[ { "id": 205200, "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": 156, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "150\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nThe handsome volume has a short preface by James Cahill who wisely cautions the reader to keep in mind that the book \"is not an authority, but a tool.\" He says that anyone “who passes final judgment on the authenticity of a painting according to whether or not the artist's or collectors' seals on it seem to match those reproduced here, without taking into sufficient account of other kinds of external evidence, and without considering all such evidence secondary to the painting itself, will certainly not be using the book as its compilers intended.”\n\nThere are also short appropriate essays by the compilers themselves: C. C. Wang's \"Seals and Authentication,\" in which he too affirms that \"seals are useful only as aids in the work of authentication,\" and stresses that brush work and calligraphy remain the most important factors in judging a painting; and Victoria Contag's \"The Chinese Seal, its evolution, cutting and use, with a note on vermilion ink.\" The book also has separate Chinese bibliographies (with title translations into English) on both Chinese paintings and seals. Painters and collectors included in the volume are listed according to stroke-count, while \"fancy names\" are separately listed alphabetically. Also included are a listing of prominent circles of painters and a useful Publisher's Note and Key to Abbreviations. The latter is especially helpful in that most translated entries in the book are in German. Thus the Key explains to the English language reader the contents of each of the nine lettered entries which follow each painter's name. There is one error, however, in the Key: \"I\", one of the nine letters, in this case signifying \"subject matter,” should be “T” which instead of “I” appears throughout the actual text itself.\n\nThe book is expensive, but beautifully done and an indispensable tool for the specialist,\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, Jr.\n\nCHINESE COMMUNIST SOCIETY: THE FAMILY AND THE VILLAGE, C. K. Yang. Cambridge, Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1965. Part 1: xii, 246 pp. Part 2: xii, 276 pp. Paper. US$3.95.\n\nThis volume contains two studies, The Chinese Family in the Communist Revolution and A Chinese Village in Early Communist Transition, which were published separately in 1959.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205203, "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": 159, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "BOOK REVIEWS\n\n153\n\nThe work contains a thoughtful and perspective-giving introduction, in which the author first explains in detail the purpose of the guide and the reasons for its particular scope (which justification appears both logical and reasonable). He then discusses nine groups of related records, both ecclesiastical and public, located in the British Isles that should also be considered by historians studying the impact of Protestantism in China. He explains the form of the guide itself and its arrangement of information in helpful detail. He also gives a useful brief account of the missionary societies themselves, of their development and administration, of how their home bases and field offices were organized and of the various functions of each. A word is given too on the different types of work, not all evangelical, done by the missionaries in China. Finally, the author gives his own sober estimate of the research value of the records.\n\nThe intimate involvement of the missionary in the political, social and economic life of China in the course of pursuing his different functions enhanced considerably the potential value of his reports to later researchers. The usually well-trained and observant missionary often packed his reports and letters with detailed information on a wide range of topics observed in diverse parts of China. These archives stand, therefore, as a rich repository of information which invites and deserves intensive study by scholars in several disciplines. One reason these materials have been under-utilized thus far is because scholars have been largely unaware of their respective locations, quantities and accessibility.\n\nMr. Marchant greatly rectifies this situation by providing the much needed guide.\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, Jr.\n\nTHE CANTONESE SPEAKER'S DICTIONARY. Roy T. COWLES, Hong Kong University Press, 1965. 1339 pages, plus Romanization Key to Characters, Character Key to Romanizations, and Radical Index. HK$80.\n\nThis book is doubtless the most ambitious single item to appear in Cantonese lexicography. It represents many years of work on the part of the compiler plus the efforts of many others whom he credits for supplying help. With over 13,000 entries,", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205463, "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": 5, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "CONTENTS\n\nEDITORIAL NOTE\n\nPRESIDENT'S REPORT FOR 1967\n\nHON. TREASURER'S REPORT FOR 1967\n\nARTICLES CONTRIBUTED:\n\n✓ Chinese Religion and Rural Cohesion in the Nineteenth Century MARJORIE TOPLEY\n\nThe Hankow Steamer Tea Races - T. J. LINDSAY\n\nNotes on Hong Kong Libraries in the Nineteenth Century - H. A. RYDINGS\n\nFurther Notes on the Sung Wong T'oi Being Caught by a Fishnet; On Fêngshui in Southeastern China\n\nFan Lau and its Fort: an Historical Perspective - ARMANDO DA SILVA\n\nPlover Cove to Taipo Market: A Study in Forced Migration - MORRIS I. BERKOWITZ\n\nSun Yat-sen and Chinese History - STEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nReview ARTICLE:\n\nCapitalism and the Chinese Peasant; Social and Economic Change in a Chinese Village (Jack M. Potter) H. G. H. NELSON\n\nARTICLE REPRINTED:\n\nChinese Street-Cries in Hong Kong J. NACKEN\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES:\n\nNotes on Some Vegetarian Halls in Hong Kong belonging to the Sect of Hsien-T'ien Tao: (The Way of Former Heaven) MARJORIE TOPLEY and JAMES HAYES\n\nJardine, Matheson & Company's First Site in Hong Kong - DAFYDD EMRYS EVANS\n\nResearch on Family Values and Culture Change in Hong Kong's Modern Chinese Novels - KLAUS MADING\n\nHong Kong's First Government House - DAFYDD EMRYS EVANS\n\nA Reaping Knife from Lantau Island, Hong Kong - JAMES HAYES\n\nItinerant Hakka Weavers JAMES HAYES\n\nThe Tung Chung Fort (Lantau Island, Hong Kong) - JAMES HAYES\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nTHE LIBRARY\n\nLIST OF MEMBERS\n\nPage 1\n\n2\n\n6\n\n9\n\n44\n\n56\n\n67\n\n74\n\n82\n\n96\n\n109\n\n119\n\n128\n\n135\n\n149\n\n154\n\n156\n\n161\n\n162\n\n165\n\n168\n\n178\n\n200", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205572, "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": 114, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "109\n\nSUN YAT-SEN AND CHINESE HISTORY\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.*\n\nSun Yat-sen as historian has not yet, to my knowledge, been subjected to special scrutiny. There has seemed to be little point in doing so previously, certainly as a topic in itself. Yet, as part of a general study to determine the effects of Asian nationalism on historiography to include a probe of Sun's thought in this area does not seem entirely unwarranted. Sun, after all, is not being selected for attention as an historian, but as a principal historical figure whose use of history would undoubtedly have some influence on the work of at least some Chinese historians, to say nothing of a more profound effect on a more popular appreciation of history among the Chinese people. Thus, since Sun was so important, and because he was so prominent a nationalist in the Chinese revolutionary movement, it is logical to pay him some regard in this respect.\n\nBut if it is legitimate to scrutinize Sun's use of history in such a general inquiry, it is vitally important to make a necessary qualification in the context of this particular panel's selection of national representatives. This is to raise the fundamental question of equivalence. Without taking anything away from Sun himself, one might present a persuasive case for other Chinese representatives, and especially for one well-known living leader, as being more suitably comparable with Nehru and Sukarno. This is not only because of the immediately obvious generational difference, for Sun's day was that much earlier than the others on the scale of national revolution. Just as important, Sun did not live to see the achievement of his objective—national unification. This is a crucial comparative point, for whatever references to history Sun made in his writings were made in the course of the struggle toward an unattained major end. Unfortunately, therefore, there can be\n\n*The author is Associate Professor, Department of History, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, and was a former editor of this Journal. The article was delivered as a paper at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, March 23, 1968, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.\n\n†The panel, termed \"Asian Nationalism and Historiography,” also included papers on \"Nehru and Indian History\" and \"Sukarno and Indonesian History.\"", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205573, "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": 115, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "110\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR,\n\nno comparisons of historical references or reflections of the kind that are made after national unification which might mirror both the satisfaction of success and the new brand of problems and frustrations that follow. Finally, in terms of impact on the Chinese people as a whole, it must be conceded that Mao Tse-tung, and his references to Chinese history, is of a greater order. This last point is important, I should think, in terms of the over-all significance of such a study. Nevertheless, it is Sun Yat-sen we are assigned to deal with, and as we have already acknowledged, keeping our qualification in mind, this exploration might well be of some use in its own right.\n\nSun Yat-sen is a fascinatingly paradoxical personality. He certainly enjoys an enviable position in history. Despite much politically naive and compromising activity on his part in his day he uniquely commands the continued respect of Chinese of all political persuasions in our day. This is not to underestimate Sun's vital role, for there should be little doubt but that he constituted for a critical period a persevering, idealistic and positive symbol around which a people trying to find nationhood, political unity and liberation from imperialistic bondage might rally. And the symbol continues today for many Chinese to represent something that might yet be, however hopeless the prospects seem. Such was the magnetism and the inspirational optimism generated by this remarkable man. Of course, his sanctification by the Nationalists has had something to do with the general absence of critical Chinese attention. But aside from such officially-imposed restraint there persists, even among normally critical-minded and politically non-involved Chinese scholars, an intriguing propensity to view Sun through mercifully rose-colored glasses, and to give his writings unmistakably charitable readings.\n\nThis instinctively favorable image of Sun extends to his knowledge of Chinese history as well. Yet this is an aspect of Sun's career that requires some working at, for Sun's historical knowledge, and the means by which he attained it are not exactly self-evident. One distinguished contemporary Chinese historian, currently residing in Hong Kong, explains that soon after Sun had returned from Honolulu, he retained a good tutor to coach him in Chinese history and literature. This same informant continues with this anecdotal story. While at the Canton Hospital School, Sun kept a full set of the twenty-four dynastic histories in his room.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205575, "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": 117, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "112\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\na table.\" In case one might raise the question of the Mongol experience, as perhaps a singular exception, Sun elsewhere explicitly affirmed that they too were absorbed by the Chinese, thanks to the fact that \"the character of the Chinese race was higher than that of other races.\" In making this point Sun incidentally raises a further historical question when he says that the Ming dynasty \"fell twice\" to the Manchus.*\n\nOf course, one might surmise that some of Sun's historical distortions are generalizations intended for forensic effect. The exaggerated assimilation concept may be in this category, as well as such claims as \"Everyone in China, beginning with emperors and kings, and ending with the common people, even robbers and pirates, all have been able to value and delight in literature as an art.\"5\n\n6\n\nBut such observations by Sun, as well as the stress on China's erstwhile moral power for absorption, are also part of a more general idealized appreciation of the past in which history and mythology blend indistinguishably together. As a matter of fact, history seems to be, for Sun, an almost dimensionless pastiche to which reference might be made indiscriminately. Thus the manifold allusions to the legendary emperors and to other historical personalities and folk heroes, without the slightest demonstrated concern for accuracy or authenticity. The \"Emperor Fu-Shi\" wrote the \"Eight Diagrams,\" thus initiating the Chinese written language. Of all the emperors throughout Chinese history only “Yao, Shun, Yu, T'ang, Wen Wang and Wu Wang\" were the ones \"who shouldered the responsibility of government for the welfare and happiness of the people.\" The statement \"you have all read a good deal of Chinese history; I am sure almost everyone here has read particularly The Story of the Three Kingdoms,\" with striking ingenuousness prefaces a brief story illustrating Chu-kuo Liang's \"splendid character,\" but neglects to suggest the difference between evidence provided by historical documentation and the imaginative renditions of fictional literature. Recounting the contributions of the legendary figures of Sui Jen Shih, Shen Nung, Hsien Yuan and Yu Ch'ao Shih, respectively the alleged inventors of cooking, medicine, clothing and housing. Sun declared: \"So in Chinese history we find not only those could fight becoming king; anyone with marked ability, who had made new discoveries or who had achieved great things for mankind, could become king and organize the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205577, "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": 119, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "114\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nthat the pseudo-historical background is merely intended to highlight the logical existence and desirability of this final political form. Again, this is not an acutely reasoned historical-theoretical construct.\n\nSun's indifferent use of history, his inaccuracies, his unquestioned acceptance of a heavily and simplistically idealized vision of the past and his limited ability for historical theorization was an aspect of his behavior that can be largely abstracted; it was a disposition apart from his nationalistic or emotional impulses. For Sun Yat-sen was never interested in history. He was a man completely the revolutionary; his entire being concentrated upon changing the present. And like other Chinese revolutionaries of his day, confronted with awesome tasks and frustrated at every turn, history, China's vast arsenal of history, stood at hand as a ready source of ammunition to be used as necessary, for the only all-important struggle. Not unlike Li Ta-chao, who even as Professor of History at Peita, was less interested in discovering the actual way history developed as its psychological usage for the present.13 Sun also used his little understood history for practical revolutionary purposes. This pragmatic political concern largely set the limits of Sun's interest in history and determined his usage of it.\n\nThis is all by way of saying that nationalism alone is not to be held accountable for Sun's distortions of history. Nationalism, to be sure, is inextricably a part of Sun's make-up, but Sun is so unique a Chinese type for his period, and is so much the revolutionary that nationalism manifests itself in a rather special way through him. It is almost a managed attitude in his hands, so that his use of it is as great as its influence on his use of history.\n\nOnce again, I would not underestimate Sun's dedication to China, nor his earnest life-long efforts to resolve China's difficulties, to see his country free and strong, and constituting a progressive force in the comity of nations. Sun cannot and should not be faulted on these grounds. I am only saying that Sun helped to evolve the feeling and the concept of nationalism in China, and he did this while being a rather atypical Chinese on the whole. Sun's Western education and experience abroad, rather than his having had traditional Chinese training in depth in China, set him apart from the overwhelming majority of Chinese. Likewise, his social background distinguished him from most intellectuals of the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205579, "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": 121, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "116\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nspeaks of its use by the secret societies. He said that since the secret societies saw \"the impossibility of overthrowing the Tai-Tsings, they seized then on the idea of nationalism and began preaching it, handing it down from generation to generation. Their main object in organizing the Hung-Men societies was the overthrow of the Tai-Tsing dynasty and the restoration of the Ming dynasty. The idea of nationalism was for them auxiliary.\"16 Perhaps this is but a reflection of the obvious fact that his own nationalistic spirit along racial lines had been artificially wrought. Sun, after all, had not initially been anti-Manchu. His memorial of 1894 to Li Hung-chang, suggesting reforms, contained no such references. Yet, characteristically, Sun would bury this fact in the recounting of his own personal history, for ignoring the memorial to Li Hung-chang altogether, he said in his Memoirs that his anti-Manchu revolutionary course had begun in 1885, nine years earlier.17\n\nAnd so, Sun's use of history, when it is an effect of nationalism or is influenced by it, must necessarily reflect his unusual and uncertain appreciation of nationalism itself. Sun the iconoclastic revolutionary was not as Liang Ch'i-Ch'ao, for example, alienated from a tradition he had personally and deeply known.18 He did not, therefore, feel as intensely the lingering emotional tie to it. He was consequently less disposed to an indulgence in too heavy a dose of cultural nationalism, in trying to preserve a semblance of identity for China in the face of extensive borrowing from the modern West.\n\nBut of course, Sun did feel the need to make some prideful assertions regarding what he believed to be superior features of China's past. We see in this a certain amount of cultural nationalism, but Sun's purpose as often as not had a practical political purpose in mind. He asserted, for example, the superiority of China's ancient virtues. “Loyalty, Filial Devotion, Kindness, Love, Faithfulness, and such are in their very nature superior to foreign virtues, but in the moral quality of Peace we will further surpass the people of other lands.\"19 Such is the source of the old moral power by means of which China could absorb the barbarians of the past. Likewise in politics, Sun declared that China had “a specimen of political philosophy so systematic and so clear that nothing has been discovered or spoken by foreign statesmen to", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205581, "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": 123, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "118\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\ntorical accuracy, either for detail or theory, a reflection of Sun's indifference to the past and the problems its recovery poses. Nationalism can be the cause of historical distortion, but it might be kept in mind that it is not necessarily the only such cause when history is written by nationalist revolutionaries. As history itself, the subject can be considerably more complex,\n\nNOTES\n\n1 Sun Yat-sen. Memoirs of a Chinese Revolutionary. Taipei: China Cultural Service, 1953, p. 82.\n\n2 Ibid., p. 55.\n\n3 Ibid., pp. 38-39.\n\n4 Sun Yat-sen, The Three Principles of the People: San Min Chu I. Taipei: China Publishing Co. (no date), p. 37.\n\n5 Memoirs, p. 37.\n\n6 Ibid., p. 38.\n\n7 San Min Chu I, pp. 117-118.\n\n8 Ibid., pp. 118-119.\n\n9 Ibid., p. 122.\n\n10 Chang Chi-yun, Chinese History of Fifty Centuries, Vol. I, Taipei: Chinese Artistic Printing Office, 1962, pp. 47-48.\n\n11 San Min Chu I, p. 163.\n\n12 Ibid., p. 57.\n\n13 see Maurice Meisner, Li Ta-chao and the Origins of Chinese Marxism, Harvard University Press, 1967, p. 170.\n\n14 see Lyon Sharman, Sun Yat-sen: His Life and its Meaning, New York: John Day, 1934, pp. 286-289.\n\n15 Leonard Hsü, Sun Yat-sen: His Political and Social Ideals, Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press, 1933, p. 207.\n\n16 Memoirs, p. 148.\n\n17 Ibid., p. 143.\n\n18 see Joseph R. Levenson, Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and the Mind of Modern China, Harvard University Press, 1959.\n\n19 San Min Chu I, p. 41.\n\n20 Ibid., p. 42.\n\n21 Memoirs, p. 79.\n\n22 San Min Chu I, p. 84.\n\n23 Memoirs, pp. 79-81.\n\n24 San Min Chu I, p. 111.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205679, "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": 221, "title": "RAS-1968", "content_text": "216 \n\nTARR, A. D. - \n\nTHOMAS, L. F. \n\nTHOMAS, Dr. O. L. \n\n- \n\nTHOMAS, T. H. \n\nTHORN, Mrs. R. \n\n+ \n\nTHROWER, Prof. L. B. - TILL, The Very Rev. B.* \n\n+ \n\nTISDALL, B. \n\nTOLMAN, Norman H. \n\nTOOGOOD, C. W. - \n\nTOPLEY, Dr. Marjorie TORRIBLE, G. R.* \n\nTOWNER, J. A. \n\nTRISTRAM, M. P. W. \n\nTSEUNG, Dr. F. I. TURNER, Sir Michael* \n\nTYLER, Mrs. M. R. \n\n+ \n\n- \n\n- \n\nP \n\n- \n\nFlat 202, Balmacara, 17 Old Peak Road, H.K. \n\nc/o Colonial Secretariat, Lower Albert Road, H.K. \n\nFlat 5, \"Cliffside\", King's Park Rise, Kowloon, \n\nc/o The British Council, Gloucester Building, H.K. \n\n14D, Headland Road, Hong Kong. \n\n6-B, Alberose, 134 Pokfulum Road, H.K. c/o Morley College, 61 Westminster Bridge Road, London S.E.1., England, \n\n1 Garden Terrace, G/F, H.K. \n\nCultural Office, U.S. Consulate General, 26 Garden Road, H.K. \n\nc/o Oxford University Press, 5th floor, News Building, 633 King's Road, H.K. 19, Peak Mansions, The Peak, H.K. \n\nc/o The Hong Kong Club, H.K. \n\n57 Buxey Lodge, 37 Conduit Road, H.K. \n\nRating & Valuation Dept., Murray House, Garden Road, H.K. \n\nChina Building, 4th floor, H.K. \n\n\"Whispers\", Riversdale, Bourne End, Bucks, England. \n\n402 Tregunter Mansions, Old Peak Road, H.K. \n\nUHALLEY, Dr. Stephen, Jr. Department of Oriental Studies, University \n\nVETCH, H. \n\nVETCH, Mrs. H. \n\n+ \n\nVIO, Dr. E. G. VISICK, Mrs. M. WALDEN, J. C. C. \n\n+ \n\nWARD, Miss J. E. A.* \n\nWARRINGTON-STRONG, Cmdr. F. \n\nWATSON, Hon. K. A. WATERS, D. D. WEBB-JOHNSON, S. A. WEI, Dr. Tat \n\nof Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, U.S.A. Hong Kong Univ. Press, The University, H.K. \n\nAs above, \n\n315, H.K. & Shanghai Bank Building, H.K. Dept. of English, The University, H.K. c/o Urban Services Dept., Central Govt. Offices, (West Wing), H.K. \n\nc/o National Provincial Bank Ltd., Bideford, N. Devon, England. \n\nc/o Registry of Persons Office, Causeway Bay Magistracy, H.K. \n\nc/o Lammert Bros., Pedder Building, H.K. Technical College, Hung Hom, Kowloon. 46 King's Park Flats, Kowloon, \n\n3. Fontana Gardens, 5th Floor, Causeway Hill, H.K. \n\n*Life Member \n\nPlease notify the Hon. Secretary of any inaccuracy", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205925, "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": 5, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "CONTENTS\n\nEDITORIAL\n\nPRESIDENT'S REPORT FOR 1969\n\nHON. TREASURER'S REPORT FOR 1969\n\nTHE LIBRARY 1969-70\n\nARTICLES CONTRIBUTED :\n\n1 - More on the Yung-Lo Ta-Tien-L. CARRINGTON GOODRICH\n\n11 - Lord Elgin and the Taipings-STEPHEN UHALLEY, Jr.\n\n17 - Hong Kong Cadets, 1862-1941-H. J. LETHBRIDGE\n\n24 - Aspects of Hong Kong Marine Fauna-LAMARR B. TROTT\n\n36 - A Hong Kong Butterfly-COLONEL V. R. BURKHARDT\n\n57 - Chinatown in Hong Kong: The Beginnings of Taipingshan-DAFYDD EMRYS EVANS\n\n63 - Chinese Emigration and the Deck Passenger Trade-A. D. BLUE\n\n69 - Removing Some Barriers to Comprehension: A New Look at Cantonese Expletives-K. M. A. BARNETT\n\n79 - A British Maritime Chart of 1780 Showing Hong Kong—HENRY D. TALBOT\n\n94 - ARTICLE REPRINTED: Hong Kong before the British-S. F. BALFOUR\n\n128 - NOTES AND QUERIES: The J.O.P. Bland Papers-J. L. CRANMER-BYNG\n\n180 - Visit to Old Shau Kei Wan-24th May, 1969-JAMES HAYES\n\n183 - Hemp-JAMES HAYES\n\n188 - Coach Tour of Eastern Hong Kong Island—18th October, 1969-JAMES HAYES\n\n190 - The San On Map of Mgr. Volontieri―JAMES HAYES\n\n193 - A Casualty of the Cultural Revolution-JAMES HAYES\n\n196 - Pile Houses at Tai O, Lantau Island, Hong Kong-10th January, 1937-W. SCHOFIELD\n\n201 - BOOK REVIEWS\n\n216 - LIST OF MEMBERS", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205949, "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": 29, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "LORD ELGIN AND THE TAIPINGS\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, Jr.*\n\nWhen Lord Elgin, Great Britain's Plenipotentiary to China and the negotiator of the abortive Treaty of Tientsin in 1858 and of the Peking Convention in 1860, in a fit of anger and frustration at the Manchu government raised the possibility of treating with the Taiping revolutionaries instead, his colleagues quickly dissuaded him from such a drastic course. But the question, having been raised, remained to what extent was Lord Elgin's threat the revelation of an alternative policy that the British might have been considering should the recalcitrant Manchus prove in the end to be hopelessly intractable? In other words, had the British been giving secret thought to negotiating a separate or alternative treaty with the Taipings at Nanking?\n\nAside from Lord Elgin's passing remark in this regard there certainly was little in the record of relations between the British and the Taipings to suggest that any such arrangement had been given serious consideration. The early diplomatic visits to Nanking in 1853 and 1854 were never followed-up by any of the Western powers.2 Despite the features of the Taiping regime that did not set well with the foreigners it had manifested a friendly attitude toward them and did continue to exist as a de facto alternative government with which they might have dealt had they been so disposed. But they were not. Instead the powers opted to deal exclusively with the Manchus, even though this required the waging of further hostilities in order to accomplish their diplomatic objectives.\n\nStill, there does remain Lord Elgin's annoyed comment. Did it possibly signify a line of action that had been hidden? Of course, this was unlikely. Yet the best way to satisfy our curiosity on this question is to examine the record of Lord Elgin's own visit through Taiping territory. Did the Minister Plenipotentiary,\n\n*The author, a former editor of this Journal, currently Associate Professor of History at Duke University, is indebted to the Research Associates Program of the Graduate School of International Studies and the Social Science Foundation of the University of Denver for a grant which facilitated the preparation of this article. In modified form the article forms part of a chapter of the author's forthcoming book Revolutionary Taiping China and the West.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205951, "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": 31, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "26\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nBy this time, reads Elgin's record, \"the other vessels of the squadron were within range of the nearest forts, which opened upon them with all the vigor with which they were capable.” The English ships then \"steamed slowly by returning with considerable effect the fire directed against them.”6\n\nOf course, this account may explain more than was intended by Elgin. If the other vessels were so quickly in position to be able to return fire, then the Taiping response to this approach by the British vessels is understandable, for they apparently thought they were being attacked in force. The formation must have appeared provocative to the Taipings. The white flag, of course, had no significance for them, except as the ensign of one of the Manchu banners. Not mentioned in the Elgin account is the fact that a large Imperialist fleet lay in the immediate vicinity.7 In fact, the river at this particular place was completely in the hands of the Imperialist fleet, so that the Taipings were prepared for trouble only from that direction. Since no effort had been made by the British to communicate with the Taipings earlier, and since it had been so long (four and a half years) since British naval vessels had paid a call at Nanking, the confusion among Taiping gunners was understandable. In order to emphasize the lesson, however, the British squadron anchored for the night a short distance away, and before proceeding on their upriver course the following morning, they redescended the stream to Nanking and again bombarded the forts for about an hour and a half. The Taipings “hardly ventured a reply,” or as one of the participating Englishmen commented, \"they seemed determined not to show us any sport.\" Given this lack of response from the Taipings, Captain Barker, the chief naval officer, appears to have exceeded his authority. Elgin had given him a carte blanche on the course to be pursued, which was to \"knock the forts about the ears of the Taepings,\" but this was to be contingent upon their showing \"any more stomach for fighting.\" It seems that another consideration intervened. The British found an opportunity for, as the record reads: \"leaving our mark, and exercising our men at the best of targets for it so happened that quarterly gunnery-returns would be soon required\" so that \"we gave our men a short practice at one or two of the forts.\" Incidentally, this report testified to the advantage taken of the British assault by the Imperialists who took the occasion to press an offensive of their own.10", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205953, "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": 33, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "28\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nhad not had sufficient time to inform Anking of his impending approach.18 Nevertheless, Elgin made no effort himself to notify the uninformed Taiping garrison. Instead, as soon as the Taipings opened fire at the head-on approach of the strange vessels it was returned with a vengeance. After the Taiping batteries had been quieted, the ships' cannons fired into the city itself. This was done even though the English observed the country people running into it for protection from the attacking Imperialists.19 The English did not stop at Anking, but continued upstream. On the way back from Hankow, when again approaching Anking Elgin took precautions, and \"thought it necessary to take a pretty high tone with the rebel authorities...\"20 He sent Wade ashore with a message of warning, reflecting that \"to menace with capture by two small gun-boats a great city, walled and garrisoned, might have been in bad taste elsewhere, but in China it was the thing to do.”21 On shore, Wade found out that the Taipings had since been informed of what had happened at Nanking and that they were highly apologetic for making the same mistake at Anking. Wade refused a present of oxen and other provisions. An invitation to visit the Taiping commander at Anking was similarly rejected. Wade departed with a final verbal warning indicating \"how simple a matter it would be for us to sweep them away utterly, were we provoked to do it.”22\n\nOn this return trip, Elgin decided to stop by at Nanking once again, this time to acknowledge receipt of a formal written apology which had been sent from the Taipings soon after the first visit, but which, because of the speed of the English ascent and the presence of the Imperialist fleet on the river, had failed to reach Elgin. The apology awaited, therefore, the return of the English and was delivered to them when they again passed by Wu-hu.23\n\nAs one of the few visits by Western officials to Nanking, this event deserves more attention than has been accorded by historians. The handling of the story of this visit is of interest in itself, for it sheds some light on how easily misunderstanding of the Taipings grew, as a result of both conscious prejudice and improper reporting. One contemporary writer, Commander Lindsay Brine, for example, who has a general reputation among historians for his relative objectivity in writing on the Taipings, gives three pages to the visit,24 His account gives details of the conversation", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205955, "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": 35, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "30 \n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR. \n\nThe English neglect is of special interest and not without significance, for although the document was written by Hung Hsiu-ch'uan, and was translated by Wade, yet it did not occasion even a minimal formal acknowledgment of receipt, either from Elgin, to whom it was addressed, or verbally from Wade during his visit in Nanking. \n\nThis document reveals significant information which should not have been so lightly dismissed by the English diplomats. Most importantly it was addressed to Elgin in polite Chinese fashion (though Ch'ing or traditional officialdom could never have been so polite) as 'Imperial Commissioner of a Superior Nation' shang-kuo ch’in-ch'ai ta-ch'en,30 Thus it signified a marked tendency of the Taipings in this period to emphasize the equality of other nations with Taiping China. The tone of writing is throughout conciliatory, and refers to foreigners as brethren in distinctly friendly terms. Taiping ministers, in it, were enjoined to entertain foreigners with ceremony. And while the adjective \"younger\" was also used with the term \"brethren\" this need not have implied inequality in an international sense. This is because Hung was giving in this document a religious lecture to foreigners as individuals. His special role as religious leader permitted him, by his reckoning, to use this mode of address in speaking to others. There were no pretensions to universal supremacy, nor was there any mention of foreigners bringing tribute. The document really marked a new and significant stage in Taiping foreign relations. However, as the English neglected even a courteous acknowledgment of the document, so they never bothered distinguishing important and necessary distinctions in it. Instead, subsequent writers have rested content with prejudicial interpretations of its \"fanatical\" religious content. Wade could not forebear remarking upon its \"very small literary pretension and indifferent handwriting.\"31 \n\nAt every point of personal contact between the English and Taipings on this trip, the latter never failed to exhibit a spirit of cooperative accommodation and outright friendliness to the English. No place in the record is there a word to contradict this, even from the obviously prejudiced Wade himself. And Elgin was sensitive to such things. Earlier he had written that he always made a point to ask persons who had penetrated the", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205957, "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": 37, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "32\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nin answering a question it is always their chief endeavour to say what they suppose their questioner will be best pleased to hear. If therefore the knowledge of a fact is to be arrived at, it is, above all things, necessary that the inquiry bear a tint so neutral that the person to whom it is addressed shall find it impossible to reflect its colour in his reply. He will then sometimes, in his confusion, blunder into a truthful answer, but he does so generally with a bashful air, indicative of the painful consciousness that he has been reluctantly violating the rules of good breeding. A search after accurate statistics, under such conditions, is not unattended with difficulty,38\n\nElgin, however, never seemed to think equally critically of the information brought for his consideration about the Taipings. While it is of utmost importance what opinions such high-ranking English decision-makers were forming of the Taipings, it need not be supposed that the foreign community in general at this time was similarly influenced. We have the account of a relatively high ranking English naval officer which stated quite explicitly: \"When Lord Elgin returned from his expedition up the Yang-tze-kiang in 1858, his high-handed policy toward them at Nankin, Ngan-king, and elsewhere, was much disapproved of by a large section of the community, and it was thought that he had hardly done justice to them.\"39\n\nOne might legitimately raise the question again as to the purpose of the mission. We have already given the ostensible reason: to investigate suitable trading ports and trade conditions along the river. But this seems implausible. With a full-scale war taking place along the greater part of the lower Yangtze Valley, it was unlikely that such an investigation would prove of much value. The mission was premature in another respect as well, for it took place before the treaty was ratified, an observation that is especially to the point since the Ch'ing government did not, in fact, ratify the treaty. Actually, Elgin had two underlying purposes. First, he believed that the trip would confirm that the Emperor had in principle conceded the opening of the river, thus inducing the Chinese to take steps to put the treaty into effect. Second, Elgin reportedly believed that the trip would aid the Imperial cause against the Taipings since the \"opening", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205958, "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": 38, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "LORD ELGIN AND THE TAIPINGS\n\n33\n\nof the river ports is contingent on the suppression of the rebellion.\"40\n\nThus the record of Elgin's own visit through Taiping territory adequately lays to rest any notion that he might have been harboring an alternative policy of dealing with the Taipings. Without question, his angry remark was merely rhetorical, entirely lacking substance. He was frustrated with Manchu behavior, both in his own repeated experiences with them, and with their poor handling of the Taiping resurgence of 1860.41 Yet Elgin had done nothing to cultivate the political alternative that Taiping China posed. Nor would he ever do so.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 Elgin referred to a \"Chinese\" government as an alternative to the Manchus. This presumably meant the Taipings who were the only viable such alternative readily at hand. See, for example, Immanuel C. Y. Hsü, China's Entrance into the Family of Nations: The Diplomatic Phase 1858-1880, Cambridge; Harvard University Press, 1960, p. 104.\n\n2 See Stephen Uhalley, Jr., \"A New Look at the Diplomatic Missions of 1853-54 to Taiping-held Nanking,\" The Chung Chi Journal, Volume 6 (May 1967), 171-190. For the best general English-language history of the Taiping movement as a whole, see Franz Michael, The Taiping Rebellion: History and Documents, Vol. I, Seattle and London; University of Washington Press, 1966. Unfortunately the fine work of Jen Yu-wen, the foremost Chinese authority on the Taipings, is for the most part unavailable in English translation; although a concise English edition of his narrative history of the Taipings is in preparation,\n\n3 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, Shanghai, January 5, 1859, \"Papers Respecting Lord Elgin's Special Mission to China and Japan, 1857-1859,\" 1859, Parliamentary Papers or Blue Book (BB), IX, 444.\n\n4 Ibid.\n\n5 Laurence Oliphant, Narrative of the Earl of Elgin's Mission to China and Japan, London, 1860, Vol. II, 310.\n\n6 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, p. 444.\n\n7 Oliphant, II, 361-362.\n\n8 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, p. 444.\n\n9 Oliphant, II, 314.\n\n10 \"A Cruise up the Yangtze in 1858-59,\" Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine (May 1860), 704-705.\n\n11 It was of an event during this exchange that Oliphant later wrote: \"A large crowd had collected outside the gate, chiefly composed of rebel soldiers watching the proceedings. We sent them a ten-inch shell just to give them some idea of our armament.\" Ibid., p. 318.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205959, "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": 39, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "34 \n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR., \n\n12 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 231, Inclosure No. 1, Shanghai, January 6, 1859, BB, IX, 454. \n\n13 Ibid., Inclosure No. 2, p. 455. \n\n14 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, p. 445. \n\n15 Ibid., Inclosure 1, p. 447. \n\n** \n\n16 Wade, in adjoining sentences, says that \"The prices put upon the articles we named were not exorbitant and, \"This part of our errand done we took our leave, glad to escape from the pressure of this most disorderly mob, and the offensive atmosphere they created.\" Ibid., p. 448. \n\n17 Oliphant, II, 361. \n\n18 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, p. 445, \n\n19 Oliphant, II, 362-364. \n\n20 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, p. 446. \n\n21 Ibid. \n\n22 Ibid., Inclosure No. 2, pp. 448-449. \n\n23 Ibid., Inclosure No. 4, p. 450. \n\n24 Lindsay Brine, The Taeping Rebellion in China, London, 1862, pp. 226-228. Despite his reputation for relatively dispassionate reporting Brine makes similar omissions in discussing other episodes as well. In discussing the visit at Wu Hu he uses only passages from Oliphant that reflected poorly on the Taipings without mentioning that the Taipings graciously complied with the request for supplies - pp. 223-226. Regarding the bombardment of Anking, Brine does not mention that the Imperialists were attacking the city simultaneously -- pp. 220-221. \n\n25 Only the surname of the Taiping leader is given in Wade's account, which is the basis of the other versions of this visit, That it was Li Ch'un-fa is a surmise concurred in by Jen Yu-wen in personal conversation with the writer. As a lieutenant of Li Hsiu-ch'eng it is likely that Li Ch'un-fa was well-disposed toward foreigners, as indeed, he seems to have been depicted in Wade's own account. \n\n26 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 228, Inclosure No. 5, pp. 450-452, \n\n27 Ibid., p. 451. \n\n28 Elgin to Malmesbury, No. 232, Inclosure of Elgin to Seymour, Shanghai, January 6, 1859, BB, IX, 455. \n\n29 This poem was not included in the Blue Book collection of documents, but was subsequently translated and printed in Oliphant, II, 334-341, and in Brine, pp. 229-236. It will soon be made available once again among Franz Michael's documents of the Taipings to be published in the near future. The Chinese text, which should be consulted, for the English translation is inconsistent, is found in Jen Yu-wen, T'ai-p'ing Tien kuo tien-chih t'ung-kao (TPTKTCTK), Vol. II, 881-883. \n\n30 We learn of the use of this specific form of address from Chester Cheng's recording of the cover letter in his book on Taiping documentary materials in the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, Cheng does not mention the important poem itself - Chester Cheng, Chinese Sources for the Taiping Rebellion 1850-1864, Hong Kong, 1963, p. 150. It is possible that the word shang was used as an honorific in place of the more usual kuei, a word that may have been proscribed by the Taipings because of its phonetic similarity to kuei meaning devil.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206188, "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": 5, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "CONTENTS\n\nPage\n\n1\n\n1\n\n1\n\n1\n\nPRESIDENT'S REPORT FOR 1970\n\nHON. TREASURER'S REPORT FOR 1970\n\nTHE LIBRARY 1970-71\n\n9\n\n13\n\nARTICLES CONTRIBUTED:\n\nThe Taipings at Ningpo: The Significance of a Forgotten Event STEPHEN UHALLEY, JNR.\n\n17\n\n33\n\nThe Debate on National Salvation: Ho Kai Versus Tseng Chi-tse-CHIU LING-YEONG\n\n52\n\nLetters from China 1835-36-HON. EDITOR\n\nChinese Voluntary Associations in Southeast Asian Cities and the Kaifongs in Hong Kong-ALINE K. WONG\n\n62\n\nThe Emergence of a Chinese Elite in Hong Kong-CARL T. Smith\n\nThe District Watch Committee: \"The Chinese Executive Council of Hong Kong'-H. J. LETHBRIDGE\n\nA Brief Report on Sung-Type Pottery Finds in Hong Kong-J. C. Y. WATT\n\nA Short History of Military Volunteers in Hong Kong-JAMES HAYES\n\n74\n\n116\n\n142\n\n151\n\nArticles Reprinted:\n\nThe Colony of Hong Kong-Rev. James LEGGE\n\n172\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nVisit to the Tung Lin Kok Yuen, and other places on Hong Kong Island\n\n194\n\nRope-making and Dyeing/Calendering on Ap Lei Chau, Hong Kong\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\n198\n\nCharcoal Burning in Hong Kong\n\n199\n\nWhat Inspired Sir John Bowring's Hymn?-J. M. BRAGA\n\n203\n\nCeremonies of Propitiation Carried Out in connection with Road Works in the New Territories in 1960\n\nG. C. W. GROUT & HON. Editor\n\n204\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nList of MEMBERS\n\n210\n\n226", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206206, "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": 23, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE TAIPINGS AT NINGPO:\n\nTHE SIGNIFICANCE OF A FORGOTTEN EVENT\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.*\n\nThe occupation of the important treaty-port city of Ningpo in Chekiang province by Taiping revolutionaries from December 1861 to May 1862 constitutes a fascinating and significant page of history. That it has been by and large overlooked in Western historical memory of the Taiping period by no means detracts from this assertion. Rather, such neglect is merely additional testimony to a faulty historiographical tradition. For a curiosity about the event is natural, and the significance of the occupation is self-evident. There are three main reasons for this. First of all, the occupation enabled the largely land-locked Taipings to realize at last their ambition of gaining access to the sea, an especially urgent matter after they had been denied this objective by the British and French at Shanghai. Secondly, the occasion gave the revolutionaries an opportunity to demonstrate in practice what they had long proclaimed verbally, that foreigners had no reason to fear Taiping political authority in an area where foreign lives and interests were exposed. Finally, despite obvious indications of Taiping success on both of these points the entire experience seems only to have helped galvanize foreign opposition to the Taiping movement. This too would seem to call for a closer look at the event.\n\nThe Taipings had been in possession of much of the Chekiang hinterland for many months. When they finally decided to take Ningpo in late 1861, they did so with surprising swiftness, and painlessly. To the disappointment of the British, who had helped in making plans for the defense of the city against the Taipings, there was in fact no military opposition. British Admiral James\n\n*The author, a former editor of and contributor to this journal, is a Senior Specialist at the East-West Center and Visiting Associate Professor of History in the Asian Studies Program at the University of Hawaii for 1970-71. This article is based upon a paper delivered at the 28th International Congress of Orientalists in Canberra, Australia on January 9, 1971 and on material from a forthcoming book, Revolutionary Taiping China and the West. The author acknowledges with gratitude the suggestions made by Professor Jen Yu-wen for improving the original paper.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206207, "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": 24, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "18\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nHope exclaimed that: \"Everything had been done to assist the Imperialists (i.e. the Ch'ing forces) in the defense of the town, except the use of force, in their favor.... His dismay led him to observe \"how utterly useless such measures prove, in consequence of the cowardice and imbecility of the Mandarins.\" The only real obstacle in the path of the Taiping approach was of a minor diplomatic character. Upon learning of the Taiping move toward Ningpo, representatives of the three countries of Great Britain, France and the United States decided to visit the two Taiping commanders, each of whom was approaching the city from a different direction. The representatives proclaimed their neutrality and announced their expectation that foreigners would not be injured or annoyed.2 They also tried to dissuade the commanders from taking the city. But the Taipings, who had already been similarly dissuaded months earlier, were now much more determined. While they had also several months earlier undertaken not to approach within 30 miles of Shanghai for the duration of the year, the agreement did not apply to Ningpo. The most the foreign representatives could get for their effort was an agreement that the Taipings would delay their attack, which had been scheduled for the following day, for a period of one week. The motive for the requested delay is not entirely clear, but it could have been for the purpose of buying sufficient time for naval support to arrive at the city. As things turned out, however, a British naval vessel failed to arrive until the afternoon of the day on which the Taipings finally moved into the city. The foreigners had simply underestimated the Ch'ing troops' timidity. But if the Taipings could not be kept out of Ningpo, the foreigners did receive adequate assurances that their persons and property would be respected and protected. Taiping General Huang Ch'eng-chung was explicit on this point, indicating that should any of his troops disobey his orders to this effect, the offender could be arrested by the foreigners and on being handed over the culprit would summarily be decapitated. Taiping General Fan Yu-tseng was equally accommodating. He said that he would issue strict orders forbidding his men from injuring foreign persons and property, and he furthermore assured the Western representatives that trade would be allowed to continue as usual, \"with the additional advantage of being conducted on a fairer footing.\"3", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206209, "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": 26, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "20\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\ngenerals were invited to dinner. And horror was expressed at instances of foreign mistreatment of the Taipings. As late as May 1862, for example, The China Mail carried an article expressing wonder how the Taiping chief at Ningpo managed to keep such good control over his men, especially when they had been abused by foreigners. The account described, among other examples, how one foreigner had cut off the finger of a Taiping in order to rob the unfortunate man of his ring.\n\nMuch of the favorable attitude on the part of foreigners may be attributed to the Taiping policy on trade. Soon after taking the city, the new administration began making arrangements conducive to trade. They established a customhouse and appropriate regulations at Ningpo, in order to organize and encourage orderly commercial intercourse. It is said that the Taipings' tariff rivaled in minuteness that of the old English customs tariffs.10 Reflecting the success of these efforts, the China Overland Trade Report of February 28, 1862, reported:\n\nSince the capture of Ningpo the Taipings have conducted themselves there in a very exemplary manner; so much so as to gain the confidence of the people, who are returning in numbers. The trade of the port is reviving, and there seems a fair probability of its entirely recovering itself.11 There is other strong evidence to corroborate this view on the Taiping support of trade at Ningpo. For example, there is the diary of a European agent of the firm of W. and G. M. Hart of Ningpo, which records a silk-purchasing trip he made in areas under Taiping control.12 The company made the diary public apparently as a protest against the intervention policy.\n\nThe diary discloses that the agent left Ningpo on March 18, which was then under Taiping authority. He wandered about the province, with cash on his person, until April 14, a total of twenty-seven days. On the 16th he arrived back at Ningpo with his silk. On the 19th he again left Ningpo with more money to purchase additional silk. On the 23rd he reported: \"Purchased a large quantity of silk, and more expected. The country about here looks most beautiful, and the crops in a very flourishing condition. There are a few rebels stationed here; they have visited me and are very friendly, offering us assistance if we require.\" On May 15 the agent learned that the Taipings had been driven out of Ningpo. His entry on this date is significant: \"Determined on going to", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206211, "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": 28, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "22\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nIn Ningpo itself, the preparations were underway. British officials persuaded all missionaries of British nationality to withdraw from the city, a step which Consul Harvey indicated would \"simplify considerably our future relations with the Taipings at Ningpo.\"14 British naval Captain Corbett concurred, reasoning that in the event of any difficulty with the Taipings the missionaries would otherwise \"prove a source of great embarrassment to us.\"15 It is a matter of record that many of the missionaries who did comply and therefore lived apart from the Taipings during the duration of their occupation did come to share the negative or hostile attitude toward the insurgents.16\n\nAs the British intervention policy developed, an anti-Taiping propaganda campaign mounted. One of the most interesting and telling samples of this effort was the reporting of Consul Harvey. His dispatch of March 20, 1862, is perhaps the best example.17 Completely in contradiction to the report of the already noted China Overland Trade Report of less than a month earlier, Harvey declared that although three months had elapsed since the Taiping takeover they had still to take a single step in the direction of good government. Curiously, he repeatedly stressed his lack of bias and dispassionate judgment. He even conceded that “personally I have received every mark of courtesy and proper regard from the Tae-ping Chiefs; and further, I have found in official dealings with them a rough and blunt sort of honesty quite unexpected and surprising, after years of public intercourse with the Imperial mandarins.” But despite such lack of bias, repeatedly emphasized, and such acknowledgment of Taiping honesty and courtesy, Harvey went on to say: \"Nevertheless, the Taepings with their frank demeanour and bluff energy have a fume of blood and a look of carnage about them, from which I, for one, recoil with horror.\" Harvey noted that the occupation of the Taipings, termed an \"experiment\", had produced \"exactly what was expected - ruin, desolation, and the annihilation of every vital principle in all that surrounds the presence, or lies under the bane, of the Taepings.\" Still underlining, undoubtedly, his lack of bias, Harvey noted: \"I now, therefore, take the liberty of declaring, once for all (and for ten years I have fairly adhered to and been consistent in this opinion), that the Taeping rebellion is the greatest delusion, as a political or popular movement, and the Taeping doctrines the most gigantic blasphemous imposition...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206213, "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": 30, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "24 \n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR. \n\nas soon as they were caught.20 A few days later, Captain Dew arrived in Ningpo and apparently impressed with General Huang's reply wrote of his satisfaction, and in his momentary spirit of good feeling toward the Taipings perhaps said too much. For example, he stated that \"Till the late acts, they (the British) had every reason to be satisfied with your (the Taipings) conduct, and you may rest assured that no breach of friendly relations shall emanate from our side.\" And since the Taiping response had been \"so satisfactory\" and tended so much \"to impress on us your wish to maintain friendly relations with the English and French,\" Captain Dew indicated that he would not insist on the demolition of the battery whence came the musket fire, but only that the guns be removed from the position. Incidentally, on the same day in a separate letter to Admiral Hope, Captain Dew noted that a \"very active trade is being carried on with the rebels in rice and fire-arms,\"22 which comment would in itself seem to be additional evidence against the contrary propaganda line which held that the Taipings were anathema to commerce.\n\nOn the very next day, April 28, 1862, there came a surprising turn of events. Captain Dew suddenly reversed himself. He now demanded of the Taipings \"an ample apology,\" insisted that the offending battery \"be immediately pulled down,\" and that all guns facing the foreign settlement be removed. Twenty-four hours were given for compliance, after which he and the French naval commander would request permission from their respective admirals to destroy the battery. Dew threatened that should the Taipings fire but one shot in return it would be considered an act of hostility, leading to measures that would probably follow with the capture of the city of Ningpo.23 \n\nConsidering the startling changed tone and the demands of this letter, it would appear that it was designed to antagonize and provoke the Taipings. One might have expected a defiant reply. Instead, on April 29, Generals Huang and Fan returned a very long letter characterized by an unusual degree of forbearance. It firmly maintained that the demands could not be complied with; otherwise the security of their position would be jeopardized. The letter pointed out all that had been done to keep relations proper and to protect trade. Without rancour it mentioned foreign transgressions against the Taipings. In the event that the foreigners should attack the Taiping positions, the generals made it clear\n\nPage 30\n\nPage 31", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206215, "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": 32, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "26\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\nabout in the preceding three days, beginning with a request apparently from the Ch'ing tao-t'ai of Ningpo for British and French naval support for his impending attack on the city. Consul Harvey noted that this was \"an extraordinary coincidence,\" and one that \"was far too good an opportunity to be thrown aside and lost.\" The attack was to consist primarily of the vessels of a famous pirate of the region by the name of Apak who had gone over to the Manchus. Some effort was made to conceal the joint nature of the attack at the outset, for Captain Dew wrote for the record that he told his Ch'ing collaborators that since the rebels had refused his demands he had no objection to their fleet passing up river, \"but that they were not to open fire till well clear of our men of war.\"28 The fiction of this position was made clear by subsequent events, and by other evidence. The ultimatum of May 8, stated that had the demands been agreed to, the English and French should have felt bound in honour to prevent an attack on the Taipings from the settlement side by approaching Ch'ing forces \"which in countless numbers and heavily armed ships advance to attack you.\" The ultimatum proclaimed neutrality unless fire came from the battery or walls opposite the settlement on the advancing Ch'ing forces \"(thereby endangering the lives of our men and people in the foreign settlement).\"29\n\nIt is of interest to note how this exchange of correspondence was characterized by Consul Harvey and Captain Dew. Harvey said that \"... the whole tenour of their letters was as bad and sarcastic as it was defiant,” and he assured his respondent “that nothing could have been more friendly, reasonable, and patient than the tone of our letters, as well as of all our demands on the Taipings.\"30 Dew was a bit more candid, for as he reported later: \"I now commenced a lengthy correspondence with the Taiping chiefs, which was met on their side by the most subtle reasoning and arguments soon convincing me that but one argument, viz: that of cannon balls would avail with them....\" The two men substantiated their interpretation of events and attitude in the correspondence with two memoranda written by an interpreter. The first, based upon \"information supplied by certain respectable natives,\" claimed that General Fan had been sent from Nanking “to turn the foreigners out of Ningpo.\"32 The second memorandum purported to be extracts of a speech made by General Huang\n\n31", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "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": 206219, "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": 36, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "30\n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.\n\ncounter.\"'48 But, of course, this act cannot be laid exclusively to Captain Dew. Another contemporary source charged perhaps more penetratingly that the Taiping possession of Ningpo was \"peculiarly adapted\" to thwart British Minister Frederick Bruce's \"schemes for aiding and abetting\" the Ch'ing side in China's civil war. The source noted that Taiping possession of the seaport would enable them to deprive Shanghai of the greater proportion of the customs duties, which not only might now be diverted into their own exchequer, but would frustrate the object of Mr. Horatio Lay's mission to London where he was seeking to put together an Anglo-Chinese flotilla to be used against the Taipings, and \"destroy the main stay of the Imperial cause.\" The Taipings would also be able to obtain needed war munitions. Finally, they would have the opportunity to dispel \"the illusion of their being inimical to foreign trade.\" This source concluded that from \"such cogent reasons\" Admiral Hope came to agree with the Minister's views, and \"resolved on the recapture of the place by fair means or foul.\"49\n\nSmall wonder that the story of the Taiping occupation of Ningpo has received little subsequent attention in Western historical accounts of the Taiping period. When it has, it has too often been sadly distorted. It is not a happy episode to think about. But however that may be, it is an historical experience that is well worth reflection upon. It was a passing moment of history which, in a telescoped span of time, rather accurately reflected a larger contemporary story. It demonstrated that Chinese revolutionaries of the early 1860s had the capacity to achieve major objectives against a weak established government, including the conquest of much of the territory of the richest provinces in the lower Yangtze River basin and the seizure of a principal seaport. It also demonstrated that the Taipings did treat foreigners respectably well and promoted trade, which was, after all, the matter of greatest importance to foreigners. It also proved that neither the apparent military nor the civil capabilities of the revolutionaries made much difference to those key foreign officials who were determined to assist the weak established government. Finally, it showed that the intervention of foreign powers made a great deal of difference in the ultimate outcome of the civil war in China. At the most, the experience at Ningpo from December 1861 to May 1862 suggests the story in microcosm", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206221, "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": 38, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "ADV \n\n: \n\n32 \n\nSTEPHEN UHALLEY, JR. \n\n23 Inclosure 7 in No. 32, Ibid., p. 46. \n\n24 Inclosure 8 in No. 32, Ibid., pp. 46-47. \n\n25 Inclosure 12 in No. 32, Ibid., p. 49. \n\n26 Inclosure 13 in No. 32, Ibid. \n\n27 Harvey to Hammond, No. 27, Ningpo, May 16, 1862, Inclosure 2, Ibid., p. 38. \n\n28 Dew to Hope, Ningpo, May 7, 1862, No. 32, Inclosure 15, Ibid., p. 50. \n\n29 Inclosure 16 in No. 32, Ibid., p. 51. \n\n30 Harvey to Hammond, No. 27, Ningpo, May 16, 1862, Inclosure 1, Harvey to Bruce, Ningpo, May 9, 1862, Ibid., p. 36. \n\n31 Dew, \"Proceedings of Encounter at Ningpo detailing the events which led to the capture of that city on May 10th, 1862,” Gordon Papers, Vol. VII, British Museum 52392, p. 22. Intriguingly, there is in this handwritten account a following sentence which says that Hope replied to Dew asking the latter to keep the peace until he could get there with sufficient force. This sentence was crossed out in the manuscript. \n\n32 Inclosure 17 in No. 32, \"Further Papers relating to...\" p. 51. \n\n33 Inclosure 19 in No. 32, Ibid., p. 52. \n\n34 Hsiang Ta, et al, eds., T'ai-ping Tien-kuo, Chinese Modern History Collection, Shanghai, 1952, Vol. 6, p. 602. \n\n35 Inclosure 1 in No. 27, \"Further Papers relating to....,” pp. 36-37. \n\n36 T'ai-ping T'ien-Kuo, Vol. 6, p. 604. \n\n37 Admiralty to Hammond, July 14, 1862, Inclosure 2, Dew to Hope, Ningpo, May 10, 1862, Ibid., p. 30. \n\n38 Green to Jardine Matheson & Co. (Hong Kong), Ningpo, May 15, 1862, No. 592, Local Correspondence Section, Ningpo (1858-62), B2/132, Jardine Matheson Archives, Cambridge University Library, \n\n39 Cited in A. F. Lindley, Ti-Ping Tien-Kwoh: The History of the Ti-Ping Revolution, London, 1866, II, 536. \n\n40 Jen Yu-wen, T'ai-p'ing T'ien-Kuo tien-chih t'ung-kao, II, Hong Kong, 1957, p. 1059. \n\n41 Captain D. Patridge to Jardine Matheson & Co. (Hong Kong) via Shanghai, Ningpo, July 28, 1860, Local Correspondence Section, Ningpo (1858-62) B2/132, JMA, \n\n42 Green to Jardine Matheson & Co. (Hong Kong), Ningpo, August 1, 1862, No. 602, Ibid. \n\n43 Green to Jardine Matheson & Co. (Hong Kong), Ningpo, November 5, 1862, No. 613, Ibid. \n\n44 Green to Jardine Matheson & Co. (Hong Kong), Ningpo, January 20, 1863, No. 622, Ibid. \n\n45 Inclosure 3, Harvey to Bruce, Ningpo, May 16, 1862, in No. 27, p. 39. \n\n46 Russell to Bruce, No. 28, July 22, 1862, \"Further Papers relating to...\" \n\n47 Alexander Mitchie, The Englishman in China, I, Edinburgh & London, 1900, p. 380. \n\n48 Cited in Lindley, II, 538 \n\n49 Ibid., 537.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207200, "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": 271, "title": "RAS-1974", "content_text": "LIST OF MEMBERS\n\nORDINARY OVERSEAS MEMBERS:\n\nJOHNSON, Mr. & Mrs. Paul K. +\n\nJOHNSTON, James J.\n\nJUNKER, Mrs. Sibylle\n\nKRAMERS, Dr. R. P. -\n\nKIDD, S. T.\n\nLEAKE, Mrs. Sima B.\n\nLECKIE, J. B. H. - + -\n\nLYNCH, Rev. P. Francis, M.M.\n\nMACK, A. M.\n\nMcCOY, J. -\n\nORR, Iain C.\n\nPENNELL, W. V. -\n\nRAINBIRD, S. W. O.B.E.\n\nRASSIM, Mrs. E.\n\nSCOTT, J. M. P +\n\nSMITH, Dr. Ralph B. -\n\nSMITHIES, Michael\n\nSOO, Dr. Hoy Mun\n\nSTOKES, John -\n\n265\n\nc/o Nan Shan Life Ins. Co. Ltd., 15, Nan King E. Road, Section 2, Taipei, Taiwan.\n\nP.O. Box 65, Marshall, Arkansas 72650, U.S.A.\n\nc/o Federal Foreign Office, Referat 412, Bonn (Germany-West), Adenauerallee 101.\n\nc/o Ostasiatisches Seminar, Der Universetat Zurich, Muhlegasse 21, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland.\n\nc/o Hong Kong Govt. Office, 54, Pall Mall, London, S.W.1, England.\n\nc/o American Consulate, Calcutta, India.\n\nc/o H.K. Trade Development Office, Britannia House, 30, Rue Joseph 2nd, Brussels 4, Belgium.\n\nMaryknoll Centre House, 120 San Min Rd., 1st Section, Taichung City 400, Taiwan.\n\n34, Wilton Crescent, London, S.W.1, England.\n\nDept. of Modern Languages, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 14850, U.S.A.\n\nPearce Institute, Govan Cross, Glasgow, S.W.1, U.K.\n\nCan Boyet Mear Puerto Pollensa, Majorca, Spain.\n\nc/o Hong Kong Govt. Office, 54, Pall Mall, London, S.W.1, England.\n\n101, Holland Road, Hove 2, Sussex, England.\n\nc/o The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., 9, Gracechurch Street, London, E.C.3, England.\n\nSchool of Oriental & African Studies, Malet Street, London, W.C.1, England.\n\nEng. Language Training Unit, University of Jadjahmada, Jogjakarta, Indonesia.\n\n249, Jalan Pekeliling, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.\n\nc/o Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., Bandar Seri Begawan, State of Brunei.\n\nSTRICKLAND, Mrs. P. G. Jaishan, Apartada 56, Marbella, Provincia de Malaga, Spain.\n\nSTURM, Dr. F. G. + c/o Dept. of Philosophy, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, U.S.A.\n\nUHALLEY, Dr. Stephen, Jr. 7103, Kukii Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96821, U.S.A.\n\nWATSON, Dr. James L. - + c/o School of Oriental & African Studies, Malet Street, London, W.C.1, E7 HP, England.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077", "rank": 0 } ]