[
    {
        "id": 205413,
        "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": 175,
        "title": "RAS-1967",
        "content_text": "168\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nble for financing and managing these arrangements, and its leaders were not allowed to canvas outside their own Fong to obtain funds. The Hung Shing Temple, being the larger and older of the island's two temples, was the hub of these activities.26\n\nIV. ABERDEEN DOCKS\n\nWhilst passing through Aberdeen you should note the old Dry Docks a little to the west of the Post Office. One was built in 1863 but two years later (to quote from the Centenary Brochure of the Hong Kong and Whampoa Dock Co., Ltd.):\n\n\"In 1865, the Company concluded negotiations with Mr. John Lamont for the purchase of his property at Aberdeen, comprising the Lamont Dock then in working order, and the Hope Dock then in course of construction, together with the Workshops, Machines, etc.\n\nThe Hope Dock was opened in June, 1867, by the then Governor of Hong Kong, Sir R. G. MacDonnell, and for a number of years was largely used for docking ships of Her Majesty's Navy and other large vessels.\n\nV. SHEK WAN POTTERY FIGURES AT THE TIN HAU TEMPLE, ABERDEEN.\n\nOn your way from the Ap Lei Chau ferry pier to the Resettlement Department Office in the Shek Pai Wan Estate (for tea), you should note the Tin Hau Temple on the left at the foot of Aberdeen Reservoir Road. This is an old temple which was given its last major repair in 1873. Any members who attended Professor Skinsnes' recent illustrated talk on Shek Wan Pottery should have a look at the roof decoration on the way. It gives the name of the firm who made it and is dated the equivalent of 1873.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205786,
        "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": 92,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "86 \n\nR. BRUCE \n\nmonopolies abolished whilst levies on imports were to be limited, and vessels were to pay a tax on their size. But Burney failed to get permission for a British Consul to reside at Bangkok. Nor was he able to free British nationals from Siamese law. \n\nNext came the Americans. A merchant, Mr. Edmund Roberts, was commissioned by the President to secure a treaty at least as good as the British one. This was seven years later, in 1833. Although a President seemed to the Siamese a much less august personage than a King and America was both remote and less important, Roberts secured his treaty. It was almost exactly the same as the Burney agreement. \n\nIn the next two decades, especially in the \"forties, trade became more difficult. In fact the treaties with the British and the Americans gradually eroded away, and the old monopolies were taken back by the Court. Imports and exports were farmed to Chinese merchants by the King. Duties were arbitrary and heavy and trade dwindled. Everywhere else the British had greatly expanded their commerce by mid-century. Singapore was growing rapidly, the China trade had increased still further after the Opium War, the northern coast of Borneo was open to British commerce. It seemed only natural and civilised to the bold merchant princes and sea captains of Victorian England that Siam should, willy-nilly, share in the new prosperity, especially now that the first steamships had reached the Gulf of Siam. \n\nSir James Brooke, the White Rajah of Sarawak, was the next British envoy to sail up the Menam to Bangkok. He came in August 1850 on board H.M.S. Sphinx accompanied by a merchant vessel of the Company, the Nemesis, both steamers. Lord Palmerston, the Foreign Secretary, cautioned Sir James to be careful in his quest for better trade. \n\n\"In conducting these negotiations\", he directed, “you must be very careful not to get involved in any disputes or hostile proceedings which would render our position in Siam worse than it now is or which might compel Her Majesty's Government to have recourse to forcible measures in order to obtain redress. It is very important that if your efforts should not succeed they should at least leave things as they are and should not expose us to the alternative of submitting to fresh affront or of undertaking expensive operations to punish insult”.'",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211123,
        "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": 184,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "159\n\nto resort to and trade at the port of Hongkong, where they will receive full protection from the high officers of the British nation.\" This promise was needed for at the time China and Britain were in conflict over the opium questions.\n\nThe principle of a free port was set forth: \"Neither will there be any charge upon imports and exports to the British Government.\n\nIn the light of the strained relations between the two nations, Charles Elliot threatened China with \"an immediate embargo upon the port of Canton and all the large ports of the Empire if there be the least obstruction to the freedom of Hongkong.\"\n\nConditions had altered considerably from 1841. At that time, any Chinese trading in or with Hongkong would have been traitors to the Chinese Government.\n\nOnly because of China's humiliation on the field of battle was Hongkong ceded to Britain. Time and financial interests had blurred the national pride of the Chinese merchants in Hongkong.\n\nThe signers of the petition may also have been connected with the opium trade. Their names are not given in the published petition. Even the consul at Canton, when he sent a copy of the petition to the British Minister at Peking, did not know the names of the signatories.\n\nThe \"blockade\" had made it increasingly difficult for the opium smugglers to escape the surveillance of the Chinese armed cruisers. The smugglers equipped their own vessels with ever larger armaments that they might emerge victorious in a shoot-out with the cruisers.\n\nThe picture of the situation the merchants painted for Her Majesty was a dark one. The villains in the scene were the Chinese officials.\n\nThe petitioners informed the Queen that, “during the past five years, some of the mandarins in authority at Canton, actuated, as your petitioners believe, by avarice and jealousy, and presuming",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211189,
        "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": 250,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "225\n\nthings very promptly.”\n\nThere was general agreement that the park would not be of immediate benefit to the Chinese, but some thought that was no reason why it should not be a suitable project for the Jubilee. Given time the Chinese would realise its value.\n\nIn seconding Mr. Chater's resolution, the Honourable A. J. Ackroyd looked into the future. In spite of the objections that the park would not be used much by the Chinese, he said: “I think it would be of great advantage to them, if not at the present, in the future, because there can be no doubt that in the future — at least I hope it will be so — the Chinese youth from the public schools will freely mix in our games and amusements.’\n\nMr. Ackroyd spoke about another objection that had been raised. A properly landscaped park would interfere with the viewing of the races. Indeed, he too “would disapprove of the valley being turned into a garden and shrubbery.”\n\nHe envisaged a sports field, because \"where there is so little level land in the Colony, we should utilise it to the best advantage.\n\nIt could also be used advantageously by the military, for “the troops can occasionally assemble to go through their exercises and the crews of Her Majesty's vessels can be brought on shore and put through their drill.”\n\nEditorial comment on the park proposal was not entirely favourable. One editor made the point that the name Happy Valley was firmly linked to the oval where the horses ran, and it was doubtful whether the public would be weaned away from it. Not only that, but it was said future generations would associate the name \"Victoria” with the City of Victoria, “rather than our much beloved and never-to-be-too-much-respected Sovereign Lady Queen Victoria.”\n\nWith only a bare flat open space and little chance of its users adopting or properly understanding the name \"Victoria Park,\" the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    }
]