[ { "id": 209215, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1981", "page_number": 118, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "104\n\nCARL T SMITH\n\nto prevent mui tsai from seeing the Secretary for Chinese Affairs.\n\nThe fourteen member committee composed equally of members from the Protection Society and the Anti Mui Tsai Society met with the Secretary for Chinese Affairs, Mr. Hallifax, to formulate suggestions for drafting a Bill for the abolition of the mui tsai system. In June 1922 their report was sent to London with a comment by the Governor that he did not think the suggestions were an altogether satisfactory solution.\n\nThe members of the Committee representing the Anti Mui Tsai Society were:\n\nMr. Joseph Mau-lam Wong (1897 - 1869), compradore of Messrs. A. S. Watson and Co.\n\nMr. Charles Graham Anderson (1889 – 1949), a Eurasian, manager of the International Savings Society of Hong Kong, also newspaper reporter.\n\nNgan Kwan-yu, Government vernacular teacher of the Gap Road School later Head-master, Congregational Church Primary School, Ladder Street.\n\nHung To-fei\n\n―\n\nRev. Wong Oi Tong (1888 – 1941), for forty years pastor of the Rhenish Church, Bonham Road.\n\nDr. T.P. Woo (1878-1941), medical practitioner.\n\nDr. Yeung Shiu-chuen (1878 – 1950), dentist.\n\nAll were members of Protestant Churches.\n\nThe members of the committee representing the Society for the Protection of the Mui Tsai were:\n\nMr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo) (1893 - 1959), son of a compradore of Jardine, Matheson and Co. and son-in-law of Sir Robert Ho Tung. He was a solicitor.\n\nMr. Tsun-nin Chau (1893 – 1971), son of a shipping and insurance magnate, Chau Shiu-ki. A cousin of Sir Sik-nin Chau. By profession a barrister.\n\nMr. Wong Kwong-tin (1879 - 1936), son of a wealthy Chinese merchant. He was a Supreme Court Interpreter when young, later Manager and Director of Kai Tack Land Investment Co., Manager of China Specie Bank, Manager of Chinese Stock Exchange, etc. A Roman Catholic.\n\nIp Lan-chuen (1865 ...), one of founders of Chinese", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209217, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1981", "page_number": 120, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "106\n\nCARL T SMITH\n\nHis trusted allies had turned against him.\n\nIn his communications with the Colonial Office he was strangely silent about the support for the Bill by the Anti Mui Tsai Society and the labour unions. It seemed to be on the opinion that the only views of Chinese to be taken seriously were those of his long-time advisers, and now they were deserting him. One of the Colonial Office administrations minuted a letter from Governor Stubbs:\n\nIt seems to me the advice we have received on the general question of mui tsai has been throughout faulty and incorrect and in certain respects misleading. It seems also the Hong Kong Government does not desire to press the Secretary of State's reform on the Chinese.12\n\nOn December 23, 1922 the Mui Tsai Bill was gazetted, and on December 28 it received its first reading in the Legislative Council as \"An Ordinance to regulate certain forms of domestic service\".\n\nThe Editor of the Daily Press, a strong advocate of abolition, felt the remarks of the Attorney General in introducing the Bill reflected the reluctance of the Hong Kong Government to implement the instructions of the Colonial Office:\n\nThe Attorney General in introducing the Mui Tsai Bill can hardly be said to have shown... fully sympathy with the object of the Bill... The attitude of the local Government to agitation for abolition has been hostile all along,13\n\n13\n\nChinese Chamber of Commerce Meeting – January 1923\n\nThe members of the Protection Society had second thoughts about the approval given by four of their representatives on the joint committee to assist in drafting a bill (three did not sign the agreement). An extraordinary meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held early in January to air reservations about the proposed Ordinance. Mr. Li Po-kwai (1871-1963), a wealthy property owner, presided. Among the members in attendance the following were named:\n\nThe two Chinese Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Mr. Chow Shou-son and the Hon. Mr. Ng Hon-tsz\n\nMr. Ho Fook, a former member of the Legislative Council\n\nLo Chueng-shiu, a compradore of Jardines and brother-in-law of Ho Fook\n\nHis son Mr. M. K. Lo (later Sir Man-kam Lo), a solicitor and\n\nPage 120\n\nPage 121", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210703, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1986", "page_number": 54, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "37\n\nlegal ability and acumen in drafting regulations for dealing with the plague and its effects. A thoughtful touch by Francis was to offer coffee and cigars to the men of the Shropshire Light Infantry who helped with plague relief. The Hong Kong Telegraph in its obituary said that he directed and controlled everything and allowed his practice to suffer in the public interest. However, in September when the emergency was over, the Daily Press attacked the Sanitary Board, saying that its springtime of promise had drifted into a moribund condition of age, and the Permanent Committee saying that it was as absolute as practically to remove all control from the executive and demonstrated the difference between representative government and amateur despotism. In October, the Colonial Surgeon, giving evidence before a Retrenchment Committee that had been set up, alleged that the Board had done very little worth doing during the last six years. So far as the unofficial members of the Board were concerned, matters continued to deteriorate, and the last straw was the proposal early in 1895 to appoint another official member, the Medical Officer of Health, to it. Francis went so far as to say that he would be a Government spy. He and two other members threatened to resign. A Chinese member, Ho Kai, expressed the hope that they would not do so because that would be playing into the hands of enemies who wished to get rid of them. Francis and another member did resign and wrote to the newspapers to explain their reasons to the ratepayers. Their resignations were followed by others. At the next meeting of the Board, the Chairman said that they had all, especially Francis, who had devoted several months of his time absolutely to the work of coping with the epidemic, rendered valuable services to the colony, and it was resolved that the thanks of the Board be conveyed to them for the assistance they had rendered during their membership, especially to Francis for his untiring zeal and energy in coping with the plague epidemic in 1894. By this time, the Governor favoured the abolition of the Board. Despite that, he held a plebiscite in 1896 to ascertain whether the community wanted an official or unofficial majority on the Board. Francis took part in the plebiscite, and by 331 votes to 31 votes, the community indicated that it wanted an unofficial majority. However, the new Colonial Secretary, Joseph Chamberlain, was not prepared to countenance that or to agree to the abolition of the Board, and it was reconstituted. Elections continued to be held.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211599, "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-1989", "page_number": 14, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "hope to catch up soon, with the aid of the Editorial group which includes Dr. Betty Wei, Dr. Thomas Lau and myself!\n\nFinally, a word of thanks to our printers, Messrs Yee Tin Tong, and especially to their Mr. Henry Law who is the soul of courtesy and cooperation.\n\nEvents in China\n\nI turn now to a world event which it was impossible to ignore, especially in Hong Kong. Like other associations in Hong Kong, the RAS Council felt it had a plain duty to write to the British Government, leading Parliamentarians and other influential figures in public life, expressing concern for Hong Kong's future in the light of the repressive action taken in Beijing in May-June 1989. A copy of this letter was sent to all local and overseas members of the Society, and many of us circulated it more widely among friends or sent copies to persons who they felt ought to know that a letter had been sent.\n\nBoth as President and as an individual, I received a number of responses from Members at home and abroad. These were all supportive of the action taken by the Council. I regret to have to say, however, that there was no response from the Foreign Secretary's Office, to whose head the letter was addressed, not even a printed acknowledgement slip, despite a courteously worded reminder enclosing a copy of the original letter. Surely two copies could not have gone astray?\n\nIn my personal capacity as President, I also sent a private submission to the Basic Law Drafting Committee last autumn, before the period allowed for submissions expired. It gave my own statement on how this Society has been able to operate without let or hindrance, fear or favour, and relying upon the open, willing cooperation of others for almost thirty years, and how essential it was for us, and Societies like us, to be able to continue operating in this way after 1997. A copy of this letter has been tabled at this meeting, and the text will be annexed to this report when it is published in the appropriate number of the Journal,\n\nThe Council\n\nYou will have noted that David Gilkes has been nominated as President for the coming year. No other nominations have been received, and this is a very appropriate appointment in view of his 23 years on the Council\n\nxiii", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211603, "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-1989", "page_number": 18, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "membership. They include talks, lectures and symposia, as well as local tours and visits. The independent co-operation of guest speakers and the willing agreement of persons and institutions visited during tours are equally vital. These, too, stem from the personal freedoms enjoyed in present day Hong Kong.\n\nIt follows that I link the Society's success with the continuance of these freedoms. They are now being addressed by both governments and are expected to be the subject of a Bill of Rights whose contents will be incorporated in the Basic Law. I very much hope that these provisions will be real after 1997 and not just 'paper' freedoms.\n\nPlease bring this letter to the attention of the Drafting Committee.\n\nYours faithfully,\n\nJAMES WILLIAM HAYES President\n\nxvii", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212296, "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-1990", "page_number": 238, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "215\n\nrole in this “secularization” process, comparing Legge's leadership in the new Board of Education with the manner of a “born bishop” I believe his motivations must be read in the light of his postmillennial leanings. See n. 55 on postmillennialism. Also see James Legge, \"The Colony Of Hong Kong\", The Journal Of The Hong Kong Branch of The Royal Asiatic Society, op. cit., p. 188; also E. T. Eitel, Europe In China: The History Of Hong Kong From The Beginning To The Year 1882 (Hong Kong: Kelly & Walsh Ltd, 1895; reprinted in Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1983), pp. 347, 390-394, 466.\n\nSee Gwenneth and John Stokes, Queen's College: Its History 1862-1987 (Hong Kong: Queen's College, 1987). A number of the details of the origins of the school in relation to Legge are not correct, and should be compared with my article in Ching Feng (1988), op. cit.\n\n51 Prof. Legge's participation in the initial stages of the drafting of the Somerville College rules is not mentioned in some of the more recent texts on Somerville College, but his role as a member of the council (1881-1883) is found in Somerville College Register, 1879-1959 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961), p. 272. In the minutes of the Provisional committee which later incorporated the College, Prof. Legge apparently helped to draft and support a college rule which, in its final form, read as follows: \"Prayers will be read daily in the house, and on Sundays the students will be expected as a rule to attend a place of worship chosen by themselves or their parents\"; an earlier proposal to eliminate family prayers, and a later proposal requiring instruction in the Bible provided by each House, were both voted down. It is also significant that the provisional committee set a rule that the members of the Council should include equal numbers of women and men. See the Notes of the Provisional Committee meetings for the year 1879, dated February 7, 15, and 28, held at Somerville College.\n\n* This picture is kept at the Library of the Oriental Institute at Oxford, and was recently used for the cover of T. H. Barrett's Singular Listlessness: A Short History Of Chinese Books And British Scholars, op. cit.\n\nHis reaction was primarily against the legalistic trends of Scottish Reform theology, particularly as it related to the harsher restrictions enforced on the Sabbath. At one point Legge, writing about his youthful days in Huntly, complained: \"The voice of Moses was allowed in our household too often to overpower the voice of Christ\". See Notes Of My Life, op. cit., p. 15, and James Legge, John Legge, ed., Lectures On Theology, Science, And Revelation (Papers by the late Rev. George Legge), XXII-XXIV. Still one must point out that the memorization of the Shorter Catechism left its mark in many of the themes discussed in Legge's The Religions of China. He may have rejected its ethics, but he was nursed and matured in its theological worldview.\n\n34 Legge gave his views on the sixty-fifth anniversary of the London Missionary Society, celebrated at Moorfields Tabernacle. See his \"The Land of Sinim,\" (London: John Snow, 1859).\n\n+4\n\n—\n\nThis perspective was technically supported by nineteenth-century \"postmillennialism,\" a view which generally interprets Biblical prophecies regarding the end of human history as one in which there will be no personal return of Christ. Postmillennialism claimed that God will reign on earth indirectly in a kingdom of peace established by his own people, the Church. This view normally involves the corollary that human achievements, particularly the advance of Christian civilization, would bring about the final state in which the Kingdom of God would be achieved. James Legge had been exposed to this position through the theology of his older brother, George Legge, and apparently accepted its arguments. See George Legge, Lectures on Theology, Science, and Revelation, ed. James Legge, et al., op. cit. Belief in a postmillennial view of history explains two important aspects of James Legge's academic work. First, it explains why he was concerned to locate a trace of revelation in the foundations of Chinese", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215286, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-2001", "page_number": 63, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "II\n\nasked that Britain should approach Australia to secure for Hong Kong the same tariff preference as Britain enjoyed, in accordance with article 15 of the Ottawa agreement. He pointed out that Hong Kong had granted Australian brandy a preference in the excise duty of three dollars a gallon and had received nothing in return. Cunliffe-Lister refused to take any action minuting that he was not prepared to press for equal treatment in the dominions for British and colonial industries like shipbuilding in which owing to different standards of living the levels of cost were necessarily different. This attitude shocked the civil servants in the Colonial Office. One senior official minuted, 'I have always assumed that the Secretary of State would be the advocate of colonial interests.' The matter was not allowed to rest there in spite of the views expressed by Cunliffe-Lister. Officials consulted the Board of Trade and when that department raised no objection a letter was sent to the Australian High Commission asking for the grant of preference. The Australian government was most unwilling to extend preference to a territory with oriental wages even though it was part of the empire, but eventually granted all the colonies preference at the same rate as Britain in respect of vessels over 500 tons only.\n\nIn 1933 Hong Kong manufacturers followed the lead of the Singapore factory in vigorously expanding their exports. Sales to Britain grew from HK$16,190 in 1930 to HK$454,252 in 1933 and to HK$1,823,874 in 1934. British manufacturers protested to the Board of Trade about this competition in their home market and the Board of Trade passed on their complaints to the Colonial Office. Cunliffe-Lister suggested that Britain should confine its preference to primary products and that entry free of duty should be refused to colonial manufactured goods which could compete with an efficient British industry. This proposal did not find favour with the civil service. Instead officials proposed that an interdepartmental committee should be set up to consider the whole question of the industrial development of the colonial empire. The committee was composed of officials from the Board of Trade, the Department of Overseas Trade, the Dominions Office and the Colonial Office. The first meeting was held in January 1934. R.V. Vernon of the Colonial Office was the chairman and was said to have been largely instrumental in drafting the committee's report.\n\nThe committee concluded that industrial development in the colonial empire was an inevitable contingency which could not be prohibited or indefinitely retarded; but the committee saw no reason why a conscious policy of the artificial encouragement of industry should be undertaken by the institution of a tariff high enough to protect the products of local industry from imports from Britain or elsewhere. The interests of British manufacturers and of colonial consumers who would have to pay a higher price for products previously imported should also be considered. So the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 } ]