[ { "id": 205995, "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": 75, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "70\n\nDAFYDD EMRYS EVANS\n\nStrand. It seems that the Chinese were encouraged to do so by the Government of the day as a matter of simple expediency, for they were required to provide food and the other necessities of life in which Hong Kong was totally deficient (many of them were said to be merchants from Macao). A. R. Johnston, who administered the island during Sir Henry Pottinger's absence in 1841 and 1842, went as far as to make grants in September 1841 to those persons who, against every obstacle (by which was meant the intimidation of the mandarins on the mainland) supplied the fleet when it could not otherwise obtain provision. It seems that Johnston 'granted' 150 lots of a size 40 feet by 20 feet at a rent of $5 per annum,2 and these 'grants' survived attempts to shift the Chinese away on the grounds that the waterfront was far too valuable to allow it to remain outstanding in Chinese hands.3 Leases were executed for most of the original lots during 1845 and after a redistribution to facilitate reconstruction consequent upon the devastating fire of December 1851 (which substantially destroyed the whole of the Lower Bazaar), the area remained much as it was, with new buildings of far greater value replacing the old structures. Whilst a good deal of the waterfront in the Central District remained through the nineteenth century in European or Parsee hands, the Lower Bazaar remained largely in Chinese hands.\n\nThe second area in which Chinese were not only encouraged but allowed to settle lay on the other side of the Queen's Road, almost opposite to the Central Market. This was the Upper Bazaar (sometimes referred to as the 'Middle Bazaar') which was built at the beginning of 1842. Its origins were similar to those of the Lower Bazaar and it consisted of two rows or streets of shops on lots about 36 feet by 14 feet. These were granted to newcomers at a time when applications from Chinese were becoming 'very numerous' and they were charged a rent of $4 per annum.4 The Bazaar was probably finished by March, 1842 and was therefore well-placed both in point of time and geographically to meet the needs of the Europeans and Chinese populations in Hong Kong's first boom period after the signing of the Treaty of Nanking which appeared to remove doubts over the future of the colony and which brought in many adventurers. This Upper Bazaar was, therefore, together with the Lower Bazaar, the first 'Chinatown' in Hong Kong in the sense that it was an area of the town in\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205996, "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": 76, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "THE BEGINNINGS OF TAIPINGSHAN\n\n71\n\nwhich the European had no place and was not really expected to penetrate. Two Europeans (Richard Oswald and F. J. Porter) did apparently have lots there though how they came by them is not recorded, and the American Baptist Mission Board had a school house and small chapel.\n\nA third area was Tai Ping Shan where many Chinese lived in matsheds, but it is not known how many lived there in these early days.\n\nBut one inconvenient feature soon revealed itself as the demand for building land increased in the Colony on the establishment of regular government in the middle of 1843. The town was restricted in its possibilities of development to the east by the reservation of 'Government Hill' (the area on which the Government Offices now stand) for Government purposes only. Beyond Government Hill to the east lay the military cantonment and, since the main part of the town was now inevitably fixed where the present central district stands, the only possible direction which expansion could take, other, that is, than up the mountainside, was to the west. But, between Inland Lots 43 and 10 on the Queen's Road lay the Upper Bazaar, an uncomfortable fact which not only meant that there would be a large number of Chinese-type houses in the middle of the 'European' town (with their attendant rather greater risk of fire) but that their presence would interfere with the proper development of the area with drainage and streets and so on. In terms of extent, the Upper Bazaar was occupying almost 11 acres of valuable building land for which speculators would be willing to offer far higher Crown Rents than those which the then inhabitants were paying. So almost inevitably, the suggestion came to move the Upper Bazaar lot-holders away to another location.\n\nThe story of the removal of the Upper Bazaar is of interest on several counts: it is the first 'resumption' of land for public purposes in the history of Hong Kong, a process since employed on an ever increasing scale by the Government for the improvement and redevelopment of the environment. It provides us with an insight into government practices of the day and the cumbersome manner in which decisions could be taken and implemented, and also of the role of the Press at that time. Finally, it led to the establishment, as a matter of deliberate Government policy, of a", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205997, "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": 77, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "72\n\nDAFYDD EMRYS EVANS\n\nseparate location, namely Taipingshan, for the main part of the Chinese town. This town was apparently to become separate in a way not altogether intended by its creators.\n\nThe question of the Upper Bazaar came to a head towards the end of 1843 when A. T. Gordon, the land officer, decided to meet the demands for building land (and, thereby, augment Government revenue from Crown Rents) by putting up to auction an area which extended from Wyndham Street to Gough Street, thus including the whole of the Upper Bazaar.\n\nGordon informed Pottinger of the land which had been marked out for sale on 22 January 1844 and told him that he intended to remove altogether \"that part of the town known as the Upper Bazaar\" and had marked it out into 27 lots, \"suitable for shops and dwellings either for Europeans or respectable Chinese\". This accorded with the views which Pottinger was persuaded to hold that, as Governor Davis later put it, “it would be very advisable for the interests of the community that the Chinese should be removed, so as to prevent as much as possible their being mixed up with the Europeans.\" Pottinger replied to Gordon that the inhabitants of the Upper Bazaar would be given six months, from 15 January 1844, to remove their houses, the only question remaining being one of compensation.\n\nThough this correspondence was not, of course, public it would have become obvious what was to happen when the Land Sale was held on 22 January, 1844, as many persons bid for lots which then formed part of the Upper Bazaar and on which buildings were standing. The European residents made no comment on the proceedings until it appeared to them that they could use the plight of the bazaar lot-holders as part of the fight against Government on account of the treatment of their own land claims. The Chinese lot-holders themselves were apparently kept in ignorance and claim to have learnt only after the event that their lots had been sold over their heads.\n\nThus, some time after the lots had actually been sold, Pottinger appointed a committee consisting of Major Caine, Chief Magistrate, Gutzlaff, Chinese Secretary to Government, and Gordon, the Land Officer, to consider where the bazaar lots should be relocated and on what terms the lot-holders should be dealt with.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205998, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1970", "page_number": 78, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "THE BEGINNINGS OF TAIPINGSHAN\n\n73\n\nIn the meantime, the lot-holders petitioned Pottinger to be allowed to stay.10 They described how Captain Mylius, the first land officer in 1842, had given them certificates to prove their holdings. The Committee met the lot-holders and endeavoured to explain to them why they were being moved. They were told that there were 'insuperable difficulties' in the way of allowing them to remain. Moreover, the permission given them by Mylius to occupy the sites in question was no more than a 'temporary arrangement' since at that date (1842) Hong Kong was not in a permanent state. Nevertheless, the Committee represented that they were to inquire into what ground could be given to them for the erection of their houses. To this the Chinese replied that what was asked of them was like \"throwing their livelihood into the sea.\" If allowed to stay, they undertook to erect houses \"in the proper manner and style\" and pay a suitable rent. But their pleas were in vain. The Committee recommended that a site be allotted to them at Taipingshan, at which place, they pointed out, a considerable Chinese population had already settled. The Committee proposed that the ground should be prepared and levelled (it was, at that time, no more than a very steep and uneven mountainside) and with streets marked out. They would be permitted to remove the materials out of which their present houses were constructed. As to compensation, they would have their arrears of rent (never paid) remitted and would enjoy a 'rent holiday' for a period of five years from the following December. In addition, each householder who could substantiate his claim would receive $50, though one member of the Committee, Gutzlaff, thought that $20 would suffice.\n\nThe area of relocation lay south of Queen's Road, between Town Lot 78 and Town Lot 44: i.e., from approximately the present Gough Street to just east of the present Possession Street. The point was specifically made by Caine, with the agreement of the other members, that this location be reserved exclusively for Chinese and that no Europeans, with the exception of police, be permitted to live there.12\n\nPottinger approved these suggestions but reserved his decision on the question of compensation. He did not favour monetary compensation, partly because some of those in the Upper Bazaar were unauthorised squatters and partly because others were keepers of brothels and gaming houses who ought to be got rid of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206000, "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": 80, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "THE BEGINNINGS OF TAIPINGSHAN\n\n75\n\nevery piece of ground and every house in the island downwards, morally speaking, were they to do so, they would be little better than robbers.\" But whatever the morals of the removal of the bazaar lot-holders, the Notification of 25 July produced the desired result for, by the beginning of September, there had already been a movement to the west to the area designated. The Hong Kong Register on 3 September 1844 somewhat uncharitably, and ignorantly since they were at this time still the official Government organ, expressed dissatisfaction with the \"Chinese village rising to the westward of Victoria\", but modified their opinion on discovering that many of the houses belonged to the 'squatters' dislodged from the Upper Bazaar who were allowed to find temporary sites until they could rebuild on land allotted to them for the purpose by Government. The area referred to was being built up fast during the month of September and opposite it, on the northern side of Queen's Road, a Government Market was erected, 18\n\nEventually, Davis's expenditure on levelling the site and providing compensation was approved at home.19 But before even the reply had left the Colonial Office, Davis received a petition from the Upper Bazaar lot-holders, praying for monetary compensation in addition to the 'rent holiday' proposed. On consideration of this petition whilst Davis was absent inspecting the new consulates in the northern ports, the Executive Council decided that the rent payable on the new allotments in Taipingshan should commence in January 1849, and not in January 1848 and that the registered holders of \"decent Chinese houses\", 81 in number, should receive $40 dollars each. Two English lot-holders in the area, Oswald and Porter, were allowed compensation on a rather more liberal scale, having refused to move. In communicating this arrangement to the Colonial Office, Davis commented that if the question of the Upper Bazaar Lots had first come up during his tenure of office, he would have allowed the tenants to retain possession, not only because to do otherwise involved a violation of rights, with a consequent heavy expense for Government in compensations, but also because of the obloquy to which Government had been subjected in the Press20\n\nThat is how Taipingshan originated. Its subsequent history is interesting for, between this time and the great Plague epidemic in the 1890's, it seems to the writer that the ability of the Government", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206002, "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": 82, "title": "RAS-1970", "content_text": "# THE BEGINNINGS OF TAIPINGSHAN\n\n77\n\nOffice's records had fallen owing to non-registration of transactions (it being by then more or less necessary for a purchaser to take a chance on the title to land offered to him by a vendor), a strenuous effort was made to regularise the situation and much \"squatting\" without title and consequently, in most cases, non-payment of Crown Rent, came to light.\n\nThe end for old Taipingshan came not in the 1880's but in the 1890's when Bubonic Plague was brought to the Colony from West China. The most virulent reservoir of the bacillus turned out to be Taipingshan. The only solution, not only to the problem of stamping out the plague but also to other forms of social offence given by the district, was to remove the Chinese town physically. This was done by powers given in the Taipingshan Resumption Ordinance of 1894, and the result was wholesale demolition of much property and re-aligning of old and construction of new roads. Taipingshan had to be razed and, fortunately for Hong Kong, never rose again in its former glory.\n\nUniversity of London, 1968.\n\nDAFYDD EMRYS Evans\n\nMr. Evans is Professor of Law in the University of Hong Kong. Two of his earlier contributions to the early history of Hong Kong appeared in the Notes and Queries section of the 1968 Journal.\n\nNOTES\n\n1 The area was known as Taipingshan from the early days of the colony and its name is not derived from its function as a refuge for T'ai Ping rebels in later years.\n\n2 See Gordon (Land Officer) to Pottinger, CO129/Vol II, f. 152,\n\n3 See Gordon to Malcolm (Colonial Secretary), CO129/Vol. II, f. 138 dated 6 July 1843.\n\n4 The rents for both the Upper and Lower Bazaar Lots represented the same rate per square foot as that charged by Johnston for Town Lots.\n\n5 But the Chinese were turning to the use of brick rather than wood by the end of 1841; see Canton Press, 19 February 1842.\n\n6 Gordon to Pottinger, 19 December 1843; CO129, Vol. II, p. 445.\n\n7 Davis to Stanley 26 July 1844; CO129, Vol. VI, p. 435.\n\n8 Woosnam (Pottinger's private secretary) to Gordon, 10 January 1844: CO129, Vol. V. p. 69.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206279, "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": 96, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "90\n\nCARL T. SMITH\n\ncapital with them. The Rev. Dr. Legge on reflecting upon the Colony's progress during his residence here remarks,\n\nIt has always seemed to me that this was the turning point in the progress of Hong Kong. As Canton was threatened, the families of means hastened to leave it, and many of them flocked to this Colony. Houses were in demand; rents rose; the streets that had been comparatively deserted assumed a crowded appearance; new commercial Chinese firms were founded; the native trade received an impetus which it did not lose till it was arrested by the superfluous vigour of some of Sir Richard MacDonnell's early ordinances.23\n\nA new category of Fukien brokers and merchants began to appear on the annual censuses. In 1848 two Fukien merchants and five Fukien brokers are reported, they too do not appear the following year. But in 1853 there are six Fukien brokers, and within three years the number had increased sixfold. Not all the brokers and merchants were from Fukien. A significant number were Cantonese or Tiuchau. In 1858 a new category, \"Hongs\", or large merchant establishments, was introduced into the annual census of Chinese shops and businesses. Thirty-five were listed in 1858, but sixty-five for 1859.\n\nSome of the capital brought into Hong Kong in the 1850s was invested in real estate, and a group of large land proprietors developed. These investments formed the foundation of the fortunes of several prominent Hong Kong families.\n\nOne of these families is the Li from San Wui District of Kwang Tung Province. They have been among the Chinese élite for well over a century. The family established its interests in Hong Kong in a very modest way in 1854, when two brothers Li Sing 李昇 alias Li Yuk Hang 李玉衡 and Li Leong 李良 bought an Upper Bazaar lot. They soon had built up a money-changing business and were lending out money on mortgages. In 1857 they bought half of the lot where Chinam previously had built his large Chinese Hong. Here they established the Wo Hang firm which operated in many different fields.\n\nIn 1865, along with two Americans, Lee Sing of the Wo Hang firm and Pang Wah Ping entered into partnership", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206617, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1972", "page_number": 165, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "H.K.'S CENTRAL MARKET AND THE TARRANT AFFAIR\n\n159\n\nforces during hostilities against China to settle and allotted them small lots on the waterfront. The Upper Bazaar which lay in the area of Graham and Stanley Streets consisted also of relatively small areas granted to Chinese who were presumptively useful to the nascent colony as tradesmen. The Lower Bazaar was almost totally destroyed in the great fire at the end of 1851 and the Upper Bazaar was removed in 1844 and its inhabitants resettled in Taipingshan.\n\n3 See Gordon to Pottinger, 10 February 1844 [CO129/V/f.141].\n\n+ Evidence given by Colonel Malcolm to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Commercial Relations with China, answer to question 4633.\n\n5 Davis sought to let as many monopolies go as possible to private individuals for what they were prepared to give. Thus, in addition to the markets, he let out also opium, salt, and quarrying monopolies.\n\n6 Lease Register Volume C, f.94. The lot was leased as Marine Lot 38. The lease registers referred to are the Registers of the Land Office in which all dealings in crown land were recorded. The actual transactions themselves are also recorded separately as 'Memorials' and reference is made to them by number. The numbering was done according to the order in which they were registered. I am indebted to the Registrar General of the Government of Hong Kong for allowing me access to the records of the Land Office and for permission to publish material derived from that source.\n\n7 Memorial 122.\n\n8 Memorial 143.\n\n9 Memorial 258.\n\n10 Friend of China, 7 July 1847.\n\n11 Memorial 383.\n\n12 In this article, the romanisations found in the Land Office records are used even where they do not correspond to those either in the Wade-Giles system or current usage.\n\n13 Memorial 304.\n\n14 Ibid.\n\n15 Memorial 345.\n\n16 Hong Kong Register, 27 July 1847.\n\n17 Friend of China, 14 July 1847.\n\n18 And in so doing, incidentally, infringing the provision of the Treaty of Nanking, 1842, which allowed British subjects to proceed only to the \"Treaty Ports\" and to nowhere else in China.\n\n19 Friend of China, 14 July 1847. Tam Achoy's market was known as the Kwang Yuen and in the disastrous fire in December 1851, the fifty-one houses which comprised the market were destroyed: see Hong Kong Register, January 1852. Tam was referred to a few years later as the \"most respectable Chinaman\" who made a practice of going into the witness box to speak for the character of accused persons. He remained in Hong Kong until his death in the 1870's and was one of the founders of the Tung Wah organisation, a charitable body still functioning in Hong Kong.\n\n20 Hong Kong Register, 27 July 1847.\n\n21 Hong Kong Register, 19 October 1847; Friend of China, 23 October 1847 and 18 December 1847.\n\n22 The Editor of the Friend (John Carr) claimed to have seen Hwei's accounts and that they revealed the \"squeeze\" payment.\n\nPage 165\n\nPage 166", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 212767, "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": 76, "title": "RAS-1992", "content_text": "61\n\nNovember 1862\n\n1863 March\n\n1863 May 1864 April\n\n1864\n\n1864-1865\n\n1867 Winter\n\n1867\n\nhis junk and three others\n\nCaptured at Fu-shan-chan by Taiping rebels. Mesny held first in Soochow and Chang-shu, then at Pao-ying the Taiping camp, and finally in Nanking\n\nRescued by Adkins, the British Consul at Chin-kiang aboard HMS Slaney and taken back to Chin-kiang\n\nJoined Chinese Imperial Customs Service, Hankow\n\nResigned from Customs Service after fourteen months Involved in cotton broking\n\nEstablished the Hankow Horse Bazaar, a private hotel in Hankow, and set up Hupei Iron and Brassworks, Han-yang Romantic interlude with a Chinese widow in Hankow Mesny called on Tso Tsung-tang during the latter's visit to Hankow and was appointed his French and English Secretary, and was further offered the opportunity to accompany Tso on his campaign to the Northwest. Mesny also claimed that he had made recommendations to Marquis Tso Tsung-tang for a number of undertakings to help modernise China\n\nSold the Huper Iron and Brassworks to officials of the Viceroy of Szechuan province\n\nMesny's trek to war\n\n1868 June\n\nLate July or early August Late August\n\nSeptember\n\nLeft Hankow, after five year's residence, for Szechuan to become a drill instructor with the Szechuan Force\n\nArrived Chungking\n\nDeparted Chungking for Kueichou to join the Szechuan Force suppressing the Miao rebellion: he accepted employment as a military instructor (wu-chiao hsi)\n\nArrived Niu-ch'ang, the headquarters of the Szechuan Force in Kueichou\n\nSeptember 1868-May 1874 Involved in the military campaigns to suppress the Miao\n\nThe Advance: Late Summer 1868-March 1869\n\n1869\n\nPromoted Colonel, awarded the Star of China and the Flowery Plume The Retreat: Summer 1869-Summer 1870 1870/1871\n\n1871\n\n1872\n\nHelped form a joint stock company in Kuei-yang to \"recover mercury\"\n\nThe Withdrawal: mid-August 1870-Lunar New Year 1871\n\nca 1873\n\n1873\n\n1874 Spring\n\nEstablished a small day school for poor boys and girls in the Jade Emperor temple in Kuei-yang, importing suitable books and paying a Chinese teacher, a struggling student painter, Chin Yü-t'ang Siege of Hsin-ch'eng in upper Kueichou (Mesny involved in preparations for the siege during 1871)\n\nWent to Szechuan with General Chou Ta-wu\n\nPromoted Major-General and awarded the Ying-yung Pa-t'u-lu Left Kueichou for Szechuan: Margary expected to meet Mesny in", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1992.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x", "rank": 0 } ]