[
    {
        "id": 206329,
        "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": 146,
        "title": "RAS-1971",
        "content_text": "140\n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE\n\n44 Sir Robert Ho Tung was never a member of the District Watch Committee although he was at one time chairman of the Tung Wah Hospital Committee. Sir Robert's brothers—Ho Fook and Ho Kom Tong—and other relatives became members of the Committee.\n\n45 Sir Chau Tsun-nin, who served on the Committee, was the son of Chau Siu-ki, a prominent financier and member of the Committee until his death. Chau Siu-ki (1863-1925) was killed in the collapse of a house during an abnormally heavy rainstorm.\n\n46 I think one may conclude that by the time the Committee met the Registrar General most of the problems to be discussed had been thrashed over previously, most likely at the Chinese General Chamber of Commerce or at the Chinese Club, both located in Connaught Road. There was also a Compradores' Club.\n\n47 For an account of Ho Kai's involvement in Chinese politics see Harold Z. Schiffrin, \"The Enigma of Sun Yat-sen\", in M. C. Wright, ed., op. cit., pp. 246 ff.\n\n48 The Hong Kong Chinese General Chamber of Commerce was in close touch with the Canton Chamber of Commerce and members flitted between one and the other. Many members of the District Watch Committee had offices and businesses in Canton and invested heavily in Kwangtung enterprises. Many bought land.\n\n49 Ho Kai, however, believed in the 'Open Door' policy in China, which he thought would be beneficial to both China, Hong Kong and the West. See the letter sent to Lord Charles Beresford in Beresford's book, The Break-up of China, London, Harper and Brothers, 1899, pp. 216-233.\n\n50 This is made clear, I feel, by a perusal of the commissions of enquiry into the workings of the Po Leung Kuk and the Tung Wah Hospital. In both cases Ho Kai worked in concert with Lockhart to protect the interests of the Chinese community. Ho Kai was no yes-man. On the other hand, he did use his inside knowledge of government activities to line his own pockets. Endacott states that Ho Kai and his cronies were suspected of spreading rumours about British intentions in the New Territories before the takeover in order to reduce land prices. Endacott, op. cit., p. 263. See also Despatches and other papers relating to the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong, Sessional Papers, No. 32 of 1899, p. 20.\n\n51 For example, Ho Fook, Chau Siu-ki and Wei Yuk all died in office.\n\n52 This board was set up to oversee the working of the managing committee and to see that continuity in policy was maintained.\n\n53 See note 52. An important function of the Advisory Board was to see that money was spent wisely.\n\n54 The Committee controlled fee-paying cemeteries at Aberdeen and Tsun Wan. Burial was reserved for Chinese who had been permanently resident in the Colony.\n\n55 This Committee, like the others listed above, was under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs. Chinese temples were controlled, in accordance with Ordinance No. 7 of 1928, by this Committee.\n\n56 The Chinese Recreation Ground was an open space situated off Hollywood Road. Funds derived from the rents of stalls in both Hollywood Road and the Yaumati Public Square in Kowloon.\n\n57 Before 1941 there were 9 Chinese Public Dispensaries controlled and maintained by a committee under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs. They were originally established to help combat plague.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207649,
        "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-1976",
        "page_number": 37,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "22 \n\nRICHARD J. SMITH \n\n11 Comparative studies on selected aspects of modernizing change in these two time periods would be illuminating. One might compare, for example, the aims and accomplishments of the Peking Tung-wen kuan (established in 1862) and the Bansho Shirabesho (established in 1858). On the former, see Wright, The Last Stand of Chinese Conservatism: The T'ung-chih Restoration, 1862-1874 (New York, 1967), 241-248; on the latter, consult Marius Jansen, \"New Materials for the Intellectual History of Nineteenth-Century Japan,\" Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 20 (1957), 569-582. On the use of Westerners in military affairs in Japan from 1853-1868, see Presseisen, 1-23; H. J. Jones, \"Bakumatsu Foreign Employees,\" Monumenta Serica, 29.3 (Autumn, 1974).\n\n12 Presseisen, chapter 1; Smith, , chapter 4.\n\n13 Albert Craig, Chôshu in the Meiji Restoration (Cambridge, Mass., 1961), 131-136, 201-203, etc.; Richard J. Smith, \"Foreign-Training and China's Self-Strengthening: The Case of Fenghuang-shan, 1864-1873,” Modern Asian Studies, 10.2 (1976).\n\n14 Presseisen, 22-23.\n\n15 See notes 7 and 8; also Hyman Kublin, \"The 'Modern' Army of Early Meiji Japan,\" Far Eastern Quarterly, 9.1 (November, 1949), 24-26; Meron Medzini, French Policy in Japan during the Closing Years of the Tokugawa Regime (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), 125-133.\n\n16 For a discussion of Li's modernizing efforts, his extensive use of foreign assistance, and the obstacles he encountered, see S. Y. Teng and John K. Fairbank, China's Response to the West (New York, 1966), 111-112; K. C. Liu, “The Confucian as Patriot and Pragmatist: Li Hung-chang's Formative Years, 1823-1866,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 30 (1970); Kenneth Folsom, Friends, Guests and Colleagues (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1968), 152-157; and K. C. Liu, “Li Hung-chang in Chihli,” in Albert Feuerwerker, et al., eds. Approaches to Modern Chinese History (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967).\n\n17 See, for example, Lord Charles Beresford, The Break-up of China (New York and London, 1899), 267-289, esp. 270-280; Major A. E. J. Cavendish, \"The Armed Strength (?) of China,\" Journal of the Royal United Service Institution, 42 (June, 1898), 709-710, 713-714, 717; Richard J. Smith, \"Chinese Military Institutions in the Mid-Nineteenth Century, 1850-1860,\" Journal of Asian History, 8.2 (1974), 127.\n\n18 See Smith, \"Foreign-Training,\" 212; Cavendish, 709-710, 713-714.\n\n19 See, for example, Cavendish, esp. 720-723; Captain W. R. E. Gill, \"The Chinese Army,\" Journal of the Royal United Service Institution, 24 (1881), 371-377; Chester Holcombe, China's Past and Future (London, 1904), 81-88; \"The Chinese and Japanese Armies,\" reprinted from the Army and Navy Gazette in the Journal of the Military Service Institution of the United States, 15 (1894), 1258; James Scott, \"The Chinese Brave,\" Asiatic Quarterly Review, 1 (1886), esp. 240; etc.\n\n20 See Smith, , Chapters 8 and 9.\n\n21 See Yang-wu yün-tung cited in Smith, \"Foreign-Training,\" 218. On Chinese resistance to foreign instructors and officers, see ibid.; also Cavendish, 720-721.\n\n22 See, for example, L. C. Arlington, Through the Dragon's Eyes (London, 1931), 18; Stanley Wright, Hart and the Chinese Customs (Belfast, 1950), 478-481; John Rawlinson, China's Struggle for Naval Development, 1839-1895 (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), 65-78, 93-94, 163; Holcombe, 80-85, esp. 83.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    }
]