[
    {
        "id": 205614,
        "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-1968",
        "page_number": 156,
        "title": "RAS-1968",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n151\n\nEnough has been said to demonstrate that East Point was not the Firm's first building site. This leads on to a further contention that it was not the original intention to site the main part of the new city of Victoria in the Happy Valley - though it is undeniable that that idea was mooted within a year or so and building did commence there after a very small number of individuals, most of them connected with Jardine, Matheson & Co., very quickly obtained grants of much of the best land in the area.\n\nHowever, one further circumstance suggests that the firm originally intended to have their Headquarters much nearer the centre of town than was later the case. Sometime in 1841, perhaps very soon after the sale of 14 June 1841, they obtained a transfer from a Captain Ramsay of what was then Town Lot 42, and there erected a large house of which the Canton Press caustically commented that \"on entering the harbour, you perceive the most commanding site, disfigured by a hybrid erection, half New South Wales and half native production, which is a foretaste of the architectural absurdities to be perpetrated on this island.\"\n\nBut Jardine, Matheson & Co. were unfortunate in their choice of this site for their headquarters on two counts. It was early decided that the hill to the west of the present Albany nullah (Garden Road) should be reserved for Government buildings only. Government correspondence was as early as November 1841 datelined ‘Government Hill’.\n\nThereby restricting the development of the town in that direction into the fairly wide and gently sloping valley behind the present Murray House. But even worse was the Military's insistence that the ridge and hillside to the east of the Albany nullah should be reserved for their use; this area covered the sites of both the firm's godowns and house. The house later became the residence of Lord Saltoun, Commander of British Forces in China during the war which ended with the Treaty of Nanking in 1842. The present Flagstaff or Headquarters House, built by 1846, now stands on this site.\"1\n\nThey were able to occupy neither building for long: early in 1842, Colonel Malcolm, Pottinger's secretary, wrote to them, extending an offer to compensate them for moving away to allow the area to be used by the Military. They would be allowed to choose marine lots in any part of the island not appropriated for any other purpose and would, in addition, be given $25,000 in cash for the buildings they had erected. They had, of course, no option, and",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205616,
        "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-1968",
        "page_number": 158,
        "title": "RAS-1968",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n153\n\nNOTES\n\n1 Minutes of Evidence, Q. 2260.\n\n2 G. R. Sayer, Hong Kong: Birth, Adolescence and Coming of Age, 1937, p. 99.\n\n3 Pottinger to Lord Stanley, (No. 15 of 1844), 28 February 1844, (CO129/5/£174) The occasion of this despatch was Admiral Cochrane's suggestion that East Point would make the best site for a naval depot and that Jardine, Matheson & Co. should be removed to make way: see Cochrane to Pottinger, 23 February 1844 (CO129/5/£182).\n\n4 Gordon to Malcolm, 6 July 1843 (CO129/2/f.138).\n\n5 See Friend of China, 2 November 1850.\n\n6 Canton Register, 29 June 1841.\n\n7 E. J. Yorke, The Princely House, (unpublished), p. 487.\n\n8 China Mail, 20 December 1849.\n\n9 Apparently published in 1861 or early 1862 in either Canton or Hong Kong. It was a reprint of articles written by Tarrant in his newspaper, the Friend of China, at the time when he was publishing it in Canton. For this extract, see Friend of China, 9 November 1861.\n\n10 Canton Press, 19 February 1842.\n\n11 See Hong Kong Register, 15 January 1850. The siting is amply demonstrated from maps also. And see Minute by Pottinger on the question of accommodation for General D'Aguilar, Saltoun's successor: January 1844 (CO129/5/f.93).\n\n22\n\n12 Malcolm to Jardine, Matheson & Co., 17 February 1842 (CO129/5/f.96).\n\n13 See Hong Kong Register, 15 January 1850.\n\n14 Yorke, op. cit., p. 488.\n\n15 Pottinger to Jardine, Matheson & Co., 3 June 1842 (CO129/5/f.224).\n\n16 The firm claimed later that this godown belonged to their Bombay agent, Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, without whose consent they were unable to comply with a request that it be sold to the military for use as barracks: see Pottinger to Saltoun, 26 October 1843 (CO129/5/f.524).\n\n17 Yorke, op. cit., p. 491.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209584,
        "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": 241,
        "title": "RAS-1982",
        "content_text": "219\n\nby their spotless virtues\". A claim that must have raised a few eyebrows.\n\nWhile the actresses were available, there seemed some doubt about the actors. Lord Saltoun, Commander of the Forces, noted on the 25 November 1842 that the Theatre was to open on Wednesday, \"But who are to be the actors, I have no idea. I believe some amateurs from the navy”.\n\nOnce opened, the life of the Theatre was short. Mr. Dutronquoy departed from Hong Kong quite suddenly on the 17th of December. It was alleged that he had to close his Hotel and Theatre under orders from the authorities and pay a fine of $500. This was denied by his agent who stated that the reason for the closure was because Mr. Dutronquoy had “received personal violence added to insult and abuse the preceding evening\". One wonders if the \"spotless virtues\" of the actresses may have been the cause of his troubles.\n\nThe next notice of dramatics is in December 1844 when a proposal to form a company of amateurs under the patronage of the Governor was announced. It was expressly stated that the authorities regarded the project as a \"protection against vice”. Little action took place, however, until the winter of 1845-46 when a group had been organized, a venue secured, and five bills put on between December and June at Aqui's Theatre in the Lower Bazaar.\n\nThis theatre had been erected some few months previous to the amateurs' first performance there. It was intended for Chinese entertainment, but, being available, it was used by the Hong Kong Amateurs even though it was in the heart of the Chinese section of the city, an area which was usually avoided by the European population of the day.\n\nLoo Aqui, the owner of the Theatre, was a leader of the Chinese community. It was alleged that he was allied with pirates but during the recent British-Chinese hostilities he had been very useful in securing provisions for the British forces. As a reward for these services he had been permitted to take up a number of lots in the Lower Bazaar, the area which was allotted to Chinese who had aided the British. On his property, Loo Aqui",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213500,
        "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": 96,
        "title": "RAS-1995",
        "content_text": "64\n\nwhich this path ended was naturally called by this same name. But among the Hakkas, the Island of Hong Kong or rather this northern portion of it, is to the present day called by the same name \"Kwantailou\" (Eitel, 1895, P.134)\n\nAs early as 1841, a shoreline road was planned in the northern part of the Hong Kong Island. It was pegged out by the Chinese labourers and made to connect Sai Ying Pun to East Point, a distance of nearly four miles. It was finished in early 1842 and was named Queen's Road. The road was so cut as to leave generally enough space between it and water and at a safe height above sea-level for the erection of godowns.\n\nThe possession and occupation of the Island in the first instance was largely due to military reasons, especially as the Chinese mainland was so near at hand. There were two Chinese forts on the tip of Kowloon peninsula. Military establishments were therefore quickly set up on the northern coast in order to prevent the Chinese from recapturing Hong Kong.\n\nIn the early days of February 1841, the navy had already laid claim to Navy Bay (Belcher's Creek) lying due east of the bluff then known as Belcher's Point and was already running up store houses on the sloping foreshore.\n\nThe Army had established two camps on the northern shore, one on Cantonment Hill (later known as the Victoria Barracks and the Seven-and-six Penny Hill) and other at Sai Ying Pun, on the long slope which now carries on its shoulders the Hong Kong University and at its foot, the old Reformatory Building (Sayer, 1937, P. 99) and above the present Pokfulam Road. On the site in Third Street where the St. Louis School now stands was a small battery, called the West Point Battery or Elliot's Battery. (A similar battery, East Point Battery or Pottinger's Battery was mounted on the site of Wellington Barracks)\n\nThe barracks at that time were of a more or less makeshift nature. Owing to unstable political situation, it was said that Lord Saltoun, then Commander-in-Chief, would not take upon himself to erect permanent and suitable barracks and officer quarters for the troops. The soldiers were encamped in flimsy structures of bamboo, cane, palm leaves and canvas. The so-called barracks at Sai Ying Pun were",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1995.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]