[ { "id": 204461, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1962", "page_number": 93, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "82 \n\nJ. W. HAYES \n\n10 \n\nstanding in loco parentis to the people of his district. An instance of this outlook is a proclamation issued by the Canton Viceroy in April 1899 in which he told the people of the New Territory that the English government had agreed that \"the people are to be treated with exceptional kindness \".10 On the reverse side of the medal the magistrate could also, like his followers in the tribunal, use his authority to evil purposes and be referred to as being as (fierce as) a tiger\" 如虎 or a dog-official\"35 whose extortions and venality were a byword \n\n44 \n\nin the district.1 \n\nC4 \n\n+ \n\n17 \n\nIn his government the Magistrate was usually assisted by an indoor and outdoor staff. The former might consist of personal adherents from his own home district who followed him from post to post, and partly of local personnel of the tribunal or yamen4 such as a legal adviser, secretaries, and land clerks, whose local knowledge it would be difficult to dispense with. All these were entirely dependent upon the magistrate for their livelihood, and upon what they could pick up in the course of their duties. To maintain his position and put food into the mouths of the members of his personal staff and their families the magistrate was given an inadequate salary by government. There were in addition the outdoor staff which comprised a considerable number of police, watchmen, runners and the like, who may have been paid by Government despite what Lockhart says to the contrary, but used their opportunities as they came, \n\nIn the San On district the Magistrate's yamen was at Nam Tau, which lies beyond the northern or further shores of Deep Bay on the far side of the Nam Tau peninsula. This was the district city where the treasury, jail and examination halls were also situated. It also contained a Confucian temple. The seat of government therefore lay outside the borders of the New Territory which, however, was served by several of his subordinate officers. He was assisted by an assistant magistrate10 whose office was at Tai Pang north-east of Mirs Bay and outside the New Territory and two deputy magistrates, one of whom was stationed within the walled city of Kowloon. They had power to make arrests and conduct preliminary enquiries but were bound to refer most cases to Nam Tau for final decision. The Kowloon deputy, like his colleagues, had a lock-up for detaining persons pending trial and there was also one each for the local", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204630, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1963", "page_number": 111, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "98\n\nJ. W. HAYES\n\nrested with the senior members of the WONG Wai Chak Tong, as it does today. It controls the old defence bureau which is rented out and the proceeds added to the association's funds. Very little information is at present available concerning its history beyond the fact that it existed in the Ch'ing period*1 and that it had a close connection with the members of the Tong, who were its principal patrons and sponsors.\n\nTwo other instances of communal enterprise remain to be mentioned. There was, before the outbreak of the Pacific War in 1941, an organisation of local leaders known as the Kaifong##, which is now represented in most things by the Cheung Chau Rural Committee. The Kaifong had an informal constitution and its leaders were generally those persons who were already playing a leading part in the affairs of the four old district associations. The Kaifong had a general concern in Cheung Chau affairs whereas the district associations may be said, in the best sense, to have had a sectional interest.\n\nThe history of the Kaifong is less easy to trace than that of the associations, very likely because it was a less tangible body. However, it seems to have existed before 1898 because the land registers list a club house or kung soA which was described as public property. This must have been built and administered by somebody and the Kaifong is the most likely candidate. In the early part of this century the building probably housed a school and is known to have served as a headquarters for the town's watchmen.* These were both likely activities for a Kaifong, and it is probable that it ran these and other central services before the British lease. Presumably, too, it administered CHOI Leung's Fong Pin hospital, which the registers describe as an asylum* and as public property. But whilst I am satisfied that there was a Kaifong on the island before 1898 which organised various functions on behalf of the whole community, there is, as yet, no information as to the date of its origin, though there is one clue which takes its history back another twenty years at least.*2\n\nThis was the provision of what are still known, to-day, as kaifong junks or kai to*. These are cargo vessels which are managed by prominent persons for a group of financially interested", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204638, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1963", "page_number": 119, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "106\n\nJ. W. HAYES\n\n30 The Tung Kwun association note book says that there was a Po On Wui Sor ★ ★ ƒ in the Ch'ing dynasty, but since this had always led to confusion their association (the Po On Shuc Shat) was renamed the Tung Kwun Wui Sor in the 12th year of the Chinese Republic (1923).\n\n31 A tablet (1953) in the Free School says that this institution dates back to 1921 and local leaders say that the kung sor was rebuilt at this time. The old kung sor was also known as the hon kaam lau ★ ★# or watchmen's building.\n\n** On the other hand it is unlikely that it predates the defence bureau (1863-70) as this would have been a suitable subject for the Kaifong to organise (there is no mention of it on the tablet).\n\n33 Mr. LEUNG Yau recalls that there were two Kaifong junks operating a daily service between Cheung Chau and Hong Kong before the lease (1898). One left Hong Kong (Sai Ying Pun) at 11 a.m., whilst the other left Cheung Chau at the same time. Both were sailing junks and took three hours to make the journey under good conditions and the whole day if otherwise. They were subscribed and run by a number of local gentlemen for public use. A steam Kaifong vessel was bought with public subscriptions in 1910. Administrative Reports, District Officer, New Territories, 1910.\n\n&\n\n34 There are now eight district associations on the island for natives of the districts of Po On; Tung Kwun; Wai-Chiu combined ✰✰ *#; Sei Yap (\"The Four Towns') i.e. Toi Shan 4, Sun Wui. Hoi Ping, Yan Ping; Ng Yap ♣ (“The Five Towns\") i.e. Hok Shan plus the towns of Sei Yap, Shun Tak: Chung Shan ✈ and Chiu Chau (separate), the four last named formed since 1945, all offering a variety of social, educational and charitable services to members.\n\n35 HSIAO, in his interesting and lengthy study of rural China in the 19th Century, does not deal specifically with the internal organisation of the market towns. The market town of Tai O at the south west end of Lantau island (land population 2248 in 1911) would provide an interesting local comparison, though material is not so readily available as for Cheung Chau. I hope to write a similar outline account at a later date.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204798, "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": 101, "title": "RAS-1964", "content_text": "PENG CHAU\n\n89\n\ncoastal and riverine areas of Kwangtung were always receiving the unwelcome attention of pirates and robber gangs, right up to the end of the nineteenth century and well into the present one. The Taiping rebellion occupied the middle years of the century and, though it does not seem to have caused much bloodshed in the San On district, the large-scale struggle between Hakkas and Puntis in the parts of the province west of the Delta must have increased mutual antipathy between the two groups elsewhere. The Opium War and the War of 1857-60 saw increased foreign activity in Hong Kong waters. There were therefore both internal and external dangers to be expected on a small island settlement like Peng Chau at this time.\n\nInternally there was probably less trouble than there was potential. There are no recollections of fighting between the various groups of settlers on the island, though the Hoklos, who are generally credited with a more turbulent disposition than the Cantonese and Hakkas, perhaps in most cases having fewer possessions to make them cautious, sometimes fought among themselves.51 The Cantonese shops in the main street were ever fearful of robbery and violence and until ten years ago one could see the last of the protective gates known as ... There were three of them, barred every night, one at each end of Wing On Street and a third at the entrance to a large lane which left the main street at right angles and led to the Hakka settlement. Within living memory one or more watchmen were employed at night by the Kaifong and collected contributions from shops according to their size. These night defences were erected as much to keep out bandits and robbers coming from the sea as thieves or dissatisfied elements from within the island. There was, as Mr. CHUNG recalls, a small military post on the island in the late nineteenth century, but this would scarcely deter would-be assailants, especially if they were numerous and well-armed, and there can be little doubt that the first farmers and shopkeepers lived in genuine fear of such assaults. There are sufficient instances of violence from neighbouring places at various times to show that such fears were fully justified3½ and an isolated town like Peng Chau would have offered better prospects for pillage than a lonely village of farmers.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205337, "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": 99, "title": "RAS-1967", "content_text": "92\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\ndistrict city it was not under the district magistrate's direct rule but was under the charge of one of his deputies. This officer's yamen was in the walled city of Kowloon and he was responsible for many other villages besides those on Lantau Island. There was no civil officer actually resident on the island before 1898 though one imagines that runners would visit it from time to time to chase in taxes and, perhaps less frequently, to make an arrest. The military authorities were more in evidence. A captain commanded a detachment in the fort at Tung Chung, a large valley in the north-central part of the island, and a junior officer was in charge of another body of troops in the market town, Their presence was perhaps due more to European activities in the local seaways, and to pirates, than to any disturbances likely to take place on the island, especially in the latter half of the nineteenth century when there is no remembrance of internal disturbances.4\n\nThe people of Lantau were left mainly to their own devices by the government, military and civil alike. From evidence collected locally it appears that as elsewhere in China the clan and village elders kept the peace in the villages, and the Kaifong (#) or Street Association did the same in the market town and paid for watchmen to bar and walk round the principal streets at night. Anything more serious than minor disturbance and petty crime, e.g. piracies or armed robberies, was reported to the military, though by that time it was usually too late for anything effective to be done. Disputes were settled locally as far as possible. Besides these, the elders handled a variety of duties which, irrespective of the size of the community, were sometimes arduous and complex since much depended on handling individuals so as to produce a fruitful result. They organised small public works of benefit to their communities, such as the digging of a well or the construction of an irrigation dam or a small pier: they managed the local temples and arranged the details and financing of all festivals: they were responsible for finding suitable premises for village schools and engaging teachers; and so on. These persons came forward by a combination of such factors as age, experience, ability, ambition, leisure, wealth, lack of anyone else willing to do the job and so on. However, it is also true to say that they had also to be acceptable in their communities, since without local support and goodwill they could hardly operate.5", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205411, "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": 173, "title": "RAS-1967", "content_text": "166\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nheld office for many years on the main advisory bodies representing the Chinese community in the Colony, including the District Watchmen's Committee, the Tung Wah Hospital Committee, the Chinese Public Dispensaries Committee and the Po Leung Kuk.15\n\nSir Show-son CHOW's son, Mr. CHOW Yat-kwong, J.P. has kindly given permission for members to visit the house in the New Village which contains the family's ancestral hall,\n\nIII. THE Hung Shing Temple And AP LEI CHAU\n\nThe Hung Shing Temple, The Hung Shing Temple at Ap Lei Chau, judging by the temple bell, dates from the 18th century.16 It appears to have been enlarged in 1847 and some wall-tablets show that it was given a major repair in 1888. The present building dates from that time or earlier. Its origin is uncertain because it is not clear who built it in the first instance. Records show that the Ap Li Chau land population was \"no more than two or three families of Hakka grass cutters\" before 1841, so that we must look elsewhere for the builders. It could have only been built and supported by the joint efforts of the local (i.e. Aberdeen) land people and boat population. The former only amounted to a few hundreds before the British came, but the boat population was probably as considerable before 1841 as after, e.g. 415 boats and 2,243 persons at the 1856 census18 and 424 boats and 4,130 persons in 1866.19\n\nThe temple is interesting in that it has old-style flagpoles still standing in front of the building. Old prints frequently show this kind of pole; but though a few bases can still be seen nowadays in Hong Kong, Macau and the New Territories these could be the only ones left with the poles and their basket-like tops still in place.\n\nAp Lei Chau before 1911. The present land settlement on Ap Lei Chau was founded in the early decades of British rule. By the mid-1860's there were 60 houses there, which implies that several hundred residents were living on the island at that time.20 By 1897 the number of residents was 1,123 rising to 1,437 at the Colony Census of 1911.21 This population gained its livelihood to a great extent from concerns directly associated with the fishing industry, such as boat-building yards, ship chandlers and rope and sail works, and from provision shops and general stores that also catered for the fishermen's daily needs.22 There was very", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205718, "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": 24, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "18\n\nT. C. CHENG\n\nwatchmen being paid for with subscriptions from the Chinese community.* In 1893 a District Watch Force Committee was formed with the Registrar General (Protector of Chinese) as Chairman, and from that time onwards up to 1941 many prominent Chinese leaders served on that Committee. Indeed, for many years, it was more or less a tradition for prominent Chinese who wished to render public service to the Colony to begin their public career with this Committee and then, in the case of those who had a knowledge of English, to proceed to the Sanitary Board (which was replaced by the Urban Council in 1935) and thence to the Legislative Council.\n\nFor some years Wei Yuk was more or less an unofficial liaison officer between Hong Kong and the Manchu Government, and the latter was indebted to him in no small degree for the assistance he rendered in bringing to justice Chinese criminals who had fled from Chinese territory to Hong Kong. He was so respected by the Chinese in South China that, following the successful revolution in 1911, when Admiral Li Tsun, Commander of the Chinese Imperial Naval Detachments of Kwangtung and Kwangsi Provinces, declared his surrender to the revolutionary forces directed by Dr. Sun Yat-sen's deputy, Hu Han-min from Hong Kong, Mr. Wei Yuk was asked to act as the guarantor of good faith on both sides!\n\nIn 1894, a fierce bubonic plague broke out in Hong Kong which accounted for over 2,000 deaths mainly in the oldest Chinese section of Hong Kong, viz., Tai Ping Shan (the present Po Hing Fong). In 1896 and subsequent years the plague recurred to a greater or less degree every spring. As there was little scientific knowledge of the plague and as there was no western treatment for this, Government decided to take drastic measures including the cleansing and disinfecting of infected areas, compulsory removal of the sick and house-to-house visitation carried out generally by the military. As it was very un-Chinese to allow sick parents or relatives to be removed from their homes to die in strange hospital rooms, and as the Chinese looked upon house visitation as interference and intrusion upon their privacy and personal liberty, they adopted an attitude of passive resistance and often hid away the dead and the sick. Wei Yuk was able to do\n\nSee chapter 4, \"District Watchmen\" of Regulation of Chinese Ordinance, No. 13 of 1888.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "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": 206305, "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": 122, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE: 'THE CHINESE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF HONG KONG\n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE*\n\nAn American political scientist, Lennox Mills, concluded after a period of research in Hong Kong that the District Watch Committee was 'in reality the Chinese Executive Council of Hong Kong'. Yet ‘legally', he continued, it is merely a committee of fifteen Chinese who meet under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs to manage the District Watch Force\" — in 1941 a body of some 120 Chinese constables and detectives recruited and paid for by the Committee for the purpose of patrolling predominantly Chinese districts of urban Hong Kong Island and Urban Kowloon. The 1941 Committee contained the five names of the Chinese unofficial members of the Legislative and Executive Councils as well as a number of extremely rich and influential Chinese, all of whom sat on various interlocking committees and boards. The Committee, needless to say, because of its prestigious membership, exercised political power within the Chinese community: it was, therefore, a group listened to and cosseted by the government.\n\nThe purpose of this paper is to trace the development of the District Watchmen Force, a constabulary body, from its inception in 1866 and to show how its Committee of Management acquired over time prestige, status and power so that it became, as Lennox Mills wrote, 'the Chinese Executive Council of Hong Kong'.\n\nWhen the Island of Hong Kong was ceded to Britain in 1842, some Englishmen assumed its Chinese inhabitants were a chance collocation of poor peasants, piratical fishermen and unkempt\n\n* Mr. Lethbridge is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Sociology, University of Hong Kong. He is the author of several articles on Hong Kong subjects. His \"Hong Kong under Japanese Occupation: Changes in Social Structure\" appeared in I. C. Jarvie and Joseph Agassi, Hong Kong, A Society in Transition — contributions to the study of Hong Kong Society (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1969) pp. 77-127. Another article, on the Tung Wah Hospitals 1870-1970, will appear in Contributions to Asian Studies, Vol. I, 1971. His \"Hong Kong Cadets, 1862-1941\" appeared in the 1970 Journal, Ed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206306, "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": 123, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "A\n\n# THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE\n\n117\n\nquarrymen a lawless and potentially dangerous class of people. But Chinese on Hong Kong Island, like their fellow countrymen in Hsin-an hsien (a county which then comprised the future British Kowloon Peninsula and New Territories) formed a socially well-organised community, knit together by ties of family and kinship and involved, apart from the boat people, in wider forms of social organisation such as the clan and the lineage3. They were constrained by the type of in-built social controls found typically in any rural Chinese community. On the other hand, immigrant Chinese arriving after 1842, who came mostly from Canton and the delta counties, formed a purely urban population, lacking roots and sentiments of belonging: they had necessarily few attachments at first to their new area of residence. Congregated in the mushrooming city of Victoria and soon outnumbering the old, established Chinese population of the island, they were not subject to any in-built system of social control. The new population of urban Chinese from Kwangtung Province, like newly arrived Europeans, were faced with the problem of maintaining public order and protecting their families and properties. The better-off Chinese merchants and traders were soon compelled to employ their own guards and some householders and shopkeepers engaged their own street watchmen, either paid for by the individual householder or collectively by subscription.\n\nBy the 1850s Hong Kong Chinese had developed not only their own associations, such as Kaifong, but even a rudimentary system of self-government, if the evidence is to be believed. A note in the China Review claims, for example, that in 1851 the shopkeepers of Sheung Wan (i.e., the area of the Chinese 'Bazaar', west of the European central district) 'repaired the Man-mo Temple, elected a Committee, and therein afterwards decided all cases of any public interest5'. The same writer also claims that in 1857 'the U-lan-shing-ui (a sworn mutual aid association) united Tai-ping-shan, Sai-ying-pun, Sheung-wan and Chung-wan under one public committee, and these four districts were called the Sz-wan or four circuits'. Eitel states (but cites no authority) that around 1851 the Committee of the Man Mo Temple 'now rose into eminence as a sort of unrecognised and unofficial local-government board (principally made up by Nampak-hong or export merchants). This Committee secretly controlled native affairs, acted as commercial arbitrators, arranged for the due", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206307, "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": 124, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "118 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nreception of mandarins passing through the Colony, negotiated the sale of official titles, and formed an unofficial link between the Chinese residents of Hong Kong and the Canton Authorities”. Such evidence is not conclusive, but it seems plausible to assume that by the 1860s Chinese in Hong Kong had acquired some experience in managing their own affairs typical behaviour in other Overseas Chinese settlements and had acted with some secrecy so as not to alarm the colonial authorities. \n\nWhat was, in effect, the first District Watch Committee was formed after a meeting of the Chinese community held on 1 February, 1866. Presumably this was a meeting of the Kaifong leaders, the more prosperous shopkeepers and merchants. According to the Registrar General's Report for 1867, after much discussion, the Community of the Five Districts to the west of the Parade Ground, agreed to elect a certain number of their body to act as Watchmen, whose pay should be disbursed by themselves and be collected by men especially appointed for the purpose'. It appears they agreed among themselves to send a petition to government asking for permission to organise a force of Chinese watchmen. In this petition they claimed a rumour had reached them that the roughs of Canton intended to celebrate the approach of the Chinese New Year by making a descent upon Hong Kong 'with the object of committing extensive robberies under cover of a conflagration'. Their intention, they wrote, was to protect their families and aid the police. \n\nThe rumour of a possible criminal foray from Canton was treated with some scepticism by government officials, but the suggestion of a district watchmen force, organised and paid for by the Chinese themselves was readily accepted by the Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, and became embodied in the Victoria Registration Ordinance, No. 7 of 1866. As Norton Kyshe affirms : 'This may be taken as the origin of the system now known as \"District Watchmen”. \n\nIt seems reasonable to infer that the Chinese notables present at this meeting used the rumour of a foray from Canton to camouflage their real desire — their own Chinese police force. They wanted an amalgamation of the numerous private watchmen and street guards already employed by merchants, shopkeepers, householders and Kaifong. At that date — 1866 — the regular", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206308, "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": 125, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE\n\n119\n\npolice were commonly reputed to be corrupt, inefficient, drunken and lazy. The police force, mainly composed of European and Indian policemen with a small contingent of Chinese, was officered by European inspectors and sergeants and controlled at the top by a European Captain Superintendent of Police, often at loggerheads with the Registrar General, the 'Protector of Chinese'. The main duty of the regular police was to protect the central business district of Hong Kong, where most of the great European firms clustered, and the docks and wharves on which the prosperity of commercial Hong Kong depended. Principally, though, the regular police were there to overawe the Chinese lumpenproletariat, composed in European eyes of the sweepings of Kwangtung Province. The Chinese residential and commercial areas on the fringes of the core central district were more arbitrarily policed—and policed of course by aliens, most of whom as ex-Indian sepoys, ex-soldiers or ex-British policemen were unable to speak Cantonese.11 Chinese merchants, therefore, thought there would be advantages in maintaining a force of district watchmen Chinese to a man—selected, vetted, paid for, controlled, and if needs be, dismissed by the Chinese community.\n\nThe establishment of a body of Chinese district watchmen by the Registration Ordinance of 1866 was at first strongly opposed by some officials. In 1866 Sir Richard MacDonnell reported to the Secretary of State that the scheme was 'working admirably'12; but two years later the Chief Justice, Sir John Smale, laid on the table of the Legislative Council a memorandum inveighing against the inefficiency and corruption of the Force and suggesting that, to avoid the constant friction between the Superintendent of Police and the Registrar General, the district watchmen should be embodied in the Police Force under one head13. Soon after the Chief Justice's animadversions were made public in the Legislative Council, MacDonnell was forced to set up a commission to inquire into the working of the regular police as a result of a number of police scandals. In his memorandum setting out the reasons for holding such an inquiry, MacDonnell also asked the members of the commission to 'report as to the expediency of continuing to maintain, with Chinese co-operation and pecuniary aid, an auxiliary force of District Watchmen, and to ascertain whether the latter body has", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206309, "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": 126, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "120 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nrendered any useful service to the Colony, also whether, as at present controlled, there is any real danger to be apprehended from allowing such a force to be maintained'14 \n\nThe commission concluded that district watchmen performed a useful service for the Chinese community. The system was thus left unchanged and the statutory control of the Registrar General was not tampered with. The Regulation of Chinese Ordinance, No. 13 of 1888, reaffirmed the principle that 'every such watchman shall be under the control of the Registrar General'. Thus the link forged in 1866 between the Registrar General and the District Watch Force was maintained intact until the radical change in the nature of the force brought about by the District Watch Force Ordinance of 1949, which ended the life of the Chinese Committee of Management and the system of voluntary subscriptions. \n\nOsbert Chadwick in his 1882 report on the sanitary conditions of Hong Kong recommended that the duty of enforcing cleanliness should be added to the duties of the district watchmen and that, if necessary, their numbers and pay be increased. Chadwick also informs us that 'the idea was suggested to me by the Chinese'15. Chadwick, the son of the great Edwin Chadwick, recognised the importance of maintaining a body of police auxiliaries, for such watchmen could be detailed to work on tasks not normally undertaken by regular police and used where the presence of European police would engender hostility or lack of co-operation. The Chinese notables also recorded their satisfaction with their own force and in a petition asking for the registration of Chinese partners in Chinese business firms claimed they could weed bad elements out of the force because only Chinese could understand the workings of the Chinese community16. Soon the district watchmen were performing a variety of tasks17—acting as census enumerators, providing guides for census officials, tracing runaway girls for the Po Leung Kuk, intercepting young girls brought into the Colony for purposes of prostitution, engaging in detective work for Chinese welfare societies, and generally just keeping the peace in the Chinese quarters. The Head District Watchman became a figure of some importance and his salary placed him far above the run-of-the-mill Chinese artisan or labourer. Inevitably, there were reports of district watchmen receiving 'tea money' but there is no reason to suppose they were any more...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "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": 206313, "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": 130, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "124\n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE\n\ndevolving upon the regular police by law or custom. As early as 1868, the Registrar General reported that the Head District Watchmen from their age and authority are often accepted as arbiters of perplexing disputes'. Clearly, these extra-police duties increased year by year, for in 1935 the Secretary for Chinese Affairs wrote 'it is not generally realised that in addition to their normal ordinary police duties the District Watch carry out a great deal of useful investigation in purely civil cases, wages and family disputes'. Watchmen were also active in counting the number of children at vernacular schools, controlling queues during periods of acute water shortage, gathering information about family budgets, and in the more general task of making known to the Chinese public the policies of the government30. Primarily, of course, the members of the force spent most of their time in apprehending shoplifters, thieves, pickpockets and loiterers in those districts where there were Chinese shops. Their special anti-pickpocket squad, a plain-clothes unit, helped to control an offence once very common in Hong Kong. This was what the subscribers expected them to do31, for the subscribers were nearly all shopkeepers and merchants, members of the propertied and moneyed class in Hong Kong. The District Watchmen, armed and uniformed, must have been a conspicuous sight in the Chinese quarters of the town before the war, well-known as individuals to the citizens in the districts they patrolled. In most cases the watchmen spoke Cantonese like the majority in the urban areas, whereas Chinese regular police were often recruited from Shantung32 and spoke another dialect. The police constables from Shantung, given the complexities of Chinese provincial and dialect differences, were comparative strangers -- tall, muscular men from the North.\n\nThe day to day running of the force was left mainly in the hands of the Head District Watchmen and their aides, the Assistant District Watchmen, and later to the European officer seconded from the police; and all clerical work was done in Chinese in the office of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs, which became the headquarters of the force. The Committee met formally once a month, though extraordinary meetings were often held. But when the Committee did meet, it usually had more important matters to discuss than the routine doings of the force. The Committee of Management, since its advice was solicited by the Secretary for", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206320, "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": 137, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "The District Watch Committee \n\n131 \n\ntoo sharply between them all. High government officials, such as the Secretary for Chinese Affairs and the Colonial Secretary, were likely to meet this cluster of Chinese constantly, if not at formal meetings, then socially, ceremonially, ritually. It follows that before the war Hong Kong had an oligarchical political structure in that a small number of entrenched and established Chinese shared political control over a largely immigrant and migratory population together with a small number of officials and taipans.\n\nThe pre-war European community in Hong Kong had no official committees of its own, although Europeans tended to predominate on certain committees such as the Labour Advisory Board and the Licensing Board60. Thus Europeans lacked the equivalent of the eleven officially recognised all-Chinese committees, the names of which were enshrined annually in the Civil Service List. The government felt no need either to sponsor or promote a system of counter-balancing European committees because of course the administration was controlled at the top by European colonial civil servants and only a few thousand Europeans were resident in Hong Kong.\n\nBut it is of some significance that in the face of growing Chinese working-class intransigence in the 1920s, illustrated by the spate of strikes, beginning with the mechanics' strike of 1920 (the first major industrial strike in Hong Kong) and culminating with the great strike and boycott of 1925-26, Europeans set up their own 'district' associations. The Kowloon Residents' Association was formed in 1922 and the Peak dwellers, the leading European residents, formed theirs a little later in the same year like the European residents on Cheung Chau, a favourite summer station with missionaries; and in 1925 the Mid Levels residents also formed an association. None, understandably, was given statutory or official recognition by government. Such associations were unnecessary for the District Watch Committee was hyper-active during these turbulent years and as keen to protect the European minority and thus help sustain the economy as were Europeans themselves. The Committee worked hard to bring the general strike and boycott to an end by mediation with strike leaders and holding talks with interested parties in Hong Kong and Canton, the strikers' base; and the District Watchmen were active in preventing intimidation of shopkeepers, fokis, artisans", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206321, "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": 138, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "132 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nand workers. In one case, a District Watch Inspector arrested a member of the Secret Strike Party (the so-called Labour Commission) carrying illegal dispatches to union members, a fact duly noted in the Secretary for Chinese Affairs' report for 1925. \n\nIt is difficult to see how the Hong Kong government could have coped as well as it did with periods of economic recession after 1918, with years of labour unrest, with the rising tide of nationalism emanating from Nationalist China, without the strong support of the Committee, whose members between them sat on most of the ten other official Chinese committees and boards. The members of the District Watch Committee were strongly entrenched in the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and the Chinese Clubs and they played a significant role in the Chinese Manufacturers' Association. They also occupied important positions in district associations, benevolent societies, guilds of employers and business associations. The power and influence of the Committee ramified down through such associations, so that the few were able to exercise political control over the many62. Thus the power of the Committee was diffused through many associations, helping to maintain what no doubt the government would call 'sensible attitudes' among the Hong Kong-born Chinese, the group that formed the vertebra of the Colony. \n\nThe District Watch Committee was re-established after the return of the British administration in 1945, the Committee containing the same names as in 1941. No further nominations were ever made. A hundred and one District Watchmen reported for duty in 1945-6 and carried on with their normal duties: patrolling streets, conducting enquiries in connection with boarding houses, guilds, and the protection of women and girls, and making general investigations on behalf of the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs. In addition, the force assisted the rice controller in checking black marketing in government supplies; they were also put on static guard duties at various premises requisitioned by government. But the pre-war system of soliciting private subscriptions for the upkeep of the force was abandoned in 1945: henceforth it was financed entirely by the government; and government soon decided that the strength of the force should gradually be reduced to about fifty men, which would be sufficient to deal with the special requirements of the Secretariat for Chinese", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206324, "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": 141, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE\n\n135\n\n4 The first census of the Island in 1841 gave a population of 5,650. In 1844 the population was given as 19,009. See Historical and Statistical Abstract of the Colony of Hong Kong, 1841-1931, Hong Kong, Noronha, 1932. The validity of the first census has been questioned by G. R. Sayer in his Hong Kong: Birth, Adolescence, and Coming of Age, London, Oxford University Press, 1937, p. 104.\n\n5 The China Review, vol. 1, 1872/73, p. 333.\n\n6 Ibid., p. 334.\n\n7 E. J. Eitel, Europe in China, The History of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Kelly and Walsh, 1895, p. 282. The Man Mo Temple stands at the western end of Hollywood Road. It was originally a shrine patronised mostly by fishermen before 1841. For a description of the temple see Charles J. H. Halcombe, The Mystic Flowery Land, London, Luzac and Co., 1896, ch. xxvii. The temple was run by a committee appointed by the Five Districts and the committee used to hold an annual ceremony at Mount Davis for the dead... in celebration of the gods of literature and war: see the Hongkong Government Gazette (henceforth cited as the Gazette), 12 February 1879, p. 52. The properties of the Man Mo Temple were transferred to the Tung Wah Hospital by the Man Mo Temple Ordinance, No. 10 of 1908. Before the committee of the Tung Wah Hospital was organized, the Man Mo Temple Committee appears to have been recognised as representing the opinions of respectable Chinese.\n\n9 J. W. Norton Kyshe, History of the Laws and Courts of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Noronha and Co., 1898, vol. 2, p. 86. See also the reports of the Registrar General for 1866 and 1867 in the Gazette.\n\n9 Ibid., p. 86.\n\n10 In 1867 the police force consisted of 89 Europeans, 377 Indians (chiefly Bombay sepoys) and 132 Chinese, many of whom were employed as marine police. See Eitel, op. cit., pp. 445-6.\n\nAs late as 1893 there were only two European policemen who could act as proper interpreters and only five who could speak some Chinese. See the Report of the Commission on the Po Leung Kuk, Hong Kong, Noronha and Co., 1893, p. 81.\n\n12 Correspondence on Hong Kong Gambling Houses, London, H.M.S.O., 1869, p. 21.\n\n13 Eitel, op. cit., p. 447.\n\n14 Gazette, 6 January 1872. The Police Commission set up by MacDonnell was not unanimous: broadly it agreed to recommend an Anglo-Chinese police force. The recruitment of Chinese police had been strongly advocated by Dr. Legge, as most likely to bring good understanding between the government and respectable Chinese', G. B. Endacott, History of Hong Kong, London, Oxford University Press, 1958, p. 160.\n\n13 Osbert Chadwick, Reports on the Sanitary Conditions of Hong Kong, London, H.M.S.O., 1882, p. 42.\n\n16 'Registration of Chinese Partners', Hong Kong Sessional Papers (henceforth cited as Sessional Papers), No. 43 of 1901, p. 22. The text reads: 'Head and District Watchmen employed to patrol the streets by day and by night, are to be recommended by the Chinese themselves, because they know whether they are trustworthy or not. If these men, however, should fail to maintain their good character and should be found to be unfit for the post by the Chinese residents of the district to which they belong, they should be dismissed at any time, in order that they may have something to fear'. The translation is clearly a bad one.\n\n17 In 1883, the Registrar General, Frederick Stewart, used the district watchmen to conduct an enquiry into all Hong Kong schools. In the 1897", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206325, "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": 142, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "136 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\ncensus 13 of the 76 Chinese enumerators were district watchmen; in the 1901 census 5 out of 107 were. In the 1906 census the 120 enumerators were shown round the blocks (census sub-divisions) by district watchmen. They also gave help in the 1911 census, and in the 1921 one the bulk of the force was placed at the disposal of the commissioner of census, who wrote 'each Chinese watchman engaged was in charge of two sections; they helped clear up misunderstandings and kept a check on enumerators'. The Committee was thanked on many occasions by government for its public service; it was praised for the help it rendered to the police during the riots which occurred in 1894 during the great epidemic of plague. The Committee did all it could to help its sister organizations the Tung Wah Hospital and Po Leung Kuk. Thus district watchmen were always employed on special duties at the Tung Wah Hospital during outbreaks of plague and the Chinese Public Dispensary Committee used Watchmen to prevent the dumping of bodies in the streets. The Po Leung Kuk's two principal detectives were serving district watchmen at the turn of the century. Co-operation was easy because most members of the District Watch Committee had served or were serving on the committees of the Tung Wah Hospital and Po Leung Kuk. In 1895 head district watchmen were paid $240 a year, assistant head district watchmen $180 and watchmen from $84 to $96. \n\n18 For examples of police corruption in nineteenth century Hong Kong see numerous references in Norton-Kyshe, op. cit. \n\n19 After a distinguished academic career at Edinburgh University, J. H. Stewart Lockhart became a Hong Kong Cadet in 1878; Registrar General in 1887; Colonial Secretary in 1895. In 1902 he was appointed first Civil Commissioner of Weihaiwei and retired from this post in 1921. Among his numerous publications there are several of sinological value. See particularly: 'Contributions to the Folklore of China', China Review, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 352-353 and vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 37-39; also 'Some Chinese Folk-lore', Folk-lore, vol. 14, 1903, pp. 292-298. Lockhart was local secretary in Hong Kong of the International Folk-lore Society. \n\n20 In 1892 new rules were drawn up under Ordinance No. 13 of 1888, with the advice of the Committee, for the regulation and guidance of the watchmen. 'Copies of these rules have been distributed among the contributors of the District Watchmen's Fund, by whom more interest seems to be evinced in and more assistance asked from the force than formerly': See Report of the Registrar General for 1892. Lockhart also persuaded two Chinese newspapers—the Tsun Wan Yat Po and the Wai San Yat Po—to publish weekly lists of cases brought before the magistrate by the District watchmen for the information of subscribers to the District Watchmen's Fund. Lockhart realised that publicity was good for the Committee: he saw that they got it. The report of the Registrar General/Secretary for Chinese Affairs always contained a section on the District Watch and news about members was given: deaths, resignations, appointments, etc. \n\n21 Wei Yuk (1849-1921) was the son of Wei Kwong, compradore to the Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London and China. He was educated at the Government Central School in Hong Kong and in 1867, at the age of 18, became a pupil at the Leicester Stoneygate School and in 1868 of the Dollar Institution, Scotland. He returned to Hong Kong in 1872 to become assistant compradore in the Chartered Mercantile Bank. He succeeded his father on the latter's death in 1879. Wei Yuk married the eldest daughter of Wong Shing (Huang Shêng). He was the fourth Chinese to be appointed to the Legislative Council, the other three being Ng Choy (Wu Ting-fang), Wong Shing and Ho Kai. He was knighted in 1919. During his public career he served on all the commissions appointed by government to inquire into matters affecting the Chinese. Ho Fook (1863-1926) was the younger half-brother of Sir Robert Ho Tung, reputed", "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": 206327, "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": 144, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "138 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nwith a passion for tidiness disliked them intensely. In this case, I suspect, the Registrar General bowed to the will of the Committee. \n\n26 There was a marked tendency for the committees of such associations to grow very large in size-so many affluent Chinese wanted their names recorded as committeemen, and to donate money, without of course doing any committee work. Professor Freedman supplies an explanation for this phenomenon in Singapore: 'Since office-holding occupies a strategic position in the formation of social status, it is not surprising that the structure of associations seems adapted to this function. This adaptation is clear in two features: the elaboration of offices, such that many positions are made available, and the institutional arrangements for filling the offices with the well-to-do', Maurice Freedman, Chinese Marriage and Family in Singapore, London, H.M.S.O., 1957, p. 95. \n\n27 In 1903 the proposed scheme of detectives under the control of the Committee was not approved; but permission was given at a later date, apparently during the First World War and probably because of the shortage of European policemen. \n\n28 In 1938 there were 5 Head District Watchmen, 6 Assistant Head District Watchmen, 26 detectives and 103 uniformed men. The position was approximately the same in 1941. \n\n29 In 1902 the rate paid by Chinese shops was increased slightly and in 1924 it was increased by another 1/4 per cent. \n\n30 Butters writes that the figures which appear annually regarding the cost of living in the report of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs are based on information obtained from the District Watch Force. At my request figures were furnished from the same source showing the cost of living of an ordinary labourer': H. R. Butters, Report on Labour and Labour Conditions in Hong Kong, Sessional Papers, No. 3 of 1939, p. 137. Applications from guilds and trade unions to the Secretary for Chinese Affairs for permission to hold 'sing songs' were granted conditionally on a district watchman attending the meeting to see that nothing unlawful transpired. See Butters, p. 126. The watchmen were always regarded as a source of information about the Chinese population. When the commission on chair and jinricksha coolies attempted to discover whether there was a secret union of public transport workers, the first people they contacted for information about the matter were district watchmen. See Report of the Commission on Chair and Jinricksha Coolies, Sessional Papers, No. 47 of 1901, p. 56. \n\n31 The Registrar General in his report for 1868 made this quite clear: 'the chief object of the Chinese paying these watchmen is to drive away thieves, the cardinal evil of a shop-keeping population, And it is thought that the watchmen succeed, not only in arresting actual offenders, but also in keeping away those who live by pilfering'. \n\n32 These constables were recruited mostly from Weihaiwei, a territory leased to Britain on 1 July, 1898. \n\n33 These facts are taken from the reports of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs for the respective years. \n\n34 See above: note 33. \n\n35 The Lok Sin Tong was an association established by officials and village gentry in Kowloon about 1879 to perform charitable works in the surrounding district. See James Hayes, 'Old ways of Life in Kowloon: The Cheung Sha Wan Villages', Journal of Oriental Studies, vol. viii, 1970, p. 167. The Chung Sing Charitable Society, originally known as the Chung Sing Opera Society, was founded around 1917 by a leading merchant, Tsang Foo. This charity also maintained a free school.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206328, "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": 145, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE DISTRICT WATCH COMMITTEE\n\n139\n\n36 In 1917 there were 31 guilds for employers only (in trades such as silk, sandalwood, wicker furniture and copper), 35 skilled craftsmen guilds (sandalwood workers, masons, tinsmiths, etc.) and 5 guilds with mixed membership (employers and workers). There were also 17 district societies, such as the Heung Shan (Hsiang-shan) resident merchants association and the General Commercial Association of the Tung Kun (Tung-kuan) merchants resident in Hong Kong. See the list of exempted and registered societies in the Gazette, 27 April 1917.\n\n37 Wei Yuk was appointed in 1891 and served until his death in 1929. He resigned several times in order to allow a newcomer to join the Committee but was soon re-appointed. Lau Chu-pak was appointed in 1902 and served until his death in 1922. Sir Shouson Chow was appointed in 1917 and was still a member in 1949, the year of the demise of the Committee.\n\n38 During the years 1929 to 1931 and in 1936 the Committee met four times a year at Government House. Lennox Mills states that members had the right to a guard of the District Watch Force on the occasion of weddings and other festivities'. The Secretary for Chinese Affairs tells us in his report for 1936 that through the kindness of His Excellency the Committee was able to meet the members of the Mui Tsai Commission on the occasion of their first visit to the Colony, 'All members attended and there was a valuable discussion with frank interchange of views'. When the Governor, Sir Henry Blake, left the Colony in 1903 on the day of his departure he inspected the District Watchmen. Clearly, everything was done by the government to give prestige and éclat to the Committee and the force.\n\n19 T. C. Cheng, op. cit., p. 18.\n\n40 Of the Chinese land population in the 1901 census 227,615 returned themselves as natives of Kwangtung Province, 179,296 of this number belonging to the Kwong Chau Prefecture, 28,844 came from Tung-kuan hsien, 28,587 from P'an-yü hsien, and 27,221 from Nan-hai hsien. The situation was substantially the same in the censuses of 1911, 1921 and 1931. In 1911, for example, 311,992 out of 350,418 Chinese in Hong Kong, exclusive of the New Territories, spoke Cantonese,\n\n41 Op. cit., pp. 399-400.\n\n42 Heung Shan, present-day Chung Shan, is the arid county on the west side of the Pearl River, stretching down to Macau. It was the Heung Ha, the Cantonese term for the province, district or village from which each person derives his ancestry, of many prominent Chinese, including Ng Choy (Wu Ting-fang), Yung Wing (Yung Hung), Wong Shing (Huang Shêng), and Sun Yat-sen. Many Chinese merchants in Hong Kong came from this county; for example, Wei Yuk, Ma Ying-piu (founder of the Sincere Company), M. Y. San (before 1941 the largest biscuit manufacturer in China), Tsang Foo, Look Poong-shan (founder of the Bank of Canton). Su Chao-cheng, organiser and leader of the Seamen' Strike in 1922, came from this county; in 1928 Su was elected to the Central Political Bureau of the Chinese Communist Party. The anarchist, Liu Ssu-fu, was also born there. In 1938 the Chung Shan Commercial Association had a membership of over 4,000 in Hong Kong.\n\n43 In 1905, for example, at least seven members of the Committee were compradores to important western firms; one was manager of a native bank; another of a prosperous pawnshop; a third ran a large export firm. Ho Kai was primarily a financier rather than an entrepreneur. See on this point the Chinese speculator Marie-Claire Bergère, \"The Role of the Bourgeoisie' in M. C. Wright, ed., China in Revolution: The First Phase 1900-1913, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1968, p. 236.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206517, "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": 65, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n59\n\nent Chinese he was largely instrumental in reorganizing the District Watchmen Force (a body of watchmen paid for by voluntary subscriptions from the Chinese community) and he obtained the appointment of twelve leading Chinese gentlemen as a supervising committee; he remodelled the Po Leung Kuk (a voluntary association concerned with the welfare of girls and young women); and he helped in the reformation of the Tung Wah Hospital and strengthened its committee of management.11 He was active, then, in setting up a number of official Chinese committees, linked to government through their special relationship with the Registrar General's Department, of which he was head. The Registrar General in all cases was ex officio chairman of the committees.\n\nLockhart's views on the importance of the Chinese element in the population are to be found in a trenchant report he submitted in 1894 to the Governor, Sir William Robinson, 'on the subject of a petition addressed to the House of Commons praying for an amendment of the Constitution of the Crown Colony of Hong Kong.' This petition from Hong Kong taxpayers to the House of Commons owed its origin principally to the imposition upon the taxpayers in 1891 of an additional military contribution of £20,000 a year, a decision that irritated and excited particularly the European business community. In 1894 T.H. Whitehead,13 Unofficial Member of the Legislative Council and leader of the business faction, was granted six months' leave of absence from the Council and he took with him to England a petition signed by 363 members of the community — (in Lockhart's words) ‘284 British, 10 Anglo-Chinese, 3 American, 4 Portuguese, and 47 British Indians.' The petitioners sought the election of representatives of British nationality in the Legislative Council; freedom of debate for the Official members with power to vote as they desired; complete control in the Council over local expenditure; the management of local affairs; and a consultative voice in questions of an Imperial character.\n\nWith great dialectical skill Lockhart took the petition to bits and exposed the vacuity of its arguments. In his memorandum to the Governor he averred: 'Most of the taxes fall almost entirely on the Chinese. The only tax to which the British and other residents as a whole are subject in the same manner as the Chinese is the tax of 13 per cent levied on the rateable value of house", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207747, "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": 135, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "120 \n\nCARL T. SMITH \n\nthe instruction of the Rev. Theodore Hamberg, preparatory to baptism. On 26 April, 1852, Fung Sen introduced Hung Jen-kan to Hamberg. Two days later, Fung was baptized with ten others at the small chapel of the Basel Missionary Society in Hong Kong. The entry in Hamberg's report lists him as \"Fung Asen, aged 21 years, from Lilong, tailor's worker.\" When Hamberg left Hong Kong at the end of March, 1853 to establish a station at Pukak (Pu-kit, Hsin-an District), Fung Sen accompanied him. He was employed by the Mission as a watchman. \n\nA biographical notice of one of the Taiping refugees, Li Tsin-kau (†), which was published in the missionary magazine of the Basel Society, Die Evangelischen Heidenboten, June, 1868, provides interesting sidelights on Hung Jen-kan's unsuccessful effort to reach Nanking in 1854. It also illustrates the connections established between missionaries and those who had been influenced by personal association with Hung Hsiu-ch'uan before he became the Taiping Wang. \n\nLi Tsin-kau was a native of Wo Kuk Lyan, in the Ch'ing-yüan District, Kwangtung. Hung Hsiu-ch'uan had been a teacher in the household of the maternal grandfather of Li Tsin-kau, and Tsin-kau's father was a good friend of Hsiu-ch'uan. He had often heard his father tell of Hung and his visions. Was the father the Li Ching-fan who drew the attention of Hung to Liang A-fa's Christian tract? Hung himself often visited Wo Kuk Lyang. During these visits there would be discussions regarding the moral and political conditions of China and hopes expressed that these could be improved and the rule of Heaven (T’ien-kuo) established. Hung Hsiu-ch'uan and Li Tsin-kau discussed especially the benefits of fasting and abstaining from meats and the worship of idols. Tsin-kau remembered that Hung spoke often of the power of God to conquer the demons. He also spoke of Jesus as our Heavenly Brother who forgave men's sins, but this was not the main theme of Hung's thoughts, \"It was though it had not much touched his heart (“Wenigstens sei es ihm nicht sehr zu Herzen gegangen\"). \n\nLi Tsin-kau was caught up in the displacement of the former friends and relatives of the Taiping leaders. When the authorities frustrated the plan to join the Taiping movement in Kwangsi, he fled to Macao. He lost track of his brothers and father, and later believed that they were imprisoned. His mother was taken in and \n\nPage 135\n\nPage 136", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207754, "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": 142, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "NOTES ON FRIENDS AND RELATIVES OF TAIPING LEADERS 127\n\nstyle befitting relatives of one of the Taiping Kings. To celebrate his second marriage, Dr. Legge and his new wife entertained their Chinese friends and associates at a feast of twelve tables with some thirty courses. Mrs. Legge remarks in a letter dated 24 August, 1860, that “Sy-poe seemed very desirous I should honour his table\n\nWe had a letter from the Rebel King, he congratulates Dr. Legge on his marriage.\" Sy-poe is not mentioned again by the missionaries, but in 1871, Dr. Legge states that his son came to the Mission house requesting a recommendation for the position of a watchman. Legge states, \"He is an honest-looking lad — but alas, that the glory of the Taipings should thus have passed away”\n \nReports in the Archives of the Basel Missionary Society mention Fung Khui-syu, born in 1848, \"son of a Taiping King\". He must be Hung K'uei-yüan alias K'uei-hsiu, the son of Hung Jen-kan.\" He was employed by the Society as a teacher; first on the mainland, but then, because of the danger to him and his family created by his former association with the rebellion, he was removed to Hong Kong to teach in the mission's Girl's School at Sai Ying Poon.\n \nIn 1873 a marriage was arranged by Mrs. Lechler between Fung Khui-syu, then teaching at Tshong-hang-kang in Hsin-an district, and one of the older girls in the Society's boarding school at Hong Kong. The bride Tsen A-lin, alias En-min was an orphan. As a young girl she had been sold by her mother in Shanghai and had been brought to Hong Kong to work in a brothel; but she had been found wandering in the streets by a member of the Basel Society congregation and was brought to the Mission House. In 1865, at the age of twelve, she was enrolled as a student, and was baptized in 1870, when she received the name Lin, meaning compassion, in place of Tchuy-khuyk (Ch'iu-chü), meaning autumn chrysanthemum.\n\nIn 1878 a large part of the congregation of the Basel Mission Church at Shau Kei Wan, Hong Kong, emigrated to Demerara, British Guiana. Fung Khui-syu went with them. The 1885 Yearly Report of the Rev. Lechler states:\n\nIn Georgetown is a Chinese Church and one of our emigrants has been placed there as Pastor. He is the relative of the former rebel king Fung Syu-tshen, and himself, at the time of the Government of Taipings in Nanking, was made king. He found his way to Hong Kong and was received at our table. I sent him", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207900, "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": 288, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n273 \n\njudging a Chinaman's respectability. Hence it regards the Committee as a mouth piece of the people\". However, rabid critics of the Committee in the foreign population claimed membership on the Committee did not necessarily confer respectability or responsibility. It was claimed that \"it is undignified on the part of the Government to treat with the often illiterate managers of a Hospital fund as if they possessed official powers over their fellow countrymen\". (C.M. Dec. 3, 1875). The Governor Sir Arthur Kennedy was charged with extending to \"men whose positions were of the humblest nature, a sort of patronage which vastly inflated their self-conceit.\" (C.M. Nov. 8, 1875). \n\nThese criticisms, however, in no way affected the prestige status given to the Tung Wah Directors by the Chinese community. It recognized the men it elected as those who had fulfilled the achievement standards accepted by the community, \n\nIn time the exclusive prestige value of the Committee was diminished by Government appointment of Chinese representatives on the Legislative Council and the reorganization of the District Watchmen's Committee into a status group. See H.J. Lethbridge, \"The District Watch Committee: \"The Chinese Executive Council of Hong Kong'\", JHKBRAS 11 (1971), pp. 116-141. \n\nThe Tung Wah Committee became responsible on behalf of the Chinese Community for being host to visiting Chinese high officials. A number of the Directors had themselves acquired an imperial degree and hence were of a sufficiently elevated rank to mix socially with their guests. Several of the Directors later entered Chinese government service holding office in the diplomatic corps. \n\nYou will note in some of the museum's old photographs of the Tung Wah functions and in the reproduction of the pictures of the first Committee members that some are dressed in Mandarin costume, wearing the feathers and buttons of the appropriate degree. These they had purchased rather than earned through the literary examination system. Sometime the degree was awarded in recognition of some particularly generous contribution for the welfare of the people of China. Whatever the reason for the degree its recipient was given social deference. Those who had acquired such honours conferred status upon the Tung Wah Committee as a group. \n\nThough in Hong Kong today the Tung Wah Hospital Directorship is not so exclusively the status group of the Chinese community, it is still recognized as a mark of achievement to be sought after.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207904, "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": 292, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n277\n\nIn the face of criticism one of the items discussed at a public meeting held at Tung Wah in 1875 was the question was it \"advisable to have a Kung Soh or Town Hall built so as to separate the functions of the Committee from that of the General Community in order to avoid further criticism\". There was no consensus of agreement on this question at this meeting. Two years earlier the Registrar General had asked the Committee to select two men from each District of Hong Kong to serve as Headmen of the District Watchmen. The Committee had demurred stating that they would like to see a separation of their duties as the Committee of the Hospital and the leaders of the Kai-fong. The Governor agreed that it would be desirable for such a separation -- the occasion was the introduction of the new Hospital Committee to the Governor in July, 1873. So the relation between the Hospital Committee and the Kai-fong leaders had been under discussion for some time, but no definite action was taken. One of the factors seemed to be that for the Kai-fong to function adequately as a separate body from the Tung Wah Committee it needed a proper meeting hall.\n\nAt the time of the discussion concerning separation of the two groups in 1875, a petition was submitted to the Government for the grant of a site at Possession Point on which the Chinese community might build such a Meeting Hall. When the 1876 Committee called on the Governor as was the custom shortly after its election, he said the matter was under consideration. The Chairman of the founding Committee, Mr. Leong On said that they had been obliged to resort to the Hospital as a place of meeting. This had given rise to adverse criticism in the foreign newspaper and they wished to have a meeting house in order to avoid future complaint. However, though the matter was \"under consideration\" by the Government nothing resulted.\n\nAs we have noted one newspaper editor almost from the foundation of the Hospital had grave doubts about the role the Tung Wah Hospital Committee would play as a representative of the Chinese community and its relation to the colonial administration. These misgivings on the part of a segment of the foreign community were not abated by the course of events. An ever growing outcry against the quasi-political activities of the Hospital Committee appeared in the editorials and the correspondence columns of Hong Kong newspapers.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209384, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1982", "page_number": 41, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "19\n\nwelfare director, one women's section director, and adds two new subcommittees, one sanitation director and one football instructor. The same kinds of subcommittees are found in an additional three committees (those for Blocks #16, #19, and #23) but Block #19 has two additional categories of junior police call (three members) and security (nine members), and Block #16 adds that of hygiene. Block #17's MAC has recently formed subcommittees for recreation, general affairs, women's section, and public relations.\n\nWhat do these committees do? Are there any differences with the subcommittee descriptions given earlier? Take, for example, the recreation subcommittee. The MACs of Lok Fu Estate may participate in two kinds of recreational activities, those organized through the District Office and planned for the estate as a whole and those organized by the block itself. The latter are much less common, as many committees do not have enough enthusiastic members to do the organizing nor do they have sufficient funds to pay for the expenses. Picnics are popular in the summer and fall, however, and the residents of many blocks are enthusiastic about outings to local temples to eat vegetarian food. One committee provides summer activities for its resident young people (such as camping trips, chess playing sessions, and table tennis) and a few committees have obtained basketballs and footballs for residents to use. The women's section subcommittee of one block's MAC provides a special service by seeing to the needs of old women living in the block. For example, it helps to pay the electricity bills for those in need and gives general assistance to these older women. The functions of the other subcommittees are generally the same as described.\n\nOne special subcommittee, that for security, is characteristic only of public housing estate Mutual Aid Committees. There, multiple entrances and exits make security a problem. It is true enough that private housing units also have security problems, often serious ones, but in my experience they rarely have patrol teams, relying instead on gates, an occasional watchman or two, or a company-hired professional security team. In the public housing estates, the security subcommittee is usually the one responsible for the neighbourhood security patrols, the regularly-rotating groups of committee members and residents who patrol", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209385, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1982", "page_number": 42, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "20\n\nJANET LEE SCOTT\n\nthe halls and the entrances of the blocks, watching for intruders and generally keeping an eye on the safety of the building. The majority of public housing estates have set up some kinds of patrol, or have had patrols in the past until the setting up of gates made them unnecessary (Scott 1980:38). While these neighbourhood security patrols are extremely common in other estates, there are very few at Lok Fu.\n\nWhy is this? There are a number of possible reasons, beginning with the smaller size of these blocks. Lok Fu Estate is designed on the older Mark I and Mark II structural designs which accommodate fewer people to start with, and recently, a number of blocks have been losing residents to newer estates elsewhere, or to home ownership schemes. In addition, the conversion of many blocks has meant fewer units, and therefore, fewer resident families. Fewer residents suggests fewer problems to many people, and so residents of some blocks do not see the need for a patrol. In addition, the H-shape of the Mark II blocks with outside balconies makes it easier to spot intruders, and makes residents feel safer. It should also be remembered that Lok Fu Estate has a Neighbourhood Police Unit in Block #13, and all the MAC officers are acquainted with its director. In fact, all the chairmen but one stressed again and again how safe and peaceful life was in the blocks. Another reason, one probably more to the point, is that residents of most blocks are simply no longer enthusiastic about patrolling, and they are not willing to give money to pay for the service, even if earlier in the committee's history they had supported such a team. The result has been half-hearted attempts to form patrols, and numerous failures.\n\nFor example, one committee had planned to establish a patrol team, but both interest and funds were insufficient to support it. Committee officers then decided that it would be more effective to hire a watchman for the front gate, but residents would not give money for that either, so up to now nothing has been accomplished. A similar lack of funds (and authority) prevented another committee from starting a patrol team. \"The MAC organizations were mainly set up in 1973, assisted by the City District Office, because public order was very bad at that", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209649, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1982", "page_number": 306, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "284\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nsympathy of all right-thinking Chinese who have not been slow to express their profound abhorrence of the action'. This was certainly true of the Chinese elite. A deputation of forty leading Chinese, including Legislative Councillors, the Director of the Tung Wah Hospital and members of the Committee of the Po Leung Kuk and the District Watchmen's Committee, waited on the Governor two days after the crime to testify to the loyalty of the community and their profound horror at the outrage.\n\nThere is little evidence to show how far such sentiments were widely shared by the rest of society. The only surviving Chinese newspaper made no comment and did not even carry a report of the incident.10 The police intercepted a letter from the landlady of the place where Li had been living in which she mentioned casually that her lodger had fired at the Governor 'and most unfortunately missed him'. At least one man saw a good omen in the affair; an Indian shopkeeper when told the news reportedly smiled and said, “Very good joss. That means there will be prosperity for Hong Kong.”\n\nAny deterrent effect of the sentence passed on Li did not last for long. Four months later the Hong Kong government made a further attempt to outlaw the use of coins minted in Canton by persuading the Tramway company to refuse to accept them. Agitators convinced the public that this was an insult to the new Republican government and a boycott of the tramway began in November, accompanied by widespread intimidation and violence directed against those using the trams and Europeans in general. In December the emergency powers under the Peace Preservation Ordinance were once again brought into force by proclamation.12\n\nOn\n\nLi Hon Hing only served six years of his life sentence.13 On 18 June 1918 Sir Henry May informed the Executive Council that he proposed to pardon the prisoner and order his release from prison. No reason is given in the Minutes of the Council for this act of clemency.19\n\nN. J. MINERS", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211016, "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": 78, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "53\n\nhowever, it is interesting to note that Mok's universe of persons and occupations encompasses such categories, as well as the more pragmatically justified \"Broker\", \"Interpreter\", \"Agent\", \"Magistrate\", \"Justice of the Peace\", \"Compradore\", \"Stone-cutter\", \"Tin-smith\", \"Shroff\", \"Coolie Agent\", et al. It is also interesting to note that the dramatis personae of this section of the book include \"Schoolmaster\", \"Teacher\", \"Horse-boy\", \"Bad man\", \"Fool\", \"Watchman\", \"Porter\", \"Deaf\", \"Convent Sister\", \"Midwife\", various family relations, \"Tenant\", \"Kidnapper\", \"Geomancer\", \"District watchmen\", \"Juggler\", and \"Priest\".\n\nA similar ambivalence, between traditional and modern as well as between East and West, may be detected in other sections of the book. Under \"Stores and Business Shops\", for example, one finds a Bank, Foreign goods shop, Factory, Dispensary, Tobacco store, Hardware dealers, Ship Chandler's store, as well as a Compradore shop, Opium divan, Pawn-broker's shop, and Chinese Bank. Under \"Clothing and Wearing Apparel\", the reader could discover a way to pronounce \"Pyjama\", \"Silk stockings\", \"Breeches\", \"Chemise\", \"Mosquito net\", \"Knickerbockers\", \"Cholera belt\", \"Combination\", \"Pantaloons\", and \"Swallow Tail coat\", while the separate section on \"Chinese Clothes\" introduced him to the pronunciation of such objects as \"Wadded Coat\", \"Mandarin robe\", and \"Queue string\". The section on \"Crockery and Household Articles\" and the separate section on \"Household Articles\" provide an interesting glimpse of some of the personal belongings which Mok Man Cheung assumed would be characteristic of his readership. Such items include \"Wine bottle\", \"Scissors\", \"Tea cup\", \"Tea saucers\", various other pieces of crockery (including a \"Mustard cup\"), \"Nut cracker\", \"Cheese scoop\", \"Pickle fork\", \"Candle stand\", \"Soy stand\", \"Bamboo broom\", \"Feather brush\", \"Red tape\", \"Bay Rum\", \"Hair oil\", \"Powder horn\", \"Bullets\", \"Horse saddle\", \"Dagger\", \"Tooth brush\", \"Tooth pick\", \"Chessmen\", \"Thimble\", \"Gramophone\", \"Telephone\", \"Looking glass\", \"Lamp chimney\", \"Scissors\", and \"Horse whip\". Under \"Court Matters\" and \"Punishments\", the reader could also find traditional modern, Eastern and Western practices intermingled. For example, in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211068, "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": 129, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "104\n\nNorth, South and Number 2 Military Cemeteries in Manila, Los Banos, as well as the Protestant Cemetery.\n\nAs with so many cemeteries elsewhere in poor tropical countries, deterioration was rapid. Torrential rain washed away the soil around graves, grave stones were stolen to be recarved and used elsewhere and the cemetery became a playground for young and old. The Filipino “Chowkidar” (watchman) could do little to stem the decline.\n\nIn July 1973, fourteen years earlier than due, the Cemetery was handed over by the British Consul C.L.F. Parker to the Ayala Corporation, the successors in title to Roxas, who donated P10,000 to help in the transfer of all remains to their new resting place.\n\nThe grave stones said to be historically valuable were turned over to a 'British Association': their present whereabouts are a mystery.\n\nThe site of the old cemetery was developed by the Ayala Corporation, the developers of the \"new town\" of Makati, Manila's business district, into a housing estate for its middle management staff and is now known as Barrio Olympia (Olympia Village).\n\nThe few British graves in the Sual Cemetery, were at last report, being well tended by the local authorities. Sadly however, the Iloilo \"English Cemetery”, (lots 158 and 674) in the very \"heart of the city\" was closed in October 1946 “for the purposes of health and sanitation and as part of the programme of beautifying the City of Iloilo”, but the British Protestant remains lie peacefully in Southern Manila.\n\nAuthor's acknowledgement:\n\nI am indebted to several people for assistance in these brief and I am sure, not fully comprehensive notes; in particular, Father Gabriel Casal and Carlos Quirino of the Ayala Museum, Dr. Serafin Quiason of the Philippines National Library and Peter Karmy of the British Embassy in Manila.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211097, "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": 158, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "133\n\nIn the opinion of the speaker, carrying a lamp was no check to crime. The measures for securing a peaceful community lay elsewhere. He asked: \"How can a lamp prevent robbery? Cannot a thief carry a lamp? Is it because one case of robbery with violence has occurred in the course of a few years that the lamp law has been enforced?\" He clearly felt the law did not achieve its purpose.\n\nCurtailment of crime could not be expected from carrying lamps and passes. This was the responsibility of the police. Ho A-mei said bluntly: \"I think the police are more to blame, because they failed to arrest those who committed the robbery. (Applause). The police do not give us sufficient protection; that is why we have our own district watchmen, in Wing Lok Street for instance, and yet we have to pay for the police as well.”\n\nThe speaker then launched out to describe the way the regulation had affected business since a policy of rigid enforcement had been inaugurated: \"Considerably fewer people visit the eating houses at night and, of course, as the business decreases so the supply of sharks' fins, etc, by the Nam Pak Hongs decreases; in fact, there is a general deadlock in every branch of trade.\" The enforcement not only curbed social activities, it also had adversely affected business.\n\nHe suggests that if no action on the matter was forthcoming from the Hongkong Government, then the matter must be put directly to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, “and we must ask that in future all ordinances passed in the Colony shall have a general effect and that they shall not aim at the Chinese alone.”\n\nThe meeting had been called to rally support for Mr. Ho Tung's petition against the regulations. No reply to the petition had been received, and Ho A-mei said that he had heard “that it was suggested to the Government that the movement was only an agitation on the part of a few members of the community, and that the petition was signed only at their request.”\n\nThis the speaker denied. “But, I say, Gentlemen, you did not sign the petition simply at the request of Mr. Ho Tung; you signed it in the public streets knowing what the contents were.”", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211158, "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": 219, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "194\n\nResponsibility for the general welfare of the Chinese in Hong Kong was assumed by the hospital directors past and present.\n\nTheir espousal of Chinese causes led them into conflict with certain European interests. It was felt they wielded too much influence over the Chinese. Their connections with Chinese authorities also caused alarm.\n\nMany aspects of life and business of the Chinese in Hong Kong were connected with China, hence, there were many occasions when it was necessary to correspond and negotiate with Chinese officials.\n\nThere was sharp criticism in the English language press against the committee for taking upon itself matters which were considered to be the proper concern of the Hong Kong Government.\n\nBecause of this, a public meeting was held at the hospital in 1875 to discuss whether it was “advisable to have a Kung Soh or Town Hall built so as to separate the functions of the committee from that of the general community in order to avoid further criticism.\" There was no consensus of opinion on the matter.\n\nTwo years earlier, the Registrar General, who was responsible for relations between the Government and the Chinese, had asked the Tung Wah Hospital Committee to select two men from each district of the city to serve as headmen of the district watchmen.\n\nThe Committee had demurred stating it would like to see a separation of their duties as the committee of the hospital and as leaders of the kaifong. The Governor agreed that a separation was desirable.\n\nOne of the difficulties was that if the functions of the two groups were to be separated, as most felt should be done, the kaifong needed a proper meeting place.\n\nAt the time of the discussion concerning the desirability of separating hospital matters from general community affairs in 1875, the Chinese submitted a petition to the Government asking", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213504, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1995", "page_number": 100, "title": "RAS-1995", "content_text": "68\n\nsubdivided into a number of cubicles and sublet to a number of households or families. In the district, examples of over 25 people clustered into a living space of 600 square feet could be found easily. The great density and the serious overcrowding had become a matter of great concern. In 1890, an exhaustive report on the subject was submitted to the Government. However, no strong action was taken after that. In that report, an enumeration of the people of the district by the method of verbal inquiry, which could only be assumed as fairly accurate, had been made by the Chinese District Watchmen. A table (Table 2) has been drawn up to show the difference between the figures of the Overcrowding Report and that of the Census.\n\nThe question of insanitary conditions in Sai Ying Pun had also excited attention for a long time. The houses in the district were usually built back to back. The rooms were dark, damp, and badly ventilated. Very few houses had been cleaned or whitewashed inside since they were built. Latrines and dustbins seldom existed in those houses. A large proportion of the houses in the district had the old-fashioned drains which were built of bricks. As the old bricks rotted away, the sewers collapsed and blocked the pipes. Furthermore, a number of houses were converted or used as storage for grains and other goods. These contained an enormous number of rats and cockroaches. In 1881, the Government had decided to seek the service of a sanitary engineer, Osbert Chadwick, to advise as to the sanitary conditions of Hong Kong. A year later, he made a special report and proposed a number of sweeping changes, which included the provision of open spaces at the rear of buildings, of a window in every habitable room, and of 600 cu. ft. of unobstructed space for each adult in rooms divided into cabins, and the layout of roads and drains before the building lots were offered for sale. A Sanitary Board was set up in 1883, but it had only limited powers because of the stiff resistance from the Chinese as well as European property owners and the laissez-faire attitude of the government. The Public Health Ordinance of 1887, which, among other things, provided for the reservation of open spaces at the rear of buildings and the fixing of a minimum standard of 300 cu. ft. of internal living space per adult, and a clause in 1889 whereby mezzanine floors could only be constructed if provision were made for a vertical clearance of 5 ft. above and below, were also met with great opposition from the Chinese.\n\nThe insanitary conditions and the inevitable direct human contacts", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213730, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1996", "page_number": 83, "title": "RAS-1996", "content_text": "54\n\nTable 22\n\nOccupations of Males. Northern District. 1921\n\n \n Occupation\n No. of Males\n \n \n \n Agricultural occupations.\n 25306\n 78.8%\n \n \n Fishing\n 3268\n 9.4%\n \n \n Masons and allied trades\n 378\n 1.1%\n \n \n Lime burners and dealers.\n 20\n 0.1%\n \n \n Buck/tile makers\n 93\n 0.3%\n \n \n Oil pressers and dealers\n 104\n 0.3%\n \n \n Boat builders\n 42\n 0.1%\n \n \n Carpenters and allied trades\n 249\n 0.7%\n \n \n Blacksmiths/other metal-workers.\n 56\n 0.2%\n \n \n Jewellers\n 52\n 0.1%\n \n \n Basketry and rattan makers and dealers\n 41\n 0.1%\n \n \n Other artisans &\n 55\n 0.2%\n \n \n Weavers\n \n 0.0%\n \n \n Sail makers\n 10\n 0.0%\n \n \n Other textile workers.\n 7\n 0.0%\n \n \n Tailors, cobblers and allied trades\n 325\n 0.9%\n \n \n Dealers in foodstuffs (See Table 22)\n 952\n 2.7%\n \n \n Dealers in wine\n 58\n 0.2%\n \n \n Builders.\n 55\n 0.2%\n \n \n Fuel dealers\n 40\n 0.1%\n \n \n Land transport workers (rail and road)\n 119\n 0.3%\n \n \n Boatmen (See Table 24)\n 371\n 1.1%\n \n \n Sailors on foreign ships and steam launches\n 841\n 2.4%\n \n \n Dockyard workers\n 20\n 0.1%\n \n \n Tobacco dealers\n 25\n 0.1%\n \n \n Doctors, dentists and medicine dealers\n 124\n 0.4%\n \n \n Opium sellers\n 4\n 0.0%\n \n \n Pawnbrokers\n 5\n 0.0%\n \n \n Other shop workers#\n 392\n 1.1%\n \n \n Hawkers, coolies, general labourers\n 886\n 2.6%\n \n \n Government service\n 63\n 0.2%\n \n \n Interpreters\n 1\n 0.0%\n \n \n Teachers\n 192\n 0.6%\n \n \n Vets, lawyers, artists\n 3\n 0.0%\n \n \n Actors, musicians\n 8\n 0.0%\n \n \n Religious, fortune tellers, geomancers, temple keepers\n 114\n 0.3%\n \n \n Domestic servants\n 23\n 0.1%\n \n \n Barbers\n 88\n 0.3%\n \n \n Cooks\n 266\n 0.8%\n \n \n Restaurant, teahouse, guesthouse workers\n 42\n 0.1%\n \n \n Laundrymen\n 2\n 0.0%\n \n \n Watchmen and miscellaneous\n 31\n 0.1%\n \n \n Total\n 34753\n 100%\n \n\n* Includes engineers, motor car repairers, scissors grinders, paper makers\n\n* Some masons and allied trades were in the building trade as well\n\n# Includes cork dealers, paper dealers, joss stick makers and dealers, umbrella makers, straw coat makers, various brokers, money changers, buyers, clerks, salesmen, shop assistants, shop accountants, shop masters, weighers", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1996.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/3n209j641", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214375, "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": 233, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "199\n\nTHE DISTRICT WATCH FORCE\n\nSHEILAH HAMILTON\n\nIn general the Force now appears to the Police to be an unwelcome anachronism, to the Chinese population to perpetuate a valued tradition, and to all civil servants not serving in the Secretariat of Chinese Affairs (as well as some who are) as an imperfectly comprehended mystery.\n\nIn the 1960s the Secretary for Chinese Affairs, Mr John C. McDouall, described the District Watch Force in the above terms. This telling statement by the Government official in charge of the District Watch between 1957 and 1966 illustrates the opposing views held about the 'Force' by various sections of Hong Kong society. Indeed, the solo use of the word 'Force,' without its more familiar qualification, 'Hong Kong Police', would have been an anathema to many members of the Hong Kong Police Force whose officers considered that they, and only they, represented the true 'Force.' This 'them and us' notion neatly illustrates the problems faced by the District Watch Force throughout its long history.\n\nIn 1971 the sociologist Henry Lethbridge contributed a paper about the District Watch Committee to the Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society and, seven years later, it was reproduced as a chapter in his book Hong Kong: Stability and Change.2 Although these early works included the District Watchmen and their duties, their main thrust was the political significance of the District Watch Committee rather than a commentary on the work of the lowly Watchmen and, in the years that followed, the contribution of this band of local private security personnel has received little attention. This paper examines the birth and development of the District Watch Force, a group of Chinese men who may be regarded as comprising the first organised body of Chinese private security personnel employed in Hong Kong. More specifically, it explores the interaction between the Hong Kong Government and the District Watch Force.3\n\nThe District Watch Force existed, in fact if not in name, for more than a century between 1866 and 1970. During this period it", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214376, "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": 234, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "200\n\nunderwent many changes both in scope and organization. However, one thing which remained constant throughout its life was its racial composition. It was always a Chinese force. As such, in the context of the colony's private security heritage, it is an important organization even though its numbers never exceeded 160. Not surprisingly, because of its traditional origins, it was also a gendered 'Force' and no District Watchwomen were ever employed even when, in 1949, women were permitted to join the Hong Kong Police.\n\nEarly Days\n\nThere is little doubt that in the 1860s the growing number of wealthy Chinese merchants residing in Hong Kong required the services of a security force since this was not provided by the Hong Kong Police. Lethbridge claimed that by the mid-1860s there were 'numerous private watchmen and street guards already employed by merchants, shopkeepers, householders and Kaifong. The need for these private security personnel was distressingly obvious. Members of the regular police force, which was composed mostly of European and Indian policemen with a few Chinese, were more concerned with the safety of the European dominated central business district of the city than with the protection of the occupants of the Chinese quarter. Language was another barrier since most of the non-Chinese police were unable to speak Cantonese, a situation which made effective communication with the local population an impossibility. However, even if the Hong Kong Government had possessed the funds, manpower and inclination to provide the Chinese quarter with sufficient policemen, it is debatable whether the Hong Kong Chinese merchants of the 1860s would have welcomed the attention of members of the predominately foreign Hong Kong Police. It is more likely that they would have resented men of an alien culture intruding into their business and private lives even if this resulted in a decrease in crime. The ideal solution to this local security problem was a 'police force' made up of Chinese men whom the merchants knew and could trust.\n\nAt the beginning of 1866 in the weeks before Chinese New Year, Hong Kong's English language newspapers reported rumours of unrest in Canton.3 There was also considerable alarm that an uprising would spread to the colony but this fear proved to be unfounded. Whether these rumours were 'massaged' to suggest a more serious state", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214377, "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": 235, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "201\n\nof affairs is not known but it is a possibility which cannot be discounted entirely. What is beyond dispute is that these widely publicized fears were used by the leaders of the Chinese community as a reason to petition the Government for permission to organise a force of Chinese watchmen who would help the public police. The scheme received the blessing of the Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, though it met with less than wholehearted approval from some other members of the administration, most notably the Chief Justice, Sir John Smale. The feature of the plan which appealed most to Government officials was its economy. Since the expenses of operating the scheme would be borne by the Chinese merchants, the Government would not need to spend any money yet it would, in effect, gain additional police constables.\n\n\"The Victoria Registration Ordinance 1866\" (No. 7 of 1866) provided the authorization for the formation of this body of men and came into effect on 1 January 1867. By its provisions the Governor, on the recommendations of the inhabitants of a particular District, could appoint a Chief Watchman and Watchmen who were under the control of the Registrar General and had the same powers as a constable. Thus, although both the words 'District' and 'Watchmen' appeared in the Ordinance, the combination 'District Watchmen' was not used. Two of the most informative early accounts of the District Watch Force appeared in the Registrar General's Reports for 1867 and 1868. In 1867 the Registrar General's post was held by a young Cadet Officer, Cecil C. Smith, who also acted as Colonial Secretary whilst in 1868 Alfred Lister, a Cadet with even less experience, acted as Registrar General. From the tenor of the earlier report it seems that Smith favoured the establishment of 'a body of men acting as a help to the Police Force.' The introduction of the scheme was not easy and 'Much jealousy was at first displayed as to the powers which were to be exercised in controlling the Watchmen.' Although the wording is ambiguous and the sentiments could have applied equally to some Europeans, the tone of the following sections of Smith's report suggest that this 'jealousy' prevailed within the Chinese community. This political in-fighting amongst the Chinese merchants and shopkeepers had long-lasting consequences for the future direction of the watchmen and undoubtedly led to the subordinate position of the Chinese in its operation.\n\nAs had occurred with earlier attempts to give the local population", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "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": 214380, "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": 238, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "204\n\nIn the late 1860s the regular police came in for massive criticism because of claims of corruption and general inefficiency. As a result of public and other concerns, a Commission of Enquiry was convened in December 1871 to inquire into and report as to the present organization of the Police Force generally, and to suggest such improvements and reforms therein as may be thought expedient by this Commission.'10 Although the Commission's main raison d'être centred around the many defects of the Hong Kong Police, its ambit also included the District Watch Force. Thus, in the last days of his Governorship, MacDonnell tasked the Commission to 'report as to the expediency of continuing to maintain, with Chinese co-operation and pecuniary aid, the auxiliary force of District Watchmen,' and to determine whether the latter body 'has rendered any essential or useful service to the Colony, also whether, as at present controlled, there is any danger to be apprehended practically from allowing such a force to be maintained'. The pseudo-apologetic language used by the outgoing Governor suggests that the community still contained many who wished that the force of District Watchmen would just quietly disappear or at least be swallowed up by the Police Force.\n\nThe Commission's Report was finally published on 27 June 1872, by which time Sir Arthur Kennedy had succeeded MacDonnell as Governor. It was a lengthy document, and the District Watch Force seemed to be one of the least contentious issues, with the majority view holding that they were 'a useful body of men.' The Commission recommended that they should be left alone for the present, but, with the reorganization of the regular Police, 'they should be gradually disbanded or absorbed into the latter force.'11\n\nSanitary Matters and the District Watch\n\nMany books about Hong Kong have documented the problems which have existed in sanitary matters since the colony's earliest days. Indeed, the lamentable lack of adequate sanitation was one of the main reasons cited for the high loss of life in the military and the police. Throughout the years, the considerable growth in population was accompanied by a corresponding increase in waste materials of all kinds. Despite the directions of the Building Ordinance, No. 8 of 1856, that 'every house should be provided with a latrine, or privy and ashpit,' no adequate sewage system existed, and there was a general reluctance to", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214382, "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": 240, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "206 \n\nnot only recommended changes but tried to respect the sensibilities of the Chinese community. His hard-hitting report to the Colonial Office described how 'the dwellings of the Chinese working classes are inconvenient, filthy and unwholesome. Accumulations of filth occur in and around them, both above ground, and below ground, in the drains, especially in the latter.' In Chadwick's opinion it was unfair to condemn the Chinese as being 'a hopelessly filthy race till they have been provided with reasonable means for cleanliness. Furthermore, it was the Government's duty to see that these means were provided and applied. There was also 'the strongest necessity for inspection and supervision, especially whilst the new conditions are being introduced.' Chadwick had very definite opinions about the type of person who should perform these inspections. He noted that the existing sanitary staff, under the joint orders of the Colonial Surgeon and the Surveyor General, consisted of only one head and three sub-inspectors and, because these men were drawn from the same class as police sergeants, they commanded very little respect from the Chinese community. Additionally, their inability to speak Cantonese and the resulting reliance on interpreters caused frequent problems. Chadwick's solution was to introduce a post of Sanitary Officer under the control of the Registrar General. In Chadwick's view it was vital that this position was filled by a man who was not already engaged in other Government work and he considered an annual salary of £400-£500 to be appropriate.\n\nThere was another reason why the proposed Sanitary Officer should report to the Registrar General rather than either the Colonial Surgeon or the Surveyor General and that was the existence of the District Watch Force. Although Chadwick was well aware that the duties of the District Watchmen 'were connected with the preservation of order only,' he perceived the District Watch Force to be 'a powerful apparatus for enforcing sanitary law.' This would get around the problem of Chinese people objecting to foreigners entering their homes. He proposed that 'their powers should be extended to include cleanliness as well as order' and 'if necessary, their numbers might be increased, and an addition made by Government to their salary, which is now paid wholly by the people of the district.' In case any further justification was required, Chadwick also stated in his report that the idea of having the District Watchmen perform these duties 'was suggested to me by the Chinese.' He omitted to specify which particular Chinese made this suggestion. The notion that 'the Chinese' thought as one and had no individual\n\nPage 240\n\nPage 241", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214383, "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": 241, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "207\n\nideas prevailed for many years amongst even the more enlightened Europeans. Since Chadwick did not identify the Chinese inhabitants who approved of the plan, it is not possible to determine from his report whether the proposed changes in the District Watchmen's duties had the backing of the Chinese merchants who paid for their services. However, what is indisputable is that a Notification appeared in the Government Gazette on 21 April 1883 about the formation of a Sanitary Board. Chadwick's crusade for the inclusion of a dedicated Sanitary Officer was ignored and the Board comprised the Surveyor General, the Registrar General, the Colonial Surgeon and the Sanitary Inspector. The Notice stated that the Sanitary Board would be assisted by the following staff:\n\n1 Coloured Watchman for the Peak District;\n\n2 Head District Watchmen for Western;\n\n12 District Watchmen for Western;\n\n2 Head District Watchmen and 12 District Watchmen for Central District;\n\n2 Head District Watchmen and 12 District Watchmen for Eastern District.\n\nThis was the entire District Watch Force.\n\nLess than two months after the publication of this Notification, an Ordinance was enacted on 1 June 1883 entitled \"The Order and Cleanliness Amendment Ordinance, 1883\" (No. 7 of 1883). This allowed the Governor 'to constitute a permanent Sanitary Board to exercise supervision and control over all matters connected with sanitation in the Colony.' Whilst the District Watchmen were not mentioned by name, the ordinance stated that the Governor could, from time to time, appoint and remove 'such officers as the Board may require for the purpose of carrying out the duties of the Board and the laws relating to sanitation.' Ten days later the 'Instructions' to the various groups of people involved in the 'Maintenance of Order and Cleanliness' were published in the Government Gazette. The Instructions to the Se-\n\n13\n\nof", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214384, "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": 242, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "208\n\nnior Inspector of Nuisances' and the 'Instructions to Head Watchmen and Watchmen' are of importance in this current study and, since the duties of the Watchmen contained in these instructions are so different from those originally envisaged by the creators of the District Watch scheme, their relevant parts are reproduced at the end of this paper.\n\nBefore continuing with a discussion of the District Watchmen's role in sanitary inspections, some explanation of the word 'nuisance' is appropriate. In the context of Victorian Britain, the term 'nuisance' implied something much more than the modern milder meaning of 'pest' or 'irritant.' 'Nuisance' was a general term to describe anything noxious which would offend the senses, whether these were sight, sound, smell or touch. Brenda Yeoh, in her study of colonial Singapore, describes it as 'an elastic term which encompassed many possibilities from filthy premises to undesirable animals.' She further mentions the comprehensive list of nuisances in The Acts and Ordinances of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements from 1st April 1867 to 1st June 1886 compiled by Mr C.G. Garrad which extended over two pages. Given the graver meaning of the term in the nineteenth century, it can be seen that the post of Inspector of Nuisances was much more important than might be regarded today from its title. Inspectors of Nuisances were found throughout the British Empire and also in the Treaty Port of Shanghai.\n\n14\n\nReturning to the removal of the District Watchmen to undertake sanitary duties, what we have here is the appropriation by the Hong Kong Government of the whole of an existing viable private security force to be used by the Government for a completely different function. Moreover, this change would incur the Government in only minimal additional expense since the bulk of the watchmen's wages would still be met by the Chinese merchants. There can be no doubt that the plan was put into operation since, in the Blue Books for 1883-85, a total of six Head District Watchmen and thirty-seven District Watchmen appeared under the heading of Sanitary (a sub-heading under Public Works Department) at an annual cost to the Government of $24 for each Head District Watchman and $12 for each District Watchman. During these three years the Chinese merchants continued to provide these men with an annual wage of $180, in the case of a Head District Watchmen, and $72 per annum for each District Watchman. The following year there appears to have been a change in policy because, in the 1886 Blue", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214385, "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": 243, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "209\n\nBook, no District Watchmen appeared under the Sanitary sub-department.\n\nWhy were the District Watchmen employed in sanitary duties for only three years? It is tempting to suggest that one reason was because the Chinese merchants were not prepared to continue paying for a scheme which should have been funded by the Government and, by 1886, the merchants finally had found sufficient courage to make their point. After all, the entire force of District Watchmen was involved with sanitary work, which left no District Watchmen available for purely security functions. The rules issued by Government were very specific about where loyalty was expected to lie since all the Watchmen ‘must understand that their sanitary duties are of equal importance with their police duties.' In case any Watchman was left in any doubt, there was a final sting in the tail. The rules further warned the Watchmen that “if the Government does not receive from them that hearty co-operation and assistance in the detection of nuisances which it has the right to expect, such of them as may be found neglectful of their duties or otherwise inefficient shall be reported to the Registrar General for dismissal.'\n\nA less likely reason is that the Watchmen themselves did not wish to continue working in what must have been an unpleasant and uncomfortable atmosphere. However, even if this were the case, it is unlikely that these objections would have carried much weight with the Hong Kong Government. Undoubtedly, the Head District Watchmen, who had been in charge of the day-to-day running of their respective 'branches' for many years, would not have taken kindly to being instructed by Inspectors of Nuisances and would have viewed this as a loss of 'face.' For all their elevated title, these 'inspectors' were simply police sergeants in different clothing. Despite Chadwick's contention that the Chinese were ‘a most docile people ... accustomed for countless generations to implicit submission to authority,' the Government officials responsible for the changeover may have anticipated trouble if there was direct contact between the ordinary Watchmen and the Inspectors of Nuisances since the rules stated that 'The Inspectors of Nuisances shall avoid, except in cases of emergency, giving any instructions to the Watchmen direct.' The chain of command was Inspector of Nuisance: Chief District Watchmen: District Watchmen. The answer may even lie in the crime figures for these years. In 1883, minor crimes increased by 41.5% over the previous year's figure and a further 43.4%", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214386, "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": 244, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "210 \n\nincrease in offences of a less serious nature was reported in 1884. Yet another possible reason for the brief presence of the District Watchmen as sanitary workers may be found in Chadwick's own words since he stated that the need for proper checking was most important 'whilst the new conditions are being introduced.' \n\nIn light of the foregoing it is interesting to note that in October 1885 a short Rule appeared in the Government Gazette relating to the transfer of District Watchmen. This was a Rule, made by the Registrar General under Section 14 of Ordinance 7 of 1866, whereby 'The Registrar General shall be empowered to transfer the Watchmen of the various Districts including the Chief Watchmen, from time to time as may seem to him expedient.' It is unclear from the wording of the rule whether this transfer referred merely to the movement of District Watchmen from one location to another or whether it legitimized the transfer of the Watchmen from one kind of duty to another. If the latter, this may have been intended to refer to the transfer of the District Watchmen from security work to sanitary duties. If this was the intention it is peculiar that the timing of the publication of this Rule coincided with the end rather than the beginning of the District Watchmen's involvement in sanitary duties. \n\nPerhaps the reason for their removal from sanitary duties was not recorded and what is most important in the context of this study is that it was a successful, if short lived, attempt to transfer a group of people from the private sector to the public domain and change their working conditions in a major way. We have seen that the District Watch Force was created for a very specific reason, namely to provide proper protection for a particular ethnic group within Hong Kong society which was not being served by the public police. Since official enquiries into the efficiency of the Hong Kong Police Force had confirmed the latter's shortcomings in 1872, there can be little doubt that in the early 1880s a need still existed for the District Watch Force as a security force. Additionally, the Chinese business folks almost certainly still preferred having their own people patrolling their streets rather than members of the Police Force. Perhaps in 1883 the merchants employing the District Watchmen were neither strong enough nor motivated enough to refuse to co-operate in Chadwick's scheme. After all the District Watch Committee was not formed until nearly a decade after Chadwick's report was published and thus the power exerted by this Committee in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214387, "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": 245, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "211\n\nfuture years was missing in 1881, a point made by Elizabeth Sinn in her study of the Tung Wah Hospital15\n\nNew Legislation - 1888\n\nIn March 1888 \"The Regulation of Chinese Ordinance' (No. 13 of 1888) was introduced under the governorship of Sir William Des Voeux. Chapter IV of this Bill related to the District Watchmen and was entitled appropriately 'District Watchmen.' Despite the passage of more than two decades, the wording of the new ordinance was almost the same as the 1866 version referred to earlier. A few years later James H. Stewart Lockhart, who occupied the combined posts of Registrar General and Colonial Secretary, recommended the establishment of a board of prominent Chinese men to oversee the running of the District Watch Force. He appears to have been encouraged greatly in this endeavour by Wei Yuk, the rich comprador of the Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London and China. Thus at the end of 1890, General Barker, the acting Governor, appointed a group of twelve Chinese gentlemen as a committee to co-operate with the Registrar General's Department in the administration of the District Watch fund. In his annual report of 1892 Lockhart, in his capacity of Registrar General, stated that the introduction of this Committee had been a resounding success. He also maintained that, not only had the Committee proved to be of great assistance in increasing the efficiency of the District Watchmen's Fund because of being able to exercise closer supervision, 'it has also by its advice on several important questions connected with the affairs of the Chinese community been a great help to this Department.' However, despite the creation of the twelve-man Committee, the Government's control over the District Watch Force did not diminish. On the contrary, Lockhart noted that 'New Rules were drawn up under Ordinance 13 of 1888, Chapter IV, Section 19, with the advice of the Committee, for the regulation and guidance of the District Watchmen, and approved by the Governor on Council. Copies of these rules have been distributed among the contributors of the District Watchmen's Fund, by whom more interest seems to be evinced in and more assistance asked from the Force than formerly.'17 The newly formed Committee was concerned about the state of the Force and during 1892 new pay scales were considered. As a result of these increases it was hoped that a 'better class of recruits' could be enticed to join the Force.", "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": 214389, "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": 247, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "213\n\nWatchmen and six Assistant Head District Watchmen. In 1900 the Force became even more entwined with the Government when the latter, after several years of deliberation, finally granted a site for a Central Watch-house on the Taipingshan Resumption Area and promised a contribution of $1,000 towards the cost of its construction. Whilst this house was intended to accommodate the Watchmen of Districts 3, 4, 5 and 6, the premises were to include quarters for two European sergeants. When the building was completed in August 1902, far from being merely a house to accommodate the Watchmen, the quarters on the top floor were described as being 'sufficient for the accommodation of one married European Police Sergeant or for two unmarried Sergeants, who will be placed there by the Captain Superintendent of Police.' In 1903, two years earlier than anticipated by Mr A. M. Thomson, the allocation of an annual Government Grant of $2,000 was resumed and remained in force until 1936 when it was reduced to $100 p.a. because this was 'considered sufficient.'\n\nIn 1904 a further thirteen District Watchmen's posts were added and the reasons behind this increase illustrate, once again, the influence which the Hong Kong Government exerted over this force of supposedly private security men. According to the section of the Registrar General's Report of 1904 dealing with the performance of the District Watch Force, 'During the year 1904 the Force had been increased by thirteen men consequent on an understanding come to with the Government by which a piece of land in the Eastern part of the town was given as a site for a District Watchmen's House on condition that the number of the Force was increased.' Stripped of the convoluted language, this meant that the District Watch Committee had to agree to the employment of more Watchmen if they wanted the extra space. The cost of building the quarters in Stone Nullah Lane near Wanchai Market was to be $4,000 and a contract to that effect was drawn up. In the same annual report the Registrar General noted rather critically that the condition of the Force during the year was not quite satisfactory. Because of the difficulties in attracting and retaining good men, a pay rise was introduced in August 1904 which brought the pay scale into line with that of the Chinese Police. Problems concerning remuneration were nothing new. In April 1897 an allowance of $2 per month was awarded to each Watchman because of the high price of rice but even this was insufficient to entice good quality men into the Force during 1901. By 1908 the total number of personnel in the Force ex-", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214390, "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": 248, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "214\n\nceeded one hundred and the same year two District Watchmen were deployed to work in the emigration sub-division of the Registrar General's Department. During 1910 and 1911 it was felt necessary to employ 124 District Watchmen of different ranks but in 1912 the number was reduced to one hundred and remained unchanged until 1924.\n\nExpansion into Kowloon\n\nSince its formation in 1866 the District Watch Force had operated only on Hong Kong island. In May 1915 this changed when the new District Watchmen Station at Yaumati was opened and six District Watchmen were 'sent over.' In 1913, following the addition of a Cadet officer to the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs, the Government decided to expand the duties of the District Watchmen to include work connected with the registration of householders under the Registration of Chinese Ordinance. Perhaps the Government felt some apprehension that those responsible for paying for the Watchmen's services might balk at the addition of these duties because the Financial Secretary, in presenting this matter to the Legislative Council, maintained that this work 'if efficiently carried out should be of great value in checking serious crime in the Colony.' It is also clear from this speech that these extra responsibilities had required the expansion of the Force into Kowloon.19 Despite the fact that Legislative Councillors were only advised about these additional duties in October 1913, it is clear from the Annual Report of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs that the District Watchmen had begun making house calls in connection with the registration campaign at the beginning of May 1913. Daily reports were made by the Chief District Watchmen to the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs and the Police were informed immediately about the large number of opium divans and sly brothels which the District Watchmen's investigations uncovered. Thus, once again, the Hong Kong Government appropriated men from this privately funded organization to carry out work which was essentially public in nature.\n\nBetween 1897 and 1918 the District Watchmen continued to patrol on police beats under the supervision of European police. The following year saw an important change in the supervision of the District Watch Force, one that would bring its members into even closer contact with the regular police. At the end of 1919 Police Sergeant Timo-", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214391, "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": 249, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "215\n\nthy Murphy was seconded from the Police to take charge of the twenty-three detectives in the District Watch Force. The official report of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs for that year enthusiastically noted that 'His work at once had the effect of inspiring the men to greater energy and of fostering co-operation with the Regular detectives' and 'A marked improvement in this department may confidently be expected under the new system.' In 1919 Sergeant Murphy, a Cantonese speaker, had sixteen years experience in the Hong Kong Police. The following year Murphy was promoted to sub-Inspector but despite his promotion he remained with the District Watch Force until January 1922 by which time he had attained the rank of Inspector. Of course detectives had existed in the District Watch Force before 1918. As early as 1894 a single detective appeared in the Registrar General's Annual Report. In 1910 the annual bill for allowances to 'Chief District Watchmen and detectives' amounted to $514 but it was not until 1911 that detectives' wages were listed as a separate item amounting to $1,212.\n\nTroubled Times\n\nIn 1922 the colony reeled from the disruption caused by a massive seamen's strike which spread to involve Chinese men and women in other occupations including the Governor's own domestic servants. The Governor, Sir Reginald Stubbs, commissioned Mr A.G.M. Fletcher, CBE, to investigate the background of the strike and to determine why the intimidation tactics of the strikers had been so successful. The resulting report together with a long covering letter from the Governor were forwarded to the Secretary of State in mid-March 1922. Stubbs was highly critical of the leading members of the Chinese community including members of the District Watch Committee who, he claimed, had not been of the 'slightest use' in either 'calming the fears of the ignorant populace' or obtaining information which would have enabled the Government to deal with intimidation. It was Stubbs' opinion that the information departments of both the Police and the Secretary for Chinese Affairs should be 'drastically reorganized.'20 Fletcher had harsh words for the District Watchmen and considered them to be 'entirely useless' when it came to collecting information about the causes of intimidation since the Watchmen 'must have had the amplest evidence available.' Whilst agreeing with Fletcher in principle, Stubbs downplayed the deficiencies of the Watchmen citing their lowly status as a probable reason for their poor performance. Given the critical tone", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214393, "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": 251, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "Closer Liaison with the Hong Kong Government \n\n217 \n\nIn the early 1920s, due ostensibly to the increase in population and rapid development of the colony, it was decided to increase the number of District Watchmen and also develop closer liaison with the regular police. During 1924 an additional twenty men were added to the establishment of the District Watch Force bringing it to 122. At the same time a police sergeant was detached from normal police work and placed in charge of the 'regular duties and non-detective members of the Force.' With the benefit of hindsight it is not unreasonable to suggest that the decision to develop more formal contact with the regular Police was due, at least in part, to decisions at the highest level to regulate the District Watch Force following the criticisms associated with its performance during the seaman's strike. However, despite this closer association with the Hong Kong Police, the official reports of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs continued to stress that the essential character of the District Watch Force had in no way been sacrificed.' A police officer of inspectorate rank continued to be in charge of the detective branch of the Force and continuity was achieved by having the same inspector as liaison officer. Still closer association with the regular Police Force occurred around 1922 when the District Watchmen started attending the Police Training School and were also armed. Since 1889 there had existed special provision under successive Arms and Ammunition ordinances for District Watchmen to be exempt from requiring licences in the same way as the Police and the Military. During 1925 some additional changes occurred within the Force with particular reference to their employment in Kowloon. Work commenced on new quarters in Yaumati at an estimated total cost of $25,000 and the Chinese shopkeepers in Yaumati and Mongkok were asked to contribute to the funds of the Force in the same way as their opposite numbers on Hong Kong island. This amounted to 1% of the rental and raised a total of $2,500 during the last three months of 1925. The image of the Force was the subject of discussion during early 1925 and its own members petitioned the Committee for a change in the 'archaic nature of the uniform' which the Watchmen believed was an impediment to younger men joining the Force. The fact that this petition was shelved until the return of the permanent Chairman illustrates the ultra-conservative nature of the Committee and, whilst the detective branch was praised in official reports, the Secretary for Chinese Affairs considered that 'the uniformed branch left much to be desired.' In the 1926 departmental...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214394, "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": 252, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "218\n\ntal Annual Report we read that 'Arrangements have now been defi-nitely made to alter the uniform to one of a more modern pattern.' The inclusion of the word 'definitely' suggests that this was a thorny issue and the change in the style of uniform had not met with universal approval from all members of the Committee.\n\nThe policy of having a police officer seconded to supervise the uniformed branch of the Force had been short-lived and the Annual report of 1926 deplored the lack of a police officer for this duty. It appears that in future years the police officer seconded to oversee the detective force was also expected to act as liaison officer between the Police and the entire District Watch Force. In November 1927 the control of the detective branch of the Force was taken over by sub-Inspector Kenneth Andrew who, like his predecessors, spoke fluent Cantonese and continued to be associated with the Force until June 1936. By the mid-1920s the number of men serving in the District Watch Force had reached 122 and their success in bringing cases to the Police Court continued to rise. In the years between the establishment of the District Watch Committee and the mid-1920s the number of arrests/convictions never exceeded 415 but we can see how this figure increased dramatically during the fifteen year period 1925-1937.\n\nArrests by District Watchmen 1925-1939\n\n \n Year\n Arrests\n \n \n 1925\n 371\n \n \n 1926\n 467\n \n \n 1927\n 606\n \n \n 1928\n 848\n \n \n 1929\n 737\n \n \n 1930\n 845\n \n \n 1931\n 867\n \n \n 1932\n 1,084\n \n \n 1933\n 1,274\n \n \n 1934\n 1,236\n \n \n 1935\n 1,322\n \n \n 1936\n 1,546\n \n \n 1937\n 2,067\n \n \n 1938\n 1,214\n \n \n 1939\n 1,228\n \n\nI corrected \"3937\" to \"1937\" as it appears to be a typo.\n\n becomes just the corrected text as per rule 12.\n\nThe final output is:\n218\n\ntal Annual Report we read that 'Arrangements have now been defi-nitely made to alter the uniform to one of a more modern pattern.' The inclusion of the word 'definitely' suggests that this was a thorny issue and the change in the style of uniform had not met with universal approval from all members of the Committee.\n\nThe policy of having a police officer seconded to supervise the uniformed branch of the Force had been short-lived and the Annual report of 1926 deplored the lack of a police officer for this duty. It appears that in future years the police officer seconded to oversee the detective force was also expected to act as liaison officer between the Police and the entire District Watch Force. In November 1927 the control of the detective branch of the Force was taken over by sub-Inspector Kenneth Andrew who, like his predecessors, spoke fluent Cantonese and continued to be associated with the Force until June 1936. By the mid-1920s the number of men serving in the District Watch Force had reached 122 and their success in bringing cases to the Police Court continued to rise. In the years between the establishment of the District Watch Committee and the mid-1920s the number of arrests/convictions never exceeded 415 but we can see how this figure increased dramatically during the fifteen year period 1925-1937.\n\nArrests by District Watchmen 1925-1939\n\n \n Year\n Arrests\n \n \n 1925\n 371\n \n \n 1926\n 467\n \n \n 1927\n 606\n \n \n 1928\n 848\n \n \n 1929\n 737\n \n \n 1930\n 845\n \n \n 1931\n 867\n \n \n 1932\n 1,084\n \n \n 1933\n 1,274\n \n \n 1934\n 1,236\n \n \n 1935\n 1,322\n \n \n 1936\n 1,546\n \n \n 1937\n 2,067\n \n \n 1938\n 1,214\n \n \n 1939\n 1,228", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214395, "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": 253, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "(Source: Annual reports of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs)\n\n219\n\nThe 1928 Annual Report of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs stressed that it was 'gratifying to note that close co-operation exists between the District Watch Force and the Police Force. This was certainly a considerable improvement from the situation which existed a mere decade earlier when District Watchmen had been specifically excluded from searching passengers who arrived at or left Hong Kong by ship.24\n\nIn 1930 a new Ordinance, No. 23 of 1930, was passed entitled the District Watch Ordinance and, although its provisions differed very little from Chapter IV of the 1888 'Regulation of the Chinese Ordinance,' it is useful to repeat the justification given by the Attorney General at the first reading of the new Bill since it illustrates the apparent high regard in which the Force was held at this time: 'It has been decided that this very valuable Force should have an Ordinance of its own and the name of the Committee had been changed from The District Watchmen's Committee to the District Watch Committee as more suitable and as preferred by the Committee themselves.'25 Only when the replacement Bill was read for a second time do we see that a new ordinance was a necessity since other parts of the \"Registration of the Chinese Ordinance' were considered to be of no further use in the interests of the Colony generally.' Along with the new ordinance, a new pay scale was introduced in 1930 and the establishment of the District Watch Force rose to 133 which enabled the patrols to extend to Shamshuipo.\n\nDuring the next few years more Watchmen were recruited and by 1934 the full strength of the Force was 140. Not only did they attend the Police Training School, they participated in revolver courses organised by the Police. 1933 was particularly glorious for the Force since every one of the 131 District Watchmen who took part in the revolver course passed.26 Although the District Watchmen had considerable success in bringing suspects of minor crimes to Court, they were much more than a duplicate Police Force, even though they did assist the Police in dealing with serious crimes such as the riots of 1894 and Communist infiltration in 1929. We have seen that as early as 1883 they were engaged in sanitary duties and in 1899 'during the outbreak of plague in the summer months 8 District Watchmen were employed on special duty at the Tung Wah Hospital.' In the censuses of 1896 and", "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": 214399, "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": 257, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "223\n\nSelected Extracts from Instructions to Senior Inspector of Nuisances, Inspector of Nuisances, Head Watchmen and Watchmen.\n\n(Source: The Hongkong Government Gazette, 23 June 1883, pp.538-544)\n\nInstructions to the Senior Inspector of Nuisances\n\n§5.\n\nThe Senior Inspector shall once a week, on irregular days, visit all the public latrines of the City and see that they are kept in a cleanly and orderly state by the Licencees, and that they are properly and systematically supervised by the Inspectors of Nuisances and native watchmen.\n\nInstructions to the Inspectors of Nuisances\n\n§38. Each Inspector of Nuisances will have two native Head Watchmen attached to his District, and such Head Watchmen shall carry out the instructions of the Inspectors of Nuisances in all sanitary matters, but more especially in the watchful supervision of the coolies of the Government Scavenging Contractor and Night-soil Removal Contractor, in the prevention and abatement of Nuisances generally, and the promotion of order and cleanliness in their respective Districts.\n\n§39. Each Head Watchman shall have under his orders the watchmen of his district, who shall carry out such instructions in respect of Sanitary matters as they shall receive from the Head Watchmen and from the Inspectors of Nuisances.\n\n§40. The Inspectors of Nuisances shall avoid, except in cases of emergency, giving any instructions to the Watchmen direct. They shall in preference communicate with the Head Watchmen, and hold the latter responsible for the actions and conduct of the Watchmen.\n\n§41.\n\nThe Inspectors of Nuisances shall see that the Head Watchmen and Watchmen carry out the following instructions:", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214401, "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": 259, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "225\n\npositing night-soil, house-slops, dry rubbish, building debris, or other refuse matters on any of the aforesaid places, and as soon after as possible the watchman who has apprehended such offender shall report the circumstance to the Nuisance Inspector of the district, who shall conjointly with the said watchman charge the offender before a Police Magistrate.\n\n§8.\n\nThe Watchmen shall report to the Inspectors of Nuisances the existence of any broken, choked, or defective house drains or downspouts, and any nuisances arising therefrom, or from any other cause which may come under their observation.\n\n§9. The Watchmen shall report to the Inspector of Nuisances any streets in their beats which shall have remained unswept over one day by the Government Scavenging Contractor.\n\n§10. The Watchmen must at all times implicitly obey the instructions of the Head Watchmen, and both Watchmen and Head Watchmen must understand that their sanitary duties are of equal importance with their police duties, and that they must at all times use their best endeavours to prevent, detect and abate nuisances arising from the dirty habits of the people, and if the Government does not receive from them that hearty co-operation and assistance in the detection of nuisances which it has the right to expect, such of them as may be found neglectful of their duties or otherwise inefficient shall be reported to the Registrar General for dismissal.\n\n§11. The Head Watchmen shall once a day at a fixed hour meet the Inspector of Nuisances of their Districts at the office of the Sanitary Inspector, and there make their reports, and receive such instructions as the Inspector of Nuisances may have to communicate to them.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214403, "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": 261, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "13 \n\n227 \n\nControl', Yeoh describes in detail how, in the late 1880s, the Chinese population in Singapore hindered the advance of Western sanitary methods by refusing to comply with the many regulations introduced by the Municipal Branch. ibid., pp. 119-125.\n\nGovernment Notification No.223, HKGG, 23 June 1883, pp.538-544.\n\n14 Yeoh, op. cit., p.110.\n\nElizabeth Sinn, Power and Charity: The Early History of the Tung Wah Hospital, (Hong Kong, Oxford University Press, 1989), p.152.\n\n16 Registrar General's Report for 1891, Hongkong Government Legislative Council Sessional Papers, No.19/92, p.241. Henceforth HKGLCSP.\n\n17 Ibid., p.257.\n\n18 Colonial Estimates for 1870-1873, (Hong Kong, Noronha), Miscellaneous expenditure.\n\n19 \"The matter is important enough for the District Watch Committee to have authorised the extension of their system of watchmen by opening a new station in Kowloon.' Hongkong Hansard, 9 October 1913, p.71.\n\n20 Stubbs to Churchill, 18 March 1922: CO129/474, p.221.\n\n21 Ibid., (enclosure).\n\n22 Between 1912 and 1925 Claud Severn administered the colony on ten separate occasions during the absence of Governors Sir Francis May and Sir Reginald Stubbs. Hong Kong Civil Service List for 1935, pp.46-47.\n\n23 Severn to Churchill, 22 August 1922: CO129/476, p.96-98.\n\n24 E.R. Hallifax, C.Mcl. Messer and R.O. Hutchison, 'Report on the searching of passengers on arrival at and departure from Hongkong', 17 March 1917, HKGLCSP, No.8/17, p.44.\n\n25 Hong Kong Hansard, 6 November 1930, p.235.\n\n26 Police Report for 1933, Administrative Reports for 1933, p.K12. It was not only", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214404, "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": 262, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "228 \n\nas marksmen that the District Watchmen excelled. In 1957 the only District Watchman who attended the Police Training School came top of his squad. Annual Report of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs for 1957/8, p.38. \n\n27 Ku Hung-ting describes the traditionally passive pro-Government role played by Chinese merchants compared with their Western counterparts, 'who played a vital role in bringing about political reforms,' Asian Affairs, Vol IX, 1978, pp. 309-318. \n\n28 Similar Government control occurred in later years. \n\n29 There had been three strikes by different groups of Chinese workers (pawnbrokers, cargo-boatmen and chair coolies) between 1860 and 1863. Eitel, op. cit., pp.368-369. The Government may not have wanted to risk a strike by members of the merchant class.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 } ]