[ { "id": 204279, "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-1961", "page_number": 47, "title": "RAS-1961", "content_text": "Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong Branch\n\nRASHKB and author\n\nVol. 1 (1961)\n\nISSN 1991-7295\n\n43\n\nUntil the Tibetan form of government was abolished in 1959, it was possible to trace its ancestry back through thirteen centuries and to find there the seeds of institutions that one could see in operation with one's own eyes. The script and the language have changed very little in the course of these thirteen centuries. The script, which was borrowed from India in approximately 640 A.D., can still be seen in inscriptions of about a century later. Any literate Tibetan today can read those inscriptions and can understand them pretty well except for a few archaic words.\n\nBut I suppose the greatest example of conservatism and mystery in the eyes of the outside world is the supremacy of religion, as seen in the rule of the Dalai Lama. This, however, is a fairly recent development. Buddhism reached Tibet in the seventh century; as you know, it came both from China and India, but the Indian stream eventually proved the stronger. In less than two hundred years after its introduction, Buddhist monks were holding office as chief ministers of state. The kings, it is true, were laymen, but Buddhists were already powerful officials. Then there came a setback of two centuries, after which religion resumed its rise in importance. The great monasteries acquired larger and larger estates and more and more temporal influence. Indeed, for about seventy years, at the time of the Yuan dynasty, a religious leader was made viceroy of the country. This was never fully accepted by the lay princes and very soon there was a return of supreme power to secular hands. It was not until 1640 (a thousand years after Buddhist religion reached Tibet) that, with the help of the Mongol Khan in the Kokonor, the line of Dalai Lamas emerged as the actual rulers. Although their role as reformers of the church had begun two centuries earlier, other lines of incarnate Lamas in Tibet, which exercised great influence until they were suddenly swept away in 1640, could trace their ancestry to the early years of the twelfth century. That is why I have described the Dalai Lamas as relative newcomers.\n\nThe rule of the Dalai Lamas, after a first brilliant appearance in the hands of a figure known as the Great Fifth, faded out. There was a period of seventy years when the laymen resumed sway and there was even a lay king. Though religious power was restored in 1750, for a century Tibet was ruled not by Dalai Lamas but by monastic regents acting for minor Dalai Lamas who died at an early age four times in succession. The system of supreme personal rule by the Dalai Lama, both temporal and spiritual, was only firmly restored by the thirteenth incarnation—that is, the predecessor of the present Dalai Lama.\n\nSo you see there was nothing static about the Tibetan system, nor was it a simple one. There have been a whole series of adjustments and balances. The Dalai Lamas, for example, although they are in theory autocratic, are in fact the creation", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1961.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/vd6724704", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204365, "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-1961", "page_number": 133, "title": "RAS-1961", "content_text": "Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong Branch\n\nRASHKB and author\n\nVol. 1 (1961)\n\nISSN 1991-7295\n\n129\n\n \n HAINES, Miss F.\n 10-F Headland Road, H.K.\n \n \n HALLIDAY, Lt. Col, P. A. T.\n Headquarters Land Forces, H.K.\n \n \n HARRISON, Prof. B.\n Dept. of History, H.K.U.\n \n \n HAYDON, E. S.\n The Supreme Court, H.K.\n \n \n HAYE, C.\n Education Dept., Fung House, H.K.\n \n \n HAYIM, E. J.\n 41 Island Road, Deep Water Bay, H.K.\n \n \n HELLBECK, Dr. H.\n German Consulate-General, 1 Duddell St., 4th fl. H.K.\n \n \n HENSMAN, Dr. Bertha\n Chung Chi College, Ma Liu Shui, N.T.\n \n \n HINDMARSH, R. H.\n Hong Kong Club, H.K.\n \n \n HO Teh-Kuei\n 61 Fort St. 3rd fl., North Point, H.K.\n \n \n HOGAN, The Hon. Sir M.\n Chief Justice's Chambers, Supreme Court, H.K.\n \n \n HOLMES, D. R.\n N.T. Administration, N. Kowloon Magistracy, Kln.\n \n \n HOLMES, G. M.\n 9 Chater Hall, 1 Conduit Road, H.K.\n \n \n HOLMES, The Hon. J. C.\n U.S. Consulate-General, H.K.\n \n \n HORSMAN, Miss A. M.\n Colonial Secretariat, H.K.\n \n \n HOOK, B. G.\n Queen Mary Hospital, H.K.\n \n \n HORTON, J. R.\n U.S. Consulate-General, H.K.\n \n \n HOWARD-WILLIAMS, E. D.\n The British Council, 133 Gloucester Building, H.K.\n \n \n HOWORTH, J. F.\n Leigh & Orange, P. & O. Building, H.K.\n \n \n HSIA Tung Pei\n 12 Ming Yuen Street W., 3rd fl. North Point, H.K.\n \n \n HUANG Sheng-Fu\n P.O. Box 9066, Kowloon City Post Office, Kowloon.\n \n \n HUGHES, G. M.\n American International Assurance Co. Ltd., H.K.\n \n \n HUGHES, Mrs. G. M.\n 175 Sassoon Road, H.K.\n \n \n HUGHES, Prof. W. I.\n Dept. of Extra-Mural Studies, H.K.U.\n \n \n HUNG, C. S.\n 19, Hec Wong Terrace, 1st fl., H.K.\n \n \n INGLES, Miss J. M.\n Government House Lodge, H.K.\n \n \n JACOBSON, H. W.\n U.S. Consulate-General, H.K.\n \n \n JONES, Dr. J. R.\n H.K. & Shanghai Banking Corpn. H.K.\n \n \n KAMATH, F. M. de Mello\n Commission of India, Tower Court, H.K.\n \n \n KAY, B.\n Flat 4, 52 Island Road, Repulse Bay, H.K.\n \n \n KEOWN, W. C.\n Butterfield & Swire, H.K.\n \n \n KHAN, Dr. L. A.\n M.O., Tai Lam Prison, N.T.\n \n \n KIDD, S. T.\n N. Kowloon Magistracy, Kln.\n \n \n KILBORN, Prof. L. G.\n Chung Chi College, Ma Liu Shui, N.T.\n \n \n KIRBY, Prof. E. S.\n 2 University Drive, H.K.\n \n \n KNOWLES, W. C. G.\n Butterfield & Swire, H.K.\n \n \n KNOWLES, Mrs. W. C.\n G. Butterfield & Swire, H.K.\n \n \n KRAMERS, Dr. R. P.\n Tao Fong Shan, Shatin, N.T.\n \n \n KUNG, Mrs. T. P.\n 8 Sunning Road, 2nd fl., H.K.\n \n \n KVAN, Rev. E.\n St. John's College, H.K.U.\n \n \n KWOK Chan, The Hon.\n Hang Seng Bank Ltd., H.K.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1961.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/vd6724704", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204475, "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": 107, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "96\n\n5\n\nJ. W. HAYES\n\nSee a tablet in the Chow-Wong School at Kam Tin.\n\n* Papers 1899 p. 188.\n\n* Papers 1899 p. 188.\n\n'Lockhart's figures, given in Appendixes 3 and 5 to his Report are not exact, and he has emphasised his sketchy estimate of the land population \"in default of any reliable statistics possessed by the Chinese Government\" and said he had been unable to obtain even an estimate of the boat people Papers 1899 pp. 187,189. Taking areas within my own detailed knowledge I have found that villages established long before 1898 have not been included in the returns or else have been linked with other villages without special mention, The population figures for the Islands, in particular, are not above suspicion and are probably greater than shown in Appendix 5.\n\n* Papers 1899 p. 189.\n\nPapers 1899 p. 189.\n\n10 Universal ownership was clearly shown by the land survey which followed the lease of 1898. This was carried out by surveyors and staff on loan from the Government of India, and was followed by a registration of titles which was enlivened by land courts which sat to determine possession in disputed cases. The survey sheets and the Crown Rent Rolls which form the schedules to them can be found in the District Offices of the New Territories Administration and they are a valuable record of land ownership and land classification at the time of the lease.\n\nAt Shek Pik and Fan Pui in 1958 out of sixty-six families four owned between 3-4 acres, nine between 2-3 acres, nineteen between 1-2 acres, fourteen owned between a half to one acre, twelve owned between a quarter to a half, and eight between 10 to 25 acres. Except a few late arrivals, therefore, every family owned land of its own. The position was much the same as in 1898.\n\nThe same was true of Wei Hai Wei, of which Johnston wrote Lion & Dragon, p. 148, \"Whatever the faults of the Chinese social system may be there is no doubt that in Wei Hai Wei it very largely accounts for the complete absence of pauperism (though no one is rich) for the orderliness of the people (nearly everyone has a stake in the land and has nothing to gain and everything to lose from disorder), for the uninterrupted succession of father and son in the homesteads, and for the long pedigrees attested by family graveyards and ancestral tablets\".\n\n11 See Johnston Lion and Dragon pp. 134-54. I have compared customary deeds of sale and mortgage from the New Territory between the years 1898 and 1958 with those cited by him and find that they invariably follow the same form (see especially Johnston pp. 144-145). These deeds are known as white deeds (as in Ching times) and had not been put through the formal process of registration in the District Office which would turn them into legal documents; or, as formerly in Ching days, in the Magistrate's yamen when they became red deeds (RI #). They were common until the Pacific war and even now are occasionally known to be drawn up in addition to the Memorial registering the conveyance in the Land Office. To select an example at random here is one from Shek Pik on Lantau Island dated the second year of the Republic (1913) which reads", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204542, "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": 23, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "18\n\nLINDSAY RIDE\n\nDr. Robert Morrison. It is easily found, for if one continues straight on through the terrace from the end of the path one comes upon it amongst a group of altar tombs in the south-east corner of the cemetery. Morrison was a member of the London Missionary Society and was the first Protestant missionary in China, arriving from England via the States in 1807. He was a great Chinese scholar, wrote a Chinese grammar, compiled an English-Cantonese dictionary, and, along with a colleague, translated the whole Bible into Chinese. He became the indispensable interpreter and translator of the Select Committee of the East India Company, was taken by Lord Amherst in that capacity on his embassy to Peking in 1816, and was appointed in 1834 by Lord Napier to his staff when he assumed office in place of the East India Company in China. In 1825 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in virtue of his outstanding scholastic achievements, and was also a member of the society under whose auspices we meet tonight — the Royal Asiatic Society.\n\nMorrison was buried alongside his wife, and next to her lies their very gifted son, John Robert Morrison, who died just as he was appointed the first Colonial Secretary in Hong Kong. Nearby lies another colleague from the same missionary society, Samuel Dyer, who did much to introduce metallic movable type to replace wooden blocks in the printing of Chinese books and tracts.\n\nAlong the eastern wall are to be found a number of members of East India Company families, and in the second row parallel to this wall is the second most frequently photographed memorial in the cemetery, that of Sir Winston Churchill's great-great-grand uncle, the 4th son of the 5th Duke of Marlborough, Lord Henry John Spencer Churchill, Captain, R.N. Near him lies a group of naval officers—Lieut. John Astell, Lieut. FitzGerald of the H.M.S. Modeste, and Captain Sir Humphrey le Fleming Senhouse, Senior Naval Officer in the China Seas during the attack on Canton in 1841.\n\nThe most conspicuous monument in the whole of the cemetery is a tall column near the north wall. It commemorates the life and death of Captain John Crockett who must have made a fortune when in command for some years of an opium storeship at Lintin. Nearby lies one of America's great ambassadors, Edmund Roberts, who served in the West Indies, South America, Muscat, Zanzibar,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204591, "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": 72, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n61\n\nacquire at Peking a site for Building, or may hire Houses, for the accommodation of Her Majesty's mission, and that the Chinese Government will assist it in so doing\". Then, when the Imperial Government appeared to procrastinate over the ratification of these treaties, another English and French force fought its way to the capital and compelled the Manchu authorities to ratify them by the Convention of Peking. This was signed by the British envoy, Lord Elgin,1 and by Prince Kung,2 the chief Chinese representative, on October 24th, 1860 in the Hall of Ceremonies situated in what was later to be called Legation Street. The second clause of the Convention stated that \"Her Britannic Majesty's Representative will henceforward reside permanently, or occasionally, at Peking, as Her Britannic Majesty shall be pleased to decide”. \n\nLord Elgin proposed that Prince Kung's own residence should be rented to the British, but Prince Kung memorialized the throne as follows: \n\nAs regards the matter of the English residing at the capital in the near future, we have been discussing it with them during the past few days. The chief barbarian official [Lord Elgin] considers that the quarters in Prince I's [Prince Kung] palace are spacious and he insists that it is to be their future residence at the capital. Moreover, he stated that there were still open spaces in the palace and that he wants to build houses there himself. It seems to your ministers that to \n\n1 James Bruce, eighth Earl of Elgin. He served as Governor-General of Canada 1846-1854. In 1857 he was appointed envoy extraordinary to China and signed the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858, returning to England early in 1859. In 1860 he was again sent to China as special envoy, and signed the Convention of Peking. He returned to England in 1861 and was appointed Governor-General of India in the same year. He died in India in 1863. \n\nHis younger brother Frederick William Bruce held the post of Colonial Secretary at Hong Kong from 9 February 1844 until 27 June 1846. In 1857 he accompanied his elder brother to China as principal secretary. He was appointed minister plenipotentiary to the Emperor of China in December 1858, but had to wait until March 1861 before actually taking up residence in Peking. He left China on his appointment as British Minister to Washington in 1865. \n\n2 I-hsin (1833-1898), the first Prince Kung, was the sixth son of Emperor Tao-kuang. When the joint French and British forces approached Peking in September 1860 the Emperor Hsien-feng fled to Jehol leaving his half-brother, Prince Kung, to make peace with the allies. When a prototype Chinese foreign office, the Tsungli Yamen, was set up in 1861, Prince Kung was in charge of it, and he played an important part in Chinese affairs for the next fifteen years.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204747, "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": 50, "title": "RAS-1964", "content_text": "JOURNAL OF OCCURRANCES AT CANTON\n\n39\n\nwas persuaded to join the firm of Baring Brothers & Co. In 1873 he became senior partner of the house, finally retiring in 1882. (L.T.R.)\n\n24 Lin Tse-hsü's fate. Hunter long survived Commissioner Lin. Lin Tse-hsü was dismissed from office in 1840 and later sentenced to exile in Ili in Chinese Turkistan, where he remained for three years. He was allowed to return to Peking in 1845. He later served as Governor-General of Yunnan and Kweichow, and retired from office in 1849. He died in 1850 at the age of sixty-seven. (J.L.C.B.)\n\n25 Heang-shan (Heungshan). Former name of the District in which Macao lies. Re-named Chung-shan in honour of Sun Yat-sen. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n26 Morrison. John Robert Morrison (1814-1843) was born in Macao, the second son of Dr. Robert Morrison and his first wife Mary (née Morton). He had some schooling in England but at the age of twelve he came back to Canton with his father in 1826. He became a fluent Cantonese speaker as well as a Chinese scholar, and on the death of his father in 1834 was appointed Chinese Secretary to H.M.'s Commission in China. In 1838 he became, in addition, Interpreter, and in 1841 succeeded Elmslie as Secretary and Treasurer to the Superintendent of British Trade in China. In 1843 he was appointed Chinese Secretary and member of the Executive Council of the newly founded Colony of Hong Kong and was recommended for appointment, by the Governor, as Colonial Secretary. Before the appointment was approved, however, he died in Macao in August 1843, and was buried in the Old Protestant Cemetery there. (L.T.R.)\n\n27 Kwang Chow Foo. Kuang-chou fu The Prefect of the Prefecture of which Canton was the chief city. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n28 Kam Hay Hue. No such title. But I suspect Hunter intended to indicate the Namhoi Hien which title was sometimes written Nam Hoy Hien. See note 14. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n29 Pwan Yu Hue. Also written Punyu Hien. The magistrate having jurisdiction over the eastern part of Canton city and the District lying to the westward of the walls which included Whampoa and the foreign shipping there. (J.L.C-B.)\n\n30 Fearon, Samuel Turner Fearon was the second son of Christopher Fearon and Elizabeth Noad who were married on 14 May 1818 at the Streatham Parish Church. His father served as a midshipman at the Battle of Trafalgar and after being discharged from the Royal Navy he joined the Honourable East India Company's marine service. In this service he made a number of voyages to Canton and when he decided to take a shore posting there he brought his wife and family out with him. Samuel became a fluent Cantonese speaker and in 1838 was appointed Interpreter to the Canton General Chamber of Commerce. After the cession of Hong Kong he was appointed interpreter and clerk of the Chief Magistrate's Court and a couple of months later were added the duties of Notary Public and Coroner. Three years later he was appointed Assistant Magistrate of Police and on 1st January 1845 he became Registrar General and Collector of Revenue. In July 1845 he was granted a year's sick leave and while in England he was appointed Professor of Chinese at King's College, London, an appointment which he held from December 1846 until December 1852. (L.T.R.)\n\n31 Van Basel. Magdalenus Jacobus Senn van Basel, born in Groningen, Holland on 27 September 1808, was appointed clerk in the Dutch Consulate at Canton in 1826, and Vice-Consul in November 1831. He was later in partnership with G. M. Toe Laer and P. Tiedenan in the firm of Senn van Basel & Toe Laer & Co. In 1848 he became Collector General of Taxes", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205148, "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-1966", "page_number": 104, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "FOREIGN RELATIONS OF BUDDHISM\n\n48 Ts'en, Hsü-yün ho-shang nien-p'u, Hong Kong, 1962, pp. 21-22.\n\n49 Ts'en, Hsü-yün, pp. 40-43.\n\n99\n\n50 Ts'en, Hsi-yün, pp. 47-48. I have been unable to get confirmation of this story in Thailand; nor have I been able to confirm the related episode, in which Hsü-yün on his way to Bangkok that year met an Englishman who had been British consul in Teng-yüeh and Kunming and who gave Hsü-yün 3,000 pounds Sterling towards the expense of transporting a set of the Tripitaka back to Yunnan. The records of the Foreign Office in London do not appear to reveal who this may have been.\n\n51 White marble images from Burma and Thailand, termed in Chinese \"jade buddhas\" (yi-fo) have been popular in China during the past century. In the late 1890's a set of such images was made in India for a Chinese monk from P'u-t'o Shan, who spent the better part of three years at Oudh overseeing the work. So popular were these particular images that when they arrived in Shanghai, they were kept on exhibit in nearby Woosung at the request of the authorities as a large number of Chinese visit them daily, which was quite profitable for the railway.\" See Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 31 (1896-1897), 203. These may well have been the jade buddhas installed during the reconstruction of the Fa-yü Ssu on P'u-t'o Shan,\n\n52 Ts'en, Hsi-yün, p. 66.\n\n53 Cheng-lien, Ch'ang-chou T'ien-ning ssu-chih, Shanghai, 1948, 7:102. Cf. Chou Hsiang-kuang, History of Chinese Buddhism, Allahabad, 1955, p. 214,\n\n54 See Eastern Buddhist, 3.3 (October-December, 1924), p. 274. This is the earliest instance I have encountered of a Chinese Buddhist going abroad to study Theravada. Unlike Huang Mao-lin he is not stated to have had the goal of spreading Mahayana as well.\n\n55 For example in 1916 the head of the Chi-le Ssu, Pen-chung, led a group of his Refugee disciples to Ku Shan to receive the lay ordination: they numbered five out of the six upasakas and forty out of the 114 upasikas. This information comes from the 1916 ordination yearbook.\n\n56 See Yüan-ying fa-shih chi-nien k'an (Memorial volume for Yüan-ying), Singapore, 1954, pp. 13-14.\n\n57 However, they came from around Amoy rather than around Foochow, where Ku Shan was located.\n\n58 Chinese Year Book 1937, p. 74.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205965, "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-1970", "page_number": 45, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "40 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nRegistrar-General in 1864, a key post, Deane Superintendent of Police in 1867, and Tonnochy who held the offices of Sheriff, Coroner and Marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court in 1865, became Assistant Harbour Master in 1867 and Superintendent of the Jail in 1875, a post he held until his death in 1882. Lister was soon sent to the Harbour Office and Russell, who also acted as Governor Sir Richard Macdonnell's private secretary, was sent to the Magistracy. James Legge, long resident in Hong Kong, was critical of the way in which the original scheme was modified by expediency and argued that \"there should have been no directing them away from their proper business of study until they had given proof of their actual interpretation in the supreme court”,22 Legge was right in principle; but although it was not the Government's intention to produce a supply of sinologues but rather administrators with a knowledge of Chinese, these early cadets did work hard at their Chinese, and one, Lister, supplied the China Review and Notes and Queries on China and Japan with many thoughtful comments on Chinese language and society. \n\nThe development of the cadet scheme can only be understood in relation to changes that occurred outside Hong Kong. The scheme was influenced - if not directly inspired by changes in public administration in India and the homeland. Open competition was first invented for India and the germ of the idea is to be found in Lord Macaulay's 1854 report on recruitment of the Indian Civil Service. In Great Britain appointments to the civil service until the year 1855 were made by nomination. In 1855 a stringent examination was introduced; and in 1870 the principle of open competition was adopted as a general rule. The year 1870 witnessed, then, the abolition of patronage and the admission of people into the civil service at prescribed ages and by means of competitive examinations; and a distinction was drawn, in terms of grades and hence of salary and prestige, between the routine and intellectual tasks of government. Competitive examinations meant, of course, that there was little chance of success into the higher grade except for candidates who had a successful university career, and, often, in addition, special preparation by a private tutor. These reforms influenced the recruitment of cadets into the Hong Kong Civil Service. \n\nIn 1869, as a result of the evolving climate of thought in English, a competitive examination by the Civil Service Commis-\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205979, "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-1970", "page_number": 59, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "54 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nSt. Andrews 2, Aberdeen 2, Glasgow 1). Sir Joseph Kemp attended Cape University, South Africa and Edward Wynne-Jones the University of Wales. \n\nThese university-educated gentlemen represent a social stratum lying somewhere between Mathew Arnold's Barbarians and the Philistines. A large number of them had been educated in schools animated by the ideas and ideals of Arnold's father, Thomas Arnold, the headmaster of Rugby. \n\n28 Alexander Macdonald Thomson (1863-1924), Educated at Aberdeen University. Lecturer in Mathematics, Naini Tal College, India, 1884-5; Assistant Professor of Mathematics, Aberdeen, 1887; entered the Hong Kong Civil Service, and attached for one year to the Colonial Office, 1887; Treasurer 1898-1918. Retired in 1918. He is the only cadet who retired to live in the United States (San Mateo, California); most cadets, including the Scots, settled in the Home Counties on retirement. \n\n29 Norman Lockhart Smith (1887-1968) was the son of Hugh Crawford Smith, M.P., Newcastle-on-Tyne, and Lewis Audley Marsh Johnston (1865-1908) the son of William Johnston, M.P., Ballykilbeg, Ireland. \n\n30 Robert Huessler Yesterday's Rulers, Syracuse, New York, 1963, p. 98. \n\n31 In H. R. Wells and Lam Tong Chinese Documents and Petitions, Hong Kong, 1931, some examples are given in Chinese, with English translations. There are also some interesting specimens of petitions received by the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs from Chinese in Hong Kong. In the section on the Secretariat for Chinese Affairs in the General Orders of the Hong Kong Government, 1924, we read: \"Before taking action affecting bodies or classes of people, the Chinese Government is in the habit of issuing proclamations explaining the action to be taken and the reason for it and the Chinese in Hong Kong expect the same notice to be given. It is desirable that whenever the Head of a Department finds it necessary to take notice of any slackness in complying with the law, or to put a stop to gradual encroachments on the part of individuals, or to bring some new regulation into force, he should first consult the Secretary for Chinese Affairs and ask him to notify the people affected in the same way\". \n\n32 Margery Perham Lugard, vol. 2, London 1960, p. 302. \n\n33 Ibid., p. 367. \n\n34 Geoffrey Robley Sayer (1887-1962), Educated at Highgate School, London, and Queen's College, Oxford. Hong Kong Civil Service 1910; Director of Education 1934-6; retired 1938. \n\n35 Stephen Francis Balfour (1905-1945). Educated at King's College, Cambridge. Hong Kong Civil Service 1929; died in internment during the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong. \n\n36 Walter Schofield (1888-1968). Educated at the University of Liverpool. Hong Kong Civil Service 1911. First Police Magistrate 1934-1937; retired 1938. Schofield was noted for his work pre-war on the geology and archaeology of Hong Kong, in which fields he was a pioneer scholar. \n\n37 Roger Soame Jenyns (born 1904). Educated at Eton and Magdalene College, Cambridge. Hong Kong Civil Service 1926; resigned in 1931 to join the British Museum. He is a noted expert on the arts of the Far East and has written extensively in that field. \n\n38 Robert Andrew Dermod Forrest (born 1893). Educated at Aberdeen University. Hong Kong Civil Service 1919; Inspector of Vernacular Schools; Immigration Officer 1940. Lecturer in Tibeto-Burman Linguistics at the School of Oriental and African Studies at London University.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206080, "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-1970", "page_number": 160, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "HONG KONG BEFORE THE BRITISH\n\n155\n\nnot a general practice, it was probably due to the easiness of running before the wind that the ships could become such large hulks. Unfortunately, we do not know who built them.\n\nBy the eighth century, the boats had become huge. \"Ladders several tens of feet high had to be used to get on board.\" The trade was organised. Foreign captains had to be registered with the Office of Trading Ships, which inspected manifests and collected export and import duties. These captains had legal powers to deal with offending passengers when at sea.\n\nIn 758, the Mohammedans had so much the upper hand in Canton that they yielded to the temptation of sacking and burning the city and making to sea with the loot. However, trade continued to flourish, the principal imports being, according to Soleyman, ivory, frankincense, ingots of copper, turtle shells, and rhinoceros horns (with which the Chinese used to make girdles), and the principal exports: silk and porcelain.\n\nThe foreign ships also carried as passengers Chinese Buddhists visiting the holy places in Java and India. In the biographies of sixty pilgrims composed by I Ching,12 37 of them took the sea route to India. Some of these went from the Tonkin delta region, but the majority started from Canton or returned thither. The compass was still unknown in those days, and the first mention of its use for navigation in Chinese literature occurs at the beginning of the 12th century.\n\nV. T'UN MUN\n\nIn the preceding sections, a picture has been given of the elements which made up the population of South China up to the end of the T'ang dynasty. We now come to our region — the peninsula South East of the Canton delta, and we must do our best to piece together such fragments of historical knowledge that we can find into a sequence which will indicate how its population developed and thrived.\n\nThe first historical reference to any place in the region occurs in a list of itineraries from China to the Persian Gulf collected\n\n11 Tang Kuo Shih Pu, by Li Chan.\n\n12 義淨,大唐西行求法高僧傳", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206293, "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": 110, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "104\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\nimposture and contemptible impudence\". He later was part of Chan Lai Tau's ambassadorial staff at Washington, and upon his return to China in 1882, he promoted the organization of the Canton and Hong Kong Telegraph Company.38\n\nAssociated with Ho Shan Chee in the Telegraph Company was a kinsman, Ho Kwan Shan (何崑珊) alias Ho Amei (何阿美),†Œ4 the Secretary of the On Tai Insurance Company in Hong Kong. Ho Kwan Shan had been educated at Dr. Legge's Anglo-Chinese College in Hong Kong, being a schoolmate of the sons of Ho Asun. Upon completing his education, Ho Kwan Shan joined his elder brother, Ho Low Yuk (何陸玉) in Australia in 1858. From Australia in 1865 he went to New Zealand to arrange for the importation of the first Chinese laborers to New Zealand. Returning to Australia, he served for a time as interpreter at Ballarat, Victoria. In 1868 he came back to Hong Kong. Here he became a clerk in the Registrar General's Office. Later he became interested in developing mines on Lan Tau Island as well as at other places in Kwang Tung Province.39\n\nThe most prominent of the Ho clan, however, was the family of Ho Tsun Shin (何遵善) or as he was better known in Christian circles, Ho Fuk Tong (何福堂).† His father had been a block cutter for the press of the Anglo-Chinese College at Malacca. Ho Fuk Tong joined him there and became a student at the College. He showed scholastic aptitude and for a time accompanied the son of the senior missionary at the Malacca Station to India for advanced study. Upon the arrival of the Rev. James Legge at the Mission, a close bond was established between the two young men. Ho Fuk Tong was his junior by three years. When Legge removed to Hong Kong in 1843, Ho Fuk Tong accompanied him and was ordained as the Chinese pastor of the London Missionary Society congregation in 1846. He continued as a faithful minister of the congregation (now Hop Yat Church) until his death in 1871. He was conscientious and faithful in his service to the church, but he was also very successful as a financier. After his death there were numerous Court suits over the interpretation of his will and the administration of his estate. Some of the difficulties arose because Ho Fuk Tong held his property under various aliases. In one of the cases a barrister gives his opinion why Ho Fuk Tong followed this procedure:", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206299, "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": 116, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "110\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\nBoarding School at Singapore of the American Board. One was Leung Tsun Tak (梁遵德) who was employed as an interpreter at the Hong Kong Magistracy. He was a son of Leung Afat (梁亞佛) an ordained evangelist of the London Missionary Society,49 The other lad was Wei Akwong (韋阿光) whom Bridgman had picked up sick and starving on the streets of Macao some years previous. Akwong, unlike the other Chinese we have been mentioning, never received baptism. At first he assisted Bridgman in his missionary work in Hong Kong, but when Bridgman moved to Canton in 1845 Akwong remained in Hong Kong. He became compradore for the ship chandlers and storekeepers Bowra and Company, but in 1855 was appointed Supreme Court Interpreter in Chinese and Malay. In 1857 when the Mercantile Bank of India, London and China opened its Hong Kong office, Wei Akwong became the bank's compradore. He retained this office until his death in 1878 and was succeeded by his son Wei Ayuk (韋亞玉) alias Wei Bo Shan (韋寶臣). Wei Akwong was a recognized leader of the Chinese community, and his name appears on numerous petitions and memorials. Like Wong Shing he sent his sons abroad to study. His eldest son Wei Yuk married a daughter of Wong Shing, and followed in the footsteps of his father-in-law by serving on the Legislative Council from 1896 to 1917.50 He was knighted in 1919 and died in 1922.\n\nThe Bishop of Victoria had under his patronage upon his arrival in Hong Kong in 1850, a young Chinese whom he had met in England. Chan Tai Kwong (陳大光) was a native of Pun Yu District of Kwang Tung, but he turned up in England in 1845 as a young man aged eighteen. How he got to England and what he was doing there, I have not been able to determine, but in 1849 the newly appointed Bishop of Victoria met him and took him under his patronage, with the hope that he could be trained as an evangelist among the Chinese. Soon after coming to Hong Kong, Tai Kwong was sent to Singapore to marry Gay Eng, also known as Sarah Hughes, a pupil in the school for Chinese girls conducted by Miss Grant. Upon his return to Hong Kong he was placed on three years' probation before ordination, but the Bishop did license him to preach to the prisoners in the Victoria Gaol. Chan Tai Kwong, however, had difficulties in adjusting to his new position. His experience in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206391, "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": 208, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "182\n\nREV. JAMES LEGGE\n\nI have drawn, you probably think, sufficiently long on your attention and patience already, and yet, that we may get a sufficient view of the growth of the Colony, I must ask you to go back with me to the time at which I had arrived when the unhealthiness of 1843 led me away into all these digressions. I will try, however, to be brief in what I have further to say.\n\nSir Henry Pottinger, I observed, was governor of the Colony when I came to it, and I was surprised to find that he was not by any means popular. He was a good man, people said, to conquer China, and a bad man to rule Hong Kong. The impression which I received from my intercourse with him was of a man condensed, reticent, powerful, who would have his own way, and was able to force it. Mr. Davis, afterwards Sir John Davis, arrived and relieved him in May, 1844; and his coming was hailed with eager expectation. He had been in China before in the East India Company's time, was a Chinese scholar, and had written a book on China, which is still the most readable and entertaining work on the country up to the time to which he was able to bring it down. He, it was thought, was just the man for the place. How it came about, I hardly know; but of all our governors he left his office under the greatest cloud of popular dissatisfaction. In his time, however, the Colony made very considerable advances. The arrival of Judge Hulme was almost contemporaneous with that of Sir John Davis, and a Court of Supreme judicature was constituted. Mr. May, whom we all know, arrived in March, 1843, and the police force began to take shape. Not long after, the tax on house property was proposed, and never was there a greater clamour in the place. It was argued that it was unconstitutional, an imperilling of that palladium of English liberty that taxation must go hand in hand with representation; and the revolt of the American Colonies in the last century was alluded to. It was not my lot, however, to be in Hong Kong during the greater part of Sir John Davis's administration. I was laid down with Hong Kong fever in the autumn of 1844, which returned with other complications in the following year, till I was carried on board ship on the 18th November, to make the passage round the Cape, my friends all supposing that Hong Kong had seen the last of me.\n\nTwo days after I had left, Ke-ying, the Chinese statesman, paid a visit to the Colony, and gave a grand entertainment to", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206495, "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": 43, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "RAJA JAMES BROOKE AND SARAWAK\n\n37\n\nFrance, and in 1859 he \"broke off\" relations with Britain, upon which the Foreign Secretary, Lord Russell commented,12\n\nTell Brooke that the people of Sarawak are welcome to any independence they can achieve and maintain but that a British subject cannot throw off his allegiance at pleasure.\n\nAnd Spencer St. John noted13 that \"the Raja's correspondence during this year with Her Majesty's Government was not pleasant, and ended, apparently, in complete estrangement”.\n\nOver the years Brooke had acquired a respectable following of supporters in Britain and Singapore, among whom were some influential figures such as Lord Grey, Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford, and the late Victorian philanthropist, Miss Angela Burdett-Coutts, later Baroness Burdett-Coutts. His friends now took up his cause and lobbied Whitehall from the Prime Minister's office down.\n\nBritain refused to extend a colonial or protectorate status to Sarawak on practical political grounds. Henry Layard, an under-secretary in the Foreign Office, wrote that a protectorate was declined because of the \"inconvenience of such relations between this country and a foreign territory\", because Sarawak “would not be of sufficient value politically and commercially\", and because Brooke's title was not \"sufficiently clear\"14\n\nBrooke's friends persuaded the Government to have another look at Sarawak, and in 1861 Lord Elgin, who was about to depart as the new viceroy of India, was instructed to investigate the prospects and potential of Sarawak. He delegated the task to Colonel Cavenagh, Governor of the Straits Settlements. In due course Cavenagh and Elgin provided an optimistic assessment of Raja Brooke's state and suggested making Sarawak a lieutenant-governorship under Singapore. \"I am disposed to think\", wrote Lord Elgin,15\n\nthat the acquisition of Saigon by the French and the persistent endeavor of the Dutch authorities to cripple British trade... give enhanced importance to the preservation of the independence of Sarawak as a matter affecting British interests.'\n\n12 See correspondence between the Foreign Office and Raja Brooke between 26 November and 17 December 1859, FO12/35.\n\n13 Spencer St. John, Life of Sir James Brooke, Rajah of Sarawak, (Edinburgh, 1879) p. 327.\n\n14 Layard memorandum to Lord Elgin, 2 January 1862, FO12/35.\n\n15 Elgin to Russell, 8 January 1863, FO12/35.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206514, "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": 62, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "56\n\nHENRY JAMES LETHBRIDGE\n\nIn 1878, after success in the competitive examination held by the Civil Service Commissioners in London, he was appointed a Hong Kong cadet by the Secretary of State for the Colonies. He had wished to join, like his friend E.D.H. Fraser,3 the Indian Civil Service but his address to the Civil Service Commissioners for service in India had been turned down. Lockhart was the eighth cadet officer appointed to Hong Kong after the introduction of Hong Kong cadetships by Sir Richard MacDonnell in 1861. Sir Richard had been concerned to recruit young men from Britain who would train to become interpreters, for there was a great need for such persons in the Hong Kong public service at that time. But Sir Richard's scheme was not, properly speaking, an innovation since it was closely modelled on the system devised in 1854 for supplying interpreters to the Consular Service in China. The practice in Hong Kong was for a successful cadet, who had to be between the age of 20 and 23 on the first day of his examination, to remain in Britain for one year after appointment, during which time he was required to begin learning Chinese and to attend a class for students at King's College, London, held by the Professor of Chinese at that institution. The cadet was also employed for some hours daily at the Colonial Office in the work of the Department. At the end of his year's study the cadet was examined in Chinese, and the confirmation of his appointment depended upon both his passing a satisfactory examination and on the performance of his duties in the Office. Lockhart appears to have had no difficulties in meeting these requirements.\n\nIt seems likely that the European public in Hong Kong first knew of Lockhart when they saw a notification from the Colonial Secretary, W.H. Marsh, in the Government Gazette of 1879 which simply stated: 'It is hereby notified that James Haldane Stewart Lockhart, Esq., has been appointed by Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, to be a Cadet in the Hong Kong Civil Service, and that he reported his arrival in the Colony on Tuesday, the 18th November, 1879.' Lockhart had set out from England by P. and O. steamer some time in September 1879; and, as was the form, immediately reported his arrival in Hong Kong to the Colonial Secretary. At that date it was the custom for a newly arrived cadet from Britain to spend a few weeks in the Colony before proceeding to Canton. During his brief stay in the Colony, the cadet was quizzed by senior officials, instructed as to his future", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206519, "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": 67, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n61\n\nCouncil to fill the vacancy caused by the removal of the Chief Justice from that body; and in 1891 he was made a member of the Executive Council. In that year he was also appointed chairman of the Board of Examiners in Chinese and chairman of the Governing Body of Queens' College,17 the oldest Government Anglo-Chinese secondary school in the Colony. In 1895 he was appointed Colonial Secretary in conjunction with his office of Registrar General, 'the first time in the history of the Colony that such a combination had ever taken place and which it was believed was effected for purposes of economy.' At the same time he became Rector of the College of Medicine for Chinese, from which Sun Yat-sen had graduated in 1892. Lockhart in 1895 was, then, the most important official, apart from the Governor, in the Colony and in charge, through his joint appointment, of both Chinese and European affairs.\n\nIn 1898 the leasing of the New Territory (as it was first called) from the Chinese Government for 99 years gave Lockhart yet further employment. The New Territory was an area of 365 square miles, consisting of a portion of the Chinese mainland lying immediately to the north of the Colony; it contained about three-fifths of the Chinese county of San-on (Hsin-an), one of the smaller administrative districts of the Kwangtung Province. In March 1898 Lockhart had proceeded to England on leave of absence but he returned hurriedly to the Colony on 2 August 1898 as Special Commissioner under instructions to inspect and report upon the territory acquired under the Convention of 9 June, 1898. Having completed his inspection he returned to England on 31 August, 1898, by The Empress of India, and submitted a detailed report on 8 October, 1898.19 Thus in less than a month Lockhart had visited the entire district to be taken over, had made assiduous enquiries, and had mapped out, as it were, the entire social and economic organisation of the area.\n\nLockhart returned from his interrupted leave on 3 February, 1899, and on 11 March was appointed to be the representative of the Government of Great Britain for the purpose of fixing the exact boundaries of the extension. By the Convention the boundaries were only indicated generally and provisions had been made for their more exact determination 'when proper surveys have been made by officials appointed by the two Governments.'20 Lockhart", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206525, "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": 73, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n67\n\nthe charge of the North Division magistrate, who was also Secretary to Government. The Secretary held a dormant commission to administer the affairs of the Territory in the Commissioner's absence. The South Division contained all the rest of the leased Territory, i.e., seventeen out of the twenty-six districts, and it was presided over by the South Division Magistrate, who also acted as District Officer. This gentleman controlled a diminutive police force of a sergeant and seven men, all Chinese; all his other staff were Chinese. Apart from the District Officer, there was only one other European official resident in the South Division, which contained 231 out of the 315 villages of the Territory.\n\nUntil 1906, however, Lockhart as Commissioner could call upon the services of the Chinese Regiment in any emergency which the police were unable to cope with. This Regiment was raised in early 1899 and owed its origin to a suggestion made by Field-Marshal Sir Garnet Wolseley, the Commander-in-Chief, that Chinese troops could be organised at Weihaiwei for use in other places. According to R.F. Johnston: 'They did good service in promptly suppressing an attempted rising in the leased Territory, and on being sent to the front to take part in the operations against the Boxers in 1900, they behaved exceedingly well, both during the attack on Tientsin, and on the march to Peking.' Johnston, it seems, over-praised their contribution for between 1899 and 1901 over 800 deserted and many of them moved straight into Chinese service after having passed through what came to be known as \"the Wei Hai Wei Military School\". As the India Office pointed out, Great Britain was in effect furnishing a \"steady annual supply of trained soldiers\" to China. At its greatest strength the Chinese Regiment numbered 1,300 officers and men but in 1906, the year the Regiment was disbanded, their numbers had fallen to about 600. A few picked men were retained as a permanent police force, and three European non-commissioned officers were provided with appointments on the civil establishment as police inspectors. In 1910, therefore, the entire Territory was policed by only fifty-six Chinese constables and three inspectors. There was no permanent garrison of British troops.\n\nWeihaiwei was officially designated not as a Colony but as a Territory, which meant that Lockhart as Commissioner was head of the local government and subject only to the control of His Majesty exercised through the Secretary of State for the Colonies in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206547, "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": 95, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "A HISTORICAL REVIEW OF\n\nHOUSING CONDITIONS IN HONG KONG\n\nE. G. PRYOR\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe pattern of residential development in Hong Kong today is the cumulative result of historical forces which began to exert their influence almost from the time when the colony came under British jurisdiction in 1842. It is therefore towards an appreciation of the current housing situation that this study outlines Hong Kong's efforts to provide homes for its people over the past 130 years. In tracing the course of history in this particular field it will be found that the dreadful living conditions which persisted in many districts in the last century, and even in more recent years, have been the combined result of an overwhelming demand for and critical shortage of accommodation; the general poverty of the population; the inadequacy of utility services; the exploitation of families desperate for a roof over their heads; and the difficulty of enforcing (and sometimes the lack of) suitable regulations governing standards of building construction, the provision of household facilities and overcrowding. However, on the basis of recent achievements the future seems much brighter.\n\nFounding of the Colony\n\nThe sea routes between Europe and China, first established by the Arabs in the 7th Century A.D., were reopened in the sixteenth century by the Portuguese who settled in Macau in 1557. Spanish, Dutch, English and French traders soon followed but during the eighteenth century the British merchants captured most of the China trade which comprised mainly exports of tea and silk. The East India Company initially held the monopoly of trade and Canton became the centre of business for the British merchants.\n\n*Dr. E. G. Pryor is Senior Planning Officer in the New Territories Planning Section, Crown Lands & Survey Office, Hong Kong. This monograph has been extracted largely from his Ph.D thesis, \"An Assessment of the Need and Scope for Urban Renewal in Hong Kong.\" The views expressed are entirely those of the author and do not necessarily coincide with those of the Government of Hong Kong. Author's copyright.\n\nPlates 8-12 illustrate this article.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206752, "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-1973", "page_number": 29, "title": "RAS-1973", "content_text": "CHINA MEDICO-CHIRURGICAL SOCIETY\n\n23\n\n• Lancer and cross: biographical sketches of fifty pioneer medical missionaries in China, comp. by K. Chimin Wong [Shanghai] Council on Christian Medical Work, 1950, p. 14-16.\n\nEurope in China: the history of Hongkong from the beginning to the year 1882, by E. J. Eitel, Hongkong, Kelly & Walsh, 1895, p. 180.\n\n* Information on the officers and committee members during the brief history of the Society in these two paragraphs, except where otherwise noted, derives variously from the Friend of China, the Hong Kong almanack and directory for 1846, and the Hongkong register, as well as the Transactions.\n\n9 As well as in the Transactions, p. 1-2, the record of this first meeting appears in the Friend of China, v. 14, no. 40, May 17th 1844, p. 754, and the Chinese repository, v. 14, 1845, p. 245.\n\n10 Presumably John Williams & Co., Book Sellers & Publishers, 18 Wellington St. \"next house to the Roman Catholic Chapel.\". From an advertisement in the Hongkong register, v. 18, no. 40, Oct. 7th 1845, p. 162, it appears that the shop also sold everything from fowling pieces to \"rare old aniseed brandy\".\n\n11 Royal Society of London: Catalogue of scientific papers, 1800-1900, London, 1867-1925.\n\n12 U. S. Surgeon-General's Office: Index-catalogue of the Library: authors and subjects, Washington, 1880-1950.\n\nPeriodical articles are entered only under subject.\n\n13 The chronicles of the East India Company trading to China, by H. B. Morse, v. 5: Supplementary, 1742-74. Oxford, 1929, p. 101.\n\n14 Trans. p. 27 gives June 8th, but this must be an error, as Dr. Hobson's letter was dated June 15,\n\n15 \"The history of medical education in Hong Kong\" by Sir Lindsay T. Ride, in Inauguration of the Li Shu Fan Medical Foundation, 3rd March 1963: commemoration volume [Hong Kong, 1963] p. 41.\n\n16 The medical missionary in China... by William Lockhart, London, 1861, p. 141.\n\n17 Royal Asiatic Society. China Branch, Transactions, v. 1, 1847, p. 76.\n\n18 Chinese repository, v. 14, 1845, p. 288-91.\n\n19 Anonymous writer quoted by V. H. G. Jarrett in the South China Morning Post; and H. A. Rydings in JHKBRAS, v. 8, 1968, p. 63.\n\n20 Catalogue of works in the Morrison Library, City Hall, Hongkong, including also a synoptical index. Hongkong, printed at the China Mail Office, 1873.\n\n21 The names adopted were, successively, the Philosophical Society of China (5 Jan. 1847), the Asiatic Society of China (19 Jan, 1847), and the China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (7 Sept. 1847).\n\n22 Royal Asiatic Society. China Branch. Transactions, v. 1, 1847, p. 71.\n\n23 Ibid. p. 23.\n\n24 J. R. Jones, op. cit., p. 2.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1973.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8910rj06r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207200, "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-1974", "page_number": 271, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "LIST OF MEMBERS\n\nORDINARY OVERSEAS MEMBERS:\n\nJOHNSON, Mr. & Mrs. Paul K. +\n\nJOHNSTON, James J.\n\nJUNKER, Mrs. Sibylle\n\nKRAMERS, Dr. R. P. -\n\nKIDD, S. T.\n\nLEAKE, Mrs. Sima B.\n\nLECKIE, J. B. H. - + -\n\nLYNCH, Rev. P. Francis, M.M.\n\nMACK, A. M.\n\nMcCOY, J. -\n\nORR, Iain C.\n\nPENNELL, W. V. -\n\nRAINBIRD, S. W. O.B.E.\n\nRASSIM, Mrs. E.\n\nSCOTT, J. M. P +\n\nSMITH, Dr. Ralph B. -\n\nSMITHIES, Michael\n\nSOO, Dr. Hoy Mun\n\nSTOKES, John -\n\n265\n\nc/o Nan Shan Life Ins. Co. Ltd., 15, Nan King E. Road, Section 2, Taipei, Taiwan.\n\nP.O. Box 65, Marshall, Arkansas 72650, U.S.A.\n\nc/o Federal Foreign Office, Referat 412, Bonn (Germany-West), Adenauerallee 101.\n\nc/o Ostasiatisches Seminar, Der Universetat Zurich, Muhlegasse 21, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland.\n\nc/o Hong Kong Govt. Office, 54, Pall Mall, London, S.W.1, England.\n\nc/o American Consulate, Calcutta, India.\n\nc/o H.K. Trade Development Office, Britannia House, 30, Rue Joseph 2nd, Brussels 4, Belgium.\n\nMaryknoll Centre House, 120 San Min Rd., 1st Section, Taichung City 400, Taiwan.\n\n34, Wilton Crescent, London, S.W.1, England.\n\nDept. of Modern Languages, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 14850, U.S.A.\n\nPearce Institute, Govan Cross, Glasgow, S.W.1, U.K.\n\nCan Boyet Mear Puerto Pollensa, Majorca, Spain.\n\nc/o Hong Kong Govt. Office, 54, Pall Mall, London, S.W.1, England.\n\n101, Holland Road, Hove 2, Sussex, England.\n\nc/o The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., 9, Gracechurch Street, London, E.C.3, England.\n\nSchool of Oriental & African Studies, Malet Street, London, W.C.1, England.\n\nEng. Language Training Unit, University of Jadjahmada, Jogjakarta, Indonesia.\n\n249, Jalan Pekeliling, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.\n\nc/o Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., Bandar Seri Begawan, State of Brunei.\n\nSTRICKLAND, Mrs. P. G. Jaishan, Apartada 56, Marbella, Provincia de Malaga, Spain.\n\nSTURM, Dr. F. G. + c/o Dept. of Philosophy, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, U.S.A.\n\nUHALLEY, Dr. Stephen, Jr. 7103, Kukii Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96821, U.S.A.\n\nWATSON, Dr. James L. - + c/o School of Oriental & African Studies, Malet Street, London, W.C.1, E7 HP, England.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207289, "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-1975", "page_number": 57, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "INCIDENT: H.K. MERCHANTS & B.E.I. co.\n\n49\n\non the E.L.C.'s China trade. These documents he read in the India Office Library in London, in the early 1920s, at a time when there was no such thing as xeroxing or microfilming. Morse, therefore, had to read through this enormous mass of documents in the different original handwritings, and always within the confines of the old India Office Library. Morse used his own judgment on what to quote verbatim from the documents, and how much space, if any, to allot to each episode or problem. Often he simply made a brief summary in his own words. Thus what we read is Morse's version of the gist of the E.I.C. records. But this is a personal view, and whenever possible, it is useful to be able to compare his account of an incident with that of another eye witness. This is the justification for printing Lindsay's account in this article, and comparing it with the half page précis given by Morse.\n\nBefore beginning, however, it is necessary to sketch in the background to this incident. Lindsay states vaguely that \"the Hong merchants had some pecuniary demands which the supercargoes thought it their duty to resist....\" Morse devotes nine pages to the relations between the Hong merchants and the supercargoes in Canton, and to explaining the bankruptcy of two Hong merchants and the measures being taken by the other merchants, and also the senior Chinese officials in Canton, to get the E.I.C.'s representatives to pay their debts. This imbroglio was confused still further by the murder of a Chinese man in January 1810. Suspicion pointed to one or more seamen serving on the E.I.C.'s ships, but no positive proof was forthcoming so no one was arrested. According to Chinese legal principles someone must be arrested and punished in the case of a homicide, even if the guilt of the arrested man was only circumstantial. The magistrate in whose jurisdiction in Canton the E.I.C. supercargoes lived began to exhort them, in December 1810, to produce the culprit(s), and threatened that failure to comply would result in a stoppage of trade. This was a familiar threat which the supercargoes themselves were quite adept at using under the right circumstances since neither they, nor the Chinese officials, really wanted trade to stop; it was mutually lucrative. On the 23rd January, 1811 the Viceroy (Governor-general of Kwangtung-Kwangsi) left his post on transfer, and the Governor of Kwangtung and the Hoppo (Superintendent of Maritime Customs for Kwangtung) were left in charge.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207308, "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-1975", "page_number": 76, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "68\n\nE. G. PRYOR\n\nintelligence service to pin-point danger spots and proposed the distribution of 100,000 hand bills publicising the causes and symptoms of plague, the destruction of rats and the addresses of places where sickness could be reported. Another recommendation was the establishment of a plague department with wide powers for the discovery, prevention and cure of plague including inoculation with a highly potent horse antiserum prepared at the Haffkine Institute in India.\n\nA final recommendation made by Simpson was a general improvement of sanitary conditions and stricter control over the design of tenement blocks which he described as follows:\n\n\"The rooms, as a rule, are far too deep, the object of this depth being to subdivide each room into a number of cubicles for the accommodation of families or lodgers. Though there may be windows at each end of the room, the great depth materially obstructs the light to take an example from the better class of buildings, many of the houses that are being erected are eighty feet deep without lateral windows and contain long, narrow rooms of fifty-five feet in depth, by twelve or thirteen feet in width, lighted in front by a window and also in the rear by another window which looks into a backyard of twelve feet. . . .”*\n\nFrom the recommendations made by Simpson arose the Public Health and Buildings Ordinance of 1903 which set new standards for the design and occupancy of buildings and which remained in force until 1935.\n\nBy 1904 a considerable amount of deductive evidence had accumulated to link the occurrence of plague to the fleas carried by rats. Dr. J. M. Howie of Changpoo, for example, was of the opinion that the main cause of plague was inoculation through the bite of fleas, lice and mosquitos. Dr. H. Dobson of Yung Kong also noted that the cases he had observed appeared to have been caused by \"the bites of insects (fleas), contamination of open wounds on legs or elsewhere (or) through food containing the germ.\" William Hunter, the Government Bacteriologist of Hong Kong also noted\n\n* Second Memorandum from W. J. Simpson to James Stewart Lockhart Sanitary Board Office, 20th March 1902, p. 15 in Blue Book Reports on Bubonic Plague 1894-1907.\n\n+ W. J. Simpson, Report on the Causes and Continuance of Plague in Hong Kong and Suggestions as to Remedial Measures, London, 1903, p. 31.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208572, "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-1979", "page_number": 29, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "2\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\nThe American sense of guilt was largely attributable to three factors: United States' military defeats in Southeast Asia, the American commitment to the policy of defeating Germany first before concentrating on Japan, and the American failure in delivering the bulk of lend-lease and other war materials promised to China. On the first point, according to Stanley K. Hornbeck who was political adviser to the Department of State, reports from American sources from or through Chungking indicated that the American defeat in the Philippines, together with the rapid collapse of the British position in Southeast Asia, had bred \"a sense of frustration and defeatism” among the Chinese.4 To be fair, however, one must add that China had been vastly more appalled and disillusioned by, and consequently more contemptuous of, the British performance.\n\nOn the second point, it was only natural that China was disappointed and embittered by the American policy of “Germany First”. Support for this order of priority was by no means unanimous within American government circles. Admirals Ernest J. King and William D. Leahy, General Douglas MacArthur (at his new headquarters in Australia), and Stanley Hornbeck, to give some examples, all expressed doubt about it and urged that a greater military effort should be directed against Japan. While President Roosevelt was firm on his decision to stand by the agreement reached at the 'Arcadia” Conference it did not mean that he was entirely free from embarrassment when faced with his Far Eastern ally, Chiang Kai-shek.\n\nM4\n\nOn the third point, immediately after Pearl Harbour, President Roosevelt had been generous in promising China war materials, including planes, mainly through lend-lease channels. However, the Americans soon realized that it was easier to make the promise than to implement it. Two difficulties were involved. The first was the problem of transport. After the fall of Burma and the seizure of the southern part of the Burma Road by the Japanese early in 1942, air transport became the only feasible means of getting supplies into China. Until the opening of the well-known Ledo Road (later on re-named Stilwell Road) early in 1945, the bulk of the supplies flown from India to China was transported by the Tenth United States Air Force between April and December 1942, and thereafter by the United States Air Transport Command in what Joseph W. Ballantine, who became director of the Office of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208579, "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-1979", "page_number": 36, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "THE U.S. AND THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG 1941-45\n\n9\n\nHong Kong, stated without authorization but from his \"knowledge of the movement of opinion in England\", he felt confident that when the time came to deal with Hong Kong, the Chinese would be completely satisfied.\" The Foreign Office was naturally most displeased by such an utterance,36\n\nBy contrast, the American behaviour at the conference was dis-coordinated. While much of the criticism of British imperialism and skepticism regarding the British attitude and intention in respect to the Atlantic Charter were expressed by the American participants, and while they generally supported the Chinese stand on Hong Kong, the pressure they succeeded in exerting was considerably discounted because they failed to function as a closely coordinated team. Stanley Hornbeck, a delegate to the conference, commented specifically on the organization of the American group in a memorandum on his observations of the conference: \"It needs to be kept in mind with regard to I.P.R. Conferences that, whereas, as a rule, the Groups from most countries... attend and function as “delegations” (with a certain amount of guidance if not definite instructions from their Governments), the members of the American Group attend the function simply as members (without a \"group\" organization and without express guidance and with no instructions from their Government.)\" This disjointed approach was to largely characterize the American stand regarding the question of Hong Kong during the war,\n\nSuch an approach did not long escape Britain's attention. In March 1943 Anthony Eden, the British foreign secretary, paid a visit to Washington, apparently on Churchill's prompting. Eden's conversations with Roosevelt and senior American officials only \"provided an exchange of views with regard to such matters as cooperation between the Governments with respect to political questions arising in connection with the prosecution of the war\"; there was no intention of commitment on either side.38 Early in Eden's visit Harry Hopkins, special assistant to Roosevelt, made the general remark, in front of the president, to the British visitor that he \"thought no useful purpose would be served at this stage of the war, and surely no useful purpose at the Peace Table, by Great Britain and [the United States] having no knowledge of [their] differences of opinion” regarding Hong Kong, Malayan Straits, and India.39 Eden could do no harm in agreeing to this comment.40 Roosevelt, however, was much more direct about Hong Kong. He", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208588, "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-1979", "page_number": 45, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "18\n\nCHAN KIT-CHENG\n\n23 W. Range, Franklin D. Roosevelt's World Order (University of Georgia Press; 1959), p. 105.\n\n24 This is according to the observation of Ashley Clarke, head of the Far Eastern Department in the British Foreign Office, during his one month visit to the Department of State early in the summer of 1942; see his report on his visit to A. Eden, secretary of state for foreign affairs, 11 June 1942, FO371/31804. See also Ministry of Information to Colonial Office, 22 October 1942, communicated to the Foreign Office, FO371/31774.\n\n25 \"The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942-43: A Study of Anglo-American-Chinese Relations\", pp. 266-272.\n\n26 Brenan's minute, 3 December, on J. G. Winant, American ambassador to London, to Eden, 2 December 1942, FO371/31664.\n\n27 Eden to Winant, 7 December 1942, in Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States (hereafter FRUS), China, 1942 (Washington, 1956), p. 390.\n\n28 \"The Abrogation of British Extraterritoriality in China 1942-43: A Study of Anglo-American-Chinese Relations\", op. cit., pp. 284-5.\n\n29 Ibid., pp. 287-8.\n\n30 Ibid., pp. 288-9.\n\n31 War cabinet conclusions 173 (42), 28 December 1942, Cab65/28. Also Eden to Winant, 29 December; and Eden to Lord Halifax, British ambassador to Washington, tel. 8264, immediate, 29 December 1942, FO371/31665.\n\n32 Thorne, op. cit., p. 179, and note 53, p. 198, referring to G. Atcheson to Hornbeck, 29 December 1942, Department of State, Decimal and Other Files, National Archives (Washington D.C.) 793.003/12-2942.\n\n33 W. L. Tung in his book V. K. Wellington Koo and China's Wartime Diplomacy (New York, 1977), based on the Wellington Koo Papers deposited with Columbia University, gives a possible explanation: \"Koo was then Chinese Ambassador to Great Britain and returned to Chungking for consultations. As an experienced diplomat well familiar with the attitude of British official and unofficial circles, he counselled the government to conclude the treaty on the relinquishment of extraterritoriality but reserve the right of later negotiations on the Kowloon question”, p. 53.\n\n34 Halifax to Eden, tel. 6310, immediate, 31 December 1942, FO371/35679.\n\n35 \"The Hong Kong Question during the Pacific War (1941-45)\", pp. 58-68.\n\n34 Ibid., p. 68.\n\n*7 See memorandum in Hornbeck Papers, box 466.\n\n** Cordell Hull, secretary of state, to United States chargé d'affaires in London, tel., 4 April 1943, in FRUS, The British Commonwealth, Eastern Europe, The Far East, 1943 (Washington, 1963), III, pp. 46-7. Also see R. E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins (New York, 1948), p. 707.\n\n30 For American interest in India, especially early in the war, see for example, M. S. Venkatramani and B. K. Shrivastava, \"The United States and the Cripps Mission\", India Quarterly, XIX, no. 3 (July-September, 1963), pp. 214-65. See also author's article, \"Britain's Reaction to Chiang\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208589, "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-1979", "page_number": 46, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "THE U.S. AND THE QUESTION OF HONG KONG 1941-45\n\n19\n\nK'ai-shek's Visit to India, February 1942\", The Australian Journal of History and Political Science, XXI, no. 2 (1975), pp. 52-61, in which the American attitude is discussed.\n\n40 Memorandum by Hopkins, 15 March 1943, in FRUS, the British Commonwealth, Eastern Europe, the Far East, 1943, III, p. 17.\n\n41 Sherwood, op. cit., p. 719, and H. C. Allen, Great Britain and the United States (London, 1954), p. 828.\n\n42 For a summary of the allied military situation at the end of 1943, see J. M. Burns, Roosevelt: the Lion and the Fox (New York, 1956), p. 464. **Hornbeck to Ashley Clarke, 16 December 1943(?), in Hornbeck Papers, box 469.\n\n44 Hornbeck's autobiography, op. cit.\n\n46 Hornbeck's memorandum, 15 November, on his conversation with Churchill, Hornbeck Papers, box 468.\n\n10\n\n16 Hornbeck to Hull, 3 January 1944; also see Hornbeck's memorandum, 3 December 1943, Hornbeck Papers, box 181.\n\n47 C. Hull, The Memoirs of Cordell Hull (New York, 1948), II, p. 1599, 4 Hornbeck's autobiography, op. cit., and J. Bishop, FDR's Last Year (New York, 1974), p. 40.\n\n**E. Roosevelt, As He Saw It (New York, 1946), pp. 163-4, 203-4, 249-50; J. T. Flynn, The Roosevelt Myth (New York, 1948), p. 349; Hull, op. cit., II, p. 1596; and T. H. White (ed.), The Stilwell Papers (New York, 1976), p. 252. Stilwell was summoned to the conference to discuss China.\n\n50 See SWNCC III, secret, 17 April 1945, in ABC 014 Japan (13 April 44) see 32, National Archives.\n\n01 See minutes of the meeting in FRUS, The Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945 (Washington, 1955), p. 769. Also F. L. Loewenheim (ed.), Roosevelt and Churchill: Their Secret Wartime Correspondence (New York, 1975), p. 656.\n\n52 FRUS, ibid., pp. 664-5, 676.\n\n53\n\n58 Thorne, op. cit., p. 549.\n\n54 Tung, op. cit., p. 61.\n\n55 Bishop, op. cit., p. 95.\n\n56 Division of Public Liaison and Office of Public Information, Department of State, \"Fortnightly Survey of American Opinion on International Affairs\", Survey no. 13, confidential, 18 October, Survey no. 14, confidential, 6 November, and Survey no. 15, confidential, 20 November 1944.\n\n57 Examples of these booklets are: \"The British Commonwealth and Empire\" (May 1944), and \"Britain and Japan\" (June 1944).\n\n**See paragraph six of the Chapter of the Combined Civil Affairs Committee at Washington, FO371/46251.\n\n**SWNCC 111, 17 April 1945, op. cit.\n\nSWNCC 111, 17 April 1945, ibid.\n\n61 SWNCC 111/2, top secret, 14 June 1945, in ABC 014 Japan (13 April 44) see 32.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208714, "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-1979", "page_number": 171, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "144\n\nREVS. J. SMITH AND WM. DOWNS\n\nMaryknollers being driven West in the face of the Japanese advance that we had to secure a house to serve them until they got flights out over the Himalaya mountains into Burma or India. Father Frank Keelan received from the Bishop of Kunming a good-sized building, formerly a club for the French who maintained the railway between Kunming and Indo-China, and turned it into a hostel for travel-weary Maryknollers who had been walking, or riding trucks, for weeks in order to reach this city. Father Jim Smith, who had been assisting Father Tennien in Chungking, took Father Keelan's place in Kunming when the latter left for the States, and while there set up a branch of Father Tennien's continent-spanning financial operation to assure a steady supply of funds to the missioners not yet driven out of their posts by the Japanese armies. Father Tennien's mission at this time was to close out this operation; his travels brought him to Calcutta and Chungking, and in the latter place, now manned by Father Tom Brack, it was decided to move the base of operation to Shanghai since the Government was leaving this wartime capital for its former site, Nanking, while the many foreign aid organizations were leaving for Shanghai. Since it seemed that Shanghai would now become the financial center for overseas remittances, he worked out a plan with Father Brack to begin closing down the Chungking operation and move to Shanghai. Following this, he then flew to Shanghai to look things over, and reported to Maryknoll that a priest should be assigned to that city to take care of financial matters for the Society. On his return to Hong Kong, Father Tennien received the first copy of his latest book, \"Chungking Listening Post,\" written while he was in that city during the war years. This copy he autographed and sent to General Wedemeyer, Chief of the American mission in China, and a personal friend.\n\nIn response to Father Tennien's request to set up office in Shanghai, the Maryknoll General Council requested him to do this personally and to continue to manage financial affairs until the post-war situation settled down.\n\n1946\n\nAt the beginning of the year, the Maryknoll Council decided to keep Father Tennien in Shanghai over his repeated requests to return to his mission in Wuchow where there was an unprecedented", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208940, "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": 102, "title": "RAS-1980", "content_text": "70 \n\nJOHN VILLIERS \n\n\"pect our virtue\". Through this gate the Chinese passed the food and other supplies needed by the inhabitants, but at other times they sealed the gate with strips of paper, allowing into China only those few Portuguese officials with authorisation and sending to Macau only customs officers. \n\nThe Portuguese in Macau were first given some official recognition by the Chinese government in 1582 when the new Viceroy of Canton and Kwangsi summoned Macau's chief officials to his court. They came with 4,000 cruzados worth of presents—velvets, crystals, mirrors and so on—and were informed that foreigners could continue to inhabit Macau provided they remained subject to the laws of the Empire.10 \n\nBy 1585 the settlement had acquired full city status with its own municipal council (Senado da Câmara). The Senado was dominated by the casados, Portuguese who had retired from the service of the crown, married and settled permanently in Macau. These acted not only as agents for the Chinese traders but traded on their own account in pepper, cloves, sandalwood and other goods from the Indonesian islands and financed voyages to Manila and to Japan in the so-called Great Ship from Amacon. Macau was not under royal control and was not ruled by fidalgos sent out from Portugal or Goa, so that the interests of the Portuguese government were seldom, if ever, allowed to prevail. The Crown had to be content with a share in the profits from the annual voyages that it financed and the revenues from customs, duties and license fees levied on the merchants.11 \n\nThe overall command of the government of Macau was in the hands of the Captain-major of the Japan voyage, who would spend some months in Macau each year en route to Japan from Goa via Malacca—from one end of the Estado da India to the other. As the Portuguese Crown seldom got more than the commissions and port duties paid in Goa and Malacca, the Captain-major was able to amass a large fortune for himself. He was, however, only permitted to operate a single ship during his term of office so he would ensure that it was the largest ship available. This ship he would load at Goa with Gujerati cottons, chintzes and other Indian textiles, woollen and scarlet cloths, wine, glassware, crystal and Flemish clocks. He would sail with the monsoon in April or May to Malacca, where much of his cargo would be traded for Indonesian spices, camphor and sandalwood and hides from Siam. Thence he", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210265, "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-1984", "page_number": 236, "title": "RAS-1984", "content_text": "215\n\nHe was known as a philanthropist; one of his charitable acts was the donation of a sum of money to the NCBRAS with which the library could be enriched.\n\n88\n\nFounder of the school at Boone Road that bore his name (1891).* Hanbury Road was named after him. Author.\n\n90\n\nHEARD, George Fairley 1863-1864\n\nCame to China as secretary of the American envoy John Ward.1 Partner in Aug. Heard & Co. from June 1, 1862.\n\nHEINSSEN, Rudolph 1864-1865\n\nThe first representative of the German firm Siemssen & Co. who established a branch office in Shanghai January 1, 1856.1 Consul for the Hanseatic Towns 1864-1865.\n\n94\n\nHOGG, James 1865-1866\n\nMercantile assistant Lindsay & Co.,2 partner from July 1, 1854.3 Partnership with E. Jenner Hogg as Hogg Bros. from January 1, 1861.\n\n97\n\nConsul for Italy 1863, 1864.\n\n98\n\nMember Committees I, IV, VII and IX.\n\nHOGG, William 1852-1853\n\nResided in Hong Kong in 1846,99 from 1847 in Shanghai,100 Partner in Lindsay & Co., 1858.102\n\n101 interest in which ended June 30,\n\nConsul for Hamburg 1852-1855(?),103\n\nMember of the Committee to study the erection of a new building for the Shanghai Library 1852;104 trustee British Episcopal Church 1853-1855.105\n\nHOWARD, William 1861-1862\n\nManager of the Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London and China, Shanghai branch, from November 8, 1859.106\n\n躲", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1984.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210599, "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": 206, "title": "RAS-1985", "content_text": "ANTHONY FARRINGTON\n\n187\n\nA NEW SOURCE FOR CHINESE TRADE TO JAPAN IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY\n\nANTHONY FARRINGTON*\n\nI must confess that the word 'new' in my title is a slight exaggeration; 'neglected' might be more accurate, because the source which forms the basis of this paper has been known from at least the beginning of the twentieth century.1 But my contention is that one of its more interesting features has been overlooked and the general context has been partly misinterpreted.\n\nIndia Office Records: G/12/17 comprises the diary and consultations of the English East India Company's factors in Tongking from 25 June 1672 to 30 November 1697. The volume is a composite one, made up in the nineteenth century from ten separate 'books' representing the sequence of transmissions back to London, and it contains some 500 folios of varying size. Neither a calendar nor a transcript of the text has been published, and I can claim to be one of the few to have read through it.\n\nCromwell's charter of 1657, broadly confirmed by Charles II in 1661, rescued the East India Company from a period of financial confusion and commercial difficulties.2 The 1660s then saw the growth of serious interest in the possibility of reviving trade to Japan. The subject was discussed by the Company's Directors at the end of 1658, a report was compiled for the Deputy-Governor in 1661,3 and in 1664 a plan was put forward. A ship would leave London in September with a cargo of English manufactures, take in pepper and Indian piece goods at Bantam, call at Cambodia for any suitable commodities, sail on to Japan and finally, leaving there in November 1665, return to England via Bantam.4 The plan had to be shelved with the outbreak of the Second Anglo-Dutch War in 1665, while in any case the Agent at Bantam pointed out that a base in Tongking, not Cambodia, to secure raw and finished silks for the Japanese market, would be\n\n* Mr. Farrington is Curator, India Office Records, London.\n\nI\n\ni", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210634, "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": 241, "title": "RAS-1985", "content_text": "Dear Sir,\n\nI have examined the fragment of ch. 494 of the Ta pan-jo po-lo-mi-to ching (Maha-prajna-paramita sutra) which you forwarded to Mr. Gardner on behalf of Mr. Nixon. It is undoubtedly a genuine document from the Tunhuang monastic library. I was extremely fortunate that Mr. Dzo Ching-ch'uan, who has worked on these manuscripts in Paris, came to London the other day, and was kind enough to give a second opinion. He considers that it is either 8th or 9th century, but certainly no later. The top and bottom have been trimmed, but it is impossible to say whether in modern times or not. Some of our documents were trimmed before the 10th century.\n\nThe Tibetan document we consider to be later, from the type of paper, but we are not able to comment on the text. I have taken the roll personally to the India Office Library, and they will write separately.\n\nThe fundamental work on paper, calligraphic style, dating sequences, etc., has yet to be done. Among the Tunhuang documents scattered throughout the world there are several hundred of the same title as the Chinese fragment. This one is average to good, with a greater variation of characters in the column than is usual.\n\nYours Sincerely,\n\nsgd.\n\n(E.D. Grinstead)\n\nAssistant Keeper\n\nThe scroll is described in our catalogue as follows:\n\n大般若經\n\n大般若波羅蜜多經卷第四百九十四第三分善現品 第三之十三三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯\n\n1\n\n44×24公分 卷軸 敦煌殘卷共 26 行行17字\n\nThe text of the scroll is reproduced in Plate 14.\n\nJames Hayes", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211626, "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": 41, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "16 \n\nthe Narrative of an Eventful Six Months in China (London, 1875).\n\n20 A. Cunynghame, The Opium War, being Recollections of Service in China (London, 1844).\n\n21 A. Murray, Doings in China: being the Personal Narrative of an Officer Engaged in the late Chinese Expedition (London, 1843).\n\n27 \n\nThe United Service Journal, 1841, part 2 (July 1841), p. 307.\n\n23 C. Smith, Chinese Christians: Elites, Middlemen, and the Church in Hong Kong (Hong Kong, 1985), p. ix.\n\n24 Chinese Repository, 10 February 1841, p. 119.\n\n25 Ibid., 11 November 1842, p. 579.\n\n26 \n\nThe Canton Press of Saturday, 30 January 1841.\n\n27 Ibid., 13 February 1841.\n\n28 \n\nThe Canton Register of 16 February 1841.\n\n* \n\nFor general information on the Sassoons, see C. Roth, The Sassoon Dynasty (London, 1941) and S. Jackson, The Sassoons (London, 1968).\n\n30 \n\nK. N. Vaid, The Overseas Indian Community in Hong Kong (Hong Kong, 1972), p. 15.\n\n31 For further information, see the centenary volume by [J. Steuart], Jardine Matheson and Co., 1832-1932 (Hong Kong, 1934) and M. Keswick ed., The Thistle and the Jade: a Celebration of 150 years of Jardine, Matheson and Co. (London, 1982).\n\n32 JMA, C5/6, 65.\n\n31 \n\nSee J. Y. Wong, 'The Cession of Hong Kong: a Chapter of Imperial History'. The Journal of the Oriental Society of Australia, 11 (1976), 52-3 and ibid., Anglo-Chinese Relations, 1839-1860 (Oxford, 1985), p. 51.\n\nH. B. Morse, The International Relations of the Chinese Empire 1 (London, 1910), p. 624.\n\n35 Wong, Anglo-Chinese relations, p. 52.\n\nJ6 JMA, C5/6, 51.\n\n37 \n\nSee the report by the missionaries in The Canton Press of 27 February 1841, reprinted from one in the Canton Register of 18 February.\n\n38 C. Smith, Chinese Christians, op. cit. p. 173.\n\n39 \n\n40 \n\nVaid, The Overseas Indian Community, op. cit. p. 22.\n\nFor further information on the Madras Native Infantry, see J. B. R. Nicholas, 'Madras Native Infantry, c. 1845', Tradition, 42 and 43.\n\n42 \n\nSee The Canton Press of 16 January 1841.\n\nSee B. Mollo, The Indian Army (Poole, 1981), pp. 64-5. For further information on the Bengal Native Infantry, see F. G. Cardew, A Sketch of the Services of the Bengal Native Infantry to the year 1895 (Calcutta, 1903) and A. Bharat, The Bengal Native Infantry, 1796-1852 (Calcutta, 1962).\n\n43 P. Fay, The Opium War, 1840-2 (Chapel Hill, 1975), p. 208.\n\n44 \n\nVaid, The Overseas Indian Community, op. cit. p. 22.\n\n45 Mollo, The Indian Army, op. cit. p. 50.\n\n46 \n\nIndia Office Library and Records, London, China Medal 1842 and Bengal Army Lists.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211627, "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": 42, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "17\n\n1840-1842.\n\n47 India Office Library and Records, Bengal Army Lists, 1840-1842, unpaginated.\n\n42 For information on these ranks, see E. G. Barrow, The Sepoy Officer's Manual (a book of reference for officers of the Bengal Native Infantry) (Calcutta, 1887), p. 18.\n\n49 W. Legge, A Guide to Hongkong (Hong Kong, 1893), p. 2.\n\n50 Sir William Laird Clowes, The Royal Navy, VII (London, 1903), p. 575.\n\n31\n\n52 Clowes, The Royal Navy, op. cit. VIII, pp. 112, 203, 207 and 88.\n\n53 Ibid., VII, pp. 90, 338 and 346.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211677, "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": 92, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "67\n\nanti-British propaganda, which the facile Eugene Chen* was then addressing to a gullible American press.\n\nSet back from the Bund behind a heavy hand-wrought iron fence of ugly design, the Consulate building was typical of those erected in the 1860s, when the Concession was first opened. The two-storied thick brick walls, shaded all round by wide arched verandahs, in the style affected in India, housed both the office and the residence of the Consul. Upstairs, parts of the verandah had been boarded in to provide bathrooms in accordance with modern practice. From the bedroom windows the view carried across the Yangtze to the flat north shore, a mile away, where the farmers were already cutting down for fuel the tall reeds, which yearly grew along the banks of the river. We would often cross over at this season with our guns and our dogs to beat the pheasant out of the smaller clumps left by the reed-cutters.\n\nHaving completed their inspection, the plotters moved on down the Bund, past the godowns of Messrs. Butterfield and Swire, past the Customs House, past the Roman Catholic Church to the Bund gate, through which they trouped a little self-consciously under the eye of the steel-helmeted gentleman, who stood there with his rifle at the slope, in the blue uniform, the khaki webb equipment, and the spats of the Royal Navy.\n\nTheir plans soon matured. Some afternoons later a political meeting was called on the foreshore outside the Bund gate, which the Navy had left open to avoid any accusation of provocation. By the offer of a ten cents inducement to the loafers and riff-raff of the Chinese city an adequate attendance was ensured. Orators stood on the Bund wall whipping up the temper of the crowd: they shouted slogans in which the words \"Beat down” and “Kill\" echoed frequently. The crowd soon responded and parties began trickling into the Concession. Stones flew through the air. The sentry at the gate discreetly withdrew and sounded the alarm. The British Naval guard turned off: they had strict orders not to fire, but to protect themselves by dropping their rifle butts on the toes of any rioters who pressed them too closely. This method of defence is not very effective against stones. Reinforcements were brought ashore from the meagre crew of the destroyer; they were joined by some dozen\n\n* (Trinidad born journalist. At this time Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kuo Min Tang Revolutionary Government.)", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212128, "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": 70, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "47\n\nthe Ch'ung-fu-ssu or Office for Christian Clergy, was set up in 1289 to supervise their activities, and this body is last heard of in 1351. The Ming revolution against the Mongols in the 1360s, which swept through China from south to north, was strongly nationalistic in character, and references to foreigners in Chinese cities cease after these cities passed under Ming control. The Mongol capital Khanbalik (modern Peking) fell in 1368, and China thereafter retreated into a long period of isolation from the outside world. Nestorian Christianity was now spent, and the next wave of Christians to arrive in China, nearly two hundred years later, were Roman Catholics from Europe. They came by sea, as it was now no longer possible to travel overland through Central Asia, and they found that the work of evangelism had to begin all over again, as scarcely the faintest memory of Christianity had survived in China.\n\nThe number of Nestorian priests in China was never large. In the T'ang period they probably numbered a few thousand at most. As we have seen, Wu-tsung's decree of 845 gives a figure of about 3,000 foreign monks, and a slightly earlier Buddhist work asserts that the grand total of Manichean, Nestorian, and Zoroastrian monasteries in China was smaller than the number of Buddhist monasteries in a single small city. In the Yüan period, according to a census taken in the 1290s, Mongols and other foreigners in China accounted for as many as one person in thirty-five of a total population of seventy-two million. Even so, the number of Nestorian Christians in China was estimated by John of Cora in 1330 to be no higher than 30,000. This estimate may be slightly low, but it is clear that it is on the right lines.\n\nThe Nestorian missions to China have generated an extensive and often romantic literature, and much, probably too much, has been claimed for the effectiveness of their missionary activity. In T'ang China the Nestorians had the Christian missionary field to themselves; in Yüan China they were joined by missionaries of the European Latin church. On both occasions the influence of Nestorian Christianity on China appears to have been insignificant. The major, if impermanent, missionary achievement of the Nestorian church beyond its heartland in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys and the hills of Kurdistan, was not in China, but in Arabia, India, and Turkestan. The mission to Turkestan was particularly important: the ethnic character of the Nestorian church, at first predominantly Syrian and Persian, was substantially modified between the ninth and fourteenth centuries.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212194, "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": 136, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "113\n\nthe walla-walla men are\n\nwould be an argument about the fare surely descended from the original Hongkong pirates and, that settled, a slow journey across the harbour, followed by a walk home. Such conditions are discouraging to social intercourse. They tend to break the community up into cliques; into the circle who live on the Peak, the crowd down in Victoria, and the mob over in Kowloon.\n\nHow deep-seated was the snobbery amongst the few could be seen at a later date, when the remnants of the British community were interned by the Japanese. Many of the women still thought themselves too superior to keep company with their sisters in misfortune, and continued to carry their noses in the air, while living under the most dismal conditions, crowded cheek by jowl seven and eight to a small room.\n\nTo avoid overheating during the Hongkong summer called for a special technique. The idea was never to move rapidly in any direction; a slow steady advance got you there. If the advance took you past the stately building erected by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, so much the better. It was air-conditioned. You could look in on your friends, who had the good fortune to rent offices there, and while passing the time of day your body refreshed itself in the cool dry atmosphere.\n\nOwing to the discomfort of movement and the geographic complexities, on leaving office at noon most people did not return home to lunch. They either went to the Club, where the cuisine, it is unreliably claimed, compared with that of the Shanghai Club, or to the Hongkong or Gloucester Hotels. These rival but contiguous establishments were a local institution. What Shepherd's Hotel was in Cairo fifty years ago, the Hongkong Hotel was in the late 1930s; a place where wanderers met. You seldom entered the hotel lobby without running into someone you had not seen for years. It might be an official of Imperial Airways who had just flown in from India, via Rangoon and Bangkok, or an American news reporter leaving by Pan-American clipper for Manila. Both hotels provided excellent fare. Some favoured the one, some the other. At the Gloucester the dining room was eight floors up on the roof, with a view over the harbour; in the Hongkong Hotel it was at ground level with a view of the \"Grips\", the arena where the cosmopolitan crowd foxtrotted to the music of a Filipino orchestra.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212302, "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": 244, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "221\n\nabout 20 headquarters staff. Shortly before Hong Kong was founded in the 1830s, this company controlled one-third of all foreign trade with China.\n\nJardine's\n\nToday, the best known of Hong Kong's traders is still Jardine Matheson, which predates the birth of the colony by nine years, although some say there has been an over-concentration on Jardine's history at the expense of other firms. Nonetheless it is the oldest, still thriving, western trading house in the Far East, having been established in the reign of William IV (1830-7).\n\nIn 1817 William Jardine decided to enter commerce, and, on an introduction by Hollingworth Magniac, from 1822 to 1824 he took charge of Charles Magniac and Company (Charles and Hollingworth were brothers) which was in financial difficulties. James Matheson arrived in Canton in 1820 and formed Matheson and Company. In 1828, Jardine and Matheson joined forces. The name Magniac was dropped, and the new enterprise was established by the two Scotsmen in 1832. The name remains the same to this day.\n\nWilliam Jardine had been a ship's surgeon in the Honourable East India Company from 1802-16. He retired to Scotland in 1838 (some records say 1839) and died in 1843. Matheson left the East in 1842 and took an active part in running the firm from Britain. He died in 1878 aged 82. Both were Members of Parliament in the 1840s. William Jardine had already returned to Scotland when the firm set up business in Hong Kong. When the first land sales were held in Hong Kong on 14th June 1841, Jardine's built godowns (warehouses) on land purchased in what is now Queensway. In 1842, these were sold to the Royal Navy for stores. Immediately Jardine's started to build an office, wharves, a slipway for ships, workshops, stables, houses, and a junior mess at East Point, on an isolated promontory. They also built godowns which had thick walls of granite blocks. The site was close to the present Yee Wo Street (fi) which takes its name from the Chinese name of the company (meaning 'pleasant harmony'), although the Chinese name for the firm is more often romanised as Ewo. All the original buildings have been demolished.\n\nOther places named after the company include Jardine's Bazaar", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212325, "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": 267, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "244\n\nParsees. At one time, with a German Chairman and an American Deputy Chairman, the Board had no British members. The financial failure of Dent, in 1867, had the effect of freeing the Bank from dependence on any one enterprise and brought about more independent management control. Within months of setting up its headquarters in Hong Kong a branch was opened in London, and further branches were established in San Francisco (1875), New York (1880), Lyons (1881) and Hamburg (1889). By the 1880s The Hong Kong Bank had become banker to the Hong Kong Government, and to this day it is, in effect, the Central Bank of the Territory.\n\nWorld War I proved a difficult period, and its German directors resigned shortly after hostilities commenced. The Bank resumed its leading position in China and the Far East in the 1920s and 30s. Like the Chartered Bank, the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank's branch in Shanghai operated without interruption all through the Cultural Revolution.\n\nToday 'Wardley' is the name of an investment company associated with the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank. In 1864, Wardley House (demolished in 1882 when its new bank building was completed) was the first premises of the Bank. William Henry Wardley was a staff member of Gibb Livingston. He started his own firm about 1850. Although the company was taken over by F.B. Johnson and James Bowman the name was retained. It stopped trading about 1861, before the Bank was established. But the name, Wardley, has been perpetuated.\n\nThe Mercantile Bank\n\nThe old Mercantile Bank can be traced back to October 1853, with the founding of the Mercantile Bank of Bombay. Within two months it had become the Mercantile Bank of India, London and China, a co-partnership of four Indian proprietors and four British. An office was opened in London almost immediately, and other offices, in 1854, in Madras, Colombo and Kandy. In 1855 branches started at Calcutta, Singapore, Canton, Shanghai and Hong Kong. Comparing these dates with the Chartered Bank, Mercantile got off to a quicker start, although both banks were established in the same year. Mercantile had a branch in Hong Kong, for example, four years before Chartered.\n\nSkipping a century, in 1958 the name was shortened to ‘Mercantile", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212476, "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-1991", "page_number": 30, "title": "RAS-1991", "content_text": "in a period when Chinese were only allowed to invest in European insurance companies. But at the same time, he still had large interests in traditional business.\n\nCantonese compradors in Hong Kong, of course, should not be considered as only a few persons; they could probably be identified from archives of the firms they worked for. However, we are limited by sources, which make it quite difficult, but not impossible, to assess compradors' wealth which they had accumulated when they were in office. Furthermore, most of the wealthy Chinese in Hong Kong, including compradors at that time, had investments or property in China. From their business activities, a Canton-Macau-Hong Kong linkage is shown in their wills deposited in the Hong Kong Public Records Office.\n\nNames of the Cantonese compradors in Hong Kong were probably Cheang Hoong of Philips Moore & Co., Wong Kong and Kwong A Hang of Smith, Archer & Co.; Ng A Cheong of Douglas Lapraik & Co., Law Pak Sheung of Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation, Wai A Kwong of Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London & China, Law Sai Nam of McBain & Co., Lau Cheong of Gilman & Co. (Fuzhou), Au Yeung Shing of Russell & Co., Sung Chin Tseung of Messrs. Turner & Co., Tong Mow Chee (Tang Maozhi) of Jardine, Matheson & Co. (Tianjin), and Choa Chee Bee of China Sugar Refining Co., Ltd. They all left wills in which some indicated business connections with Canton, Macau, and Hong Kong. For example, the will of Wai A Kwong written in 1866 reads:\n\nI am a native of Tsin Shan in the District of Heung Shan, Empire of China, at present residing in Victoria, Hong Kong, and holding the office of compradore of the Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London, and China. At the age of eleven years, I left my native place and proceeded to Macau, where I obtained employment as a domestic servant to a Portuguese; at the age of thirteen, I was sent down to Singapore by the Reverend E. C. Bridgman, missionary to the Chinese, and became the first pupil of the Morrison Education Society. I returned to Hong Kong in the year 1843, and I have ever since lived under the just and equitable rule of the British Government. I married in Hong Kong and have several children, all born in this colony. By industry and thriftiness, I have acquired and am possessed of sundry houses, lands, shares in business, and other property and effects. Knowing\n\nPage 30\n\nPage 31", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212477, "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-1991", "page_number": 31, "title": "RAS-1991", "content_text": "11\n\nthat all men must die and not knowing when I may be called away, I deem it right while still in bodily health and full possession of mental faculties to make my will.\n\nWei A Kwong, the father of Wei Yuk, had a typical story of success. He was a Zhongshan native; he left his hometown and worked in Macau as a teenager. His father was a comprador to two American merchants, Benjamin Chew Wilcocks and Oliver H. Gordon. It was known that Wei was forsaken by his family and had to resort to begging on the streets of Macau. He was later sent to Singapore where he studied under the auspices of the Morrison Education Society in a school of the American Board of Commission for Foreign Missions. This changed his life. He returned to Hong Kong and began his career. He served as comprador in Bowra & Co. and then in the Mercantile Bank of India, London and China until his death. Wei wrote his will in 1866. He prefaced it with a brief account of his life, particularly mentioning that he was the first student of the Morrison Education Society and that he first came to Hong Kong in 1843. He had \"ever since lived under the just and equitable rule of the British Government.\" Though we cannot prove to what extent his exposure to Western culture was related to his Christian education, he succeeded in becoming a leading member of Chinese society in Hong Kong. This contrasts with the will of Sung Chin Tseung, which reads.\n\nSung Chin Tseung, otherwise literary appellation Sung Ching, otherwise Ngok Shan, native of Kat Tai village, of Kong Sheung Division, Heung Shan District. I followed my deceased father, Mr. Shau U, to Hong Kong in 1842 to trade in foreign business as compradore. Further, in 1854, thanks to the kind support of Mr. Ryrie and others of Messrs. Turner and Co., Hongkong, I took over the office of compradore and up to the present thirty odd years.\n\nBoth Wei and Sung were natives of Zhongshan. They came to Hong Kong for business in the early 1840s when Hong Kong was already a British colony. Though they lived in Hong Kong, they maintained connections with their hometown, as Sung's father, Soong Ke, stated in his will written in 1864:\n\nIn the 21st year of Tao Kwong (1841), I came to Hong Kong and employed myself in business all the time with foreigners, always being diligent and making little profit sufficient to", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213095, "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-1993", "page_number": 163, "title": "RAS-1993", "content_text": "144\n\ndescribed him as 'ubiquitous and indefatigable, burying, demolishing, disinfecting, burning and evacuating during the Epidemic.' He eventually succeeded Lockhart as Colonial Secretary in 1902 and as Sir Henry May, became Governor of Hong Kong in 1912, the first local cadet officer to have risen to the highest rank.\n\nFor details about Lowson's subsequent career and life, I am indebted to Mrs. Ashburner for giving me some biographical notes. He came back to Hong Kong to continue his work in the Epidemic after his holiday in Japan. In 1896, he married Miss Isabel Lammert at the St. John's Cathedral. His bride was the second daughter of G.R. Lammert, the auctioneer, whose firm Lammert & Co. was the first of its kind in the Territory, with rooms in Duddell Street for many years. He went on leave in 1897 but soon after went to India at the request of the Secretary of State to advise the government in their efforts to stamp out plague. However, he did not stay long. To quote from an obituary notice, 'he quarrelled with the authorities in a very downright fashion after a few months and took himself to England. This sounds like Hong Kong all over again!' He was back in Hong Kong after this episode. In 1901, he became ill with tuberculosis. On sick leave in Australia, he was asked to advise the Government of South Australia about plague. Eventually, in 1902, he was invalided out of the service at the age of 36 only. He was awarded a gold medal, but not the CMG which was what he would have liked. Back in Scotland, after a period of convalescence, he was active in public affairs in his home town, Forfar. He was elected to the Town Council in 1905 and served continuously for thirty years, during which he was Provost from 1925 to 1931. During the First World War, he served as a Medical Officer of Health for troops quartered in the area. He died in 1935, aged 69.\n\nFrom a number of obituary notices which Mrs. Ashburner kindly sent me, I have gathered some descriptions of Lowson. 'He had a most forceful personality.' 'Pale faced, bright-eyed and black-haired, he stood about five feet ten and had hardly any flesh on his bones.' That was his appearance. About his work on the Forfar Town Council, 'Into the duties of his office he entered with characteristic energy. It was not long before he had shaken his seniors out of their self-complacency.' Also, 'He criticised at every opportunity the Council's methods of doing business and he attempted and did indeed bring about many much-needed reforms.' Another passage: 'He was looked upon not unreasonably as something of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213203, "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-1994", "page_number": 25, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "4\n\nincluded (CO129/414, p. 177).\n\nThe three German females in the 1921 census are mentioned in a report Canon Bannister sent to the Church Missionary Society in 1914. The Berlin Foundling House had 150 children and the two Blind Homes had 120 children. \"The Government has allowed three German ladies to remain in each home and the writer was asked to take general oversight”, (Archives of the Church Missionary Society, University of Birmingham, England, CH1/P/4 No. 149, Bannister, 5 Nov. 1914).\n\nThe German community gradually reestablished itself in Hong Kong, but in 1931 it was less than half of what it had been in 1911.\n\nHong Kong being a British colony, the British were the largest non-Chinese community. Next was the Macanese-Portuguese. The third were the Germans. They were followed by the Americans,\n\nGermans in the Canton trade\n\nGerman-speaking merchants participated in the China trade in the eighteenth century. The trade was confined to Canton. In 1729, the Holy Roman Emperor, the Emperor of Austria, chartered the Imperial East India Company to trade in the East using the port of Ostend in the Netherlands as its home base. At that time Netherlands was a part of the Austrian Empire. This company did not use German ships, but chartered British vessels which were principally manned by British crews. This was a stratagem to get around the efforts of the British chartered East India Company to control the European trade with China. Over the years there were usually two or three ships each season from Bremen or Hamburg arriving at Canton.\n\nBritish free traders used the protection of the office of Consul for foreign states to acquire the privilege of permanent residence in China. These free traders were large importers of opium of India, a trade the British East India Company ships did not engage in as it was prescribed by Chinese Imperial Edict and the company wished to maintain a good relation with the Dragon Throne. It feared that if it was too closely identified with the opium trade the Chinese authorities would curtail the company's lucrative and traditional trade in tea.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213204, "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-1994", "page_number": 26, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "As a chartered monopoly the East India Company had the right to exclude British subjects who were not members of the company from residing permanently in China. Their presence was tolerated for only the few months of the trading season. Consuls representing a foreign country could claim exemption from this rule. In 1783, John Reed was commissioned as head of the Austrian Imperial Factory at Canton - the trading establishments were called factories. He had been born in Britain but subsequently became a naturalised subject of the Austrian Emperor. Another Englishman, a subject of Austria, arrived in Canton in 1787, carrying a certificate of naturalisation from Austria. There was, however, a dispute about the national status of Edward Watts and the British East India Company demanded he leave at the end of the trading season, but he stayed on for several more years ignoring the attempt to get rid of him.\n\nDaniel Beale, a British subject who had been in the employ of the East India Company, in 1787 was appointed the Prussian Consul at Canton. This post was held by subsequent partners of the firm of which Beale was a member. The firm eventually became Jardine, Matheson and Co. The present Rua Pedro Nolasco da Silva in Macao is called by Chinese Bak Ma Lo, or in translation White Horse Road. Father Manuel Teixeira, the Macao historian, states that the white horse was on the Prussian flag which flew over what was then No. 1 Rua Hospital, a building occupied by Jardines for some years.\n\nIn the lists of residents on the China coast published in the Chinese Repository and the Anglo-Chinese Commercial Directory, the first name I have identified as German is Edmund Mueller in 1835. He was from Hamburg but arrived at Canton from Manila. He became the editor of the Canton Press, holding this position from 1836 to 1844. In the latter year he went into trade at Macao. He appears to have left China by 1847.\n\nGustav Christian Schwabe is listed as a German residing at Canton in 1837. He had arrived from Calcutta in November 1836 and sailed for Manila in October 1837. The firm of Sykes, Schwabe and Co, which later became Boustead and Co., had its head office at Liverpool with overseas branches at Singapore, Manila and Canton. Mr. Schwabe was manager of the Liverpool office from 1845 to 1853. He then returned to China to head the firm of G.C. Schwabe and Co. at Shanghai. This firm was dissolved by lapse of time in 1859 and was succeeded by Bower, Hanbury and Co, Shanghai.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213224, "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-1994", "page_number": 46, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "25\n\nerected on the lot was completed, he moved into temporary offices. Two marine lots were bought in 1858 in Sai Ying Pun on which extensive godowns (ware-houses) were built (Hong Kong Land Office, Memorial 1477, 21 Sept. 1858). He soon after left Hong Kong to assume management of the firm's affairs in Hamburg. There he married in 1859 a Miss Wagner (North China Herald 6 Aug. 1859). He continued to reside at Hamburg until his death on 24 November 1886 aged seventy-one (DP 6 Dec. 1886).\n\nWhen Mr. Siemssen left Hong Kong his partners were Ludwig Wiese and Woldemar Nissen (FC 31 Mar. 1855). Mr. Wiese was a Norwegian by birth but subsequently became a naturalized British citizen. From 1849 to 1855 he had been an assistant in the office of Carlowitz, Harkort and Co. at Canton. At various times he served as Consul for Hamburg, Lubeck, Sweden and Norway and was acting Consul for Prussia and Austria. His connection with Siemssen and Co. ended in 1863 (CM 5 Jan. 1865). He located in London, where in 1871 he joined the Board of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China (CM 24 July 1871). Though no longer a partner he represented the interests of Siemssen and Co. in England. He died in England on 22 March 1887 (GG, Probate Calendar 4 July 1887). His widow Joanna died in the City of Westminster on 10 May 1904 (GG, Probate Calendar 25 Apr. 1906).\n\nAgathon Friedrich Woldemar Nissen — usually known as Woldemar — was a partner from 1855 until his death in Hamburg on 28 December 1896 (DP 7 June 1897). He was a member of the Provisional Committee for the organisation of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in 1864. He was Deputy Chairman of the Board in 1866 and Chairman in 1867. He left Hong Kong in October 1867 (CM 31 Oct. 1867). In Hong Kong he was Consul for the Hansa Towns of Bremen, Hamburg and Lubeck as well as for Sweden and Norway.\n\nThe business of the firm increased rapidly. New branches were opened and new partners admitted. Rudolph Heinsen was transferred from the Canton office to Shanghai to open a new branch there in January 1856 (FC 1 Jan. 1856). He later became a partner and his interest in the company ended in 1868 (GG 9 Jan. 1869). George Wilhelm Schwemann was the managing partner at Foochow in 1861. Friedrich Adolph Joost was a partner from 1864 to 1873 (CM 1 Jan. 1864, Daily Press 28 Jan. 1874). When Messrs. Schwemann and Heinsen retired from the firm in 1868, they were replaced by Ferdinand Nissen and Heinrich Hoppius (GG 9 Jan. 1869).", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213226, "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-1994", "page_number": 48, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "27\n\nthe style of Oxford and Co., entered a suit in the Supreme Court of Hong Kong against H.B. Cama and Co for a debt of $12,294.21 (GG 10 June 1865). Alexander C. Levysohn and Jacob Arnhold were admitted partners in Oxford and Co. | January 1863 (CM 30 Apr 1863)\n\nJacob Arnhold, one of the original partners of Arnhold, Karberg and Co. died in July 1903 (DP 18 Nov. 1903). He made his will on 5 September 1902. In it he gave his address as 5 East India Street, London, and named his brother Philip Arnhold and Sir Ewen Cameron, London Manager of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank as his executors. All his estate was left to his wife Anne (PRO Will File 201 of 1903/1642).\n\nPhilip Arnhold died on 29 March 1910 at Altona, Germany aged a little over sixty years. He was then the senior partner. His obituary states he came from Europe to China as a young man in his twenties. In 1868 he joined Messrs. Oxford and Co. of Canton. A few years later he followed his brother Jacob Arnhold to Hong Kong where the firm of Arnhold, Karberg and Co. was formed. Philip joined the new firm. The careful reader will note that the chronology of the obituary differs from the notices in contemporary newspapers noted above. After a few years a branch was established at Shanghai and Philip went there, where he remained until 1902. The obituary observes that he lived a plain business man's life, devoid of ostentation. He was a director of the Soy Chee Spinning Co. at Shanghai and various other local companies. In 1902 he returned to London to join his brother Jacob in the management of the headquarters office. Upon Jacob's death in 1903, Philip became senior partner, and upon the latter's death E. Goetz assumed that position (HKT 1 Apr 1910).\n\nMr. Arnhold made a will dated 13 May 1900. It mentions the children of his first marriage but does not name them. His second wife was Thekla Emma Elizabeth Vogler, formerly the widow of Dr. Gustav Carl Ludwig Zedelius. He left bequests to his sisters and sister-in-law Theresa Wagner, nee Arnhold, Hanna Delbanco, nee Arnhold, and Adele Hoppe, nee Vogler. The place of his death is given as Klein Flottbek, Holstein, Germany (PRO Will File No. 43 of 1911/2366).\n\nPeter Karberg, one of the founders of Arnhold, Karberg and Co., appears in the Hong Kong jury lists from 1867 to 1876. Four children were born in Hong Kong to him and his wife Helene Dorothea between September 1871 and April 1876. A Christian, Peter Karberg was an assistant in the firm at Hong Kong from 1882 to 1898. After leaving Hong Kong Peter Karberg lived in Copenhagen, Denmark.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213227, "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-1994", "page_number": 49, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "28\n\nAlexander Cosman Levysohn, another founder of the firm is on the Hong Kong jury lists in 1864 and 1865. He then went to Canton to take charge of the Shameen office there. Lewis Mendel became a partner in 1875 (DP 3 Jan. 1874). He died at Hong Kong on 4 November 1895 aged fifty-one. He came to China to join the firm in 1867, retired in 1883 and returned home, but came back to Hong Kong later and established his own business as a share broker (DP 5 Nov. 1895). His will made in 1882 mentioned only his father, brothers and sisters as his heirs. His executors were Jacob Arnhold of London and Lorenz Poesnecker of Hong Kong. Mr. Mendel was a native of Altona, Germany (PRO will File No. 101 of 1896 [4/1105]).\n\nLorenz Poesnecker was an assistant in Arnhold, Karberg and Co. in Hong Kong from 1870 to 1880. He was authorised to sign for the firm on 6 June 1874 (DP 7 June 1876) and became a partner in 1880/81. When he made his will in June 1896 he gave his address as 5 East India Avenue, City of London. He left his estate to his wife and after her death to his children. He named Caesar Erdmann of Hamburg and Richard Millitzer of Hof, Bavaria as his executors. He died in London on 9 July 1897 and the administration of his estate in Hong Kong was granted to Carl Beurmann and Max Carl Johann Grote as attorneys of the executors named in the will (PRO Will File No. 20 of 1898 [4/1162]).\n\nJulius Kramer was authorised to sign for the firm in June 1888 and was admitted a partner in 1892 (DP 13 June 1888, 18 Mar. 1892). During his first years with the company he was at its Canton office. At an auction for lots in the French Concession on Shameen in November 1889 he purchased Lots 1 and 7 for $2,610 (DP 8 Nov. 1889). After being admitted a partner he moved to Hong Kong. There his wife Bertha died on 14 February 1896 at “Luginsland” on the Peak Road (DP 15 Feb. 1896). Not long after he left Hong Kong and died on 11 November 1898 at Heidelberg. Administration of his estate in Hong Kong was granted to Ernest Goetz as the attorney of Philip Arnhold (GG Probate Calendar 7 June 1898). A former street in Tai Kok Tsui, Kowloon, was named after Mr. Kramer. When the Royal Dutch Oil Co. began importing oil to China by tanker in the last decade of the nineteenth century, Arnhold, Karberg and Co. acted as its agent. Oil storage tanks were built at Tai Kok Tsui. The Royal Dutch is better known as the Shell Co.\n\nWhen Philip Arnhold died in 1910 Ernest Goetz became senior partner.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213270, "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-1994", "page_number": 92, "title": "RAS-1994", "content_text": "72\n\nThus, although the doctrine has made a comeback among the citizens of the People's Republic (Superstition rife, 1989: 13), no thought was supposed to have been paid to it when the towering Bank of China was planned. The Chinese-American architect, I. M. Pei, insists, even though the building includes water features, geomancy was not a consideration.\n\nEugene Ho (Ho, 1987), in a letter to the South China Morning Post, wrote:\n\nI find the whole theory of fung shui wholly devoid of cognitive content.\n\n(For instance) that the sharp edges of the Bank of China in Central are allegedly bad luck.\n\n(It has been suggested) a triangle resembles a pyramid, called kam che tap in Cantonese, and this is similar to kam tap -- which means urns where the remains of the dead are kept.\n\nWhy (should) the mere resemblance between a triangle and a pyramid be sufficient implication of and invitation to bad luck?\n\nThere are those who maintain that paying attention to fung shui helps promote business and keeps staff contented. Few Chinese are likely to quibble over an office layout if it has been designed on the advice of a fung shui consultant. It is, one can argue, a branch of ergonomics. Altering the positions of furniture (which fung shui experts sensibly say should have rounded corners) and office paraphernalia can provide a better sense of space and convenience.\n\nCustoms in Other Countries\n\nChinese fung shui is more complex than most geomantic doctrines, yet there are comparable customs in other countries. A Hindu in India does not like building a house on a triangular site. The position of his bed is important. Such beliefs are more on account of spiritual reasons. Similarly, in the Philippines it is not good to construct a staircase or door facing the direction in which the sun will set because it signifies the disappearance of wealth. The front and back doors, as with Chinese belief, should, likewise, not be in a straight line through the building; otherwise, wealth can escape. You should also not face the door when you sleep.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214117, "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-1997", "page_number": 185, "title": "RAS-1997", "content_text": "154\n\nSchofield, a competent geologist, a good example of the colonial scholar-administrator, helped to map more than 100 sites with evidence of archaeological finds (Bard 1995: 383).\n\nAnother well-known scholar, a big man in every sense of the word, who served the Hong Kong Government from 1932 to 1969, was K. M. A. Barnett. As a jovial, erudite scholar who managed to master various Chinese dialects, this larger than life personality received a severe beating at the hands of the Japanese for volunteering information to a Red Cross team which came to inspect a prisoner-of-war camp in Hong Kong during World War II. Ken Barnett, who in prison camp had difficulty, according to Dr Solomon Bard another inmate, in finding people with whom he could play \"mental chess\", has fortunately left a few examples of his scholarship in RASHKB journals.\n\nWhen the Branch was re-established, in 1959, Dr J. R. Jones (J. R. as he was known to most of us) became its founding President. As well as being a good all-rounder in the heritage field, he too was a linguist.\n\nDr Jones was followed as President by Sir Lindsay Ride, a Rhodes Scholar and, from 1949 to 1964, Vice Chancellor of Hong Kong University. During World War II he escaped from a prisoner-of-war camp in Hong Kong and, from a base in China, served with the British Army Aid Group. One of his best known pieces of research, which he undertook together with his wife Lady May (also a long time member of the RASHKB), was about the East India Cemetery and protestant burials in Macao (Ride 1996).\n\nThe third RASHKB President was Dr Marjorie Topley, an anthropologist. She too was recognised internationally and a number of her papers may be seen in our Branch's journals.\n\nDr James Hayes, who first joined the Branch back in 1961, served all but about six years of his membership period in Hong Kong as an office bearer. He did not step down as President until 1990, when he emigrated to Australia. There are more contributions by Dr Hayes in the Branch's journals than by any other author. He too has an international reputation as a scholar, and, in 1992, an Honorary Doctorate of Letters was bestowed on him by the University of Hong Kong for his work in the field of local history. For him, the Royal", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1997.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/wp98g7579", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214983, "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-2000", "page_number": 79, "title": "RAS-2000", "content_text": "35\n\nOn the British side, other nationalities were considered for recruitment for use in Labour Corps, including Egyptians (thought to be reliable), Indians (considered to be lazy and would be affected by the climate), Maltese (whom Kitchener thought bad workers), as well as conscientious objectors, but were deemed for various reasons to be unsuitable. There were Labour Corps serving in France from Egypt, Fiji, India, Malta, Mauritius, Seychelles, the British West Indies as well as a Native Labour Corps from South Africa.\n\nFollowing protracted negotiations between Beijing, the British Government and the War Office, the first contingent of 1078 coolies, under six officer candidates, one doctor and one regular Army captain, left Weihai Wei on 18th January 1917, three months after recruitment commenced.\n\nThe (British Army) Labour Corps was formed in April 1917 from various ASC, RE and infantry labour units which had come into existence from the early days of the war to meet the need for unskilled labour in large numbers for handling stores, constructing rear lines of defence, making and repairing roads, etc.\n\nAt the same time a Directorate of Labour was formed at GHQ, BEF, to take over the control, administration and allocation of all labour. Companies belonging to the Chinese or similar Labour Corps were included but not RE technical units.\n\nChinese were recruited both directly and through the Wei-min and other recruiting companies while Chinese-speaking British personnel for officers were contacted directly through the British Legation in Peking. Later, advertisements were placed in newspapers throughout the British Empire seeking Chinese-speaking Europeans to enlist as officers and NCOs in the CLC.\n\nThe Chinese, invariably from the “up-country” farming class, were mainly recruited from the provinces of Shandong and Zhili [Chihli in the former romanisation, and the metropolitan area covering much of present-day Hubei province]. They were considered physically strong and were used to adverse weather conditions. Others also came from the provinces of Liaoning, Jilin, Jiangsu, Hubei, Hunan, Anhui and even as far as Gansu. This was ascertained from the graves of those visited.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215041, "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-2000", "page_number": 137, "title": "RAS-2000", "content_text": "93\n\nWaters, D. D: The Chinese labour Corps in the First World War : Labourers buried in France : Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society: Vol. 35 : 1995\n\nThe Commonwealth War Graves Commission,\n\n2 Marlow Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 7DX\n\nUnited Kingdom\n\nTel: 44-1628 634221 Fax: 44-1628 771208\n\nImperial War Museum\n\nNOTES\n\n1\n\n3\n\nLambeth Road, London, SE1 6HZ Tel. 020 7416 5000\n\nLiang Shiyi (1869-1933). Chinese government official and financier. Under the Qing government, amongst his financial dealings, he helped found the Bank of Communications (1907). He was President of the Board of Communications (1912), Chief Secretary in the Presidential Office and General Manager of the Bank of Communications, acting Finance Minister (1913-1915); Director-General of the National Revenue Administration and Director-General of the Domestic Loans Office. He was linked with Yuan Shikai and in 1916 fled to Hong Kong. He formed the Wei Min Corporation for the recruitment of Chinese labourers to serve in France, as a proponent of China's entry into the war. Returning to Beijing in 1918, he was made Chairman of the Board of the Bank of Communications; Speaker of the National Assembly; Director of the Domestic Loan Bureau (1920); and Prime Minister (1921-1922). After exile (1922-1925) he again served in the Beijing Government under both Duan Jirui and Zhang Zuolin. He retired to Hong Kong in 1928 after the Northern Expedition reached Beijing.\n\nThis was usually referred to by “real” soldiers as the Crosse and Blackwells, as this British provision company had a very similar crest.\n\nLt Col. Bryan Charles Fairfax, a Yorkshireman, was born on 12th September 1873, the second son of Col. T.F. (or L?) Fairfax of the Grenadier Guards and passed through the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, being commissioned on 8th March 1893 into the Durham Light Infantry (DLI). He was posted to the 2nd Battalion, then serving in India. In 1898 he volunteered for service with the newly raised 1 Battalion, The Chinese Regiment of Infantry, stationed in Weihai", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215281, "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": 58, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "6\n\nStraits Settlements, but not to Hong Kong. The governor protested to the Colonial Office at Hong Kong's exclusion in 1907, 1910 and 1912 but the Canadian government refused to include Hong Kong within its preferential tariff on the grounds that goods from China might be shipped through Hong Kong's open port and fraudulently obtain the benefit of Canada's preferential tariff.\" So Hong Kong's exports of cement and refined sugar were taxed at the highest rate and soon lost their market in Canada. In 1912 a trade agreement was negotiated between Canada and the West Indian colonies whereby Canadian exports were granted preferential tariffs in return for Canadian preferences on Caribbean cane sugar, cocoa beans and lime juice. The West Indian colonies negotiated this trade agreement directly with Canada and the secretary of state for the colonies raised no objection. These preferences were increased by a new trade agreement in 1920 and were generalised to benefit goods from all empire sources.20 The Colonial Office invited all colonies and protectorates to consider the practicability of introducing preferential rates of duty for goods of imperial origin. But most of the colonial empire was prevented by international treaties from imposing discriminatory tariffs. Northern Rhodesia, Kenya and Uganda, being part of the Congo Basin, were forbidden to discriminate by the Convention of St. Germain (1919); Nigeria and the Gold Coast by the Anglo-French treaty of 1898; and Tanganyika, Togoland, Cameroons and Palestine were mandated territories of the League of Nations which prohibited discrimination. By 1932 the only colonies which were free to adopt imperial preference but had not done so were Somaliland, Ceylon, the Straits Settlements, Hong Kong and certain islands in the Pacific.\" Canada and New Zealand were the only dominions which granted any preferences to the colonial empire before 1932. Australia, South Africa, Newfoundland, Southern Rhodesia and India granted none.\n\nThe world trade depression which began in 1929 convinced British politicians that the liberal principles of free trade which had been followed for the past 70 years must be abandoned. The National government elected in 1931 quickly passed the Import Duties Act which imposed a general duty of 10 per cent ad valorem on all imports. Section 5 of the act granted an entire exemption from the general duty to imports from all colonies, protectorates and mandated territories, provided that at least 25 per cent of the value was derived from materials grown or produced or from work done within a part of the empire.\" Imports from the dominions and India were exempted from duty only until November pending the outcome of an Imperial Economic Conference.\" A circular despatch was sent by the Colonial Office to all colonies and protectorates drawing attention to the great advantages extended to the colonies by the Import Duties Act and inviting them to give similar preferences to United Kingdom manufactures", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215282, "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": 59, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "where the territory was not debarred from doing so by treaty. In preparation for the negotiations at Ottawa the colonies were also asked to consider what preferences might be accorded them by the dominions and what preferences they might give to the dominions in return on the lines of the Canada-West Indies agreement.”\n\n34\n\nThe governor, Sir William Peel, discussed Hong Kong's position while visiting the Colonial Office in June 1932. Officials agreed with him that Hong Kong's status as a free port made it impossible to impose anything like a general tariff. Any such tariff would ruin the entrepôt trade which was vital to Hong Kong's existence and no practicable means could be devised of landing goods in bond for re-export without involving so much inconvenience as to drive the entrepôt trade to other neighbouring ports. Peel was prepared as a gesture to give a preference to empire products on articles such as spirits and tobacco which were subject to excise duty and to impose a higher rate of first registration tax on foreign motor cars than on cars imported from Britain and Canada. He did not ask for any preference from the dominions in return since in his view the bulk of Hong Kong exports consists of foreign goods the proportion of the cost of which, due to treatment in Hong Kong, was not large enough to secure a preference...” This showed a surprising ignorance of Hong Kong's growing trade in domestic manufactures which were largely exported to neighbouring Asian countries.\n\nThe Ottawa conference convened in July 1932. The British delegation was led by Stanley Baldwin, the former prime minister, and four other cabinet ministers. Canada, Southern Rhodesia and Newfoundland were represented by their prime ministers; Australia and New Zealand by former prime ministers; South Africa and the Irish Free State by their finance and trade ministers. India, which had been given the freedom to establish protective duties in 1923, was represented by Sir Atul Chatterjee and other members of the Viceroy's Council. The interests of the colonial empire were safeguarded by the secretary of state for the colonies, Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister and one civil servant from the Colonial Office, G.L.M. Clauson.\n\nThe conclusions of the conference were embodied in agreements between the United Kingdom government and the governments of the dominions and India. Britain consented to continue the free entry of goods grown, produced or manufactured in any part of the empire, and to impose additional duties on specified foreign goods which would give empire produce a preferential margin higher than the 10 per cent tariff already imposed by the Import Duties Act. Britain also agreed to 'invite' the non-self-governing colonies and protectorates to extend to all the dominions any preference at present extended to any part of the empire, and to increase the margin of preference or impose specific duties on a long list of items requested by the dominions. In return the dominions confirmed the existing", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215287, "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": 64, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "creation of protected local industries could be justified only where the colony had natural advantages for the development of an industry and where it was likely eventually to be profitable without protection. However, regard should also be paid to the principle of trusteeship and where the commercial interests of Britain and the general economic well-being of the colony were in conflict, colonial interests should prevail. These ambiguous recommendations gave the Colonial Office a considerable area of discretion to determine whether or not a colony should be allowed to institute a protective tariff or provide other assistance to a proposed new industry.\n\nThese recommendations did not affect the situation in Hong Kong and Singapore, where Chinese entrepreneurs were successfully exporting shoes and other goods manufactured from imported raw materials without the assistance of any protective tariff. Their home market was small compared to their export markets and they could easily undercut any foreign competitors. The committee regarded the invasion of the British and dominion markets by cheap rubber shoes produced by oriental labour as an evil, but it opposed the imposition of import duties on colonial manufactures since the Ottawa agreements had granted entry free of tariffs to all imports from the dominions and India; discrimination against colonial products would undermine the principle of free trade within the empire and call into question the preferences and privileges which the colonies had extended to imports from Britain. Instead of tariffs on colonial manufactures the committee recommended that efforts should be pursued to assimilate conditions of employment and factory and workshop regulations to those in force in Britain by the adoption of the International Labour Conventions by the colonies. The committee also suggested the encouragement of negotiations between manufacturers in Britain and in the colonies to divide the market by the assignment of quotas between them.\n\nCunliffe-Lister welcomed the report in spite of the rejection of his idea of protection for British manufactures against colonial competition. The report was circulated to the cabinet for the information of ministers but objections were unexpectedly raised by the secretary of state for India and the chancellor of the exchequer. The main doubt was whether the report went far enough in recommending the discouragement of new industries in the colonies. So the report was remitted for further consideration by another committee, but nothing was done for three years. In the meantime the Colonial Office proceeded to act on the principles recommended in the report. Instructions were sent to all colonies that any proposal to protect a local industry must be referred to London at the earliest possible stage and no bill to impose or increase a protective tariff should be introduced into the legislative council without prior authorisation by the colonial secretary. Telegrams were sent to the governors of Singapore and Hong Kong asking\n\nPage 46", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215291, "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": 68, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "16\n\nsufficient to qualify for preference in colonial 'native' markets then it is a very bad outlook for us as I cannot see how the growing population of Victoria and Kowloon are going to find employment without industrial development,\n\nI therefore consider it as politically important as it is, from our point of view, economically advantageous to give the Hong Kong Chinese a commercial attachment to the empire. Our military and naval defences are designed against external aggression, but if relations with China ever became antagonistic there would be an enemy totalling over one million within the fortress gates, unless their bread is liberally spread with Empire butter.\n\nThe governor's plea for Hong Kong's manufacturing industry was warmly supported by all the Colonial Office officials who wrote minutes on this despatch. It was quickly passed up to the colonial secretary, W. Ormsby-Gore, who endorsed it as 'an admirable letter' and gave instructions for copies to be sent to the Foreign Office and the Board of Trade.\" Officials made frequent use of Caldecott's argument of imperial interests when attempting to repulse proposals from the Board of Trade and other departments to place further restrictions on Hong Kong's manufactures in the years that followed.\n\nBritish textile manufacturers continued to protest that they were suffering from unfair competition in the British and colonial markets and demanded that Hong Kong exports should be excluded by tariffs or quantitative restrictions. In order to fend off these pressures the Colonial Office suggested to the governor of Hong Kong that all cotton and artificial silk piece goods exported to Britain and the colonies should be accompanied by a certificate that they had been made from cloth which had been spun, woven and finished within the empire. This proposal posed difficulties for Hong Kong. There were no spinning mills in the colony and more than half the cotton yarn used in the production of piece goods and hosiery was imported from Japan and Shanghai. In order to continue to enjoy the benefits of imperial preference, the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce secured the manufacturers' agreement to switch their purchases of yarn from China and Japan to cotton mills in India which were within the empire. But the manufacturers of goods made from artificial silk protested strongly that the only alternative to yarn from Japan was British yarn which was double the price ($1.70 a pound compared to 85c). This would destroy their competitiveness with Japanese products in British Malaya, the African colonies and the West Indies and drive them to bankruptcy. The Colonial Office put its case to the Board of Trade which refused to compromise, asserting that if Hong Kong was to continue to enjoy the advantages of the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215297, "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": 74, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "22\n\n22. The requirement of an empire content of 25 per cent to qualify for preference was set in consultation with the Board of Trade, which pointed out that some British manufacturers using foreign sources of raw material would not qualify for preference if the empire content was set at 50 per cent. CO323/1192/11.\n\n23. L.M. Drummond, British Economic Policy and the Empire 1919–1939 (London, 1972), 92; Report of the Interdepartmental Committee on the Industrial Development of the Colonial Empire, Colonial Office Confidential Print 445, CO885/40.\n\n24. Secretary of State to all colonies and protectorates, 4 Feb. 1932, DO35/242/4, PRO.\n\n25. Minutes of a conference at the Colonial Office, 27 June 1932, CO323/1193/2.\n\n26. The texts of the agreements are in Imperial Economic Conference at Ottawa Cmd4175 (London, 1932), 19–76.\n\n27. Canada agreed to extend to the colonies and protectorates the preferences accorded to Britain, but in practice raised objections when requested to do so by the British government. See for example CO323/1099/16, CO852/51/9 and CO852/251/10. Cunliffe-Lister minute, 22 Oct 1933, CO323/1232/8, 'Canada has done less than nothing to implement the most essential part of the Ottawa accords.'\n\n28. See the comments in paragraphs 18 and 30 of the Report of the Interdepartmental Committee.\n\n29. Confidential Circular Despatch, 29 Sept. 1932, CO854/174. Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister is better known by his later title, Viscount Swinton.\n\n30. Secretary of State to Governor of Ceylon, 27 Sept. 1932; S. of S. to High Commissioner, Federated Malay States, 30 Sept. 1932; S. of S. to Barbados, 24 Oct. 1932; S. of S. to Jamaica, 10 Oct. 1932; S. of S. to Windward Islands, 24 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5. A clause was drafted for inclusion in the 1933 Finance Bill to allow Britain to withdraw preferences from any colony if it did not grant the Ottawa preferences to empire products, CO323/1230/3.\n\n31. Officer Administering Government, Leeward Islands to Secretary of State, 19 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n32. Governor Barbados to Secretary of State, 17 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n33. Governor Windward Islands to Secretary of State, 21 Oct. 1932, CO323/1188/5.\n\n34. Stevens to Cunliffe-Lister, 17 Nov. 1932, CO323/1193/11.\n\n35. Cunliffe-Lister to Stevens, 8 Dec. 1932, CO323/1193/11.\n\n36. Hong Kong Trade Returns show exports of rubber shoes to the British West Indies as follows: 1932 - HK$4,894; 1933 - 116,670; 1934 - 643,337; 1935 - 574,376; 1936 - 1,071,932; 1937 - 1,427,634.\n\n37. High Commissioner for Canada to Cunliffe-Lister, 15 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n38. Cunliffe-Lister to High Commissioner, 27 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/8. Canada later succeeded in excluding Singapore shoes by setting a fictitious high rate of exchange for the Singapore dollar. See minute by Calder, 8 June 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n39. Peel to Cunliffe-Lister, 13 Nov. 1933, CO323/1231/16.\n\n40. Minute by Vernon, 21 Dec. 1933, CO323/1231/16. R.V. Vernon was an Assistant Secretary who joined the Colonial Office in 1900. He had previously expressed his disapproval when Cunliffe-Lister refused to approach India and South Africa to ask for imperial preference for Hong Kong's rubber shoes: 'The Secretary of State is placed practically in the position of a trustee who is bound to act with the sole regard to the interests of the colonies and is not at liberty to abstain from any claim on the account of the interests of U.K. industry or the susceptibilities of dominion industrial interests.' Minute, 9 Nov. 1933, CO323/1232/3. The attitude of Cunliffe-Lister may be contrasted with that of Alan Lennox-Boyd (Colonial Secretary 1954-59) who threatened to resign if Hong Kong was forced to accept a limitation on its textile exports to Britain. Harold Macmillan, Riding the Storm, 1954–1959 (London, 1971), 739-43.\n\n41. CO323/1294/3.\n\n42. Hong Kong Trade Returns 1932, 1933, 1934.\n\n43. Minute by Cunliffe-Lister, 7 June 1933, CO323/1232/8.\n\n44. Edgcumbe (Department of Overseas Trade) to Eastwood (Colonial Office), 18 April 1936, CO323/1298/10.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215298, "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": 75, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "23\n\n45. Cabinet Minutes, 6 June 1934, 23(34)6, 13 June 1934, 24(34)6, 3 Oct. 1934, 33(34)5, CAB23/79, PRO.\n\n46. Confidential Circular Despatch, June 1934, CO323/1298/10 and CO854/175.\n\n47. Colonial Office to Governor Hong Kong, 6 April 1934, CO323/1298/11.\n\n48. Information from R.R. Todd, an administrative officer in Hong Kong 1924-56, interviewed in 1986.\n\n49. CO323/1298/11. CO852/16/10.\n\n50. CO852/219/13.\n\n51. Circular Despatches, 13 April 1934, and 15 May 1934, CO854/175.\n\n52. Havinden and Meredith, 188-90. Governor Hong Kong to Colonial Office, 2 May 1934, CO323/1290/6.\n\n53. Circular Despatch, 19 Sept. 1936, CO854/170.\n\n54. Governor Jamaica to Colonial Office, 6 July 1936 and 11 Aug, 1936, CO852/51/9. Governor Jamaica to Colonial Office, 3 June 1937, CO852/106/19.\n\n55. An Economic Survey of the Colonial Empire, HMSO Colonial No 95 (London, 1934), 137. Economic Survey Col. 109, 170; Economic Survey Col. 126, 170. Hong Kong Trade Statistics 1932, 1933, 1934, 1935.\n\n56. Circular Despatch, 13 March 1933, CO323/1230/11.\n\n57. Letters and Memorandum from Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce in Caldecott to Colonial Office, 25 July and 4 Aug. 1936, CO852/51/9. McKenzie (Custom House) to Eastwood (Colonial Office), 18 Sept 1936. Rydderch (Custom House) to Colonial Office, 26 Feb. 1937, CO852/107/1.\n\n58. In 1936 exports of electric flashlight torches totalled HK$2,930,000, including India HK$595,000, Netherlands East Indies HK$379,000, and Britain HK$167,000. Hong Kong Trade Returns 1936.\n\n59. Minutes on Caldecott to Clauson, 15 Oct. 1936, CO852/51/9. Clauson commented: 'It is all too seldom we get from a colonial governor so thoughtful and comprehensive a review of the future of the colony he governs.'\n\n60. Officer Administering Government, Hong Kong to Colonial Office, 30 Sept. 1937, with enclosures, CO853/109/5. King (Board of Trade) to Eastwood (Colonial Office), 13 Nov, 1937, CO852/109/5.\n\n61. Circular Despatch, 2 June 1937, CO854/176.\n\n62. Memorandum by Hamilton (Superintendent of Imports and Exports Hong Kong), 22 April 1937 CO852/106/19. Hong Kong Trade Returns 1937.\n\n63. Circular Despatch, 24 Feb. 1938, CO854/177.\n\n64. Minute by Caine (Financial Secretary Hong Kong 1937-39), 24 Jan. 1940, CO852/215/3. Gas masks, CO129/580/9. Aircraft assembly, CO129/571/15 and CO129/580/4.\n\n65. Hong Kong Blue Book 1936, 1938, 1939, 1940.\n\n66. Calculations made as in note 5 from Hong Kong Trade Returns 1938 omitting all raw materials, unprocessed agricultural products and exports of banknotes (valued at HK$36,000,000).\n\n67. Clausen described the policy of the Colonial Office in these words when speaking at a meeting of the Overseas Trade Development Council, 31 July 1935, CO852/16/7.\n\n68. Colonial Office to Neville Chamberlain, 15 Jan. 1936. Federation of British Industries to Warren Fisher, 14 Feb. 1936. Minutes in Treasury file T160/763/F14811/1.\n\n69. Minutes of the second meeting of the committee, 23 April 1937, T160/763/F14811/1.\n\n70. CO852/16/13, The inventor approached the Colonial Office directly and officials referred the project to the governor of Trinidad. The governor appointed a committee which doubted if the project was feasible. The Colonial Office received a number of similar proposals in the 1930s. Often the entrepreneur was eager to set up a factory provided that he was granted a high protective tariff, an exclusive license, part of the capital costs, subsidised freight rates and other financial privileges. In effect the businessman was asking the colonial government to bear all the risks while he would enjoy the profits if the project was successful. See for example CO852/16/9, a proposal to set up a factory in Nyasaland to process sisal into binder twine. An official commented that this was a last desperate attempt by a bankrupt farmer to keep his own sisal estates going.\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215387, "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": 164, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "TERAKR Bar: A XXS NAVAR\n\n2001 * 12 9 14ÜIADAVKUGAN\n\nCharles Pinker RL.\n\nDavid Blur (Anne) A A\n\nAlexandra Blair' AL\n\nAndrew Blau\n\n113\n\nThe descendants of Sir Frederick Lugard, the Pinker and Blair families, have generously agreed to present The Tribute on permanent loan to the University of Hong Kong. Members of the family attending the presentation ceremony on Friday December 14, 2001, and representing Major Richard Pinker, include (with their relationship to Sir Frederick Lugard):\n\nMr Charles Pinker (great great nephew)\n\nMrs David Blair (Anne) (great great niece)\n\nMiss Alexandra Blair' (great great great niece)\n\nMr Andrew Blair (great great great nephew)\n\n盧押在香港\n\nLugard in Hong Kong\n\n1858 年 1 月 22 日\n\n(Fort St George, Madras)\n\n教士,他出任香港總督一職前,擔任英國\n\nRoyal Niger Company 工作的經歷,使他在 1900 年至 1906 年間出任尼日利亞高級專員。\n\n## 1902 年 Flora Shaw 與 Lugard 結婚\n\n...\n\n旅行家、作家,曾擔任倫敦《泰晤士報》殖民地編輯。\n\n由於 Flora 的健康問題,盧押辭去尼日利亞高級專員的工作,離開當地,並於 1907 年後接受任命為香港總督。\n\n盧押在香港的工作及功績並不屬於本文介紹的範圍。但值得一提的是九廣鐵路通車和香港大學的成立,是他任內發生的重要事件。\n\nFrederick John Dealtry Lugard, Baron Lugard of Abinger, was born of missionary parents on January 22, 1858 at Fort St George, Madras, India.\n\nBy the time he arrived as Governor of Hong Kong, his work and exploits in Africa on behalf of the British Army, the British East Africa Company, the Royal Niger Company and the Colonial Office were legendary. He was High Commissioner of Nigeria from 1900 to 1906. In 1902, he married Flora Shaw, herself a great traveller and writer and Colonial Editor of The Times of London until the end of the 19th century.\n\nBecause of Flora's health and her inability to be with him in his colonial posting, Lugard resigned his post and left Nigeria. However, he accepted the Governorship of Hong Kong in 1907.\n\nLugard as perceived by the cartoonist \"Spy\" in Vanity Fair's \"Men of the Day\" series, December 19, 1895\n\nThe events which followed and Lugard's role and achievements in the life of the Colony are mostly beyond the scope of this introduction to The Tribute. They would, however, include the opening of the Kowloon-Canton Railway and the foundation of The University of Hong Kong.\n\nMiss Blair, who is the assistant foreign editor of The Times of London, continues a family association with the newspaper begun by Flora Lugard.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215580, "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": 357, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "307\n\nand Monuments Office and the Government Marine Department and to everyone mentioned in the text. Without their help this paper would not have been written. Special thanks are also due to Yip Kin-sang Superintendent of Aids to Navigation of the Marine Department. Thanks are also due to many other helpful people including Master Mariners Roger Parry and Alan Lack, Dr James Hayes, Simon Lord, Paul Brown, Phillip Bruce, Louis Thomas and S J Chan. This paper would not be complete without photographs and those published here are indeed rather special. For these, a very sincere thank you to Charles Slater.\n\nNOTES\n\nPart One\n\n1. T. Roger Banister (1932). The Coastwise Lights of China, Shanghai: Inspectorate General of Customs, Statistical Department.\n\n2. Lee Krystek - http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/pharos.htm\n\n3. Trinity House - http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/\n\n4. A day in history - http://www.sis.gov.eg/calendar/html/cl171196.htm\n\n5. It was named after James Horsburgh (1762-1836), an eminent hydrographer for the East India Company, author of the book Sailing Directions, which became the most widely used nautical directory of Eastern waters during the first half of the 19th century. He was also a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The lighthouse has a cone-shape tower painted with black and white horizontal bands. http://www.lighthouseclothing.com/database/searchdatabase.cfm.\n\n6. It was rebuilt in 1875 in the form of a white conical cast-iron tower with black trim. The 30-foot high tower with lantern constructed of oyster shells had a light visible for 20.5 nautical miles.\n\n7. T.R. Banister concedes that the claim is good only in its literal sense. '...if we except such primitive lights as the old open beacon at north-east promontory, or the ancient native light on Fisher Island in the Pescadores. The Tungsha Lightship, in the Yangtze Estuary, was established in 1855, and the Taitan Light was apparently first shown by the Chinese priests in 1863. But neither of these were exactly light [houses].'", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215664, "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": 441, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "393\n\nService and was posted to the British Consulate in Beijing. He was interned by the Japanese during World War II but was then exchanged for Japanese diplomatic staff and made his way to India. He spent the War serving in various capacities with the Indian Army. In 1940, he met the German photographer Hedda Hammer and they married in Beijing in 1946. Due to the increasing instability of the political situation in China, they left Beijing soon after. The Morrisons spent six months in Hong Kong before relocating to Sarawak, in the north-west of the island of Borneo, where Alastair was appointed to the British Colonial Service and later became a district officer. Throughout her 20-year residence in Sarawak, Hedda accompanied Alastair on all his official journeys and made numerous independent photographic tours. From 1960 to 1966 Hedda was employed by the Sarawak government to work part-time in the photographic section of the Information Office in Kuching. Her duties included taking photographs, establishing a photographic library and training government photographers. Hedda wrote two major books on Sarawak, Sarawak (1957) and Life in a Longhouse (1962).\n\nJennie Morrison, 1912, (Mitchell Library)\n\nIn 1967 the Morrisons settled in Canberra, Australia. Hedda died in Canberra in 1991, at the age of 82. Alastair lives in Hughes, Canberra. His Fair Land Sarawak: Some Recollections of an Expatriate Official (Ithaca, Cornell University) and The Road to Peking (Canberra, Highland Press, private distribution), both appeared in 1993.\n\nMr. Morrison's other brother, Colin Morrison was born in April 1917. He joined the Administrative Service in Hong Kong and was also a member of the Hong Kong Volunteer Defence Corps, which held out valiantly for 17 days against the Japanese in December 1941.2 He was interned by the Japanese at the Shamshuipo camp for the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215769, "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-2002", "page_number": 68, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "1\n\nARTICLES\n\nTHE TRANSFER OF THE STRAITS SETTLEMENTS: A REVISIONIST APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF COLONIAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATION\n\nANDREW ABRAHAM\n\n[Hon. Ed. - The Straits Settlements was a former British crown colony on the Strait of Malacca, comprising four trade centres, Penang, Singapore, Malacca, and Labuan, established or taken over by the British East India Company. The British settlement at Penang was founded in 1786, at Singapore in 1819; Malacca, occupied by the British during the Napoleonic Wars, was transferred to the East India Company in 1824. The three territories were established as a crown colony in 1867. Labuan, which became part of Singapore Settlement in 1907, was constituted a fourth separate settlement in 1912.\n\nThe Straits colony, occupied by the Japanese during World War II, was broken up in 1946, when Singapore became a separate crown colony. Singapore attained full internal self-government in 1959, became a part of Malaysia in 1963, and became an independent republic in 1965. Labuan was incorporated in North Borneo (later Sabah) in 1946, which in turn became a part of Malaysia in 1963. Penang and Malacca were included in the Malayan Union in 1945, the Federation of Malaya in 1948, and Malaysia in 1963.]\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe Straits Settlements were transferred in 18671 to the Colonial Office's administration due to the dissatisfaction of the European merchants with the Indian government's rule. Their grievances were cited in a petition in 1857, the most contentious of which cover complaints of the East India Company's (EIC) attempts to introduce measures damaging to trade, problems with piracy and convicts, and failure of the Indian government to build up an influence in the Malay peninsula.\n\nHowever, a study of the history of the Straits Settlements shows evidence of a booming economy, many cases of intervention by the EIC in the affairs of the Malay states, and issues such as those concerning piracy, convicts and currency more or less resolved. Furthermore,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215770, "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-2002", "page_number": 69, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "Turnbull, an established historian, equivocally suggests that the transfer was based on an inaccurate and unbalanced feedback of the community's feelings:\n\nNo dissenting voice was raised in London and Calcutta, and the colonial office naturally had the impression that the demand for transfer was based on general dissatisfaction with rule from India, with the entire merchant body clamouring for change. In fact, it had required years of agitation on the part of Read, Woods and a small minority of enthusiasts in Singapore to arouse interest in the transfer, and apart from the brief period of panic in 1857 in when the petition was framed, the majority even of European merchants in Singapore were not actively in favour of the change, while the Asian merchants showed almost no interest in the movement.2\n\nIn spite of these conflicting points, I hold that the transfer was needed as the problems raised in the Straits merchants' petition were material and bona fide enough to necessitate the transfer of the administration from Calcutta to London. However, my essay attempts a revisionist's approach to the transfer controversy, questioning its necessity and examining its legal significance through an orchestration of the pot-pourri of relevant issues, in the hope that this methodology may help to provide a clearer awareness and legal understanding into this much taken for granted transfer, thus according it the new angle of attention it deserves.\n\nBackground history of the Straits Settlements3\n\nSingapore, Malacca and Penang were combined to form the Straits Settlements in 1826. The Straits Settlements became the fourth presidency of India, and remained an Indian dependency until 1867. The EIC obtained possession of Penang in 1786, as a base to protect the company's expanding China trade and a centre for the collection of Straits produce from the Malay peninsula and the eastern archipelago for shipment to China. When Singapore was founded in 1819, it was placed under the administration of Bencoolen (in Sumatra) where Raffles was lieutenant-governor. When he resigned and returned to England in 1823, Singapore was placed under the control of the Supreme Government of India. Singapore was ceded to the EIC in 1824 and", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215772, "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-2002", "page_number": 71, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "In Calcutta's eyes, the main duties of the governor of the Straits Settlements were to 'balance his budget and to insulate the settlements from complications in the hinterland.' This policy, as Turnbull puts it, was doomed to fail;15 instead it provided the background causes for the agitation of the European merchant community for the transfer of the Straits Settlements from the India Office to the Colonial Office in London.\n\nFor example, as the settlements prospered, the European merchants demanded more expensive and sophisticated administration, an efficient judicial system, defence, and security for their property and trade.1 However, due to Raffles' free trade policy, which was extended to all three settlements, and the failure of land and agriculture, there was insufficient revenue to fund these demands.\n\nThe activities of ambitious pioneers, mainly Chinese migrant workers, who were 'lured by the wealth of the interior [of the Malay states],' made it impossible for the Straits government to cut the settlements off from the affairs of the Malay states. Calcutta maintained its policy of non-intervention to the end, but in practice, every would-be final settlement the government of India authorized merely provided the basis for further involvement.18\n\nThe petition of 1857, wherein the grievances of the Straits merchants were cited\n\nIn 1857, the Straits merchants sent a petition to the House of Commons,19 explaining their grievances with regard to the administration of the Straits Settlements under the EIC, and requesting a transfer of control (by means of an Act of Parliament) from the EIC to the Colonial Office. However, some of the issues raised to the House of Commons appear to be questionable (that is, not all the issues were as serious as they were made out to be). This calls for an examination of the validity of these hazy 'problems,'20 in order to assess the necessity of the transfer.\n\nIn the process, I will also highlight the way in which constitutional and legal changes were introduced in the Straits Settlements. Legal changes emerged in response to the demands of the Straits society; that is, such changes were governed by a variety of factors. Hence, I will", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215776, "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-2002", "page_number": 75, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "The EIC and relations with the Malay states\n\nIn the merchants' own words, 'The Supreme Government of India had uniformly discouraged the local Government at Singapore from interfering with matters beyond the limits of the Island. The cultivation of friendly relations with Native States and Chiefs has been neglected.'44 In this section, I will examine the merchants' reasons for this complaint, and also assess the accuracy of their claim. Rupert Emerson, a historian, calls the period during the Indian government's administration of the Straits Settlements 'a half-century of inactivity.' This is arguably the truth but not the whole truth, because DGE Hall, another historian, tends to disagree with Emerson's assertion. He says that 'one only has to glance through the many volumes of records relating to the period to realise that even if there was little or no spectacular achievement there was plenty of activity.' 'Even if by inactivity is meant the pursuit of non-intervention policy in native affairs, the term is misleading.\n\nPage 48\n\nThe Calcutta administration, wherever possible, adhered to a policy of strict non-intervention in the affairs of the Malay States. This policy had its roots in Pitt's India Act of 1784,49 which stipulated that the EIC's aim was peace, not interference in local politics or extension of the company's territories.50 The main reason for this policy was to avoid any form of entanglement in the internal troubles or wars of the Peninsula which could incur unnecessary expenses for the EIC,51 As it was, the EIC had lost its monopoly over the China trade in 1833 and, with this, the Straits Settlements ceased to be a source of direct profits, and were maintained at an annual loss.52\n\nPage 51\n\nYet despite the law on non-intervention, there was evidence that in some cases concerning threats to British interests, whether commercial, political or involving prestige, local administrators often found it necessary to intervene. In such cases, the actions were often condoned by the Supreme Government. Thus, there was a violation of Pitt's India Act (which eventually did lead to the change in British policy of non-intervention to intervention in 1874),54\n\nPage 53\n\nThio summarises the politico-legal scenario thus:\n\n...when responsibility for the Straits was transferred from the Government of India to the Colonial Office in 1867, the British were already bound by treaties with four of the five states south of Kedah, two of whom they\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215778, "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-2002", "page_number": 77, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "10\n\nreporting to the Government of India if they took unfair trade measures).\n\nHowever, I am more inclined to take the view that the Calcutta government was not efficient in administering the Straits Settlements, in spite of the mitigating factors. Problems were still prevalent, albeit small or insignificant as Mills makes them out to be. In this regard, the Straits Settlements were better off being under the Colonial Office, and concluding thus, the \"problems\" were justified ones.\n\nAt this point, I wish to draw attention to the different systems of law existing simultaneously in the Straits Settlements. There were the Indian laws (passed by Calcutta, modelled on English law) which were either unsuitable to the Straits Settlements or did not cover \"illegality\" in many cases, as we have seen. Then there were the English laws which were more predominant after the transfer but even before 1867 were still the official laws to be applied insofar as the public sphere was concerned. Matters were a little more complicated in the private sphere, as in the case of the local laws under the Sultans, for example, pertaining to Malay customs and religion, discussion of which is beyond the intended scope of this essay.\n\nChinese secret societies—\n\nA wealth of material can be obtained on this issue which has been well-researched by many scholars. However, with regards to the petition and the transfer, all that need be said (despite the topic's complexity) is that the merchants had a legitimate cause for complaint because the Chinese secret societies were dangerous and caused problems; for example 'rivalries of hostile societies and clans gave rise to disturbances and outrages, often of a very grave nature.' This was a real problem, and not a questionable or hazy one, and the Indian government paid little attention to the situation.69\n\nAfter the transfer, measures were undertaken by the Colonial Office to deal with the problem. \"The Straits Settlements government was now empowered to legislate fully for the requirements of the Colony and to adopt a more determined policy towards secret societies,\" for example, Act XX of 1867 legalised the 1863 practice of apprehending headmen of belligerent societies to do duty as special constables during riots;71 1869 Ordinance XIX to provide for 'the suppression of dangerous", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215780, "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-2002", "page_number": 79, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "them. These ex-convicts married local wives, and some even rose in prominence.82 The European merchants complained mainly about the high cost of keeping the convicts (for example, as early as 1841, they grumbled about the costly body of troops to be maintained in the Straits Settlements mainly because they were penal stations).83\n\nThere were some disturbing facts about the Indian convicts pertaining to the growth of Indian-type secret societies,85 and to the spread of criminal activities among present and ex-convicts. There are no statistics to prove how far these groups were involved in crime, but there were nevertheless a few notorious incidents.87\n\nOn the whole, the convict \"problem\" was not really a problem. The Indian government did make some attempts to improve the situation. However, this only took place after the petition of 1857 to the House of Commons. Thus, even though most defects of the system were remedied by the time of the transfer to the Colonial Office, little credit can be given to the Indian government in this issue. Taking into account the context in which the convict problem was cited in the 1857 petition,88 it is not difficult to sympathise with the European merchants,8991 and hence, this \"problem\" in my opinion, was a bona fide one.\n\n## Conclusion\n\nThe transfer was governed by a series of factors. The overall argument has been broached with a revisionist's method of assessment. However, the conclusion is nonetheless an orthodox one in that having clarified the \"problems,\" most would appear to have been bona fide and convincing enough to necessitate a liberation from the Indian government's rule. In this respect, the transfer was a necessary, and hence, a justified move. The act that was eventually passed by Parliament, to change the government of the Straits Settlements from the India Office to the Colonial Office, was the result of a complex variety of causes, which also explains how legal changes were brought about, not in isolation, but in the context of and in accordance with the Straits society's requirements. The regulations of the Straits Settlements were made subject to London's control, and this is a confirmation of the primacy of the English legal system in which was entrenched the rule of law in the Straits Settlements.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215793, "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-2002", "page_number": 92, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "25\n\n225\n\nCady, John F, 1964, Southeast Asia: Its Historical Development, McGraw Hill, New York\n\nCameron, J. (1865) 1965, Our Tropical Possessions in Malayan India, Kuala Lumpur\n\nCampbell, Persia Cranford, 1923, Chinese Coolie Emigration to Countries within the British Empire, PS King & Son, London\n\nCavenagh, O, 1844, Reminiscences of an Indian Official, London\n\nCavenagh, O, 1867, Report on the Progress of the Straits Settlements from 1859 - 60 to 1866 - 67, Singapore\n\nChan, Helena H M, 1986, An Introduction to the Singapore Legal System, Malayan Law Journal Pte Ltd, Singapore\n\nChiang Hai Ding, 1966, 'The Origins of the Malayan Currency System', JMBRAS, xxxix, no 1, 1-18\n\nCollis, Maurice, 1966, Raffles, Faber and Faber, London\n\nComber, Leon, 1961, The Traditional Mysteries of Chinese Secret Societies in Malaya, Eastern Universities Press, Singapore\n\nCoupland, Sir Reginald, 1946, Raffles of Singapore, Collins, London\n\nCowan, 1950, 'Early Penang and the Rise of Singapore 1805 - 1832', JMBRAS, xxiii\n\nCoyajee, JC, 1930, The Indian Currency System, Madras\n\nCrawfurd, J, 1967, History of the Indian Archipelago, Cass, London\n\nDavidson, G F, 1846, Trade and Travel in the Far East, London\n\nDesai, Tripta, 1984, The East India Company, A Brief Survey from 1599 to 1857, Kanak Publications, New Delhi\n\nDe Vere Allen, J, 1968, \"The Colonial Office and the Malay States, 1867 - 73', JMBRAS, xxxvi, no 1, 1 – 36", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215797, "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-2002", "page_number": 96, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "29\n\nSeton, Sir Malcolm, 1926, The India Office, G P Putnam's Sons, London and New York\n\nStrang, Lord, 1961, Britain In World Affairs, Faber and Deutsch, London\n\nSwettenham, F, 1948, British Malaya - An Account of the Origins and Progress of British Influence in Malaya, Allen and Unwin\n\nTan, Ding Eng, 1986, A Portrait of Malaysia and Singapore, Oxford University Press\n\nTarling, N, 1962, Anglo-Dutch Rivalry in the Malay World, 1760-1824, Cambridge\n\nThio, Eunice, 1969, British Policy In the Malay Peninsula 1880-1910, Vol 1, University of Malaya Press\n\nThio, Eunice, 1960, 'The Singapore Chinese Protectorate: Events and Conditions Leading to its Establishment, 1823-77', Journal of the South Seas Society, xvi, 40-80\n\nTregonning, K G, (1964) 1972, A History of Modern Malaysia and Singapore, Eastern Universities Press Sdn Bhd, Singapore\n\nTripathi, Amales, 1956, Trade and Finance in the Bengal Presidency 1793-1833, Calcutta\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1960, 'Bibliography of Writings in English on British Malaya, 1786-1867', JMBRAS, xxxiii, no 3 327-424\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1958, 'Communal Disturbances in the Straits Settlements in 1857', JMBRAS, xxxi, no 1, 96-146\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1970, 'Convicts in the Straits Settlements, 1826-67', JMBRAS, xliii, no 1\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1969, 'The European Mercantile Community in Singapore, 1819-67', Journal of Southeast Asian History, x, no 1, 12-35\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1957, 'Governor Blundell and Sir Benson Maxwell; a Conflict of...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215826, "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-2002", "page_number": 125, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "58\n\n1.\n\n1 Edward S. Miller, War Plan Orange: the U.S. Strategy to Defeat Japan (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1991), p.14.\n\n2 Miller, p.21-22, 24.\n\n3 Miller, p.33-36.\n\n(1) Steven T. Ross (ed.), American War Plans, 1919-1941, vol.2 (New York: Garland Publishers, 1992), p.125-126. (2) Miller, p.4-5, 31-32.\n\n• Ernest J. King & Walter Muir Whitehill, Fleet Admiral King, A Naval Record (New York: WW Norton & Co., Inc., 1952), p.432. The JCS was the military committee that directed the war on the American side.\n\n6 Charles F. Romanus & Riley Sunderland, Stilwell's Command Problems, 1956 of U.S. Army in World War II: the China-Burma-India Theater, (pt. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, 1976), p.10.\n\n7 Christopher M. Bell, \"Our Most Exposed Outpost: Hong Kong and British Far Eastern Strategy, 1921-1941,\" The Journal of Military History, 60 (January 1996), p.65.\n\n• Colonel Lindsay T. Ride, \"Memorandum on the Liberation of Prisoners-of-War, Hong Kong,\" 30 Sep 43, p.11-13; Series 2/33, BAAG (British Army Aid Group) Correspondence Concerning Operations, September 1942-November 1943; Personal Papers of Sir Lindsay Tasman Ride (microform); Canberra, ACT: Australian War Memorial, 2001 (hereinafter known as the Ride Papers).\n\n* Unless otherwise noted, information for this section was collected from Weather Information Branch, HQ, USAAF, R&A Report #71087, \"Climate of Hong Kong (China),\" October 1943; Intelligence Reports (\"Regular Series\"), 1941-1945; Research and Analysis Branch Division; Records of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), RG226; National Archives (NA), Washington, DC.\n\n10 Later, it was reported that an all-weather road ran from Hong Kong to Canton, and the Japanese had improved other roads nearby to the same capacity. See \"G-2 Estimates of the Following Places: Haiphong-Liuchow Peninsula-Hainan Island-Hong Kong-Swatow-Amoy-Foochow-Santuao-Wenchow-Hangchow Bay Region-Laoyao-Chingtao-and the Tip of the Shantung Peninsula to Include Wei Hai Wei,\" 17 Feb 45, p.5; Ch.7-Intelligence, Correspondence, 1945, Folder", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215829, "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-2002", "page_number": 128, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "61\n\n28\n\nChic Publishers, 1996), p.12-14. (3) Heywood, p.17:\n\nTyphoon winds that approach Hong Kong from the southeast blow on Victoria Harbour from the north, so Kowloon's mountains can serve as a partial barrier. See Donald Alan Mantner & Samson Brand, An Evaluation of Hong Kong Harbour as a Typhoon Haven (Monterey, CA: Environmental Prediction Research Facility, Naval Postgraduate School, 1973), p.53.\n\n29 Navy Department, \"Advanced Base: Hong Kong,\" p.14-15. However, Tolo Harbour could do little more than serve as a secondary anchorage because shore facilities in Tai Po were limited.\n\n30\n\n31\n\n32\n\n(1) Heywood, p.7-8. (2) Adamson & Kosco, p.12. Although described by many sources as a \"tidal wave,\" the wave would be more appropriately described as a storm surge because it is not caused by the moon.\n\nHKRO, A Statistical Survey of Typhoons and Tropical Depressions in the Western Pacific and China Sea Area From 1884 to 1947 (Hong Kong: Government Printers, 1951), p.3 (hereafter referred to as HKRO, Statistical Survey). See also P.C. Chin's Tropical Cyclone Climatology for the China Seas and Western Pacific From 1884 to 1970, Vol. I: Basic Data (Hong Kong: Government Printers, 1972) for maps of typhoon tracks for each year.\n\n33\n\nThe evasion option became more popular after the war, probably because of better typhoon location and tracking methods. See Mantner & Brand, p.78-79, 88. The authors cited British and American dissatisfaction with Hong Kong as a \"safe haven\" for ships during a typhoon.\n\n34 HKRO, Statistical Survey, p.9.\n\n35\n\nRomanus & Sunderland, Stilwell's Mission to China, 1953 of U.S. Army in World War II: the China-Burma-India Theater (rpt. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, 1984), p.12-13.\n\nCPS 83, \"Appreciation and Plan for the Defeat of Japan,” 8 Aug 43, Map F; CCS 381 Japan (8-25-42), sec.6; Geographic File, 1942-45; Records of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, RG 218; NA, Washington, DC. The map shows that Hong Kong lay within the minimum area required for the air bombardment of Japan.\n\n* United States Army Air Force, B-29 Erection and Maintenance Manual (Dayton,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215832, "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-2002", "page_number": 131, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "64\n\n53 Ronald Spector, Eagle Against the Sun: the American War with Japan (New York: Vintage Books, 1985), p.489.\n\n54 (1) South China Weekly Situation Report No.4, 30 Mar 45; Series 1/1; War Diary, January-April 1945; also includes South China Weekly Situation Reports Nos.1-23, 9 Mar-23 Oct 45; Ride Papers. (2) South China Weekly Situation Report No.14, 8 Jun 45 (rest of details the same as above).\n\n55 Romanus & Sunderland, Time Runs Out in CBI, 1959 of U.S. Army in World War II: The China-Burma-India Theater (rpt. Washington: Office of the Chief of Military History, 1976), p.332-334.\n\n56 Adamson & Kosco, p.149-150, 190.\n\n57 Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet and Pacific Ocean Areas Report, Serial 0395 of 11 February 1946; Entry 351; World War II Action and Operational Reports; RG38; NA, Washington, DC,\n\n58 Alderson, p.57.\n\n59 Adamson & Kosco, p.52-53, 185-187. Interestingly, the carriers in question, the USS Hornet (CV-12) and USS Bennington (CV-20), had survived previous Japanese attacks (including Kamikazes) without suffering anything worse than strafing, but they couldn't escape the typhoon.\n\n60 CPS107/1, p.15.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216258, "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-2003", "page_number": 17, "title": "RAS-2003", "content_text": "ship. His final seagoing appointment was in command of the experimental deep diving ship HMS Reclaim. After retiring from the Royal Navy in 1972, he joined the secretariat staff of Rotary International in Great Britain and Ireland administering the 1,800 or so Rotary Clubs in GB&I from which he retired as Secretary to the Association in 1996 (michaelgillam@compuserve.com)\n\nJames Hayes, Ph.D., (London), Hon. D.Litt. (Hong Kong), spent his working life as an Administrative Officer in Hong Kong. He is a noted scholar and local historian and has contributed prolifically to the Journal. Among his books are The Hong Kong Region 1850-1911: Institutions and Leadership in Town and Country (Hamden, Archon Books, 1977) and the memoir of his Hong Kong service, Friends and Teachers: Hong Kong and its People 1953-1987 (Hong Kong University Press, 1996). His most recent book, a volume in OUP's Images of Asia series entitled South China Village Culture, was published in 2001. Dr Hayes is a Past-President and former Hon Editor of HKBRAS (mouseh1@bigpond.com).\n\nDavid Mahoney, is an active member of the Friends of HKBRAS. He joined the Crown Lands Office of the Public Works Department, Hong Kong Government, 1964, and moved to Swire Properties in 1973 where he spent the next 20 years looking after Taikoo Shing and Taikoo Place. A keen collector of medals, he has just celebrated 50 years of membership of the Orders & Medals Research Society. Specialising in awards to Britons who served in China, Mr Mahoney addressed HKBRAS on the subject in 2000. Having previously served on the committees of various societies, his only remaining commitment is to the British Association of Cemeteries in South Asia, an organisation which locates, identifies, records and restores European cemeteries in India, Pakistan and South East Asia (davidwmahoney@aol.com).\n\nLan Li, Ph.D., is an anthropologist working at Queen's University Belfast as a Visiting Research Fellow at the School of Anthropological Studies. She also lectures in Chinese Culture and Society at the Institute of LifelongLearning was corrected to Institute of Lifelong Learning. Her research interests are Chinese popular religion, history, politics, and ethnic minorities. She was a co-organiser of the international conference on 'The Career and Legacy of Sir Robert Hart,' which took place in Belfast between 26 and 27 September 2003 (lan.li@gub.ac.uk).\n\nxvii", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390", "rank": 0 } ]