[
    {
        "id": 205964,
        "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": 44,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "HONG KONG CADETS, 1862 - 1941\n\n39\n\nwhere the need was pressing; for often the courts could not sit at all for want of interpreters and as frequently had to adjourn owing to incorrect interpretation. Sir Hercules' plan was that 'the cadets should be under 20 years of age; that they should be chosen from any of the Colleges, and not from King's College alone, as at present in the consular service.........on arriving in China, they would have teachers provided for them; when competent, as they might be in three years.........they should be considered preferable (after a further two years of experience in administration) to any office in the Civil Service that did not involve a professional training.\" The Council liked the scheme and the Secretary of State gave his approval. Regulations governing the cadetships were then published in the Government Gazette on 12 October 1861. The Regulations stipulated that 'at the end of two years' study or as soon afterwards as they shall be declared qualified by a Board of Competent Examiners, the first three Cadets shall be appointed Government Interpreters, and be employed in such of the departments as may require their services (and that) after three years' service they will be considered eligible by the Secretary of State for promotion to the higher offices in the Civil Service of Hong Kong. As it turned out, the first three cadets never held the position of interpreter. They were in such demand and were promoted so swiftly to substantive posts that their promotion was a de facto violation of the published regulations.\n\nThe first three cadets were appointed in 1862 and arrived in Hong Kong late that year. They were M. S. Tonnochy,12 W. M. Deane13 and Cecil Clementi Smith.14 There were further appointments in 1865 — Alfred Lister,15 James Russell,16 and R. G. Starkey, but the last resigned within a year and joined the North China Insurance Company. H. E. Wodehouse17 was appointed in 1867 and J. H. Stewart Lockhart18 in 1879, after an interregnum of 12 years during which the scheme was in abeyance. Only 14 cadets were appointed during the rest of the century, among them Francis Henry May19 (1881), Reginald Fleming Johnston20 (1898), and Cecil Clementi (1899), all of whom were to distinguish themselves at a later date.\n\nThe early cadets had meteoric careers. They all received acting posts before their period of study was up. Smith became",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205965,
        "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": 45,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "40 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\nRegistrar-General in 1864, a key post, Deane Superintendent of Police in 1867, and Tonnochy who held the offices of Sheriff, Coroner and Marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court in 1865, became Assistant Harbour Master in 1867 and Superintendent of the Jail in 1875, a post he held until his death in 1882. Lister was soon sent to the Harbour Office and Russell, who also acted as Governor Sir Richard Macdonnell's private secretary, was sent to the Magistracy. James Legge, long resident in Hong Kong, was critical of the way in which the original scheme was modified by expediency and argued that \"there should have been no directing them away from their proper business of study until they had given proof of their actual interpretation in the supreme court”,22 Legge was right in principle; but although it was not the Government's intention to produce a supply of sinologues but rather administrators with a knowledge of Chinese, these early cadets did work hard at their Chinese, and one, Lister, supplied the China Review and Notes and Queries on China and Japan with many thoughtful comments on Chinese language and society. \n\nThe development of the cadet scheme can only be understood in relation to changes that occurred outside Hong Kong. The scheme was influenced - if not directly inspired by changes in public administration in India and the homeland. Open competition was first invented for India and the germ of the idea is to be found in Lord Macaulay's 1854 report on recruitment of the Indian Civil Service. In Great Britain appointments to the civil service until the year 1855 were made by nomination. In 1855 a stringent examination was introduced; and in 1870 the principle of open competition was adopted as a general rule. The year 1870 witnessed, then, the abolition of patronage and the admission of people into the civil service at prescribed ages and by means of competitive examinations; and a distinction was drawn, in terms of grades and hence of salary and prestige, between the routine and intellectual tasks of government. Competitive examinations meant, of course, that there was little chance of success into the higher grade except for candidates who had a successful university career, and, often, in addition, special preparation by a private tutor. These reforms influenced the recruitment of cadets into the Hong Kong Civil Service. \n\nIn 1869, as a result of the evolving climate of thought in English, a competitive examination by the Civil Service Commis-\n\nPage 45\n\nPage 46",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205977,
        "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": 57,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "52 \n\nH. J. LETHBRIDGE \n\n12 Malcolm Struan Tonnochy (1840-1882). Educated at Blackheath Proprietary School and Trinity College, Cambridge. Hong Kong Civil Service 1862; died in office while Superintendent of Victoria Gaol. Obituaries of Tonnochy are to be found in the Hong Kong Telegraph, December 14 and 15, 1882, and China Mail, December 15, 1882. The Telegraph tells us \"that yesterday the deceased was in good spirits and played tennis in the afternoon, dined out with a friend, and was in the Club until shortly after midnight\", A Chinese barber found Tonnochy dead in bed when he came to shave him in the morning. He was a bachelor. \n\n13 Walter Meredith Deane (1840-1906). Educated St. Paul's School and Trinity College, Cambridge. Hong Kong Civil Service 1862; Captain Superintendent of the Police, 1866-1891. Deane was severely wounded on duty in 1878 and resigned in 1891 on account of ill-health. \n\n14 Sir Cecil Clementi Smith (1840-1916). Educated at St. Paul's School and Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, Hong Kong Civil Service 1862; promoted from Colonial Treasurer, Hong Kong, to Colonial Secretary, Straits Settlements, 1878. Administered Government 1884-85; appointed Lieutenant-Governor and Colonial Secretary, Ceylon, 1886; Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the Straits Settlements, 1887; H. M. High Commissioner and Consul-General for Borneo and Sarawak, 1889. \n\n15 Alfred Lister (1843-1890). Educated at University of London. Hong Kong Civil Service 1865; prepared detailed index to the Ordinances of Hong Kong in 1870; Colonial Treasurer 1883-90. Died on board ship near Yokohama while on sick leave, Lister held the office of Treasurer as an adjunct appointment only, and with an almost nominal salary, in conjunction with his substantive appointment of Postmaster-General, Lister left a wife and four children in England. See Hong Kong Telegraph, 15 June, 1890. Governor Des Voeux referred to Lister as an \"excellent officer\". \n\n**\n\n16 Sir James Russell (1843-1893). Educated at Queen's University, Belfast. Hong Kong Civil Service 1865; private secretary to Governor Sir Richard MacDonnell 1868; Police Magistrate 1870; Chief Justice of Hong Kong 1888. The Hong Kong Telegraph, 4 September, 1893, in an editorial entitled \"Sir Judas' Russell: His History\" declares \"You could not have been much of an expert in the Chinese language two short years after your appointment to a cadet-ship, yet in 1867, you were Government ‘Interpreter'\". The editorial referred to Russell as \"the Gargantua of Hong Kong social life\" and \"the Jeffries of the Hong Kong Bench\". The writer of the editorial was the atrabilious Robert Fraser-Smith, who founded the Hong Kong Telegraph in 1881. Since Fraser-Smith had been jailed several times for libel, he had reason to dislike the Chief Justice. (See Frank H. H. King and Prescott Clarke A Research Guide to China-Coast Newspapers, 1822-1911, Cambridge, Mass., 1965). Russell, a bachelor like Lister, died at Strathpeffer, Scotland, shortly after resigning from Government. \n\n17 Henry Ernest Wodehouse (1845-1929). Educated at Repton School. Hong Kong Civil Service 1867; retired on pension as Police Magistrate in 1898. One son, Peveril, was the first baby born on the Peak and brother of P. G. Wodehouse, the novelist. Wodehouse was the last of the batch of officials originally appointed to the Colony in the capacity of student interpreter. \n\n18 Sir James Haldane Stewart Lockhart (1858-1937). Educated at King William's College, Isle of Man, Watson's Academy, Edinburgh (gold medallist), and Edinburgh University (Greek medallist), Hong Kong Civil Service 1878; attached to the Colonial Office for one year; Registrar General 1887; Colonial Secretary 1895-1902; Special Commissioner to Inspect and Report on the Extension of the Colony of Hong Kong, 1898; representative of Great Britain to delimit the boundaries of the extension of Hong Kong; first civil Commissioner of Weihaiwei, 1902; retired 1921.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211034,
        "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": 95,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "70\n\n32\n\nFor further details and comments about the establishment and failure of the 1881-1883 Normal School, see CO129/197, p. 326f. In this file, Colonial Office minutes are critical of Hennessy's extravagance, note that \"the scheme is evidently Dr. Eitel's with Governor Hennessy's fiat\" and other correspondence (e.g., Eitel first report on the Normal School, in Eitel to M.S. Tonnochy, Acting Colonial Secretary, 19th January, 1882, and his second report enclosed in his letter to Tonnochy of 19th January, 1882) shows that Eitel, the Inspector of Schools, felt that there would be very unfortunate repercussions if the school were to be closed and that the headmaster, A.J. May was even prepared to take a salary reduction (from the original proposal of $2,400 a year to $1,600) rather than see the Normal School break up. In later reports (contained in CO129/202 p. 532f.), Eitel compared the Normal School, with its \"special private tuition and instruction\" in pedagogy, to the pupil-teacher scheme at the Central School to the disadvantage of the latter, and May, in his letter to Frederick Stewart of 19th July, 1883, mentioned the virtues of being able to utilize simulation techniques for the preparation of teachers at the Normal School. The actual end of the Normal School, which had been dismissed as unnecessary in the Education Commission Report of September 1882, was precipitated by A.J. May's insistence, in September 1883, that the students agreed to a bond to teach for five years at a salary rate of $25 per month on their completion of the course. The immediate result was that four of the ten students left for the Medical College at Tientsin, three joined commercial firms, and one became a government interpreter, leaving only two of the original intake, as mentioned above, to become teachers.\n\n33\n\nIn Singapore, a central training college for men teachers using English as the medium of instruction was proposed in 1904 and again in 1910, but the scheme was aborted because of the lack of applications. In Kuala Lumpur, an experimental teacher training course began in 1905, proved successful, and was followed by a two-year course in Penang in 1907. See Wong Hoy Kee, Francis, and Gwee Yee Hean, Perspectives: The Development of Education in Malaysia and Singapore (Kuala Lumpur: Heinemann Educational Books (Asia) Ltd., 1972), pp. 12-14.\n\n34\n\nWhat is certain is that his name does not appear in the Blue Book as one of the Pupil Teachers at the Central School at any time between 1880 and 1885. As noted above, Mok Man Cheung won the Class 1 Mathematics prize in January 1884. He was employed as \"Fourth Chinese Assistant\" at the Central School from September 1884. He did not, therefore, have the time to be enrolled in a pupil teacher's course, which customarily lasted for three years, but he might have taken an examination in \"Pupil-Teacher's Theory\" while studying in Class 1.\n\n35\n\nThe dispute over the opening hours at the City Hall Museum had come to a head in 1880 when the Executive Committee of the City Hall Museum, led by its chairman, William Keswick, attempted to restrict the entry of Chinese to the afternoons. They were opposed by the first Chinese member of the Legislative Council, Ng Choy, and by the Governor, Sir John Pope Hennessy. See CO129/189 p. 476-614 for correspondence, largely unsympathetic to the Committee's discriminatory proposal and including an extract from the Hong Kong Hansard for 1880 reporting a speech by Ng Choy, and CO129/192 p. 438-446 for correspondence which includes Keswick's opinion that racial distinctions should not be abolished with regard to admission to the Museum of the City Hall. The call for separate schools for the different races had been made on a number of occasions in the past, most notably in 1845, 1856, and 1870-1872, but the most recent resurgence of interest and argument about the issue had been provoked by a speech made by the Anglican Bishop Hoare at the Prize Distribution of the Diocesan Boys' School in January",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211133,
        "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": 194,
        "title": "RAS-1987",
        "content_text": "169\n\npublic. Its conclusions were considered not acceptable and its tone would have aggravated differences between China and Britain.\n\nIn December 1873, the Governor of Hongkong had appointed a three-man commission to investigate the alleged interference by China with the trade of Hongkong. Its members were Phineas Ryrie, a businessman and chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, H. G. Thomsett, the harbour master, and M. S. Tonnochy, his assistant. They submitted their report in April 1874.\n\nThe General Chamber of Commerce requested a copy, but it was told that as the Colonial and Foreign Offices were still considering the report, it could not be released to the public.\n\nThe merchants felt that the Government was deliberately withholding the findings of the commission. To draw attention to their views, which were similar to those expressed by the commission, the merchants encouraged a group of aggrieved Chinese to petition Her Majesty. They then followed this up with their own public meeting.\n\nThe commission had taken the position that the method China was using to enforce its revenue collection was seriously hurting Hongkong trade. The main premise of the report, that China had encroached on Hongkong's sovereignty, was rejected by the representatives of the British Government at Canton and Peking.\n\nAlthough the Foreign Office in London, Sir Thomas Wade, the British Minister in Peking, and Sir Brooke Robertson, Her Majesty's Consul at Canton, were not in complete agreement about the various points raised by the commission, they all agreed that the commission had greatly overstated the case.\n\nIt was conceded that the employment of a low type of foreigner by the Chinese was objectionable, that in the nature of the case there must have been some violation of Hongkong waters when a junk was being chased by cruisers, and that no doubt there had been instances of squeezing.\n\nIn commenting on the report of the commission, Sir Brooke",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213165,
        "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-1993",
        "page_number": 233,
        "title": "RAS-1993",
        "content_text": "215\n\nTAKING A GODSON\n\nDAN WATERS\n\nOne June Sunday evening, in 1995, I attended a ceremony at a restaurant in Tonnochy Road, Wanchai, at which a childless couple (the wife has a daughter by a previous marriage) adopted (kai zi), Chinese style, a 28-year-old ‘godson'. The first ceremony of this kind that I went to took place in a private home, when a girl of 19, for whom the foster mother had great affection, was adopted. Presents brought to the foster parent's house on that occasion, by her real parents in 1966, included a live chicken.\n\nAmong traditional Chinese it is important for a couple to have a son to offer sacrifices, to worship the departed and to carry on the family line. Without a son, one cannot die in peace. If you do not have one you can adopt one. Not infrequently, if two families want to strengthen the friendship existing between them, then one couple may kai an offspring from the other family. On such occasions, Chinese speak of yuan fen (緣分), meaning ‘predestined connections”.\n\nAncient custom had it that there was no distinction between an adopted and a natural son. An adopted boy could not be disinherited except for offences which would apply to a natural son. On the death of his foster parents an adopted son mourned as for the death of his natural parents, although J. Dyer Ball, in Things Chinese (1903), says the adopted son need only go into ‘half mourning'. Ball also maintains that five per cent of Chinese families adopt children, 70 per cent of whom are male. A large number of Hong Kong Chinese families adopt children today.\n\nAlthough these adoptions are supposed to be permanent, come what may, I myself know of cases where relationships have been severed. For example, because of the alleged misconduct of the foster child.\n\nBut back to the case study in Wanchai. At that gathering in the restaurant there were four standard, Chinese, round tables, meaning that approximately 48 people, comprising relatives and friends, attended. A ‘good day' had been chosen according to the Chinese almanac. The ceremony of ‘adopting' commenced with a speech by godmother (kai neung ah).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1993.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833t302",
        "rank": 0
    }
]