[ { "id": 204590, "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-1963", "page_number": 71, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "60\n\nTHE OLD BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING, 1860-1959\n\nBased on a lecture delivered on 20 August, 1962\n\nJ. L. CRANMER-BYNG, M.A.*\n\nOn the afternoon of March 26th, 1861, Frederick Bruce, the first British minister to China to reside in Peking, entered the grounds of the former palace of Duke I-liang, and the history of the old British Legation had begun. The desire of Great Britain to have a minister resident in the capital was of long standing, and had its origins in the eighteenth century. From at least 1760, some English merchants in Canton had been arguing that only when an ambassador from England resided at Peking would their grievances be properly represented to the Emperor of China and their position improve. Eventually, this point of view was strong enough to influence the Government of England. Indeed, one of the prime objects of the embassy of Lord Macartney to the Court of the Emperor Ch'ien-lung in 1793 was to secure for England just such permanent representation at Peking. However, there was not the slightest chance that such a request would be granted. All foreign embassies to China were regarded as tributary missions of a temporary nature, and all foreign countries as inferior. Even the first Anglo-Chinese War of 1839-1842, and the subsequent Treaty of Nanking failed to obtain this object. From the Chinese point of view, relations with the western barbarians were still a local matter to be carried on by the Governor-General at Canton or by the Governor-General at Nanking. The foreign powers, for their part, were still unable to gain direct communication with the Imperial Government at Peking, and therefore were unable to protest effectively when the treaties did not appear to be working properly, or when they wished to revise them. This was the background to the War of 1858-1860, in which English and French forces were used to secure the Treaties of Tientsin, by which the earlier treaties were revised. Article III of the British Treaty of Tientsin stated (in part): \"It is further agreed that Her Majesty's Government may\n\n* Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Hong Kong. Author of An Embassy to China, reviewed on page 136 of this Journal.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204591, "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-1963", "page_number": 72, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n61\n\nacquire at Peking a site for Building, or may hire Houses, for the accommodation of Her Majesty's mission, and that the Chinese Government will assist it in so doing\". Then, when the Imperial Government appeared to procrastinate over the ratification of these treaties, another English and French force fought its way to the capital and compelled the Manchu authorities to ratify them by the Convention of Peking. This was signed by the British envoy, Lord Elgin,1 and by Prince Kung,2 the chief Chinese representative, on October 24th, 1860 in the Hall of Ceremonies situated in what was later to be called Legation Street. The second clause of the Convention stated that \"Her Britannic Majesty's Representative will henceforward reside permanently, or occasionally, at Peking, as Her Britannic Majesty shall be pleased to decide”. \n\nLord Elgin proposed that Prince Kung's own residence should be rented to the British, but Prince Kung memorialized the throne as follows: \n\nAs regards the matter of the English residing at the capital in the near future, we have been discussing it with them during the past few days. The chief barbarian official [Lord Elgin] considers that the quarters in Prince I's [Prince Kung] palace are spacious and he insists that it is to be their future residence at the capital. Moreover, he stated that there were still open spaces in the palace and that he wants to build houses there himself. It seems to your ministers that to \n\n1 James Bruce, eighth Earl of Elgin. He served as Governor-General of Canada 1846-1854. In 1857 he was appointed envoy extraordinary to China and signed the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858, returning to England early in 1859. In 1860 he was again sent to China as special envoy, and signed the Convention of Peking. He returned to England in 1861 and was appointed Governor-General of India in the same year. He died in India in 1863. \n\nHis younger brother Frederick William Bruce held the post of Colonial Secretary at Hong Kong from 9 February 1844 until 27 June 1846. In 1857 he accompanied his elder brother to China as principal secretary. He was appointed minister plenipotentiary to the Emperor of China in December 1858, but had to wait until March 1861 before actually taking up residence in Peking. He left China on his appointment as British Minister to Washington in 1865. \n\n2 I-hsin (1833-1898), the first Prince Kung, was the sixth son of Emperor Tao-kuang. When the joint French and British forces approached Peking in September 1860 the Emperor Hsien-feng fled to Jehol leaving his half-brother, Prince Kung, to make peace with the allies. When a prototype Chinese foreign office, the Tsungli Yamen, was set up in 1861, Prince Kung was in charge of it, and he played an important part in Chinese affairs for the next fifteen years.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204594, "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-1963", "page_number": 75, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "64 \n\nJ. L. CRANMER-BYNG \n\nuninhabitable according to our notions, and we therefore tell the Chinese that the Minister is obliged to postpone taking up his residence until the residence is fit to receive him. Mr. Adkins is therefore charged with the task of repairs, and in March of next year or possibly earlier Mr. Bruce expects to take up his quarters there. His arrival at Peking before we quitted it was a happy hit. Formal interviews took place between Lord Elgin and Prince Kung at which the former introduced his brother and abdicated in his favour; so that before we quitted Peking Mr. Bruce had commenced his business with the Chinese authorities, while that of the Special Embassy terminated.7 \n\nSo interpreter Adkins remained alone in the Palace of Duke I-liang throughout the winter of 1860-61, until in March 1861 Bruce set out from Tientsin, accompanied by Thomas Wade, his interpreter, and Dr. Rennie, physician to the new Legation. Colonel Neale, the Secretary of the Legation, with two attachés, St. Clair and Wyndham, had gone ahead with the baggage. We are fortunate to have a detailed account of the first year at the British Legation kept by Dr. Rennie. In the Preface to his book Peking and the Pekingese he explained that \"a few months after Her Majesty's Legation had been established in Peking, a feeling began to be entertained by its members, that, with a view to future publication, some record should be kept of the various incidents which were from day to day occurring, during what may be termed the inaugural period of foreign diplomatic residence at the capital—the most important event in the modern history of Anglo-Chinese intercourse.\" Since Rennie had been keeping \n\n7 Quoted in The Life of Sir Harry Parkes by Stanley Lane-Poole, 2 vols., (London, 1894), I, 404-5. \n\nParkes was born in 1828, and came out to China in 1841 to join his two sisters who were living with their cousin, the wife of the Protestant missionary, the Rev. Charles Gutzlaff. Parkes was attached to Sir Henry Pottinger's suite in the expedition up the Yangtze in 1842 and witnessed the signing of the Treaty of Nanking. He started to learn Chinese and at the age of fifteen was attached to the British Consulate at Canton. Many appointments as interpreter and consul followed until 1865 when he was appointed Minister to Japan. In 1883 he became British Minister at Peking. He died in 1885. \n\n* D. F. Rennie, Peking and the Pekingese during the First Year of the British Embassy at Peking, 2 vols. (London, 1865) vii. \n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204639, "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-1963", "page_number": 120, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "107\n\nEUROPEAN NAVIGATION ON THE YANGTSE\n\nA. D. BLUE *\n\nThe Yangtse is the greatest river in China, and has been of much greater importance in the history of the world than the Amazon and the Mississippi, which are superior in length and volume. In this respect it ranks with the Nile and the Euphrates, but unlike them it has always had a much greater population living along its banks. The Chinese know the Yangtse as the Long, or Great, River. Marco Polo may not have been the first European to see the Yangtse, but he was certainly the first to appreciate its importance, and to bring it to the notice of the Western world.\n\nOf the Yangtse in general Marco Polo said \"the multitude of vessels that invest this great river is so great that no one who should read or hear would believe it. The quantity of merchandise carried up and down is past all belief. In fact it is so big, that it seems to be a sea rather than a river\". There is no doubt but at that time, the second half of the 13th century, the Yangtse carried a greater volume of traffic than any other river in the world. Marco Polo was correct in thinking that no one would believe his reports on the Yangtse, or on China, and it was left to later generations to appreciate the accuracy of his observations.\n\nIt was the missions to China of Lord Macartney and Lord Amherst in 1793 and 1816 respectively, that made Europeans realise the importance of the Yangtse. Then in 1842, during the First China War, a British naval force entered the Yangtse, and was on the point of attacking Nanking (182 miles from the mouth) when the Chinese sued for peace. Sixteen years later, after the Second China War, one of the clauses of the Treaty of Tientsin\n\n* The author served as an Engineer Officer with the China Navigation Company from 1928 until 1938, and was on the Yangtse in 1930 in the Shengking and again in 1934 in the Wuhu. He was captured by pirates in the Newchang river in Manchuria in 1933 and held prisoner for five and a half months. During and after the War he was in the Colonial Service in West Africa, but in 1958 he returned to service with the China Navigation Company, and this has enabled him to revisit a number of the former Treaty Ports.\n\n1 Chinese records mention the visit of a 'Roman merchant' to Nanking about 230 A.D. See G. F. Hudson, Europe and China (London, 1931), p. 90.\n\nPage 120\n\nPage 121", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204640, "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-1963", "page_number": 121, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "108 \n\nA. D. BLUE \n\nprovided that the river be opened to foreign shipping. This commenced the modern or more correctly the European history of the river. \n\nBy the terms of the Treaty of Tientsin three ports on the river were opened to foreign shipping and trade - Chinkiang, Kiukiang, and Hankow, Hankow, by far the largest and most important of the three, was six hundred miles from the mouth of the river. The Franco-Chinese Treaty, signed at the same time, provided for the opening of Nanking. At that time, however, and for a further six years, Nanking was occupied by the Taiping rebels, and no attempt was made to trade there, and it was not until 1899 that the Chinese Maritime Customs opened a station there. \n\nWhen the Treaty of Tientsin was signed in 1858 most of the Lower Yangtse was in a disturbed state because of the Taiping Rebellion, and a great part of the river was under rebel control. In these circumstances, therefore, it was not expected that the river would be opened to foreign trade until the restoration of Imperial authority. Lord Elgin, the British Plenipotentiary, however, was unwilling to wait for this, and persuaded the Chinese authorities to allow him to make a voyage up the river. His expedition consisted of the frigates Retribution and Furious, and three small gunboats, Cruiser, Lee, and Dove. After being fired on by the rebels at two places, Hankow was reached on 6th December 1858, the first time it had been visited by a foreign ship. \n\nLord Elgin went ashore at several places on the river, and made short excursions into the country. He found the people to have no sympathy with the rebels, and thought they welcomed the prospect of foreign trade. He also thought them reasonably prosperous and contented, and not too heavily taxed. At Hankow he found coal and iron, the latter in abundance, also considerable quantities of imported cotton and woollen goods; but he formed the opinion that British manufacturers would have to exert themselves to supplant native goods. It was a pleasing fallacy, he wrote, to imagine that it was only the malign influence of intriguing mandarins which caused the Chinese to prefer native to foreign goods. James Matheson, one of the founders of Jardine, Matheson and Company, frankly admitted on several occasions the superiority of Chinese nankeens over Manchester cotton goods.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204641, "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-1963", "page_number": 122, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "NAVIGATION ON THE YANGTSE\n\n109\n\nThe Imperial forces had very little success against the Taipings in the next two years, and although it had been stipulated that the three ports on the river were not to be opened until they were defeated, a second naval expedition left Shanghai early in 1861 to establish consular posts at Chinkiang, Kiukiang, and Hankow. This expedition went up 158 miles beyond Hankow before turning back. Shortly after the return of this expedition the river was opened to foreign trade.\n\nThere is some ambiguity about Western policy during the Taiping Rebellion. It seems to have been regarded with sympathy in the early stages, when it was looked on as a reforming movement with Christian affiliations; and many foreigners welcomed the prospect of a change from the corrupt and reactionary Manchu régime. The British, American, and French governments, therefore, adopted a policy of neutrality in the early stages of the conflict. Later on, however, a marked change took place, which was not entirely due to the excesses committed by the rebels. Commercial considerations undoubtedly played some part. The Treaty of Tientsin had legalised the opium trade, but the Taipings were against opium and alcohol, and banned this trade in the territory under their control. They also made it clear that under their rule foreign trade would not be carried on in the one-sided manner so favourable to the foreign merchants. The Treaty of Tientsin again had stipulated that foreign ships could not navigate the Yangtse until peace was restored. Because of these and other reasons, the Western Powers abandoned their policy of neutrality. The rebels were looked on and referred to as firebrands and extremists, and the Manchu government as a peaceful and stabilising element, and steps were taken to help the latter. These included supplying the government forces with arms and ammunition — including the new Lee Enfield rifle, not yet used in Europe — allowing foreign steamers to transport government troops, and supplying officers to train and lead them.* As a result Nanking was captured in 1864, and the last vestiges of the rebellion were stamped out by 1866.\n\nIn 1862 the Scotland, a steamer belonging to Lindsay and Company of Shanghai was the first ocean-going merchant ship to go to Hankow, and thus opened the interior of China to direct\n\n* Gordon was the most famous of these officers.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204644, "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-1963", "page_number": 125, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "112 \n\nA. D. BLUE \n\nYangtse was not an easy river to navigate, and with its swift currents and shoals presented problems very similar to those on American rivers, in particular to the Mississippi. The Americans made good use of their experience in river navigation, and were also more willing to carry cargo on deck to speed up loading and discharging. They were more partial to paddle than to screw steamers, the former being better against strong currents and for reversing off shoals. This combination of factors gave the Americans a decided advantage in the early years, and the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company, belonging to the famous American trading firm of Russell and Company, was the most important company on the river for the first fifteen years of foreign trade.\n\nThe 1860's on the Yangtse was in many respects a repetition of the 1840's and 50's on the coast. Great stretches of the river were still under Taiping control, and it was constantly patrolled by British warships. Lawlessness was common among Chinese and foreign traders alike, and shipping was liable to attack from rebels, Imperial war junks, and pirates indiscriminately. Many foreign ships were engaged in illegal and immoral trades, in flagrant disregard of treaty rights, let alone of the welfare and laws of China. This applies to the sailing ships and lorchas under foreign flags, rather than to the steamers run by the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company, the other American companies of Heard and Olyphant, and the British companies of Jardine, Dent, and Lindsay. Opium trading had been legalised by the Treaty of Tientsin, and for the first decade or two at least 20% of the foreign imports into Hankow by the steamers was opium.\n\nThe salt trade was a government monopoly, and the most common illegal activity on the river was salt smuggling. Salt could be bought for the price of rice at Eching, eighteen miles above Chinkiang, and sold further up the river for at least double the price to the great detriment of the salt gabelle. Then there were foreign adventurers who supplied arms and ammunition to the rebels, and others who, if not actually smuggling themselves, convoyed native junks which were smuggling.\n\n— \n\nThe Shanghai Steam Navigation Company was formed by Russell and Company in 1862 with American, British, and Chinese capital, and performed valuable pioneer work in developing river", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204645, "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-1963", "page_number": 126, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "NAVIGATION ON THE YANGTSE\n\n113\n\ntransport. It was so successful that by 1872 it had a fleet of 17 steamers, had established 9 depots on the river, and found it necessary to increase its capital from Tls. 1,000,000 to Tls. 2,000,000.\" During 1866 and 1867 the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company succeeded in obtaining almost a complete monopoly of the Yangtse river trade, at least in that part of it carried by foreign ships. In these two years the rival American company of Olyphant withdrew their two steamers, Jardine's transferred their two river steamers to the Hong Kong-Shanghai run, and the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company bought the steamers of Dent, Lindsay, and Heard. Their only remaining rivals were two steamers of the recently formed Union Steam Navigation Company, a Shanghai British company. These were not serious rivals to American supremacy, but in five years' time were to be sold to a new British company which was destined to challenge the American near monopoly on the river successfully.\n\nAlthough American steamers were supreme on the Yangtse at this time, and also prominent on some of the coast runs, British trading firms were still the most powerful foreign firms in the treaty ports as a whole, including the three newly opened ports on the Yangtse. British ships were also the most prominent in the foreign trade of China, including that from the Yangtse ports. In 1869, for instance, two British ocean steamers went up to Hankow at the height of the tea season and loaded direct for Europe, and were followed by six in 1870, and nine in 1871.* This, of course, was a serious challenge to the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company.\n\nCompany. Of the Shanghai Steam Navigation Company's 17 ships at this time only five had been built in America, six having been built in Britain, and six in Shanghai; while a good proportion of their captains and officers were British. This, together with the fact that Russell and Company always had a friendly alliance\n\n\"Of the original Tls. 1,000,000 capital about one third was contributed by members of Russell and Company, another third by foreign business men in Shanghai, of whom the majority were British, and the last third by Chinese business men, also in Shanghai.\n\n* Six of their steamers were on the Shanghai-Tientsin run, with calls at Chefoo, and two on the Shanghai-Ningpo run.\n\n? As the result of a triangular arrangement between the firms of Russell, Jardine and Dent, Jardine withdrew to the coast, and helped Dent financially, and Russell agreed not to increase their services on the coast.\n\n* One of these was Holt's Agamemnon and the other the Erl King. After this Holt's sent at least two ships to Hankow each season.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204973, "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": 81, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "72 \n\nA. D. BLUE \n\nFor the first few years after the cession of Hong Kong, the British Government and Royal Navy practically ignored piracy on the South China coast; and the American, French, and Portuguese governments were equally indifferent. Any attempts at suppression by the Hong Kong Government were as feeble and ineffective as those of the Canton authorities. British traders in Hong Kong and the treaty ports, however, considered that they were entitled to much greater protection, and after repeated protests and representations to the home and Hong Kong governments, the Hong Kong Government passed its first anti-piracy ordinance in 1847, and the Royal Navy began to take more effective action. As a result, many unsavoury practices were uncovered. It was found that certain British merchants were supplying arms and ammunition to the pirates against whom they were demanding protection; and that Hong Kong officials were licensing ships to provide convoy protection for Chinese traders, which ships were using the cover of the British flag to plunder the cargoes they were paid to protect. This licensed convoy system was open to much abuse, and a source of great trouble to the Navy. The Chinese called these ships \"protecting tigers.\" The Navy itself was not blameless in its anti-piracy operations. The over-generous bounty system, which made pirate hunting a lucrative profession for the first decades after the cession of Hong Kong, often led to innocent Chinese traders and sailors losing their lives and property. Admiralty records ignore most of the errors committed by overzealous naval officers, but the Navy's anti-piracy campaign was one of the many British activities to draw unfavourable criticism from Lord Elgin in his mission to China and Japan in 1858.\n\nThe Royal Navy and the Hong Kong Government faced a difficult and complex situation when they undertook serious anti-piracy operations in the late 1840's. The Navy could attack pirates anywhere on the high seas, and commit them for trial to any British or Chinese court; but Hong Kong could only free its own waters of pirates. Piracy on the coast and rivers came within the jurisdiction of the Chinese Government, and neither the Navy nor Hong Kong could operate there without permission from the Canton authorities. Anglo-Chinese co-operation, therefore, was essential for successful anti-piracy operations, and this was not always available. The Treaty of Tientsin was the first", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "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": 205950, "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": 30, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "LORD ELGIN AND THE TAIPINGS\n\n25\n\nhimself, use this opportunity to reach some kind of understanding with the Taipings? Did he use the opportunity to at least gain a greater understanding of them, as a possible prelude to a later accommodation? Let us look at the record.\n\nThe occasion was Lord Elgin's trip up the Yangtze River following the yet-to-be-aborted Treaty of Tientsin of 1858. The treaty had provided for the opening of the Yangtze River to Western trade. The official purpose of the mission was to investigate suitable trading ports and trading conditions along the river in anticipation of the day when this concession could be fulfilled. Elgin departed Shanghai aboard H.M.S. Furious on November 8, 1858 and arrived in Hankow on December 6. He left Hankow on December 12, returning to Shanghai on January 1, 1859.\n\nFar from getting off to a diplomatic start as far as any approach to the Taipings was concerned the trip was conducted in the grand gunboat style. Elgin declared:\n\nI, of course, resolved that no human power, and no physical obstacle which could be surmounted should arrest my progress. It was obviously essential to the prestige of England, that a measure of this description, if undertaken at all, should be carried out; I could not therefore recognize in the rebels a right to stop me, nor could I take any step which they might construe into such an admission. Subject to this limitation, I was ready to give them every assurance that our movement was of a peaceful character, and that we did not intend to take part, one way or another, in the civil war to which they were parties.3\n\nNo effort was made to notify the Taipings of the coming of this special mission. As a result an almost predictable misunderstanding occurred when Elgin's mission reached Nanking. Unfortunately we only have the English version of the incident, but this is sufficient to raise some interesting questions. Upon reaching Nanking, Elgin dispatched a smaller vessel to communicate, if possible, with the Taiping authorities. As the vessel approached the Nanking batteries, it was not unnaturally fired upon. The vessel, however, was under orders not to return fire immediately, but to hoist a white flag first. It did so. The Taiping batteries, however, fired seven additional shots within three minutes time.5\n\nPage 30\n\nPage 31", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206004, "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": 84, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "CHINESE EMIGRATION \n\nAND THE DECK PASSENGER TRADE \n\nA. D. BLUE* \n\nUntil after the Treaty of Tientsin of 1858, emigration from China was illegal, but this law, like so many others, was more honoured in the breach than in the observance, especially in the southern provinces of Fukien and Kwangtung, and to a lesser extent Kwangsi. Traders, however, were allowed to go abroad under certain conditions, which usually included eventual return to China. There had been emigration from these southern parts of China to most regions of South-east Asia for centuries before 1858, and there were flourishing colonies of Chinese at all the main ports when the first Europeans arrived there in the 16th century. The Ming fleet under Cheng Ho is said to have killed five thousand Chinese at Palembang in 1406, and while this is almost certainly an exaggeration, it is certain that these Chinese colonies were already populous. While treating briefly with Chinese emigration to other parts of the world, the following essay deals mainly with emigration to South-east Asia. The Chinese called this region the 'Nanyang', which literally means 'Southern Ocean'; but it is often used to describe other countries even further south, such as Australia, New Guinea, and the South Pacific islands. In the pre-European and early European eras, most overseas Chinese were traders, money lenders, and craftsmen, and their contribution to the economy of South-east Asia was out of all proportion to their numbers.\n\nThe civil wars which succeeded the Manchu defeat of the Mings in south China in the mid-17th century gave a strong impetus to emigration; but the arrival of the Europeans in South-east Asia in time created the conditions favourable to Chinese settlement on a much larger scale. The Chinese were often the intermediaries between the Europeans and the native peoples, useful to each, but periodically incurring hostility from both. As they increased in numbers, the Chinese posed increasingly\n\n*The author served as an Engineer Officer with the China Navigation Company from 1928 until 1938, and was on the Yangtse in 1930 in the Shengking and again in 1934 in the Wuhu. He was captured by pirates in the Newchang river in Manchuria in 1933 and held prisoner for five and a half months. Three of his articles have been published previously in the Journal: \"European Navigation on the Yangtse\" in Vol. 3, 1963, \"Piracy on the China Coast\" in Vol. 5, 1965, and \"The China Coasters\" in Vol. 7, 1967.\n\n* See the note at the end of this article.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206226, "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": 43, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "THE DEBATE ON NATIONAL SALVATION\n\n37\n\non the part of the Power committing it of a desire to discontinue its friendly relations with the Chinese government.\n\n\"In the alienation of Sovereign dominion over that part of her territory comprised in foreign settlements at the treaty ports, as well as in some other respects, China feels that the treaties impose on her a condition of things which, in order to avoid the evil they have led to in other countries, will oblige her to denounce these treaties on the expiry of the present decennial period. China intends the establishment of manufactories, the opening of mines, and the introduction of railways.\n\nThe publication of Tseng's article immediately attracted the attention of those who were interested in Far Eastern affairs. It was soon translated into German and French and was immediately published in leading papers of these two countries. Moreover, this article was simultaneously reprinted in several English newspapers in Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Tientsin.3 Immediately after the publication of this article in London, a Chinese translation was swiftly made available to the Chinese public. Reactions to this article, however, were not all favourable. The North China Herald in Shanghai, in its editorials on 16 February and 2 March 1887, stressed that Tseng's opinion on the Chinese Navy and Army was of no significance. The writer even quoted the comment of the French Premier, Jules F. C. Ferry, that \"China is a great country, but in spite of her greatness, her existence can just be ignored.\" He further said that China was not only continuing her sleep, but, as a matter of fact, she was on the verge of death. Tseng Chi-tse's article was nothing but boasting.\" Criticism also came from The Spectator in London:\n\nIn fact, what Marquis Tseng announces in his article is not true..... to purchase battleships from Great Britain or Germany can hardly make China become a Naval power. What China needs at the moment is to have a crew of well-trained naval officers to man the battleships. Without them, the battleships can easily be captured or go aground. It is impossible to bring all these naval officers to have confidence to manage such complicated and difficult courses in one or two years' time. As for the army, China has a very good background to increase her military", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206351, "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": 168, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "152\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\nin 1859 and spread outwards through the self-governing and other territories of what became the Commonwealth and Empire. It extended to Britain's Eastern Colonies and to the foreign communities of the treaty ports of China and Japan where, from time to time, various alarms and excursions added self-preservation to the list of factors motivating the continuance or periodic resuscitation of volunteer corps.\n\nIn Hong Kong the Laws of the Colony early provided for their existence as a constitutional force. A succession of Ordinances established volunteers on a proper basis. The earliest of these was No. 2 of 1862, which was repeated with slight variation in No. 18 of 1882. An important re-modelling was carried out by No. 6 of 1893. This was followed by a Volunteer Reserve Ordinance No. 25 of 1910. Both these Ordinances were replaced by a further Volunteer Ordinance No. 2 of 1920, still modelled largely on the important 1893 Ordinance.\n\nVolunteer forces were the rule in the various foreign concessions in China, though save in the larger ones local volunteer forces tended to be formed and reformed whenever events seemed to warrant it. For example, the Shameen Defence Corps was formed after a serious riot in 1884 and was reformed from time to time, e.g. in May 1911 due to the unsettled state of affairs in Canton (see Diary of Events and the Progress on Shameen 1859-1938 compiled by H.S.S. and privately printed about 1938, pp. 19-26).\n\nThe largest of the China volunteer units was, in time, the Shanghai Volunteer Corps. This originated at two public meetings held in April 1853 and its early doings are described in Chapter XXXV of Lanning and Couling's The History of Shanghai, Part I (Shanghai, Kelly & Walsh, 1921).\n\nInteresting details of its development are given here and there in Brigadier J. V. Davidson-Houston's Yellow Creek, The Story of Shanghai (London, Putnam, 1962). As in Hong Kong, the passing of the first emergency resulted in the demise of the Corps. \"Enthusiasm for the Volunteer Corps sank to a low ebb, members neglected to turn up for training and it was soon practically defunct\" (p. 58). The Corps was again raised in August 1860 with the onset of the Taiping rebels, when 107 volunteers came forward for enrolment (p. 65). However, after the successful operations against the rebels the Corps \"wilted and died\" and was wound up in 1867 to \"pay for its debtor's balance by selling its rifles\" although the rifle club continued to function (p. 90). The Corps was again formed in 1870 following the Tientsin massacre and continued in being thereafter, its numbers fluctuating between 250-350 for the rest of the 19th century (pp. 92-93). It then continued to grow in size, like the Hong Kong Volunteer Defence Corps, to meet the difficulties of the troubled 1920s and the war with Japan.\n\nThe number of foreign residents in China is relevant to the size and location of Volunteer Corps. Some figures are given at pp. 292-295 of J. Dyer Ball's Things Chinese or Notes Connected with China, 4th edition, Hongkong, Kelly and Walsh 1903. There were, for instance, 4,424 foreigners in Shanghai (exclusive of those living in the French Settlement) in 1895 and 6774 in 1900. The Hong Kong Census of 1891 listed 10,446 British and foreign residents.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206802, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1973", "page_number": 79, "title": "RAS-1973", "content_text": "SWATOW (CH’AOCHOW) HORIZONTAL STICK PUPPETS\n\nHELGA WERLE*\n\n# Introduction\n\nThe so-called Swatow puppets are in fact wrongly named. This is due to a confusion which requires some explanation. In Western languages the adjective Swatow is used to attribute a dialect, culture or people etc., when the Chinese themselves speak of Ch’aochow. This is because the British gained access to the Ch’aochow area by the opening of the port of Shantou (Swatow) by the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858. Chinese know that the city of Ch’aochow heads one of the 8 prefectures of the province of Kwangtung and is situated on the Han River about 40 miles from the sea and as far from the border with Fukien. Swatow itself, a port with about 85,000 inhabitants in 1925, is in the delta of the Han River, five miles from the open sea.\n\nIn this article the term “Swatow” has been replaced by the use of the proper Chinese description of Ch’aochow.\n\nCh’aochow developed very early into a culturally independent area. Its seaboard position and flourishing port gave it the necessary economic basis and exposed it to various cultural influences. Culturally and linguistically, it is more like a prefecture of Fukien than of Kwangtung. Its dialect is distinctly different from Cantonese, so are its customs and its music, which all deserve to be studied in detail for the value of its rich ancient tradition. Among its cultural assets, the Ch’aochow puppet-theatre is truly amazing, with unique features found nowhere else in the world.†\n\nThe author has studied in the Sinology departments of the Universities of Munich, Hamburg, and Cologne. She has been a resident of Hong Kong since 1966 and has followed up her studies with field work in Taiwan, Indonesia, Cambodia, Thailand and the Philippines. She is particularly interested in folk art and theatre and is at present on the staff of the Hong Kong Arts Centre Ltd. She has published various articles on puppet theatre and folk art.\n\n† For the Introduction, see L. Richard (translated, revised and enlarged by M. Kennelly), Comprehensive Geography of the Chinese Empire and Dependencies, Shanghai, T’usewei Press 1908, pp. 206 and 210. Also J. Dyer Ball, Things Chinese or Notes connected with China (5th edition, revised by É. Chalmers Werner), Kelly & Walsh, Shanghai, Hong Kong etc., 1925, pp. 689-690. For the Min dialects of which Ch’aochow and Swatow are part, see R. A. D. Forrest, The Chinese Language, Faber & Faber, London, 1958, pp. 225-232.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1973.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8910rj06r", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207364, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1975", "page_number": 132, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "124\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\nTo be sure, the Ch'ing dynasty was not blindly anti-foreign, having accepted both Russians and other Europeans (the Dutch) as allies, and having allowed a number of Russians to be \"naturalized\" (kuei-hua) and incorporated into the elite Banner forces.58 But the ever-tightening strait-jacket of neo-Confucian orthodoxy under the Manchus, and the rise of anti-foreign (particularly anti-Christian) propaganda, did not portend a friendly reception for Westerners when they attempted to \"open\" China by force in the nineteenth century.\n\nThe Nineteenth Century Context\n\nBy the mid-nineteenth century, the West had earned China's well-deserved distrust for its aggressiveness and intractability. Pronounced anti-foreignism (championed, ironically, by a scholar of Mongol extraction in the 1860's) blossomed after the Opium War of 1839-1842 and grew apace with further Western economic, military and religious activity in China. During the Opium War, the throne had countenanced, and even encouraged, limited and unobtrusive military assistance from Americans in the time-honored tradition of \"using barbarians against barbarians.\" In the area of Canton, for example, a few individuals \"dressed in Chinese costume\" assisted the Chinese in building fortresses and casting cannon.59 But by the Hsien-feng emperor's reign, China had adopted a belligerent anti-Western stance, and despite the panic precipitated by the Taiping outbreak in 1850-1851, the throne seemed totally indisposed to accept any kind of foreign assistance against the rebels. The situation did not change appreciably until 1860, when the British and French occupied Peking in an attempt to enforce the provisions of the Treaty of Tientsin (1858).60\n\nAfter the signing of the Peking Conventions in late 1860, which ushered in a new period of \"cooperation\" between China and the foreign powers, Western barbarians began playing a prominent role in Chinese military affairs. A number of diverse individuals became involved: Foreign military men and diplomatic officials, customs personnel, swashbuckling adventurers, and even missionaries.61 On the whole, the participation of these individuals fell within the bounds of China's long tradition of \"borrowing talent from foreign lands\" (chieh-ts'ai i-ti).62 But unlike alien employees in earlier periods of Chinese history, Westerners in the nineteenth century were a new breed of barbarian, confident of their own cultural and", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209424, "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-1982", "page_number": 81, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "59\n\nSerious measures were taken to change the whole social and political structure of the town.\n\nNOTES\n\nPreliminary note:\n\nAlthough the present paper is to a great extent based on fresh research, the following works have been of considerable use as they contain material about the government of the International Settlement:\n\nFeetham, Justice Richard: \"Report to the Shanghai Municipal Council\" 1931-1932.\n\nJohnstone, W.C.: \"The Shanghai Problem\", 1937.\n\nJones, F.C.: \"Shanghai and Tientsin\", 1940.\n\nKotenev, A.M.: \"Shanghai, its Mixed Court and Council\", 1925.\n\nMontalto de Jesus, C.A.: \"Historic Shanghai\", 1909.\n\nPort, F.L. Hawks: \"A short history of Shanghai\", 1928.\n\n1 The International Settlement at Shanghai was formed in 1863 by the amalgamation of the original British Settlement (formed in 1845, but later increased in area) with the so-called American Settlement in the Hongkew area which had grown up without formal establishment in the 1850s, and early 1860s, and which had been formally recognised by the Chinese earlier in 1863. The French Settlement (formed in 1849) always remained separate from the International Settlement. Outside the area of the foreign settlements lay the old Chinese city and suburbs: these remained under Chinese rule, and became subject to the Greater Shanghai Municipality when that was set up by the Chinese authorities in 1927.\n\n* Cf also Treaty of the Bogue, article VII, \"ground and houses, the rent of which is to be fairly and equitably arranged for, shall be set apart by the local officers in communication with the Consul.\"\n\n3\n\nPopulation figures for intermediate years are, 1,666 foreigners and 75,047 Chinese in 1870, and 6,774 foreigners and 345,276 Chinese in 1900. Of the 13,536 foreigners resident in 1910, 4,465 were British, 940 Americans and 3,361 Japanese. Of the 38,940 foreigners resident in 1935 no fewer than 20,242 were Japanese, as against 6,596 British and 2,015 Americans.\n\n+ * Text of the 1845 Land Regulations (LR) is in Shanghai Almanac 1853.\n\nIt is not too fanciful to suppose that persons willing to move to as remote a place as Shanghai in the 1840s were likely to be particularly strongly imbued with the contemporary belief in individualism, with its consequent hatred of despotism and paternalism; this almost certainly assisted in the speedy breakdown of the 1845 Land Regulations to something far more individualistic in tone.\n\n• North China Herald (NCH) 30.7.1853.\n\n* J.H. Haan: \"De opkomst van de International Settlement te Shanghai 1845-1865. Een historisch — politicologische analyse\" (\"The rise of the International Settlement at Shanghai. A historical-political analysis\"), unpublished manuscript University of Amsterdam, 1977; chapter II. Cited as Haan \"Shanghai\".\n\nCf NCH 22.7.1854; text of draft LR in NCH 30.7.1853, 27.8.1853; final version in 8.7.1854.\n\nNCH 22.4.1865.\n\n10 NCH 17.3.1866.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209653, "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-1982", "page_number": 310, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "288\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nThe reply from the Secretary of State, Lord Salisbury, was, “I approve your proceedings\" (F.O.228, v.605, p.237, dated Dec. 9, 1878).\n\nThe letter from the Foreign Office to Mr. Herton which he referred to in his letter to Mr. Keswick has not been traced in F.O.228. Perhaps he would have been less pleased with Foreign Office action if he had been aware of the above exchange.\n\nNothing further appears to have happened until 24th July 1879, when Sir Thomas Wade, who as H.M. Minister in Peking had meanwhile taken over from Chargé d'Affaires Fraser, wrote to Mr. Scott enclosing a memorandum on the Herton claim (F.O.228, v.630, p.101-2), and instructing him to inform the Superintendent of Customs at Kiungchow that the firm's claim for $909.57 was supported, and that the attention of the Chinese authorities in Canton had been directed to the case. It is not entirely clear whether this was before or after Scott's letter of 3rd July, enclosing one from Herton of 2nd July to Sir Thomas Wade (F.O.228, v.630, p.134-6), had reached Peking, though the latter are filed later. Herton claimed that, because of his \"unfair treatment at the hands of the Authorities\" his business had been \"entirely crippled\", and he was \"now in most pressing need of the money,\"\n\nIn accordance with Sir Thomas Wade's instructions, Scott wrote on 22nd August 1879 to the Customs, claiming $909.57, and rehearsing the whole affair on the lines of Wade's memorandum (F.O.228, v.630, p.165-7). No reply of substance was received until November, when, on the instructions of the Governor General of the two Kwangs, the old argument was reiterated, that no instructions for issue of transit passes were drawn up until January 1879 and as Herton had made his journeys in 1877 the duties paid were legally charged (F.O.228, v.630, p.174-5). In reply, Scott referred Acting Taotai Liu to the Treaty of Tientsin, art. XXVIII (see note 3 below), and pointed out that transit passes had been obtainable at Shanghai and other open ports for many years. He continued, \"Are the Canton Authorities then alone to be free to carry out their individual opinions under pretext of drawing up rules, refuse to issue passes and levy any dues they please in opposition to Treaty rights?\"\n\nIn", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209658, "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-1982", "page_number": 315, "title": "RAS-1982", "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES \n\n293 \n\nThe final happy twist to this story is that the Foreign firm which took over Welsh's contract for Cassia, thus restoring the good name of the foreigners, was almost certainly Herton's. Earlier in Piry's report he wrote: \"Messrs. RUSSELL & CO's steamer Hainan will be remembered here as having proved the means of breaking the ice in Pakhoi. She made her first appearance here on the 28th of September, with a Foreign merchant on board\". As we have seen above, the Hainan came to Pakhoi especially to fetch the consignment of Cassia, and the Foreign merchant on board was equally probably Mr. Herton, perhaps come to take up residence as indicated by Stronach.\n\nWhat use, if any, William Keswick made of the two letters has not been ascertained. It is of interest, however, to note that soon after Russell's Hainan inaugurated the Hong Kong - Pakhoi run, Jardine, Matheson's Conquest began to include Pakhoi on her Hong Kong -- Haiphong route.\n\nH. A. RYDINGS \n\nNOTES \n\nThe large collection of China Maritime Customs publications in the Library of the University of Hong Kong were donated by the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce in 1937. William Keswick was at one time Chairman of the Chamber. When the letters were found in the 1879 volume it was unfortunately not noticed between which pages they had been left, but it is probable that it was at the beginning of the report from Pakhoi.\n\n* Contained in Great Britain, Foreign Office, Embassy and consular archives: China: correspondence (F.O.228), now in the Public Record Office, London: microfilm in the University of Hong Kong Library. Correspondence on the Herton claim is in vols. 612, 630 and 654.\n\n4.\n\nTransit passes were instituted under the Treaty of Tientsin, 1858, in Article XXVIII of which it is stated:\n\n\"It shall be at the option of any British subject, desiring to convey produce purchased inland to a port, or to convey imports from a port to an inland market, to clear his goods of all transit duties, by payment of a single charge. The amount of this charge shall be leviable on exports at the first barrier they may have to pass, or, on imports, at the port at which they are landed; and on payment thereof, a certificate shall be issued, which shall exempt the goods from all further inland charges whatsoever.\"\n\n(Hertslet's Treaties, &c., between Great Britain and China, London, 1908, v.1, p. 27-8).\n\nHai-An (M) is the port on the mainland opposite to Kiungchow,\n\nPage 315\n\nPage 316", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1982.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mk61z420p", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 209960, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1983", "page_number": 219, "title": "RAS-1983", "content_text": "197\n\nFrom 1860 there is, firstly, a collection of China Medals and related items and eight drawings by a Royal Marines Light Infantry officer who served in the Second China War. There is also a vase and a gilded, seated, Buddha which were taken from the Summer Palace in that year.\n\nThe Marines were involved in the fighting occasioned by the Boxer uprising in 1900, and the Museum holds a number of relics of this involvement. A Boxer flag is, for instance, on display. This was captured by Sgt. Preston, Royal Marines Light Infantry, on the walls of Peking on July 14, 1900, an act for which he was awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Medal. The notes explain that Preston kept the Boxers at bay while an American Marine seized the flag.\n\nA Victoria Cross was won at about the same date which is commemorated by the display of a large pike. This was captured by the RMLI detachment during the siege of the Legations. Captain L.S.T. Holliday led a sortie during which he had half a lung shot away. He later became Adjutant General of the Royal Marines and when he died in 1966 at the age of 95 he was the oldest holder of the VC. A squat, gape-mouthed, mortar about two feet high is also on show. This was seized at the capture of the Taku forts in 1900. A large brass shell case used by the Quick Firing guns at the Taku Forts is mounted in the museum as a gong. The case has the name Berndorfer stamped upon it, an Austrian firm.\n\nNext came a quick visit to the National Army Museum, in Chelsea, London. Among the items which I spotted there were the following, and I am sure there must be others which I missed.\n\nThere is a large, full-length, portrait of Sir Hugh Gough, by an unknown artist. He is shown with what looks to be an Indian servant buckling on his sword and is impressively bemedalled. A tall, slim, figure, with a white moustache, the General was in his fifties or sixties when the picture was painted. A silver model pagoda commemorating the Treaty of Nanking, August 1860, is on loan from the present Viscount Gough. It was made by Richard Hennell and is hallmarked London 1860-61.\n\nA long rampart gingall, manufactured at South Tientsin Arsenal in 1895 slants diagonally across a case which also features", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211109, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 170, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "145\n\nThe question arose again in 1897. At that time the pass requirement was abolished, except when invoked under special order by the Governor in Council, but the light requirement remained. This gave rise to confusion among the Chinese, for many thought both requirements had been abolished.\n\nIn commenting on the misunderstanding the Daily Press suggested that all regulations should be done away with. The abolition would be a gracious act in the year of Queen Victoria's Jubilee. The editor felt that ‘if this were done as a concession to the Chinese on the occasion of the Diamond Jubilee, it would afford extreme pleasure to the native community, in fact it would not be easy to find any form of Jubilee Memorial that would afford the Chinese more genuine satisfaction than the repeal of a law which they regard as obnoxious.”\n\nImmediately after, the requirements were repealed. This long delayed move could only serve to improve relations between the various sections of the Hongkong community.\n\nWHY EARLY EXPATS FEARED CONSUL MOVE\n\nAnother issue on which Ho A-mei expressed his opinion publicly was the appointment of a Chinese consul for Hongkong.\n\nIn July 1891, when the matter was under discussion, he wrote a letter to a Chinese paper published in Hongkong advocating the appointment. A translation of his letter was published for English readers in the China Mail.\n\nIt was a long-standing issue, having first been raised by the Chinese in 1868. The request became involved in negotiations for the revision of the Tientsin Treaty between Britain and China. The treaty was signed in 1858, but it provided for a review after ten years.\n\nAt times the Chinese request for a consul in Hongkong was given favourable consideration by the British Foreign Office, but it was consistently opposed by the Hongkong Government and the foreign merchants trading with China.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211110, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 171, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "146\n\nThe Chinese desire to have a consul in Hongkong was tied to the much larger problem of the opium trade. Hongkong had a special place in the trade. As a free port immediately next to the Chinese mainland, it was an excellent base for smuggling opium into China.\n\nThe Chinese Government had for many years prohibited its importation. However, it reluctantly agreed to its legalisation by the Treaty of Tientsin in 1858. There was the hope that, if legalised, China could better control the trade.\n\nA heavy duty was levied on it, however, and to avoid payment, large quantities continued to be smuggled from Hongkong in Chinese junks.\n\nThe smuggling was difficult to control. Hongkong regarded it strictly as China's problem. It saw no reason why it should be responsible for its suppression.\n\nIt was the peculiar situation of Hongkong that made enforcement by the Chinese difficult. In Hongkong there were ample storage facilities for the drug. The processed opium could be purchased from the Government opium monopolists. There was little difficulty in putting it aboard a junk in Hongkong and delivering it to agents somewhere along the coast or in an inland waterway.\n\nTwo types of charges were levied on opium. There was the duty on goods imported in foreign vessels to the treaty ports. The Chinese Imperial Maritime Customs became responsible for collecting this.\n\nIn addition, there were provincial levies called likin. These varied from province to province and were subject to change at the will of the provincial administrators.\n\nThis is the background for the intermittent suggestion that a Chinese official be placed in Hongkong to supervise the collection of duties imposed by the Chinese upon goods shipped from Hongkong and thereby to check the blatant smuggling.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211111, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 172, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "147\n\nHongkong opposed the request for two basic reasons. Any check to smuggling would deprive opium importers of substantial profits. This reason was seldom openly acknowledged. The other reason was frequently stated.\n\nIt was the ever-present fear that the Chinese population of Hongkong would be influenced or controlled by the officials in China and British prestige and sovereignty would be affected.\n\nThe dispatches, memorials and letters of the Hongkong Government, the General Chamber of Commerce, the Foreign Office, the Colonial Office, the representatives of the Chinese Government, the British Consul at Canton, and the British Minister at Peking, as well as the editorials and correspondence in the local papers, such as the letter of Ho A-mei in 1891, point up the issues involved.\n\nThe matter was first raised in 1868. At that time, Prince Kung on behalf of the Chinese Government was discussing the revision of the 1858 Treaty of Tientsin with the British Minister at Peking, Sir Rutherford Alcock.\n\nThe Prince asked Sir Rutherford if China would be permitted to station one of its officials in Hongkong to look after the collection of duties China levied on goods conveyed in junks from Hongkong to the mainland. Much revenue was slipping away because of the ease by which Hongkong exporters could evade the custom taxes. China wished to plug the leak. The simplest and least expensive method was to check it at its source.\n\nSir Rutherford thought that Britain should not permit a Chinese Government official to reside in Hongkong in any official capacity other than that of consul. This would bring his position in line with general diplomatic usage.\n\nIt was the practice for consuls of foreign nations to reside in British possessions to look after the interests of the country they represented.\n\nThe British Minister in Peking was aware that China had a real", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211117, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 178, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "153\n\nclaimed: “We believe that such a creation of an imperium in imperio would produce alarm and dissatisfaction among the Chinese residents here; and by unnecessarily pressing on the Chinese the adoption of such a measure, Her Majesty's Government would be taking the surest course to develop, during times of peace, the worst vices of Chinese rule in a population under British protection; and, on the other hand, in the event of approaching disturbances, or the cessation of friendly relations with Peking, we would be creating in our midst a dangerous centre of rebellion, plots and hostile actions.”\n\nThe basic insecurity of a small group of colonials dwelling in the midst of a large population, whose customs and language were unfamiliar and strange, welled up at the prospect of the approval by Britain for a Chinese consul to assume duties in Hongkong.\n\nPressure from Hongkong and from merchants in Britain interested in the China trade caused the matter to be dropped.\n\nIt was revived in 1875 and again in 1891. It was in the latter year that Ho A-mei spoke out on the matter.\n\nCONSUL NEEDED ‘FOR FAIR TREATMENT\n\nThe suggestion that a Chinese consul be appointed for Hongkong reappeared periodically. The idea was first advanced in 1868.\n\nAt that time the Governor, Sir Richard MacDonnell, sent a strong protest to England.\n\nTwo years later the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce expressed its views on the subject.\n\nThe Treaty of Tientsin between Britain and China was signed in 1858. It contained a provision that it should be reviewed after 10 years. These revisions were embodied in the Chefoo Convention.\n\nThe Foreign Office asked the various Chambers of Commerce", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 211260, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1987", "page_number": 321, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "296\n\nIndividual treaty ports in China as well as other parts of Asia, large and small, are receiving attention from scholars. Meanwhile, British Mandarins and Chinese Reformers should be read by all who are interested in modern China or who are interested in the British in Asia. Dr. Atwell has made a significant contribution to our knowledge of how the British administered one small locality and coped with demands of modern forces. Her work can be used as a guide or springboard for comparison of British colonial policy in various East Asian places, such as Brunei and the Straits Settlements, Hankow, Tientsin, and Shanghai, say, with Hong Kong tossed in for good measure.\n\nWEI PEH T'I*\n\nSteven A. Leibo, Transferring Technology to China, Prosper Giquel and the Self-strengthening Movement, China Research Monograph 28, Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Center for Chinese Studies, 1985.\n\nProsper Giquel, edited by Steven A. Leibo, A Journal of the Chinese Civil War 1864. Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press, 1985.\n\nThese two works, one of compilation and assessment based on a doctoral dissertation, the other of translation (with the help of Debbie Weston) and annotation with a lengthy introduction, have a considerable intrinsic interest because they deal with a rather extraordinary man. They have also a degree of relevance, over a century later, for the West's involvement with present-day China's modernizing programme.\n\nThey are to be read in conjunction with other modern works on this period of China's self-strengthening efforts, including those listed in Dr. Leibo's introduction to Transferring Technology.\n\nProsper Giquel, a French naval officer, came to China during the Second China War. After service with the Joint Commission\n\n* Wei Peh T'i is Honorary Lecturer, Department of History, and Research Associate, Centre of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong. She is the author of Shanghai: Crucible of Modern China (1987).", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212502, "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-1991", "page_number": 56, "title": "RAS-1991", "content_text": "36\n\nKong, Capital Communications Lid\n\nHo, Ping-ti 1966a. Zhongguo huiguan shilun (On the history of Landsmannschaften in China). Taibei, Shihuo Chubanshe.\n\n1966b. The Geographical Distribution of Hui-kuan (Landsmannschaften) in Central Upper Yangtze Provinces. In Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 5/2 120-52\n\nHonig, Emily. 1992. Creating Chinese Ethnicity Subet People in Shanghai 1850-1980. New Haven and London, Yale University Press.\n\nHunter, William C 1882 'Fan Kwae' at Canton Before Treaty Days, 1825-1844, London Kegan Paul, Trench & Co\n\nKing, Frank H. H. 1983. edited. Eastern Banking Essays in the History of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation London, Athlone Press\n\nKeswick, Maggie 1982. The Thistle and the Jade: A Celebration of 150 Years of Jardine, Matherson & Company London, Octopus.\n\nLai, Chi-kong. 1992 The Qing State and Merchant Enterprise: the China Merchants' Company, 1872-1902. In Jane K. Leonard (edited) 139-56.\n\nLee, Pui Tak. 1990 Kindai Chugoku ni okeru kōsho Kigyō no rekishi teki tenkai Kanyahyōkōshi wo jirei toshite (The historical Origins of Commercial and Industrial Enterprises in China, the Case of Han-yeh-p'ing Coal & Iron Company Limited, 1896-1991) M Litt. Thesis. University of Tokyo.\n\nLeonard, Jane K 1992. edited; To Achieve Wealth and Security, the Qing Imperial State and the Economy, 1644-1911. Ithaca, East Asia Program, Cornell University\n\nLeung, Yuensang 1982 Regional Rivalry in Mid-nineteenth Century Shanghai. Cantonese vs Ningpo Men. In Ch'ing-shih wen-t'i: 4/8; 29-50.\n\n1986. The Shanghai-Tientsin Connection. Li Hung-chang's Political Control over Shanghai during the Late Ch'ing Period In Chinese Studies 4/1 315-31\n\n1990 The Shanghai Taotai: Linkage Man in a Changing Society, 1843-90 Singapore. National Singapore University Press\n\nLiu, Kwang-ching 1979 Credit Facilities in China's Early Industrialization The Background and Implications of Hsu Jun's Bankruptcy in 1883. In Modern Chinese Economic History 499-509, Edited by Chiming Hou Taibei, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica\n\n1982 A Chinese Entrepreneur In Maggie Keswick (edited) 103-30.\n\n— 1990. Jinshi Shixuang yu Xincheng Qiye (The new thoughts and modern enterprises) Taibei, Lianjing Chuban Shiye Gongsi\n\nMann, Susan Jones 1972. Finance in Ningpo the 'Ch'ien Chuang', 1750-1880 In W E. Willmott (edited) 47-78\n\n1974 The Ningpo Pang and Financial Power at Shanghai In Mark Elvin & G. William Skinner (edited) 73-96\n\n— 1976. Merchant Investment, Commercialization, and Social Change in the Ningpo Area In Reform in Nineteenth-Century China 41-8. Edited by Paul A, Cohen Cambridge and Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.\n\nMcElderry, Andrea Lee 1992 Guarantors and Guarantees in Qing Government-Bussiness Relations In Jane K. Leonard (edited) 119-38\n\n1993 Guarantors in China's Treaty Ports the Evolution of Employee Bonding Unpublished paper presented at the 34th International Congress on Asian and North African Studies, Hong Kong\n\nMei, June 1979 Socioeconomic Origins of Emigration Guangdong to California, 1850-1882 In Explorations in Economic History 7/4 451-73\n\nQing Xu Yuzhi xiansheng ruḥ zixu nianpu (Chronological autobiography of Xu Run) Reprinted in 1981\n\nQuan, Hansheng 1972 Zhongguo Jingjishi luncong (Collected essays on Chinese economic", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212769, "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": 78, "title": "RAS-1992", "content_text": "63\n\n1881\n\nApril\n\nJune\n\n1882 February March Spring\n\n1882 November 1882/1883\n\n1883 May\n\n1833 Autumn\n\n1883\n\nca 1883/1884\n\nEarly 1884\n\n1884 July\n\nArrived Hami\n\nPassed through Shensi and Kansu to Turkestan he tried to push on through Central Asia to India but was stopped; again, tried to push on to the Russian frontiers via Ili and Tarbagatai but was stopped, visited Hami [HQ Chinese Army]. Residence in Hami where he said he remained until the Treaty of Livadia [2-10-79] was signed and where he learned a number of Turkish words. [Mesny claimed that in 1882 returning from Kashgaria he stayed in Tso Tsung-t’ang's camp. [Tso was recalled from Hami to Peking in late 1880] Departed Hami and retraced his steps leisurely across the Gobi desert to Kansu, on to northern Tibet (visited old fashioned gold diggings) and back to Kan-chou to refit before continuing into Tibet a second time in another direction. He then, travelled through the Kokonor region ending up at Lanchou, February 1881, via Hsi-ning.\n\nDeparted from Northwest China for Peking, via Si-an, Ho-nan Fu, Tai-yuan Fu and Pao-ting Fu.\n\nWhilst in Si-an Mesny visited the Nestorian Cross, later, on his first evening in Taiyuan he lost 640 pages of notes, the journal of his Journey to Hami from Canton\n\nArrived Peking\n\nVisited Tientsin to await the first steamers of the season carrying mails Returned to Tai-yuan in Shansi and Pao-ting Fu, and again visited Si-an.\n\nVisited the famous Shao-lin monastery in the Sung-shan [Mountains] near Ho-nan Fu and invited to settle down for a couple of years with the monks.\n\nDeparted Shansi for Canton; however,\n\nVisited Yunnan province at the invitation of T'ang Chung to assist in the development of natural resources of the province The French authorities in Tongkin insisted that Mesny leave the province Passed through Ch'engtu and Yunnan Fu heading for Canton via Po-se, Nanning Kuangsi [Kuei-hsien, where he spent three to four months whilst the Franco-Chinese war raged in Tongkin), Kueichou and the West River. He travelled much of the way by large house boat. He took careful notes which he offered to the Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce but failed to receive any encouragement\n\nArrived Canton, then visited Hong Kong, Macau, Swatow, Amoy and Foochou [Viceroy Chang Chih-tung retained Mesny at Canton for one year and ten months (nfd) He lived in an hotel unable to get an appointment from Chang he eventually withdrew. Mesny met Kung Chao-yuan, the Commissary General at Shanghai for Formosa, at the Kiangnan Arsenal in Shanghai\n\nVisited tomb of Su Hsiao-hsiao near Hangchou. (a celebrated courtesan of the 11th century AD)\n\nDeparted Canton via Hong Kong for Foochou and Shanghai [elsewhere he noted that he had been recommended for the post of Foreign Superintendent of the Arsenal at Foochou during his visit there in 1883)\n\nIn Wu-chang and Han-yang", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214325, "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": 183, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "147\n\nPLUM PUDDINGS AND SHARP BOYS “ONE TOUCH OF NATURE MAKES THE WHOLE WORLD KIN”\n\nAN ANALYSIS OF THE CHINA COVERAGE IN THE ILLUSTRATED LONDON NEWS,1\n\n5 JANUARY TO 23 SEPTEMBER 18612\n\nGILLIAN B. BICKLEY3\n\nWhether or not the British public had a particular interest in China before 1861, it is impossible that their interest can not have been heightened by the stirring diplomatic news coming out from China in the last days of 1860 and the early days of 1861. This raised interest was further fuelled by the human interest touches written into features appearing over the next several months, and by the media's developing focus on a desire for a better understanding between the British and Chinese peoples.\n\nWhat British readers could have known previously about events in China was briefly as follows. After the signing of the Treaty of Tientsin on 26 June 1858, the Allied land force of Britain and France had evacuated Tientsin on 6 July without any force having been sent – even as a token – to the Chinese capital, Peking. It was generally considered, however, that the retirement of the troops was premature and that eventually a force would have to be sent to Peking to prove that the allies had established their positions in China.\n\nThe expected peace demanded under the Treaty did not materialise. Small attacks continued to be made by armed parties on British occupied positions. On 8 January 1859, correspondence was found which confirmed that the Emperor had no intention of keeping the Treaty, and had in fact issued orders that the British were to be prevented from entering the Pei-ho River and trading on the Yangtse, contrary to the provisions of the Treaty.\n\nIn June 1859, the British fleet escorting Lord Elgin, the first British Minister, to Peking, to exchange the ratifications, was brought up sharp by the forts at Takoo, at the entrance to the Peiho River. Men and material were lost, and there was grave damage to prestige.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214326, "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": 184, "title": "RAS-1998", "content_text": "148\n\nMore than a year later, on 25 July 1860, French and British forces combined prior to proceeding to Peking to enforce the treaty of Tientsin. On 18 September, a small group of diplomats, civilians and soldiers, led by Mr (later Sir) Harry Parkes, of the British Consular Service in China, left the main body of troops to make certain arrangements with the Chinese Commissioners. They were taken captive on their way back to rejoin the troops. Given the nature of their mission at the time of their capture, great indignation was felt.\n\nMr Harry Parkes was held for ransom. Other prisoners were treated with great cruelty. This again caused great indignation.\n\nBy way of reprisal and on Lord Elgin's deliberated orders, the Imperial summer palace at Peking was razed to the ground. On 24 October 1860, the Treaty of Tientsin was finally ratified and the Convention of Peking was annexed to it as a make-weight.\n\n6\n\nThe arrival of full news on these and related events gave rise in Britain to several months of heavy press coverage on China and the Chinese in early 1861. The London Illustrated News, with its combination of illustrations and narrative, is a useful case study to illustrate both the extent and the variety of this coverage.\n\nThe Illustrated London News\n\n8\n\nOn 5 January 1861, The Illustrated London News was full of news from China. It carried three illustrations \"by our special artist\": two double-spread half-page illustrations of \"Street Scene in Pekin: A Crowd of Celestials Contemplating the Barbarians\" and \"An-tin Mun, the Gate of Pekin in Our Possession\"; and one full-page double-spread illustration, showing \"The Earl of Elgin's Entrance into Pekin on the 24th of October Last to sign the Treaty of Peace Between Great Britain and China\". The Illustrated London News also gave the text of the Convention and a description of the ceremony of the signing of the Convention.\n\n11\n\nThe same issue also contained part of Mr Harry Parkes's detailed and circumstantial narrative of his own imprisonment, and an account by the Daily News correspondent of the fate of the whole number...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 215783, "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": 82, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "15\n\n25 Ibid, Chap 5\n\n26 Ibid, pp 755 - 6; Hansard, 3rd series, vol cxlix, p 989\n\n27 Turnbull, supra p 350\n\n28 Act XVII of 1855, cf. Pridmore, Memoirs of Raffles Museum; Hansard, 3rd series, vol cxlix, pg 988\n\n29 Tan DE, A Portrait of Malaysia and Singapore p 70\n\n**Tumbull, supra, p 207**\n\n31 Tan DE, supra, p 70\n\nBuckley, supra, p 760; Hansard, 3rd series, vol. cxlix, p 990\n\n+\n\n* for example, when an act was passed in 1862 to regulate coinage in India, special provision was made by the Legislative Council for the Straits Settlements, and between 1862 and 1867, copper cents for the first time bore the name 'Straits Settlements' (Turnbull, supra, p 208; Hansard, 3rd series, vol. cxlix, p 990)\n\n34 Ibid. p 760\n\n35 1867 Act to Provide for the Government of the Straits Settlements, para 4\n\n36 Turnbull, supra, p 209\n\n37\n\nBuckley, supra, p 756\n\n38 Mills, supra, p 241\n\n39 Turnbull, supra, p 247\n\n40\n\n41\n\nMills, supra, p 243\n\nCameron J, Our Tropical Possessions in Malayan India pp 251 - 2\n\n42 of Treaty of Tientsin Art. LIII; Prussian Treaty Art. XXXIII; Danish Treaty Art.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216025, "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": 324, "title": "RAS-2002", "content_text": "258\n\nShanghai did not possess, and were undoubtedly conducive to health by promoting exercise. In winter the climate is bracing and healthy though fever and dysentery were to be dreaded in summer'.\n\nThere are a number of highlights for foreign visitors beginning, perhaps, with the former foreign concession, though nowadays more than seventy years on, it is difficult to discern. Outside the Chinese old city with its modern main roads, cobbled side streets and a stone pagoda said to be 13th century Yuan dynasty, though its present condition suggests that it has either been well restored or completely remade within the last century, there are the fourth century Jin Shan temple and pagoda; the Grand Canal; the former British Consulate; the home of Pearl Buck, as well as the sites of the storming of the town by a British brigade on 21st July 1842 during the First China War [commonly referred to as the Opium War]. There are also the remains of the lengthy trench dug by the Taiping rebels to protect the city from recapture by Imperial forces as well as the ruins left after the destruction of the city by the Taipings during the 1850s. And for those who have read a little Chinese literature or attended Chinese opera the widely-known tale of the White Snake Lady is also part of the story of the Jin Shan temple.\n\nBefore waxing too lyrically about its glories let us remember that Zhenjiang is the vinegar capital of China, with, if the wind is in the wrong direction, an evocative sour tang forewarning approaching visitors long before they are anywhere near to the city. The majority of Chinese when confronted with the name of the city almost to a man voice the single word 'vinegar' or to the connoisseur 'brown rice vinegar'.\n\nZhenjiang was a treaty port with a foreign concession for sixty-eight years, from the signing of the Treaty of Tientsin in 1860 until 1928, one of the minor footholds foreigners had obtained from China in one of the 'unequal treaties' and the base for numerous foreign interests. There were great hopes for the place and Sir Robert Hart, the Inspector-General of the Chinese Imperial Maritime Customs, even anticipated that eventually it would eclipse Shanghai as a commercial centre. Despite numerous westerners passing through the place down the years only a few spent full tours of duty there. Many of the temporary visitors were the lesser employees of major western companies such as BAT and Butterfield and Swire, whose regular tours to the many small", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278", "rank": 0 } ]