RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1984 https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572 216 J.H. HAAN INCE, Henry Alexander 1855-1856 At first lived in Hong Kong, 1850. 107 Partner in Dent, Beale & Co. from July 1, 1854;108 interest ceased June 30, 1858. KAHN, Julius 1864-1865 111 Authorized to sign for Reiss & Co. (a British firm) from October 10, 1859;110 partner May 1, 1860 till April 30, 1865.1 He donated the vases that adorned the entrance of the Shanghai Club. KAY, William 1852-1853, 1854-1855 Partner in Fox, Rawson & Co. in Canton;112 since 1846 in Shanghai as partner of Blackin, Rawson & Co.'113 Member of the Committee to study the erection of a new building for the Shanghai Library 1852.114 KESWICK, William 1865-1866 Possibly was first a resident of Yokohama.115 Partner in Jardine, Matheson & Co. since July 1, 1862.116 Consul for Denmark 1863-?.117 Trustee British Episcopal Church 1866;118 member of the management committee of the Society for Relief of Distressed Foreigners of All Nationalities 1865.'119 Unofficial member of the Legislative Council in Hong Kong 1867-1872, 1875-1886.120 Member of the NCBRAS.121 Member of Committee IX. KING, David O. 1854-1855 Before 1850 he lived in Canton.122 At first partner in J.M. Smith & Co.; later Smith, King & Co.'123 and King & Co.'124 Vice-Consul for Prussia 1853-1854.125 1856-1858 he resided in Bangkok.'126 Author127 ================================================================================ RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1992 https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qf85tx75x 41 His leaders in his Miscellanies and his letters to the local papers are little different from present day British local paper indignation. A typical Mesny throw-away remark was the comment that ‘As China licks the hand that slaps her most, even a mailed one, so she has decided to give Prince Henry of Prussia’ a befitting reception at Nanking, of all places. He frequently made the point that his knowledge of Chinese customs outweighed that of virtually all other foreigners, and that he, understanding Chinese ways, was in the position to inform foreigners how they should react to Chinese behaviour with due decorum. He explained manners and Chinese courtesy at great lengths, including the various bows and genuflections to be afforded to whom and when. It must have irritated many a foreigner to be reminded so often that he, Mesny, ‘knows better’ what is ‘the done thing.’ One of the hundreds of short essays in the Miscellany in which he informs his readership of such Chinese mores and customs is simply entitled ‘Etiquette’. He begins by explaining that the Chinese people beat the world for official etiquette, social politeness, ceremonies, manners and customs. He added that ‘I have never yet found or met a foreigner who has been so careful as myself to observe all the Chinese manners and customs of society, whether official or private and without sacrificing any important privilege of my British birthright. Without performing the degrading ceremony of kotowing to anybody, I have nevertheless observed all the other rites and ceremonies. Some foreigners, like Sir Halliday Macartney, have performed the kotow to their superiors, Li Hung-chang, for instance, but I have rigidly declined to do so, although many Chinese officials of the highest rank have kotowed to me; on such occasions I have bent my knees and picked them up.’ Mesny continued in this vein for several more paragraphs instructing his readers on polite behaviour. He then described the matter of ‘equipage’ which he suggested was ‘a serious one, especially at Peking.’ ‘I was advised by a friend,’ he continued, ‘not to travel in a cart or carriage drawn by a horse or pony. A mule is the proper animal. A cart with four openings on each side, three at the back, and one at the front is called a Shih Erh Kai, or twelve openings, and is only used by dudes, saunterers or other persons noted for their irregularities in the matter of genteel propriety. I was quite surprised to find the veteran Doctor Dudgeon riding in a cart drawn by a pony. I called his attention to this ================================================================================ RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1994 https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zk522640g 25 erected on the lot was completed, he moved into temporary offices. Two marine lots were bought in 1858 in Sai Ying Pun on which extensive godowns (ware-houses) were built (Hong Kong Land Office, Memorial 1477, 21 Sept. 1858). He soon after left Hong Kong to assume management of the firm's affairs in Hamburg. There he married in 1859 a Miss Wagner (North China Herald 6 Aug. 1859). He continued to reside at Hamburg until his death on 24 November 1886 aged seventy-one (DP 6 Dec. 1886). When Mr. Siemssen left Hong Kong his partners were Ludwig Wiese and Woldemar Nissen (FC 31 Mar. 1855). Mr. Wiese was a Norwegian by birth but subsequently became a naturalized British citizen. From 1849 to 1855 he had been an assistant in the office of Carlowitz, Harkort and Co. at Canton. At various times he served as Consul for Hamburg, Lubeck, Sweden and Norway and was acting Consul for Prussia and Austria. His connection with Siemssen and Co. ended in 1863 (CM 5 Jan. 1865). He located in London, where in 1871 he joined the Board of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China (CM 24 July 1871). Though no longer a partner he represented the interests of Siemssen and Co. in England. He died in England on 22 March 1887 (GG, Probate Calendar 4 July 1887). His widow Joanna died in the City of Westminster on 10 May 1904 (GG, Probate Calendar 25 Apr. 1906). Agathon Friedrich Woldemar Nissen — usually known as Woldemar — was a partner from 1855 until his death in Hamburg on 28 December 1896 (DP 7 June 1897). He was a member of the Provisional Committee for the organisation of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in 1864. He was Deputy Chairman of the Board in 1866 and Chairman in 1867. He left Hong Kong in October 1867 (CM 31 Oct. 1867). In Hong Kong he was Consul for the Hansa Towns of Bremen, Hamburg and Lubeck as well as for Sweden and Norway. The business of the firm increased rapidly. New branches were opened and new partners admitted. Rudolph Heinsen was transferred from the Canton office to Shanghai to open a new branch there in January 1856 (FC 1 Jan. 1856). He later became a partner and his interest in the company ended in 1868 (GG 9 Jan. 1869). George Wilhelm Schwemann was the managing partner at Foochow in 1861. Friedrich Adolph Joost was a partner from 1864 to 1873 (CM 1 Jan. 1864, Daily Press 28 Jan. 1874). When Messrs. Schwemann and Heinsen retired from the firm in 1868, they were replaced by Ferdinand Nissen and Heinrich Hoppius (GG 9 Jan. 1869). ================================================================================ RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1995 https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/95941j25g 140 trouble. Half way through, I came to feel that my book could not benefit the World, and I abandoned it. Not long after, I travelled throughout Fukien, Chiangsu and found even more people coming to me for translations. Seeing my friends suffering through ignorance of English - some being tricked, others being despised because they knew no English - I took up the correction of my book again. Well aware that my book cannot be of help to the World. Yet that it may still be of some help to those engaged in trade, it is formatted in the Chinese style of reference: this is different from other books on English. Moreover, not only may Chinese use it to learn English, but English and Americans can also use it to learn Chinese. The Americans and the English have shared origins. Their nations have been separated for over a hundred years, but their speech and writing remain the same. The foreign words collected in these volumes are current not only in Britain and America, but also in all the nations of Europe, including France, Russia, Prussia, Austria, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Holland and, as well as throughout the American continent. But as their spelling is different, their meanings also differ. The Americans and British form the majority of those who come to trade with our Country, and those of other nations all speak English. For this reason, English is the language of foreign trade. Kwangtung and East China have been trade routes for over a hundred years, and the majority of Chinese doing trade with foreigners are Cantonese. So this book takes Cantonese Pronunciation as its standard, so that it can gain the maximum currency. Everything has been included in this book; readers may find it too detailed. Learners should choose the most important parts and seek out their essence so that uncertainties can be dispelled. Signed, Tong Ting-shue of Canton ================================================================================ RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-2002 https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278 However, in response to a petition by European merchants in 1835 to the EIC against piracy, some action on the part of the Indian government was taken, through the use of steam warships (for example, the Diana and HMS Wolf). These ships were effective in fighting piracy, and according to LA Mills, 'piracy in the Straits greatly decreased for several years... Conditions never became as serious as they were before 1836.'38 However, Turnbull says that these measures only gave temporary relief and that, within a few years, the position deteriorated. Moreover, in the 1850s, a new breed of pirates began to haunt the merchants' commerce. They came from China, and the Chinese imperial government was too weak to suppress them. The main theatre of Chinese operations was the Gulf of Siam, although many vessels were captured near Singapore.40 The Indian government did not pay much attention to the problem as it was involved in the second Anglo-Burmese war at that time, and as Calcutta had passed no laws to detain suspicious vessels, there were no legal means to curb piracy. In 1857, the Indian legislative council had passed an inadequate law which permitted the right of search, but did not solve the problem of proving intent. No improvement was made to the naval force in the Straits Settlements in the last ten years of Indian rule, which consisted of only three gunboats (a 'lilliputian fleet'41). Eventually the Chinese pirates were gradually eliminated from the Straits waters as a result of a series of treaties and agreements between China and other western powers (such as with Prussia 1861, Denmark 1863, the Netherlands 1863, Spain 1864, Belgium 1865, Italy 1866, and Austria-Hungary 186942), the contents of which included co-operative measures to wipe out piracy. The Hong Kong 'Ordinance for the suppression of piracy' was the first real blow delivered against Chinese piracy.4 The Indian government played a minimal role with regards to the combat of piracy in the Straits. The problem was brought under control through a list of other factors, including foreign treaties and ordinances, and hence, the merchants' complaints were not without reason, as little credit can be attributed to the Indian administration in this respect. ================================================================================