[
    {
        "id": 204482,
        "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-1962",
        "page_number": 114,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "103\n\nEXCAVATIONS AT MAN KOK TSUI ON LANTAU ISLAND\n\nELSPETH MANEELY *\n\n[On 13 May 1961 over fifty members of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society landed from a launch at Man Kok Tsui, a promontory on Lantau facing Hong Kong. Here Professor S. G. Davis and Dr. S. M. Bard explained to the members of the Society how the excavations were carried out and what objects had been discovered. Later the party walked over the hills to Silvermine Bay. This article gives an account of the excavations carried out there in 1958, Ed.]\n\nTo date, the investigation of Neolithic remains in China points to the existence of three main Neolithic cultures.' This broad classification depends largely on differences in the types of fine pottery. In the north-west traces of the Painted Pottery Culture were first noted by J. G. Andersson at Yang Shao, Honan in 1920, and three years later at the Tao river sites, Kansu. In the north-east, traces of the Black Pottery Culture were uncovered in 1928 at Lung Shan, Shantung. The finds at Man Kok Tsui belong to the third of these Neolithic traditions: the South-East Neolithic, and the characteristic fine pottery found is a hard stoneware bearing a variety of impressed designs. This type of impressed pottery was first discovered in Hong Kong by Dr. C. M. Heanley in 1926 and it was associated with several kinds of stone artifact. It is interesting to note that the traces of these three Neolithic cultures were uncovered within a period of eight years and that in 1926—the year in which Dr. Heanley began his work on pre-historic remains in Hong Kong—the exciting discovery of \"Peking Man\" took place at Chou Kou Tien, south-west of Peking.\n\nDr. Heanley was joined in his systematic survey of the Hong Kong area by Professor J. L. Shellshear and Mr. W. Schofield and they soon established that the Colony was rich in scattered finds, in general concentrated near the beaches and on the low\n\n* Mrs. Maneely has lived in Hong Kong since 1956, and is the Hon. Secretary of the Hong Kong University Archaeological team.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204984,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 92,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "PIRACY ON THE CHINA COAST\n\n83\n\nAnother case which might be said to have had political undertones was that of the China Navigation Company's Shuntien in June 1934. The Shuntien was the latest addition to the China Navigation Company's large fleet, and was making only her second voyage at the time. She was captured by some thirty pirates after leaving Tientsin for Chefoo, and was taken to the mouth of the Yellow River where she was beached on soft sand. The pirates then made off inland, taking five European and twenty Chinese passengers as hostages. Before leaving, they told the ship's compradore that the piracy was a reprisal for the Chinese Maritime Customs having stationed an extra customs cruiser in Shantung Bay, thus interfering with their smuggling operations. The Europeans returned a few days later, but nothing more was ever heard of the Chinese hostages.\n\nBias Bay, sixty-five miles northeast of Hong Kong, was notorious as the pirates' stronghold in the interwar years. Unfortunately, it was just outside Hong Kong territorial waters, and came within the jurisdiction of the Cantonese authorities, who were either unwilling or unable to co-operate with the Royal Navy against the pirates. The nationalist and anti-foreign feelings of the Cantonese probably contributed to this, as did the fact that the warlords of Kwangtung were suspected of being in league with the pirates. Whether this was so or not, it was definitely established that pirates based on Bias Bay committed nine major piracies between 1924 and 1926.\n\nAlthough the Navy was unable to suppress piracy on the China coast, so much of which took place almost on its own doorstep, the mere fact that naval ships were in the vicinity must have reduced its incidence. The pirates rarely boarded ships at Hong Kong, partly because of the strict naval and police control there, and also because passengers joining ships there were unlikely to have much money or valuables. In the case of the second Sunning piracy in 1926, it was definitely established afterwards that the pirates came on board at Amoy, and that their weapons were smuggled on board by stevedores. The lack of co-operation from Canton meant that the Navy was unable to follow up action at sea by punitive expeditions against the pirates' shore bases. The Kwangtung authorities had been much more co-operative in the first few decades after the cession of",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206079,
        "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": 159,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "154\n\nS. F. BALFOUR\n\npopulation who took on Chinese surnames and customs. The town of Canton itself, although parts were surrounded by walls, continued to be inhabited by a large matshed population. It was full of Arabs, Indians and Persians who were allowed to have their own administration and laws and to settle in the place without hindrance. Here is a quotation from the famous Arab book known as the Chain of Chronicles which is an account of the trade with China in the ninth century compiled by the Zaid Hassan of Siraf in Arabia. The merchant Soleyman states:\n\n\"The reason why Chinese merchandise in Baghdad is at present rare is because fires are so common in Khanfu (Canton). This town is the principal port for ships and is the entrepôt for all trade between Arabia and China. The fires which consume the merchandise break out because the houses are built of bamboo and reed. Another cause of the paucity of merchandise (in Baghdad) is the large number of shipwrecks and the fact that the ships are so often raided by pirates or are forced to remain in port for long periods during their journeys.\"\n\nAnother merchant states in the same book: \"In 878 the rebel Ban Shua (Huang Chao) besieged Khanfu (Canton). After many days the town was taken. On this occasion 120,000 Mussulmans, Jews and Christians who were established in the city perished by the sword.\"\n\nSince this event preceded a decline in the trade with the west from Canton it is as well to try and form a picture of it up to this period.\n\nThe boats used were larger than any of the native craft that are now seen on the Chinese coast. As early as 413 Fa Hsien the Buddhist pilgrim returned from Java on a boat which carried over 200 people. It drifted, he says, at the mercy of the wind without taking any particular course and \"only by observing the sun, moon and stars was it possible to go forward.\" Fa Hsien's ship was set for Canton but was blown out of its course as far as Shantung where they landed without knowing in the least where they were. In spite of the difficulty of steering without a compass the trade route was very much helped, as it has always been, by the monsoons which blow from the north in winter and from the south in summer. There is some evidence that tacking was",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206632,
        "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": 180,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "174\n\nKEITH STEVENS\n\nA legend in another book, the Shen I Ching (*) says that Chin Ch'ong (†) the son of Pan Ku the Creator of the World, who lived in the mountains of Shantung province, was canonised T'ai Sui for his many good deeds and was made responsible to Heaven for supervising the activities of all spirits (shen‡) and demons (kuei§). Few present-day Chinese with whom I have spoken appear to know of this story.\n\nT'ai sui was first worshipped during the Sung Dynasty in the eleventh century A.D. and was first offered official sacrifices during the Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty. Only after The Deification of the Gods popularised the idea was T'ai Sui identified with Yin Ch'iao.\n\nReason for the worship of Yin Ch'iao\n\nYin Ch'iao, or T'ai Sui as he will be referred to from now on, is a stellar deity who in many parts of China is believed to have flood, famine and all good and bad fortune under his jurisdiction. He is worshipped by the general populace to avert calamities, and has to be placated before any enterprise or journey is embarked upon. He was also worshipped by the imperial officials at the beginning of Spring. He is known to control the dates and times of births and deaths, and each one of his sixty images often displayed in rows in temples is dedicated to one specific year in the sixty year cycle of Chinese dating. Chinese place their offerings on the altar before the T'ai Sui bearing the cyclic year date of their birth. Father Doré in his Recherches sur les Superstitions en Chine calls him the \"Patron of the Harvests\".\n\nT'ai Sui is the great Father Time who, presiding over the year, is the arbiter of the destiny of all men. He is very much feared as he destroys those whom he dislikes and those who offend him. He is said to strike when least expected and can injure and destroy the highest and the lowest, at home or on the high roads, but is believed never to injure anyone in the vicinity of his, T'ai Sui's, own person. Therefore it is essential to know where he is at any given moment, and if he is nearby but not immediately present, he is at his most dangerous and precautions against his evil influence must be taken at once. This is done by hanging the appropriate talisman or stellar charm near the front door or facing the entrance. To find where T'ai sui will be during the forthcoming year he is believed to move annually—a device similar to a compass is used by a fêng shui\n\nPage 180\n\nPage 181",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207053,
        "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": 124,
        "title": "RAS-1974",
        "content_text": "118\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\nto play havoc in it. The Japanese wo-jen had been particularly active. In 1571 the small walled town of Tai Pang on Mirs Bay in the northeast of the district had sustained a siege of over forty days by Japanese pirates equipped with scaling ladders.1\n\nThe district gazetteer gives an account of the troubled times at the end of the Ming period, which brought much misery and suffering to the people of the district, since famine accompanied the disturbances.2 These disorders lasted for a considerable time. It is reported that Tai Pang was held for nine years against all comers by a band of soldiers.3 The clan record of the Tsui family of Shek Pik contains a vivid account of the disasters of the time, as it affected their relatives and friends in their old home near Tung-kuan city which was the centre of an unsuccessful revolt against the new dynasty. These disturbances extended to the present New Territories. A former officer of the Ming, Li Man-wing, held this area on his own account between 1647 and his surrender to the new dynasty in 1656, and the walls and moats of the principal villages of the Tang clan in the New Territories are said to date from this time. The land presented a pitiable sight in these years: there was much burning and pillaging and many of the inhabitants fled. During this time, it was said, \"The ground was covered with bones, in the day time nothing could be heard but the hum of flies, and at night the voice of weeping.\"\n\nThe evacuation of the coast in the early years of the K'ang Hsi reign between 1662-1669 followed soon after these prolonged miseries and had a profound effect on the lives of the population and on the pattern of future settlement.\n\nUnder instructions from Peking, the provincial authorities required the evacuation of the coastal areas of Kwangtung. The provinces of Shantung, Chekiang, Kiangsu and Fukien were also affected to varying degrees.7 This measure was in accordance with a five-point plan to deal with the pro-Ming ruler of Formosa, Cheng Ch'eng-kung, suggested by one of his former lieutenants\n\n1 IHNHC 13/7.\n\n2 HNHC 13/8-9.\n\n3 HNHC 13/9-10.\n\n4 JHKBRAS, 7 (1967), p. 154.\n\n5 Sung Hok-p'ang in HKN, VIII, No. 2:107-108.\n\n6 ibid, presumably a quotation from the Tang clan's genealogical record. The YCKC has a lengthy entry on the disorders of this troubled time, chuan 4/46-60.\n\n7 Hsieh Kuo Ching, pp. 585-593.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207921,
        "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": 309,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "294\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nof the Cotton Bag Monk, Pu Tai (), an incarnation of Mi Lo Fu. Pu Tai was said to have died at that temple at the beginning of the tenth century.\n\nAnother preserved body was that of a Shantung peach seller who dropped dead at the altar and was embalmed in mud and became a deity, Wu Yu Hsien (†), around whom a local cult sprang up and flourished during the fourteenth century. Yet another was the skeleton of an old and holy abbot overlaid with gold foil on Chiu Hua Shan at the Pai Sui Kung“.\n\nA preserved body in the Nan Hua Shan Monastery in northern Kwangtung was that of the Sixth Patriarch of Chinese Buddhism (A.D.). It appears to be the earliest recorded \"fleshy body\". The Sixth and last of the Chinese Patriarchs, Hui Neng (#), died in A.D. 712. His corpse is said to have remained incorrupt and even to exhale a sweet fragrance. His chest maintained its natural position and the skin appeared glossy and flexible. In A.D. 1236 when the Mongol troops pursued the last emperor of the Southern Sung and defeated him in Kwangtung, it is said that Mongol soldiers violated the tomb of the Patriarch and even went so far as to rip open the abdomen with a sword thrust. On seeing that the heart and liver were still in a perfect state of preservation, they were filled with fear and went no further in their sacrilege. Several replicas are to be seen in Hong Kong; a good example is on the altar of Huang Ta Hsien (黄大仙) in the San Yuan Temple (三元宫) in T'ai P'ing Shan Street, Hong Kong. (See plate 27). Incidentally, smaller images of Hui Neng, often seen in curio shops, are easily recognisable by the small dragon in his begging bowl. He is considered to be the founder of the Vegetarian Sects of Buddhism, Ch’ih Su Chiao ( vegetarian ).\n\nAnother mummy, black faced, covered in lacquer and gilded, sat in a lotus position in a place of honour in the T'ien T'ai Temple south-west of Peking, wearing Buddhist robes but of Imperial yellow. He wore a vairocana five-leaf crown on his head, his face was smooth and full fleshed and his skin black with age. Many thought that he was a wooden image and legend, since disproved, claimed him to be Fu Lin, the first Manchu Emperor of China (1638-1661) better known as Shun Chih who died at the age of 30. The story probably grew from the known fact that he wished to become a monk. The mummy was refurbished annually at a minor ceremony and was a great attraction for pilgrims.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212755,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1992",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "RAS-1992",
        "content_text": "49\n\nDespite the feeling we have acquired simply from his own writings that he had many acquaintances and few friends, that he was neither a European nor a Chinese and was held at arms length by both, that he was God's gift to the girls, that he offered guidance and good advice with great foresight to the Chinese, and was either ignored or his ideas purloined by others, the obituaries, possibly following a policy of avoiding speaking ill of the dead, described him as ‘a great traveller, a great scholar, a soldier, an author and publisher. A cheery man who most people knew, who at 77 walked briskly to and from his office, beloved by many, although not rich in the world's goods he was always ready to help others, and was of a very cheerful disposition. He endured many shrewd blows of fortune but always came up smiling.'\n\nHe must have been regarded both in Shanghai and in Hankow as an eccentric and colourful old man. Everyone would know of him but to what extent he was accepted socially we shall probably never know unless, that is, someone's private correspondence in which he is mentioned comes to light.\n\nNOTES\n\nMason was a young British official in the Chinese Customs on the Yangtze who organised the shipment of arms to and became involved with Nien rebels. Mesny, who knew nothing of Mason's schemes and plot, found himself officially ostracised after being accused by Li Hung-chang of being a rebel leader.\n\nIt is strange that there appears to be no reference to the typhoon in the available Shanghai papers of the day. Also, in view of his complaints about people's refusal to face up to disaster by taking out insurance, why did he not have the Rink insured? Probably, considering his circumstances, he was unable to afford the premium.\n\nThe Tsar-li Hui has been variously described as a minor religious cult, in Shantung province in particular, or as survivors of the White Lotus Society, an anti-dynastic body since its foundation in the fourteenth century through to its final defeat in Shansi in 1815. A number of members then joined the Nien revolt, and here we have a link perhaps between Li Hung-chang's accusation that Mesny was a leader of a Nien rebels during the Mason case.\n\n$\n\nMesny's Chinese Miscellany: Volume 2 item 1431 page 362\n\nBat'uru: 'A kind of Manchu Distinguished Service Order [DSO]' Johnston RF Lion and Dragon in Northern China. Murray: London 1910\n\nWilliam Mesny always referred to himself as 'Knight Ying of the Pa-t'u-lu' BA\n\nThis decoration was intended to correspond to European Orders [sic].\n\nGarrett, Valery M Mandarin Squares. Oxford University Press. Hong Kong. 1990",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214367,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 225,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "191\n\nindustry. It was common, so it claimed, for construction teams to hold Taoist rituals, including the sacrifice of oxen before work began.*\n\nOn the other side of the coin, according to the Bureau of Religious Affairs, about 200 Taoist temples have been re-opened to the public in China since the 1980s and seven Taoist provincial associations have been established. One of these temples is the former Taoist Cheng-i sect centre, the Heavenly Master Sect temple [T'ien-shih Miao] on Dragon and Tiger Mountain, Lung-hu Shan, in Kiangsi province. It was burned down in 1945 and work on rebuilding it did not begin until 1983. This consisted of the renovation of the main hall and the re-sculpturing of the images of the San Ch'ing, the Three Pure Ones, and fourteen other clay statues. Other sites nearby have also been renovated, including the Shang Ch'ing Palace, where the Immortals lived, and the Lien-tan Ch'ih, the Furnace [where pills of immortality were made]. It is interesting to read that both local and central authorities donated more than half a million yuan towards the project.\n\nAbout the same time as the iconoclastic campaign began, a ban was also imposed in Tsingtao, the port in southern Shantung, on the manufacture, sale and burning of funeral objects in a bid to curb a resurgence in superstition.\n\n...\n\nDespite all of these reports of the destruction of illegal temples and the crackdown on superstition, my daughter and I during the years 1995-1997 have visited a number of temples both urban and rural in remote areas of China as well as in cities and towns which, without doubt, fall under the category of superstitious religious establishments. We have not only been guided to several such temples by policemen but also in one instance we found the local party cadre actually lived with his mother inside a small popular religion temple. The only instance where a member of a temple staff had reason to explain that an activity was banned because it was superstition happened in the suburbs of Shanghai. When we asked why there were no oracular blocks on the altar with which to obtain the deity's answers to questions posed by devotees, we were told by the temple guardian that this particular practice was superstition and not permitted, whereas other routine rituals seen in temples in Hong Kong and Taiwan were. A Chinese scholar recently explained that in his view illegal temples are the structures built without permission because local State authorities have not had the quid pro quo erection of a village school, crèche or health centre paid for by the villagers with the same sum funded for the project as\n\nPage 225\n\nPage 226",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215537,
        "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": 314,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "264\n\n10. Chekiang and Kiangsu\n\n11. Hopeh and Shantung\n\n12. Pentecostal\n\n13. Christian\n\n2. Distribution of lots at Wo Hop Shek Cemetery:\n\nCoffin section:\n\n1. General\n\n2. Chiu Chow\n\n3. Fukien\n\n4. Yan Ping\n\n5. Wai Hoi Wai\n\n6. Pentecostal\n\n7. 7th Day Adventists\n\nUrn section:\n\n1. General\n\n2. Chiu Chow\n\n3. Toi Shan\n\n4. Hoi Ping\n\n5. Ka Ying\n\n6. Tung Kwun\n\nThe very large number of indigenous villagers' burial sites/graveyards, some of considerable size, will not be dealt with in this study.\n\n2 Prior to 1926, Hong Kong's official spelling was 'Hongkong.' In September 1926, under instructions received from the Secretary of State for Colonies, 'Hong Kong' was adopted as the official form. See Hongkong Government Gazette (hereinafter HKGG) Notification 479 of 3 September 1926.\n\n3 The name of Wan Chai was not in use in the early 1840s, the area around the burial ground was described as 'that part of the town fronting upon Howwan Bay' in Friend of China of 19th May 1842.\n\n4\n\nOxley, D.H. (ed) (1979), Victoria Barracks 1842-1979. Hong Kong: Headquarters British Forces Hong Kong, p. 25.\n\n5 The barrack area of the present Hong Kong Park site.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215826,
        "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": 125,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "58\n\n1.\n\n1 Edward S. Miller, War Plan Orange: the U.S. Strategy to Defeat Japan (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1991), p.14.\n\n2 Miller, p.21-22, 24.\n\n3 Miller, p.33-36.\n\n(1) Steven T. Ross (ed.), American War Plans, 1919-1941, vol.2 (New York: Garland Publishers, 1992), p.125-126. (2) Miller, p.4-5, 31-32.\n\n• Ernest J. King & Walter Muir Whitehill, Fleet Admiral King, A Naval Record (New York: WW Norton & Co., Inc., 1952), p.432. The JCS was the military committee that directed the war on the American side.\n\n6 Charles F. Romanus & Riley Sunderland, Stilwell's Command Problems, 1956 of U.S. Army in World War II: the China-Burma-India Theater, (pt. Washington, DC: Office of the Chief of Military History, 1976), p.10.\n\n7 Christopher M. Bell, \"Our Most Exposed Outpost: Hong Kong and British Far Eastern Strategy, 1921-1941,\" The Journal of Military History, 60 (January 1996), p.65.\n\n• Colonel Lindsay T. Ride, \"Memorandum on the Liberation of Prisoners-of-War, Hong Kong,\" 30 Sep 43, p.11-13; Series 2/33, BAAG (British Army Aid Group) Correspondence Concerning Operations, September 1942-November 1943; Personal Papers of Sir Lindsay Tasman Ride (microform); Canberra, ACT: Australian War Memorial, 2001 (hereinafter known as the Ride Papers).\n\n* Unless otherwise noted, information for this section was collected from Weather Information Branch, HQ, USAAF, R&A Report #71087, \"Climate of Hong Kong (China),\" October 1943; Intelligence Reports (\"Regular Series\"), 1941-1945; Research and Analysis Branch Division; Records of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), RG226; National Archives (NA), Washington, DC.\n\n10 Later, it was reported that an all-weather road ran from Hong Kong to Canton, and the Japanese had improved other roads nearby to the same capacity. See \"G-2 Estimates of the Following Places: Haiphong-Liuchow Peninsula-Hainan Island-Hong Kong-Swatow-Amoy-Foochow-Santuao-Wenchow-Hangchow Bay Region-Laoyao-Chingtao-and the Tip of the Shantung Peninsula to Include Wei Hai Wei,\" 17 Feb 45, p.5; Ch.7-Intelligence, Correspondence, 1945, Folder",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216398,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 157,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "107\n\nto the submarine was so great that a major salvage operation probably would be necessary.\n\nMost unfortunately too no more survivors were to come to the surface from the sunken vessel.\n\nAt 1300 hours on the 13 our ship sent her Chaplain, The Rev. F. Freeman, MA, and Royal Marine band across to MEDWAY. An hour later HERMES weighed for Wei-Hai-Wei where she anchored in Four Funnel Bay at 1643 hours. The summer base of the Royal Navy was that close to the scene of the accident.\n\nThe entire fleet mourned the very sad loss, and amongst their fellow submariners the mood was sombre.\n\nA memorial service was held on Sunday, the 14th.\n\nOn Monday, 15th June 1931 a Court of Inquiry was opened. The President was a submariner of note, and the recently appointed Flag Captain in SUFFOLK, Geoffrey Layton.\n\nIt transpired that while steaming in a south-westerly direction, course 235 degrees, at 1212 hours on Tuesday, 9th June H.M. Submarine POSEIDON had come into collision with the Chinese cargo steamer YUTA, Captain T. Iyeishi, steaming in a north-westerly direction on course 42 degrees magnetic. In other words, the two ships had been about to cross at right angles to each other. The sea was calm and visibility about six miles, position 37.49.5N 122.16E which, as suggested above, is just to the east of the easter point of the Shantung peninsula.\n\nS.S. YUTA was on passage from Shanghai to Newchwang with a cargo of 27,000 bags of flour and carrying no passengers.\n\nAt the time of the collision, several crew members in the submarine had jumped off her into the sea. One able seaman, J.E. Halsall, seeing his opportunity actually had had the presence of mind to take hold of a loose bight of cable hanging from the bow of YUTA and had climbed onboard to safety. Of the remainder, and as related, six men had escaped from the wreck of whom one died.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    }
]