[ { "id": 205221, "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": 177, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n171\n\nMany acres of old rice lands have been converted into vegetable land and we now have a super grade type of land producing vegetables which pay higher prices than padi, and hence result in higher rentals being charged for the land.\n\nRecent trends show that agricultural rents are now more often paid in cash. This probably stems from the fact that vegetables are rapidly replacing rice as the main agricultural production in the New Territories. As vegetables are sold on a daily basis through the Government wholesale markets, which pay cash on the day of sale, the farmer finds it easier to offer rent on a fixed cash basis rather than arranging for an indeterminate amount of rent to be paid based on two crops of kuk per year at differing rentals for each crop.\n\nNotes\n\n1 In S. Wells Williams, Syllabic Dictionary of the Chinese Language, North China Union College edition, Tung Chou, near Peking, China, 1909, good descriptions of the Chinese measurements mau and tau, showing how they vary from place to place, are given on pp. 583 and 804. For tam see p. 751. (In the Wade romanisation used in this dictionary they are spelled mou, tou and tan). Tam shui is not a term to be found in dictionaries as denoting a means of measuring land.\n\n2 This division of land into three classes is taken from the old classification used by the Chinese authorities before the lease of the New Territories. See J. H. Stewart Lockhart's \"Memorandum on Land\" in Hong Kong Government's Sessional Papers 1900, pp. 266-269.\n\n3 This method of calculating the area of vegetable fields is also common to other areas and was in use in the Kowloon peninsula from at least the late nineteenth century onwards. Again, it would appear that, like the fau, the measurement is variable, even within the Colony.\n\n4 See C. J. Grant, Soils and Agriculture of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Government Printer, 1960, pp. 53-81.\n\nMr. W. A. Taylor, the author of this Note, is Senior Land Assistant in the New Territories Administration, Hong Kong, and has long experience of land work there. In Mr. Taylor's temporary absence this note was prepared for publication by Mr. J. W. Hayes who also added the footnotes. It is an abbreviated version of a longer technical paper, with maps and tables.\n\nAddendum\n\nIt has since been established that rice was grown in four locations on Cheung Chau before the Pacific War 1941-45, but not after.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206517, "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": 65, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n59\n\nent Chinese he was largely instrumental in reorganizing the District Watchmen Force (a body of watchmen paid for by voluntary subscriptions from the Chinese community) and he obtained the appointment of twelve leading Chinese gentlemen as a supervising committee; he remodelled the Po Leung Kuk (a voluntary association concerned with the welfare of girls and young women); and he helped in the reformation of the Tung Wah Hospital and strengthened its committee of management.11 He was active, then, in setting up a number of official Chinese committees, linked to government through their special relationship with the Registrar General's Department, of which he was head. The Registrar General in all cases was ex officio chairman of the committees.\n\nLockhart's views on the importance of the Chinese element in the population are to be found in a trenchant report he submitted in 1894 to the Governor, Sir William Robinson, 'on the subject of a petition addressed to the House of Commons praying for an amendment of the Constitution of the Crown Colony of Hong Kong.' This petition from Hong Kong taxpayers to the House of Commons owed its origin principally to the imposition upon the taxpayers in 1891 of an additional military contribution of £20,000 a year, a decision that irritated and excited particularly the European business community. In 1894 T.H. Whitehead,13 Unofficial Member of the Legislative Council and leader of the business faction, was granted six months' leave of absence from the Council and he took with him to England a petition signed by 363 members of the community — (in Lockhart's words) ‘284 British, 10 Anglo-Chinese, 3 American, 4 Portuguese, and 47 British Indians.' The petitioners sought the election of representatives of British nationality in the Legislative Council; freedom of debate for the Official members with power to vote as they desired; complete control in the Council over local expenditure; the management of local affairs; and a consultative voice in questions of an Imperial character.\n\nWith great dialectical skill Lockhart took the petition to bits and exposed the vacuity of its arguments. In his memorandum to the Governor he averred: 'Most of the taxes fall almost entirely on the Chinese. The only tax to which the British and other residents as a whole are subject in the same manner as the Chinese is the tax of 13 per cent levied on the rateable value of house", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206544, "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": 92, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "86\n\nHENRY JAMES LETHBRIDGE\n\n'Memorandum ... on the subject of a Petition addressed to the House of Commons praying for an amendment of the Constitution of Hong Kong',\n\nHong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 26 of 1896,\n\npp. 427-434.\n\nThe Currency of the Farther East from the earliest times up to the present day,\n\nHong Kong, Noronha & Co.,\n\n1895-98, 3 Vols.\n\n(Second edition 1907).\n\n*Memorandum on the Registration of Chinese Partners',\n\nHong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 43 of 1901, pp. 8-13.\n\nA Confidential Report of a Journey in the Province of Shantung including a Visit to Kiaochou: Hong Kong, Noronha and Co., 1903, pp. 57, with XII enclosures.\n\nThe Stewart Lockhart Collection of Chinese Copper Coins, (North China Branch, Royal Asiatic Society,\n\nExtra Vol., no. 1),\n\nShanghai, Kelly and Walsh, 1915.\n\n'A Note on Three Chinese Gold Coins\",\n\nNew China Review, Vol. 3, [Oct. 1921], no. 5,\n\npp. 386-388.\n\nIndex to the Tso Chuan, compiled by Everard D.H. Fraser,\n\nrevised and prepared for the press by James Haldane Stewart Lockhart,\n\nLondon, Oxford University Press, 1930.\n\n(Reprinted Ch'eng-wen Publishing Co., Taipei, 1966).\n\nHan Wen Ts'ui Chen by Chai Li-ssu (H.A. Giles),\n\nChinese texts collected by Sir James H. Stewart Lockhart, K.C.M.G., Shanghai, Commercial Press, 1931.\n\nTHE NEW TERRITORIES\n\n'Extracts from a Report by Mr. Stewart Lockhart\n\non the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong',\n\nHong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 9 of 1899, pp. 181-198.\n\nReport on the New Territory at Hong Kong,\n\nCmd. 403, London, H.M.S.O., 1900.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206545, "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": 93, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "SIR JAMES HALDANE STEWART LOCKHART\n\n87\n\n'Report on the New Territory during the First Year of British Administration', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 15 of 1900, pp. 251-263, (same as Report on the New Territory at Hong Kong).\n\n'Memorandum on Land', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 15 of 1900, pp. 266-269.\n\n'Report on the New Territory for the year 1900', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 28 of 1901, 565 (pp. 1-9).\n\n'Report on the New Territory for the year 1901', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 22 of 1902, pp. 553-556.\n\nADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS\n\n'Census Report 1891', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 30 of 1891, pp. 373-395. Annual Reports of the Registrar General, 1891-1892, 1894-1897, 1899-1900, (all published in the Hong Kong Government Gazette).\n\nWeihaiwai: Report for 1903, Colonial Reports — Annual, London, H.M.S.O. Also: Reports on Weihaiwai for the years: 1904-1916, 1919-1920.\n\nCOMMITTEE REPORTS\n\n'Report of the Committee of the Legislative Council appointed to consider the advisability of raising a Public Loan', Hong Kong Sessional Papers, no. 12 of 1892, pp. 187-8.\n\nReports of the Special Committee on the Po Leung Kuk, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1893.\n\nReport of the Commission to Enquire into the Working and Organization of the Tung Wah Hospital, Hong Kong, Noronha & Co., 1896.\n\nReport of the Committee appointed to enquire into the condition of British trade in Hong Kong, Hong Kong Sessional Papers, 1896, pp. 611-613.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208036, "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-1977", "page_number": 75, "title": "RAS-1977", "content_text": "TWO ESSAYS ON THE CH'ING ECONOMY OF HSIN-AN\n\n59\n\nThe study of perpetual tenancy systems has long constituted an important, if overlooked, avenue of research into the diversity of economic life which characterized pre-revolutionary rural China.13 Though the institution of perpetual lease was widespread, the degree to which it dominated the agricultural sector—as well as the particular form it took—varied considerably over short distances. In a communication to the Colonial Secretary's Office in January 1904, an officer of the Land Court complained of difficulties facing administrators attempting to codify the land tenure system:\n\nChinese law does not, so far as I can ascertain, contain any mention of perpetual lease and I am informed that the custom of leasing land perpetually is local in the New Territories and does not prevail a short distance from our borders.14\n\nThe variant of perpetual tenancy found in 19th-century Hsin-An closely corresponded to the ti-ku (地骨)/ti-p'i (地皮) system found in Ch'ung-An Hsien (崇安縣) of Northern Fukien. Hsu Tien-t’ai, in his \"Study of the Tenancy Systems of Fukien” (福建租佃制之研究), groups this system with the t'ien-ku (田骨)/t'ien p'i (田皮) category of perpetual tenancy (永佃制). His description follows:\n\nConcerning t'ien k'u (lit: \"field's bones\") and t'ien p'i (lit: \"field's skin\"), or k'u t'ien (骨田) and p'i tien (皮田), this system is found in several counties throughout the province, the names changing slightly from place to place. The value of the \"bones\" belongs to the landlord, and the value of the \"skin\" belongs to the tenant; both sides can freely sell their respective rights. While the landlord (\"bones-master\") can freely sell his title, he can, in no way, affect the rights of the tenant to the \"skin-value.\" Moreover, the responsibility of paying the land-tax resides, as usual, with the landlord. When the tenant sells his title, even if disputes arise, there is no way for the landlord to interfere. Indeed, even the government finds it difficult to intervene.15\n\nOne of the earliest British accounts of perpetual lease in Hsin-An is to be found in Lockhart's \"Memorandum on Land\" appended to his Report on the New Territory at Hong Kong (1900):\n\nThe relation between landlord and tenant is often a complicated one, chiefly owing to the system of perpetual lease. Under such leases the landlords have practically renounced all rights to the\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209459, "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": 116, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "94\n\nELIZABETH SINN\n\n2 The inapplicability of the Ordinance was pointed out by E. Ashley of the Colonial Office. Minute by E. Ashley to Marsh to Derby, 27th October, 1884, Telegram: CO129/217.\n\nMarsh to Derby, 1st October, 1884, Despatch No. 338: ibid. 24 Daily Press, 3rd October, 1884.\n\n25 Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\n20 Daily Press, 4th October, 1884. This incident is discussed at greater length below.\n\n27 Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\nto Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\nsa Enclosure 1 in Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\nDaily Press, 4th October, 1884. The Magistrate's speech leaves no doubt that the sentences had been imposed for their deterrent effect.\n\n30 Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\n\"Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: ibid.\n\nMarsh to Parkes, 4th October, 1884, enclosed in F.O. to C.O., 2nd February, 1885: CO129/224.\n\nThe meeting was described in a sergeant detective's report to the Executive Council, enclosed in Marsh to Derby, 11th October, 1884, Despatch No. 342: CO129/217, Shu-pao II, 11th October, 1884. This report was wrong in saying that Stewart and Lockhart were present. The Nam Pak Hong was a commercial association established in 1868. \"The Nam Pak Hong Commercial Association of Hong Kong\" (Notes and Queries) Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 19 (1979), 216-226 (hereafter JHKBRAS) gives an account of the founding and early works of this institution.\n\nThe Tung Wah Hospital was conceived in 1869 and incorporated in 1870. For this very important institution, see H.J. Lethbridge, “A Chinese Association in Hong Kong\", Contributions to Asian Studies (Toronto), Vol. 1 (1971), pp. 144-158, and collected in his Hong Kong: Stability and Change (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1978), pp. 52-70; and Carl Smith, \"Visit to Tung Wah Group of Hospitals' Museum, 2nd October, 1976\" (Notes and Queries), JHKBRAS, 16 (1976), pp. 262-280. Both the Nam Pak Hong and the Tung Wah Hospital were organizations of the local Chinese elite. They exerted great influence on the Chinese population in Hong Kong so that on many occasions the Government sought its assistance in the management of the Chinese community. These associations will be discussed at greater length below.\n\n\"Minute by the Acting Colonial Secretary on a Conference held with certain members of the native community regarding the Strike and Riot,\" enclosed in Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\n\"Minute by the Acting Colonial Secretary on a conference held with certain members of the Native Community regarding the Strike and Riot\", enclosed in Marsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: CO129/217.\n\nMarsh to Derby, 6th October, 1884, Despatch No. 340: ibid.\n\n\"Memorandum by the Colonial Secretary\" enclosed in Bowen to Derby, 5th December, 1884, Despatch No. 399: CO129/218.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210707, "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-1986", "page_number": 58, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "41\n\nwith Mr. Francis. The procedure of the Hong Kong Government towards him seems miserably failing in tact. The Government was contemptible but Mr. Francis has diverted to himself a portion of the criticism that would otherwise have been monopolised by the Government. The whole affair makes an ugly page in the annals of the colony\".\n\nThere was reaction also inside the Government. Ackroyd wrote to the Colonial Office saying \"Mr. Francis is not a general favourite in Hong Kong and therefore the feeling in his favour on this occasion is all the more forcible testimony”. A Government memorandum recorded \"It has been decided not to give Francis the C.M.G. and it is impossible to vary that decision in the light of his letters. It will be seen that in his letter of 29 May he asks for the reason why he has not been honoured to the same extent as May. He should be politely told that the Secretary of State must decline to enter into correspondence on the subject”. The Governor recommended that Francis should be noted for a C.M.G. \"if he is quiet between this and then\" (i.e. the next honours list). According to a memorandum in 1902 Francis was so noted but “it was not finally decided that he should be given the C.M.G.”\n\nAfter the death of Francis, Ackroyd wrote to the Daily Press “He was a most useful citizen. As Chairman of the Plague Recognition Committee I recall he had put aside his professional duties and sacrificed his large practice for some months to help the Colony in her hour of trial\" (in fact he did not entirely abandon his practice). “He did a great and good work and I deeply regretted that these deserving services had not met with their reward but I suppose some official jealousy prevented him receiving that mark of Her Majesty's favour which he surely deserved and which he would greatly have appreciated\". The Colonial Secretary, J.H. Stewart Lochkart, brought this letter to the attention of the Governor writing “Ackroyd was knighted and now draws a handsome pension of more than £1,200 a year. So far as the Hong Kong Government is concerned his supposition of official jealousy is entirely unfounded. The services of Francis were brought to the notice of the Colonial Office by Sir William Robinson, and Mr. May when he was on leave at home also informed the Colonial Office of the good work done by Francis. I believe he would have been decorated but he published an injudicious letter after receiving the historical inkpot", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213452, "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": 48, "title": "RAS-1995", "content_text": "15\n\nfarmers agree that the farmers are absolute owners of the soil in perpetuity, but have been paying money or produce to the clans for generations, which the clans claim to be rent payable to them. The case for the farmers is that the land is and always has been theirs absolutely free from rent, and that the amount paid by them to the clans was the Government land tax, which they claim to pay direct to the Hong Kong Government without the intervention of the clans... The system of payment in produce is one of the farmers' troubles because the measures used by the clans are larger than those intended by the deeds, and are not the measures in general use in the district.\n\nThis \"taxlord\" problem was settled by the Land Court which found the status of the clan taxlords to be \"under Chinese law... entirely illegal\" and disallowed their claims as “untenable”. In some cases, however, grants of Crown land were offered them in compensation for loss of income.\n\nGrants of Crown land to the clans were registered under the Crown lease in the name of the clan's ancestral temple, that is, in the name of mythical grandfather or Tang. The tradition is that a proportion of the rent from such land is set aside for the maintenance of ancestral halls, for the upkeep of schools and for other objects connected with the clan's welfare. No clan land may be sold or mortgaged without the consent of all the clan members who may, of course, number hundreds.9\n\nSuch clan land (tso) sometimes is leased to one of the families within the clan and they pay an annual rent to the clan accountant who is usually one of the male heads of the families within the clan who so serve for a fixed period in rotation. Sub-letting by such a family is not permissible and, if it occurs, the lease is usually cancelled. Alternatively the various families of the clan may cultivate the land for a year at a time in rotation and at a fixed annual rent. A third method whereby clan land may be leased within the clan is by auction of the tenancy for the following year. The proceeds of the auction are devoted to the worship of ancestors and for the education and welfare of clan members.\n\nThat type of land tenure has a close resemblance to the traditional tenure of ancestral land or sheung t'in described by Lockhart's memorandum.2", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213453, "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": 49, "title": "RAS-1995", "content_text": "Ancestral land is land that has been originally set apart for ancestral worship and is increased by purchase from time to time in the name of the deceased ancestor, in whose name also the Government taxes are paid. The rent of ancestral land is devoted to the upkeep of the ancestral temple, to the education of the members of the clan, to the education of the members of the clan, to the worship of ancestors, to the relief of poor members of the clan, to marriage expenses of those who require assistance and to the funeral expenses of those whose relations are poor. Such land is always held in the name of the ancestor who bequeathed the property, the land being nearly always leased to members of the clan who cultivate it and pay a yearly rent. Sometimes the different branches of a clan cultivate the land in rotation, the branch in occupation of the land being held responsible for the payment of the expenses incurred on account of the objects for which the land was originally transmitted. Clan land cannot be alienated without the consent of the representatives and elders of the whole clan. The rent roll is kept by a Committee of the clan.92\n\nThis type of ancestral land tenure is still in operation,\n\nTemple land or miu t'in existed also in the territories under Chinese custom as described in the Memorandum:-\n\n\"Temple land is devoted to the support and upkeep of a temple dedicated to the service of some specially selected idol in the name of which the land is held. Some of those who originally subscribed towards the erection of the temple or their descendants act as trustees and keep the rent roll and an account of current expenses. Certain land in Kam T'in and Tsiu Kwang is devoted to the support of a few nuns. The rent roll is kept by a trustee, the rent in grain being handed over to the nuns, who, in order to increase their meagre income, also go from village to village begging for alms from the inhabitants.”\n\nChinese temples throughout the New Territories, as in the Colony, are now governed by the Chinese Temples Ordinance, which requires their registration (s. 5) and places their \"revenues, funds, investments and properties\" under the absolute control of the Chinese Temples Committee (s. 8).\n\nThe next variety of tenure described in Lockhart's Memorandum", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 213473, "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": 69, "title": "RAS-1995", "content_text": "36\n\nHong Kong Sessional Papers, 1900, pp 26-269 This Report was forwarded to London under cover of Sir Henry A. Blake's despatch to Mr Chamberlain of 19th February 1900 and this Memorandum of Land was subsequently published as Command Paper 403 in November 1900 (vide Committee Report, 1953, Chap III para 39 and Appendix 10 at p 207, where only two extracts appear) Mr Lockhart stated that the Memorandum was prepared with the assistance of Mr. Messer and Mr Ts'oi, Cader and First Clerk respectively\n\nA later, verbose but less informative source is \"Some Notes on Land Tenure in the New Territories\" attached to the Report, dated 4th March 1901, on the Land Court for 1900 by Mr HHJ Gompertz (who in 1909 was elevated to a puisne judgeship), a Member of that Court - Hong Kong Sessional Papers 1901 p 371 at p. 374\n\n17\n\nThe Emperor of China\n\nre the Chinese Government and Imperial Rent\n\nReport, DCNT, 1959-60, para. 171. The District Commissioner's Report for 1947-48 records (at para 29) that it was discovered in that year that one hamlet had never paid Crown rent since the British occupation of the New Territories This was remedied by the grant of a Block Crown Lease\n\n90 8. New Territories Ordinance (Cap 97)\n\n\"Report, DCNT, 1959-60, para 171\n\nTA\n\ne The Chinese Government\n\nby Bruce Shepherd, Deputy Land Officer, dated 17th January 1900, being Appendix VIII to Lockhart's Report, para. 12 (Hong Kong Sessional Papers, 1900, p 277 at p 279)\n\n44\n\nReport dated 18th February 1905 of Mr C. Mcl Messer, member of the Land Court (Hong Kong Sessional Papers, 1905, p. 149)\n\nReport dated 7th March 1905 of Mr JR Wood, Member of the Land Court (Hong Kong Sessional Papers 1905 p. 147)\n\nIbid, and see also Report on the New Territories 1899-1912, para 21(1), (Hong Kong Sessional Papers, 1912, p 46)\n\n7\n\nTregear, op cit, p 62\n\nDA\n\nReport, DCNT, 1959-60, para 177 and Tregear, loc cit\n\n44 Wilson's Notes\n\nalso sometimes termed \"Ching Sheung\" according to Wilson's Notes", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g", "rank": 0 } ]