[ { "id": 205783, "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-1969", "page_number": 89, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "KING MONGKUT AND THE KINGDOM OF SIAM\n\n83\n\nopened the Treaty Ports and a second British conflict with China had proved the superiority of Western arms, the Chinese court refused to reform. The Japanese were quicker to read the signs. Only Siam, unlike her weak neighbours in the tropical south, was able to adapt herself to the new world without war or its threat and without loss of sovereignty.\n\nWhy was this? Was it because Britain and France had agreed to the Thai kingdom being a buffer between their Indian and Indo-Chinese empires? Or was it that the King of Siam who received Sir John Bowring had more vision than most of his Asian contemporaries and was succeeded by an equally gifted son? Whatever the reasons, the Treaty of 1855 was a major factor in determining the future of the Thai kingdom. It provided for the opening of diplomatic relations with Britain and, as a natural consequence, with other western nations. It introduced extra-territorial rights to British subjects living in Siam and allowed them to own or rent property. In commerce the Treaty abolished the strangling system of monopolies owned by the King and 'farmed' to Chinese merchants - replacing it by a free market with low duties on imports and exports. The year after the conclusion of the British treaty the Americans and the French secured similar agreements and these in turn were hastily followed by treaties with various European nations. These treaties marked a turning-point in the modern history of Siam.\n\nIn the century and a half which followed Louis XIV's mission to Ayuthia in 1689 Siam had little or no contact with the West. In the mid-eighteenth century her main preoccupation was the constant war with the Burmese who finally sacked their ancient and splendid capital in 1767. By the time the new house of Chakri had established the capital at Bangkok in 1782 the British East India Company had consolidated its dominion over India. The tea trade with China was growing rapidly and ports of call on the eastern run were obvious advantages. Francis Light obtained Penang island for the Company from the Sultan of Kedah in 1786 for the annual payment of $6,000 and the vague understanding of British protection. Kedah was an acknowledged feudatory of Siam, but at that time King Rama I was far too busy with the building of Bangkok to concern himself with the incident and the British were not then interested in Siam. Raffles had", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206007, "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": 87, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "82\n\nA. D. BLUE\n\nmarine surveyor was appointed to enforce the provisions of this Act. This resulted in many of the emigrant ships leaving Hong Kong harbour with the prescribed number of passengers on board, and then picking up many more outside Green Island, on its western limits. Even the very modest space of 12 square feet (6 feet by 2 feet) was only provided in the few good ships, and in some sailing ships each coolie had only 8 square feet. Another step to remedy abuse was taken in 1869, when emigration of Chinese to places outside the British Empire was prohibited. A more important step outside China was the appointment of British officials as Protectors of Chinese in Singapore and Penang in 1877 and 1880 respectively, followed in 1901 by the appointment of similar Dutch officials in Indonesia. (It should be remembered in any comparison between British and Dutch colonial administrations, that slavery was not abolished in the Dutch East Indies until 1860). Perhaps the last major improvement was taken in 1914, when Britain abolished indentured labour throughout the British Empire, an act of altruism which destroyed the Penang sugar industry.\n\nBesides emigration to the Nanyang and to South America, the discovery of gold in California and Australia in 1849 and 1851 respectively, started Chinese emigration to both places; and the first official returns of emigrants from Hong Kong in 1854 showed 10,491 emigrants leaving for California and 4,341 for Australia. The Chinese called California ‘Kam Shan', Golden Mountains; and Australia San Kam Shan, 'New Golden Mountains', a name this country still retains among many Chinese to this day.\n\nMost of the emigration to California and Australia was voluntary, and as stated above, the greatest abuses in the emigrant trade involved South America and the West Indies, and in particular the Peruvian guano islands and Cuba. In 1856, for instance, the master of a British ship which had left Hong Kong with 332 emigrants for Cuba, reported losing 128 from suicide and disease during the voyage. The first suicide took place on the first day out, and there was an average of three per day until the ship passed through the Sunda Straits. The captain had received $70 in passage money for each man who boarded the ship in Hong Kong, and collected a further $400 for every one", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206009, "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": 89, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "84 \n\nA. D. BLUE \n\ncame from cholera and fire, and not from revolt. It was generally believed that the Chinese were more able to look after themselves than the Indians. \n\nOne of the greatest tragedies in Chinese emigration befell the American clipper Flora Temple in 1859. The Flora Temple left Macao for Havana with 850 passengers, who were rebellious from the very start of the passage. Although they were unsuccessful in breaking out of the holds, they killed one of the crew who fell into their clutches. The ship ran into bad weather four days out from Macao, and was unable to take accurate sights. Two days later she ran on a reef off the coast of Indo-China. It was apparent that she would soon break up, so the captain and crew launched and provisioned the two lifeboats, and abandoned the ship and passengers. After a rough passage the captain and one of the lifeboats reached the coast near Touron twelve days later, but nothing was heard of the other lifeboat. A French naval ship was sent to rescue the deserted coolies and search for the missing lifeboat. When they arrived at the scene of the wreck, however, all they could find was a few planks of the Flora Temple, but no trace of the passengers or other lifeboat. \n\nAnother tragedy, but on a smaller scale, befell the British barque Sophia Fraser when taking emigrants from Amoy to Penang. The Sophia Fraser ran into a typhoon three days out of Amoy, and during the pandemonium which broke out among the coolies confined in the 'tween decks thirty-five died. The subsequent enquiry revealed that only four of the deaths were due to natural causes, the rest having been killed in the senseless fight caused by panic. This bears some resemblance to the central incident in Conrad's novel \"Typhoon\", as the burning of the Shah Jehan in the Indian coolie trade resembles the central incident in \"Lord Jim\". \n\nWhat appeared at the time to be one of the major tragedies in the history of Chinese emigration concerned the French ship St. Paul in 1858, when taking 327 indentured labourers from Hong Kong to the Australian gold fields. The St. Paul ran on a reef off Rossel Island, a small island lying to the east of the New Guinea islands, and the captain and eight of the crew were picked up fifteen days later by the British schooner Prince of Denmark. After an inexplicable delay of two months they were put ashore", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206488, "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": 36, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "30\n\nLEIGH R. WRIGHT\n\nentered the Borneo scene in 1839 very much the idealist-humani-tarian, nineteenth century liberal, gentleman adventurer, in the colonial tradition of such forerunners as Francis Light of Penang and Thomas Stamford Raffles, founder of Singapore and sometime British governor of Java. Even much of the colour and romance painted by the early travellers and story writers bears up under the careful scrutiny of the historian.\n\nJames Brooke came from stock which had produced a seven-teenth century lord mayor of London. His father and uncle were civil servants in the East India Company, and James lived until aged 12 near Benares on the Ganges in British India where he was born in 1803.\n\nBrooke himself entered the military service of the Company after a somewhat indifferent education which involved only two years of formal schooling in the Norwich Grammar School. He was severely wounded in a campaign of the first Anglo-Burma war in 1825, and after a prolonged convalescence resigned from the Company, largely, we are led to believe, because of disenchantment with its conduct of eastern affairs and because of widespread corruption among Company servants.\n\nWhen in 1835 Brooke's father, then a retired nabob living in Bath, died leaving him a comfortable fortune of £30,000, James bought a schooner and fitted out an expedition to Borneo and the Celebes Islands, an area in the East Indies with which he was familiar from earlier voyages and from exhaustive reading of the accounts of George Windsor Earl and Stamford Raffles.\n\nBrooke's schooner sailed in December 1838 under the colours of the Royal Yacht Club. He looked forward to satisfying his adventurous curiosity about Borneo and perhaps doing some trading. He particularly wanted to penetrate to the interior of Borneo, and had in mind exploring up the rivers which flowed into Marudu Bay, on the northern end of the island. He was a private voyager, but the colours of the Royal Yacht Club commanded respect in naval and colonial circles and he was well received in Singapore where he arrived in May 1839.\n\nI\n\nThere he was given a pseudo-official mission to perform in Borneo. Several Singapore-based vessels had recently been ship-wrecked or plundered by Bornean pirates and their crews sold into", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211635, "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": 50, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "25\n\nwhich is reserved exclusively for the occasion. The offerings must include red pork and two long stems of bamboo in leaf; these are laid out on special tables placed on small stools so that they do not touch the ground and be defiled.\n\nThe Jade Emperor's image has been noted on altars in nine temples in Hong Kong and in two in Macau. It is also to be seen on numerous altars throughout South-East Asia and in Taiwan. In Taiwan his image appears alone or with two or three attendants on a number of secondary altars and even on side altars. In Hong Kong he is the main deity in six of the nine temples and is the major deity on a secondary altar in the other three.\n\nThe most fascinating image of the Jade Emperor in Hong Kong is to be seen in the upper level hall of the Monastery of the Ten Thousand Buddhas in Shatin where he is flanked by two of his ministers. In a large number of temples in which he is the main deity the Jade Emperor is supported in this way by the two stellar deities, each in his own secondary altar flanking the main altar with the Jade Emperor. They are the Lord of the Northern Bushel and the Lord of the Southern Bushel, Nanpei Tou (jjdk-1-). There are also a number of images of attendants flanking the image of the Jade Emperor, and on occasions the Civil and Military Judges (Wenwu P'ankuan).\n\nHe is the main deity in a tiny temple near Shaukiwan on Hong Kong island, a tiny image in a small single-room temple occupied by one elderly lady, the temple keeper. The original occupants were refugees from Yunnan province in the early fifties, dead these many years. By the mid-seventies the temple was being kept spotlessly clean by the elderly lady who had been an amah to a long-departed English family. She explained that she had to earn her keep somehow, especially as her husband had already 'long time gone topside'.\n\nIn Penang people will tell you that the small red shrine outside their shop or house is dedicated to the Jade Emperor even though neither his name nor title is recorded anywhere.\n\nSupporting the Supreme Deity is a Board or Ministry of Thirty-Six Ministers, with duties to supervise junior celestial officials and clerks, whose images are rarely to be seen on altars though on temple murals all thirty-six are frequently portrayed. Their role is to control and run", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211639, "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": 54, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "29\n\ndedicated to Pao Kung, the Lenient Judge, and also in a Buddhist temple in Beverley Hills on Cebu where he has behind him a small image of the Jade Emperor's second son Erh T'ai Tzu (...). The whole group of the Jade Emperor's family, though only the two sons (the second one and the third) are portrayed, is referred to as Chiu Chung T'ien Lao Tsu (LICEEM).\n\nA rural temple on the island of Penang contains three images on its secondary altar identified as the Three Sons of the Jade Emperor. They are referred to as San Yuan T’ai Tzu (SAT).\n\nAnother rural folk religion temple at Bukit Mertajam on the Malaysian mainland opposite Penang contains an image of the Jade Emperor's Fourth Daughter (Ti Ssu Kung Chu Pч2) on one side of the main deity on the altar, the Jade Emperor himself, with an aide to the princess on the other side of the Jade Emperor. The aide is known as Meng Yen Hua (夢燕花),\n\nAn unusual image, of a farmer standing holding a hoe over his shoulder, stands on a private altar belonging to a Hakka petty businessman in Kranji, Singapore. The businessman explained that it portrayed one of the sons of the Jade Emperor and had been brought from eastern Kuangtung province last century; it has been prayed to for good crops ever since. He is known as Li Po Kung Kung (#22).\n\nIn one group in Singapore, on a Taoist altar in Lorong How Sun, the Jade Emperor is attended by four of his seven daughters. The first is Hsien Chi Niang Niang (瑄姬娘娘), the second is Kuan Yin, the third is T'ien Hou and the fourth is Nu Wa. All but the eldest are well known deities from early Taoism and Buddhism in their own right. Hsien Chi Niang Niang has only been noted twice, both times in Singapore, on altars where she is said to be the eldest daughter of the Jade Emperor. She is portrayed standing on rocks, holding a fly whisk in her right hand.\n\nAgain in Singapore, on a private altar, a Buddha figure, gilded and seated in a lotus position, was identified as Han Hsien Fu Tsu (#\n\nbili), and said to be a daughter of the Jade Emperor (see Plate 8). She has three identifying features apart from her Buddhist five-leaf crown. These are a small dragon crawling over her left knee, a vase balanced on her right knee and her palms held facing together before her chest with her fingers making a mystic sign. This image has also been seen", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215771, "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-2002", "page_number": 70, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "3\n\nbecame British territory. Malacca was administered by the Dutch until the signing of the Anglo-Dutch treaty in 1824, whereby it was ceded to the British among other terms. Two years later, Singapore and Malacca came under the Penang Presidency.\n\nAccording to Turnbull, the Straits Settlements were the East India Company's most incongruous offspring….The Straits Settlements formed a scattered unit, which was difficult to administer efficiently.” In legal terms, it included Western laws at constitutional level, and local legal systems under the control of sultans.\n\nPhysical/geographical problems\n\nPenang Island lay opposite Province Wellesley (a strip of land about 30 miles long and three miles wide) which the EIC acquired from the Sultan of Kedah in 1800. Malacca was about 260 miles to the south of Penang. Singapore Island was a further 120 miles south, at the tip of the Malay Peninsula.\n\nThere were problems of communication between these settlements, being only by means of sea. Until 1861, the Straits government possessed only two antiquated sailing gunboats and one steamer, used mainly to ferry the governor, recorders and senior officials between the three stations. Communications with the EIC's headquarters in Calcutta were also poor, and until 1864, a monthly steamer service between Calcutta and the Straits Settlements remained the only link with the seat of government.\"\n\nAdministration problems\n\nAccording to Turnbull, '[d]ivision of interest between the East India Company and its eastern dependencies was even more formidable than the geographical and physical problems of administration. The sole value of the Straits Settlements to the East India Company was to protect and stimulate the China trade. When [the EIC] lost its monopoly of this trade in 1833 Calcutta was left with an unrewarding and expensive burden. She could not abandon the Straits Settlements but constantly begrudged the drain they made upon India's financial resources and upon the time and attention of senior officials over the next thirty years.'", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215785, "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-2002", "page_number": 84, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "in the Straits, for example in negotiation for the settlement of Penang Island in 1786 where the Supreme Government remained steadfast in refusing to promise military aid to the Sultan of Kedah. Thus, in a Siamese invasion in 1821, the Penang Government did not offer military aid to the Sultan, but only political asylum and mediation. Indeed the whole history of Anglo-Siamese relations in the Malay Peninsular shows evidence that the non-intervention policy was adhered to as much as possible, (cf. Mills, supra, Chap 8 (Anglo-Siamese relations)) For the obvious political and economic reasons the British did not want to antagonise the Siamese (cf. Tarling, Anglo-Dutch Rivalry in the Malay World, 1760-1824) by interfering in the affairs of the Malay States (such as Kedah, Kelantan and Trengganu) which were within the Siamese sphere of influence.\n\nSevere censures were passed upon Captain Low for his treaty with Perak in 1826; and the treaty between James Low and Perak and Selangor in 1826, received strong criticism from the Supreme Government and resulted in Low's being suspended from his duties. (Tan DE, Supra, p 119) The Indian Government only relented when Governor Fullerton managed to convince it of the necessity of protecting British interests, a clear instance of the Indian Government's unwillingness to intervene in any of the Malay States. This was further proven when appeals of Perak and Trengannu for defensive purposes were likewise rejected. In the Naning War of 1831-2, Governor Ibbetson was told that the extension of territory was not desired. (Ibid. p 119)\n\nAn even more striking instance occurred in 1833, when the boundary between the Malacca Territory and the tiny state of Johol was debated over. Between the two lay a debatable piece of land which had formerly been claimed by both states, containing rich mines of tin and gold. Governor Ibbetson regarded the frontier delimitation as an excellent opportunity for showing that accessions of territory and encroachments upon their rights is the furthest from our views and intentions' (Mills, supra, p 177), thus resigning any claims that the British might have to it, and even included it within the area of Johol.\n\nThrough the above examples, I would say that the British were pursuing a policy of non-intervention in the Malay States between 1824-73. They upheld this policy whenever possible, though in some cases intervention was unavoidable. And it is significant that sometimes even in instances where British merchants' interests were threatened (for example in Negri Sembilan), the policy of non-intervention was still observed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 } ]