment of the association by the twenty-four villages was originally reported in the Chinese Repository (IV, 1836, p. 414), and is quoted by Wakeman (op. cit., p. 63) from that source. It is also quoted by Hsiao (op. cit., p. 309) as an example of inter-village co-operation for the purposes of defence and the maintenance of order. Skinner (op. cit., p. 39, n. 80), quoting from Hsiao, argues its significance for the analysis of standard marketing communities.\n\n35 Wakeman, op. cit., p. 39.\n\n36 Skinner, G. W. \"Marketing and Social Structure in Rural China Part II\". The Journal of Asian Studies, vol. XXIV, no. 2, February 1965, pp. 207f.\n\n37 Only those aspects of the New Territories most relevant to the argument will be discussed. There is a growing literature about the area which, taken together, gives considerable detail. Freedman, op. cit., p. viii, provides a bibliographical note on published works.\n\n38 The land frontier of the territory begins just north of the Sham Chun river and runs eastward from Deep Bay to the market of Sha Tau Kok. J. H. Stewart Lockhart, the then Colonial Secretary of Hong Kong, was deeply opposed to this boundary. \"It cuts in two the rich valley of which Sham Chun is the centre, and, while excluding that town, divides the villages in the valley hitherto linked together by family ties and common interests; all these villages regard Sham Chun as their central and most important market, where they dispose their goods and make their purchases\" Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, Extracts from Papers Relating to the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong, 1899, Hong Kong, 1900, p. 196.\n\n39 Ibid., p. 187. Stewart Lockhart's population estimates cannot be regarded as very accurate. By 1900 he thought the number of villages to be 597. Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, 1900, Hong Kong, 1901, p. 252. The Hong Kong census of 1911 gave the total population of the territory as 104,101. In the Northern District alone, 398 villages were enumerated. Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, 1911, Hong Kong, 1912, pp. 103ff. On the other hand, as guesses go, Stewart Lockhart's count is by no means disreputable. His estimate of 100,000 is not all that far from the 1911 census figure cited above. Other examples could be given which suggest that his estimates are sufficiently accurate to indicate general magnitudes of population, if not precise numbers.\n\n40 Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, Extracts..., op. cit., p. 188.\n\n41 This discussion will be confined to that part of the territory which used to be known as the 'Northern District' and will not consider the markets at Sai Kung, Tsuen Wan, Sham Shui Po, and Cheung Chau island. For brief accounts of these, see Hayes, J. W., \"The Pattern of Life in the New Territories in 1898\"; \"Cheung Chau 1850-1898: Information from Commemorative Tablets\", Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 11, 1962, vol. III, 1963.\n\n42 Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, 1911, op. cit., pp. 103f.; Correspondence (December 15, 1903, to February 27, 1907) Relating to the Proposed Canton-Kowloon Railway, Eastern No. 88, Colonial Office, London, 1907, pp. 85ff.\n\n43 For example, the marketing schedule of the two Tai Po markets was 3-6-9. That is to say, the markets met on the 3rd, 6th, 9th, 13th, 16th, 19th, 23rd, 26th and 29th days of each lunar month. The same principle applies to the schedules of each of the other markets. Normally, in specifying a schedule, only the first three days are given.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205972, "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": 52, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "HONG KONG CADETS, 1862 - 1941\n\n47\n\nrelieved by H. E. Wodehouse until January 1890, resuming duties until June, when Wodehouse again acted until the end of the year. Mitchell-Innes was then appointed Treasurer on January 1, 1891, and in 1893 defalcations were discovered in the Treasury. During Mitchell-Innes' term of office, F. H. May acted for him during a six months' leave of absence. Throughout this period 1888-1892, one Alves, first Clerk in the Treasury, had been systematically embezzling crown rents paid to him as shroff for the Department. Alves was sentenced to six years imprisonment with hard labour. It seems that he had been, like many others, caught up in a tide of building speculation, and had lost most of the stolen money, amounting to $67,817, a large sum in those days.46\n\nThe fact that the defalcations occurred in the Treasury and went unnoticed by several heads of department - Lister, Wodehouse, May and Mitchell-Innes - caused a great stir in Government and in the Colony. Lister had died in 1890, and before he died he had been given a bond of $10,000 for the faithful discharge of his duties, so that only Wodehouse, May and Mitchell-Innes were called upon by Sir William Robinson, the Governor, to show cause why they should not be held pecuniarily responsible for the sums embezzled by Alves. Each of the officials replied in his own way and attempted, naturally, to exculpate himself. The Governor mildly censured Wodehouse and May but concluded that Mitchell-Innes had continuously neglected the duties of his office, especially as his was a substantive post but theirs had been merely acting posts in addition to their regular duties in other departments. A confidential despatch was sent to the Secretary of State, the Marquis of Ripon, setting out the facts of the case. Ripon replied that 'the officer to whom the heaviest amount of blame must be attributed is unquestionably Mr. Mitchell-Innes, and I regret to observe that he has not improved his position by the tone and temper of his defence'. Ripon concluded: 'I must mark my sense of his shortcomings, by directing that, as a condition of his remaining in the public service, he be required to pay into the Colonial Treasury a fine of $1,000... and that as he has not justified his selection for the headship of a department in Hong Kong, it will be necessary for me to arrange, if possible, his transfer to another Colony. But such transfer will not mean a promotion, but I trust that...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206362, "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": 179, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "HISTORY OF MILITARY VOLUNTEERS IN H.K.\n\n163\n\nfor defence and internal security purposes. This Ordinance was similar to that introduced in Britain in the early post-war years, and was equally unpopular. It was suspended in 1961, having outlasted the British one by two years. Thereafter the Force reverted to Volunteers. Apart from retaining one infantry company and a Home Guard Company, the former infantry organisation was discontinued and the Hong Kong Regiment was reorganised as a reconnaissance unit with internal security duties, companies converting to squadrons, one of them later equipped with armoured cars.\n\nVOLUNTEER PERSONNEL\n\nWho were the Volunteers during this hundred years and more of service? Generally speaking they were mostly Europeans up to the establishment of Chinese companies in 1937-38, since when Chinese have played an increasingly important part in the manning of the Volunteer Force. The names of the famous Ninety-Nine who signed the Colonial Secretary's circular on 30th May 1854 show a predominantly British group with some Portuguese, Germans and Scandinavians.\nBy 21st June following their number had risen to 127 comprising 92 British, 4 Danes and Swedes, 8 Germans, 16 Portuguese, 1 Italian, 1 Frenchman and individuals from 5 other countries. This mixture was representative of the polyglot foreign population of the time. It has been a feature of Volunteer life in the early and later periods, though not in the middle years from 1893. The Ordinance of 1862 made it easy for persons who were not British subjects to join. Volunteers needed only to be \"such and so many of the Inhabitants of Hongkong as shall volunteer and offer themselves, and as His Excellency the Governor shall approve of\" (Clause 1). Neither did the Rules and Regulations approved on 14th May 1862 make any stipulations about nationality. Christians and non-Christians alike were acceptable and could make either an oath or declaration of allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria and of faithful service during the term of enrolment (Clause VIII). There then came a change. Whilst the 1893 Ordinance, though being more specific in many things, still said nothing to exclude\n\n37 Vol, 1954, p. 21\n\n38 Vol, 1954, p. 20.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210205, "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-1984", "page_number": 176, "title": "RAS-1984", "content_text": "155\n\nof the policy of suppression which had been adopted in Singapore. He strongly opposed the sending of an investigatory commission from London, which the Colonial Office had been pressing upon him. Peel's views were supported by the Permanent Under-Secretary and officials in London, who advised against any immediate action. A League of Nations commission to enquire into the international traffic in women and children was about to visit the Far East and this gave a good reason for delay, since any sudden change of policy would appear to be either designed to impress the commission or else to be an admission of guilt. Lord Passfield accepted this advice.\n\nFor the next six months the question was allowed to rest. Then in June 1931 Peel again wrote to the Colonial Office, enclosing a long memorandum on the legal position of brothels in Hong Kong written by the Chief Justice, Sir Joseph Kemp. This legal exposition concluded by warning that, though the suppression of all registered brothels might possibly lead to less illicit intercourse, it would probably arouse great resentment if the Chinese brothels patronized by the Chinese were to be suppressed. He continued: ‘I fear the danger of shaking the loyalty of the Chinese community as a whole and their confidence that the government will respect Chinese customs generally. The risk may have to be run, but I think it is a real one. It must be remembered that the Chinese do not view prostitution as we do. They look upon it with a more lenient eye, though excess is reprobated just as excess in other forms of self-indulgence is reprobated. Prostitutes are not social outcasts to the same extent as in 'Western' countries. A prostitute often becomes a highly respectable concubine . . . I realise that this is a very difficult defence to make, especially as the English public do not always realise the delicacy required in ruling an alien civilisation.' Peel offered up a small sacrifice to appease the Secretary of State: he suggested that the seven brothels containing European prostitutes should be closed down. This was not a sign that Peel had been converted to the moralists' point of view; European prostitutes were customarily deported from Hong Kong from time to time, since their presence was considered demeaning to European prestige in the East. This decision to close the brothels employing European, Australian and American women was endorsed by the Executive Council in July 1931.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1984.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210965, "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": 27, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "2\n\nserved under him for the next nine months until he was replaced by the late (Sir) Ronald Holmes. It was my first posting after language study, and I was inexperienced and ignorant. Ken was formidable by reason of bulk and intellect, and I was instinctively wary of him. He was, too, one of those rather \"larger than life\" personalities around whom legends and stories had already accumulated. However, he turned out to be both kindly and helpful. More, he was informative; and for a new District Officer anxious to know more about his charges it was fortunate that he had written about local history, something that had attracted insufficient attention from the Civil Service, or anyone else for that matter. I probably saw more of him than the other DOS, because of our joint preoccupation with the Shek Pik Reservoir investigations and the fact that his town office was in the District Office (South) building on Gascoigne Road, Kowloon.\n\nHe used to come in once a week, on set days, and I remember once being indignant upon hearing his booming voice on another day. “Oh well” I thought resignedly, for I was still very new, “he'll come in shortly”, and dismissed him from my mind. Some time later I heard his voice again, and realized it was a tape recording on which his secretary must have been working, a draft speech or something of the kind.\n\nAfter he left the N.T., our association was mostly personal. Through joint interests, including membership of the Royal Hong Kong Defence Force, we met from time to time. The Royal Asiatic Society, Hong Kong Branch, to which he lectured occasionally, was another shared interest. After he left Hong Kong on retirement we exchanged letters periodically. I also saw him on his visits to his family here, and particularly remember the last occasion (1986) when, together with the then District Officer, Yuen Long, we arranged a visit to the border area including the Mai Po marshes. We began with a picnic lunch at Island House which had been his home when he was District Commissioner, New Territories. This was a particularly happy and relaxed family occasion, with his grandchildren, on which I look back with great pleasure.\n\nOne always got a lot out of Ken. Our mutual interest in local people and their history led me to send him copies of any draft", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213341, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1994", "page_number": 163, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "145\n\n25 See SCMP, 10 June 1994. Since then, the park has been completed and opened (December 1995), and is one of the most interesting and pleasing public amenities of Hong Kong.\n\n26 See the President's letter to the Colonial Secretary at pp 7-8 of Vol 11 (1971) of the Journal. And again, in 1985-86, to the Chairman, Urban Council, after a joint Museum of Science and History was shelved see p.xiv of vol 25 (1985).\n\n27. This was attended with success, reflecting the considerable effort made by the Council of the Society.\n\n28 See p xiv, HKBRAS 29 (1989).\n\n29. Ibid, pp xvi-XVII.\n\n30 In the end, we did neither, though we did set up an ad hoc committee to consider ways and means to attract more Chinese members.\n\n31 See the short account at pp ix-x and xii of the 1987 Journal foreshadowed in the President's annual report at pp xii-xiv of the 1984 Journal.\n\n32 Tam Ko Tim-yeong of Ngau Tau Kok, Kowloon (In Chinese entitled Hong Kong Today and Yesterday, published by Joint Publishing (HK) Ltd, 1994).\n\n33 Personal letter 3 August 1994. Tim was born a native villager in Ngau Tau Kok Oi Village, Lower Kowloon which was cleared for development in 1966. It was very gratifying for me to find that my friends there were his uncles and to know that my historical enquiries there, made at that difficult time, were to prove of such interest to him, some 27 years after.\n\n34 Economic and Public Affairs, which incorporates some of the civics topics, is now included in the examination curriculum. See SCMP 15 November 1994 for an interesting critique and defence of Civics and history teaching in Hong Kong as now seen by China's spokesmen and local educators.\n\n35 15-22 secondary schools had opted for the curriculum in 1992.\n\n36 At Hong Kong University, Dr Elizabeth Sinn has developed the Hong Kong Workshop of the History Department as a resource centre for local history, and has greatly added to our knowledge and understanding of Hong Kong through her own research and publications. Yet there is still, in 1994, no lectureship in Hong Kong history at Hong Kong's oldest university!", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214495, "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": 353, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "322\n\nbeing thrust upon us we confirm to Your Majesty, with the truthfulness due when speaking to our King and lord, that whatever has been stated we do not know or understand what we have done or said for the public prosecutor to be able to present this petition but rather, as we have mentioned above, everyone is trying to discredit us and in order to do so, they seek any legal or illegal methods they can. A copy of the petition which was presented on the part of the Bishop in order to request this evidence, is enclosed with this letter, and the secretary did not wish to provide it, simply responding with another petition to request that it should be sent for due authorisation and a copy was sent to the public prosecutor, and in this status the affair has remained until now. However our only intention is that Your Majesty should know what is happening, and that it can be seen clearly how the petitions which have been sent to were authorised.\n\nWe are at Your Majesty's disposal here as your chaplains and you know that we live in these lands without personal interests, and therefore Your Majesty will see that we have no reason not to tell the truth in our dealings with Your Royal Majesty whom God protect for many years for the defence of the Church our Holy Mother and protector of those of little power.\n\nFrom Manila,\n\nThe Bishop of the Philippines, Fray J. De Placencia, custodian/ Fray Diego de Bazer.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214740, "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-1999", "page_number": 155, "title": "RAS-1999", "content_text": "119\n\none of the best descriptions about the background to the Battle of Hong Kong.\n\nThe Battle Itself\n\nIn terms of the actual fighting, a host of publications specifically on the facts of the fall of Hong Kong and its aftermath, both English and Chinese, has been published, beginning in 1943 with Harrop's memoir, The Hong Kong Incident (Harrop 1943). This was followed after the war by the despatch by Major-General C.M. Maltby to the Secretary of State in the London Gazette, “Operations in Hong Kong from 8th to 25th December, 1941\" of 1948 and a Hong Kong Government publication in the same year, Events in Hong Kong on 25th December 1941 (Hong Kong Government, 1948) and in 1953, A Record of the Actions of the Hong Kong Volunteer Defence Corps in the Battle of Hong Kong. Seven years later, Carew's book The Fall of Hong Kong was published (Carew, 1960). Endacott's History of Hong Kong, first published in 1958 (Endacott, 1958), and Fung's Chinese counterpart of 1967 (Fung, 1967) represented the earliest local works that put the Battle in the historical context of the Colony.\n\nAnother 17 years lapsed before another phase of active publication occurred, starting with Coates' A Mountain of Light (Coates, 1977). One year later, Hong Kong Eclipse commenced by Endacott and posthumously completed by Birch appeared (Endacott and Birch, 1978) with Lindsay's The Lasting Honour: the Fall of Hong Kong 1941 (Lindsay, 1978). Birch's own Radio Hong Kong broadcast on the Battle was published one year later in a book entitled Captive Christmas: the Battle of Hong Kong (Birch, 1979). In 1980, Ferguson's work, Desperate Siege: the Battle of Hong Kong, was published (Ferguson, 1980). In the following year, Vincent's (1981) work, No Reason Why: the Canadian Hong Kong Tragedy: An Examination, and Lindsay's second work, At the Going Down of the Sun: Hong Kong and South East Asia 1941-1945 (Lindsay, 1981). This active phase of publication ended with the first systematic Chinese account, A History of the Fall of Hong Kong, (Yip, 1982) and The Royal Hong Kong Police 1841-1945 written by Crisswell and Watson (Crisswell and Watson, 1982). Most English works in this period retained a condescending view about the reliability of Chinese soldiers who happened to be in the Colony and Chinese civilians who helped the defence of Hong Kong. The odd", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1999.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s178b887x", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215293, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-2001", "page_number": 70, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "Though the 1934 interdepartmental committee report had not been officially approved by the cabinet, the Colonial Office regarded it as an authoritative guide to policy. Governors were instructed to refer all proposals for industrial development to London before any changes to tariffs or excise duty were submitted to legislative councils, or any promises of financial or other assistance were made to the promoters of the project. Entrepreneurs also approached the Colonial Office directly with their own schemes for industrial development. Officials examined the proposal to see if it was economically sound. Normally the Board of Trade was consulted for advice as to whether British exports would be adversely affected. Expert advice was sometimes obtained from outside government. If the colony was receiving a grant from Britain to balance its budget, the views of the Treasury were sought. The general attitude of the Colonial Office was an exceedingly cautious one, but if the project appeared to be economically viable, officials did not feel justified in preventing its development.\n\nWhen a proposal was rejected by the Colonial Office, a governor could still protest at the decision, arguing that the special circumstances of his colony should be taken into account. Governors often submitted counterproposals suggesting a lower protective tariff or a different mix of financial incentives to enable the project to go ahead. Governors were insistent on the need for industrial development, and the Colonial Office was always very reluctant to overrule a governor who persisted in pressing his views on what was in the best interests of his colony. In 1936, the colonial secretary wrote to the chancellor of the exchequer suggesting that the cabinet should reconsider the 1934 Report, so that when writing to governors, he could refer to the principles laid down in the report as having the authority of the whole government. The Federation of British Industries had also written to the Treasury complaining about competition from dominion and colonial manufacturers which enjoyed free entry into the British market. Treasury officials believed that the Colonial Office was too ready to sanction the establishment of industries in the colonies which might adversely affect British exports, ignoring the fact that Britain bore the whole cost and responsibility for the Royal Navy and colonial defence.68\n\nA new committee was set up, which, unlike the 1933 committee, included representatives from the Treasury and the Bank of England. It met for the first time in February 1937. The committee tried to formulate general principles, but found that in every case they examined, special considerations could be adduced to justify the new industrial development. For example, a brewery in the Gold Coast which competed with imported British beer was defended by the governor as a means to turn the natives away from gin and neat drinks to (cheaper) beer; the capital investment of £250,000 would be", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215944, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-2002", "page_number": 243, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "177\n\n3 xii\n\nThe whole plan was discussed with RAC North, Secretary for Chinese Affairs and JA Fraser, Defence Secretary who agreed. When Harrop went to Chongqing the first person she contacted was her old friend from pre-war, Madame Soong Ching Ling.\n\nMadame Soong was the widow of Dr Sun Yat Sen, founder of the Chinese Republic and a former Hong Kong resident himself, and graduate of the Hong Kong Medical School which predated Hong Kong University. When Chiang Kai Shek and his extreme rightist faction won the power struggle for control of the National Government, Madame Soong moved to Hong Kong where she and other supporters of the left wing principles Sun had espoused were able to operate with more latitude. She headed an organisation known as the China Defence League which raised funds in support of the anti-Japanese war effort in China, and had connections with many left wing liberal groups, both within China and among the western intelligentsia in Hong Kong and China. This organisation was effectively a form of interface between the KMT Old Guard and more progressive groups. Agnes Smedley, Rewi Alley, Anna Louise Strong and other westerners with strong contacts with the Communist Party under Mao Ze Dong mixed in the same circles as Madame Soong and her supporters, which included Sun Fo, Dr Sun's son by a previous marriage. Sun Fo himself, though he lived in Hong Kong, frequently travelled to Moscow, ostensibly for 'medical treatment,' often staying for long periods. The league did humanitarian work, organising aid for the millions of refugees in Guangdong and in Hong Kong. Percy Chen, son of Dr Eugene Chen, Dr Sun's Foreign minister and close friend worked closely with this aspect of the League's activities. Chen was a socialist and would later declare for the Communist Party. Significantly, FW Kendall had worked with the league in organising programmes to cope with refugees. He himself was something of a refugee, having lost his livelihood in the same Japanese push in Guangdong. Contacts between this left faction of the Guomindang and British people in Hong Kong of a progressive frame of mind were also significant. Hilda Selwyn-Clarke, known as 'Red Hilda' not only for the colour of her hair, but for her politics, was part of this group, rather than a member of the conventional, highly stratified world of colonial society. Her husband may have been a member of the government administration but she did not subscribe to colonial or establishment values. Kendall also worked with Selwyn-Clarke, as did his Chinese wife, who was to be one of the Selwyn", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216002, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-2002", "page_number": 301, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "235\n\nEdith Legge, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar, p. 120.\n\n89. Legge's letter to Arthur Tidman, Secretary of the London Missionary Society, dated October 31, 1861, also printed in the EMMC/MM 26 (1862), pp. 18-19.\n\n90. The first and second volumes comprising Legge's translations and commentaries to the Four Books had been completed in February and November that year,\n\n91. The essay, Che'a Kin Kwáng, must be a pastiche prepared by Helen Edith Legge in preparation for her larger book on her father, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar. It is particularly evident in the last few pages, when letters from Chalmers and others are quoted (without notes or details, typical of her style in the book as well). A comparison of the typescript and the chapter in Helen Edith Legge's book on \"Che'a\" (notice the same error in transmitting the name of the martyr, pp.102-121) show that she was using the typescript liberally, the last pages of both documents being exactly the same except in one final addition within the book. That addition is a final, short paragraph, hagiographic to the extreme, summarizing how Ch'ea had received the \"salvation and strength and the kingdom of our God and the power of His Christ\" so that he \"loved not his life unto the death\". Though its sentiment could be shared by all sympathetic Christians, Helen Legge's writing also had other purposes in mind.\n\nA careful reading of the chapter in her book on Ch'ea reveals numerous factual errors -- wrong timing, mixing up place and person names, confusing original situations -- but also contains some new material from her mother's letters (Hannah Mary) received from her father that provide little cameos of other dimensions of the situation. Unfortunately, she used these sources only selectively, and then apparently destroyed the originals. It is quite significant, therefore, that it is only in the typescript mentioned above and in her chapter in the book that a defence of her father's leaving Poklo in the early morning before the vigilantes attacked the city is presented. (She may, however, be referring to the content of a letter by her father to her mother, or to the later portions of the Reminiscences which I could not check.)\n\n92. See a historical description of the development of this very important institution, one which continued on for forty years as the major bureau for foreign affairs in China, provided by Masataka Banno, China and the West, 1858-1861: The Origins of the Tsungli Yamen (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1964).\n\n93. See his Appendix I, “Incidents Mentioned in Text, 1861-1870\" in Paul A. Cohen, China and Christianity, pp. 275-276. In spite of the title of the table, it seems that the summary is supposed to include all major incidents among the religious affairs documents within the files of the Zongli yámén. Another important gap in the record is the burning of the newly built chapel in Buddha Hill City (Fat-shan, M. Fóshan) in September 1870, a malevolent act perpetrated by crowds who opposed the erection of the building and threatened all those who were there with severe bruisings. Ho Tsun-sheen was one of the Christian officials present at the meeting, escaping through a rear window and finding his way back to Hong Kong independently. The event was so traumatic for him, that within six", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 } ]