[
    {
        "id": 206268,
        "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": 85,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "CHINESE ELITE IN HONG KONG\n\n79\n\nauthority and its geographical location made it a base for pirates. One of the stories about the origin of the name of the Tai Ping Shan District on Hong Kong Island is that a pirate named Cheung Po-chai used it as his headquarters. He finally went over to the authorities and left the island. In relief the local population named the mountain side on which he had dwelt \"Great Peace Mountain\". Since it was easy to slip away by boat if government officials came to check on inhabitants, the islands on the edge of San On District were popular haunts for outlaws and the criminal element.\n\nAt the time of the establishment of the British claim to the island, The Canton Register under date of 23 February, 1841, predicted that under British jurisdiction the island would become even more popular with these classes: \"Hongkong will be the resort and rendezvous of all the Chinese smugglers. Opium smoking shops and gambling-houses will soon spread; to those haunts will flock all the discontented and bad spirits of the empire.\" Future developments substantiated this forecast.\n\nFACTORS WHICH IMPEDED THE EMERGENCE OF RESPONSIBLE LEADERS IN THE CHINESE COMMUNITY.\n\nSamuel Fearon, the Census and Registration Officer, in his report dated 24 June 1845, describes the origin of the first settlers of Hong Kong.\n\nThe arrival of the British fleet in the harbour speedily attracted a considerable boat population, and the profits accruing from the supply of provisions and necessaries at once raised many from poverty and infamy to considerable wealth. The shelter and protection afforded by the presence of the fleet soon made our shores the resort of outlaws, opium smugglers, and indeed, of all persons who had rendered themselves obnoxious to the Chinese laws, and had the means of escaping hither. In course of time the demands for labour, for the public and other works, drew some thousands to the island, the majority of whom were Hakkas or gypsies; people whose habits, character and language mark them as a distinct race. Careless of the ties of home and of those moral obligations, the observance of which is deemed absolutely necessary",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209232,
        "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": 135,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "EDUCATION AS A BY-PRODUCT OF FISH MARKETING\n\n121\n\nHow does it come about that this pleasing mixture of American Youth camp and English public-school sports day should come to represent the emotional high point of the year for these fifteen schools which cater for the Shui-sheung-yan (water-folk), traditionally the lowest of all Hong Kong's social strata. Organised quite separately from the normal Education Department schools, the F.M.O. school cater for less than 0.4 percent of the territory's school population.\n\nSeparate educational systems for religious and ethnic minorities, often assisted by the state, are not uncommon; wholly state-run separate school systems for occupational minorities, apart from members of the armed forces posted overseas, are extremely rare. The nearest parallel that comes to mind is that of the special education projects for European Gypsies, developed to cater for children whose schooling is often prevented by frequent moves and social prejudice, just as that of the Hong Kong people used to be. Indeed, it was experience with Gypsies since running the first caravan summer school in 1967, which led me to what seemed, from the European end, a remarkable parallel with projects started for the boat people of southern China, and Hong Kong.\n\nThe Development of the F.M.O. and its schools\n\nIt can be argued that the Hong Kong Government, despite its ever-reiterated ideological commitment to laissez-faire economics, began to intervene to ensure the future of the fishing industry as early as the building of the Yaumatei typhoon shelter in 1911-15. During the Second World War the Japanese government began the building of regulated fish markets, such as that at Shaukeiwan, guaranteeing a better deal for the fishermen from the buyers. Since we are assured on all sides that all sections of the population suffered grievously under the Japanese occupation, the returning British government could hardly do less for the fishing population than had the Japanese. After 1945 a scheme was introduced under the old Defence Regulations of 1940 to provide \"orderly and efficient Fish Marketing facilities\", developing the industry, and protecting the interests of consumers. That is to say both fishermen and public were to be protected from the entrepreneurial wholesale fish merchants or middlemen. There are now seven publicly owned and regulated wholesale fish markets, and three other collecting depots. Underlying the economic goals, there was also a stated objective of improving \"the socio-economic status of the fishing community.\" Of course, to state this too publicly would be self-defeating, but in\n\n7\n\nPage 135\n\nPage 136",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209234,
        "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": 137,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "JUAN YÜAN'S MANAGEMENT OF SINO-BRITISH RELATIONS IN CANTON, 1817-1826 123\n\ncome about by which most of the Shui-sheung-yan under the age of 35 now have the choices which ability to read and write gives.\n\nHow important a part is education of the F.M.O.'s activity? Its official report rather downplays it - a neat little diagram in 1979 showed no more than 2.2% of its expenditure going on education. If, however, one adds in the government's subsidy to the F.M.O. schools to both the receipts and expenditure, one sees that in fact 22.7% of the money actually spent by F.M.O. officials is spent on education; it would not be unfair to say that it represents nearly a quarter of the department's activity.\n\nThe Comparison with European Gypsies\n\nIt is thus a serious and sustained effort, and much more comprehensive, than any provision for Gypsies in Western Europe, where illiteracy rates remain high, and probably than Eastern Europe also, where Gypsies are more likely to take advantage from ordinary schools.\n\nIt is perhaps possible to make a direct comparison, in terms of the size of population catered for, between the Hong Kong F.M.O. schools and the largest project for Gypsy children in England, one jointly financed by eleven West Midlands Local Education Authorities, which replaced previous charity-financed projects in 1973/74. The West Midlands projects had in 1974 a target of up to 1,500 children from nomadic families estimated not to be receiving adequate education, with, by rough rule of thumb estimate, as many Gypsy children again already settled, as a secondary target. The F.M.O. schools have over 3,600 children attending them. There are many differences, however.\n\nAlthough the West Midlands Gypsy population is probably more distinct culturally from the majority population than are the Hong Kong Shui-sheung-yan, the West Midlands scheme is more flexibly integrated to the general school system. Although several of the West Midlands teachers work in separate units, most become additional resources in ordinary schools receiving Gypsy children. The West Midlands project has never had more than 16 teachers. The F.M.O. schools in comparison, have over 130 teachers, and have no declared intention of integrating their organisation into the normal school system at the primary school level, despite the shrinkage of the fishing fleet, and the lessening of social prejudice against fisherfolk since the founding of the system in 1947. As we have noted, the fifteenth school, on Apleichau was opened only in 1980.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209235,
        "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": 138,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "124\n\nTA ACTON\n\nAt the same time, in 1978-81, the secondary school in Aberdeen, founded in 1966, was being expanded from a three-year \"practical school\" into a five-year secondary technical school. This school is in a sense integrated, or at least linked to the normal education system in Hong Kong, in that its pupils are allocated by the Education Department through the ordinary secondary school places allocation system, which also allocates 300-400 children from F.M.O. primary schools to ordinary secondary schools every year. The maintenance of all the F.M.O. schools as distinct institutions for the fisherfolk does NOT imply a belief in a separate future for the children in them. In the end they feed their graduates most often not back into fishing, but into the ordinary schools system or into non-fishing jobs. Of the 77 F.M.O. Aberdeen Secondary School graduates of 1979, 22 went into further study, 31 joined the Government apprentice training scheme and 24 found employment in factories.\n\n14\n\nThe F.M.O. schools, then, are separate in form but they are still the means of a policy of integration, not of apartheid. They exist in a situation where the barriers between Shui-sheung-yan and ordinary Cantonese are becoming blurred. The new primary school at Apleichau is sited in a new housing estate which has a large proportion of ex-fishing families. Since the school is over-subscribed by parents wishing their children to attend, the F.M.O. is having some difficulty deciding who should, on the basis of their fishing background, have a priority right to attend. This difficulty points to a further common dimension in the educational-administrative problems with Gypsies and Shui-sheung-yan: a profound ambivalence as to the ethnic status of these 'pariah' or 'marginal' communities, which means that it often appears to the authorities both important and difficult to decide who does, and who does not 'truly' belong to the community. Moreover the balance of informed opinion within this ambivalence has, over the past thirty-five years swung decisively but in the opposite direction in each of these two cases.\n\n-\n\nOfficial perceptions of the ethnicity of Shui-sheung-yan and Gypsies\n\nAfter 1945 the official view in Britain was that, despite a small \"Romany\"\n\n” 15 element, the vast majority of “Gypsies” in Britain were native British who had taken up a particular set of nomadic occupations, and were therefore a social, but not an ethnic problem. \" As a result, however, of the growth of pan-Gypsy organisation and new scholarship, it has been well-established that the overwhelming majority of ‘gypsies'",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209236,
        "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": 139,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "EDUCATION AS A BY-PRODUCT OF FISH MARKETING\n\n125\n\nthat is, the nomadic population, of Britain, do belong to a series of ethnic communities genealogically linked to the settlement of Romani immigrants in the sixteenth century, who now speak Romanes-linked creole dialects, as well as standard English.\" Several times in the early 1970s I was still able to converse with pupils in dialects that teachers had assured me were quite unknown to \"their\" Gypsies. Now it is much harder to catch teachers out this way. Work for Gypsies has become a small part of Britain's \"Race Relations Industry\". The word \"Gypsy\" has been ethnicized.\n\nThe case with the fisherfolk of Hong Kong is exactly the reverse. Originally thought to be a distinct ethnic community, the thrust of modern scholarly research since the mid-1950s is that they are no such thing, that the vast majority are Cantonese, ethnically indistinguishable from the majority of Hong Kong inhabitants.\n\nThe pre-War view, however, of the British administration in Hong Kong was that the boat people comprised two of the four ethnic groups native to Hong Kong. S.F. Balfour wrote: \"This region has a country population consisting of four distinct communities known in Chinese as the Tanka, the Hokio, the Punti and the Hakka.\"18 By the \"Punti\" he meant the local Cantonese; by the 'Hakka' the descendants of late Han migrants from Northern China. Both the \"Tanka\" and the 'Hoklo' were boat-dwellers, fisherfolk. The Hoklo, a small minority of the boat people, mostly in the north-east of the New Territories, spoke a variety of Fukien dialect. The Tanka spoke Cantonese, but were believed to have another dialect of their own, to be in fact not Han Chinese at all, but, said Balfour, drawing on Chinese sources, \"a branch of the Man tribe.\"\n\nIn fact, it was generally believed that there existed in South China an aboriginally-descended aquatic people called the Tanka boat-people like the Hoklo. In Hong Kong they were fishermen, but in the Pearl River delta, and further north along inland waterways, they were transporters, salt-traders, prostitutes and followers of numerous other pariah occupations that could be based on a boat. Detailed studies in the 1930s by the new school of sociologists based at Lingnam University did not challenge this assumption.10 They were backed up by historian colleagues who traced back a recorded history of the Tan people to T'ang times. Then, Ho Ke-en concluded, Tan \"was broadly equivalent to Man\", a name covering several non-Han tribes in South China, but \"in its narrow sense it designated one particular South China tribe\". In the Sung period, he tells us, \"the Tan people began to live on boats,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209237,
        "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": 140,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "126\n\nTA ACTON\n\n+\n\nan oppressed and pariah people without social status.\n\n20\n\nIt must be emphasized that this picture of an ethnic group with a long history was not the image of a few scholars only. It was the socially constructed reality of pre-1939 China. Even though since the mid-1950s modern scholarship and the views of the officials most directly concerned, both in the People's Republic of China21 and in Hong Kong have demolished it as though it had never been, it lingers among ordinary people and even some British officials not directly concerned.\n\n22\n\n23\n\n26\n\nFrom the early 1950s one British social-anthropologist, Barbara Ward, has carried out recurrent field-work on a community of the kind that used to be called 'Tanka', on the little island of Kau Sai.29 She found that with minor exceptions they were ethnically Cantonese, with similar models of the world, marriage and death practices, and religious beliefs to other Han Chinese.24 Other scholars endorsed her view; even their language, apart from an enormous, specialised fishing vocabulary was said to be virtually the same as ordinary Cantonese. In fact, Hong Kong fishing people in the larger ports can tell each others' origins partly by the fact that they speak with different, local coastal accents - for example, a 'Yeung Kong' accent.;\n\n26\n\n27\n\nOfficial policy in Hong Kong also now sees the boat-people as an occupational, and not an ethnic group, whereas the British Government in Britain sees the Gypsies now as an ethnic and not an occupational group, both viewpoints having reversed themselves over the past thirty years.\n\n28\n\nIt should be emphasized, though, that these perceptions of ethnicity, whatever relation they may have to the form and organisation of education (and the vigour with which it is pursued), do not usually affect the content of special educational provision by the state, for either group. Both the curriculum and language remains that of the ordinary school, and the amount of exotic cultural material included is meagre. Despite some pioneering work by voluntary projects, the Gypsy dialects are not used in the West Midlands Local Authority projects, and \"Gypsy material\" is limited to commercially published books featuring Gypsies, and the occasional pasted cardboard caravan. Equally, in the F.MO. schools in Hong Kong, one might find general readers, with a carefully laudatory couple of pages on the brave fishermen, or, once or twice, beautiful collections of strange fish and other marine creatures in jars, that have been contributed by parents; but the main task was to give them the same education other Chinese children received.\n\n29",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209249,
        "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": 152,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "138 \n\nTA ACTON \n\nindividuals, though rare in Hong Kong, might find their way through the system more easily if the F.M.O. schools were to become part of the general educational system, which they now so closely resemble. \n\nConclusion \n\nSpeaking at the closing ceremony of the 12th annual summer camp of the F.M.O. schools, at Wukaisha Youth Village, the Director of Agriculture and Fisheries, the Hon. J.M. Riddell-Swan J.P. said: \n\n\"There are clear advantages in completing secondary education, whether a child wishes to follow a career in the fishing industry or ashore. In common with other industries, fishing and fishing vessel technology are advancing rapidly, and the well-educated fisherman will obviously be able to take better advantage of this and so increase family prosperity.' \n\n* 46 \n\nThe two major themes of this education policy appear in this speech: its benefit to the efficiency of the fishing industry, and its contribution to slimming it down (“a career in the fishing industry or ashore”). It is noteworthy, however, that the speaker applies these themes specifically to secondary education. The battle for primary education has already been won (give or take the odd thirteen-year-old who suddenly appears at a remote school, refusing to admit to any previous schooling; but this happens far less often than in Gypsy school projects.). \n\nThis is an indication of how much more educational policies for the Shui-sheung-yan in Hong Kong have \"achieved\" than those for Gypsies in Britain. There has been a much greater penetration by the schools system, and by the dominant attitudes of industrial society to education among the Shui-sheung-yan than among the Gypsies. This paper quoted the SOCO study which showed that 32.5 percent of 263 poor Shui-sheung-yan respondents declared they wanted no more than primary education for their children. If such a question were asked of a sample of nomadic Gypsies in Britain, the figure would be nearer 90 percent, one would guess. \n\nIn Hong Kong progress towards better education for the Shui-sheung-yan is general throughout the territory. The 11 British West Midlands Local Education Authorities, with their claims of achieving 800-1,300 children attending out of their estimated 1,500–2,000 constituency, are merely the brightest spot in Britain. Many other local education authorities are doing nothing, and the Department of \n\n47",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209250,
        "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": 153,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "EDUCATION AS A BYPRODUCT OF FISH MARKETING\n\n139\n\nEducation and Science, though it has taken an interest, has so far postponed for ten years the fulfilment of promises to give written encouragement to local education authorities.**\n\n49\n\nThere are some obvious reasons for these differences. The F.M.O. schools started some twenty years before the first projects for Gypsies, and the faintly remembered problems of their early years, of continuity, over-age pupils in inappropriate classes, all-age literacy teaching and so forth, were probably more similar to the problems of Gypsy education today than their present problems. There is a much greater drive to social assimilation of the Shui-sheung-yan than of the Gypsies, both in the community itself as well as from the government side. There is a greater availability of government resources in Hong Kong.\n\nTo understand these differences, however, we have to set the education policies in a more general policy context, to look at the overall policy problem that each pariah community seemed originally to present.\n\nIn the case of the Shui-sheung-yan in Hong Kong, it was an economic problem, the necessity, first of regenerating the fishing industry, then in the '50s and '60s of mechanising it, and finally in the '70s, of slimming it down. To carry this out a technologically literate workforce was needed, with appropriate social standing and honour in the community. So the start of an educational policy came swiftly on the heels of an economic policy: fish markets in 1945, schools in 1947. Finally in the 1950s, with the loans to the \"Better Living Societies\", came the beginnings of a housing policy to enable the Shui-sheung-yan to have the domestic culture consonant with their new economic and educational status.\n\nIn Britain a quite different chronology applied to the development of policy concerns. Once Gypsies were no longer being conscripted for military service or agricultural labour, as happened in the Second World War (and was promptly forgotten afterwards!) the initial policy concern was precisely with Gypsies' domestic culture. Gypsy caravan parked on rapidly diminishing amount of open land, giving rise to continuous protests by house-holders, increasingly brutal evictions by British police and council workers, and finally political resistance by Gypsies themselves, demanding places to camp. In 1968 the Caravan Sites Act was passed to try to produce an accommodation between Gypsies and house-dwellers, and on the heels of that came increasing concern for the education of Gypsy children, to further that accommodation (“so they\n\n49",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209251,
        "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": 154,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "140\n\nTA ACTON\n\ndon't grow up like their parents\" as many an insensitive teacher has put it.) Finally, as concern for the number of sited Gypsies forced onto social security has grown, there has been a little thought for the economy of the Gypsies, shown in such measures as the provision of work areas for scrap metal.\n\nBetween these two situations, then, we can see a structural reversal of policy priorities of stunning simplicity. For the Hong Kong Shui-sheung-yan it was economic policies first, educational policies second, and housing and life-style third. For the British Gypsies it was housing and life-style first, education second, and economic policies a poor third.\n\nThis, incidentally, gives us a possible resolution of the paradox of changing views of ethnicity that we noted on page 126. The Hong Kong Government had an economic problem; contrary to its expectations from the literature, it found it was dealing with an occupational group of fishermen, and not an ethnic group. The British Government had a problem of a clash of life-styles in housing; contrary to its expectations from the literature it found it had an ethnic group to deal with and not merely an occupational group of scrap-dealers and seasonal farm labourers. Ethnic reality, like all other reality, is socially constructed. It almost makes one believe that there might be something in the old metaphor of base and superstructure.\n\nBeneath these structural differences, however, the fabric of the situation is the same. In both cases we are dealing with pariah groups seeking a way out of their pariah status, but still somewhat occupationally, socially and to some extent culturally distinct. Both are linguistically differentiated by the possession of special vocabulary rather than of a completely different language. Both groups have been coming closer to the general community, and both are the objects of general government policies of integration. The same practical difficulties may come up in the classroom. Perhaps the British experiments are marginally more innovative in administration, if not in curriculum; but they remain experiments, very patchily implemented. The administrators of the F.M.O. schools (there are only three administrative staff for the whole system) have to run a very tight ship, but they do so with great dedication and enthusiasm, and since their education policy is rooted in economic concern, have been able to pursue it with much greater vigour and success than British Gypsy education policy, this would seem, then, to be a case when educational policy does make a difference; at least, when there is a difference waiting to be made.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210450,
        "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-1985",
        "page_number": 57,
        "title": "RAS-1985",
        "content_text": "38 \n\nBARBARA E. WARD \n\ngiven land, a new dwelling, a new pig-sty, free transport for himself, his family, livestock and all belongings, and an agreed sum of $50 per person per month to tide his family over the first six months until he could begin to get an income from his new land. It is important to stress that the negotiations, which were conducted by the District Office, were entirely correct, the enquiry meticulous and the terms most generous. Only the fishermen were left out of account. \n\nThe omission was, at the time, not unnatural. The stereotyped view of the Boat People as essentially mobile (“like gypsies” was a common English phrase) made it difficult even to imagine that some of them might be attached in any permanent sense to any particular place. It was assumed, too, that fishing could be carried on as well in one part of the water as another (or, if not, that it would be impossibly difficult with such a transitory population to determine who normally fished where) and that therefore only the land people of Kau Sai could be considered. \n\nThere were in fact two separate issues, affecting respectively two separable categories of fishermen. On the one hand were those who claimed that because firing practice interfered with their fishing operations and therefore reduced their income they were entitled to monetary compensation; on the other hand there were the others who did not want compensation but simply desired to be allowed to go on using Kau Sai as their permanent anchorage. The former group, mainly small long-liners and others engaged in day-time fishing, put in their claim to the District Office during the course of the negotiations with the land villagers. It was referred to the Fisheries Section of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, and investigated by its officers together with those of the Fish Marketing Organisation. Finally, a list of claimants was drawn up, and a once-for-all payment agreed and handed over. The organisation of this claim and its significance are discussed more fully below. \n\nThe second group of fishermen were mostly, but not all, night-time operators, purse-seiners, who normally spent the days at anchor in Kau Sai bay. At first, they seem to have shared (though for different reasons) the District Officer's assumption that the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210622,
        "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-1985",
        "page_number": 229,
        "title": "RAS-1985",
        "content_text": "210\n\nTHE COUNTRY BOY WHO DIED FOR HONG KONG*\n\nLargely, I suppose, because I experienced over four years of active service and action myself — in the deserts of North Africa and Italy in World War II — when I have seen the remains of fortifications and slit trenches on the hills of Hong Kong, I have often pondered on the battle, in 1941, for this \"outpost of Empire\".\n\nWhen I joined the Hong Kong Government, in 1954, the war was still fresh in people's minds. Time has passed quickly, however, and there is a danger that brave deeds will disappear forever.\n\nWhile the courage shown by Company Sergeant Major (CSM) John (Jack) Robert Osborn has been recorded, few people know much about him. Indeed it was not until 1982 that I learned he was born in the County of Norfolk, England, not far from my home town.\n\nThe Village of Foulden is an unspoiled, peaceful place, but at the turn of this century it was even more isolated.\n\nFor a number of years a group of anonymous, horse-drawn caravans made its way, every year, from the Fen Country to tiny Foulden. The gypsies, who occupied these \"homes-on-wheels\", earned their livings as dealers, and by making clothes-pegs and rock (a kind of confectionery). They also managed to obtain part-time work on the land, for instance at harvest time. While no villager got to know them well, the Osborn family always spent longer in Foulden than the other Romanies.\n\n* Plate 11.\n\nAcknowledgements\n\nThe author is grateful to many people, too numerous to name individually, for their assistance in the research and preparation of this article. This article was first published on 22nd December, 1985 in the Sunday Morning Post and is reprinted with the author's permission.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210623,
        "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-1985",
        "page_number": 230,
        "title": "RAS-1985",
        "content_text": "211\n\nThe Osborn's ornate, timber caravan was high and brightly painted, and almost every time it returned to the village it appeared to have an additional occupant.\n\nIn later years the family comprised father, John Robert Senior, and mother, Harriet Susanna, four sons one of whom was killed in World War I as well as a daughter. In fact John Robert Junior, so people say, was born in that caravan in Foulden. And while people generally had not, unfortunately, much time for gypsies, they had to admit that the Osborns were pleasant, peace-loving people.\n\nBy the start of World War II the caravans had long stopped coming to Foulden, and John Osborn Junior had emigrated to Canada in 1920. However 12 days after the infamous attack on Pearl Harbour, 42 year old (some records state 41) Sergeant Major Osborn, together with his Company of Winnipeg Grenadiers (which consisted of both French and English-speaking Canadians), found himself on the 436 metre high Mount Butler\n\nwith its spectacular view in the centre of Hong Kong Island, waiting to take on the might of the Imperial Japanese Army.\n\nDawn on the 19th December 1941, which was punctuated with blasts and smoke, came up cool and grey with odd wisps of mist. Shortly afterwards, the Grenadiers recaptured Mount Butler summit. However, the Japanese moved three companies against them, and, owing to superior numbers, by about 10.00 am, the Canadians were driven down the hill.\n\nThey then regrouped and attacked in the direction of Wong Nai Chung Gap, and later turned towards Stanley Gap. As the soldiers charged they came under persistent, merciless fire and their ranks were severely thinned. As a result, the Company became divided.\n\nAt that stage Osborn took over. The mainly young and tired group of 65 Grenadiers, which was all that remained after the charge, was under-trained and previously had had no experience in action, although there were some regular non-commissioned officers.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213557,
        "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": 153,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "122\n\nFirst, the extracts in the Sing-Song are clearly artificial productions written as a literary joke. Given what we understand of the way Pidgin developed and how it was used, there is little chance that texts of the sort published by Leland would have circulated other than as an after-dinner entertainment among Western-educated people with a knowledge of Pidgin. We know from the writings of W.C. Hunter that this sort of entertainment did, in fact, take place.\n\nWe are not saying here that Pidgin-English Sing-Song is a hoax. Leland never claims that the texts are authentic, only that they have been judged plausible by western scholars of Chinese. The style and expressions used in the texts contain a variety of American slang and minstrelsy terms, and the overall internal evidence is, to my mind, that Leland wrote most of the texts himself.\n\nLeland was never a long-time resident of the Far East, I must therefore digress slightly to explain how he could perform the feat of writing a small book of prose and verse in a language which he could only have known slightly. It also gives me an excuse to introduce you to a colourful and talented character,\n\nCharles Godfrey Leland was born in Philadelphia on 15 August 1824. He was a voracious reader by the age of nine and studied at college in New Jersey from 1841 to 1845. Then he went to Germany via Italy and spent two years at the universities of Heidelberg and Munich.\n\nKnown as the \"Gentle Giant\", he had a gargantuan appetite for food, drink and tobacco. In 1848, he moved to the Sorbonne, and manned the barricades in the Paris Commune. Returning to Philadelphia, he studied law, then turned to journalism, authorship, politics and exploration of the Western US. He joined the Confederate cause and fought in the Civil War. He was an acknowledged master of literary journalism and in 1866, he became editor of the Philadelphia press.\n\nFrom 1869 to 1879, he stayed in London and became closely associated with the humanist thinker Walter Besant. Leland took a close interest in education in the industrial arts, as well as taking up research on Gypsies and the Romany language. He was a talented linguist and was particularly interested in slang and jargon",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213558,
        "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": 154,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "123\n\nHis writing was prodigious and varied: he wrote translations of the poems of Heinrich Heine, dictionaries of slang, jargon and cant, he wrote on the English, Welsh and Irish Gypsies and their languages, the art of conversation, the development of memory and willpower, Etruscan Roman remains, the discovery of America by Chinese Buddhist monks in the fifth century; and he wrote textbooks on perfumes and cosmetics, pyrography and wood-roasting, bent iron and strip work, art drawing, and leather work.\n\nThis digression into the life of Charles G. Leland is to show that, as an acknowledged philologist and literary wit, the Pidgin-English Sing-Song was well within his powers and sphere of interest. With these doubts about the authenticity of the language of the Sing-song, we propose to leave the work aside.\n\nNext, I must mention Robert A. Hall Jr's article, \"Chinese Pidgin English Grammar and Texts\" (Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 64, 1944). In this article, Hall analyses, after the manner of Jesperson, a body of China Coast Pidgin elicited from English speakers, reflecting late-19th to early 20th Century Pidgin.\n\nMuch effort was made by Hall to undertake a phonetic and syntactic analysis of his material. But given the well-known degree of variation among Pidgin speakers, we feel that most of the effort was misguided. It is well worth noting, however, the degree of consistency between what is reported by Hall and what is found in other sources.\n\nDo we have any sources for the way Pidgin appeared to the Chinese? Yes. First, there is the \"Devils' Talk” pamphlet described by a number of authors. Unfortunately, we have not yet found a surviving copy of this, although we suspect that there must be a number of them in the U.S., if only we could imagine how the National Library of Congress would catalogue them...\n\nBut the major source was published in Canton in 1862 by an individual from Kowloon, Tong Ting Kü. The \"Ying u tasp ts'ún\" or \"The Chinese and English Instructor\" consists of six volumes, organized in the Chinese style according to topics. It contains prefaces by the author as well as by the general in command of the Kowloon Walled City, Cheung Yue Tong (famous for his calligraphy).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]