[ { "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": 206433, "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": 250, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "224\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nthe familiar background of the disasters — natural and man-made which afflicted China from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards.\n\nThe author, a retired Naval Officer, himself with a first-hand knowledge of the China Station and with some apparent experience of the military and political intelligence work supporting the diplomatic moves described in this book, weaves his story from the letter books of the Great and Ancient House, Taikoo. The period covered by these extracts and quotations is from the Sino-French war of 1883-5 through to the so-called Great Boycott of 1925. There are appended a number of short notes, some by the author, others contributed to the book, on topics ranging from \"The origin of Tribute Rice and of Lao mei\" to \"Treaty Port Racing\". Several of these are probably not to be taken as serious studies of these subjects; for example, the two devoted to \"Opium\" and \"The Eunuchs of the Empress\" are mere fragments not embodied in the main text.\n\nThere is undoubtedly a wealth — even an overflowing — of rich historical material in this volume; so much so, that the author, unwilling to sacrifice any scraps of illustrative comment from these business records, ends up by creating a confused picture of events. The significant fact throwing particular light on the business activities on the China Coast, is circumscribed by coils of superfluous trivia. From a naval writer, one might have expected a direct, economical style of exposition; and of course, the impact on the reader would have been much more effective. It is, indeed, painfully obvious throughout the book that despite the authorship of a considerable number of publications, the writer is an amateur. The book is written in a mixture of styles compounded from the Boys' Own and official memoranda; it is ridden with clichés and undigested wedges of administrative gobbledy-gook.\n\nFor the historian who would like to use this book as a compilation of source material, there are also the difficulties that the extracts are frequently not dated nor ascribed to a writer or only vaguely so. For example, there is the telegram from the Admiralty to the Commodore Hong Kong — one wonders how this came to be with the B & S records, if in fact it is extracted from them. The exercise would have been much more useful if the range of extracts had been more carefully selected, given full documentation, and", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208933, "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-1980", "page_number": 95, "title": "RAS-1980", "content_text": "HONG KONG RIOTS OF OCTOBER 1884\n\n63\n\nmajor factor in the affair. On October 24 the Hong Kong Chinese population was reported to have been very agitated by the appearance in the city of a man who claimed to have captured a French standard and was on his way to Canton to collect the reward being offered there for such items. The description of the stir he caused among the local population cannot but lead one to believe that a great deal of national pride was involved in the demonstration. National pride is one of the first signs of true nationalism.\n\nOne other piece of evidence may be cited along the same lines as the above incident. On August 29 the North China Herald reported great excitement among the Chinese population of Shanghai at the news of the battles at Foochow. The editor felt it necessary in commenting to state that he should withdraw everything he had ever said about the lack of public opinion or interest in political events among the Chinese. He, like his colleague in Hong Kong two months later, was trying to come to grips with the realization that the old ideas about the lack of national feeling among the Chinese were no longer valid.\n\nHow much of what happened in Hong Kong during September and October of 1884 can be traced to influences from the mainland, and how much was due to genuine national feeling among the Chinese population? We do know that one of the small number of Chinese banished under the Peace Preservation Ordinance was accused of being a paid agitator from Canton, but how many others like him were there and how much influence did they have? We also know that many of the strikers during the troubles claimed coercion from Canton in defense of their action, but in the general strike that followed they claimed to be striking for the right to boycott the French. Were they claiming coercion because they believed that that was what the Europeans wanted to believe?\n\nAnother aspect of this problem is the fact that we have here a very early example of the labor boycott and strike among a local Chinese population. Thus, in addition to the question of how much nationalism was involved in these events, we also have the question of how modern a labor movement was it? The demand for the right to boycott the French would seem to indicate some kind of developing labor consciousness which would gladden the heart of a Marxist historian if it could be proven true.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209283, "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": 186, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "172\n\nNG LUN NGAI-HA\n\nThe person in Hong Kong who had the most direct influence on Sun's thought was Ho Kai, a founder and also a teacher of the Hong Kong Medical College, teaching medical jurisprudence and physiology.1 Ho was the son of a missionary of Cantonese origin who later settled in Hong Kong and became a businessman. Ho himself received his early education at the Central School and then left in 1872 to continue his secondary and then university education in Britain. He returned in 1882 as a qualified medical doctor and barrister. As a prominent civic leader, he served as the Chinese representative in various Government councils and boards, including the Legislative Council and the Sanitary Board. He was a great promoter of Western medicine and education for the Chinese in Hong Kong. In addition to the Alice Memorial Hospital and the Hong Kong Medical College, he was also a founder of the University of Hong Kong and patron of a number of Anglo-Chinese schools. In the Sino-French war of 1884-1885, when China failed to protect Annam, the Chinese seamen and coolies in Hong Kong reacted patriotically in boycott against French ships. Ho began to be concerned with the fate of China and the need for her modernization. From 1887 onwards, Ho began to contribute articles to the local English language newspapers, expressing his views on affairs in China. Most of his reformist essays were translated into Chinese or rewritten by Hu Li-huan and published both in Hong Kong and in China.2 Hu also received part of his education at the Central School both as a student and then as a student-teacher between 1862 and 1872. Unlike Ho, whose education was mainly in English, Hu had received very solid education in classical Chinese, and later won great fame as a gifted prose writer, scholar and poet. He was also a comprador and a very successful businessman.\n\nBecause of Ho's and Hu's prominence in Hong Kong, their essays must have caught the attention of many intellectuals. Ho's first essay was a long critical review of Tseng Chi-tse's article, \"China, the Sleep and the Awakening\". The review was published in the China Mail on February 12, 1887, three days after Tseng's article appeared in the same paper. Ho argued that the real cause of China's troubles lay not so much in her military weakness as in her \"loose morality and evil habits, both social and political\". He strongly emphasized complete and sweeping reforms in China's administration. More specifically, Ho demanded a new basis for recruiting officials as the existing civil examinations involved no knowledge of modern science or arts and were worthless as a test of real ability and talent. He also considered", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209443, "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": 100, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "78\n\nELIZABETH SINN\n\nThere can be no doubt that there were anti-French feelings among local Chinese of many different classes, feelings which existed independently of any initiative from Canton, but which were likely to rally to any call for patriotism from China.\n\nThe choice of the La Galissonière as the first target to boycott is significant. It had taken part in the storming of Keelung and at the attack on the Foochow fleet, and it had carried Admiral Courbet, the man in charge of these operations. It was a symbol of French aggression and a natural focus of Chinese hatred.\n\nPatriotism was recognized as an important factor in the initial strike not only by the Chinese. The Foreign Office in London sympathized with Chinese workers who refused to do work which would further French war efforts, and it implicitly raised the question of whether it was morally right for the Hong Kong Government to fine them for that.55 Questions raised in the House of Commons over the riots in Hong Kong reflected similar views, and the suggestion was made in the House that directions be sent to authorities in Hong Kong and Singapore to refrain from forcing to work Chinese who refused to do so for patriotic reasons.56 When the strike was over, Governor George Bowen identified the feelings behind it as a \"common national spirit\", and saw its rise as an important turning point of modern Chinese history.57\n\nOf course, the ties between the Canton authorities and local Chinese were not confined to the noble feelings of patriotism. The other forces at work included an assortment of interests. Many local Chinese had business and family ties in China which were vulnerable to retaliation. There was also the incentive of winning rewards from the Chinese Government which could greatly enhance status in Hong Kong. The Canton authorities exerted, therefore, by use of this carrot and stick approach, great influence on the Chinese in Hong Kong who while living and working there, still had their social, political and cultural frame of reference in China.\n\nIn many instances, local Chinese were eager to carry out official Chinese instructions. When the problem of finding agents in Hong Kong was brought up among Canton officials in 1884, Chang Chih-tung confidently declared, “All the civil and military", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209489, "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": 146, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "124\n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE\n\nthat destitute or disreputable Chinese were shipped back to their homeland without expense to the British taxpayer. All in all, a model citizen of his adopted country.\n\nOne surmises that Lock settled down in England in 1895 without experiencing an acute degree of cultural ‘dislocation'; it was after all his elected country and must have appeared a land of opportunity to the young Cantonese. But he remained Chinese, enmeshed in the themes of Chinese society and culture — a migrant, a marginal man. Since wealth and status are closely linked in Chinese society, particularly so in overseas Chinese communities which then lacked a Chinese scholar class, once his fortune disappeared as a result of injudicious speculation, he must have experienced a shameful loss of 'face', a loss of standing within the Chinese Liverpool community. His bankruptcy was temporarily masked by maintaining a high degree of conspicuous consumption (how did he do it?). Lock was 52 in 1925, and to recoup his finances would have been difficult at that time, when the British economy was listing and shipping trade with China interrupted by the great strike and boycott of Hong Kong and the Treaty Ports. It is plausible to suggest, then, that Lock felt disgraced, ashamed of what the future might bring his wife and three grown-up children, victims of his middle-aged ineptitude, or bad luck. It is possible to point to a number of English, let alone Chinese murders, motivated by the same impulse: fear of the future.19\n\nAll this is speculation, need it be said. The writer has not seen the transcript of the trial — has it survived? — and Lock's case is not included in the eighty-three volumes of the Notable British Trials Series.20 It seems sensible, though, to argue that Lock's friends, all those giving evidence for the defence, would tend to over-emphasise his bouts of ill-temper and any episodes which might suggest he was mentally sick. This type of retrospective interpretation or evaluation is common in many murder trials. We do not know what precisely triggered off Lock's murderous assault in the early hours of December 2, 1925. Did some chance remark made by his wife drive him into a frenzy? Did she, perhaps unwittingly, make him aware of the shame he had brought upon his family — did she awaken the tiger? That,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 } ]