[
    {
        "id": 211620,
        "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": 35,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "10\n\n16\n\nnot the temper to speak. He had the Chinese at his feet, and might have had what he wished; and what has he got? A few paltry dollars and a barren island... The Chinese are already chuckling, and say they have got the best of it. It makes me quite sick to think of it, and there are not half a dozen people on shore or afloat who are not quite furious'. The alleged sentiments of the Chinese in this letter are in direct contrast to those reported by James Matheson in a letter to William Jardine of 11 February: 'The cession of Hong Kong to the British is what most mortifies the Canton folks with Ki Shen's proceedings. They cannot bear to speak of it with composure'.\" It seems that a portion of the British community in the Pearl Delta area (the author of the letter wishes to appear to have as large a constituency as possible, not only within the merchant community) may have presupposed that their feelings of failure with regard to the acquisition of Hong Kong meant a corresponding sense of triumph for the Chinese.\n\nThe second letter to The Times was equally scathing as it claimed that the British negotiators had been tricked because 'Hong Kong was virtually ours, for it is the place which the opium ships have used as a rendezvous for years'. It was only to be expected therefore that the Chinese would choose to cede that island rather than any other.\n\n19\n\n18\n\nOf the acts of soldiers in the expeditionary force, it might have been expected that the formal taking of possession of Hong Kong would have been worthy of mention even if the author had not been present in person, but it seems that this is not the case. Neither Duncan McPherson nor W. W. Mundy refers to it. Nor did soldiers such as A. Cunynghame20 or Alexander Murray21 who became involved just after the cession of Hong Kong refer back to the ceremony. There is only one reference to the taking of Hong Kong in the official mouthpiece for the forces, The United Service Journal of 1841, and that was in a general article entitled 'The British colonies considered as military posts' written by Lieutenant-Colonel Wilkie. He complained in July 1841 that the rationale for his inclusion of Hong Kong in the article was threatened because arrangements between the British and the Chinese had collapsed, ‘and consequently it is more than doubtful whether I shall have any more authority for treating of this island as a British colony, beyond the simple fact that it has been formally taken possession of as such',22\n\nContemporary press notices of the event, again in direct contrast to news of the opium war and the expedition to the Bogue, are terse and rudimentary. The Chinese Repository of February 1841, edited by the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213319,
        "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": 141,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "122\n\nthe 49th Regiment (Hertfordshire Regiment consisting of 25 officers and 426 men) and a Sapper unit. The Force commander, Sir Hugh Gough accompanied the Left Column.\n\nThe Centre Column under Lieutenant Colonel Montgomerie consisted of detachments of Royal Artillery and Madras Artillery, a Sapper unit and a rifle company of the 35th Madras Native Infantry.\n\nThe Right Column, under Colonel Schoedde, consisted of the 26th Regiment (The Cameronians) under Lieutenant Colonel Pratt, the 55th Regiment (Westmorland Regiment) and a unit of Sappers.\n\n6\n\nThe British plan required the 2,200 troops to be landed on the right flank, on the west face of the line of low-lying hills some two miles to the east of Chapu Bay. From there the three battalions would separate, one, the Centre Column, to hold the base, one, the Right Column, to pass round the base of Huang-p'an Shan to cut off the Chinese retreat and the third, the Point or Left Column, to storm the heights of Kuan Yin Shan. On 16 May the Nemesis and the Phlegethon reconnoitred the northern coast of the Bay of Hangchou and on the 18th they landed in a bay some two miles east of the city without opposition, with the Left Column advancing along the heights parallel to the coast, whilst the rest moved inland to the rear of the heights on which the enemy was posted. Elements of the British Naval Brigade, consisting of some 700 men, landed within a quarter of a mile of the harbour and advanced straight for the harbour battery and then on to the town itself. Only about one in ten of the Chinese force had firearms, the rest being armed with bows and spears. The British plan so took the Chinese by surprise that they fell back in disorder, throwing away their arms and fleeing in every direction. The Chinese having made their nominal stand in the hills had left their rear wide open allowing Chapu to be taken without any major problems. After a battle lasting more than four hours, Chapu was taken by the Right Column and the Naval Brigade with the British casualties of nine killed and fifty-five wounded. Of these, in addition to Colonel Tomlinson, the loss to the Royal Irish were one serjeant and three other ranks killed, and Lieutenants E. Jodrell and A. Murray, one serjeant, one drummer and twenty-seven other ranks wounded. Major Jeremiah Cowper was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel on the day following the battle, in succession to Colonel Tomlinson. The Chinese defenders fled to the west, towards Hangchou leaving the British with the town which was promptly looted by the native Chinese.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213320,
        "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": 142,
        "title": "RAS-1994",
        "content_text": "123\n\nCasualties suffered by the Chinese were estimated at some twelve to fifteen hundred, with a powder factory and several arsenals destroyed.\n\nThe incident which has left its mark in regimental histories is now known as the Battle of the Joss-house. A small detachment of the Royal Irish were held up by some three hundred Manchu Tatars who, having seen their retreat cut off by the Naval Brigade, had taken cover in a small Buddhist temple, the Temple of Reverence for Heaven, between two hills, one of which was Kuan Yin Shan, with a single entrance guarded by an internal 'spun wall'. The stubborn valour of the Tatar soldiers cost the Royal Irish dear. After an initial sortie, their detachment commander, Lieutenant A. Murray, drew off his men to wait for reinforcements. The next assault by a small number of men from both the Royal Irish and the 49th (Hertfordshires) had already been repelled with at least one killed and several wounded. A company of the Royal Irish, commanded by Captain Edwards, was intercepted in its advance and, accompanied by Colonel Tomlinson, who had heard what was passing, proceeded to the valley and joined the small body blockading the joss house. While the platoon of the Royal Irish waited for the rest of the battalion to come up, Lieutenant Murray was approached by the Hertfordshire's battalion commander who, having been warned that the temple was strongly manned, was understood to have made \"an injudicious and undeserved remark\" which was overheard by Colonel Tomlinson. They were now a force considered strong enough by Tomlinson to carry the building at the point of the bayonet, and Tomlinson's reaction to what he must have taken as a slur on Irish courage, his regiment or himself, was immediately to call for the men of the Royal Irish and the Hertfordshires to follow him and storm the temple. He rushed in at the temple door where he was shot dead with two bullets through the neck and all who had accompanied him were either killed or wounded. After Tomlinson had fallen, it became almost impossible to prevent the Royal Irish from rushing madly at the temple, for the men burned to avenge their Colonel, whom they described as \"the best officer who ever said 'Come-on' to a grenadier company\". In more formal language, General Gough recorded the same opinion, saying in his despatch that Tomlinson fell \"in full career of renown, honoured by the troops, and lamented by all\". The defenders, who were determined to fight to the bitter end, held out against assaults by the Royal Irish and part of the Naval Brigade, until Sappers under a Captain Pears finally used a 50-pound bag of powder to bring down the thick walls, after a party of Gunners commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Knowles who had brought...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1994.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]