[ { "id": 204793, "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-1964", "page_number": 96, "title": "RAS-1964", "content_text": "84 \n\nJ. W. HAYES \n\nprobably building materials and general goods, including clothing, luxury items and foodstuffs, since Peng Chau produced little more than sufficed for the Hakka farmers who had settled there. In the other direction the boats may have taken salt fish and shrimp paste, and lime for the building trade from Peng Chau's kilns. \n\nPeng Chau's development in the nineteenth century and before was assisted by its proximity to the south-east coast of Lantau. The waters in this area, except in the south-west monsoon, are generally calm and are easily crossed by rowing sampans or wind-driven craft. In 1898 there were some half a dozen small villages and hamlets situated along this coast37 which, together with a large settlement on Nei Kwu Chau, used Peng Chau as a market centre, selling their produce and livestock there and purchasing goods of all kinds from the island's shopkeepers. The area east of Tai Pak appears to have been well settled in 1899 by Hakka farmers whose descendants still live there today, but from Tai Pak west to Man Kok the land must at one time have supported a larger population than it did in 1899. The land registers show that many fields were abandoned, and no owners came forward to claim them at the Land Settlement after the lease of the New Territories. Even the claimed land, which in this area was in the minority, was in the course of changing hands, largely by way of mortgage to persons from Peng Chau. A WONG Keng of Peng Chau had recently become the registered owner of sixteen acres situated there and east to Yee Pak and was giving mortgages to other owners. The LAMs of Peng Chau were in possession of many fields at Man Kok and Kau Sat Wan, of which they were the mortgagees. They also held the mortgages of other fields there which belonged to the unfortunate LUI clan of Peng Chau. The large amount of empty fields, unclaimed at the lease, is interesting and the conclusion must therefore be that there were more settlers in this part of Lantau fifty or a hundred years before, and that these persons helped in a small but steady way to increase Peng Chau's prosperity,38 These families had either died or gone away by 1899. \n\nIn an island community like Peng Chau where different groups found themselves in the course of time committed to joint settlement, and hence to the need to establish a modus vivendi, one of the more interesting relationships is that which subsisted", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204838, "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-1964", "page_number": 141, "title": "RAS-1964", "content_text": "116\n\nCRANMER-BYNG AND SHEPHERD\n\nwhich lies in the mouth of the Pearl River estuary between Macao and Castle Peak on the opposite headland. However, during the south-west monsoons the anchorages of Kapsuimun門 pq 29, and Hong Kong were used because they provided greater protection. The Kapsuimun anchorage was situated south of Ma Wan island and sheltered to the west by the headland of Lantao and to the east by Tsing I island. Because of the smuggling of opium from depot ships at these outer anchorages the capabilities of the anchorages off Lantao island and between Hong Kong island and Kowloon on the mainland became thoroughly known to British merchants and sea captains. In 1835 a former member of the British East India Company published a book in which he advocated the need for Britain to obtain some island from which trade with China could be carried on because of the uncertain conditions of trade at Canton following the ending of the Company's monopoly30. In a review of this book published in the Chinese Repository the reviewer remarks on the fact that the author pressed the idea of Britain acquiring Macao from Portugal, which he considered ill-advised. He wrote\n\nThe want of a good harbour, and its dangerous position in the season of typhoons and strong north or east gales, unfit it for the possession of a commercial nation, as point d'appui. Lantao is better, and this we should prefer of the places named by our author. It is an island, capable of defence, producing abundant supplies of food, with many good harbours, is not so near the provincial city as to render it dangerous for natives to resort to it, for the purpose of commerce.31\n\nThus in 1835 Lantao was still considered eligible as a possible British settlement. In May 1839 the British Superintendent of Trade, Captain Charles Elliot, and all British subjects, left Canton as a result of the measures taken by the Imperial Commissioner Lin Tse-hsü, and retired to Macao. However, when in mid-August of 1839 the British were forced out of Macao by Chinese pressure it was to the anchorage of Hong Kong that the English ships went. Although Hong Kong was eventually ceded to Britain by the Treaty of Nanking 1842 this had not always been an automatic choice, the possibility of forming a settlement on Formosa, the Bonin Islands, and on Ma Wan and Lantao island had previously been given serious consideration.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1964.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205077, "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-1966", "page_number": 33, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "28\n\nHUGH D. R. BAKER\n\npoint in history at which the clans arrived, and with their subsequent development. Grant gives some maps plotting the regions of land of various qualities, dividing the land into categories according to the number of catties of paddy per dau chung per crop it can produce.38 Best quality land produces 300 catties and upwards per dau chung, and then he grades the qualities down in units of 50 to 150 catties per dau chung, the lowest category of production worth his recording.\n\nThe region of the New Territories which has the largest area of double-cropping land is the Kam Tin Valley, settled largely by the earliest comers to the district—the Tangs. The land is not all of the best quality, about two-thirds falling into the category of moderate productivity (200–250 catties per dau chung),40 but for sheer size, with good water supply, it is the best region of the New Territories. In the early thirteenth century the lineage segmented, one branch hiving off to the Ping Shan area, where again was a large region of paddy-growing land, double-cropping with moderate productivity,42 fairly well watered, and close enough to the parent village to be within the range of easy communications. Three generations later another branch hived from Kam Tin and established itself in Ha Tsuen.43 I have no information as to the quality of the soil in the area (though from Grant it would seem that productivity might not be very high44), but there is a large quantity of land. The Tangs thus secured to their near-exclusive possession the whole of the agricultural land in the Southwestern corner of the New Territories. When later other groups hived off to found villages on the Eastern side of the New Territories at Lung Kwat Tau in about 1368 A.D.,45 and at Tai Po Tau perhaps two generations earlier,47 they were less fortunate. Not only were they out of the immediate power sphere of the Tang Clan but they moved into an area where other clans were already settled or in the process of settling.\n\nThe Hau48, who were the next of the clans to arrive, settled in an area which was well watered but rather too low-lying to be safe against flood. They appear to have had little power, and after an initial period of growth, when they founded several new villages,49 seem to have lost all impetus. Their land is of good quality, but when they expanded to Ping Kong,50 Kam Tsin,51 and Yin Kong,52 they did so along a line of poorer quality soil,53 arguing perhaps prior settlement in the nearby rich Sheung Shui", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205613, "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": 155, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "150 \n\nNOTES AND QUERIES \n\ncanal which would give access to warehouses and so on built in the Valley (a plan which A. T. Gordon, the Land Officer, endorsed in the 'dream' of the future City of Victoria which he communicated to Pottinger in 1843).4 But if Pottinger's description is accurate, it would have taken a good deal of imagination to see it that way. \n\nThe East Point site was purchased, at the first Land Sale on 14 June 1841, in the name of Captain William Morgan, a ship's captain who may have been Jardine's Hong Kong manager, and the actual area purchased was not specified then or when Pottinger's Second Land Committee was attempting to settle the Land Question in Hong Kong. We learn, from a later source, that it amounted to almost 170,000 square feet (about 3.4 acres). It is, however, often overlooked that the firm also purchased three other marine lots at the same sale: numbers 26, 27 and 28 and it is here that they had already commenced building by the time of the sale. This contention is upheld by a number of contemporary accounts of the sale. The Canton Register (predecessor of the Hong Kong Register) intimates that one purchaser had commenced building before the sale,6 \n\nWe are told in an unpublished history of the early years of Jardine, Matheson & Co. that in February 1841, within a month of the naval forces taking possession of the island, that they had erected a large matshed godown above the foreshore. An anonymous correspondent of the China Mail, writing 8 years after the event, but who attended the first sale in 1841, states that Matheson, in order to avoid the expenses involved in landing goods at Macao for transhipment, resolved to land a consignment of cotton at Hong Kong. To make this possible, he sent from Macao materials for the erection of a godown. This building, he avers, was four feet above the ground at the date of the sale and was sited on what later became known as the Commissariat Stores. The fact that they were building and had ground cleared, he continues, gave additional value to adjoining lots. As will be seen, Marine Lots 26, 27 and 28 were shortly to become the Commissariat stores. If further support is needed, I may quote from Tarrant's History of Hong Kong, published in 1861 or 1862: he states that \"some months before the sale......Messrs Jardine, Matheson & Co, erected those godowns which now form part of the Naval Yard, near the Canton Bazaar.” \n\nI", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205787, "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": 93, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "KING MONGKUT AND THE KINGDOM OF SIAM\n\n87\n\nPursuing this conciliatory line Brooke came to Bangkok determined to win the confidence of the Siamese and to allay their fears. He wrote to a friend:\n\n\"I shall not seek to make a treaty in a hurry. I shall try to remove apprehensions and obstacles and pave the way for the future. The King is old and a usurper; he has two legitimate brothers, clever and enlightened, who ought to be raised to the throne.... A treaty extorted by force would be but a wasted bit of parchment... The Prince Chow-fa Mongkut is an educated man, reads and writes English and knows something of our literature and science\".2\n\nWith such admirable sentiments Rajah Brooke arrived at the mouth of the Menam. Everything went wrong. The Sphinx ran aground attempting to cross the bar at Paknam. When he met the Praklang (the Foreign Minister), every point he raised was opposed. Was there any need for a treaty? What was wrong with the Burney treaty of 1826? When Brooke asked for more freedom of trade the Praklang replied that trade was already free. As for the British having a Consul at Bangkok and being exempt from Siamese law, both proposals were unnecessary and improper. Later talks with the Siamese Ministers made no more progress. They asked Brooke to put his points in writing but letters between the two sides made no more progress than conversations. It was clear that the Siamese did not want a treaty or any improvement in trade or diplomacy with Britain.\n\nThe Brooke mission was obviously failing. And as frustration grew Sir James's conciliatory attitude changed. Finally he advised force. In a dispatch to the Foreign Minister he wrote:\n\n“Should these just demands firmly urged be refused, a force should be present immediately to enforce them by a rapid destruction of the defences of the river which would place us in possession of the capital and by restoring us to our proper position of command, retrieve the past and ensure peace for the future, with all its advantages of a growing and most important commerce.\"3\n\nBrooke alleged, with some justice, that the Burney Treaty had been broken by the Siamese. Monopolies had been restored, trade was no longer free and taxes on British vessels had increased. In", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205998, "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": 78, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "THE BEGINNINGS OF TAIPINGSHAN\n\n73\n\nIn the meantime, the lot-holders petitioned Pottinger to be allowed to stay.10 They described how Captain Mylius, the first land officer in 1842, had given them certificates to prove their holdings. The Committee met the lot-holders and endeavoured to explain to them why they were being moved. They were told that there were 'insuperable difficulties' in the way of allowing them to remain. Moreover, the permission given them by Mylius to occupy the sites in question was no more than a 'temporary arrangement' since at that date (1842) Hong Kong was not in a permanent state. Nevertheless, the Committee represented that they were to inquire into what ground could be given to them for the erection of their houses. To this the Chinese replied that what was asked of them was like \"throwing their livelihood into the sea.\" If allowed to stay, they undertook to erect houses \"in the proper manner and style\" and pay a suitable rent. But their pleas were in vain. The Committee recommended that a site be allotted to them at Taipingshan, at which place, they pointed out, a considerable Chinese population had already settled. The Committee proposed that the ground should be prepared and levelled (it was, at that time, no more than a very steep and uneven mountainside) and with streets marked out. They would be permitted to remove the materials out of which their present houses were constructed. As to compensation, they would have their arrears of rent (never paid) remitted and would enjoy a 'rent holiday' for a period of five years from the following December. In addition, each householder who could substantiate his claim would receive $50, though one member of the Committee, Gutzlaff, thought that $20 would suffice.\n\nThe area of relocation lay south of Queen's Road, between Town Lot 78 and Town Lot 44: i.e., from approximately the present Gough Street to just east of the present Possession Street. The point was specifically made by Caine, with the agreement of the other members, that this location be reserved exclusively for Chinese and that no Europeans, with the exception of police, be permitted to live there.12\n\nPottinger approved these suggestions but reserved his decision on the question of compensation. He did not favour monetary compensation, partly because some of those in the Upper Bazaar were unauthorised squatters and partly because others were keepers of brothels and gaming houses who ought to be got rid of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206217, "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": 34, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "28\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nand justify their active support of the attack on the city. This then is what happened on the morning of May 10th. According to the Ch'ing official, Hsü Yao-kuang, the provocative shots were fired at a foreign vessel and actually killed two foreigners.36 Dew jumped to the conclusion or feigned to believe that it was the Taipings who had done the firing, and immediately joined in the fight. Dew's own account is nonchalant, noting merely that the Taiping guns were silenced and that he then went to dinner at noon. At 2 p.m. storming parties mounted the walls, and at 5 p.m., after all opposition had ceased, the \"Governor” (probably the tao-t'ai) and Ch'ing soldiers landed from their junks. Dew turned the city over to the Manchu official and withdrew his men.37 The disposition of the Ch'ing troops during this attack is implicit in this report, but another unofficial source was more explicit, reporting that the Chinese allies could not be made to move toward the walls, so that in the end, even the actual breaching of them had to be undertaken by foreign troops.38 Obviously, under the circumstances of such an attack by Ch'ing forces, the Taipings had little alternative but to return fire toward foreign vessels which were interspersed among or in close proximity to the pirate fleet, both as the action began and as it continued.\n\nAfter a determined resistance, and after both of their generals, Huang and Fan, had been badly wounded, the Taipings retired from the city. The contrast between what happened during the retaking of the city at this point and the record of the Taiping seizure of the city several months earlier is interesting. It will be recalled how universal had been the favorable comments regarding the bloodless Taiping takeover. As for this latest occupation, the report of the correspondent for the China Mail speaks eloquently: \"The rebels retreated through the west gate; the pirates then entered the city and began the work of destruction, and in a few hours did more damage than the rebels did in the whole of the five months that they had possession.\" The same account goes on to speak of the executions and the tortures that were perpetrated over the next couple of days, and notes specifically that the British Consul's Chinese servant was \"one of the principal murderers and torturers of the poor fellows found in the city.\"39 Cheng A-fu was subsequently given the status of a petty official in Ningpo, as a reward for his service.40", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206654, "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": 202, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\nThe following letter appeared in the South China Morning Post, 10th April, 1972. — Ed.\n\nWHO HOISTED THE UNION JACK?\n\nIn today's (April 7) issue on page 20 you publish an article headed \"The Hongkong Club decides to go back to Victorian Era”. In the article you state \"The Club was founded in 1846, five years after the Union Jack was hoisted on Possession Point by Captain Charles Elliot\".\n\nThe statement is not correct. It is true that Sir Charles Elliot issued a formal declaration of British sovereignty over Hongkong in January 1841 after the treaty of Chuenpi, but the Union Jack was hoisted on Possession Point by Captain Belcher commanding H.M. survey ship, Sulphur, on January 26, 1841.\n\nThe account is given in Captain Belcher's book \"Voyage round the World\" published 1843, Volume II page 157. The following is an extract:\n\n\"The only important point to which we became officially partners was the cession of the island of Hongkong, situated off the peninsula of Cow Loon within the island of Lama,\n\n\"On the return of the commodore on the 24th we were directed to proceed to Hongkong and commence its survey. We landed on Monday the 26th January at fifteen minutes past eight, and being 'bona fide' first possessors, her majesty's health was drank with three cheers on Possession Mount.\n\n\"On the 26th the squadron arrived; the marines were landed, the union hoisted on our post, and formal possession taken of the island by Commodore Sir J. G. Bremer, accompanied by the other officers of the squadron, under a feu de joie from the marines, and a royal salute from ships of war”.\n\nThere may be some uncertainty about the exact date. It is probable that the landing was on Monday, January 25 and that the more serious formalities took place on Tuesday, January 26.\n\nCaptain Belcher's history is preserved in the Colony in the names Belcher's Gardens, Belcher's Fort (and formerly Belcher's Creek)", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206809, "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-1973", "page_number": 86, "title": "RAS-1973", "content_text": "80\n\nHELGA WERLE\n\nChing p'eng \"cleaning the matshed\" has to take place before the performance. The puppeteers take a live cock and make an incision in his throat and then carry him over the stage, dropping his blood into every corner, over the backstage and even over the musical instruments. This is done in order to protect themselves against the evil spirits or hungry ghosts, which performing puppets attract. That human actors perform at the Hungry Ghosts Festival is a development of the past 20 years for Ch'aochowese. Originally only puppets were used. The human likeness of the moving puppet fools the ghost, who takes possession of the puppet. Thus humans are protected from their assault and the whole area gets cleared of their evil influence. Puppet-shows are mainly performed as an exorcising ceremony and it therefore does not matter whether there is a public to watch the performance or not.\n\nThe actual performance starts mostly with the 'Birthday of the Eight Immortals', which is a series of good wishes. This introductory piece starts with the Peach Banquet, implying the wish for longevity. The next part is called 'To bestow Rank and Riches'; then comes the fairy who sends sons. The next short play is a ceremony to \"cleanse the matshed\" and the last is called \"the banquet at the capital\", which is to congratulate the troupe for its performance. The main play starts after this introduction.\n\nThe repertory of the two Hong Kong Ch'aochow puppet-groups comprises the following operas, which are part of the Ch'aochow Opera tradition:\n\nHu-li Luan Chou Wang 狐狸亂周王\n\nTuan-Chiao Hui\n\nLi Te-wu 李德武\n\nKuan Wang Miao 闊王廟\n\nYang Tsung-pao\n\nI Chih Mei 一枝梅\n\nThe script/stories of these operas are spoken and sung by the puppeteers. If the opera is a wen-chü or literary play, the text which is in rhymes is fixed and a script is used; but when a wu-chü or military play is performed the puppeteers use their own imagination to enrich the familiar plot.\n\nOne further point should be mentioned. Shadow-puppet theatre was very early a most important part of entertainment and when finally drama became organised, the public eye was so trained on the shadow-puppet movements that they were taken over into the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1973.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8910rj06r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207143, "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-1974", "page_number": 214, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "208 \n\nNOTES AND QUERIES \n\nwas bought by the Church and a large number of houses were built for the poor. In 1849, the Roman Catholics acquired land next to the Colonial Cemetery at Happy Valley and ceased burying in the old cemetery, though headstones remained scattered about for a long time. \n\nAnother Roman Catholic institution was located south of Queen's Road on the waterfront between what is the present Anton Street and Li Chit Street. Here the French Sisters of St. Paul de Chartres, who arrived in Hong Kong in 1848, built an orphanage called the Asile des Sainte Enfance. \n\nIn 1845, two Americans, Charles Emery and George Frazer, moved their ship-building yard from Kowloon Point to a lot east of the French Orphanage. The yard passed through a succession of owners. In 1880 George Fenwick came into possession. He gave his name to the present Fenwick Street. In 1871 the Hong Kong Pier and Godown Company was launched to develop extensive wharfing and storage facilities. It occupied the land between the Orphanage and the shipyard. The present Gresson Street intersects the original property. The venture was not a success and the Company went into liquidation in 1873. In 1876 several Europeans financed by Chinese capital built the Oriental Sugar Refinery on property now defined by Swatow and Amoy Streets. It also soon failed and passed into receivership. Eventually, it was taken over by Jardine, Matheson and Company and was merged with their China Sugar Refining plant at East Point. \n\nThe first Protestant Chapel in the area was built in 1863 on Wan Chai Road by the London Missionary Society. A school was also opened, supported by Chinese subscriptions. The present Ying-Wa Girls School had its origins in the Wanchai Girls' Boarding School of the London Missionary Society opened in 1888. The Wanchai Chinese Methodist Church on the triangle of Hennessy Road, Fenwick Street, and Queen's Road East was occupied in 1936. \n\nThe Urban Services Office, where we are having tea, and the Wanchai Post Office next to it, are located on a lot which was sold to the first American resident of Hong Kong, Charles V. Gillespie. Here, in the spring of 1842, he built a substantial brick house of six rooms surrounded by a verandah at a cost of about $2,800. It was called “Jorrock's Hall” (sic) and was located on Inland Lot 14. The adjoining Lot No. 15 was also owned by Gillespie. He sold it", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207144, "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-1974", "page_number": 215, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n209 \n\nto Dr. Peter Young of the Hong Kong Dispensary, but Dr. Young was prevented from building on it by the Governor's Notification of 10 April 1843, that no further building was to continue until after the signing of a Treaty determining the future of Hong Kong as a British possession. Both of the lots were later resumed by Government and a Police Station was built on the site. \n\nAcross the Queen's Road and on the sea front from “Jorrock's Hall\" was the business establishment of Gillespie operated in Captain Thomas Larkin's godown. Here he sold general provisions and goods suitable for trade with the Pacific Islands. Larkin's Godowns were just west of another extensive range of buildings called the Albany Godowns. They were built to store the goods of Chinese merchants, but they were not a financial success and stood empty or partially used for a number of years. Finally the land reverted to government in 1847. In 1855 both Larkin's Godown and the Albany Godowns were resold by Government and in the 1860's they were used for McGregor's Barracks by the Military, giving the present McGregor Street its name, \n\n(3) VISIT TO OLD WESTERN DISTRICT, SATURDAY, 8 JUNE, 1974 \n\nRoute Instructions \n\nMeet at Chinese Recreation Ground, Possession Point (the British flag was raised here in January 1841). \n\nEnter Possession Street and visit: 1) Offices of the Tung Kwun Trade Assn. (including the roof, from which an excellent view can be obtained); 2) The Foo Lung Restaurant (2nd and 3rd floors only). \n\nThe Tung Kwun District Commercial Association, as the Tung Yee Hop Tong, was founded in 1893. There are several interesting photographs and inscriptions in this office. \n\nFrom there the group will go along Fat Hing Street — a lane with many embroidery stores in it to the Shun Tak District Commercial Association at 67, Queen's Road, West. The Association owns the whole building and its office occupies the 2nd floor. The interior is practically the same with photographs, furniture and inscriptions as provided in 1915 when the Association was founded. The Association dates in fact from much earlier, around 1875, under the name of a Tong or 'Hall' (****).", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207146, "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-1974", "page_number": 217, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n211\n\nNote the offices of the Nam-pak Hong Association on the left-hand side of Bonham Strand; the divided shops of the Chun Lung Sang porcelain business (1878) and the bamboo and rattan ware dealers further along, also the frontage of the Ping Heung Tea-house next to Ching Wah Kok.\n\nDuring this visit Members are advised to look around them, up as well as down, because there are all sorts of interesting little vistas to have had, often revealed by the removal of a house for redevelopment.\n\nFootnote:\n\n1) We will not be going to the Shun Tak District Commercial Association at 67, Queen's Road, West, as hoped, because a terrible blow; the furniture and fittings have already been cleared out prior to demolition of the building.\n\n2) The Tung Kwun District Commercial Association was founded as the Tung Yee Hop Tong in 1893 for charitable, including educational, work among persons of that district resident in Hong Kong. The present premises were purchased about 40 years ago. There is an interesting commemorative board above the window in the main hall presented by four shops in Liu Po New Market, Tung Kwun in 1912 in appreciation of flood relief work and settlement of disputes and of a defamation case by the Hong Kong Chamber. This shows that its influence extended beyond Hong Kong.\n\n3) The Nam-pak Hong Association in Bonham Strand, though in new premises that are of no appeal, is of great interest. This powerful commercial association was established in 1868 by merchants from different parts of China together with Chinese merchants from South-east Asia. This explains the name of the association which, in Chinese, means South-North Firms' Public Office.\n\nAdditional Notes for the Visit to Old Western District Carl T. Smith\n\n(a) The Development of West Point\n\nThe area we are visiting today was formerly dominated by two points of land. After the British occupation of Hong Kong they became known as Possession Point and West Point. Between the two was a steep hillside with a bay at its foot. The present Ko Shing Street approximates the original beach.\n\nDr. Eitel in his history of Hong Kong, Europe in China, pp. 123-124, gives an account of the event which gave Possession Point its name:\n\nOn January 24, 1841, Commodore Bremer, having arrived at Lantao, directed Captain Belcher, in command of H.M.S. Sulphur, to proceed forthwith to Hongkong and commence its occupation.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207147, "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-1974", "page_number": 218, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "212\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nsurvey. Sir E. Belcher, accordingly, landed on Monday, January 25, 1841, at the foot of Taipingshan, and on the hill, now occupied by the Chinese Recreation ground, Captain Belcher and his officers, considering themselves the bona fide first British possessors, drank Her Majesty's health with three cheers, the spot being thenceforth known as Possession Point. The Point remained an open space and came under the management of the Chinese Recreation Ground Committee created in 1890.\n\nIn 1887 there was a rearrangement of streets to the south of the Recreation Ground. With the change there was a renaming. The western terminus of Hollywood Road was shifted from the present Possession Street to what was known as Gap Street, so that Hollywood Road emptied into Queen's Road on the south side of the Recreation Ground rather than on its east side.\n\nOn the south side of old Gap Street across from the Chinese Recreation Ground the original St. Stephen's Anglican Church opened in 1866. Here also the Baxter Memorial School was built in 1872 in memory of Miss Sophia Harriet Baxter. She had come to Hong Kong in 1860 and until her death five years later established schools for Chinese, Eurasians and orphans. St. Matthew's Anglican Church now occupies a part of the original site granted to the Church in 1864.\n\nThe neighbourhood could have been regarded as a good missionary area for it was dominated by establishments devoted to pleasure. Nearby was a theatre, and the present Possession Street was lined with brothels in the nineteenth century. It was also, however, near a more sobering district.\n\nThe hillside between Possession Point and West Point was used as a Chinese burial ground. The I-tsz Temple, built to house commemorative tablets for Chinese residents who died without a family to remember them, and, temporarily, for those whose families were in their home villages in China, was behind Possession Point on Tai Ping Shan Street. It adjoined the burial ground and thus, in accordance with Chinese practice, was in a convenient location to be used as a depository for those who were about to die. Publicity regarding conditions at the temple started a movement to provide better medical services for the Chinese community. This resulted in the formation of Tung Wah Hospital. It was opened officially in 1872 across the street from the I-tsz Temple, occupying land that was a part of the old burial ground.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207148, "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-1974", "page_number": 219, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n213\n\nDealings in land and property were a major enterprise in early Hong Kong. An insight into the hazards of real estate speculation is given by George Duddell's testimony before the Land Committee in 1849. He speaks about his purchase of a lot at the south-west corner of Queen's Road West and Possession Street. As we walk along Fat Hing Street we shall be passing the south side of the lot. Duddell states regarding the purchase of the lots in 1844:\n\nThe lot was bought after unprecedented bidding for two hundred per cent on the original upset rental. The circumstances in palliation of my buying it at such a price are, the lot was airy and perfectly level with one rock only to clear it off before building could be commenced, combined with a great demand for houses, and the facility the lot offered to speedily erect them, with the fact I was outbid on all other lots the same day. The buildings were built and tenanted, but within a year they had left for other houses. These houses were void, vagrants plundering even from doors and glass from windows, every grate was stolen. I must hire a private watchman to protect useless property\n\nThe buildings were much damaged by the typhoon of 1848. In November of 1848, I surrendered them to Government. In consequence of requiring a Sailor's Home, I have by petition obtained back the lot, repaired the buildings and put my seamen into it.\n\nThe premises were known as the Circular Buildings. Duddell again surrendered them to the Government in 1850. Not long after, the land was resold to Quoke Acheong, the Compradore of the P. & O. Steam Navigation Company. He was a large land owner in this area. On this property and a section he had purchased across Queen's Road, he developed his own business enterprises under the firm name of Fat Hing. The firm gave its name to the lane south of Queen's Road off Possession Street.\n\nUpon the elevated promontory called West Point, Joseph Frost Edgar built a bungalow. In March, 1843, he was admitted as the resident partner of the firm Jamieson, How and Company. He was one of the first two unofficial members of the Legislative Council, serving from 1850 to 1857. An advertisement for the rent or sale of the West Point Bungalow, dated July 19, 1845 (Friend of China), provides a description of one of the early residences in Hong Kong:\n\nA substantial house consisting of two sitting rooms each 30 by 20 feet and in height 17 feet, separated by folding doors, five", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207264, "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-1975", "page_number": 32, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "24\n\nJOHN T. MYERS\n\nincantation around the cauldron. On they go for hours in darkness. The voices at times grow louder and the drum beat more vigorous. All at once the medium who has begun to sway his body from side to side as if to invite supernatural influences begins to be violently affected. He dances and leaps in the air, the beat of the drum becomes more rapid, and the voices of the men louder and shriller. The wildest confusion reigns. It seems as though some horrid scene from the infernal regions were being enacted on earth and the devils had been let loose for a time to carry on their orgies among men.\"14\n\nWe have quoted at length the 19th century description because it is our opinion even the most zealously anti-pagan observer may have a difficult time identifying it as essentially the same type of ritual enacted each evening at Tai Wong Ye Temple. Scheduled at 10 p.m. for the convenience of a working class population the ceremony incorporates little of the din and frenzy which characterized its Amoy counterpart.\n\nOn almost any given evening shortly before 10 o'clock petitioners begin arriving at the temple. The number commonly varies from 10 to 15, with a distinct majority being middle-aged and elderly women. After burning joss sticks and offering prayers to the deity, petitioners at the direction of various tan sang who tend the altar, inscribe their name, birthday, and the names of other family members on a red sheet of paper. This accomplished they gather around a red table in the middle of the shrine chamber. The atmosphere is casual as greetings and gossip are exchanged between them. On the red table is a can of red paint, a slender paint brush, a rubber stamp, a stack of yellow paper slips, a rather large compartmentalized box with various types of herbs, and a basin of foo shui or \"sacred water\" #k. Near the table is a red, throne-shaped chair.\n\nAt approximately 10 p.m. the medium enters the temple. After greeting those present he approaches the table and takes a sip of the sacred water. Continuing to stand before the table, he begins to move his head from side to side. He then starts pounding the table with his fists while emitting loud guttural grunts. After a few moments he adopts a stylized posture signifying to all present the identity of the possessing deity. The tan sang provide him with the throne-like chair and he sits to hear the petitions of worshippers. The possession is usually effected within two minutes of his sipping the sacred water.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207266, "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-1975", "page_number": 34, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "26\n\nJOHN T. MYERS\n\nmanaged by members of one Chinese speech group, the Chiu-chow. The \"honorary\" committee members, the working committee members, the tan sang, and the kei tung are Chiu-chow. Observation of numerous possession ceremonies reveals that it is rare to discover a non-Chiu-chow among the worshippers. This de facto exclusivity is rendered more formal in a brochure advertising places for tablets of the deceased in the “Hall of 100 Surnames\" by the statement that the places are reserved for heung lei or fellow countrymen, i.e. fellow Chiu-chow.\n\nWhile from a ritual point of view Tai Wong Ye is correctly described as a spirit-medium temple, from a social point of view it is akin to a type which Feuchtwang2 designates a \"Compatriot” temple. It is a place where members of the Chiu-chow minority speech group can gather to converse freely in their native tongue, exchange useful information, and enjoy that sense of solidarity which Durkheim posits as the chief product of shared ritual. The low-keyedness of the ritual offerings is understandable when one realizes that the target population is one already predisposed by regional socialization to accept the reality and effectiveness of the kei tung's mediumship. Our conclusion therefore is that the success of the Kwun Tong spirit-medium temple is due more to the social selectivity of its appeal than to a heightened interest in spirits and their mediums on the part of the general population.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 Firth 1959, p. 141.\n\n2 Feuchtwang, no reference details available.\n\n3 Elliott, 1955.\n\n4 Jordan, 1972.\n\n5 Ahern, 1973.\n\n6 Potter, 1974.\n\n7 This observation is based on casual questioning of Hong Kong residents over a three-year time period.\n\n8 Potter, op. cit.\n\n9 The Chiu-Chow and Hoi-Luk-Fung people's native regions are the eastern coastal counties of Kwangtung Province. The Hokkien are natives of Fukien Province which is immediately east of Kwangtung Province.\n\n10 Tak Kaau is a syncretic cult which claims tens of thousands of supporters from the Chiu-Chow communities in Southeast Asia. Although more ritual attention is awarded to Chinese deities the Tak Kaau pantheon includes Christ, Allah, and deities from the Hindu religion.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207539, "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-1975", "page_number": 307, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "Site 10\n\n**\n\nל3\n\n11\n\n12\n\n:\n\n..\n\n16\n\n•\n\n1.\n\n17\n\n:\n\nSite 20\n\n22\n\n>\n\n29B\n\nJ\n\n29C\n\n*\n\n30A\n\n:\n\n**\n\n:\n\n=\n\n**\n\n33\n\n34\n\n41A\n\n43A\n\n45A\n\n+\n\n46A\n\n+\n\nby\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\n299\n\nTenement houses at nos. 62-72, Po Hing Fong,\n\nTemples, etc. at intersection of Pound Lane and\n\nTai Ping Shan Street.\n\nCorner of Hollywood Road and Tank Lane. Possession Point.\n\nPossession Street.\n\nSchedule 2\n\n: Street lamps in Lower Albert Road.\n\n+4\n\nDairy Farm building, Lower Albert Road. Shing Wong Street.\n\nJunction of Bridges and Shing Wong Streets. Carpenter's booth in Shing Wong Street. No. 115 Caine Road.\n\nPoon Yau Hoy Mansion, 99 Caine Road,\n\nNo. 47 Staunton Street,\n\nLetter writer's booth, Peel Street.\n\nNos. 61-69 Caine Road.\n\nNo. 49 Elgin Street.\n\nSchedule 3\n\nOhel Leah Synagogue, Robinson Road. House at junction of Robinson Road with\n\nSeymour Road.\n\nSite 49\n\n52\n\n56\n\n:\n\n68\n\n:\n\n**\n\nOld Police Quarters, 150-156 Caine Road. Ying Wah Terrace.\n\nThe following persons, to all of whom the thanks of the Society are due, have been involved in this project:\n\nR.A.S. Subcommittee on the Photographic Survey\n\nA. I. Diamond\n\nJ. W. Hayes\n\nH. A. Rydings C. T. Smith\n\nH. Werle\n\nPreparation of Schedules\n\nA.I. & I.R. Diamond\n\nJ. W. Hayes", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207842, "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": 230, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "far as I can see, it is not fear that keeps people away from the court so much as unfamiliarity with technically administered justice and reluctance to become involved with professional lawyers.\n\n41. Through the courtesy and co-operation of the Registrar of the Supreme Court, the Registrar at the Kowloon District Court, and the District Judge, I was able to collect some information on recourse to the Fanling District Court (which covers most of the New Territories) since its establishment. From 27 Sept. 1961 to 19 April 1963, 1,741 cases were heard (436 in 1961, 1,179 in 1962, and 126 in 1963). The cases can be seen to fall mainly into four classes: 'goods', 'loans', 'possession', and 'dishonoured cheques'. In round figures the 'goods' cases amount to 280, 'loans' cases to 1,170, 'possession' cases to 70, and cases of 'dishonoured cheques' to 60. The 'loans' cases, which account so heavily for the business of the court, owe their great number to the activity of the Director of Agriculture and Forestry in claiming his due. It is the 'possession' cases which bring us into the traditional field of New Territories disputes: land. But in fact these cases seem to be largely about tenancies held by immigrants, the terms on which land is to be let for vegetable-growing and poultry-keeping (particularly with respect to the termination of leases) not yet having become standardised to the point where there is a generally recognised custom. The only other classes of cases where numbers rise to any significant degree are 'rent' (18 cases), 'wages' (29), 'wages in lieu of notice' (24), and 'tax' (16). So that, on the whole, the business of the court appears to be largely bound up with the relations between government and individuals and between long-settled residents and outsiders with whom they have become commercially engaged. Matters touching 'Chinese law and custom' have hardly yet reached the court. The extent to which lawyers were involved in the cases is worth noting. In 151 cases solicitors acted for plaintiffs; but only 3 defendants were so represented. (There are no solicitors outside the urban area and no sign yet that rural practices may develop).\n\n42. The second question raised at the beginning of paragraph 40 has already been answered in part: so far what has been regarded as falling within the province of 'Chinese law and custom' has barely been in question in the court; but the court is so constituted that if such cases do arise District Officers and other experts can be asked to sit with the judge, and it will be interesting to see whether cases of this kind do arise in the future in any considerable number.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207904, "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": 292, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n277\n\nIn the face of criticism one of the items discussed at a public meeting held at Tung Wah in 1875 was the question was it \"advisable to have a Kung Soh or Town Hall built so as to separate the functions of the Committee from that of the General Community in order to avoid further criticism\". There was no consensus of agreement on this question at this meeting. Two years earlier the Registrar General had asked the Committee to select two men from each District of Hong Kong to serve as Headmen of the District Watchmen. The Committee had demurred stating that they would like to see a separation of their duties as the Committee of the Hospital and the leaders of the Kai-fong. The Governor agreed that it would be desirable for such a separation -- the occasion was the introduction of the new Hospital Committee to the Governor in July, 1873. So the relation between the Hospital Committee and the Kai-fong leaders had been under discussion for some time, but no definite action was taken. One of the factors seemed to be that for the Kai-fong to function adequately as a separate body from the Tung Wah Committee it needed a proper meeting hall.\n\nAt the time of the discussion concerning separation of the two groups in 1875, a petition was submitted to the Government for the grant of a site at Possession Point on which the Chinese community might build such a Meeting Hall. When the 1876 Committee called on the Governor as was the custom shortly after its election, he said the matter was under consideration. The Chairman of the founding Committee, Mr. Leong On said that they had been obliged to resort to the Hospital as a place of meeting. This had given rise to adverse criticism in the foreign newspaper and they wished to have a meeting house in order to avoid future complaint. However, though the matter was \"under consideration\" by the Government nothing resulted.\n\nAs we have noted one newspaper editor almost from the foundation of the Hospital had grave doubts about the role the Tung Wah Hospital Committee would play as a representative of the Chinese community and its relation to the colonial administration. These misgivings on the part of a segment of the foreign community were not abated by the course of events. An ever growing outcry against the quasi-political activities of the Hospital Committee appeared in the editorials and the correspondence columns of Hong Kong newspapers.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208215, "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-1977", "page_number": 254, "title": "RAS-1977", "content_text": "238\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nI wish to express my thanks to Dr. Robert F. Inger (Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago) for kindly confirming my identifications of specimens of both R. paraspinosa and R. spinosa from Hong Kong, and to Dr. Frank F. Reitinger and Mr. Jerry K. S. Lee for their generous gift of all of the above-mentioned specimens from Tai Mo Shan.\n\nREFERENCE\n\nDubois, A.\n\n1975 Un nouveau sous-genre (Paa) et trois nouvelles espèces du genre Rana. Remarques sur la phylogénie des Ranidés (Amphibiens, Anoures) Bull. Mus. natn. Hist. nat., Paris, 3rd series, No. 324, Zoology 231, pp. 1093-1115.\n\nHong Kong, 20 September 1978\n\nJ. D. ROMER\n\nA VILLAGE WAR (Postscript)\n\nA very similar incident is reported by E. J. Dukes in his late 19th century work Everyday Life in China, pp. 106-107:\n\n\"Several years ago, in a village near Amoy, rival idols were being carried in procession. The paths converged to a point a little way out of the village. The persons forming the procession caught sight of one another, and ran towards the junction of the paths, to see which could get the precedence. They came into collision, indulged in a little fighting, and began a quarrel which lasted fourteen months. Thirty-two villages became involved. A tax was levied upon them by the elders of the villages for the purchase of firearms and ammunition. Sentries were placed at the top of square towers, to shoot at any of the hostile party that might venture into the fields. The seeds could not be sown. The standing crops could not be reaped. Two small cannon were bought in Amoy, and with these they amused themselves occasionally in battering a wall or a roof. Great damage was done. The whole neighbourhood was reduced to distress. Where were the mandarins? Calmly waiting till some one was killed. When that event occurred, and was multiplied by twenty-two, the district mandarin became indignant, sent three thousand troops to take possession, levied black-mail on all the villages involved, and retreated with the spoil.”", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208618, "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-1979", "page_number": 75, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "48 \n\nREVS. J. SMITH AND WM, DOWNS \n\nports, visas and so on, and on their return the bus which they had boarded took them only as far as Repulse Bay Hotel. From there they began walking to Stanley, and they had not gone far when the command rang out: Halt!. They saw no one in the gathering darkness and continued on, when suddenly a bullet whistled over their heads. Some British Tommies on sentry duty stopped them and demanded their credentials. These having been verified they were allowed to proceed, none the worse for their experience. \n\nDuring these eventful days, Father Toomey did great work in visiting the Prison, on occasional sick calls. He also went to Point d'Aguilar where volunteers were holding an advance position. He was likewise at the Fort on the Hill when it was being bombed by the Japanese planes. While at the Prison he attempted to visit the interned Italian Fathers, but was not allowed. However, he managed to have delivered to them a Mass kit or two with the necessary supplies. \n\nAt the Carmelite Convent just below our hill, Father Hessler said daily Mass for the Sisters and later on remained with them during the actual fighting at Stanley. \n\nAs the days wore on in the second week of the war, things began to get pretty \"hot\" around Stanley. An occasional shell whistled overhead, reports came in that the Japanese landed in Hong Kong and were even now converging on the Tytam reservoir just to the east of us; in fact, they were even said to have captured a red brick house close by. Finally, on the twenty-second of the month, without warning, eight of the Royal Engineers' coolies who were standing just outside our garage on the west of the house, were wounded by machine gun bullets fired from across the valley. Also a little beggar girl who used to come frequently for food received a flesh wound. We brought them all into our house and laid them on the floor and did what we could for them, bandaging up their wounds. Just across this valley the British had built some ammunition dumps and had placed there an anti-aircraft battery or two. These batteries fired at enemy planes in the beginning but eventually we heard them no more and no doubt they were removed elsewhere, for now the Japanese were in possession of this hill. As a measure of safety we moved our kitchen away from this western exposure and also kept away as much as possible from that end of the house. \n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208621, "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-1979", "page_number": 78, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "THE MARYKNOLL MISSION, HONG KONG 1941-46\n\n51\n\nnest from the spurt of British fire at that point. Then almost instantly a Japanese shell could fall dangerously close, but the machine gun would continue to sputter. But the time came when they ceased to sputter. Perhaps they had moved their positions, or perhaps were silenced. The British had some mobile guns in the roadway leading to the Prison, and the flash from their muzzles could be easily seen. Fortunately, all during this time no bullets struck our house, it being on an eminence out of the range of fire, but the Carmelite Convent below was in the very midst of the battle. Its walls were pelted with machine gun and rifle bullets, but by the great mercy of God no one was either injured or molested, save Father Hessler, and the extent of his punishment was merely a slap or two in the face on Christmas morning.\n\nAt midnight, the battle seemed to be raging fiercely, and we could hear distinctly the blood-curdling yells of the attacking Japanese as they swarmed down the road past the Convent and reached the defending positions. So it must have been when the American savages attacked a frontier outpost when the world was not quite as civilized as it is supposed to be today. As the night wore on, the din of battle seemed to grow less and less. The defenders were slowly yielding ground, and the Japanese advanced towards the Prison and the Fort, so that when dawn began to break, the firing became more desultory, and the Japanese were in possession of Stanley Village and St. Stephen's Hill. They were not yet in the Prison, nor had they attempted the assault of the Fort, some distance out on the Stanley promontory.\n\nOn Christmas Day, needless to say, there were no Midnight Masses at Stanley to herald the birth of the new-born King, but as there seemed to be a lull in the battle raging all around us, we began saying our Masses at about five o'clock, on the portable altars in the corridors. We used but one candle, and even with that, we were in trepidation lest that tiny flame draw the fire of some lurking soldier. Some of us managed to say our three Masses, others two, and still others but one, while a few never got the opportunity, for about seven o'clock in the morning, there was a great hubbub at our front entrance, and we soon heard the sound of crashing glass. Most of us got as far as the second floor and tried to figure out what was happening. Finally, Father Meyer went down to the front entrance and there saw a group of Japanese soldiers who had gotten", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208637, "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-1979", "page_number": 94, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "THE MARYKNOLL MISSION, HONG KONG 1941-46\n\n67\n\nLooking forward, as only Father Meyer can do, he buys a small pig and puts it down in brine, and now and then in addition to our cans of bully beef, we have a slice of salt pork.\n\nSome of us are anxious to get to Hong Kong for various reasons. Bishop O'Gara to see the dentist and Father Troesch, with his procuratorial instinct, to see about food supplies. Permission therefore being duly secured, the Bishop, accompanied by Fathers Benson and Norris, C. P., start out for Hong Kong on foot, as there isn't a car on the road, save occasionally Japanese army trucks or official cars. Father Troesch also succeeds in getting passes for two, and he and Father Meyer trek in to see what is to be seen and what is to be done. We are also rationing our Mass candles and wine.\n\nAfter saying Mass on the sixth at the Carmelite Convent, the Bishop comes up again to see us. With him is a Korean Seminarian from Rosary Hill. As a few of our members are ill, this seminarian is instrumental in securing the services of a Japanese doctor. He seemed rather kindly disposed, but could not do much under the circumstances, though he promised to have the sick men transported to Queen Mary Hospital. Accordingly, in the afternoon, a truck drew up in our driveway and Father Bauer, Brothers Michael and Thaddeus are put aboard. Bishop Valtorta and Father Toomey get permission to accompany them. Fathers Troesch and Meyer return with the news that Bishop O'Gara and Fathers Benson and Norris have been interned in Hong Kong! We may be next, but nevertheless today we again started our language classes.\n\nAnd now for a little retrospect as to what happened in Hong Kong after the 16th, when the writer returned to Stanley. We left the Japanese in complete possession of Kowloon and as their peace mission failed, they returned to prosecute the siege of Hong Kong. The shelling and bombing kept up, and within a few days, they had effected a landing on the Island at North Point, from which place they advanced towards the city and inland to Stanley. Later, other landings were undoubtedly made as they were soon in control of Aberdeen and Repulse Bay. The guns on Stonecutters Island had been silenced as were those on Mt. Davis. Bitter street fighting took place as the enemy advanced to Causeway Bay and through Wanchai. The central part of the city suffered little actual damage, although an occasional bomb or shell fell there. Later on, the worst damage inflicted on property was by the looters, who virtually stripped buildings of all their woodwork for fuel. In many instances.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208731, "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-1979", "page_number": 188, "title": "RAS-1979", "content_text": "CHINESE RELIGION REDISCUSSED\n\n161\n\npresent day Taiwan, I may point out the cult of the Golden Mother of the Jade Pool and the cult of Kuan Ti focussing on divinatory writing and the publication of morality books.\n\nHaving discussed the great variety of temples according to the first criterium: religious affiliation, the other two criteria mentioned (nature of deities enshrined, and ownership) do not need much attention, since they have already been co-discussed. However, the second criterium needs some elaboration: distinction of temples according to the nature of the deities enshrined. In a few cases there can be no mistaken identity although this criterion by itself is insufficient to determine the temple type. The clearest cases are when the Buddhist Holy Ones are the main objects of worship; Buddhas Sakyamuni, Amitabha or Amita, the Buddha of Healing (rather than 'Medical Buddha' as Baity calls him on p. 126), bodhisattvas Kuan-yin (Avalokitesvara), P'u-hsien (Samantabhadra), Maitreya, Wen-shu (Manjusri), to name the principal ones. In most instances these temples are essentially Buddhist. However, one has to be very careful: the mutual absorption of cult objects by various religions has often blurred the origins; in many Matsu temples (community temples of the folk religion) there is a secondary shrine behind the central hall, in which Kuan-yin is enthroned on the central altar. However, the iconography has been changed: this Kuan-yin does not have the appearance of traditional Buddhist sculpture but appears as another deity of the folk religion. Therefore such temples are still essentially folk religious temples, and the dissonant appearance of Kuan-yin should not deceive the observer.\n\nThe same principal applies to the cult of Ti-tsang (Ksitigarbha). Although originally a bodhisattva, his cult has become so popular that he has been absorbed into the folk religion: his image can be found in many community temples throughout Taiwan, mostly on a secondary altar in the central hall. But once again he has lost the typically Buddhist iconographic appearance.\n\nWhat is the difference between Taoist and popular deities? The most distinctively Taoist Holy Ones are those one does not often see in the temples: their images, painted on scrolls, are in the possession of Taoist priests and brought to the temples or temporary roadside shrines by them for special occasions: such as rituals for the dead or the great chiao festival. Besides those there", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209133, "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": 36, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "22\n\nSTEPHEN MORRIS\n\nship. He may resist for a time and continue to be ill, or the spirit, in order to make his point doubly clear, may not reveal his intentions at a simple domestic caring for the sick ceremony; and so the patient goes on being ill. But sooner or later he has to undertake the next curing ceremony called escorting the spirits.\n\nThis ceremony lasts three nights, and is a considerably more elaborate and expensive affair than a simple caring for the sick; and a household is unwilling to go to the expense unless it is very necessary. In its essentials, however, the procedures are the same as in the caring for the sick, except that in three nights a great many more spirits can be summoned to advise and help than can be done in one night, especially if more than one shaman is employed. In most cases the curing of an illness stops at an escorting of the spirits ceremony. If, however, the condition is serious or persistent, or if the attacking spirit really means to establish a permanent relationship of friendship with the patient and so turn him into a shaman, then the sick person has to go on to the third and the last ceremony, the cradling ceremony. But before doing that, a man will do everything else he can to cure himself because the ritual is expensive, and, as the Melanau say, 'it is the end of our medicine'. If it fails there is no more to do but die. Indeed in the two previous ceremonies spirits may well have advised him to try more Malay herbal medicine, to see what a Chinese doctor can do, or even go to one of the European dressing stations, which are not unlike the barefoot doctors of the Republic of China, and which in Malaya and Sarawak have existed for seventy or eighty years,\n\nBut to return to the cradling ceremony. It lasts five days and nights and can go on for seven or nine. Except for the annual cleansing of the village itself, a cradling ceremony is the most festive occasion on which humans and spirits meet. It is called 'cradling' because the patient is placed on a swing made of rattan rope hung from the rafters of the house, and is swung backwards and forwards to be possessed by the spirit who is attacking him and who wants him for a friend. If this is the cause of the illness the fact that the patient is willing to sit on the swing is a sign that he has surrendered and is willing to accept the friendship, and even to become a practising shaman if that is what the spirit wants. Whether the spirit will insist on the patient's becoming a practitioner is an open question; for even spirits are not wholly unreasonable, and will not often insist on an aristocrat's undergoing the indignity and loss of all good manners involved in frequent possession and trance in public. Besides, to be really effective,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209148, "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": 51, "title": "RAS-1981", "content_text": "ANOTHER LOOK AT LAND AND LINEAGE IN THE N T. c. 1900\n\n37\n\nnames!\n\nMy point of departure is Hugh Baker's essay on the \"Five Great Clans of the New Territories\". I can hardly hold Baker responsible for what my imagination has done with the material and the views he presented. I can only give him credit for stimulating me to think about the history of the New Territories as, looked at in one way, a history of a few major clans competing for influence over territory. Territorial influence, as I understand it, might have been exercised through overlordship, of the kind the Tangs of Kam Tin held in the Pat Heung region; or control of markets (there were some well-known instances of this); or actual land ownership (in the sense of ownership of the right of cultivation or occupancy, whether by clan trusts or by individual members of the clan); or by possession of mortgages over a significant proportion of the land. It is the last two of these – land ownership and mortgage holdings that I shall examine.\n\nBaker did not argue that all of the land in the New Territories was occupied by the great clans. Indeed, it has been generally observed for many years now that there were two types of area, with reference to lineage in the New Territories: one, the lineage stronghold, was dominated by a single lineage; the other was an area where there was no dominant lineage. Whenever the relationship between the two kinds of areas had been discussed it has been either in terms of the kind of overlordship of Tang over Pat Heung that I have mentioned above or else with reference to the existence of subordinate villages within the sphere of the dominant lineage. This last phenomenon, that of the so-called ha-tsai (more commonly referred to as \"ha-fu\" or subordinate villages), has been discussed by Potter for the Ping Shan area and by Watson for the San Tin area. So far I have found no evidence of its existence in the part of the Pat Heung I am studying.\n\nMy objective in choosing for study the area from Kam Tin eastward to the end of the Kam Tin Basin was to see what I could learn about the extent of Kam Tin power as expressed in land and mortgage ownership as one moves away from the stronghold of Kam Tin itself. Since none of the other “Five Great Clans\" owned land or otherwise exercised influence in this region it seemed to me that any limits on Tang land-owning power or expansion would not, therefore, be the result of countervailing power expressed by another major clan. Such limitations, if any, might be the result of local resistance of some sort, or merely the result of distance from Kam Tin. With this in mind, I have examined land and mortgage ownership, house ownership and evidences of the existence and strength of local clans, temples, schools and community", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209886, "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": 145, "title": "RAS-1983", "content_text": "123\n\nwhenever there is an outbreak of plague or other serious epidemic; but within the fifty years' collective memory of the mid 1960s managers this had only happened once, about 1915. The committee of managers does not run money loan or funeral benefit schemes, nor does it undertake general welfare or community work. It is, and was, it seems, concerned only with ensuring the continued protection of the area through the faithful and regular performance of religious rites and their accompanying entertainment. The god's image was always brought to the place where the puppets were being shown, and to the restaurant where the annual dinner was held at which the leaders were selected.\n\nIt will be seen from this account of their duties that these managers did not have the wider general functions performed by the leaders of the three Fong on Ap Lei Chau. They were kaifongs, but they were not the Kaifong, a role played by the predecessors of the postwar Western Kaifong Association, Ltd., whose premises are located at Possession Point.\n\nThe method of selecting the managers has differed little over the period 1910-1965, although it was apparently more protracted and complicated in pre-war years. This was because there were more interested parties than there have been since the war, when redevelopment of old properties has gradually taken large numbers of former residents away from the area, and so beyond the immediate area of the god's protection.\n\nIn pre-war times there might be up to 100 interested parties who wished to become chik lei, but as stated, only 40-50 were required. The selection was left to the god. It was the practice for all persons wishing to serve on the committee to go to the shrine at an appointed time on the god's birthday. Lots were drawn in front of the altar. The number of tickets matched the number of aspirants. Only, say, 40 of the papers were marked chik lei, the rest being marked with the characters tai kat (1/2) or 'great fortune'. Only those securing the first went forward to the second stage in the selection of managers. This was the filling of the three senior posts of chung (#4), fu (§]) and hip chik lei (£), or principal, deputy and assistant (senior) manager, This event was conducted in a restaurant at the annual dinner held in the first moon. Again, the selection was made in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210436, "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-1985", "page_number": 43, "title": "RAS-1985", "content_text": "24\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\nprofessing the Christian religion could be buried and that such sections be consecrated. An area in an isolated part of the cemetery would be designated for the burial of non-Christians. The Ordinance set apart certain Crown Land to be used as a burial ground for persons professing the Christian religion and had its first reading in Legislative Council in November 1909.\n\nThere was some ambiguity between the title and the memorandum which accompanied the proposed bill. One spoke of the Colonial Cemetery, the other of the Protestant Cemetery. The original draft of the bill also excluded the burial of Roman Catholics. The Attorney General explained that they had been excluded because \"The Church of Rome had been in possession for years of a portion of the English Cemetery.\" A separate piece of ground under the administration of the Catholic Church was immediately to the north of the Colonial Cemetery.\n\nAs an explanation for the introduction of the Bill, the Governor told the Council, “I think everybody is aware of the fact that there has been a good deal of discussion at the Sanitary Board and elsewhere on the subject of Chinese interment in the Colonial Cemetery. The Colonial Cemetery, so far as I can ascertain from a study of the archives, has always been open to any person irrespective of race or creed. It has now been desired that there should be a certain portion set aside for Christian interment. The Bishop presented to me a joint request from the representatives of the Church of England and various denominations of the Colony that a portion of the Colonial Cemetery should be dedicated for Christian burial”. A member of the Council asked if Christians other than Protestants would be excluded, such as Nestorian and Armenian Christians. The Governor replied that this was an ecclesiastical problem which should be left to the ecclesiastical authorities. At a subsequent meeting of the Legislative Council the Governor stated that he had been approached privately regarding the situation of Roman Catholic who were Freemasons and who were not allowed to be buried in the Roman Catholic Cemetery. He consulted the Anglican Bishop who assured him there would be no difficulties regarding their burial in the proposed consecrated section of the cemetery. A question was asked if in the separation of sections", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210696, "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-1986", "page_number": 47, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "30 \n\nWALTER GREENWOOD \n\ndue from him for some sharpness with which he might have addressed the men (there was cries of “not at all”). If he had done so it had been with the best intentions. A gentleman from Shanghai who had recently witnessed them at seven pounder gun drill had expressed the opinion that the Shanghai artillerymen could not hold a candle to them. In May the Governor congratulated the Volunteers on their smartness at the Queen's Birthday parade. In November the Daily Press noted “The Volunteers are very fortunate in the officers they have elected to command them, for since the time they were appointed they have shewn an enthusiastic interest in the welfare of the Corps. During the past week Captain Francis has been busily engaged in getting up a field day at Kowloon so as to give the men a good introduction to the new equipment of small arms and mountain guns which were sent out in the Telemachus, with the additional attraction of a knife and fork drill at Mr. Chater's bungalow afterwards”. In June 1884 a volunteer complained to the press of having to drag guns up and down the parade ground for over an hour. However Francis seems to have been absent from the colony at that time. In 1886 and again in 1887 he was acting Commandant but his active participation in the Corps was coming to an end. He was absent from the Annual Meeting and there was a critical letter in the press about that. He tendered his resignation and in 1888 was placed on the retired list as an honorary member with the rank of captain. However that did not end his contributions to the Corps. In December 1892 he was a member of a committee formed to re-establish the Corps on a new basis and in January 1893 he was chairman of a recruiting committee which met at his chambers on Tuesdays and Fridays at 4-5p.m. In 1897 he contributed to prizes for a firing competition. The firing point was on an eminence near Wong Nei Chong Gap and the target at Deepwater Bay. Common and shrapnel shells were used and “some good practice was made”. Francis presented a cup for competition known as the \"Francis Cup\" but it seems to be no longer in the possession of the Volunteers. And as one of his obituaries noted he \"took a keen interest in military matters and was seldom absent from any important parade or display in his uniform\". Francis himself said \"I would rather any day attend a military parade or march in front of a military band than march in a procession in Westminster Hall headed by the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice. If I have one proclivity more than any", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210776, "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-1986", "page_number": 127, "title": "RAS-1986", "content_text": "110 \n\nNICHOLAS TAPP \n\nof the Xishuang Banna area of Southern Yunnan (the Dai account for 59 of Yunnan's 130 counties), almost all Buddhist temples were destroyed in 1965 and 1966, or converted into store-houses, mainly by the people themselves acting under policy directives. In 1980 a similar revival of religiosity took place among the Dai as the new policies of liberalisation began to penetrate the minority areas. Almost every village built a new temple, traditionally the focus of religious and much secular sentiment and exchanges in the Dai communities, and moreover despatched novices of 7-8 years old to be ordained in them. Recently, however, this intensity of fervour has slackened somewhat: fewer novices are being ordained, there are less bun-(merit) making activities undertaken by the villagers, and in general less religious enthusiasm among the young. \n\nHowever, there is no doubt that under the impact of these and similar policies, religiosity has been greatly reinforced among the Buddhist Dai as among the Christian A Hmo, while in the Naxi areas of Northwest Yunnan, locally sponsored Lamaist temples have been re-opened and practising priests may be visited. It is appropriate to point out here the great importance attached to literacy (and hence to education) by many of the national minorities, and the close connection this often has with religious, and therefore ethnic, sentiments. The extraordinary pictographic writing of the Naxi, for example, of which we have good records from the last century, is still in use and very much revered as the repository of the sacred wisdom of these people, in which blessings and spells are still inscribed. The Christianity of the A Hmo, as I have described at length elsewhere (Tapp 1985), originated from the importance they attached to the missionary-invented script for their language, which was the first they had known. As with their Christian faith today, it is often denied that the script has not always been their possession, and it remains in many ways at the core of their faith today. Particular social conflicts have arisen owing to the use of the Pollard script, as the original script is known, and other forms of script introduced later for the language. These different scripts are used by different groups owing to their previous affiliations with different Christian denominations. Again, among the Dai there has recently been a return to the old, Mon script, in which temple records and historical chronicles are", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210997, "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": 59, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "34\n\nAt the head of the pier was the Lung-chin Pavilion which provided shelter for travellers. It was also known as the “Mandarin-Greeting Pavilion” (ying-kuan t’ing), for it was presumably here that officials landing at Kowloon were officially greeted before they proceeded to the Walled City.21\n\nIronically, the first invaders of the Walled City were not British, but Chinese. In 1854, certain anti-Dynastic elements in Hong Kong, taking advantage of the general disturbance caused by the T'ai-p'ing uprising, attacked the Walled City across the harbour and occupied it. According to British officials, they were mainly Hakka stone workers and Triad members. Though the rebels had promised the inhabitants protection if they withdrew their support from the Imperial forces, as soon as they took possession of the City, they ransacked the houses and seized pigs, poultry and dogs for food.\n\nThe Kowloon officials fled to Hong Kong Island. At one point, nine war junks carrying 2,000 Imperial soldiers were ready to confront an equal number of rebel naval forces. The British in fact held the ring by ordering all warships to leave Hong Kong waters and so averted a major naval battle. The Imperial troops finally prevailed.22 However, the hsun-chien's official residence in the Walled City was so damaged by fire that for a while, he was obliged to move to Ch'ih-wei on the Shumchun river.23\n\nChinese officials at Kowloon and British officials in Hong Kong kept in close touch and generally co-operated in maintaining law and order in the vicinity. In 1867 for instance, when conflict broke out between villagers from either side of the border, Governor Macdonnell made a special trip to Kowloon, met the Chinese official on his steamer and agreed to co-operate in keeping peace.24 In 1884, Kowloon officials warned the Hong Kong authorities of a possible rising of the Triad Society.25\n\n24\n\n26\n\nUnder Ordinance 2 of 1850, Chinese fugitives in Hong Kong were handed over to Kowloon officials, but the provision was not reciprocal — China had no obligation to extradite criminals to Hong Kong. Chinese authorities, however, did arrest and convict them. The Namoa case was the most dramatic example. In 1890,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211099, "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": 160, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "135\n\nIn the past, he claimed, the Chinese community was too divided to act in opposition to a measure it felt was objectionable. But now the Chinese were more vocal, more public-spirited and more conscious of their rights. It was time to take a stand, for “if we tolerate this ordinance and say nothing about it, other ordinances may be passed aiming at the Chinese, and if we keep quiet the Home Government will not know our grievances.”\n\nHo Tung took up the previous speaker's charge against the police: “If the police and the detectives would do their duty, we should have no robberies in Hongkong.” Perhaps he was somewhat too optimistic in this view.\n\nHe remarked about certain ways in which the Chinese were treated as an inferior group in the community. Chinese theatres had to close at 11 pm. At the City Hall, patronised by foreigners, functions could continue to 1 am.\n\nThere was also the matter of provisions for recreation. Ho Tung charged that “the Government gave all sorts of recreation for the European community. What have they done for the Chinese? They gave them a recreation ground in Taipingshan (at Possession Point). What kind of a place is that for recreation while latrines and urinals are there?”\n\nDiscrimination had an economic as well as social aspect: “We are the principal ratepayers in Hongkong; we pay more taxes than the Europeans, and derive the least advantage.\n\nBut not all the fault for the situation was Government's. Ho Tung reminded his audience that “if we have suffered any hardship before, it is we who are to blame for being silent. We should always bring our complaints to the notice of the Government in order to have them remedied.”\n\nHe concluded by stating that he did not wish those present to get the idea that the weight of wealth or position as represented by Ho A-mei and himself — should influence their decision on this public issue.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211141, "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": 202, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "177\n\nony had every reason to be satisfied with the arrangements of 1886.\n\nBasking in the success of the arrangement, the editor does not mention the dire forecasts his paper had made in former years concerning the evil effects which would result if Hongkong allowed itself to be used in any way as a collecting point for Chinese revenue.\n\nNow with the customs question on a satisfactory basis, the editor asked what reason remained for a consul:\n\n\"Is it to give protection and render assistance to the Chinese subjects in this Colony? If so, alas for the Chinese subjects! The assistance the consul will give them will simply be in ascertaining the extent to which they can be squeezed, and if they do not pay up pleasantly, the screw will be turned on through their families on the mainland. No more serious blow could well be struck at the well-being of the Chinese population than the establishment of a Chinese Consulate in the Colony, and the damage to British prestige would be disastrous.\"\n\nThere had been little change in attitudes over the years - the same arguments, the same fears, the same distrust.\n\nIt was claimed that the British possession of Hongkong did not impress the average Chinese. According to the editor, the “ignorant masses\" still believed Europeans were allowed to be in Hongkong only through the sufferance of the Emperor. This misconception would only be reinforced “with the establishment of a Chinese Yamen in the Colony, flaunting the dragon flag.\"\n\nIt was believed that the view of the “ignorant masses” was encouraged by Chinese officials.\n\nThe Colonial Office, in commenting on the question of a consul for Hongkong, said: \"The one idea prevalent among the Chinese governing class is to represent to their fellow countrymen that we hold Hongkong as vassals of the Emperor of China and the advent of a consul would be used in this sense and so understood by the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211159, "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": 220, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "195\n\nfor the grant of a site on Possession Point on which they might build a meeting hall.\n\nOn the occasion of the annual official visit to the Governor by the newly elected Tung Wah Committee, they were told that the matter of a meeting place was under consideration. However, no definite action was taken.\n\nThe same meeting that had discussed the need of a kung soh or town hall also considered related questions, such as: “Should the hospital committee in the future participate in anything which affected the interest of the Chinese community at large; had the committee usurped the authority of local officials; and was the hospital a guild detrimental to the interest of the community?”\n\nNo.\n\nThe answer to the first question was yes. To the last two it was no.\n\nThese questions reflected charges frequently made in the English language press against the manner in which the directors of the hospital had conducted their business.\n\nThese charges were an expression of the sense of insecurity underlying the foreign presence in China.\n\nThe colonials were a handful in the midst of a surging, vital and ever growing Chinese population. For all the efforts of the expatriates to recreate the social and political structures of the homeland, Hongkong was at heart Chinese. They had yet to discover and employ adequate ways of relating to this fact.\n\nThey projected their insecurity on the prestige of the Tung Wah Committee within the Chinese community. It was the centre for the self-identity of the Chinese in Hongkong and, as such, it was regarded as a threat to the power and position of the expatriate community.\n\nThis same attitude was expressed at the time of the opening of a Chinese Chamber of Commerce in 1896.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211162, "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": 223, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "198\n\nment upon which they might build a community hall.\n\nIn 1877 the Governor promised the Chinese they should have a site at Possession Point. The Surveyor-General was instructed to make the arrangements. For some reason there was no further action on the matter.\n\nThe request for a site was renewed in 1880 under a new administration. The Chinese hoped that the Governor, John Pope Hennessy, who was always kindly disposed to the needs of the Chinese, would support their request and take action.\n\nTheir hopes were not disappointed. He promised to recommend a grant of $10,000 towards building costs and the allocation of a site at Possession Point.\n\nHis proposal was not looked upon with favour by his Executive Council. Possession Point had been previously designated as the Chinese Recreation Ground and was the only public open space in the crowded Chinese section of the city.\n\nMr. Osbert Chadwick, an authority on civic sanitation and hygiene, had been brought to Hongkong to investigate conditions and make recommendations for improvement. He designated the open space at Possession Point as an absolutely necessary “lung” for a dangerously overcrowded neighbourhood.\n\nThis point was raised in opposition to the recommendation of the Governor and the project was put on the shelf.\n\nThe plan for a community hall was revived, however, in 1887 on the occasion of Hongkong's celebration of the 50th year of the reign of Queen Victoria. The opportunity for the Chinese to use the jubilee as an occasion for raising funds for a hall arose out of the inability of the whole community to agree on a project which could serve as a lasting memorial of the celebration.\n\nHongkong's planning for the jubilee was characterised by community division. It aggravated the distinctions of class and race which were a prominent feature of life in Hongkong in the nine-", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211621, "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": 36, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "1} \n\nAmerican missionary, the Reverend Elijah Bridgman,1 merely noted the formal possession of the island in its journal of occurrences; it gave no precise date nor any details.24 Another reference in the same journal in a historical review of events in China was only marginally fuller.25 The Canton Press, published at this point from Macao, expressed itself slightly puzzled by the lack of information about the event: 'On Tuesday last, the 26th January, the Island of Hongkong, the new settlement ceded by the Chinese to the English, was taken possession of in the name of Her Majesty, Queen Victoria. The English colours were hoisted, and saluted from the ships; we have not yet heard any further particulars of the ceremony.' Two weeks later the incident was mentioned again, but no further details were forthcoming.26 The Canton Register made no mention of the possession of Hong Kong except in the context of Elliot's treaty with Ch'i-shan; it seemed unimpressed by the terms and referred to 'the paltry island of Hong Kong'.\n\n› 28\n\nThe two groups with the most immediate interest in the acquisition of Hong Kong for the British were the merchants and missionaries. Unlike the troops, for whom the possession of the island was just one part of a long and arduous expedition in a foreign and unhealthy part of the world, the merchants and missionaries were already operating from the area and found Chinese restrictions on their movements irksome. And unlike the British government and its officials, the traders and propagators of salvation were most cognizant of the advantages that a piece of British territory in South China would afford them. They were not politically or ideologically committed to punishing China for the 'disrespect' it had shown to Britain. It is not known whether any missionaries attended the ceremony on 26 January, but some merchants who were late to have their fortunes inextricably bound up with the colony turned up to witness its official birth. According to a study of the Indian community of Hong Kong, at least four Indian merchants were present in Hong Kong at the flag-hoisting: Cawasjee Pallanjee, the representative of Cursetjee Bomanjee and Co. of Bombay; F. M. Talati; Albert Sassoon;29 and Rustomjee Dhunjee Shaw of P. F. Cama and Co. of Bombay. James Matheson of Jardine Matheson and Co.30 went from Macao to Hong Kong precisely in order to witness the hoisting of the British flag, and afterwards, as he wrote to William Jardine in a postscript to a letter of 30 January, he circumnavigated the island.32 Thus the future character of the colony can be gauged from the type of person with most to gain from its possession by the British.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211624, "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": 39, "title": "RAS-1989", "content_text": "14\n\n48\n\nto have been a more junior soldier such as a drill or colour havildar who would have been ordered to hoist the flag. At the moment it is not possible therefore to say whether Mohammed Arab hoisted the Union Jack on Hong Kong or not, but what is undeniable is that by his death in 1878 Hong Kong had prospered and grown in importance to such an extent that he and the wider community in the colony considered that whoever had hoisted the flag that day had done something of interest to posterity. If it had been Mohammed Arab, it would have been a foretaste of the multiracial legacies that colonialism would leave to the island.\n\n49\n\n50\n\nThe other candidate for the honour of hoisting the flag is a far more conventional one. In his guide to Hong Kong of 1893, William Legge wrote: 'In January [1841] . . . the British Ensign was hoisted on Possession Point . . . by midshipman Dowell (now Admiral Sir William Dowell KCB)'. William Montagu Dowell was born on 2 August 1825 and was made a lieutenant in the Royal Navy in 1847, rising to be vice-admiral in 1880 and admiral in 1885. In January 1841 he would have been fifteen, so it is possible that he could have been a midshipman at that date and could have been among the group landing on Hong Kong to hoist the flag. More important than whether Dowell raised the flag or not is the fact that the author wished to associate a famous person with the act. William Dowell had been involved in the Second China War of 1857, he was at Shimoneseki in Japan in 1864 and he returned to the Far East as commander-in-chief of the navy in China between January 1884 and September 1885; his naval career had also included spells at the Cape of Good Hope, on the West coast of Africa and on the Egyptian expedition of 1882. By claiming an admiral and a knight as the perpetrator of the deed, the author may have been expressing a desire that Hong Kong's rise in importance should be seen to be mirroring that of Dowell.\n\n51\n\n52\n\nIt is extraordinary that historians have paid so little attention to the acquisition of Hong Kong and that so little effort has been expended in trying to establish the manner in which Hong Kong came to be possessed by the British, and contemporary reactions to that possession. Such omissions might perhaps have been more understandable had Hong Kong at this stage only been thought of as a temporary possession. But by the 1870s it was clear that Hong Kong had become a permanent and financially successful part of the Empire, and certainly by the twentieth century it could have been expected that there would have been considerable interest in constructing a colonial history. That such a history", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1989.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8336pm92h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212301, "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-1990", "page_number": 243, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "220\n\nand business in Hong Kong has been neglected. Nonetheless, over the past decade some hongs have commissioned researchers and authors to compile company histories. A number of these are listed in the bibliography.\n\nEarlier Days\n\nHistorically, overseas businessmen have been permitted only limited contact with locals in China. In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries Westerners were only authorised to reside in Canton during the trading season, from October to May. Emperors confined all foreign trade there, as far from Peking as possible, keeping 'unpleasant things at a distance.' Foreigners were forced to maintain their base in the Portuguese city of Macau (established 1557).\n\nThese restrictions caused great inconvenience to merchants. Captain Charles Elliot wrote, on April 6th 1839:\n\n\"There can be neither safety nor honour for either government until Her Majesty's flag flies on these coasts in a secure position.\"\n\nIt was considered necessary to have a colony with a fine harbour, where Europeans could live, work and trade in peace and security. The Union Jack was raised at Possession Point, on Hong Kong Island, on January 26, 1841.\n\nHong Kong was established specifically to facilitate trade. Not surprisingly, therefore, the authorities depended a great deal upon the support of business houses in the early days of the colony. Some of these early trading houses are still trading here today.\n\nBy the end of 1843 there were 12 large British firms in Hong Kong, ten British merchants trading on a smaller scale, and about six Indian companies. The following year there were said to be about 100 foreign firms doing business, half of which were British and about one-quarter Indian or Parsee. Russells, an American firm, had six partners and eight griffins (assistants). Dent and Company (British) five partners and eight assistants, and D. and M. Rustomjee (Parsee) fifteen partners. Jardine Matheson employed", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212319, "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-1990", "page_number": 261, "title": "RAS-1990", "content_text": "238\n\nCompany joined Dairy Farm and became known as the Dairy Farm, Ice and Cold Storage Company Limited, following the merging of the food sections of Lane Crawford and Dairy Farm.\n\nBecause records were lost little is known of the company's history between 1920 and 1942. The directors who were not killed fighting the Japanese in 1941, however, did manage to hold a minuted board meeting, on June 1st, 1942, in Stanley prison camp. They later held a joint meeting with the directors of Lane Crawford's when it was suggested the two firms should co-operate after hostilities ceased.\n\nThis idea materialised in 1960 with limited success. In 1972, Hong Kong Land acquired Dairy Farm in the first contested takeover bid in Hong Kong. The old building on Lower Albert Road, used by the Dairy Farm Ice and Cold Storage Company Limited until 1978, now houses the Foreign Correspondents' Club and the Fringe Club. In the late 20th century milk is tankered into Hong Kong mainly from China.\n\nWatson's\n\nAnother of the few firms that is as old as Hong Kong itself is A.S. Watson's. It is connected with the Canton Dispensary which operated from 1828 to 1858. The Hong Kong Dispensary was opened in a matshed at Possession Point by Doctors (Peter) F.H. Young, a naval surgeon, and Alexander Anderson. The latter became the first Colonial Surgeon of Hong Kong. Doctor John Morrison, son of Doctor Robert Morrison who founded the Canton Dispensary with Doctor Livingstone, was also involved. In July 1841, a bad typhoon destroyed the Dispensary's matshed at Possession Point as well as other structures in Hong Kong.\n\nThe main purpose of Di Yeuk Fong (†) (big medicine shop as it was then called) was as a dispensary for soldiers and sailors. On 1st January 1843 it moved to Captain Morgan's Bazaar, and the same year a Doctor Samuel Marjoribanks, a surgeon, joined as a partner. In 1845 the dispensary moved to permanent premises, in Queen's Road, and Doctor James Hume Young (a relative of F.H. Young) became manager.\n\nThe first member of the Watson family to go East was Thomas", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1990.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299", "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 }, { "id": 215405, "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-2001", "page_number": 182, "title": "RAS-2001", "content_text": "131\n\nTHE FAÇADE OF ST. PAUL'S, MACAO: A RETABLE-FAÇADE?\n\nIntroduction\n\nCESAR GUILLEN-NUÑEZ\n\nThis paper will look at the façade of the church of Madre de Deus, Macao, popularly known as ruinas de São Paulo (Ruins of St. Paul's), from a perspective different to that familiar to most, including scholars. For I believe the surviving frontispiece should be classified as a fachada retablo, that is, as a retable-façade.\n\nA retable-façade is a kind of structure that has been given this appellation by modern Hispanists because of its similarities to carved Spanish altarpieces. Altarpieces, also known as retables (whence the façade's name), were as popular in Portugal as they were in Spain. Curiously, retable-façades were less frequently used in Portugal and are practically unknown in Portuguese colonies. I hope therefore that it will not seem too fanciful to start this paper by asking the question: is the surviving front of St. Paul's just such a façade? And if so, then how could such a structure have appeared in seventeenth-century Macao, Portugal's most treasured possession in Southeast Asia? (Fig. 1).\n\nBefore continuing, I must point out that part of this paper has been adapted from a thesis on the subject that I completed in 1997 for University College London. The thesis itself evolved from an unpublished youthful article written a number of decades ago, after many years' interest on the extraordinary phenomenon of the retable-façade. Eventually a few of my ideas on the façade of St. Paul appeared in a book on Macao that I wrote almost twenty years ago.\n\nSome art historians may disagree with my identification of the façade of St. Paul's as a retable-façade, mainly because of the lack of primary sources backing up the idea. Perhaps it will not be thought too irrelevant to consider that in recent years the tourist trade in Macao has readily echoed it, as is true of a small number of Portuguese researchers steeped in Lusitanian architectural traditions. Although the latter come from outside the field of the retable-façade their writings at least imply an acceptance of the idea. Unfortunately they only include a discussion...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215972, "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": 271, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "205\n\nbecause of this specific claim.\n\nSeveral points of interest should be underscored in this account. Although Ch'ea had stopped the rituals of ancestral veneration at home and during the festival seasons, he continued to live in accordance to other accepted norms, including \"cleaning the graves\" of his ancestors. Apparently wanting to be with people and to share his message, Ch'ëa had obviously worked through the ethics of which traditional practices did not hinder his Christian life and so developed means of approach to others through them. Kot was very specific about the themes Ch'ea spoke about, some which he might have heard from Ho and Legge in Hong Kong in the spring of 1856. What Kot remembered were themes on \"the bounty of God in creation and providence,\" the latter an issue expressed in Legge's sermons and most likely in Ho's elegant Chinese homilies, as well as elaborations on the nature of the soul, why people should not worship idols, and \"the propitiation made by Jesus Christ for the sins of men.\" In spite of the disbelief of many listeners in the cemetery after Ch'ea mentioned that he had the “divine books\" in his possession, Kot kept note of where he lived and made it a point to visit him nearly a month later.\n\nCertainly the fact that Kot waited a full month before attempting to visit Ch'ea suggests that he did not feel very comfortable or highly motivated to do so. Apparently Kot had begun questioning his village neighbours about many of the issues Ch'ea had raised, and so a greater curiosity about Ch'ea's actual \"domestic arrangements\" prodded Kot to see if this local preacher lived by what he taught. Once he found Ch'ea's home, Kot was invited in and saw, perhaps to his surprise, that \"there was in his house neither Koon Yum (Guanyin, the famous Chinese female Boddhisatva), nor Kwan Ty (Guandì, the spirit guardian, often the image placed on doors as a protector of homes), neither ancestral tablets, nor incense pot.\" Willingly receiving Christian literature from Ch'ea at that time, Kot returned to his village only to find his neighbours still taking Ch'ea \"to be mad.\" After intermittent reading of the books and later repeated visits by Ch'ëa (in \"my house three or four times\"), Kot began to join Ch'ea in \"worship[ping] God\" and \"convers[ing]\n\n+62", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216000, "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": 299, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "233\n\nespecially in official rituals such as this interview with foreign guests). \"Friendly conversation\" and longer \"speeches\" constituted the interview, Ch'ea continuing to interpret even though \"his Honour evidently understood us well enough.\"\n\n68. A sensitive reading of these events from both Qing and British sides with the implications for missionaries and their Chinese followers is provided in A. J. Broomhall's Hudson Taylor & China's Open Century: Over the Treaty Wall (Book 2) (Sevenoaks: Hodder and Stoughton, 1981).\n\n69. See notes for May 7th, 1861, in Legge's Journal Of A Missionary Tour.\n\n70. Taken from notes for May 12th, 1861, in Legge's Journal Of A Missionary Tour.\n\n71. Described candidly in Legge's Journal of a Missionary Tour, notes for May 9th, 1861.\n\n72. This incident occurred on May 19th, Ch'ea's being \"rudely handled\" by what some elders in the town (who later came to apologize) called a \"few heady youth\". Yet when Legge sought out the sexagenarian Ch'ea's response, suggesting that the beating was severe enough to consider a formal response to the authorities, Ch'ea's principles were unmoved. \"I only pray our Heavenly Father to have pity on them!\" said Ch'ea, and there the matter rested.\" See Legge, Journal of a Missionary Tour, notes for May 9th, 1861.\n\n73. Ch'ea had suggested two places, one next to the Füzi miàao temple complex and a house located on a main thoroughfare in the town. The fact that Ch'ea had formerly been a keeper of the temple probably influenced his opinions as well as the sense of a suitable location for the first Christian church in the area. See comments made by Legge about Ch'ea's suggestions in his Journal of a Missionary Tour, notes for May 6th, 1861.\n\n74. Letter to Arthur Tidman, Secretary of the London Missionary Society, dated October 14, 1861, and published with commentary in EMMC/MM 26 (January 1862), pp. 13-17, here esp. p. 15. Helen Edith Legge refers to another source (no details provided) where it is claimed that the obstructing gentryperson \"led a body of men to make a tumult at the house, assailed it with a quantity of filth, made a violent entry, plundered it of its goods, took possession of the house and threatened to put to death Ch'ea [sic] and other Christians.\" Actions reflecting anti-foreign attitudes follow this event, heightening the tension. See Helen Edith Legge, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar, pp. 114-115.\n\n75. So described in Helen Edith Legge, James Legge: Missionary and Scholar, p. 116.\n\n76. The China Mail in Hong Kong actually described the ceremonies attending the formal evacuation of the British and French forces in its number for October 24, 1861. The event had taken place on October 21st. See China Mail #871 (October 24, 1861), p. 171.\n\n77. Recorded in Legge's essay, \"Che'a Kin KWáng,” the typescript found in CWM/South China/Personal/Legge/Box 7, p. 5.\n\n78. During one point in this tense trip Legge caught Ch'ea sitting down in the corner of his room on the boat with his eyes closed, thinking at first sight that Ch'ea was exhausted from the ordeals he had been facing. Able to see the humour in the serious situation they all faced, Legge playfully chided the elder Chinese", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216072, "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": 371, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "305\n\nMason that 'You [Mason] have been left at Chinkiang not because you have been overlooked, but because you have shown a particular proficiency in acquiring the Nanking dialect, and I did not wish to interrupt these studies by transferring you to another province. It is also important for me to train certain men in the intricate business of Transit Passes40 peculiar to Chinkiang alone, and I have been pleased with your mastery of this branch of our work'.\n\nFor the next couple of months Mason's name crops up in some dozen or so of Hart's letters, usually towards the end of a letter on, what were to Hart, weightier matters. Such comments included 'The Yamen finds \"Mason Affair\" very handy: it can now return the Legation fire neatly after last summer's bombardment sustained for the riots, etc.\n\nMason was brought to trial in the British Supreme Court before the British Consul-General and the Shanghai Settlement's Chief Judge, N J Hannen, on 29 October 1891, charged simply with the illegal possession of dynamite to which he pleaded guilty. Although he had declared before and after the trial that he was a member of the Gelao Hui, had acted to further its plans to overthrow its government, and had personally brought the dynamite into China with unlawful intent, these facts were not mentioned at the trial nor did the Chinese government produce any evidence. The Chinese Legation in London later exerted pressure to demand that Mason, on his release from prison in Shanghai, be tried in Hong Kong on charges of crimes and conspiracy against the Chinese state. Mason was, however, not tried again.\n\nHart, at one point, refers to Mason's comrade Croskey who Mason himself mentioned in his \"Confessions\" as a spy, put there by the Customs Service to watch Mason and who, according to Mason, betrayed and ruined him. In practice Croskey had been promoted from the outdoor staff to the indoor, and then posted to Zhenjiang. Mason somewhat naively explained his plans and plots to Croskey shortly after they met, and Croskey informed his boss in Zhenjiang who in turn asked Croskey to learn more about Mason's plan. Croskey resigned from the Service in the November 'on Sir Robert Hart's recommendation'. Croskey, according to Hart, was a promising young American citizen, a grandson of the first Sir Thos. Bazley, a Manchester MP.41", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216222, "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": 521, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "455\n\ncould sometimes hear barking deer calling from Victoria Peak. At the time one could still hire a sedan chair and four coolies to carry one up to Conduit Road. There were half a dozen or so parked regularly in Wyndham Street, in Central, up until the late 1950s. The fare was 30 cents for each 15 minutes with a 30 cents surcharge. The working life of a chair coolie was said to be eight years.\n\nAs with many houses in Conduit Road at the time, 41 Conduit Road had a superb view and, long before the days of cross-harbour tunnels, one of the pastimes of children was counting the number of ferries they could spot. Between the two World Wars an eccentric Englishman who lived in Robinson Road, not far away, did not own a clock. He used a telescope to tell the time from the clock tower then standing in Pedder Street. In the \"good old days,\" more than one British Governor used the activities in the harbour as a barometer of the strength of the economy. We are talking of times, up until the mid 1930s, when a cannon was fired from Blackhead Point, in Tsim Sha Tsui, to let residents know when a typhoon was approaching or, alternatively, the mail ship had arrived. Occasionally, inhabitants were not sure to which of the two events the firing referred!\n\nWhen the FCC vacated the premises the final days had come for the old mansion at 41 Conduit Road. In 1960, it was bought by Cheng Hing Realty and, in 1966, rebought by Court Properties. As with so much of Hong Kong it was a case of 'Hungry for the new forget the old.' The old building was demolished and the site remained empty for some time. The sale price was reputed to have been $13 million. The site was then redeveloped. In the summer of 1970, there were 1,200 applications to purchase the 400 flats at Realty Gardens. My wife and I were successful in the ballot and we took possession of our newly completed flat in Venice Court, for which we paid, in mid 1972, the princely sum of $114,000. Prices were still low after the property slump brought on largely by the drawn-out 1967 riots. My flat has been a splendid investment. We let it for the first four years, unfurnished, at $2,000 a month. We moved in ourselves on 1 March 1976.\n\nAlthough I can see a narrow strip of the harbour and Stonecutters Island (an island no longer) from my bedroom window, my flat at Realty Gardens in fact faces south. It is thus shielded from the cold north-easterly monsoon in the winter and receives the benefits of the cool", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 } ]