[
    {
        "id": 206422,
        "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": 239,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "BOOK REVIEWS \n\n213 \n\nwe find, when he writes about family law, an attempt to describe the law in terms of formal (rather static) relationships. The dynamic element, how the law responds in practice to the needs and expectations of the people subject to it, is missing. Surprisingly, this element is also missing where one would most expect to find it in his consideration of commercial law as it was developed in the Mixed Court at Shanghai. Much of the book is concerned with Family Law and as such is still of interest though, consisting as it does largely of statement without exposition, it is of diminishing value in the light of modern anthropological techniques. But it is to the chapter on Commercial Law and to the Appendix of Mixed Court cases (at p. 142) that the reader will look forward most eagerly. \n\nThe Mixed Court at Shanghai developed over the years its own distinctive brand of law, not consciously but in consequence of the cultural and commercial interplay which was the hallmark of Shanghai. Though the law administered between Chinese parties may be Chinese, the context within which the disputes arose could not be called wholly Chinese and the Court's decisions themselves display a 'mixed' character. Shortly after the publication of Jamieson's book, A. M. Kotenev's much more considerable work, Shanghai: its Mixed Court and Council, was published1 and from it we may learn considerably more about the operations of that court. But, even so, many of the questions which arise in our minds are left unanswered and we are given, for example, little elucidation on the true legal position of the compradore, on his rights and his liabilities. Perhaps Jamieson was too close to events to be able to consider these wider conceptual (though, at the same time, essentially practical) matters but, nevertheless, he fails to point out the basic principles behind the decisions to which he refers and the reader is left unenlightened. He confines himself to description and, in so doing, wrote a less valuable book than he might otherwise have done. \n\n3 \n\nLooking at this book through the eyes of the nineteen-seventies, it appears disappointing. But, though it does not really live up to the enthusiasm of its re-publishers, at a time when interest in the formal study of Chinese Law is waxing fast, it is most valuable to have available once more a work which is part of the history of the development of Chinese law from its earlier ‘feudal' stage",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206423,
        "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": 240,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "214\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\ninto a modern system of law. No less important is the way in which this book tells us much of western attitudes towards Chinese law and of the ways in which the westerners attempted to come to terms with a system which was so unlike their own. Though we might today criticise Jamieson's comparative law approach and his defective anthropology, his book was a creature of its own time and of his own intellectual experience, and as such it must take a place on the sinologists' bookshelves.\n\nNotes\n\n1. A. M. Kotenev, Shanghai: its Mixed Court and Council, (Shanghai: North China Daily News and Herald Ltd, 1925; now reprinted by Ch'eng Wen Publishing Company, Taipei, 1968).\n\n2. But see now Hao, The Comprador in Nineteenth Century China, Cambridge (Harvard U.P.), 1970.\n\n3. pp. 124-126.\n\nHong Kong, 1971.\n\nDAFYDD EVANS\n\nCHINNERY AND CHINA COAST PAINTINGS, Henry and Sidney Berry-Hill, 64 pages text, 144 photographs, F. W. Lewis. Publishers, Ltd., England 1970, U.S.$30.00.\n\nThe writers operate a picture gallery in New York City. In 1963 they published George Chinnery 1774-1852, Artist of the China Coast, which was reviewed in this Journal, Vol. 4, 1964, pp. 128-132.\n\nIn spite of severe criticism of their previous efforts, the authors, in another volume under the present title, persist in claiming that Chinese Port Scenes painted in Cantonese style were influenced by Chinnery and therefore are \"Chinnery School\". Even though there are numerous pictured examples in both books that Chinese Port Scenes before, during, and after Chinnery do not change and bear no resemblance to English painting, the authors plod on with their futile theory. For some 26 illustrations in the List of Plates marked \"Chinnery School\", substitute “Chinese artist\".\n\nObviously this book is written for the inexperienced collector. It lacks bibliography, an index, and a comprehensive table of contents. The text is largely a lyrical history of China from Macartney through the Arrow War. It positively oozes opium and frequently lacks accuracy.\n\nPage 240\n\nPage 241",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207281,
        "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": 49,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "MERCHANT ORGANISATIONS IN IMPERIAL CHINA\n\n41\n\n5 Ho Ping-ti, \"Salient Aspects of China's Heritage,\" in Ping-ti Ho and Tang Tsou, eds., China in Crisis (Chicago, 1968), I. 1:34-35; Ho Ping-ti, Hui-kuan shih-lun, pp. 33-34, 37-40.\n\n6 See John Fincher's article on provincialism in Mary C. Wright, ed. China in Revolution: The First Phase, 1900-1913 (New Haven, 1968).\n\n7 Ezra F. Vogel and Tamako Yagai, “Japanese Studies of Chinese Guilds,\" unpublished paper delivered at the Seminar on Problems of Micro-Organs in Chinese Society, 1963; Peter J. Golas, \"Early Ch'ing Gilds,” unpublished paper delivered at the Conference on Urban Society in Traditional China, 1968.\n\n8 Ch'üan Han-sheng, Hang-hui chih-tu, pp. 99-101; Peng Chang, “Distribution of Provincial Merchant Groups in China, 1842-1911,\" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, 1958), pp. 51-55.\n\n9 The others were from (1) Chihli, (2) Shantung, (3) Nanking, (4) Wusih and (5) the Shansi bankers. See A. M. Kotenev, Shanghai: Its Mixed Court and Council (Shanghai, 1925), p. 253 n.\n\n10 Lai Lien-san, Hsiang-kang chih-lüeh (A brief account of Hong Kong) (Hong Kong, 1931), 115-17\n\n11 For a detailed account, see Fang Teng, \"Yü Hsia-ch'ing lun,\" (On Yu Hsia-ch'ing) in Tsa-chih Yüeh-k'an (Monthly miscellany), 12.2:46-51 (Nov. 1943); 12.3:62-67 (Dec. 1943); 12.4:59-64 (Jan. 1944).\n\n12 P'eng Tse-i, \"Shih-chiu shih-chi hou-ch'i Chung-kuo ch'eng-shih shou-kung-yeh shang-yeh hsing-hui ti chung-chien ho tso-yung\" (The revival and function of urban handicraft and commercial organizations in late nineteenth century China), Li-shih yen-chiu (Historical studies) 1:71-102 (1965).\n\n13 T'ung-chih Shang-hai hsien-chih (Gazetteer of the Shanghai County for the T'ung-chih reign), ed. Yü Yueh (n.p., 1871), 2:21-28.\n\n14 Ibid.\n\n15 Nan-hai hsien-chih (Gazetteer of the Nan-hai County), eds. Chang Feng-chieh, et al. (n.p., 1910), 6:106-13.\n\n16 Sixtieth Anniversary of the Tungwah Hospital: A Commemorative Issue (Hong Kong, 1930).\n\n17 They were Ai-yü, Kuang-chi, Kuang-jen, Ch'ung-cheng, Shu-shan, Ming-shan, Hui-hsing, Fang-pien, Jun-shen.\n\n18 \"Reports of the Special Committee appointed by H.E. Sir William Robinson, KCMG, to investigate and report on certain points connected with the Bills for the Incorporation of the Po Leung Kuk, a Society for the Protection of Women and Girls\" (Hong Kong, 1893).\n\n19 E.g. see Hsiang-shan hsien-chih hsü-pien (A continuation of the Gazetteer of the Hsiang-shan County), ed. Li Shih-ch'in (n.p., 1923), 4:18a-20b, in which it is stated that a number were founded during the Kuang-hsü reign (1875-1908).\n\n20 Song Ong Siong. One Hundred Years' History of the Chinese in Singapore (Singapore, 1967), pp. 277, 309, 424, 432; George W. Skinner, Leadership and Power in the Chinese Community of Thailand (Ithaca, 1958), pp. 2-13.\n\n21 Nan-hai hsien-chih, 6:10b.\n\n22 Shang-hai hsien hsü-chih (A continuation of the Gazetteer of the Shanghai County), ed. Yao Wen-nan (Shanghai, 1918), 2:38a.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209424,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 81,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "59\n\nSerious measures were taken to change the whole social and political structure of the town.\n\nNOTES\n\nPreliminary note:\n\nAlthough the present paper is to a great extent based on fresh research, the following works have been of considerable use as they contain material about the government of the International Settlement:\n\nFeetham, Justice Richard: \"Report to the Shanghai Municipal Council\" 1931-1932.\n\nJohnstone, W.C.: \"The Shanghai Problem\", 1937.\n\nJones, F.C.: \"Shanghai and Tientsin\", 1940.\n\nKotenev, A.M.: \"Shanghai, its Mixed Court and Council\", 1925.\n\nMontalto de Jesus, C.A.: \"Historic Shanghai\", 1909.\n\nPort, F.L. Hawks: \"A short history of Shanghai\", 1928.\n\n1 The International Settlement at Shanghai was formed in 1863 by the amalgamation of the original British Settlement (formed in 1845, but later increased in area) with the so-called American Settlement in the Hongkew area which had grown up without formal establishment in the 1850s, and early 1860s, and which had been formally recognised by the Chinese earlier in 1863. The French Settlement (formed in 1849) always remained separate from the International Settlement. Outside the area of the foreign settlements lay the old Chinese city and suburbs: these remained under Chinese rule, and became subject to the Greater Shanghai Municipality when that was set up by the Chinese authorities in 1927.\n\n* Cf also Treaty of the Bogue, article VII, \"ground and houses, the rent of which is to be fairly and equitably arranged for, shall be set apart by the local officers in communication with the Consul.\"\n\n3\n\nPopulation figures for intermediate years are, 1,666 foreigners and 75,047 Chinese in 1870, and 6,774 foreigners and 345,276 Chinese in 1900. Of the 13,536 foreigners resident in 1910, 4,465 were British, 940 Americans and 3,361 Japanese. Of the 38,940 foreigners resident in 1935 no fewer than 20,242 were Japanese, as against 6,596 British and 2,015 Americans.\n\n+ * Text of the 1845 Land Regulations (LR) is in Shanghai Almanac 1853.\n\nIt is not too fanciful to suppose that persons willing to move to as remote a place as Shanghai in the 1840s were likely to be particularly strongly imbued with the contemporary belief in individualism, with its consequent hatred of despotism and paternalism; this almost certainly assisted in the speedy breakdown of the 1845 Land Regulations to something far more individualistic in tone.\n\n• North China Herald (NCH) 30.7.1853.\n\n* J.H. Haan: \"De opkomst van de International Settlement te Shanghai 1845-1865. Een historisch — politicologische analyse\" (\"The rise of the International Settlement at Shanghai. A historical-political analysis\"), unpublished manuscript University of Amsterdam, 1977; chapter II. Cited as Haan \"Shanghai\".\n\nCf NCH 22.7.1854; text of draft LR in NCH 30.7.1853, 27.8.1853; final version in 8.7.1854.\n\nNCH 22.4.1865.\n\n10 NCH 17.3.1866.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209425,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1982",
        "page_number": 82,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "60\n\nJ. H. HAAN\n\n11 NCH 17.3.1866, 24.3.1866.\n\n12 Final LR 1869 in e.g. Feetham, I, p. 68-83.\n\n1* NOH 29.5.1852, 5.6.1852.\n\n** NCH 13.4.1861.\n\n16 NCH 29.6.1861,\n\n18\n\n10 NCH 5.4.1862; cf also NCH 5.12.1863 and 25.6.1864.\n\n17 In Hertslet: \"Treaties between Great Britain and China and Foreign Powers\", 1908, Volume II, p. 686-687.\n\n19 Cf. NCH 13.4.1861.\n\n10 Cf R. Bendix: \"The extension of citizenship to the lower classes\" in R. Bendix (Ed.): “State and Society\", 1973, p. 251; also Guido de Ruggiero: \"The history of European Liberalism\", 1967 (Repr).\n\n20 NCH 11.11.1854.\n\n21 Ibid.\n\n** NCH 9.12.1854.\n\n** Cf. NCH 23.12.1865, 30.12.1865; Kotenev, p. 18-19.\n\n* NCH 22.4.1865.\n\n* NCH 17.3.1866; for the discussion about this affair cf. also Haan \"Shanghai\" p. 95-100.\n\n24 NCH 17.3.1866.\n\n* NCH 5.7.1851.\n\n28 NCH 29.3.1852. **NCH 22.6.1861.\n\n30 NCH 27.8.1864,\n\n* Cf. J.H. Haan: \"De buitenlandse concessies en settlements in the 19e en 20e eeuwse China\" (\"Foreign concessions and settlements in 19th and 20th century China\"); unpublished manuscript, University of Amsterdam, 1972, Volume I, p. 47.\n\n** NCH 5.12.1863.\n\n34 NCH 28.11.1863.\n\n** NOH 24.3.1863.\n\n* Shanghai Almanac 1855.\n\n56 Johnstone, p. 56.\n\n27 NCH 5.7.1851.\n\n宫\n\n** NCH 29.6.1861.\n\n30 NCH 5.4.1862.\n\n* For a detailed account of membership of the MC 1849-1866 see Haan, \"Shanghai\", appendix II, reprinted as the appendix to this article.\n\n41 Cf Johnstone, p. 243-247.\n\n* For this and the following scheme of Feetham, Volume I, p. 112-130; Johnstone p. 227-242.\n\n** NCH 22.4.1865.\n\n** Cf NCH 10.3.1866.\n\n45\n\nPeople's Tribune (Shanghai), 16.3.1935, p. 358.\n\n** China Weekly Review 24.3.1934, p 119.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215765,
        "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": 64,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "Transitional wares and their forerunners.\n\nHong Kong: Oriental Ceramic Society of Hong Kong, 1981.\n\nKotenev, Anatol M.\n\n+\n\nShanghai: its mixed court and council: materials relating to the history of the Shanghai Municipal Council and the history, practice and statistics of the International Mixed Court, Chinese modern law and Shanghai municipal land regulations and bye-laws governing the life in the settlement. Shanghai: North-China Daily News & Herald, 1925.\n\nKotenev, Anatol M.\n\nShanghai: its municipality and the Chinese. Shanghai: North-China Daily News & Herald, 1927.\n\nLam, Susan YY. and Sze, Jane\n\nPast visions of the future: some perspectives on the history of the University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: University Museum and Art Gallery, The University of Hong Kong, 2001.\n\nLiao Disheng, Zhang Zhaohe, Cai Zhixiang\n\nXianggang li shi, wen hua yu she hui. 1, Jiao yu xue pian. Xianggang : Xianggang ke ji da xue Hua nan yan jiu zhong xin, 2001.\n\nLiao Disheng, Zhang Zhaohe, Cai Zhixiang\n\nXianggang li shi, wen hua yu she hui. 2, Tian ye yu wen xian pian. Xianggang: Xianggang ke ji da xue hua nan yan jiu zhong xin, 2001.\n\nLiao Disheng, Zhang Zhaohe, Cai Zhixiang\n\nXianggang li shi, wen hua yu she hui. 3, Tian ye yu wen xian pian. Xianggang: Xianggang ke ji da xue hua nan yan jiu zhong xin, 2001.\n\nLee, Kuan Yew\n\nMemoirs of Lee Kuan Yew. Tai-bei: Shi jie shu ju, 2000.\n\nLiang, Ellen Johnston\n\nArt and aesthetics in Chinese popular prints: selections from the Muban Foundation collection. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 2002.\n\nlv",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    }
]