[ { "id": 206266, "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": 83, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "CHINESE ELITE IN HONG KONG\n\n77\n\n(10) Relation of land ownership to élite status can be judged by a list of the twenty highest rate-payers in 1876 and 1881, published in the Government Gazette. The list includes both Europeans and Chinese. In 1876 European ownership outranks Chinese twelve to eight; but in 1881 ownership had shifted so that there were seventeen Chinese among the twenty highest rate-payers. In the 1881 list seven of the top twenty were of compradore families, six were merchants, one contractor, and the widow of Rev. Ho Fuk Tong, ordained minister of the London Missionary Society's Chinese congregation.\n\nThe terminal date for this study is the opening of Tung Wah Hospital in 1872. After this date, the names of the Directors of the Hospital published in the Development of the Tung Wah Hospital 1870-1960 are an excellent criteria for determining élite status. After 1872 there is also an ever increasing number of subscriptions, memorials, committees, delegations, etc., which serve as counter-checks to the Tung Wah Directorships.\n\nFor a study of élite based on such lists, it is necessary to give identity to the names by a biographical sketch. These sketches indicate the manner by which the individual arrived at élite status. To reconstruct the biographies of these early residents of Hong Kong is not easy. Only documentary sources have been used for this reconstruction. No information has been sought from present day descendants of these individuals. I have relied upon such material as newspapers, Land Registry Office records, the Police and Lighting Rates for 1860, 1868 and 1872, the Government Gazettes and Blue Books, the published Calendar of Probates and Administrations, the Colonial Office Records in the Public Records Office, London, and the archives of several Missionary Societies. The Chinese practice of using various aliases complicates identification. In one instance, for example, an individual used at various times and in various relationships ten different aliases. The varying Romanization for Chinese names constitutes another problem for the researcher who uses western sources. The contemporary English, Portuguese, Germans and French each had a different system for Romanizing Chinese characters. For instance on page 101 there is a reference to Tso Aon's brother, Chow Yik Cheong. The Chinese character", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207532, "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": 300, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "292\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\ntablets showing a major repair or reconstruction in 1897-98 and 1925-26. A large Roman Catholic chapel, now in ruins, once stood close by. It is shown as being in existence in Father Volonteri's 1866 map of the San On District—see JHKBRAS Vols 9 & 10 (1969 & 1970), pp. 141-148 and 193-196 respectively—but unfortunately receives no mention in Father Ryan's The Story of A Hundred Years. The Pontifical Institute of Foreign Missions (P.I.M.E.) in Hong Kong 1858-1958.\n\nHong Kong 1975\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\nTHE NOON DAY GUN\n\nThe following extract from the Hong Kong Daily Press, January 3, 1870, is not without a historical and for present day residents faced with an increase in our defense contribution—topical interest:\n\nIt is interesting and just to note that the renewing of the twelve o'clock gun firing is due to liberality of Mr. Magniac of Messrs. Jardine, Matheson and Company, who when the Home Government ceased to provide this small return for the heavy Military Contribution forwarded annually from this Colony, purchased a gun, etc., and had it fixed up at Messrs. Jardine's, where it is fired daily.\n\nNOTE: Herbert St. Leger Magniac was admitted a partner in the firm of Jardine, Matheson and Company, July 1, 1862.\n\nHong Kong, 1975\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\nTHE GERMAN CONGREGATION IN HONG KONG UNTIL 1914\n\nA note on \"Bethesda\" and the \"Berliner Frauenverein für China” by Pastor Albrecht Plag appeared in vol. 9 (1969) of this Journal. He there asks where Bethesda was located.\n\nEarly maps of Hong Kong and a search of title in the Land Registry indicates it occupied the site of the present Mid-levels Police Station on the north side of High Street at its junction with Bonham Road. The original lot extended down to Hospital Road. The plot consisted of two Inland Lots numbered 624 and 607.\n\nPage 300\n\nPage 301", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209777, "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-1983", "page_number": 36, "title": "RAS-1983", "content_text": "14\n\ninterfered, and had the fence removed, to the detriment, we think, of the villagers, who had they hereafter been ousted from their homesteads, would have been glad, as the amount of compensation uniformly adjudged to the aborigines, has far exceeded their expectation\". (Friend of China, 25 May 1843)\n\nThe bay of Tung Lo Wan where the village of So Kon Po was located became the centre for the salt trade.\n\nEarly Government-financed improvements in the area included a road from Wong Nei Chung to So Kon Po built in 1845 at a cost of $2,000, and a sea wall under three contractors employing some six thousand men (C.O.129-11 No.73).\n\nIn 1844 an order was issued forbidding the cultivation of rice in the Wong Nei Chung and So Kon Po valleys. It was thought the miasmic vapours arising from the paddy fields made the area unhealthy. The cultivated land of the Wong Nei Chung valley was seventy-five acres and of So Kon Po thirty-seven acres. Following this prohibition of rice growing, the land was purchased by the Government from its Chinese owners. The area was drained, and health improved. The Governor, in a report submitted to the Colonial Office dated 10 March 1845, said he was contemplating letting the So Kon Po valley to Chinese for market gardening (C.O.129-11, No.28).\n\nAn advertisement in the Hong Kong Register dated 16 July, 1846 indicates that the introduction of the new crops to the valley took place very shortly afterwards:\n\n\"Farm to let the Hinton Farm, district of Su-kun-pu, comprising about 30 acres, six and upwards of which are of the best arable land. Possession can be given immediately on removal of present Crops, consisting principally of Flax and Vegetables. Apply to the Proprietor at the Land Office, Mr. Tarrant.\"\n\n52\n\nAt the time William Tarrant was clerk in the Land Registry Office.\n\nAfter purchase from the Chinese, the valley was laid out into five Farm Lots. These were sold at a Land Sale on 1 July 1846 on twenty-one year leases. The purchasers were George Duddell,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210177, "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": 148, "title": "RAS-1984", "content_text": "127\n\npractices dating back to the complainants childhood and before suggests that the Tanka were using the Tai Tam Tuk anchorage from at least the very beginning of the nineteenth century.\n\nI turn now to the important question of how far back was Hong Kong occupied? This is practically an impossible question to answer for lack of sufficient information. As in many other places, like Tsuen Wan and north-west Kowloon, the present old, local, formerly tenant families appear mainly to have come into the area after the Great Evacuation of the Coast ordered by the Kanghsi emperor, 1662-69, and many of them not until the eighteenth century or even after. Yet it is an interesting fact that the maps in a later 16th century geographical work on Kwangtung, the Yueh ta-chi(A) contain names that are familiar to us today, on Hong Kong island as well as on the other islands and mainland of the Hong Kong region. Thus we find Chek Chu (Stanley), Tai Tam, Wong Nei Chung, Tit Hang, Chun Hoi and Shau Kei Wan, as well as Hong Kong itself, implying surely, that these places were settled at that time or were at least resorted to periodically. Also, the Tang correspondence from the 1840s quoted above specifically refers to recultivation of their land in various places in the late seventeenth century — though not necessarily by the former tenant farmers after revocation of the edict of 1662 referred to above. We also learn that the Tang land on Hong Kong island was entered in the Tung Kwun district land registry, suggesting that the registration might well be earlier than 1573, at which date the San On district was carved out of Tung Kwun and established as a separate county.\n\n71\n\nThe island was certainly well-established in settled communities long before 1841. The temples alone give proof of that. To this day, two existing temples at Stanley, and two at Aberdeen (one at the former village and one on an islet now joined by reclamation to Ap Lei Chau) and the Tin Hau Temple at Tin Hau Temple Road, Causeway Bay (formerly called Hung Heung Lo or \"Crimson Incense Burner\") contain items that go back to the eighteenth or very early nineteenth century. There were others now demolished or resited that probably predated 1841. Details are given in the Table below.\n\n72", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1984.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211731, "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": 146, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "121\n\nCHEUNG SHAN KWU TSZ (長山古寺), AN OLD BUDDHIST NUNNERY IN THE NEW TERRITORIES, AND ITS PLACE IN LOCAL SOCIETY\n\nThe Plan of the Nunnery\n\nP. H. HASE*\n\nHong Kong has dozens of Buddhist monasteries and nunneries, mostly located in the New Territories. Almost all are recent foundations. The majority were founded by monks or nuns fleeing from one of the three major disturbances to Buddhist life in China in the last 80 years - the 1911 Revolution, and the chaos of the Warlord years which succeeded it; the Anti-Superstition Campaign mounted by the Kuomintang from the mid 1920s; and the Communist Revolution of 1949-1952.\n\nThese monasteries and nunneries mostly share a single common plan, which distinguishes a Buddhist place of worship from the ordinary temple of the traditional village religion. The ordinary temple consists of a windowless rectangular hall, with the altar to the God against one of the short walls, and entered through the opposite short wall. The hall usually has a Tin Tseng (天井), or lightwell, in the centre for the escape of incense smoke. Often two subordinate similar halls are placed one on either side of the main hall, interconnecting by arches.\n\nMost Buddhist institutions are built to a different plan. They are centred on a Buddha Hall (A, 大殿), which is also a rectangle, but one entered through the centre of one of the long walls, and the altar is not against the opposite long wall, but free-standing a little in front of it. These Buddha Halls usually have windows, and do not have Tin Tseng. In large monasteries or nunneries, the Buddha Hall is a free-standing structure surrounded by a portico, placed in the centre of an enclosed courtyard-garden on a raised podium, with the other buildings forming ranges along the edges of the courtyard. The whole complex is enclosed: the monastery or nunnery, unlike the ordinary temple, is\n\n* The author would like to thank those Ta Kwu Ling elders who gave him the information on which much of this article is based, and also the staff of the District Office, North, who assisted in setting up the interviews. He would also like to thank the staff of the District Land Registry, North, for their unfailing courtesy and assistance.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211754, "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": 169, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "144\n\nThe Shing Ping She was thus required to maintain the Kim Ho Temple, and at least the Heroes Shrine part of the Ping Yuen Temple, and had to meet the costs of the rituals it conducted there. It also had to maintain the bridges and roads, and to meet the costs of the patrols it sponsored. However, it had no land at the time of the Block Crown Lease (1905). Apart from the temple itself, the Ping Yuen Hap Heung owned no land at that date either. Similarly, none of the individual villages of the area owned any significant amounts of communal land. The Shing Ping She did, however, have enough income to buy a good deal of land within the New Territories later — five and a half acres was bought, together with a house, between 1911 and 1920, at a cost of $1,272.50 for just over three of the five and a half acres. Villagers believe the She also bought land at Wang Kong Ha during this period.\n\n18\n\nThe She seems to have imposed a grain tax on all householders and cow owners within the patrol district. At least in the 1930s, as the elders recall, some of this grain was passed to the nuns at the Kim Ho temple and the Cheung Shan Kwu Tsz for their sustenance, but most was sold.\n\nThe villagers claim that the Shing Ping She also bought from the Cheung Shan Kwu Tsz all the nunnery's lands within Ping Che and Ping Yeung, at a date somewhen in the 1920s, but without changing the registration of the land in the Land Registry. This is possibly why the She's programme of land purchase in its own name comes to an abrupt end in 1920.\n\nThis claim may well hide a more complex situation. As mentioned above, neither the Shing Ping She nor the Ping Yuen Hap Heung held any communal land in 1905, although they had significant communal commitments: Loi Tung, equally, seems to have had no communal land to provide income for the needs of the Loi Tung Yeuk. At the same time, the nunnery land does not seem to have been used to meet nunnery needs. After the fire, the abbess repaired the roof by seeking donations, not by selling or mortgaging part of the land, and this was clearly the position also at the time of the 1868 rebuilding, since the inscription in the temple records the donors. In the 1930s, the nuns' rice came from donations from the Shing Ping She, not from rent. It seems very likely that the Ping Yuen Hap Heung and Loi Tung people had placed their communal lands under the name and protection of the Buddha. This is not uncommon in the area; such an arrangement made it more difficult for managers to embezzle the land entrusted to them, and protected it from external...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213449, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1995", "page_number": 45, "title": "RAS-1995", "content_text": "12\n\nOrdinances of Hong Kong is the governing law unless its application would be unjust or oppressive when Chinese customary law may be let in. It is fortunate, therefore that there is available a most comprehensive and authoritative memorandum describing the land tenure found in the New Territories when the area was taken over from the Chinese authorities in 1899. I refer to the \"Memorandum of Land” which forms an appendix to the Report of Mr. J. H. Stewart Lockhart, Colonial Secretary and Registrar General of Hong Kong, dated 7th February 1900.\n\nChinese law regarding land is there stated to be as follows:-\n\n“Land according to Chinese tenure is held as freehold by grant from the Crown. The land comprised in the original grant can be sold by the proprietors in sub-divisions and is most usually sold in perpetuity or for 1,000 years. The proprietors record their names in the district registry as responsible for the tax, and their possession is legally secure so long as that is paid. Deeds of absolute sale have been brought in from the New Territory for registration which were made in the reign of the Emperor KA TSING and of subsequent Emperors of the Ming Dynasty (A.D. 1519 to 1626) and which have been recognised by the present dynasty. Strictly, a grant issued by the present dynasty should be attached to all grants made by the previous dynasty. The present owners under such grants are all the existing male descendants of the original grantee and in one case the proprietors now number over 700.\n\nAll land under cultivation is supposed to pay a land tax and... must be registered or is liable to confiscation. On registration stamped title deeds are issued by the District Magistrate.\n\nOfficially registered title deeds are called \"red deeds” (Hung K’ai) because they are stamped with the official stamp in red.\n\nPrivate deeds of sale are called “white deeds\" (Pak K’ai) because they are simply written on plain paper and do not bear the official red stamp; but the purchaser has the right to register his purchase and obtain a red deed.\n\nThere are also mortgages, operating as deeds of sale, redeemable\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g", "rank": 0 } ]