[
    {
        "id": 209402,
        "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": 59,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "37\n\nLater, in 1861, it was again stated that \"this Municipal institution (is) founded upon the consent and concurrence of the whole community (...)\" There were even reminiscences of a contract theory à la Locke in a very elaborate article by the editor of the North China Herald on \"Led Horses\" (which at the time were forming quite a nuisance): \"That Britannia rules the waves' is the firm belief of all her sons, and they feel too that her onward march to almost universal dominion as it would seem, is to be traced solely to their obedience to her laws. All men are equal by virtue of their birth and under this conviction the only law that prevailed in the beginning was Club law. The administration of this Code, however, proved to be so fatally inconvenient that men in self-defence met together and voluntarily surrendered a very considerable portion of their birthright to secure that 'comfort, order and convenience' which they so signally failed to obtain under the equality system. Hence the origins of assemblies or 'meeting of wisemen', from Parliament to Parish vestries. Under this system tyrants have come to grief, and legally constituted authorities have grown up like trees by the waterside and have become the polished corners of the temple in our social system. (..)\"15\n\nNow, whether all these statements about the origin and functioning of representative bodies were correct or not, apparently they were believed in by at least part of the foreign community. At times it was very evident that there was no consensus at all about several questions, and that assertions of such a consensus were no more than a polite fiction, but these beliefs in the existence of and need for, consensus were the basis of the willingness of ratepayers to defend local self-government as an essential part of life. In practical terms this meant that the Public Meeting was considered as the local parliament1 and as such the body which had to approve any measures taken by the Municipal Council.\n\nIt seems therefore appropriate to give an outline of the Public Meeting's procedures and practice, as well as the voting qualifications, before turning to its executive organ, the Municipal Council.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214997,
        "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": 93,
        "title": "RAS-2000",
        "content_text": "49\n\n'I am a Christian, Sir.'\n\n'Very good,' replied the officer, 'I hope I am one too.'\n\n'But I am a Presbyterian, Sir, and at the Depot there were others of that religion, and we could have a service together. In my hut now there are no Presbyterians, and all are wicked.'\n\nMutinies did, however, occur, not only amongst service personnel of the Allies, but also amongst the various Labour Corps. Some were court-martialled and punished in various ways, i.e. hard labour, penal service, imprisonment or even death.\n\nIn September 1917 some British soldiers stationed at the base camp at Etaples, south of Boulogne, caused trouble and rebelled. Word of this spread to some unwilling Chinese and Egyptians, working at Boulogne, who then stopped work unloading supplies and went on the rampage. Field Marshal Haig ordered this to be quelled and, as a consequence, 27 unarmed strikers were shot dead, 39 wounded and 25 imprisoned.\n\nOn 10 October 1917, in a serious shooting incident in the Fourth Army area, 5 Chinese labourers were killed and 14 wounded. The inquiry into this incident came to the conclusion that this was due to the CO not appreciating the standard of discipline required to be maintained between his officers and British NCOs as regards the treatment of labourers.\n\nOn 16 December 1917, a mutiny, as a result of bullying by British NCOs, was reported amongst 21 Company CLC at Fontinettes. The armed guard fired on the mutineers, killing 4 and wounding 9. A Canadian soldier was also killed. The next day, a British infantry platoon forced the Chinese to resume work and, after the ringleaders were jailed, normality was restored on 23 December.\n\nOn Christmas Day 1917, labourers of 151 Company CLC conspired to kill their Sergeant Major, a \"half-caste\", as he had been an extortioner and had forced the men to work too hard. Two hundred men of the Royal Welch Fusiliers rounded up some of the mutineers whilst others had fled to near the HQ of 5 Corps at Locre. On Christmas Day, D. H.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n",
        "rank": 0
    }
]