[
    {
        "id": 205952,
        "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-1970",
        "page_number": 32,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "LORD ELGIN AND THE TAIPINGS\n\n27\n\nThe next evening, the squadron anchored off the city of T'ai-p'ing, also in Taiping hands, after having previously silenced some other forts a few miles below under equally questionable circumstances. Nevertheless, at T'ai-p'ing a request came to the British from the Taipings for assistance against the Imperialist war junks. The request note referred to its writer as \"your younger brother\" and was addressed to \"your Excellencies the Foreigners.\"12 In reply, Elgin sent a note recalling what had happened the previous day at Nanking, indicating that this had been a \"warning to all who may be hereafter minded to interfere with the ships of Her Majesty.\"3 For their part, however, the Taipings apologized for the firing at Nanking, explaining that it had been a mistake. Assurances were also given that the mission would not again be molested. Elgin conceded that he believed the Taipings to be sincere.14 Their request for assistance, however, was ignored.\n\nTwo days later, on November 23, the English arrived at Wu Hu, where they paused and sent ashore Thomas Wade \"to ascertain the disposition of the insurgents\" and \"in particular to determine if supplies could be obtained.\"15 This proved to be another instance of unmitigated presumption on the part of the visitors, and we see this by reading the English account only. Even though the Taipings' suggestion as to the form in which the request be made (a letter to the Taiping chief) was ignored by the English, the Taipings were still quick in making available the requested provisions. In spite of this gracious and generous Taiping hospitality, Wade's report of this visit is filled with language prejudicial to his hosts. There is not the slightest indication that appreciation was felt, or expressed.16 The squadron continued its progress up the Yangtze,\n\nThe next clash, at Anking, remains a classic instance of international effrontery. As the English ships approached this city it was under attack by Ch'ing forces, an assault that may have been coordinated with the English arrival. According to eyewitness Laurence Oliphant: \"It seemed that the Government troops had received notice of our approach and had determined to take advantage of it, in order to make a grand attack upon Ngan-king…\". Aside from these circumstances, not mentioned in most accounts of the affair, Elgin himself knew that the Taipings",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209288,
        "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-1981",
        "page_number": 191,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "THE HONG KONG ORIGINS OF DR. SUN YAT-SEN'S ADDRESS TO LI HUNG-CHANG 177\n\nTranslation from op. cit., vol. 3, p. 1.\n\n# The school was set up in 1870 and was originally named the Diocesan School and Orphanage for Boys and known in its short form as the Diocesan Home. The orphanage was closed in 1896, but the school has continued as the Diocesan Boys' School. Its early history is given in W.T. Featherstone, The Diocesan Boys' School and Orphanage, Hong Kong, 1869 to 1919 (Hong Kong, 1930).* The Central School was set up by the Hong Kong Government in 1862 as a result of a proposal from the famous sinologue James Legge. It was the first government school put directly under the supervision of a government officer recruited from Britain. The school was meant to be a model school for the promotion of teaching of English and Western learning. For its history, see Gevenneth Stokes, Queen's College, 1862–1962 (Hong Kong, 1962).\n\n7\n\nThe article was written in 1937, when the early school register was still in the possession of Queen's College. The Yellow Dragon, vol. 37, p. 94.\n\nIt is still not clear when Sun entered the college. It is generally known that Sun was transferred to Hong Kong in early 1887, but the college was not opened until October of the same year. It is possible that Sun had been transferred to work at the Alice Memorial Hospital as a student before the college was officially opened. For Sun's student life in the college, see Lo Hsiang-lin, Kuo-fu chih ta-hsüeh shih-tai (Chungking, 1945).\n\n10 A brief survey of the significant role of the Central School in this respect is given in Ng Lun Ngai-ha, “Role of Hong Kong Educated Chinese in the Shaping of Modern China”, paper presented to the 8th IAHA Conference, 1980.\n\n11\n\n“For more information on these and other early Hong Kong newspapers, see Ng Lun Ngai-ha, “A Survey of Source Materials in Hong Kong Related to Late Ch'ing China”, Ch'ing-shih wen-t'i, 4, (December 1979), 145–146, appendix A.\n\n12 The China coast newspapers are valuable sources for the study of modern Chinese history. For a brief survey of these materials, see Frank H. H. King and P. Clarke (eds.), A Research Guide to China Coast Newspapers, 1822-1911 (Camb. Mass., 1965).\n\n13 It was said that Sun might have contributed articles to the local newspapers and also to the Wan-kuo kung-pao, of which Cheng Kuan-ying was a patron. See Sun Chung-shan nien-p'u (Peking, 1980), p. 24 and Lo Hsiang-lin, \"Kuo-fu yü Ho Chi chüeh-shih ti kuan-hsi\", Kuo-fu ti kao-ming kuang-ta (Taipei, 1965), p. 129.\n\n14 The Hao T'ou yueh-k'an 14 and 15 (1947), a magazine published by a secondary school in Chung-shan county, noted that it was first published in the Macao Daily in 1892. Its full text can now be found in Sun Chung-shan Shih Jiao chuan chi (Kuang tung wen shih tzu-liao, Canton, 1891), pp. 271–273.\n\n16 For a brief comparative study of the two letters, see Huang-yen, “Chi-shao Sun Chung-shan 'chih Cheng Tsao-ju shu'”, Li-shih yen-chiu (1980:6), pp. 184–189.\n\n10 For a short description of Ho's life and career in Hong Kong, see Wu Hsing-lin, The Prominent Chinese in Hong Kong (Hong Kong, 1936), II, pp. 1–2. Ho's contributions to the reform movements in China have been studied in a number of works. The more recent ones are Chiu Ling-yeong, The Life and Thought of Sir Kai Ho Kai (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Sydney, 1968) and Tsai Jung-fang, “Comprador Ideologists in Modern China: Ho Kai and Hu",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209875,
        "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-1983",
        "page_number": 134,
        "title": "RAS-1983",
        "content_text": "112\n\nHaven\".\n\nPui O at present often uses for its name characters meaning \"Shell Harbour\".\n\n1* Yi Long Wan (\"Second Wave Bay\").\n\n1 These villages used to stand just south of Discovery Bay but have since given way to the major housing project of that name.\n\n\" Tai Pak Island is now called Tai Lei (\"Great Profit\").\n\n19 Shau Chau is now called Sha Chau (\"Sand Isle\").\n\n\"Tongkwu is now called Lung Kwu Chau (\"Dragon Drum Island”). \"The Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Addicts (SARDA) has had a treatment centre here since about 1960.\n\n31\n\n* Capital of San On District.\n\n** No villages now survive on Hei Ling Chau, which, after the closure of the leprosarium, is now occupied solely by the Correctional Services Department. The remaining villagers were resited to various places on Lantau in 1952-53.\n\n** Chau Kong is now called Sunshine Island (Chau Kung To), after an agricultural rehabilitation programme for refugee families launched there in the 1950s by Mr. Gus Borgeest (of Hong Kong) and others.\n\n\"Kau Yi Tsai is now called Siu Kau Yi Chau, with the same meaning.\n\n**A prewar periodical magazine containing many items of great interest, including Father D.J. Finn's contributions on local archaeology, 1933-36. These were reprinted, edited by Rev. T.F. Ryan S.J., by Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, 1958, entitled Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island (M) near Hong Kong.\n\n** Waglan at present uses for its name characters meaning \"Barrier to the Waves\".\n\n#T\n\nRespectively Cheung Shek Pai, Ngan Wu, and Shan Liu.\n\n\" Also known in English as Junk Island. At present the island is known in Chinese only as Fat Tau Chau (\"Buddha's Head Island\").\n\nNam Tong Island is now known as Tung Lung Chau (\"Eastern Dragon Island”).\n\n* This is the Tin Hau Temple (Tai Miu) on Joss House Bay.\n\nAfter partial excavation, it is now listed as an ancient monument under the care of the Urban Services Department.\n\n** Respectively Pak A, Leung Shuen Wan, and Pak Lap.\n\n** These inlets were drowned in the mid 1970s to form the High Island Reservoir.\n\n*Tolo Harbour.\n\nYuen Chau Tsai, see note 2 above.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211005,
        "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-1987",
        "page_number": 67,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "42\n\nNOTES\n\nAnthony K.K. Siu, \"The Kowloon Walled City”, Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, (hereafter, JHKBRAS) vol 20 (1980) 139-140; his Chiu-lung ch'eng shih lun-chi ” (“Studies on the Kowloon Walled City\") (Hong Kong: Hin Chiu Institute, 1987) p. 27. It was called miserable by the Rev. Krone in his “A Notice of the Sanon District” China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Transactions 6 (1859) 71-105, reprinted in the JHKBRAS 7 (1967) 104-137, 132.\n\n2 Chou-pan i-wu shih-mo (The complete account of the management of barbarian affairs) 260 ch'uan (Photographic copy of original compilation, Hong Kong, 1964), ch'uan 70: 18b-19b.\n\nThe hsun-chien originally administered 496 villages in the county; with the cession of Hong Kong Island, 5 were taken out of his hands, and in 1860, another 12 were lost with the cession of the Kowloon Peninsula. Thus by 1898, he was only responsible for 479. See Siu, Chiu-lung ch'eng, pp. 16-20.\n\n3 ibid., p. 28.\n\n4 Chou-pan i-wu shih-mo, ch'uan 76: 3a-4a.\n\n5 J.H.S. Lockhart, [Report on the New Territory], enclosed in Lockhart to Chamberlain, October 8, 1898 in Great Britain. Colonial Office. Original Correspondence (Series 129) (hereafter CO129)/289; p. 74. According to a later account, however, the wall was about 23 English feet high, and the width at the top between approximately 5.8 feet and 11.75 feet. See Chiang-shan ku-jen LA, “Hsiang-kang hsin-chieh feng-t'u ming-sheng ta-kuan\" (A panorama of local customs and famous places in Hong Kong and the New Territories) part 104. These articles appeared in the Hua-chiao jih-pao between 1935-36, and are collected in an album deposited at the University of Hong Kong Library. Based on observations, these articles are an important source of geographical and historical information of places in the territory. However, it seems that Lockhart, who had been commissioned to reconnoitre the newly leased territory, might have gone to greater lengths to obtain accurate measurements.\n\n6 Another detailed observation of the wall and guard houses was made by Walter Schofield in 1928, and his notes are reproduced in JHKBRAS 9 (1969) 154–156.\n\n7 Chiang-shan ku-jen, “feng-t'u”, part 104.\n\n8 Lockhart, p. 75.\n\n9 Lockhart, p. 75.\n\n10 Chiang-shan ku-jen, “feng-t'u”, parts 109-110.\n\n11 See the inscription recorded in David Faure, Bernard Luk and Alice Ng Lun Ngai-ha ed. Hsiang-kang pei-ming hui-pien (Historical inscriptions of Hong Kong) 3 volumes. (Hong Kong: Urban Council, 1986) vol. 1, p. 101,\n\nJames Hayes, The Hong Kong Region 1850-1977 (Hamden, Connecticut, 1977) pp. 167-168. The building was partially demolished in the early 1980s, and a high-rise apartment building was built over it. At the moment (1988), the frame of the entrance with the original couplet is still in place, and an altar, said to be from the school, still stands on the ground floor.\n\n12 Hsun-huan jih-pao June 13, 1883.\n\n13 Hayes, p. 168; Chiang-shan ku-jen, \"feng-t'u”, part 107.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211764,
        "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": 179,
        "title": "RAS-1989",
        "content_text": "154\n\n19\n\n, at Law Fong) are believed to have entered the area after 1700. See Map of Ta Kwu Ling.\n\nIt is interesting to note that, of the 21 villages in the Ta Kwu Ling area, seven are purely Punti, nine are purely Hakka (including two of originally Punti but now Hakka speaking Mans), but five are of mixed Punti and Hakka residents, including the large village of Chau Tin (which has only a tiny handful of Hakka residents), Fung Wong Wu, Kan Tau Wai, and Law Fong, and Tong Fong which consists partly of Punti speaking Mans, and partly of Hakka speaking Mans.\n\n+\n\n1\n\nYeung, and Ng, at Fong Wong Wu; Siu, and Ho, at Chau Tin; Wong, at Kan Tau Wai; Pang, and Au, at Tai Po Tin; Fu Lau, (and others) at Wo Keng Shan; Yiut, at Chuk Yuen; Chan, and Yiu, at Law Fong (Luofang); Chau at Wang Kong Ha; Yeung, and Kwu, at Sai Ling Ha (Xilingxia), and others.\n\n21 The temple bell, of Chien Lung 21 (1756) was donated by \"all the faithful people of the Ping Yuen Hap Heung...\n\n...to stand for ever before the altar of the Lady Tin Hau*. Faure, Luk, Ng, op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 670. The only earlier dated item in the temple, a Cloud Gong of 1727, was donated by a single family from Ping Che, Faure, Luk, Ng, op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 661. The temple continued to be owned and controlled by this group of villages. Faure, The Structure of Chinese Rural Society: Lineage and Village in the Eastern New Territories, Oxford Univ. Press, Hong Kong, 1986, p. 104 is incorrect in saying that the temple was owned by Ping Yeung. In the Block Crown Lease, the Manager of the temple was Man Shan-fung, of Ping Che. The Tong Fong people, although closely related genealogically to the Ping Che people, were not part of the Ping Yuen Hap Heung, and did not take part in the Ta Tsiu.22 Faure, op. cit., p. 103.\n\n+\n\n+\n\n23 The four managers at the time of the Block Crown Lease were Tang Hung-wai (a houseowner of Loi Tung), Chan Shing-pong, called a houseowner of Ping Yeung in a District Office report of 1979), Man Ying-shau (probably a villager of Ping Che, a relative of the houseowners Man Ying-kei, Man Ying-wai, and Man Ying-fat), and Chung Choi-wah (a houseowner of Man Uk Pin). These died in 1938, 1926, 1925, and 1942 respectively, according to a report made to the District Office in 1979. The abbess, Wong Tik-yuen, was appointed a manager in 1926, but she died in 1931. After the War, the lack of managers caused trouble on a number of occasions. A temporary manager was appointed in 1968. In 1979 the Chairman of the Sha Tau Kok Rural Committee and others were appointed as managers, although he, as a Lin Ma Hang villager, had no connection with the nunnery. This seems to have been with a view to rebuilding the nunnery. This proposal has led to a string of vigorous complaints from the elders of the six villages with shares during the last three years, but the situation remains, at present (1991), unresolved.\n\n24 See Faure, The Structure of Chinese Rural Society, op. cit., pp. 100-127, for a discussion of the Yeuk.\n\n25 The only alternative was a dangerous, difficult, and often impassable waist-deep ford, as the 1896 Kwong Fuk bridge tablet makes clear. See Faure, Luk and Ng, Historical Inscriptions of Hong Kong, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 298.\n\n26 See Robert G. Groves, \"The Origins of Two Market Towns in the New Territories\", Aspects of Social Organisation in the New Territories, Royal Asiatic Society, Hong Kong Branch, Symposium Report, 1964, pp. 16-20, and Alice Ng Lun Ngai-ha, \"Xianggang Xinjie xushi zhi xingqi yu shuailao: Dabuxu yanjiu\" [The Foundation and Decay of Market Towns in the New Territories of Hong Kong: A Study of Tai Po], in Chinese Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1985, pp. 633-655. The very widespread support for the Tsat Yeuk can be gathered from the list of donors shown on the Kwong Fuk bridge tablet, Faure, Luk and Ng, loc. cit.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212777,
        "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-1992",
        "page_number": 86,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "71\n\nThe Szechuan Force, of five corps with a total of thirty-three battalions* [i.e. 18-20,000 men] to start with, had two brigades up to full strength, the An-ting Brigade and the Ko-i Brigade [the latter with fifteen and a half battalions]. Mesny was located with the headquarters of the Ko-i Brigade during most of the campaign as a foreign adviser to the C-in-C of the Force on the use and maintenance of foreign arms. His descriptions of skirmishes between the Imperial troops and the Miao tribesmen reflect this limitation, being restricted to what he saw for himself and information he was able to gather within both the C-in-C's and the Ko-i Brigade Headquarters.\n\nThe first location of the headquarters of the Ko-i Brigade referred to by Mesny was Niu-ch'ang, though it moved forward shortly afterwards towards the old city of Huang-p'ing Chou. The vanguard advanced to Ma-ping-bah, occupying a Miao camp where the Szechuan Force planned to spend the winter of 1868/9. Shortly after this, Mesny moved to Huang-p'ing Chou, and described a skirmish at Ta-ngai, followed the next day by a full-scale battle at Huang-p'ing itself.\n\nJust before Chinese New Year in 1869, the Ko-i Brigade despatched a reconnaissance party in the direction of the Miao headquarters at Hsin-chou [Huang-p'ing New Town] some ten miles further into tribal Kueichou beyond the old city of Huang-p'ing. They discovered that the Miao had left only a small body of men in the town, having withdrawn their headquarters to Wu-ku Lung. The day after the New Year, a large body of Miao rebels descended from the hills and fired on the Imperial camp at Huang-p'ing but were driven off by the Ko-i Guards Regiment.\n\nRegionalism and factionalism were two powerful factors influencing the inter-personal relationships between members of the various Forces involved in the Kueichou campaign. In order to achieve anything, one had to rely on personal connections. Mesny, who did not hide his partisan views, repeats again and again how unfairly his Commander-in-Chief, T'ang Chiung, had been treated both in rewards for good service and in support, both financial and matériel [both of which were withheld]. Jealousy between the commanders of the various forces caused not only disharmony but, if Mesny is to be believed and there is no reason to doubt him, the failure of the whole of the first campaign. One of China's cultural characteristics was reflected in a number of instances referred to in Mesny's narrative. Personal relationships and connections, 'squeeze', and deep concern for one's self to the detriment of others were the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212780,
        "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-1992",
        "page_number": 89,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "74\n\nRepeated references by Mesny to the refusal by the Szechuan provincial Viceroy to send funds, supplies, reinforcements and rations to his provincial Force in Kueichou were followed by harrowing descriptions of the great hardships caused to the Szechuanese troops, with rations virtually non-existent and rampant disease carrying off many men.\n\nBy mid-winter of 1869/70 the C-in-C of the Szechuan Force decided that he could no longer wait for the Hunan Force to complete its reorganisation, and made up his mind to capture Ka-ba Niu-ch’ang, near to where the Hunan Force had been defeated the previous year. In the event the main body of the Ko-i Brigade were defeated with heavy losses though the rest of the Szechuan Force managed to hold on. The Ko-i Brigade, after a feint attack by a flanking element of the Szechuan Force which drew off the Miao rebels, eventually reached Wu-ku Lung and Ka-ba Niu-ch'ang.\n\nAgain the C-in-C of the Szechuan Force proposed joint action with the Hunan Force, supporting an advance this time towards Tu-yün Fu and Ma-ho Chou with the express aim of relieving pressure on the provincial capital. The Hunan Commander appears not to have agreed and, without co-operation and united action, nothing could be attempted and nothing therefore was done. However, T'ang, the C-in-C of the Szechuan Force again decided to act alone. He seemed to be unaware at the time that a new Kueichou provincial C-in-C, Chou Ta-wu, had been appointed to command all troops within the province operating against the rebels; this included the Szechuan and Hunan Forces. T'ang went ahead, ordering the withdrawal of the main body of the Szechuan Force from its forward positions in Miao territory in mid August, leaving behind at Ch'ang-p'ing Hsien some fourteen battalions of his now increased Force to hold the line until new plans could be made and carried out. In less than three days the main body of the Force had retreated unmolested through Ta-ngai and Niu-ch'ang to Weng-an Hsien where the main body remained whilst the C-in-C and his headquarters withdrew a further 20 miles to Kou-ch'ang (later renamed Lung-ch'ang: about half way between Kuei-yang and Tsun-i).\n\nThe commander of one half of the force of the fourteen battalions left behind at Ch'ing-p'ing Hsien decided off his own bat to evacuate the city, abandoning all camp kit and equipment, and fleeing with his seven battalions to Kuei-yang where he spread a report that the main body",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214200,
        "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-1998",
        "page_number": 58,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "21\n\nBut, while comparing Chinese and western humour, with the latter propagated by television, radio and other forms of the mass media, it has to be borne in mind that the peoples of many countries are changing their way of life. The world is fast becoming a global village.\n\nAmusement in language\n\nIn the mid-1950s, the author recalls, a fashionable colour in Hong Kong was described in Cantonese (a vibrant, vivid language) as ‘duck's excreta green'. This tickled foreigners but was (and still is) good descriptive, serious stuff to our Chinese friends. They never seem to realise, however, that any of their own surnames, such as Mr Wu, Mrs Ma (meaning horse), Mrs Lung (meaning dragon) or Miss Ng (which is difficult for some Europeans to pronounce), may strike the average Westerner as funny. Yet the author has never really understood why his family name, 'Waters' (which hardly ever strikes Europeans as comical) (probably meaning his forebears lived near a river or a lake), is often considered amusing by Chinese. A Chinese physician once wisecracked: 'Dan Waters, please pass some water;' while a Chinese architect quipped, 'Dr Waters has been inspecting waterworks structures all morning.' In other examples just the mention of the name Green, Whalebelly or Goodbody strike many Chinese, understandably perhaps, as comical. We British have become accustomed to such names. However, the countless Chinese firms with names like Lee Kee Motor Boat Service, No-Squeak Wong the cobbler and Au-Choo the medicine shop, do strike the average Westerner as good for a chuckle.\n\nThere is a Chinese saying which, when translated, goes something like this:\n\nWalking we will not change our family name. Sitting we will not change our given name.\n\nIt really implies we are digging our heels in and sticking to our principles. Nevertheless, Sir (now Lord) David Wilson did change his name when he came back to Hong Kong to become Governor in 1987. He had served in Hong Kong before and his Chinese name had previously been romanised as Ngai Tak-ngai (Spurr, 1995;246). The Chinese, however, who read far more into a name than the average European,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    }
]