Date back of King's College: Early English Colonial Education in Hong Kong in 19th-Century Hong Kong

• (1973 King's College F.7B Science ; 1976 HKU B.Sc.)
• Version: 2026年5月20日

• Email: Lausanching2@gmail.com
• WhatsApp: +852 94103119

The objective of this research is to clarify the historical predecessor of King's College, Hong Kong. This study draws upon rigorous official and historical archives, including annual Hong Kong Blue Books, Government Gazettes, Annual Education Reports, Public Works Bureau Reports, Legislative Council Records, contemporary issues of *The New York Times*, early Hong Kong newspapers from Archive.org, annual and monthly reports from the American Missionary Association, and various historical monographs. A very small number of instances where AI assistance was used for verification are specifically noted within the text.

This document delves into and supplements several key historical segments from that period. It provides an in-depth exploration of Fung Fu's life and historical significance, examines whether early vernacular schools had school names, and investigates the existence of substantial "heritage" and institutional continuity in those early institutions. The research also addresses the mystery surrounding the Saiyingpun (English) school being listed as "newly established" in official records in 1879, and meticulously reconstructs the naming decisions and evolution of King's College. Furthermore, it records an anecdote about Ho Kom-tong at the age of 12 at Central School, explores the historical connections between Fung Fu, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, and Rev. C. R. Hager, and confirms through genealogical research that Fung Fu's wife, "Ms. Fung Kwan（187- 1）," was Kwan Yuan-chang's eldest daughter, Kwan Yuet-ming（187- 1）. The study also analyzes the marriage alliances among Chinese families at the time and examines the profound impact of the Central School dispute in 1878 on Governor John Pope Hennessy's administration.

The narrative of this research begins with the sensational Central School dispute of 1878 and Governor Hennessy's subsequent vigorous efforts to promote English language education. The historical predecessor of King's College is closely intertwined with this process of popularizing English instruction by Native teachers. Key historical figures in this development include Governor Hennessy, Inspector of Schools Dr. Eitel, Principal Fung Fu, and later Principal A. Morris. 

This research indicates that all official historical records concerning the predecessor of King's College ultimately point to the "Sanctioned Free Schools" (五所國家義學館) approved by the Secretary of State for the Colonies and published in the Government Gazette in 1880.

Kwan Yuan-chang (1832–1912), originally named Zhenrong, was a native of Panyu, Canton. He was a pioneer of modern dentistry in China and is revered as the "Father of Chinese Dentistry." Sun Yat-sen regarded him as a foster father.

Kwan Yuan-chang was born into a Christian family in Canton. His father, Kwan Ri (courtesy name Yunzhu, 1797–1863), was the first Chinese Christian pastor and one of the ten disciples of Liang Fa, a missionary of the London Missionary Society. After the First Opium War, Kwan Ri moved his family to British Hong Kong. There, Kwan Yuan-chang worked as a handyman and in printing at the Anglo-Chinese College, which was run by the London Missionary Society. He later studied Western dentistry under Dr. Columbus, an American dentist and missionary, becoming the first registered Chinese dentist and earning the title "Father of Chinese Dentistry." In 1870, he returned to Canton to practice, eventually settling back in Hong Kong. Besides his medical practice, he was deeply involved in the affairs of the London Missionary Society, actively participating in the relocation of the Tai Shek Chu Church and the establishment of the To Tsai Church in Hong Kong.

Kwan Yuan-chang's wife, Lai A Mei, was born into the prominent Li clan of Xiqiao, Nanhai. She was the first matron of Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital and Hong Kong's first Chinese female nurse. Together, they had ten sons and five daughters. Many of their children and subsequent generations achieved prominence in various fields.

Their eldest daughter, Kwan Yuet Ming (1858–1913), was devoted to the church. Their eldest son, Kwan King Wan (1860–1923), graduated from Nanyang Naval Academy and served as a battleship first mate and customs officer. Their fourth son, Kwan King Yin (1867–1919), became an imperial physician and director of the Beiyang Naval Hospital. Among King Yin's sons were Kwan Sung Sing (1892–1960), a prominent architect and founder of K.T. Engineering Co., and Kwan Sung T'ao (1896–1980), a pioneer of neurosurgery in China.

Their fifth son, Kwan King Leung (1869–1945), was a physician, a co-founder of the Chinese Medical Association, and a close friend of Sun Yat-sen. His first wife, Li Yue'e, was introduced by Sun Yat-sen. His daughter, Kwan Wai Heng, married Cheng Yoon-tin, and their son, James K. M. Cheng (born 1947), is a Canadian architect. Their third daughter, Kwan Yuet Ying (1870–1962), was the first female elder of Daoji Church and a midwife. Her sons, Yung Chi Chao (1898–1970) and Yung Chi Tung (1908–1987), became distinguished chemists and botanists, respectively, with significant academic careers in Hong Kong.

Their sixth son, Kwan King Chung (1873–1923), served as a customs officer. His daughter, Margaret Kwan Fu Shing, married a prominent Singaporean doctor, Hu Zai Kun, and their son, Richard Hu Tsu Tau (born 1926), later served as Singapore's Minister for Finance and Health. Another descendant, Kevin Kwan (born 1973), is an American author. Their eighth son, Kwan King Sun (1878–1948), graduated from Cornell University and served as director of the Canton Provincial Department of Industry. His granddaughter is the American actress Nancy Kwan Ka Shen (born 1939).

 Their tenth son, Kwan King Fai (1883–1943), after an early plot to assassinate Empress Dowager Cixi, studied in the US and later held various government positions in the Republic of China.

The earliest historical document recording the West Point school is a report written by Reverend William Lobscheid in January 1859, titled "A few notices on the extent of Chinese education and the Government Schools of Hongkong, etc." In this report, Lobscheid stated: "The school at West Point was established under very unfavorable circumstances. There were few families living about where the school was opened; most of the pupils had therefore to come from Tai-ping-shan and its neighbourhood. Besides, the teacher was a very illiterate man, full of cunning and deception. Finding that his ignorance could no longer be concealed, he engaged another man to explain the Four Books for him. To this I strongly objected, because no respectable man would teach a school for four to five dollars a month, and that was the greatest amount he could earn. I therefore desired his removal. He was the last who tried the old tricks of ruining the school by seducing the pupils under false promises. As the means which they generally employed were illegal, I informed the teachers that transgressors of British laws should be summarily punished. This largely put a stop to the unceasing intrigues surrounding their dismissal from Government service. The teacher appointed in place of Cha was a member of the London Missionary Society’s congregation. He is not a very learned man, but is able to explain the principal Chinese schoolbooks with great facility; and I am happy to state that the number of pupils now amounts to 61, of whom about 52 were always present when I visited the school."

Further historical records from "The Chinese Serial" (《遐邇貫珍》) shed light on the early establishment of free schools. In March 1856, the publication recorded an expenditure of "Silver Dollars---$ 658.17 " for various free schools. An earlier entry in "The Chinese Serial" from June 1855 profoundly documented the Hong Kong government's initial intent and background for setting up these institutions, stating that "Since the opening of the port by Great Britain, the Crown has established free schools in villages to enlighten children, out of compassion and unwillingness to see them remain uneducated..."

According to the 1857 Government Gazette, Victoria City was officially divided into seven sub-districts. Geographically, West Point (西點/西角) was considered a village and a key landmark within the Saiyingpun (西營盤) area. This often led to the interchangeable use of these two names in early documents. For instance, the Gazette specified: "The District of Victoria is divided into Seven Sub-districts. No. 1, Or SEI-YING-POON — From the small village Westward, called Cowee-wan, to the end of Circular Buildings, including all the houses on Bonham Strand, West of No. 1 Police Boat Station." — By Order, Colonial Secretary’s Office, 6th May 1857.

By 1872, the original West Point School was formally renamed Saiyingpun School. This was purely a name change, essentially a direct extension of the same institution. There was a seamless transition, as the school's staff salaries, teacher establishment, and student body remained unchanged. Although the specific reason for the name change is not detailed in official archives, the Saiyingpun School of 1872 was fundamentally a direct institutional continuation of the West Point School of 1871.

In 1858, the Hong Kong colonial government officially stipulated that fees charged by teachers in government-funded schools were strictly limited, allowing only a symbolic 'tea money.' This marked the beginning of free education. In December of the same year, the government, via Gazette No. 100, allocated £125 for the construction of Chinese school premises. A regulation in 1858 specified that each student was to pay the teacher only 25 copper cash per month. For context on contemporary prices, by 1876, one catty of white rice cost approximately 3 cents, and one silver dollar was equivalent to approximately 1100 copper cash.

Vernacular schools at the time were categorized into three types: Private schools (私塾), which received no government funding; Aided Village Schools, jointly funded by the government and villagers; and Government Schools / Free Schools, which were fully funded by the government. The government viewed Aided Village Schools as institutions where teachers were selected by the villagers themselves, and part of their salaries was paid in kind by the community. According to an 1870 report, half of the teachers' salaries in these aided village schools came from the government (approximately sixty dollars per year), with the other half expected from villagers in kind. An 1887 report further detailed that the villagers' contribution was roughly 30 copper cash and 3 catties of rice per month, valued at approximately 12 cents. This practice of paying salaries in kind was considered a traditional Chinese custom.

Improving the quality of local teachers remained a persistent challenge. Teachers in aided schools often struggled to collect full tuition fees due to local poverty, and friction arose between villagers and the government over school premises rent. Early village school teachers had diverse and sometimes questionable backgrounds, with some reportedly involved in fortune-telling, banditry, or falsifying attendance records. Although the government had the authority to veto appointments, these teachers often held significant influence within their villages. An 1871 report described a dispute at Pok Fu Lam School, where villagers refused to replace a teacher deemed by the government to have misconducted himself. This tug-of-war among villagers, traditional teachers, and the government only began to ease after 1876.

An 1887 report thoroughly analyzed the impact of child labor and family circumstances on school attendance in Hong Kong at the time. It identified key contributing factors such as domestic chores, bond-servitude for girls purchased as domestic servants, and fishing work in some villages.

The 1864 education report noted significant fluctuations in attendance at Chinese schools in Hong Kong. Attendance peaked annually from Chinese New Year until May, after which it steadily declined. Enrollment data at the time revealed a very high proportion of new students: 10 out of 21 students in one school, 12 out of 22 in another, and as many as 40 out of 51 in a third. Many students from the previous year did not return, ultimately only able to memorize a few hundred Chinese characters without understanding their meaning. The report attributed this to the fact that respectable Chinese residents rarely brought their families to settle in Hong Kong. It concluded that until this situation changed, educational development in Hong Kong would struggle to achieve anticipated progress.

The 1868 report (Article 56) refuted external accusations that the government's education system was 'immoral'. The report emphasized that while secular education was promoted at the time, and village schools purely taught Confucian principles, this was by no means immoral. Although Confucianism might have lacked a religious dimension, its overall orientation was towards promoting good. In terms of secular life, its moral system was considered no less robust than any ancient or modern ethical framework.

The 1870 report clearly categorized the school system into three types: Central School, government-funded Village Schools, and Grants-in-aid schools. There were 12 government-funded village schools at the time. After assessments of teaching effectiveness, their operational efficiency was ranked as follows, with Sai Ying Pun alone accounting for two of the top positions: Second place went to Sai Ying Pun Local (Sai-ying P’ún, Pún-ti), and third place to Sai Ying Pun Hakka  (Sai-ying P’ún, Hak-ka). These schools exclusively used Chinese textbooks, and their teaching methods were identical to those of traditional private village schools in mainland China.

In 1871, Inspector Frederick Stewart vividly described the traditional 'reading aloud' environment in Chinese schools in his report (Article 9): "It was customary in Chinese schools for students to shout out their lessons at the top of their voices. My entrance was often taken by students as a signal to demonstrate diligence. Unaccustomed to this deafening din, my first reaction was surprise, and my second, anger. I shouted 'Silence!', but this was tacitly understood by the students as 'Read louder!' After several attempts to restore order only resulted in louder noise, I retreated almost in despair to one of the junior classrooms, where I divided the children into smaller groups for more manageable interaction."

The 1873 report stated that, apart from the Central School, all other government schools, totaling 29, were collectively referred to as 'Village Schools'. Of these, 15 were fully funded and controlled by the government; the remaining 14 received an annual subsidy of 60 silver dollars, with villagers responsible for providing school premises and covering half of the teachers' salaries. However, in practice (Article 4), teachers were often forced to deduct school rent from their meager government subsidies, and the other half of their salaries promised by villagers was frequently in arrears. In many extremely poor villages, a teacher earning 5 silver dollars a month was considered well-off. This explained why villagers were reluctant to contribute financially to their children's education. Yet, due to the villagers' strong insistence on their right to select teachers, they would agree to all conditions before a school opened. Once the school was successfully established and teachers were exhausted by their inability to pay rent, villagers would then cite poverty as a reason to demand additional subsidies from the government. By 1874 (Article 10), this discontent gradually subsided.

The 1875 report (Article 6) documented the decline of some previously prosperous schools due to population migration, following two major fires and the relocation of boat dwellers to Causeway Bay. Many villagers at the time even believed that allowing their children to attend school was 'bestowing a favor' upon the government. Regarding curriculum (Article 11), in addition to geography, which was introduced in 1873, the first three volumes of new textbooks compiled by the School Book Committee were implemented in 1874 with significant success. The new subjects were taught effectively without compromising the traditional Chinese curriculum. As for 'Arithmetic,' it was not adopted that year for two reasons: firstly, there was insufficient time to compile suitable Chinese arithmetic textbooks; secondly, the innovations in the educational system within that year were considered sufficient, and it was deemed inappropriate to add further burdens. However, arithmetic was not forgotten and would be incorporated into the curriculum when the time was right.

• 1876 (Para 5): Issues with Village School efficiency were addressed, specifically tackling the habit of masters neglecting sustained effort throughout the year in favor of only working hard at the end.
• 1877: The Sai Ying-p'in schools suffered due to forced relocation and delays in building a new school-house, highlighting the delicate nature of native schools and the significant impact of external circumstances.
• 1878: The Aberdeen school was closed due to a teacher's incompetence and neglect, leading parents to prefer paying for other schooling options over free, neglected education.
• 1879 (Para 6): It was expressed that government-run Chinese schools in town were unnecessary and competed poorly with native educational efforts. Additionally, the scope of the Grant-in-aid Scheme was expanded by removing the "elementary" restriction.
• 1883 (Para 14): A report from Sir John Douglas (Ceylon Times) considered reducing government intervention in education, favoring a shift towards supporting voluntary, Grant-in-Aid institutions over directly funded schools.

“Early Hong Kong vernacular schools ( –1879) operated similar to private tutoring centers where patronage followed specific teachers rather than institutions, leading to a lack of institutional continuity when teachers departed. A shift occurred in 1879 with Fung Fu's appointment by Dr. Eitel, establishing a new model of school heritage that began as one of the five sanctioned schools in 1880, distinct from earlier, fragmented schooling .“

"We all have a concept of school heritage. Government schools and mission schools each possess their own unique characteristics and traditions; it is this very heritage that we are discussing here."

“Foreigners may know something of other matters, especially if they have reference to trade, but, in the matter of education, the dullest villager and the most ignorant boat-woman loudly proclaim their superiority, without the slightest suspicion of its being questioned. They know exactly what books their children are to read, and when and how they are to be read, the opinion of all foreigners to the contrary notwithstanding.” ---1870 Education Report

"...Early vernacular schools, even government free schools, were inherently similar to other Chinese schools under the Qing Dynasty. When a teacher left, everything started from scratch, leaving no institutional heritage behind."

“8. The appointment to the school in Battery Road was successful in every way, and was so from the first, although it was feared that there would be a falling off at the start, so difficult is it to calculate beforehand what will be the effect of a change of master.”   -1875 Education Report

"When a teacher left, even the Inspector of Schools could not foresee its future enrollment situation." 

“8. A new master was appointed to the school at Little Hongkong in the month of March, and the grant was continued, with the understanding that on the next complaint it would be permanently withdrawn. The villagers have, this time, got a man of a very different temper from that of the previous one, who would not bate a tittle of his rights. The present master makes no complaints,but it is currently reported and generally believed in Aberdeen and other adjacent places that,instead of receiving anything, he has to give monthly presents to certain of the villagers for the privilege of getting their children to teach. The school has improved considerably under the present master. In order of efficiency it was last on the list in 1872. It is now twentieth, but it will be long before it is in a very satisfactory state, if the people continue to do as they have been doing.

 11. The schools at Sai-ying Pún, Shéung Wán， Tái Wong Kung， Wántsai and Sháu-kí Wán come next in order. At these, the attendance is very large and very regular. At no place has the advantage of a good master been so evident as at Sháu-kí Wán. Three years ago, it had become a question whether any further attempt should be made to maintain a school in the village. When a Hákká master was appointed,failure was attributed to the indifference of the people. When he was succeeded by a Púnti,similar excuses were never wanting. Under the present master,both Púntis and Hákkás avail themselves of the school, and express themselves as highly satisfied. If the people were more straightforward when anything is really amiss with a school, salutary changes would be effected more rapidly; but, as a rule, they are studiously silent until their information is no longer of any use.”—1873 Education Report

In their essence, early vernacular schools, even government ones, were virtually no different from other Chinese schools during the Qing Dynasty. When a teacher left, everything started from scratch, leaving no school heritage behind. 

 When Fung Fu took over A. Fong's students from 1^st Feb.1879 and stepped into his classroom, the school became something entirely different. Fung Fu established an experimental school for the Inspector of Schools, Dr. Eitel.

 All historical timelines date back to the five new sanctioned schools approved by the Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1880. King’s college date-back has nothing to do with West Point, and tracing the school's lineage any further back before 1879 is fundamentally invalid.

In all educational reports, Hakka Free Schools and Punti Free Schools were consistently listed as independent entities, not subordinate to each other. Therefore, it is inaccurate to refer to them as Hakka and Punti sections "部." Early free schools in Hong Kong generally did not have formal names, often being identified by their location, such as "the free school at West Point." When a location hosted both Punti and Hakka free schools, they were distinguished by the language of instruction.

In 1858, following a suggestion from William Lobscheid, the colonial government allocated £125 to establish "Chinese Schools," as recorded in the Gazette on November 6, 1858. Examples of these early institutions include schools at West Point, Webster’s Bazaar, Bowrington, and Tang-lung-chow, mentioned in reports from 1860 and 1861, with the West Point school specifically noted again in 1864. A report from 1865 stated, "Here, as at West Point, a new and commodious School-room was opened last year. In the same building with this School there is also one for Hakkas, which has suffered very severely from the removal of the houses." This indicates that while a Hakka school might have shared a building, it remained a distinct entity. The Hakka school at West Point only began recording enrollments in 1866, with a minimum attendance of three students, which helped alleviate earlier concerns about its potential relocation to Kowloon.

A significant structural change occurred in 1902 under Edward A. Irving. Prior to this, Vernacular Schools in areas like Sai Ying Pun and Wan Tsai operated under the same roofs as English Schools but were not otherwise formally connected. By April 1902, these English and Vernacular Schools were formally linked, becoming what were then known as Anglo-Chinese Schools. In this new structure, the Vernacular School functioned as the Lower School, and the English School as the Upper School, as detailed in the 1902 Education Report.

Governor J. Pope Hennessy believed that promoting English education was a crucial responsibility of colonial governments. He stated on February 11, 1878, that "in the great Empire of England an important duty of colonial Governments was to spread the language of England throughout the British colonies. Over and over again we have been told, and I heard it from an authority the other day to whose practical opinion I attach some weight, that in that respect the English Government is supposed rightly to imitate the ancient Government of Rome, and wherever it goes throughout the world it imposes its civilisation by beginning with its language."

The "Central School Dispute" began to unfold with public scrutiny. A letter to the Editor of the "CHINA MAIL," dated June 8, 1877, from "A.B.C.," expressed concern that Governor Hennessy had shown great interest in denominational schools but had not yet visited the Government Central School. The author questioned whether the Governor was forming opinions solely based on the experiences of the episcopate, calling such a supposition "preposterous." The letter noted that previous governors, Sir Arthur Kennedy and Sir Richard MacDonnell, had been strong supporters of the Central School, and expressed hope that the new administrator would not deviate from this path.

Hennessy eventually made his first visit to the Central School on Saturday, January 5, 1878. During a subsequent inspection on January 25, 1878, he recounted: "I visited one large classroom, indeed a sort of double classroom, on the other side of that passage. In that room I should think there must have been a hundred and fifty Chinese youths who were being instructed by three Chinese teachers. They were reading the Chinese classics. I found that the three Chinese teachers who were instructing them in the Chinese classics had themselves no knowledge whatever of the English language. These three Chinese teachers spoke no English; and of the pupils in that particular classroom not one could speak English." Hennessy was dismayed to find that neither the three Chinese teachers nor the more than one hundred students in the classroom could communicate with him in English. This was particularly concerning given that the Central School's educational expenses accounted for 65% of the entire colonial education budget. He then asked Frederick Stewart, the headmaster and Inspector of Schools, "How many of the boys now in the school speak English?" Stewart replied, "From fifty to sixty; and that imperfectly."

A month later, at a Prize Day event at St. Joseph's College, Mr. J.J. Francis added fuel to the fire. He stated, "I was astonished to find that, at the recent examination of the Central School, only forty or fifty of the boys had been learning English, or were able to speak any English at all." This statement, reported in the China Mail on February 9, 1878, under the headline "Prize Day at St. Joseph's College," and followed by "Failure of Central School" on February 11, sparked controversy. The China Mail noted, "We will address the Governor’s speech, which unfortunately contained a similar fallacy, in more detail later. It is peculiar that he did not correct the unfair and unjust impression created by Mr. Francis’s misleading remarks." Although Mr. Francis's assertion was not entirely accurate, Hennessy, who was present, did not correct it and seemed to agree, leading to widespread media coverage. Frederick Stewart later commented on the public perception: "The belief now abroad in the Colony is that no attempt is made at the Central School to teach more than fifty or sixty of the boys English; and that the study of that language is subordinated to the study of Chinese, which both the English and the Chinese masters devote their time and their energies to teach. Indeed, it is difficult to see how people could believe otherwise, considering that Mr. Francis, as appears above, stated at St. Joseph’s College on the 9th instant, that he was astonished to find that only forty or fifty of the boys at the Central School were being taught English, and that His Excellency practically endorsed the statement by allowing it to pass unchallenged although touching upon it."

The escalating dispute led to a flurry of correspondence. In just two months, Governor J. Pope Hennessy, Frederick Stewart, and the Colonial Secretary exchanged 19 letters, as recorded in the 1878 Gazette No. 31. Hennessy instructed Stewart to postpone his leave to England, asking, "Could you not therefore postpone your departure for a fortnight?" He demanded a list of all government school students and teachers who could speak English. Stewart immediately replied, "Accordingly, when the Central School was established, the teaching of English was abolished in all the other Schools." He also expressed difficulty in changing his travel plans: "I had to telegraph to Shanghai to secure a passage for the 21st instant, and I have no chance. I should, of course, at once sacrifice my own to be able to get one by the following steamer." Governor Hennessy further demanded a report on the English proficiency of every student at the Central School. Stewart submitted a list of 453 scholars, stating that "336 pupils cannot be said to 'speak English' at all." Hennessy scrutinized the report, questioning, for instance, why one student, enrolled for only 22 months, was listed as having studied English at the Central School for 10 years and 2 months. He then requested the Acting Inspector of Schools, E.J. Eitel, to review the report for any further errors before resubmission.

Frederick Stewart continued to challenge Hennessy's stance. He voted against the fifth clause in the Education Committee, which would have allowed Central School students to decide for themselves whether to study Chinese. Stewart also ultimately compelled Hennessy to issue a public clarification in the Gazette.

Sir John Pope Hennessy KCMG (August 8, 1834 – October 7, 1891) was an Irish politician and colonial administrator. He served as the eighth Governor of Hong Kong from 1877 to 1882 and later as the fifteenth Governor of Mauritius from 1883 to 1889. Although his governorship in Hong Kong was relatively brief, he was noted for demonstrating a traditional British humanitarian spirit and for reforming English education in the colony.

As an Irishman, Hennessy faced prejudice from the British, who I think, viewed him as a "potato and onion-eating native" attempting a "royal" accent with an Irish brogue. Upon his arrival in Hong Kong, he was constantly ridiculed by the English media. His unconventional actions, such as immediately visiting the bishop and kneeling before him (disregarding tradition), drew press criticism. He was also criticized in newspapers in mid-1877 for prioritizing church visits over inspecting the Central School. Furthermore, his review of the inhumane practice of flogging and his stance on it were mocked by newspapers as "starting with a roar but ending with a whimper." His authority was consistently challenged by the British media in Hong Kong.

Early colonial officials often exhibited a dual nature and should not be conflated with later, less significant figures like police officers chasing hawkers. The Legislative Council of that era was an arena where prominent Chinese families vied with British power. A comparison of English and Chinese newspapers from the period reveals two entirely different perspectives: Chinese newspapers focused primarily on turmoil inside mainland China and generally disliked the British. This context somewhat reflects the political activities of Fung Fu after his retirement. In a related vein, during Fung Fu's time, Irish immigrants in America had settled earlier than Chinese immigrants. These Irish immigrants, often impoverished and living in slums, were known for assaulting Chinese coolies. It is suggested that Fung Fu, while selling cigars in New York streets, likely had confrontations with them.

Hennessy's subsequent inspection of the Central School proved controversial, leading to the widely circulated joke that "only a few dozen students at the Central School could speak English." He clashed with Inspector of Schools  , F. Stewart, who was also the headmaster of the Central School. This incident severely damaged Hennessy's authority and had a profound impact, not only leading to the later establishment of Sai Ying Pun (English) but also demonstrating the ineffectiveness of his humanitarian policies during his tenure. The history of King's College's predecessor carries special political significance and is distinct from Queen's College; they cannot be compared, at least before 1928.

According to a December 25, 1883, article in the Hong Kong Daily Press, the Japan Mail appeared to be developing a more accurate assessment of Sir John Pope Hennessy’s administration in Hong Kong. The Japan Mail had recently commented on an article from the Mauritius Argus, which hailed Sir John as the "liberator of the Creoles." While not fully endorsing the Argus's views, the Japan Mail acknowledged that "disaffection and hatred can be the only results of creating political aspirations which it is impossible to gratify." The Hong Kong Daily Press noted that this accurately described Sir John’s actions in Hong Kong and might prove to be an accurate assessment of his actions in Mauritius.

The Hong Kong Daily Press expressed hope that Her Majesty’s Government would reach a conclusion that would lead them to no longer entrust the important duties of a governor to such an individual. The Japan Mail, however, still credited the former governor with good intentions, stating that "Sir John’s aim was to remove, as far as possible, the municipal and political disabilities under which the Chinese residents labour." It further cited the "fundamental principle of British civilization that men who pay taxes ought to have a voice in their disposal." While acknowledging the complexities of balancing the claims of Chinese and English residents, the Japan Mail article asserted that the equalization of those claims should be the ultimate goal of a just administration.

The Japan Mail questioned the true extent of the municipal and political disabilities of Hong Kong's Chinese residents and the hardships faced by Creoles in Mauritius. It suggested that Sir John Pope Hennessy manufactured imaginary grievances and then took credit for addressing them, appearing to follow the same course in Mauritius. He was characterized as a "professional philanthropist" who exploited humanity's finest instincts for personal ambition and notoriety. The Japan Mail believed that Sir John’s actions in Hong Kong had led to disaffection and hatred, and that the Creoles in Mauritius were not under any disabilities.

The Argus, a journal supporting Sir John, had reported that when a Creole doctor in government service named an English doctor as his locum tenens during a leave of absence, the governor expressed displeasure. The Japan Mail interpreted this as the Creoles seeing their new governor as anti-English, stating that his attitude "is interpreted by this class as indicating a desire to give Mauritius to the Mauritians," or, in other words, to grant the Creoles political liberty and representative institutions.

While "political liberty and representative institutions" sounded appealing, the article argued that in a Crown colony, such possessions must remain under the control of the home government. It suggested that such colonies should be given full control over their purely municipal affairs, which Mauritians already possessed. Natural racial distinctions, it noted, had always existed and would continue to exist, but there were no political racial distinctions in Mauritius, except those implied by the island being a British possession while its people were French in language and sympathy. The political aspirations of the Creoles, if any, tended in that direction. They had not been actively disaffected to the British Crown, but they were "at heart French." The article concluded that it was injudicious for the English government to send a governor whose past history had shown he would lose no opportunity of fomenting discontent and impressing upon them the idea that they were a "hardly used race" among such a population. This sentiment was echoed by Hong Kong's English newspapers, which mocked Hennessy when he accepted local demands for self-governance after his transfer to Mauritius.

Following these criticisms, Sir John Pope Hennessy resolved to replace the preparatory or junior classes of the Central School with “the five sanctioned schools”. These schools were intended to "take the place of the Central School in giving an Elementary Education" and ensure that "with regard to the other Government Schools entirely supported by Government, arrangements be made, as soon as possible, to teach the boys English in all of them." Coincidentally, E.J. Eitel met Fung Fu, who had just returned to Hong Kong, and recommended him to head this new, experimental District Government School in Sai Ying Pun (English).

In the 1879 Education Report published in the 1880 Gazette (108), Fung Fu's new school was still referred to as Sai Ying Pun (Punti), but in the grading, "Sai Ying Pun (English)" was used for the first time. Before 1879, the colonial government had never established such kinds of schools. Another similar school, Wan Chai (English), only appeared in 1885. Although Fung Fu utilized the old site on Third Street, it was now a "national free school"—one of five new government free schools in Hong Kong intended to "replace the existing Central School in teaching elementary students." Fung Fu indeed taught using the teaching methods of "teaching elementary students in Central School."

Governor Hennessey's new policies on education included several key initiatives. One such initiative involved a public examination to select the best teacher to serve as headmaster and English teacher at Wong Nai Chung. Among the seven candidates was 18-year-old Ho Tung. An assessment noted that "all except Ho Tung were ignorant of the art of asking questions in English." However, Chan Man Kwong ultimately won the position, though he resigned after only two years.

In September 1880, a normal school was established in Wan Chai, utilizing a government elementary school, with the aim of training Chinese English teachers. A.J. May was appointed as its headmaster. However, this teacher training institution operated for only two years (1881 Education Report).

 Additionally, Fung Fu was assigned to Sai Ying Pun to teach English on a voluntary basis, leading to the establishment of an experimental district school.

Further reforms included altering the class schedule at Central School to dedicate five hours daily to English instruction.

 Hennessey also lobbied the British Crown for the construction of five new schools. Though the first physical construction of the “five sanctioned schools” was carried on long after his retirement. It was the Saiyingpun School new site at the High Street in 1910. 

Of course, the most important reform was the code of Aided Religion Schools. Because of its complexity, I do not prepare to handle here.

Fung Fu's 23 years at Sai Ying Pun School began upon his return to Hong Kong when he met Dr. Ernst J. Eitel, who recommended him for the headmaster position. Eitel, a pastor of the London Missionary Society (LMS), belonged to Congregationalism, as did the American Missionary Society and the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM), with whom Fung Fu had connections. This connection to Eitel and the LMS would later prove more significant for Fung Fu than his origins with the American missionary association. Soon after his return, Fung Fu married Kuan Yue-ming, the eldest daughter of Kwan Yuan-chang, an elder of To Tsai Church.

An American missionary report from 1888 mentioned a "Wong Ock" busy in Christian work, preaching in a Gospel Hall in Hong Kong under Dr. Eitel's direction. Eitel noted that one of Wong Ock's hearers offered himself for baptism after only three weeks of work.

Fung Fu took office on February 1, 1879, and within a year, his school received high praise. At the government schools, except Central School awards ceremony in February 1880, Eitel commended Fung Fu's school as the best to Governor Hennessy. Eitel stated, "Considering these Anglo-Chinese Schools first, I found that the English School kept by Mr. Fung Fú in Third Street, Sai-ying-p’ún, should be classified as the best school. I am confident that the examination results from this school are fully comparable to those of the Central School in corresponding classes." He explained that the school, which opened in early 1879 with about 61 pupils, initially offered both English and Chinese instruction, but after a few months, nearly all parents opted for English only. Eitel was surprised by the "exceptionally high results" when he examined the children according to Grant-in-aid Schedule standards, acknowledging Fung Fu's collegiate education in America and his competence as a teacher.

By 1883, the Anglo-Chinese Government Schools, including Sai Ying Pun, Wan Tsai, Stanley, and Wong Nai Chung, continued to show good results. A report from that year specifically highlighted Sai Ying Pun School's performance: "Out of 52 boys examined in Standards I, II and III, 49 passed, the three failures being in Standard I. Of the total number none failed in reading, 3 in dictation, 8 in arithmetic; of the 32 examined in geography 1 failed; while the 9 that presented grammar all passed with great credit." The report concluded that the school provided "a very thorough education and obtained a remarkably high average of ‘very good’ marks," and that Fung Fu's "excellent discipline maintained... throughout the year, places his school far ahead of the other Government District Schools." The report, however, regretted that Fung Fu lacked "a more commodious and healthy building in which to give his abilities freer scope."

The high cost of English teaching, requiring imported trained masters, expensive materials, and European accommodation, was a general challenge for schools in the Colony. Despite this, Sai Ying Pun School's students excelled. In August 1883, the Acting Inspector of Schools observed that some boys from district schools, including Sai Ying Pun, had sufficient English knowledge for advanced study. To address the deterrent of a $1 monthly fee, he suggested a competition for four annual free scholarships at a higher school. Governor Hennessy approved, and three of the four elected boys were from Sai Ying Pun, all passing their examinations creditably, with one securing the first prize in the 6th class.

Sai Ying Pun (English) was consistently rated as Rank 1 in education annual reports until 1890, when such ratings ceased to be published. In September 1881, Mr. Alfred J. May was appointed headmaster of the new Normal School, and students from Sai Ying Pun School could compete with those from Central School for entry. In December 1881, one pupil from Sai Ying Pun School was among the ten students who satisfactorily passed their probation examination for the Normal School, alongside nine from the Central School. Sai Ying Pun (English) were noted to "provide the same type of education as the lower half of the Central School" and served as "feeders to the Central School," making good progress in 1884. Eitel reiterated in 1885 that these schools "showed decidedly good results," and that their brightest students could become monitors and pupil-teachers, eventually serving as teachers in their own villages. By 1887, Fung Fu's eighth year in office, Eitel's assessment had shifted slightly, noting that "The examinations of these schools showed fair results."

In 1890, Fung Fu moved the school to new premises at the junction of High Street and Pok Fu Lam Road, which provided "Three class rooms... fitted up to accommodate 186 children," addressing the previous accommodation concerns. However, by 1893, government schools faced increasing competition from grant-in-aid schools. While government schools generally had better facilities, they began to experience problems similar to those of King's College in later years. Although the Anglo-Chinese Schools at Sai Ying Pun, Wan Tsai, and Wong Nai Chung still showed "very fair results and are greatly appreciated by the people," the report highlighted "insufficiency or unsuitability of the accommodation and in the almost total absence of properly trained teachers" as main difficulties. Grant-in-aid schools, whose teachers' salaries and promotions depended on their efficiency, were seen as more painstaking. This led to declining attendance in some government schools, resulting in the closure of eleven schools on January 1, 1893, and two more later that year, if they had fewer than 25 scholars and other schools were nearby. Grant-in-aid schools often stepped in to fill the gap.

By 1895, Fung Fu's sixteenth year of teaching, the Inspector of Schools began to view these government schools as a burden. The report noted that "The teachers of these Schools are natives who have had no special technical training," and suggested that if "voluntary effort would take up the work in these places, the Government might well confine its efforts in the sphere of Anglo-Chinese education to the working of Queen’s College." Eitel remained Inspector in 1896, but in 1897, the new Inspector, A. W. Brewin, explicitly stated, "I do not consider the work done by them as effective as that done by Grant-in-Aid Schools." This shift in perception might be what A. Morris referred to in 1928 when he mentioned that "at one time it was proposed to close it down."

Despite these growing criticisms, Sai Ying Pun School still showed good results in some areas. In March 1899, ten boys competed for Free Scholarships at Queen’s College, and two of the four awarded scholarships went to students educated at Sai Ying Pun School, demonstrating continued academic strength.

However, in 1901, Inspector Edward A. Irving initiated a reform of several government district schools. He found Sai Ying Pun, Wan Tsai, and Yaumati schools to be "in as nearly a satisfactory state as can be expected so long as English subjects are taught exclusively by Chinese," but recommended a "complete reorganization." His assessment of Fung Fu's school in 1902 was particularly critical: "At Wan Tsai and Sai Ying Pun (English Schools), English, Arithmetic, and Geography were taught up to the Fourth Standard. The study of the Chinese Written Language was entirely neglected, and in consequence scholars in the uppermost class were quite incapable of composing a few sentences correctly in their own language. Being what they were—schools professing to teach English—an equally serious fault was that from lowest to highest Standard the practice of colloquial English was almost entirely neglected." Irving's negative opinion of Fung Fu seemed long-standing, as he reportedly made a joke about Fung Fu being a long-lived pensioner at a 1924 event, implying a dismissive attitude.

Fung Fu retired on February 1, 1903, and began receiving his pension from February 13. His annual salary before a demotion was $720, with a housing allowance of $72 per year. However, after William took office on December 25, 1902, Fung Fu was demoted to 1st Assistant Master, with a salary of $624, which was his final working salary. He began receiving a pension of $336.4 on February 16, 1903. In 1928, Fung Fu was notably absent from the official guest list for the opening ceremony of King's College, presided over by Governor Clementi, despite over 2,000 guests attending.

When W.H. Williams was appointed, Government English Schools were already headed by European Masters. A European Master was a colonial-era position, recruited in the UK with teaching qualifications. For example, A. Morris held an A.C.P. Assessment Practising Certificate (UK/Specialist teaching), which was two levels below a Bachelor of Arts degree. According to the 1929 Education Report, "English Masters [were] usually appointed from England… successful candidates being required, after graduation, to take an Education Diploma Course in England before coming out to the Colony."

These European Masters enjoyed significant benefits. After three years of service, they were entitled to a six-month holiday in England, traveling first-class by steamer with their wives. Their starting salary was £270 per annum, and a first-class return steamer ticket cost approximately £88 per person. They also received European-style accommodation and an annual Chinese language tutoring allowance of $180. For comparison, in 1878, Central School hired its fourth assistant master with a monthly salary of $120 and a housing allowance of $30 (1878 Gazette No. 32).

W.H. Williams taught until January 1, 1905, when he was transferred to Victoria British School as headmaster, resigning in December of the same year.

 A. Morris was appointed on May 12 of the same year, following a vacuum of several months during which student numbers significantly declined. At the 1906 English Government School prize-giving day, A. Morris complained to the Governor, stating: "My tenure of office has been from the end of June. At the commencement of the summer vacation, I submitted a report on the unsatisfactory condition in which I found the school. The staff consists of 3 Anglo-Chinese assistants, a vernacular master, and myself. The number in attendance throughout the year has been very poor, the highest monthly average being 49 and the lowest 35, while the average for the year is only 44."

From A. Morris's era onwards, the role of the three main English government schools became more prominent. Governor Matthew Nathan stated in 1906: "We have also commenced to raise the general standard of that establishment by doing away with its lowest classes and making the three principal Anglo-Chinese Schools (Wantsai, Saiyingpun, Yaumetei) feeders for Queen’s College." Additionally, "Two free scholars are yearly admitted from Aberdeen into Saiyingpun School, and from Tanglungchan into Wantsai School."

A. Morris developed Scouting activities and the St. John Ambulance Brigade, both of which were highly valued by colonial officials. Ho Kom-tong consequently became a major supporter of Saiyingpun School. Scouting activities included a grand inaugural parade in November 1921.

 The "inauguration ceremony of the Saiyingpun School Boy Scouts (7th Hongkong Troop) was held on the University Football Ground, Pok Fu Lam, yesterday afternoon in the presence of a large gathering of the parents and friends of the boys, including Mr. Ho Kom-tong, the Patron of the Troop." The 1922 Prize Distribution Day report noted: "Our Scouts attended at Government House during the visit of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, when Patrol Leader Lo Kwok Chung was decorated by H.R.H. with the gilt cross for gallantry in saving a boy from drowning at Kennedy Town bathing beach."

A major bus accident occurred at Un Long Bridge in 1924, involving a number of scouts. The 1924 Education Report stated: "Under the able leadership of Scout-master Kong, assisted by assistant Scout-masters Lam and Lau, good scout work has been done. Successful camps were held at Sai Wan, Taipo Market, Telegraph Bay, Pinewood, and Tsin Wan. During the Tsing Ming holidays a number of scouts were involved in a motor-bus collision, on the Castle Peak Road, while proceeding to camp at Un Long. Three were injured—one fatally. The accident, which cast a gloom over scouting, evoked world-wide sympathy. A special letter of commendation, addressed to Scout Master Kong, for devotion to duty and endurance under great trial and distress, was received from the Chief Scout, Sir Robert Baden Powell." The Hong Kong Daily Press reported on April 7, 1924, on the "Terrible Bus Accident: Crash on Bridge in New Territories. Two passengers killed, All Injured. A terrible motor-bus crash occurred in the New Territories yesterday afternoon. Two motor-buses, traveling in opposite directions, collided on a bridge at Un Long. Both buses were completely wrecked, and two passengers died from their injuries. Two more were, at a late hour last night, not expected to live, and seven others were seriously injured. Practically all the remaining passengers suffered from shock and superficial injuries."

Regarding the Hong Kong St. John Ambulance Brigade, the "Saiyingpun School Old Boys' - Mr. Ho Kam Tong - Ambulance Division was inspected by Dr. Sir Erie Stewart Taylor on Sunday morning on the University Football Ground, which was kindly loaned for the occasion... Amongst those present were Lady Taylor, Mr. Ho Kom Tong (Patron of the Division), Mr. B. Ralphs (St John Ambulances Commissioner Overseas), Mr. A. Morris (Superintendent of the Division), and others interested in Ambulance Work." Mr. A. Morris, as Corps Superintendent, held a high position and conducted inspections alongside the Governor.

The school also excelled in other areas. In chess, the "China Mail" reported on July 18, 1917, that "An interesting ceremony took place today at noon, when the Hon. Mr. H.E. Pollock, KC, presented the Challenge Shield of the Hongkong Schools’ Chess League to the winners for this year – the Saiyingpun School." 

Another report on October 4, 1917, detailed a popular match: "SAIYINGPUN SCHOOL v. MIDDLESEX REGT. (B. COY.). Last evening, the members of the Saiyingpun School chess championship for 1917 visited Mount Austin for a friendly match with B Company, 25th Middlesex Regt. An enjoyable evening was passed, and after a keen struggle, the Saiyingpun boys won by 13(1) games to 2(1). The games on boards 1, 2 and 3 were particularly interesting and attracted a large number of spectators." 

Swimming was also popular, with the 1920 Prize Distribution Day report stating: "Swimming was popular, and most pupils were proficient swimmers. The school held its annual aquatic sports on Empire Day. In the Inter-Schools Athletic Sports, the school performed well."

 Saiyingpun School students' calligraphy was consistently praised; in 1921, it was noted that "Handwriting throughout the school continues to merit special praise; at a recent 'Vere Foster’s International Writing Competition,' one pupil from this school sent in a copy which was adjudged to be 'of conspicuous merit and deserving of special commendation,' and was ranked 'fourth.'"

The school consistently produced strong academic results. The 1918 Prize Distribution Day report noted: "The names of three old pupils appear in recent university lists, one as having passed the Matriculation Examination and two as having qualified for the Medical Faculty." In 1920, "four boys from the school who proceeded to Queen’s College passed the Matriculation Examination of the Hong Kong University." By 1923, "the names of thirteen old scholars figure in the recent University examination lists: Matriculation, 3; Senior Local, 1; Junior Local, 1. One, Lo Tung Fan, who won the Alan Morris Memorial Scholarship to Queen’s College where he obtained further honours, has distinguished himself by gaining the President of China Scholarship." The 1923 Education Report added that "All the boys in Class 4A, thirty-four in number, succeeded in passing the qualifying entrance examination to Class 3 at Queen’s College." Further achievements were highlighted in the 1924 Prize Distribution Day report: "Matriculation: One, Yau Fung Hon, (Distinction in Physics) went to Queen’s College as an Alan Morris Memorial Scholar; Senior, one; junior, twelve, one of whom, Cheng Iu Man, also holding an Alan Morris Memorial Scholarship, gained no less than five distinctions."

Among its distinguished alumni was Lo Tung Fan (羅棟勳). In 1941, on the eve of the Battle of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong government appointed Chinese barrister Lo Tung Fan as Deputy Commissioner of Police (Special Constabulary). Tragically, he died during the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong.

The school also demonstrated a strong charitable and humanitarian spirit. On January 30, 1923, it was reported that "the school has done splendidly. From class collections and self-denial, the scholars contributed $800 to the Swatow Relief Fund. Our Scouts assisted the Charitable Associations in street collections and were instrumental in raising $11,000 for the same purpose. Again, when we were unfortunate to lose our head boy, the School came forward, defrayed the whole of the funeral expenses, and handed a substantial sum to the bereaved and aged mother." 

The 1924 Prize Distribution Day report further highlighted the school's humanitarian efforts: "The lad succumbed after a few days’ sickness. The last rites were arranged by classmates, the funeral expenses paid by the school, and a substantial sum handed to the bereaved parents. Never have I witnessed a more impressive sight than this funeral procession, wending its way up the road outside, in an orderly, decorous manner, attended as it was by the whole school – masters and pupils. 'One touch of pity makes the whole world kin.'"

Other notable activities included sports and international engagement. In volleyball, the school's team was highly successful, with the 1924 report stating: "For the second year in succession our Volley-ball team has not lost a single game, and is again the proud holder of the Junior Volley-ball shield." 

The school also received visits from foreign educational delegations. In 1924, "Gentlemen interested in education visited on a number of occasions. The Japanese Education Commission from Formosa called during January, and carried away souvenirs of their visit in the form of maps, the handwork of our pupils. Later, the Vice-Chancellor of the University, the Professor of Education and the Registrar went round, and subsequently the Director of Education of the Fiji Islands." 

A 1924 report also mentioned an innovation in summer activities: "From May to the Summer Vacation, with the approval of the Director of Education, the morning session commenced at 8:30 a.m. The innovation was popular and could be extended. Nineteen years ago this same experiment was tried with the greatest success: school commenced at 7:30 a.m.; afternoons were devoted to outdoor activities - swimming and excursions."

Saiyingpun School's brilliant achievements under A. Morris were continued by King's College in 1928. Among the three main English government schools of the time, Saiyingpun School quickly became pre-eminent. From 1928 until at least 1930, it was the only government district school offering matriculation classes (Class 1).

In December 1926, the school received a visit from a Siamese Prince. A 1928 speech noted: "The Siamese Prince, who visited the school in December 1926, was much impressed with what he saw, and like the Queen of Sheba, who, after viewing the Temple at Jerusalem, was constrained to say, 'The half has not been told.'" At that time, Thailand needed to reform its elementary education, and the Prince and Princess were sent abroad to learn from other systems, visiting Saiyingpun School. The Prince stated that "the King and the government were particularly focused on the advancement of elementary education, which would be the primary focus of his observations during the tour." The Governor hosted a banquet for him, as "Prince Dahni, a younger son of the King of Siam, was on a tour to inquire into education. He was to report to his father upon his return home."

Saiyingpun School also played a role in teacher training. As noted in the "History of HKU" (page 279), "Teacher training (Group 4) continued to be the most popular of the arts courses. There was close co-operation between the government's Director of Education and the University's Professor of Education, especially after Lancelot Forster was appointed to the Chair in 1926. Forster was diligent in introducing the latest educational ideas from Britain, in 1930 proposing a radical review of the government's policy on teacher training. This resulted in a formal submission from the Vice-Chancellor to the colony's Director of Education, suggesting reforms to the system. The government took a cautious approach, however; while it agreed to continue recruiting graduate masters for its schools and to maintain the scholarship system for teacher trainees, a proposal to introduce a post-graduate diploma in education, first mooted in 1924 and endlessly postponed, was once again put on hold. Teaching practice ('school method') was a particular concern in the 1920s and the capacity of the Sai Ying Pun government school must have been seriously overstrained by the large number of student teachers who undertook their practical work there until King's College opened in 1928."

In 1880, among the Anglo-Chinese Schools, the English School run by Mr. Fung Fú in Third Street, Sai-ying-p'ún, was considered the best.

By 1904, after a recitation by pupils of the Saiyingpun School, Mr. Irving presented the annual report on the schools' progress. He noted that the three schools had existed as free institutions since 1901, offering elementary English and Chinese instruction to local children. The Chinese masters were performing excellent work, employing methods that, while common in Europe and America, were revolutionary for Hong Kong. Alongside English classes, vernacular classes were held, but few boys truly understood what they learned by rote. Mr. Irving observed that if boys did not learn their own language, they also struggled with English, often memorizing several school readers without comprehension. This old system had been replaced by a new one, with the schools' organization entirely remodelled under English masters. The results of the last examination showed significant improvement, particularly in elementary geography and first-year arithmetic. While composition remained weak, colloquial English had advanced considerably, with senior boys reportedly speaking English "courageously," as Napoleon once said of Wellington's French. The standard of Chinese language was moderate, with Saiyingpun achieving the best results among the three schools.

In 1905, instruction in District Schools had previously not extended beyond Standard V. However, during the past year, Standards VI and VII were introduced, though the results were unsatisfactory. Boys frequently left school as soon as they secured employment, disrupting the continuity of their education. Given that most boys left after Standard V (or even earlier) to become junior clerks in local firms, earning salaries between $15 and $30, a personal inquiry was made into their performance. Employers from two shipping firms, one wholesale firm, two large retail firms, and three engineering firms provided feedback. While acknowledging exceptions and boys who made good progress, the general testimony regarding the average boy leaving school was concerning. Employers stated that boys from the Anglo-Chinese Schools were proficient at copying letters legibly and taking dictation fairly well, but they "show little or no resource, are lacking in general intelligence, and do not make that progress and show that interest in their work which an employer looks for, while their ignorance of practical mathematics is astonishing." Illustrations of these shortcomings were provided, and attempts to suggest that employers might be expecting too much from junior clerks were met with specific instances. Employers cited boys who, after two or three years, were still incapable of managing a desk, writing proper business letters to foreign firms, or intelligently handling quotations and estimates from Chinese firms, both local and inland, due due to a lack of commodity knowledge or inability to apply what they knew. One example given was a senior clerk using a primitive method to convert £30 sterling to dollars, consuming an entire sheet of foolscap paper and rechecking the same figures.

By 1906, several educational innovations had been successfully implemented with the Inspector of Schools' consent. These included launch trips, walking excursions, swimming, and drawing exercises. Around 30 excursions were made to important factories and places of interest in the Colony, well-attended by both teachers and pupils, and believed to benefit the boys mentally, physically, and morally. Specimens collected during these trips contributed to a school museum, further enhanced by valuable donations from English manufacturing firms. Drawing, including freehand, geometry, and brushwork, was taught for the first time. During summer, bathing parties were organized, and boys were taught swimming. It was suggested that an inter-schools swimming contest, similar to football and hygiene competitions but with more restrictions to level the playing field for weaker schools, would greatly encourage this useful, healthy, and popular exercise. However, due to the small number of students, the school was unable to compete in the hygiene shield contest.

In 1910, Saiyingpun, the largest of the district schools, recorded the least satisfactory results, being surpassed by Wanchai and Yaumati. Examiners noted poor Chinese composition and expressed that the boys' manners left much to be desired. A call was made for improvement in these areas for the coming year. Despite these criticisms, Saiyingpun received a good report in the hygiene examination.

The 1918 Prize Distribution Day report highlighted good reading and conversation skills across all classes, especially among beginners who received their initial English instruction from Mrs. Morris, an English Mistress. Class 4, divided into two sections, showed excellent work despite a few weak arithmetic papers. Class 5, also in two divisions, performed very well, with minor weaknesses in arithmetic in Division A and in arithmetic and geography in Division B. Class 6, with three divisions (the third for newly admitted boys), saw Division A excel, Division B struggle with arithmetic, and Division C achieve highly creditable results in a Mid-Term Examination. Class 7, with three divisions (two for new admissions), showed very good results in all subjects. Class 8 performed very well, though a tendency towards weakness in arithmetic was observed. The Beginners' Class, taught in three divisions, achieved excellent results, with English instruction being particularly successful. The relationship between the Headmaster and scholars at Saiyingpun School was described as "peculiarly happy." Three former pupils were noted in recent University Lists: one had passed the Matriculation Examination, and two had qualified for the Medical Faculty. The school's social life was well-maintained, with Mr. Ray raising the chess players to a high state of efficiency. The School Team won the Hong Kong Schools Chess League Shield, presented by the Hon. Mr. H. E. Pollock, K.C., at a July function.

In 1923, the school's Scouts attended Government House during the visit of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, where Patrol Leader Lo Kwok Chung was decorated with the gilt cross for gallantry in saving a boy from drowning at Kennedy Town bathing beach. Mr. Irving concluded by expressing his hope that Saiyingpun School would increasingly serve as a training ground for the University, aiming to educate boys to matriculation standard.

Sir Claud Severn, addressing the pupils in 1924, announced that facing bricks had arrived in large quantities from Formosa, removing any further excuse for delay in completing their new premises. He hoped that 1925 would be their final year before moving into what the headmaster called "the Promised Land." The new Saiyingpun would become a senior school, akin to Queen's College, offering great convenience to boys in the Western districts. The large number of applicants turned away that year was a testament to the Headmaster and his colleagues' successful work and the school's popularity. Sir Claud also commended the School Scout Troop for their individual work, which made them an example of true duty. He concluded by praising the school's high standard of proficiency and expressed hope for a long period of progress as a main Government school in the Colony once the new premises were occupied.

In 1929, the Governor highlighted the significant personal interest shown by parents, who attended classes in large numbers at the Head Master's invitation. He emphasized that this interest and the resulting cordial relationship between staff and parents were vital for the school's success and should be fostered. He then proposed the formation of an Old Boys' Association, noting that 4,856 former pupils had passed through Saiyingpun School (which evolved into King's College) since its opening in 1879, with nearly 900 boys currently enrolled. He cited the immense value such an association held for Queen's College and expressed confidence it would be equally beneficial for King's College.

The 1930 Prize Distribution Day featured reports on popular extracurricular activities. The Woodwork class was exceptionally popular, surprising the headmaster in his 25 years in the East. As many as 120 students in the middle divisions voluntarily enrolled in this class, held after school from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Excellent results were achieved, with students producing tables, door frames, towel rails, cupboards, knife boxes, and splints for the Ambulance Divisions, in addition to practicing joint-making. The Photography Class also attracted many students with cameras, with enthusiasts often working until 9 p.m. The headmaster suggested that including a section for school students in the University Amateur Photography Exhibition would provide a valuable stimulus.

His Excellency addressed the gathering, drawing comparisons between Queen's College, an older institution with traditions to uphold, and King's College, a younger one with traditions to establish. He noted that King's College had more than doubled its student numbers to its maximum capacity of 940 in just over three years. He emphasized the material advantages King's College offered, boasting one of the finest school buildings in the East, equipped regardless of cost with everything a modern educational enthusiast could desire, unlike Queen's College, which prospered despite its surroundings.

In 1932, a disappointing trend was observed: Senior Classes were depleted during the summer as many promising pupils successfully passed competitive entrance examinations to institutions like the Customs College in Peking, the Naval College at Whampoa, or Ling Nam University in Canton, resulting in the loss of 21 students. Another concerning aspect of the examination system was the migration of unsuccessful boys to other schools, as inability to pass was perceived as a "loss of face." Guardians were strongly advised to cooperate and ensure their wards remained in the same school and form for another term.

In 1933, candidates from the King's College Life Saving Class successfully passed a test for the Royal Life Saving Society's Proficiency Certificate and Bronze Medallions. The examination, held at the Chinese Athletic Association Bathing Pavilion, was overseen by Mr. C. W. Brand, the Society's official representative in Hong Kong. All twenty candidates, including Chan Tak Chun, Heung Iu Nuen, Fong Ho Tuen, Un Shu Man, Chung Sze Yuen, Leung Wing Lau, Chan Chin Un, Taui Wai Shing, Chan Sun Pui, Woo Hei Tak, Chick Sui Ting, Ng Hung Cheong, Chau Wing Chuen, Li Po Tin, Ng Sheung Fai, Chan Kwok Leung, Sing King Leung, Tse Shing Fong, Lau Po Chia, and Wong Yui Man, were successful, with the examiner commending their high standard of proficiency. Mr. Chan Sik Pui, who trained the class, was congratulated for the excellent results. King's College announced its readiness to provide qualified life-saving members for school launch picnics, bathing beaches, and swimming sports, inviting applications for these services.

In 1934, Mr. Alfred Morris, the popular headmaster of King's College, was due to retire the following month, celebrating his 60th birthday on June 18th, after 30 years of educational and public service. Throughout these three decades, Mr. Morris dedicated his life to education, first as headmaster of the old Sai Ying Pun School and then of King's College. Hundreds of young men, predominantly Chinese, benefited from his guidance and now hold positions of responsibility across Hong Kong and China. For over sixteen years, he was also deeply involved in charity work, particularly with the St. John Ambulance Association and Brigade, where he served as Commissioner. He was instrumental in establishing free nursing centres, stations, and clinics in both Hong Kong and the New Territories, providing invaluable assistance to the sick and poor.

Members of the Old Boys' Associations of King's College and Sai Ying Pun School, along with Chinese Merchants of the Colony led by Sir Shou-son Chow, Kt., organized a farewell party in Mr. Morris's honor, held at the Gloucester Building. Beyond his educational activities, Mr. Morris's wide benevolence was greatly appreciated by the people, and he further established more than ten clinics in the villages of the New Territories, offering free treatment and medicine that cured innumerable patients.

A concert in aid of Cancer Research was scheduled to be held at King's College Hall. The program included an attractive new item: Mr. Lum Siu Mui, a former associate of renowned Chinese actors Mei Lan Fong, Siu Yeung, and Yuet Lo, promised to perform the historical dance of Queen Yu Ki in costume. The dance tells the story of Queen Yu Ki, who danced to console Ruler Pah Wang in his despair after defeat, and subsequently committed suicide to avoid capture by the enemy.

In 1935, King's College made a donation of $20 to the Sir William Peel Fund for the Protection of Children, bringing the total subscribed amount to $17,583.60. Notice was given that the Fund would close at the end of June, with further donations gratefully acknowledged by the Hon. Treasurers, Mr. A. McKellar and Mr. Kwok Chan.

The special Jubilee Number, the July issue of the King's College Magazine, was received, noted for its readability and interest to all past and present members. The magazine featured the school's entrance on Jubilee Day as its frontispiece, along with excellent photographs of Hong Kong's Jubilee celebrations, taken both day and night, and full-page portraits of Their Majesties the King and Queen.

The King's College Old Boys' Association was formally established at a meeting held in the College, chaired by Mr. W. L. Handyside, the acting Headmaster, and attended by over 80 past pupils. Its objectives, as per the adopted constitution, were to provide a corporate existence for old boys, strengthen relations between the College and its alumni, and encourage interaction among them. Ordinary membership was open to all King's College 'Old Boys', past and present staff members, and College prefects, with an annual subscription of $2. The elected officers for the ensuing year were: President – Mr. W. Kay, Vice-President – Mr. A. White, Hon. Secretary – Mr. Chung Hon-ki, Hon. Treasurer – Mr. Ho Tse-kin, and General Committee members – Messrs. Edmund Sun, Wu Hei-tak, Li Shan-chung, Lo Hung-sui, Samuel Ling, Au Tin-woon, and Li Shiu-luen.

In 1936, the number of students in English schools in Hong Kong significantly decreased, prompting criticism of the English school system. Many believed improvements were necessary to enhance educational effectiveness and meet general standards. The eight-year curriculum, heavily emphasizing English with relatively superficial Chinese instruction, often led to students failing when transferring to schools in mainland China, and tuition fees were high. Consequently, the system's development had stagnated. According to the Director of Education's report, the total number of students in English schools across Hong Kong decreased from 18,036 to 17,086, a reduction of 950 students. The report also indicated that there were a total of 58,394 Chinese students in Hong Kong, of whom 17,086 were enrolled in English schools.

King's College announced its university entrance results, with Wong Man Hon achieving Honours with Distinctions in English and Chemistry. Those who passed included Chan Kai Hee (Distinction in Trigonometry), Chan Kai Him, Chan Tak Chun, David W. La Chang, Cheung Hok Wing, Chow Hok C. Yee, Chow Yun Pui, Fong Kwai C. Tak, Ho Kai Yin, Ho Tit Yau, Ip Tai Sung, Ko Tsok Yum (Distinction in English), Lam Iu Bun, Leung Man Po, Li Choi Tsun, Li Yun Gun (Distinction in Chemistry), Liu Shiu Wa, Ma Chiu Tung, Ma Sing Fai, Man Shun Yee, Mui Ho Chun, Ng Wah Keng, Ngo Chi-Dao, Pau Kwok Sum, Shum Wing Hong, Tang Hon Chiu, Tang Shu Shing, To Shui Yuen (Distinctions in Chemistry, Algebra), Theodore To, Wong Kam Tim (Distinctions in Chemistry, Algebra, Geometry), Wu Wing Yan (Distinction in Geometry), Yee Pang Fei, Yeung Yuk Nga, and Yu Yiu Hin.

King's College Division scored the most points in the Annual Ambulance Aquatic Sports.

Regarding a badminton problem for an association involving the Chinese "Y" and King's College, Mr. John Pau, Secretary of King's College, stated that their answer would be 'No!' He explained that most of his players had only recently taken up the game, with Chan and Woo being their only truly experienced players. In contrast, the Chinese 'Y' players, all from the Straits, had played since childhood, with most having participated in the 'B' Division of the Singapore Association's league, which was considerably stronger than the local 'A' Division.

In 1937, Mr. Kay articulated a progressive view on education, stating that "Examinations and examination results are not our be-all and end-all. Most educational authorities now admit that examinations are by no means an infallible test of a pupil's ability. That being so, it seems to me all wrong that a boy's whole future should depend (as so often it does) on how he happens to perform in one particular examination. More account should be taken of the lad's school record, his character, his capability for leadership and the like." He noted that only 10 to 15 percent of senior boys entered university, yet this small percentage largely dictated the curriculum. Efforts were underway to change this, with the new School Certificate Examination, run by the Education Office and introduced that year, not qualifying for matriculation. A certificate winner wishing to enter university would need to continue studies at school for at least another year.

In 1938, King's College volleyball and basketball teams both achieved victory during a tour of Macau. In their first match against the 'Roaring' team, they won both games. Over a hundred spectators watched the exciting matches, where the seasoned King's College team consistently demonstrated superior skill. Despite strong players, the 'Roaring' team's lack of coordination led to their defeat, losing 0-3 in volleyball and 42-47 in basketball after initially holding an advantage.

In 1940, at King's College Speech Day, the Acting Governor noted that in September, Class 4 was almost entirely moved from district schools and concentrated in King's and Queen's Colleges, resulting in King's College having five divisions of Class 4. Headmaster Mr. H. G. Wallington expressed concern that among the 31 students who passed, five were boys from Class 2 who entered as private students. He stated this was unknown to him until the examination and, while pleased they passed, he did not consider it a good thing. He explained his concern: "For one thing, boys who pass in this way are usually too young to enter the University and have to waste a year before entering. Also, usually, they leave, thus depriving the school of some of its best students one year early. If the entry of students from a non-matriculation class is permitted, I can see no reason why, in future years, boys from Classes 3 and 4 should not try their luck, provided they can get someone outside the school to sign the entrance forms."

King's College announced the successful candidates for Class 8 new admissions, with 50 regular and 10 reserve admissions. Admitted candidates were required to assemble in the school hall at 8:15 AM on the 9th for placement, and transfer students were not accepted. The regular admissions included Liu Siu Hung, Au Ka Hung, Li Wang Chung, Kwok Ming Sung, Chan Sum Wang, Tsang Ching Ming, Chan Hoi Chan, Yu Shu Wah, Choi Tai Kin, Man Yi Hung, Wong Siu Tat, Lam Chik Ching, Mak Chim Kwong, Tsang Koon Yau, Yung Koon Sing, Tse Siu Kwan, Suen Cho, Mak Siu Ping, Chan Yau Kan, Li Koon Cheung, Tong Tai Kwan, Chan Ting Chung, Yeung Ying Chan, Chan Man Chi, Lui Nai Moon, Yiu Chun Tang, Lam Sing Cheung, Mak Ping Kwan, Lui Kwai Sang, Chan Yiu Wah, Yung Shu Wing, Kwan Nai Sing, Ng Kuen Wah, Poon Kau, Yip Sai Chan, Li King Wai, Pang Hon Ming, Pang Shu Tang, Chan Pui Chi, Chan Fai Kai, Yip Tai Chi, Lo Shu Chi, Leung Nai Mo, Leung Chi Keung, Yiu Kwong, Pang Hon Wah, Pang Ching Kwong, Yeung Wai Tak, Hung Kwok Kan, and Li King Leung. Reserve admissions were Leung Sing, Yip Duk Kwong, Lui Hip Sing, Leung Ping Chung, Lai Yui Suk, Koo Hong Wing, Cheung Yi Tin, Ng King Tong, and Chow Leung Ming.

Seven English secondary schools in Hong Kong held their annual athletic meets in spring to review the year's achievements. King's College's athletic meet was scheduled for the 21st of the month. In the King's College Table Tennis Tournament, student Poon Sai-on, a top player in Hong Kong, successfully retained his championship, having repeatedly won the school's annual competition. He and 'Wah Szabados' were particularly renowned.

The 1940 English Secondary School Certificate Examination results were announced, with King's College achieving the best performance among boys' schools, while Belilios and Sacred Heart were the top girls' schools. Additionally, fifty more students applying for relief were approved after review.

In 1941, King's College secured a significant victory in Wednesday's "B" Division matches, defeating Chung Wah. The win was particularly meritorious as one of King's players, K. H. Lo, was hampered by a leg injury, effectively making him a passenger. Despite Lo and Lam failing in all three games, the other two pairs, Chan and Chung, who won all three, and Woo and Liu, who won two, carried the team to victory. Chung Wah's performance was disappointing, but it was hoped they would improve with more practice from players like Choy Wing-chiu.

King's College held its eleventh annual athletic sports at the Caroline Hill track, where no less than ten new records were established. Mrs. J. J. Ferguson, wife of the Second Master, distributed the prizes. Sin Kwok-bun, the 1939 champion, regained his Senior title, and Wong Man-ying was crowned Junior champion. West House won the House championship with 163 points. The new records included: 100 metres (Junior) by Wong Man-ying in 12 2/5 secs; 400 metres (Senior) by Sin Kwok-bun in 58 1/5 secs; High Jump (Junior) by Ching King-chow with 5 ft. 3/4 in.; Small Boys Long Jump by Lee Cheuk-Sang with 14 ft. 6 in.; 200 metres (Junior) by Leung Ylu-kow in 26 3/5 secs; Small Boys High Jump by Lee Cheuk-Sang with 4 ft. 2 in.; 1,500 metres (Senior) by Liu Sin-chi in 5 min 19 2/5 secs; Long Jump (Junior) by Wong Man-ying with 17 ft. 11 in.; 400 metres (Junior) by Wong Man-ying in 64 4/5 secs; and 110 metres High Hurdles (Senior) by Wong Kilim in 18 4/5 secs.

The history of King's College should be traced back to Saiyingpun School.

When Fung Fu first took office, only a portion of parents were willing to let their children learn English. However, Fung Fu was very engaging, and within a year, all students were eager to learn the language. At the prize-giving ceremony in February 1880, Inspector E. A. Odell addressed the Governor, expressing his satisfaction and stating, "However, I must explain that this school operated throughout the year on the optional principle, which, with Your Excellency’s permission, I applied to this school as an experiment." The 1883 Education Report further praised Fung Fu's school: "This, taken together with the excellent discipline maintained by Mr. FUNG FU throughout the year, places his school far ahead of the other Government District Schools; and it is much to be regretted that he has not a more commodious and healthy building in which to give his abilities freer scope."

Due to insufficient space, the government constructed a new school building in 1891 at the junction of High Street and Pok Fu Lam Road, a project that had been approved by the British Crown 12 years prior. The single-story building soon became inadequate. By 1908, during A. Morris's tenure, another floor was added, and Morris himself resided in the school quarters, as noted in the 1908 Public Works report. Even the two-story Saiyingpun School quickly became insufficient. By 1914, plans to add a third story were budgeted, but the approved expansion project was withdrawn after the government took over Ellis Kadoorie School. Saiyingpun School had become the most important among the Government District Schools, and its original site was no longer large enough for a new building. The search for a new site became a point of contention between non-official members of the Legislative Council and the government.

In 1917, the Hon. Mr. Pollock raised concerns in the Legislative Council: "With regard to Saiyingpun School, I think there was a committee which reported on that school a few months ago. I think they mentioned something about the class-room accommodation being deficient." His Excellency responded, "The Saiyingpun School report, to which the hon. member representing the Justices of the Peace referred, condemned the site of this school. It is cramped and crowded in by a large number of buildings. The only real remedy is to remove the school altogether. That is an expensive and rather difficult project. Crown land in that vicinity is very scarce. It is a matter which will doubtless come one of these days, but, in the meantime I do not see any immediate remedy."

By 1918, several Chinese members relentlessly pursued the matter. After extensive negotiations, the government exchanged land with the Catholic Church, as documented in file HKRS58-1-80-37, titled "SAIYINGPUN SCHOOL - INSUFFICIENCY OF ACCOMMODATION. PROPOSED REMOVAL TO A MORE SUITABLE SITE. I.L. 2364 SITE FOR ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, BROADWOOD ROAD." By 1921, the project began to materialize, with "Item 10 provides a sum for beginning the new buildings for Saiyingpun School on a site on Bonham Road, which will probably be acquired during next year." From 1917 to 1927, the construction of the new Saiyingpun School was debated 18 times in the Legislative Council, where the new school building was consistently intended for Saiyingpun School. A. Morris was preparing to take over this new school building and indeed took possession of it as the headmaster of Saiyingpun School.

The Hong Kong Daily Press reported on January 30, 1923, from the annual prize-giving at Saiyingpun School, quoting A. Morris: "The school remained full throughout the year, and many prospective pupils were unable to secure admission. The school anticipated the completion of its new building, which would accommodate a greater number of students." Public Works reports from 1923 detailed the site formation for the New Sai Ying Pun School, followed by contracts let for its superstructure in 1924. Interestingly, the 1925 Public Works report noted "Good progress was made on the New King’s College," while the 1926 report simply mentioned "111. Bonham Road School."

In October 1925, the government announced plans for Saiyingpun School. In response to a question by the Hon. Mr. P. H. Holyoak at the Legislative Council meeting, the Colonial Secretary stated that "if no unforeseen circumstances arise, it is hoped to complete and open Saiyingpun School by the 30th June, 1926. The work was delayed for about two months mainly owing to the Strike." The Director of Public Works confirmed in the Official Record of Proceedings on April 22, 1926, that "the structural work would be completed in June," though furniture and fittings might be late. By April 1926, the construction of the new Bonham Road campus was largely complete, with "The school authorities have occupied a portion of the building." The school was partially occupied in June, the building completed, and furniture (except desks) provided by the end of July. It was fully occupied in September after the summer holidays, despite delays in desk delivery. Less than a month later, the media already knew the school was named King's College. An editorial in the Hong Kong Daily Press on June 22, 1926, titled "KING’S COLLEGE, HONGKONG," stated: "The completion of King’s College near the University provides the Colony with one of the best school buildings in the Far East. However, buildings alone do not make a school, and it is fortunate that the first Headmaster, Mr. Morris, will take with him a full-grown and conspicuously successful organization. Sai Ying Pun School has been made by him from very small beginnings in twenty-one strenuous years, and it is safe to say that his flock would have followed him to any other District School during that time." This sparked controversy, with one reader submitting a letter suggesting "it would have been wiser to have kept the word 'School' and to call the students 'Schoolboys.'"

In 1927, the newly completed King's College building was occupied by the military. "The College began the year well with 644 pupils in January, but during the Chinese New Year Holidays (Wednesday, February 2nd, 1927) the building was handed over to the Military. Boys in Classes 8 to 5 (inclusive) were transferred temporarily to the Ellis Kadoorie School and the remainder to Queen’s College." The Headmaster, Mr. A. Morris, was transferred to the Education Office, and Mrs. Morris to the Victoria British School. The remaining staff members were transferred with their classes. The 1927 Education Report confirmed: "In February, King’s College was taken over by the Military Authorities for use as an emergency hospital. The pupils were accommodated partly in Queen’s College and partly in Ellis Kadoorie School... At the end of the year, King’s College was restored to this department to be ready for the reopening of school at the New Year." Morris returned to the school as headmaster on January 26, 1928.

Just as Fung Fu moved the school from Third Street to High Street in 1891, A. Morris moved it from High Street to Bonham Road. The only difference was that during his headmastership, the school's name was changed by a distant authority. A name change does not signify the start of a new school. For instance, the former West Point (Punti) was renamed Saiyingpun (Punti). Similarly, the University of Hong Kong's Faculty of Medicine was renamed the Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, but its predecessor remains the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese, founded in 1887. One argument suggests that the Education Department formally terminated and then re-contracted A. Morris internally. If so, all old teachers should have undergone the same process. Indeed, there were changes in the 1928 Civil Establishment, with A. Morris's date of appointment listed as January 1, 1927, and Temporary Mistress Ellen L. Philips's appointment on October 10, 1926. These changes were due to the school building being handed over to the military hospital, unrelated to the name change.

Saiyingpun School's brilliant achievements under A. Morris were directly continued by King's College in 1928. Among the three main English government schools at the time, Saiyingpun School quickly became preeminent. From 1926 until at least 1930, it was the only government district school offering matriculation classes (Class 1). The 1926 Education Report stated: "Boys are no longer sent to Queen’s College after passing this (Class 4) Examination but remain at King’s College, which now has classes preparing for the Matriculation Examination." The 1927 Education Report noted Queen's College's maximum enrolment, "including 192 from King’s College," indicating student transfers. Some argue that King's College was a new school due to the different curriculum, reasoning that "it has a new name" and "it has matriculation classes" therefore "it is a new school." However, times change, and later all government schools could offer matriculation classes, which certainly did not make them "new schools." As early as 1923, the outgoing Inspector of Schools, Mr. Irving, had expressed a desire for Saiyingpun School to offer matriculation classes, stating, "He would like to see the school educate boys up to the matriculation standard."

In December 1924, Colonial Secretary Sir Claud Severn, speaking at Saiyingpun School's annual prize-giving ceremony, unequivocally stated that the new site was a continuation of Saiyingpun School. He expressed hope that 1925 would be their last year before entering "the Promised Land," where Saiyingpun would become a senior school, similar to Queen’s College. He concluded by remarking on the school's high standard and expressed hope that "when the new school came into being, they would inaugurate a long period of progress as one of the main Government schools in the Colony."

There are several compelling reasons why the history of King's College should be traced back to Saiyingpun School:

1. In Legislative Council and government documents, the new Bonham Road campus was consistently referred to as an expansion of Saiyingpun School.

2. During the transition period, Legislative Council documents referring to "King’s College" often included annotations like "then Saiyingpun School" or "New Saiyingpun School," indicating a reference to the building rather than a new institution.

3. The subsequent renaming after completion was purely to honor King George V and fulfill a promise made to his grandmother, Queen Victoria.

4. The introduction of matriculation classes was a natural progression; all other secondary schools later offered such classes, altering Queen's College's status. This change in curriculum does not justify considering it a new school.

5. A. Morris's relocation with the original staff and students to the new site represents a natural continuation, unequivocally demonstrating its educational legacy and community transmission.

6. A. Morris's contract modification in 1927 was solely due to the new school building being occupied by the military for 11 months that year.

7. At the 1928 opening ceremony, Governor Sir Cecil Clementi and A. Morris both affirmed that King's College's predecessor dated back to 1879. This assertion was upheld by principals, including Mr. Madan in 1976.

8. In Governor Clementi's view, the name change was merely a formality, unrelated to the school's heritage or A. Morris's work. Thus, the Director of Education only briefly mentioned it in the 2016 Education Report, not even highlighting King's College and Queen's College jointly admitting government school boys for matriculation, as this intention had already been stated by his predecessor when it was still Saiyingpun School, reflecting a general trend.

9.  A 1928 editorial affirmed, "The name of Morris of Saiyingpun is already well known and well-loved, but future generations will have cause to honor and revere the name of Morris of King’s."

The history of King's College's predecessor is often traced back to 1879, every official documents link it to “five new schools gazetted in 1880”. For instance, the 1910 Report of the Education Committee noted that the erection of a new District School building at Saiyingpun, the first of five new buildings sanctioned in 1882 (or 1880), commenced in the autumn of 1890. This project was part of a larger initiative, as Sir M. Hicks-Beach had approved 10,000 dollars for the construction of five schools. The Colonial Secretary, Derby, further inquired about these "five sanctioned schools" in December 1882, questioning whether they recommended a more expensive class of school than previously approved. 

However, by 1890, this sum was only sufficient to build the first schoolhouse on High Street.

In September 1926, Saiyingpun School, which had been founded in 1891, moved to magnificent new quarters on Bonham Road and was renamed King's College by His Excellency, King George V. While the 1926 Education Report stated the school was "founded in 1891," this date specifically refers to the completion of its building, which was the first of the five schools promised by Queen Victoria. The institution's history, however, was recognized as predating this. At the opening ceremony in 1928, A. Morris, the headmaster, explicitly stated, "Saiyingpun School dates back to 1879." Governor Sir Cecil Clementi, speaking at the same event, concurred, noting, "The career of the school under another name and in another premises has already been a long one, dating back to 1879. Next year, therefore, it will celebrate its jubilee."

Several reasons support the 1879 origin for King's College's institutional history. Firstly, the Saiyingpun (English) school that emerged in 1879 was a new entity, distinct from the Saiyingpun (Punti) schools, which did not teach English and were viewed differently by the British. The 1869 Education Report, for instance, highlighted the general state of "Village Schools" without special consideration for English instruction. West Point School, established in 1856, was renamed Saiyingpun (Punti) and Saiyingpun (Hakka) in 1882. Before 1879, Central School was the only government free school that taught English.

Secondly, the 1879 school marked a significant shift in English education. A. Morris, despite knowing of earlier schools, referred to Mr. Fung Fu, a returned student from America, as the "first Headmaster" of this new school. Similarly, the Industrial and Commercial Evening News reported Fung Fu as the "first Chinese to serve as headmaster in a government school primarily teaching English in Hong Kong." This distinction is crucial because, while many government schools before 1879 had Chinese headmasters, they were not primarily focused on English instruction, unlike Central School, which had foreign headmasters. This new school was also an experimental initiative under Governor Hennessy's reforms for English teaching, operating on an "optional principle" as an experiment.

Finally, and most conclusively, Governor Clementi officially endorsed the 1879 origin in 1929. At the Prize Distribution Day, he suggested the formation of an Old Boys' Association, stating that former pupils, numbering 4,856 "since the Saiyingpun School (which evolved into King's College) opened in 1879," should be included. This statement, made after the school's renaming, unequivocally links King's College's alumni history to 1879, solidifying its institutional foundation in that year.

Clues regarding the naming process of King's College appeared in a March 1928 newspaper report. It stated: "—school to be known by the proud title of King’s College, which was to provide for higher education up to the Matriculation Standard. To you, Sir, the College is indebted for its name, for you will recollect that in March, 1926, when you visited the building in its incomplete state, you selected the name King’s College, a title of which we all can be justly proud." (Hong Kong Daily Press, 1928-03-06). This raises questions: The new Bonham Road school building was still under construction in March 1926 and not fully operational by the end of that year. Why did the Governor take time out of his busy schedule to visit the construction site and meet A. Morris then? And why was the school named before it was officially opened for use?

It turns out this hasty decision was related to another event. Britain's Crown Prince Edward visited Hong Kong on March 15th, 1926, to bestow honours on behalf of King George V. During this visit, Cecil Clementi was awarded the Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George. At the time, the Bonham Road school building was one of Hong Kong's most significant newly completed structures. As a gesture of gratitude, Clementi presented it as a tribute. However, a secondary school seemed somewhat inadequate for such a tribute, so it was elevated to the status of a 'College'. Yet, in Britain, only institutions like Trinity and King's were typically referred to as 'College'. Consequently, when the public became aware of the situation, they submitted letters to newspapers, criticizing the decision: "Every means possible should be made to keep the School boys and School girls in their proper places and such terms as “colleges” and “graduation ceremonies” should be rigidly avoided."

The entire naming process likely took place in March 1926. From the later speeches of the Governor and A. Morris, it is evident that they never considered this renaming as the opening of a new school. The 1926 Education Report explicitly stated: "The name of the School has been changed from ‘Saiyingpun School’ to ‘King’s College’." A China Mail report on April 22, 1926, further revealed that while the Education Department still used 'Saiyingpun School', the Public Works Department was already using 'New Bonham Road School' – a new term that had not appeared before. The Public Works Department also used the name 'Bonham Road School' in its April tenders, indicating that the government internally was already aware of the school's renaming.

This raises another question: why does the 'Report of Public Works 1925', page 23, contain the phrase, "good progress was made on the New King’s College"? This is likely because the complete report was submitted to the Legislative Council on November 4th of the following year (1926). This was standard practice, and by then, the entire renaming process had been completed. This also suggests that the naming process occurred during the construction period. Notably, Morris took a ten-month leave in 1925, vacationing in the UK and procuring items for the new school building.

The old school building was handed over to the Vernacular Normal School in March 1926. The "Administrative Reports for the Year 1926" noted that the "Vernacular Normal School provided a nucleus for this new institution which was started in March in the premises of the old Saiyingpun School." The Legislative Council approved transitional arrangements in April, stating that "$780 is required for the rent of two flats for the Vernacular Middle School" because "structural work would be completed in June, but he could not give an exact date as regards furniture and fittings. Some would be quite late, but there would be nothing to prevent the school being carried on there after the end of June." Arrangements for the relocation of students from Saiyingpun School were also made. Class 8 (in four divisions) was transferred to the New King’s College building, occupying first the Gymnasium and later the classrooms on the top floor, where they were joined by Class 7 after the Ching Ming Vacation (April 5th, 1926). The remainder of the school moved into King’s College in September after the summer vacation.

By December 1925, construction was still ongoing, with "a few alterations and additions... made to the original design, notably the provision of tile dados to all classroom walls, and a granite portico to the Main Entrance." Progress reports from 1926 further detailed this: on April 12th, "The electric wiring and installation of water service are both almost completed. The erection of granite portico to front entrance is progressing and brickwork is generally being cleaned. The school authorities have occupied a portion of the building." By July 28th, "the granite portico to front entrance is nearly completed."

Particular attention should be paid to the alteration of the granite portico design for the main entrance. A. Morris stated in 1928 that "the designs and drawings were the work of Mr. Dawbarn whose plans have since been selected from amongst many competitors, for the now Raffles College at Singapore." The design of the granite portico was a major part of the building and could not have been altered so close to completion. This might be related to the widening of Bonham Road. However, widening Bonham Road would have required tenders, and despite this not being a minor project, no relevant tenders could be found for those years. Tenders related to Saiyingpun School included: "Tender for Formation of Site, Laying Foundations and Building Retaining Walls for Bonham Road School" (November, 1922) and "Tender for Bonham Road School Superstructure-- The work consisting of Erection on Existing Foundations of Bonham Road School" (March, 1924). Judging from the garden wall of King's College, the widening of Bonham Road also seems unlikely to have affected the main entrance design. Another possibility is that the original name on the main entrance was 'Saiyingpun School', and the plans were altered after the impending renaming was known. Mr. Dawbarn should have included the school's name when designing the plans, and that name would, of course, have been 'Sai Ying Pun School'.

Fung Affoo, born on February 5, 1849, and died on January 19, 1934, was one of three young Chinese men whose admission to Howard University was requested by the American Missionary Association (AMA) just three years after the university opened. The AMA found these three men at New York City’s Five Points House of Industry, a charitable organization that provided assistance, English instruction, and religious guidance to the destitute. All three were Cantonese from Guangdong province and had initially arrived in the United States as laborers.

Fung Affoo, aged 20, was born in Heshan, Guangzhou, and orphaned at 15. He was sold to Cuba, where he worked as a house servant, narrowly escaping the slavelike conditions of a coolie laborer in the sugar cane fields, before arriving in America. Choy Awah, 21, came to America as a ship’s cabin boy. Leong Sing, 18, had studied to be a bookkeeper for six years in China before sailing to the United States. Like Fung, Leong had been in America for only six months prior to their enrollment. As a condition for accepting the AMA's offer of a full scholarship, all three were asked to renounce "paganism."

On February 20, 1870, the trio entered Howard’s Normal School (Model School), whose preparatory course required a basic knowledge of reading, arithmetic, spelling, and geography. They remained at Howard for two years, and both Fung Affoo and Leong Sing were baptized there in 1872. The men were popular among their peers and excelled in their studies. A schoolmate, Cornelius Scott, wrote in 1872, "Fung is very sociable, polite and funny. Sing is also very sociable and good-natured. We were playing football the other evening and in running at the ball we came in contact with each other and I being the heavier knocked him down; he just jumped up and went on playing and said nothing about it."

The only known photos of the three, taken around 1870, show them in various stages of assimilation. While some had adopted Western clothing, others still retained their queues, the long, signature braids of hair they were required to wear under Chinese law. It is noted that Fung Affoo did not wear a queue, suggesting that Choy Awah and Leong Sing were the ones depicted with braided queues. These images were circa-1870 halftone prints, likely "cartes-de-visite" or similar small-format albumen prints typical of 19th-century portrait studios. Such portraits, costing one to five dollars, were popular among Howard students. The photos are housed at Howard University Library's Moorland-Spingarn Research Center, with catalog entries for "Affoo, Fung," "Awah, Choy (Student)," and "Assing, Leon (Student)," indicating they were taken shortly after their enrollment.

After their time at Howard, Leong Sing's subsequent story remains unknown. However, both Fung Affoo and Choy Awah remained in the United States. Fung Affoo moved to San Francisco and became a teacher at the Chinese Mission School. Choy Awah stayed in Washington, D.C., opening a tea shop on Pennsylvania Avenue in the area that would later become Chinatown. In 1874, Choy became a U.S. citizen, and the following year, he married a woman of Irish descent. His marriage certificate listed his race as "White (Mongolian)." By the end of 1876, Choy was a tea salesman at 721 12th Street NW, and by 1880, he was a grocer at 431 L Street NW.

The American Missionary Association's primary mission after the Civil War was to provide education and evangelism to freed slaves. However, in the years leading up to 1870, the powerful Presbyterian denomination resolved to extend its missionary work to Chinese laborers in the United States. Unlike earlier German and Irish immigrants, Chinese laborers were often perceived as stubborn and unwilling to assimilate, leading to tense relations with American workers. The AMA's records are considered the most original accounts of Fung Affoo's background.

 An AMA monthly journal from May 1870 featured "OUR CHINESE PROTEGES," stating that three young Chinese men had been sent to Howard University to complete their education. The article described Fung Affoo as a 20-year-old orphan who had attended school in China for six years before being sent as a coolie to Cuba five years prior, where he worked as a house servant. He had been in New York for six months and was reading at a "Third Reader" level. If calculated from this account, Fung Affoo likely left Cuba in July 1869, arriving in New York to begin his American life at the poorhouse.

The AMA's interest in Chinese laborers was set against the backdrop of the harsh Cuba Coolie Trade. In 1867, it was reported that six to eight depots in Macao shipped 30,000 to 40,000 coolies annually to Peru and Cuba. These coolies were supplied by recruiting agents, both Chinese and Portuguese, many of whom were disreputable and suspected of piracy. The Hong Kong Gazette recorded a 14% mortality rate among 9,600 Chinese coolies transported to Cuba on 26 ships in 1857, with many reportedly jumping overboard. One Chinese emigrant, Pang Akan, recounted being kidnapped from Macao, bound, and held in a barracoon before being shipped to Cuba. The AMA's 23rd Annual Meeting in December 1869 passed resolutions to initiate vigorous missionary work among Chinese in the U.S. and to be ready for "Christian labors" following the "soon-coming emancipation in Cuba."

Fung Affoo's journey to New York in May 1869, after escaping slavelike conditions in Cuba, placed him at the Five Points House of Industry. Although the institution typically housed street children aged five to sixteen, it had expanded around that time, and Fung Affoo, then 20, stayed for about half a year. Coming from Cuba, he likely only knew Spanish.

 The New York Times reported on the Five Points House of Industry's work with Chinese immigrants. In March 1869, an evening class for "grown Chinese" was established, where members proficiently read lessons from the Scriptures in English and Chinese, demonstrating their industriousness and eagerness to learn. Mr. and Mrs. Railsback, missionaries at Five Points, were noted for their "excellent work with the Chinese," holding evening lessons and even visiting their homes, stands, and workshops. An October 1869 report described a festival held by the Chinese class, where about forty participants, many of whom made and sold cigars during the day, showcased their progress in English. This institution aimed to train them as "teachers and leaders of their countrymen." Fung Affoo, who may have sold cigars during the day, was likely a participant in these evening classes and social events, given the limited number of Chinese youths in similar circumstances in New York at the time.

Fung Fu, along with Leong Sing and Choy Awah, arrived at Howard University in February 1870, during the Winter Term, which ran from January 3 to March 29. The university's academic calendar for that period also included a Fall Term (September 13 - December 20) and a Spring Term (April 3 - June 12), followed by a thirteen-week Summer Vacation. On February 18, 1870, an application was made for their reception into the institution. Two days later, on February 20, 1870, they were admitted as unclassified students. By November 1870, they had converted to Christianity, and on January 21, 1872, they were baptized as Baptists by Dr. Rankin, who later became president of Howard University. This baptism attracted many witnesses, and the American Missionary Association expressed gratitude for the success of their evangelization efforts.

Records from the "Catalog of the Officers and Students of Howard University" show Fung Fu as an unclassified student for both the 1869-70 and 1870-71 academic years. In the 1871-72 academic year, they entered Class A of the Model School. There is an inferred suspension of studies for Fung Fu and his companions during the 1872-1873 academic year, coinciding with a period when Howard University may have suspended operations for a year. 

This inference arises from a lack of published "Catalog of the Officers and Students" for 1872-1873 and significant drops in student progression. For instance, in the Preparatory Department, only 13 out of 47 junior class students from 1871-72 entered the 1873-74 middle class. Similarly, in the Normal Department, only 2 out of 25 middle class students from 1871-72 advanced to the 1873-74 senior class, and in the Collegiate Department, only 1 out of 24 freshman class students from 1871-72 entered the 14-student sophomore class of 1873-74. 

This period of disruption was likely due to early disorganization and a lack of funds, though "The Capstone of Negro Education" does not explicitly mention a suspension of operations. If this inference is correct, Fung Fu and his companions would have paused their studies for a year. During this time, their living expenses were supported by the American Missionary Association, and they could have found work in D.C. or been assigned to the industrial department of Howard University, making leather and furniture.

After this inferred year of suspension, Fung Fu and his companions returned to their studies in 1873-74, entering the Junior Class of the Preparatory Department. They left the university after the Spring Term in June 1874. Fung Fu, despite having studied elementary school textbooks at a night school in  New York Industrial House of Five Points, had not formally attended elementary school, making his admission to Howard University's Model School appropriate. The Model School functioned as an elementary school attached to the Preparatory Department.

Unlike many students who "came to dig, literally, to dig their way through school" by bringing picks or shovels and working to drain hills and grade land, Fung Fu and his companions were fortunate to have their living expenses covered. This contrasted sharply with the struggles of other applicants, such as a 19-year-old orphan who wrote, "Is there any way in which I can enter your school. I am a white boy 19 years of age an orphan and poor and have no money and want an education." Fung Fu might also have held various part-time jobs while at school, as the university had industrial ventures, including a planned "Shoe factory and tannery."

The Model School served as a "school of practice and observation," preparing students for either the Normal or Preparatory Department. Candidates for admission had to be at least twelve years old and pass examinations in Arithmetic (through long division), Reading, Spelling (common words of two syllables), and Elements of Geography. Its curriculum included Reading, Spelling, Penmanship, Drawing, Grammar, Geography, United States History, Mental and Written Arithmetic, Loomis’s Elementary Algebra, and Natural History, arranged for classes A, B, and C. 

The Model School, including elementary grades A, B, C, and D, was established in a large frame building on Georgia Avenue, which had previously been a German dance hall and beer saloon. An ungraded class was later added beneath it to prepare pupils for the Model School, illustrating how "Howard University went down to the people."

The Preparatory Course itself was designed to prepare students for the Collegiate Department, with its Junior Course curriculum including Latin, Arithmetic, Ancient Geography, Algebra, and History. That year, out of 58 students in Class A, 14 entered the Preparatory Junior class (which had 36 students), and 4 entered the Normal Department Junior class (which had 23 students). Enrollment in other classes was almost zero.

Howard University faced significant challenges during this period, described as "a period of confusion" or "anarchy" from 1874 to 1877, following an "early period" from 1866 to 1874. The university was plagued by financial difficulties and corruption scandals. By 1874, conditions were so severe that salary reductions were necessary, and an application for a $75,000 loan was denied. In 1874, the American Missionary Association withdrew its funding, leading to the departure of Fung Fu and his companions. For many years afterward, Howard University had no more Chinese students. Some students during this tumultuous time found ways to earn money without attending classes, with records indicating, "They do not pay their debts although many make more money than their teachers."

Fung Fu and his two companions were housed in Room No. 29 M.H. in the basement of Miner Hall, a three-story women's dormitory designed to accommodate one hundred students and instructors. Boarding fees ranged from over one hundred to two hundred dollars annually. Miner Hall was razed in 1961, with the School of Education now occupying its site.

A rare glimpse into Fung Fu's personality comes from a letter written by Cornelius Scott to his parents on November 4, 1872. Scott described Fung as "very sociable, polite and funny." He also noted Leong Sing's sociable and good-natured disposition, recounting an incident during a football game where Sing, after being accidentally knocked down by the heavier Scott, "just jumped up and went on playing and said nothing about it." Cornelius Scott himself graduated from the Preparatory Department on June 16, 1873, and joined the Collegiate Department as a freshman that same year, later becoming a learned minister.

Choi Awah, one of Fung Fu's companions, also achieved success. He likely left school a year earlier than Fung Fu and became a U.S. citizen in 1874. He married a woman of Irish descent and opened Choy's tea shop on Pennsylvania Avenue, one of the first Chinese-owned businesses in Washington, D.C. This historic tea shop, located in the 300 block of Pennsylvania Avenue NW, became a cornerstone of the city’s original Chinatown, which later moved to 819 E Street NW.

Three Chinese youths were studying at Howard University, Washington, D.C., one of whom was Fung Affoo, the writer of the following letters. When he arrived in America, he had been in the country for only 18 months and had no English education. Although he had studied for six years in a private school at home before going to Cuba at age 15, he may have forgotten everything, as he was illiterate before attending night school at an almshouse. His academic level was probably equivalent to the first year of high school, and his English writing ability was approximately at a high school level.

D.C. Jan 9, 1871

Dear Mr. S,

I thank you for your kind present, which I received last Thursday. It keeps me very comfortable. I could not find words to express your kindness, but "God" knows how you are doing in this world. As the Bible says, "Beloved, if our hearts do not condemn us, then we have confidence toward God."

Our school commenced last Wednesday for the Winter Term. I am glad that I have something to do, for studying is the best thing for everybody, as it will guide me to a good way. In this term, I am studying the same books as I did last term. I also received a valuable lesson today, which I'd like to share. It was a story about a woman who had taught her little children to pray. One evening, as the little girl was saying the Lord's Prayer aloud, her mother stopped her in the middle. "How is it," she asked, "that when you have prayed for daily bread, you always add something I cannot understand? You must tell me what that is." The little one lay silent and ashamed, looking at her mother. "What is it you said after our daily bread?" the mother pressed. "Dear mamma, don't be angry, I only said, 'and plenty of butter on it.'"

I liked this lesson very much because that little girl spoke very truly, for I, too, put plenty of butter on my daily bread, just like her. But when I say the Lord's Prayer, I do not say it in that way. After "our daily bread," I just say, "and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." That is how I say it every day.

Last Wednesday, I went to the President's Building and saw General Grant, and shook hands with him. I had a nice time at Christmas with my friends here, and I hope you enjoyed yourself very much.

Choy Awah and Leon Sing send many thanks to you. God bless you, dear Friend S.

Yours affectionately,

FUNG AFFOO.

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 30th, 1872.

Dear Sir,

Since I saw you last time here at Howard University, I felt quite happy, and I wished you could have stayed a little longer until my school was out, so that I could talk to you and tell you what I desire to be able to do by and by. As I have been here about two years, I feel that I have learned many useful things which will do me a great deal of good in my future.

Besides that, I have learned another thing, most importantly: to reconcile with God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer. I know that I was a heathen, and I find myself living in darkness, so I am trying to seize this opportunity, which will bring great pleasure in the afterlife. As I read John Bunyan's book, *Pilgrim's Progress*, it greatly interested my mind. It seems to me it will show me everything in my life and tell me how to be happy while I live on earth. I am very fond of that book because the words are not so hard for me to read and are easy to understand.

Yours most affectionately,

FUNG AFFOO.

June 5th, 1872.

When I was in China, I never thought I would be here in America, and when I came to New York, I did not think I would have the opportunity to come to this school at Howard University to learn the doctrine of Christ. But God has placed me under the care of you and some other friends, and I have been well cared for. Now I can see my life is in the hands of the Lord. I can only look up to Him for guidance and see if I will be able in my future to follow the example you are setting for me now, and that I may gain pleasure in another world; that is what I desire.

As I read the A.M.A. paper, "Advance Supplement," the other day, about my countrymen in San Francisco, when I read that they had formed a Chinese Christian class there to meet weekly for study and prayer with American Christians, I felt so happy. I hope that by this opportunity, they will continue to live nearer to God and join the army of Christ, so that they may have the power to turn those who are worshiping idols to worship the true God who is in heaven. I desire that I myself will be able to take part with these Christian men, working together in San Francisco or China, wherever God's will may lead.

I am preparing myself to be an English teacher, knowing that they need this language. I hope these Christian men will be successful; then I will have good partners and good help.

Yours truly,

FUNG AFFOO.

Fung Affoo seemed to enjoy writing to Rev. Pond. The last letter was written before the summer break of his second year. It is believed that he may have suspended his studies in his third year to work for the school, and the coursework in the Preparatory Department during his fourth year was likely demanding, leaving him no time to write. He studied in the Preparatory Department for one year.

Fung Affoo expressed his aspiration for missionary work during his university years. In a letter dated March 30, 1872, he wrote, "As I have been here about two years, I feel that I have learned many useful things which will do me a great deal of good in my future. Besides that, I have learned another thing better than all; that is, to be reconciled with God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer." A few months later, on June 5, 1872, he further articulated his desire: "As I had read the A.M.A. paper, 'Advance Supplement,' the other day, about my countrymen in San Francisco, when I read that they had formed a Chinese Christian class there, to meet weekly for study and prayer with American Christians, I desire that I myself will be able to take part with these Christian men, working together in San Francisco or China."

When Fung Affoo left Howard University in June 1874, Rev. Pond's mission school work in San Francisco was just beginning. Rev. Pond consolidated scattered mission schools for Chinese laborers across California, noting in April 1874, "Immediately upon receiving my commission as superintendent, I wrote to each of the teachers and received prompt replies." A new movement began in June 1874, calling for a church, which was secured by generous contributions from Chinese converts. 

Fung Affoo went to San Francisco and was appointed as a teacher before February 1875.

He actively participated in the work of the recently established Chinese Young Men's Christian Association. In an address published in January 1878, Fung Affoo stated, "I have only a few words to say about the Chinese Young Men's Christian Association, of which I have been a member for about three years. This Association was organized not quite four years ago." 

He also played an important role in the newly formed "California Chinese Mission," which was organized as a new and promising auxiliary in connection with the General Association of California on October 5, 1875. He led 13 Chinese laborers to conversion, prompting Rev. Mr. Pond to write: "Besides the thirteen conversions reported by Affoo, two are reported from the Los Angeles school, and two in the school in Stockton; a total of seventeen during the month of December. It is an amount of saving result—a harvest—that almost staggers my weak faith." 

In the same year, Fung Affoo translated the Chinese membership rules of the "Association of Christian Chinese" into English and hung them on the wall. These rules, "originally written in the Chinese language, and in that form adopted unanimously, framed, and hung on the wall in the room of the Association, so as to be read and understood by every one proposing to join the Association," were translated by him.

Fung Affoo was invited to speak at the annual picnic of the Sunday schools. A report noted: "On Friday last, Woodward's Garden [a well-known landmark] was opened to the Chinese Missions and Sunday-schools, for their annual picnic. The attendance was large, -- But the gem of the occasion was an English address by Fung Affoo." He was very popular and was again invited to speak at the annual meeting of the Plymouth Chinese Sunday School. His missionary work was very successful, and he was invited to give a testimony. Rev. Pond, in the February 1876 issue, alluded to "the remarks made by Fung Affoo at the anniversary of Plymouth Chinese Sunday School." 

In August 1876, Fung Affoo went to Oakland to teach and evangelize.

Teaching English for the church was a salaried position, but it was merely a means to an end; evangelism was his true calling. At 27 years old, having found his true calling after his studies, he was in his element, dedicating himself to his work with great enthusiasm. His achievements were highly praised, and he was considered a rising star. Fung Affoo received praise from Presbyterian minister T. M. Oviatt in a letter to Rev. Pond, who wrote: "I enclose from last week's 'Pacific' a brief address by Fung Affoo. He is winning a high place in the esteem both of his own countrymen and of American Christians: a man of most excellent spirit and of rare ability." T. M. Oviatt further reported on Fung Affoo's assistance in baptisms: "

Visiting Bro. McLean's church at Oakland, nearly one year ago, when several Chinese converts were there baptized and made a public profession, they inquired diligently, there and here, to know the ways of God more perfectly, and at their urgent request, these three were examined carefully by the session here, assisted by Fung Affoo and Jee Gam (whom you well know), and they were found worthy of baptism and reception."

During the Lunar New Year in 1877, Fung Affoo lavishly decorated the Chinese Young Men's Christian Association rooms to welcome the new year, competing with the neighboring temple for adherents. At that time, the Christian church and Chinese temples, where incense was burned, were fierce rivals. The acceptance of incense burning for ancestor worship by Christians came much later. A report described the New Year's activities: "On New Year's eve we gathered together to watch the old year out and welcome the new year. The hour between 11 and 12 o'clock we spent in thanking God. From 12 o'clock to 1:30 A.M., we prayed God to give us strength. We retired to bed about 2:30 A.M. to get rest. About 6 o'clock, our friends and pupils began coming to give us New Year's calls; and about noon many of our Christian brethren from the country arrived. We commenced singing and preaching at one o'clock P.M. And though there is a Chinese 'joss house' just four or five doors from our Mission, many of our countrymen left it and came over to hear our preaching of Jesus." By August 1877, Fung Affoo became a teacher at the Central School of the San Francisco Church, a large school rented by the church. Fung Affoo and other helpers had their own lounge, and he effectively served as the pastor's assistant there.

In October 1878, Fung Affoo wrote an article for the "American Missionary Association" annual meeting, introducing the Sunday Bible class work at the Central School. He described the class: "On Sunday we have the 'Bible-class,' commencing at 11:30 A.M. and continuing for an hour and a half. We sing for about half an hour, either in Chinese or in English, then offer a prayer, and then read a chapter from the Bible. Each verse they read after me, then I translate it into Chinese; after interpreting, on each verse or paragraph I make some remarks which I have studied during the weekdays. After we get through the chapter, I speak about ten minutes on a subject selected from that chapter beforehand, then one of our brethren offers prayer; we then unite in singing the Doxology and close with the Lord's Prayer."

 Records from the Third Annual Meeting of the "California Chinese Mission" on October 11, 1878, indicate that he was a teacher at the Central School in San Francisco. The June 1878 issue introduced his work in the Bible Class, titled "Sabbath Worship at the Central Mission - Bible Class, By Fung Affoo." He was likely still leading the Sunday services in San Francisco around that time. In the October 1878 issue, he published an article titled "More about a mission at Hong Kong," expressing his hope to start missionary work upon his return.

 It is inferred that he returned to Hong Kong in mid-to-late 1878, met with E. J. Eitel, and was recommended for the Sai Ying Pun School. The timeline was quite tight, making it unlikely that he taught at Hong Kong's Central School before becoming the headmaster of Sai Ying Pun School. Upon leaving the U.S., Fung Affoo was commissioned by Rev. Pond to gather Chinese converts' views on starting missionary work in Hong Kong.

Ho Kom-tong, the half-brother of Ho Tung, was a prominent figure in the community, particularly during Principal Morris's tenure at Saiyingpun School. He frequently attended prize-giving ceremonies and supported school activities, especially the Boy Scouts and St. John Ambulance Brigade. According to the China Mail on November 31, 1921, Ho Kom-tong, as Patron of the Saiyingpun School Boy Scouts (7th Hong Kong Troop), attended their inauguration ceremony held at the University Football Ground in Pokfulam. Earlier that month, on November 1, the Saiyingpun School Old Boys' Ho Kom-tong Ambulance Division was inspected by Dr. Sir Erie Stewart Taylor on the University Football Ground. Among those present were Lady Taylor, Mr. B. Ralphs (St John Ambulance Commissioner Overseas), and Mr. Morris (Superintendent of the Division). Beyond his patronage, Ho Kom-tong is credited with founding the St. John Ambulance Brigade in Hong Kong and was its sole supporter for its first twelve years.

An intriguing, previously unrecorded historical detail reveals Ho Kom-tong's indirect role in the establishment of a Saiyingpun (English) under Fung Fu. This occurred when Ho Kom-tong was just 12 years old, two years before Fung Fu became the school's principal. Student's name, which rarely appeared in public records, was discovered on the Central School student register (no. 310) when Inspector of Schools Frederick Stewart was ordered by Governor Hennessy to produce the list. The record indicated he was Chinese, aged 12, and had been enrolled for one year, with the note "cannot be said to speak English at all." Historical records from Ryan Ka Chun Iu's "The Government Central School and the Elite Network in Early Colonial Hong Kong" confirm he enrolled in Central School in 1877 at the age of eleven. After graduating, he began his career in 1886 as a Chinese agent in Jardine Matheson & Co.'s insurance department. This timeline confirms he completed his studies at Central School, graduating from its highest class.

Entry to Central School was highly selective, admitting only elite students through examinations. Ho Kom-tong's reported lack of English proficiency was not uncommon, as the school in its early years did not prioritize spoken English, with junior students primarily focusing on Chinese. A 1920 Educational Report noted, "Twenty years ago, our effort in English education was largely meaningless, because the teaching of spoken English was almost entirely neglected." It further explained that in the Preparatory Classes, where the first rudiments of English pronunciation were taught, instruction was "left in the hands of native assistants, whose own pronunciation is by no means perfect." The school also faced significant challenges with overcrowding. An 1874 Educational Report highlighted that "existing accommodation is limited to bare sitting room. Each class-room contains on an average 100 boys... Three or more masters have to teach simultaneously in the same class-room." This meant that over 150 junior students, including Ho Kom-tong, would often be crammed together for Chinese lessons, further illustrating the challenging learning environment. Consequently, most junior Chinese students, like Ho Kom-tong, were assessed as having minimal English ability.

The disparity in English proficiency between foreign and Chinese students eventually led to calls for segregated education. Ho Tung later donated a school in Yaumati to the government, stipulating inclusive teaching for all races. However, the government had already decided to establish separate schools for European children. Official records from November 19, 1903, confirm that petitions for separate schools for European and "better classes of Chinese" children were approved. Ho Tung's newly completed school in Kowloon, originally intended as a mixed-race institution, was subsequently dedicated for European children. In return, the government undertook to build a replacement school in Yaumati. At the 1906 Prize Distribution Day, it was further noted that Ho Tung consented to his Robinson Road school being maintained for European British children, rather than all nationalities, on the condition that an equally good school be provided for Chinese boys in Yaumati. This building was erected in partial fulfillment of that condition, marking a significant development in the history of education in Hong Kong.

Rev. Pond, a San Francisco helper from Hong Kong responsible for Chinese work in the Bay Area, naturally hoped to bring missionary work back to Hong Kong for the American Missionary Association. A speech by a senior helper, Jee Gam, clarified the background of this initiative.

In his address, Jee Gam recounted, "It was ten years ago when our Chinese brethren first felt the need of a mission in China. For the first three years, we often expressed our great desire among ourselves for this mission, but never thought of telling our superintendent, Rev. W. C. Pond. Not a word was said to him until, at our usual Wednesday afternoon Bible class about seven years ago, when the subject of foreign missions was accidentally mentioned. We then told Rev. W. C. Pond what we so much desired. He at once approved of it. Hong Kong was chosen for the seat of this mission, and Rev. Pond requested that those who were able to write a letter should do so, explaining why this mission was so much needed. He accordingly forwarded these letters to the American Missionary Association." Jee Gam further added, "In early October 1879, I attended its annual meeting in Chicago. I felt moved by the Holy Spirit to make an earnest plea for it. I also spoke for it at all the meetings I attended while East."

The date Rev. Pond requested these letters from supporters might be incorrect; it should have occurred in 1878, when Fung Affoo was about to return to Hong Kong. In the October 1878 issue of *MISSIONARY*, Rev. Pond wrote, "Regarding the proposition for a mission in Hong Kong, which I proposed last month to be closely connected with our Californian Mission, I asked our helper, Bro. Fung Affoo, to consult the Chinese brethren on the subject and get their opinions. Soon after, I began receiving letters, and I now have about twenty on file. I thought that extracts from these letters would interest the readers of the *MISSIONARY*. Some of them I can copy verbatim; others will need slight revisions to their English for clarity. However, the ideas are their own, and the expressions will be modified as little as possible. First, Affoo himself says: 'I told the brethren at the meeting last Sunday what you said to me about establishing a mission at Hong Kong. They were very glad; their faces beamed with joy. They all wish, with one accord, that this enterprise will be accomplished before long.'"

Fung Affoo was ambitious at the time, and money was not his primary concern. Had the American Missionary Association agreed, he might have taught at this mission school, taking a different path. Without Fung Affoo, the history of English promotion in the colony might have been delayed by several years. This crossroads, however, indirectly led to a significant turning point in Sun Yat-sen's life. The American Missionary Association had close ties with the US Congress, and its mission was to aid the large number of freed slaves after the Civil War by providing education and religious instruction. To undertake missionary work in Hong Kong, they would need to amend their constitution. They resolved this at their annual meeting in 1880: "That while your Committee recognize the difficulties in the way of establishing a mission in China, they also see that there would be great advantage, both direct and indirect, in thus connecting a foreign with the home work, and they recommend the Board to give serious consideration to the proposition, and to carry it into execution, if, on a more thorough inquiry, it shall be found practicable to do so without interfering with the other work of the society, or with the work of other Evangelical missions in China."

Actual preparations began in 1882, with extensive discussions within the American Missionary Association. Rev. W. C. Pond, in the January 1882 issue, envisioned the mission: "Two American missionaries, a little property in Hong Kong, a rented chapel here and there in the larger villages and the small stipends of the Chinese evangelists; this would be all."

Rev. Charles Robert Hager, M.D., D.D., of the ABCFM, was born in Switzerland and arrived in China from the United States in 1883. He died on July 13, 1917, in Claremont, California, USA. He labored in Hong Kong and Canton in educational and evangelistic work and famously baptized Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Rev. C. R. Hager's involvement began in 1883. Rev. W. C. Pond reported in February 1883: "The memorable event of the month of February—so far as our work is concerned—is the inauguration of the mission of the American Board to Hong Kong, and through Hong Kong to those districts of South China from which most of our Chinese have come. Rev. C. R. Hager, a recent graduate of our Pacific Theological Seminary, and for more than a year past a very successful and greatly beloved pastor at Antioch, in this State, having offered himself to the Board as a Foreign Missionary, was at our own suggestion and request appointed to take charge of this new work, and was ordained as a Missionary at Bethany Church, on Friday, Feb. 16."

By July 1883, the mission was underway. The Congregational Association of Christian Chinese, at its last annual meeting, voted to give $500 toward establishing this Hong Kong mission and pledged to do all in its power to help in the future. Rev. C. R. Hager and Lee Sam, sent by the American Board to establish a mission in the South China districts from which Chinese in America had come, were already at work. A house had been rented, and an evening school for English instruction for the Chinese was provided. The plan for instilling the truths of the Gospel into the minds of the scholars by using the Bible to some extent as a textbook, which had been so successful in California, was adopted. By October 1883, "Bro. Hager has established his headquarters at Hong Kong and has gathered there a school similar in all respects to ours in California."

This demonstrates the power of faith, as they quickly began their work in Hong Kong with meager funds. In 1883, Charles Robert Hager preached and established the American Congregational Mission Preaching Hall at 2 Bridges Street in Central, Hong Kong. The original building was a three-story house that served as a preaching hall, school, and residence. The mission became the spiritual home for early converts, most famously Dr. Sun Yat-sen, who was baptized there in June 1883.

Two letters are widely cited regarding Hager's baptism of Sun Yat-sen. In a letter to Clark dated May 5, 1884, Hager wrote: "...At present there are some seven members in the interior belonging to our mission, and two here, one I baptized last Sabbath, a young man who is attending the Government Central School. We had a very pleasant communion service yesterday..." Similarly, in a postscript to Pond on May 5, 1884, Hager noted: "...We had a pleasant communion yesterday and received one Chinese into the church..."

Sun Yat-sen and Charles Robert Hager both arrived in Hong Kong in early 1883, full of vigor. At that time, there were many churches in Hong Kong, raising the question of why Sun Yat-sen chose to be baptized in this small, rented place. With his unconventional character, he would quickly assess a person, and only after gaining his trust could a friendship be established. From the letters, it can be inferred that Sun Yat-sen liked Hager. There is a theory that Sun Yat-sen learned English from Fung Affoo at Hop Yat Church. As an excellent student, Sun Yat-sen would primarily need to converse with foreigners to learn spoken English, making Hager an ideal candidate. Hop Yat Church, Bridges Street, and Central School were all located nearby. Fung Affoo, Hager, and Sun Yat-sen were likely friends. Fung Affoo's suggestion before returning to Hong Kong, though it did not materialize as planned, indirectly fostered the relationship between Sun Yat-sen and Hager.

Logically, Hager should have first sought out Fung Affoo upon his arrival in Hong Kong. However, this was not the case. In "[For The Pacific] The First Sabbath in Hong Kong," it states: "After I had carefully made my toilet, and quietly surveyed the scene from a third-story verandah, and been invited to partake of a little breakfast tea, I repaired to the house of Mr. Wang Ching Kai (a California Chinese) and found Lee Sam there." Wang Ching Kai was a wealthy merchant who helped Rev. Hager rent a three-story house at 2 Bridges Street in Central, Hong Kong, to serve as a base and residence. Lee Sam was also a key figure in the "California group." Both had a significant connection to Sun Yat-sen's later baptism.

Fung Affoo also belonged to this "California group." His notable students included Kong Wing-wen, who was a student at Sai Ying Pun Fung Fu School before enrolling in the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese in 1887—the same inaugural class as Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Another former student under Fung Fu, Lau Sz-fuk, also joined the Hong Kong College of Medicine in 1887 and graduated in 1895 with a degree in Western medicine. Fung Affoo might have joined the London Missionary Society instead of an American church due to his father-in-law's connections.

Fung Fu was never listed as a civil servant, except during his tenure at Sai Ying Pun School from 1879 to 1903. Several misconceptions about his life have emerged from A. Morris's introduction at the 1928 King's College opening ceremony and from newspaper reports following Fung Fu's death. As my research neared its end, I encountered these three reports and sensed something amiss. I may have inadvertently stumbled upon a 150-year-old scandal. The British authorities might have later become aware of it, but due to the involvement of a former Governor and Inspector of Schools, they might have been hesitant to act.

It should be noted that not being a civil servant does not entirely rule out the possibility of having taught at Central School, as not all Chinese masters were paid as civil servants at the time; temporary teaching positions were funded through miscellaneous expenses. However, the claim that Fung Fu served as a Chinese master is refuted by a mismatch in timelines. During his funeral, several of Fung Fu's sons were in Hong Kong. Three media outlets made the same erroneous report that he had studied at Harvard University, which is curious.

I had overlooked one detail: Eitel's introduction of Fung Fu to Governor Hennessy at the 1880 awards ceremony. Eitel stated, "I knew that Mr. Fung Fú, the master, who had a collegiate education in America, was a thoroughly competent teacher." The 1881 Education Report also noted, "At Saiyingp’ún there is a native Master, educated at Howard University, Washington, U.S.A., teaching English, whilst there is another Government school in the same building teaching only Chinese, so that those who wish to learn Chinese in addition to English, have an opportunity of doing so. But few, however, avail themselves of it, and the majority devote the whole of each day to learning here English only, having private opportunities to keep up their Chinese knowledge." Fung Fu did not conceal his history at Howard University. Eitel, who held a doctorate from the University of Tübingen, would have been well aware of the requirements for obtaining a B.A. or A.B. degree. Fung Fu had not even completed the preparatory department of a collegiate college. This suggests he misrepresented his academic qualifications to Eitel, who then accepted his account at face value.

A. Morris stated in 1928: "Saiyingpun School dates back to 1879, in which year the Government decided to establish a Free School at West Point (Saiyingpun(English)), and appointed as the first Headmaster Mr. Fung Fu a returned student from America, and who was selected after a competitive examination as an assistant teacher for the Central School where he remained for one year." However, there is no record of him teaching at Central School, and the timeline does not align. Fung Fu did not, and could not have, taught at Central School before his tenure at Sai Ying Pun School. Chinese individuals could only be examined for the position of Chinese Master. Fung Fu, having only attended school in China for "six years" before the age of 15, could not have passed the entrance examination for Central School. The examination, held in March, required candidates to complete tasks such as "2. Explanation.-Select passages from any of the thirteen classics" and "5. Literature. Prolegomena to any of the thirteen classics."

Newspaper reports, presumably from his sons, stated that Fung Fu returned to Hong Kong at the age of 27 (in 1876) to become a coal merchant. However, Fung Fu left university in mid-1874 and was employed as a teacher before February 1875. He was actively and continuously involved in missionary work in San Francisco during that period. Crossing the ocean was not a simple matter in those days. The obituary's mention of Fung Fu's business failure upon his return to Hong Kong at age 27 (in 1876) might be significant, as obituaries rarely include negative details. At the age of 27, Fung Fu was teaching in San Francisco. He was an orphan and appeared to have no family wealth. Although he might have earned some money as a domestic servant in Cuba and during a year-long leave from Howard University, it likely would not have exceeded a thousand silver dollars. This raises the question: did he leave university, return to Hong Kong for an arranged marriage, and then, amidst the wartime demand for coal, quickly lose all his money and incur significant debt? He might then have returned to America to seek refuge with the church. This timeline is plausible, as a third-class passage to San Francisco cost approximately 100 silver dollars at the time.

This leads to an investigation into the background of the Fung Fu’s wife. Kwan Yuet-ming was the eldest daughter of Kwan Yuan-chang, a lady from a prominent family. Fung Fu's father-in-law, Kwan Yuan-chang, was China's first Western-trained dentist, and his mother-in-law, Lai Ah-mui, was China's first female teacher, nurse, and court translator. The Kwan family made numerous significant contributions to modern China. Fung Fu's first daughter, Fung Sui-king, was born on August 16, 1879. Fung Fu likely married Kwan Yuet-ming around the end of 1878. At that time, the Taoist Society was an exclusive club, admitting only about 20 newborn baptismal members annually. This aligns with records from the American Missionary Association, indicating that Fung Fu hastily returned to Hong Kong at the end of 1878. He was quickly recognized by Eitel and appointed headmaster of Sai Ying Pun English School on February 1, 1879.

Two English newspaper obituaries simultaneously reported that "The second son of the deceased, Mr. Fung Yiu Wing, is the managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory, one of the largest concerns of its kind in Hongkong and South China." However, the actual managing director of Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory was Fung Yat-hing (馮日興). The Governor visited the factory in December 1934, and Fung Yat-hing was present. In a 1935 case, Fung Yat-hing testified on behalf of the company. Fung Yiu Wing was likely accepted into Fung Keong's core team due to his experience as a lawyer in Shanghai.

Fung Fu never served as headmaster of Wanchai School after his retirement. Official records from April 20, 1903, show a discussion regarding the Education Vote. During this discussion, Hon. R. Shewan inquired if the schools were Chinese schools, to which the Chairman replied, "Yes. These are schools for Chinese learning English, called Anglo-Chinese schools." When asked if they were in charge of foreign masters, the Chairman confirmed, "Yes. The new system is to have a foreign master at each of these schools—Saiyingpun, Wanchai, and Yaumati. I may mention, however, that the master at Yaumati is not an European; he is a Chinese educated in America and has a good knowledge of English, so that he is able to do the work of an English master." The vote was agreed to. At that time, policy dictated that government district schools be headed by "foreign masters." The headmaster of Wanchai School mentioned here was Young Hee, who served from 1904 to 1910, followed by William Curwen. Later headmasters included William Kay in 1914, Arthur Robert Sutherland in 1918, and Reginald Joseph Birbeck in 1923. Fung Fu died in 1934. Therefore, Fung Fu never held any position, including headmaster, at Wanchai School. William Kay was reassigned as headmaster of Wanchai School on September 9, 1914. He eventually returned from Queen's College to take over from A. Morris as headmaster of the new King's College on June 18, 1934. King's College has a 'Kay House' named in his honor, which attests to the historical ties between King's College and Sai Ying Pun English School.

Fung Fu's post-retirement life is documented in two historical records. The first is his inclusion in Feng Ziyou's "Revolutionary Anecdotes." In July 1905, the Tokyo headquarters of the Chinese Tongmenghui was established. Sun Yat-sen, recognizing that party affairs had stagnated since the Gengzi Incident and that Chen Shaobai and comrades in Hong Kong and Guangdong were not in harmony, dispatched Feng Ziyou to Hong Kong on August 10 to organize the Tongmenghui and serve as a reporter for *China Daily*. At that time, the editorial staff included Lu Xin, Liao Ping'an, and Chen Chunsheng, with Fung Fu serving as a translator. This brief mention should not be underestimated. It occurred when Feng Ziyou was commissioned by Sun Yat-sen to develop party affairs in Hong Kong. The office of *China Daily* served as the headquarters of the Revive China Society. This indicates that Fung Fu actively participated in politics immediately after his retirement and was likely a party member. Although he was not on the official guest list for the King's College opening ceremony in March 1928, which had over two thousand attendees, it is plausible he was among them. This period was a turbulent time for China, and many Chinese intellectuals harbored reservations about the British. On May 21, 1928, the *Hong Kong Chinese Daily News* reported on a public memorial held by the Tongmenghui at the fountain in "Hong Kong's First Park" (now Hong Kong Zoological and Botanical Gardens, commonly known as "Government House Garden"). Four hundred people attended, creating a grand scene. Fung Fu might have been among them. Szeto Wah organized similar gatherings 60 years later. Fung Fu possessed a chivalrous character. His involvement with the Revive China Society brought a fitting conclusion to his life.

Fung Fu's eldest daughter married Ruan Jiaxiang, a wealthy merchant from Nanyang (Southeast Asia). Ruan Jiaxiang was the general agent for Watsons in Nanyang and a supporter of Sun Yat-sen's Tongmenghui. Fung Fu's second daughter married into the Zhao family in Nanyang, who may also have been a prominent clan. However, she died prematurely at 36. It is possible her marriage was unhappy due to her inability to bear sons for the Zhao family. Fung Fu brought her three young daughters back to Hong Kong and enshrined her spirit tablet. Two of Zhao's three daughters remained unmarried, as did two of Fung Fu's five daughters, possibly due to related circumstances. Fung Fu's eldest son who remained in Hong Kong, Fung Yiu-cheung, had an arranged marriage into the Ho family, marrying Ho Man-fai. However, this was also an era of burgeoning free love and youthful rebellion. The Fung family was highly Westernized, and arranged marriages for their children may have been less frequent. Fung Fu's second son who remained in Hong Kong, Fung Yiu-wing, became very prominent. He worked as a lawyer in Shanghai early in his career, earning a substantial amount of money. Upon returning to Hong Kong, he became the deputy to rubber magnate Fung Keong, a well-known supporter of Sun Yat-sen's revolution. Fung Fu's in-laws also contributed to modern China. Fung Fu meticulously cultivated his network, and many people around him were connected to Sun Yat-sen's revolution, reflecting the high hopes many Chinese bourgeoisie placed on Sun Yat-sen at the time. Feng Ziyou's brief description likely carries significant weight. A photograph at the Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall showing Fung Fu participating in a ship reception further illustrates his standing. Comparing English and Chinese newspapers from that era reveals a general distrust of the British among Chinese elites.

The second historical record mentioning Fung Fu after his return to Hong Kong is found in the 1889 annual report of the American Missionary Association, where Joe Jet states: "I have seen Tsing Ki, Fung Foo and all my friends at Hong Kong." Reverend Hager's missionary work in Hong Kong encouraged many helpers from San Francisco to return, with Joe Jet being a key figure among them.

His obituary reported: "Philanthropic work also claimed his attention, and a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys will always remain as a memorial to him." In memory of his father, Fung Fu's son, Fung Yiu-cheung, funded the construction of But San School. The school's founding in 1920 originated as an enlightenment institute of the Tuen Mun Evangelical Church of the Church of Christ in China. Initially, there were only nine students, which grew to over forty within ten years. In 1931, members of the New Territories Mission, recognizing the high demand for school places, proposed building a new school. With donations from brothers, including Fung Yiu-cheung, the school building was completed and officially named "Butsan School" in memory of his father, Mr. Fung But San (Fung Fu). This enlightenment institute was likely founded by Fung Fu himself, which explains why his obituary specifically mentioned "a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys." However, a question arises: Fung Fu was 71 years old in 1920. If he voluntarily established a free school in Castle Peak, it would have been more likely during his younger, more active years.

Fung Fu, born on February 5, 1849, passed away on January 19, 1934, and was interred on January 21, 1934, at the Chinese Christian Cemetery in Pokfulam. His wife, Kwan Fung Shi (real name is Kwan Yuet Ming), born on January 17, 1859, died on September 2, 1933, and was buried on September 4, 1933. Fung Fu occupies three grave plots in the "Zion Hill" section of the cemetery. His tombstone lists his grandsons as Cong, Xin, Li, Rong, Rong, Cai, Yang, and Guang.

The "Zion Hill" (郇崗, pronounced "Waan Gong") section holds deep Christian spiritual significance. "Zion" in the Bible represents God's dwelling, the Holy City, and the gathering place of the chosen people, symbolizing the glory of the Kingdom of Heaven. "Gong" means a high ground or hill. Thus, naming the burial ground "Zion Hill" symbolizes it as "God's holy mountain," reflecting the Christian belief in resting in the Lord's embrace after death and reuniting in heaven. The Pokfulam Chinese Christian Cemetery, established in 1882 after receiving land from the Hong Kong government, was the first permanent Christian cemetery for Chinese people in Hong Kong. The "Zion Hill" section was one of its core original areas.

This cemetery is renowned for interring many pioneers who significantly influenced the development of Christianity in Hong Kong and the Xinhai Revolution. Among them are figures like Au Fung-chi (1847–1914), Sun Yat-sen's Chinese tutor and revolutionary confidant; Tse Tsan-tai (1872–1938), a core revolutionary of the Furen Literary Society and Revive China Society, and a co-founder of the *South China Morning Post*; Cheng Si-leung (1863–1901), a Triad leader and key member of the Revive China Society who led the Huizhou Uprising; and Li Yuk-tong (1851–1936), a prominent Guangdong merchant and crucial financial supporter of the Xinhai Revolution. The cemetery also serves as the resting place for modern literary, educational, and academic luminaries such as Xu Dishan (1893–1941), a renowned writer and New Culture Movement pioneer; Ma Jian (1883–1959), a distinguished scholar who succeeded Xu Dishan as head of the Chinese Department at the University of Hong Kong; Wu So-ching (1890–1979), a celebrated female educator and long-serving principal of St. Paul's Co-educational College; and Lin Zifeng (1892–1971), a banker and educator who founded and served as the first president of Hong Kong Baptist College. Another notable individual buried here is Fung Shui Sang (1858–1932), who was eight years younger than Fung Fu and likely knew him.

News Summary

Mr. Fung Fu, a prominent Chinese educationalist, passed away on Friday, January 19, 1934, at 3:55 AM, at his residence at 1 Third Street, Saiyingpun, Hong Kong, at the age of 85. He had been in retirement for nearly thirty years. Approximately fourteen months prior to his death, he suffered a cerebral hemorrhage, which impaired his mobility, and his condition worsened in the days leading up to his passing. He was remembered as an exceptionally unassuming and good-natured man, well-liked by a large circle of friends and students.

His funeral took place on Sunday, January 21, 1934, at the Chinese Christian Cemetery in Pokfulam, following a service at the Cemetery Chapel officiated by the Reverend Cheung Chuk-ling. Three generations of his family followed his mortal remains. The profound respect for Mr. Fung was evidenced by a large procession of mourners, many following in cars. In accordance with his dying wish, the coffin was of native style, encased in a beflowered catafalque, and borne by uniformed bearers. Other notable features of the cortege included a large photograph of the deceased carried in a canopied chair and two European-style bands playing appropriate music and hymns. The immense mass of floral tributes required five motor trucks for transport to the cemetery.

The news also reported that:

"Fung Fu was among the first Chinese individuals to receive a foreign education. At a young age, he traveled to the United States with relatives, where he studied at Harvard University, earning an education degree. (which is not correct)He returned to Hong Kong at the age of 27 and briefly worked as a coal merchant, an endeavor that unfortunately failed. Recognizing his deep knowledge of education, the Hong Kong government subsequently appointed him as a headmaster in government schools, making him the first Chinese to hold such a position. Over four decades prior to his death, he served as headmaster of Saiyingpun Government School (which later expanded into King's College) and Wanchai Government School (also known as Wanchai Gap Government School). He also held a senior professorship at Queen's College. He retired from government service at the beginning of the 20th century, leaving behind a record of exceptional work and earning general esteem for his fine character, marked by good nature and a quiet demeanor. He took a keen interest in Church activities, particularly in the development of the Church of Christ in China, serving as one of its elders, and was also a committee member of Ying Wah Boys' College. His philanthropic work included establishing a free school at Castle Peak for poor boys, which stands as a memorial to him.

Mr. Fung Fu is survived by five sons, two daughters, and a number of grandchildren. Four of his five sons and two daughters were present at the funeral. His second son, Mr. Fung Yiu Wing, is the managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory, one of the largest concerns of its kind in Hong Kong and South China."

The text details the contributions of Fung Fu and his family to the church and educational institutions in Hong Kong, along with biographical information for several individuals.

Fung Fu (also known as Fung Butson, 1849-1934) was a prominent figure whose family, spanning three generations, were devoted Christians. He served as a deacon at To Tsai Church in 1908, supporting Rev. Cheung Chuk Ling in church affairs. Fung Fu was also a member of the Ying Wa College Re-establishment Committee in 1914.

Fung Fu and his wife, Mrs. Kwan Yue-ming, had a large family. Their children included:

Firstborn

Fung Shu-king was born on August 16, 1879, and passed away on June 2, 1920, at the age of 41. She was buried on June 4, 1920, according to cemetery records, and her headstone was erected in 1922. It she did not buried with her husband and returned to their mother's home before her death, leaving her infants behind.

Hilda Mo-Yin Yuen, the 6^th born, was born in 1905. She was among the first ten female graduates of the University of Hong Kong's Faculty of Medicine, following Eva Ho Tung, who was the first. Hilda enrolled at the University of Hong Kong in 1924 at the age of 19 for her first degree and entered the Faculty of Medicine in March 1926.

Her medical studies progressed through several examinations. In December 1926, Miss Yuen completed the 1st Degree Examination by passing Physics, Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, and Biology. In December 1928, she passed Anatomy and Physiology. By May 1930, she had completed the 3rd Degree Examination, having passed Junior Pathology and Pharmacology. (At this period, the examination at the end of the second year in Junior Anatomy and Junior Physiology, now known as the 2nd Degree Examination, had not been instituted.) She passed Senior Pathology, Medical Jurisprudence, and Public Health in May 1931. Finally, in December 1931, she passed Medicine, Surgery, and Obstetrics & Gynaecology, thus completing the Final Degree Examination. The Degree of MB BS from the University of Hong Kong was conferred upon Miss Yuen on January 11, 1932. This record was signed by L.T. Ride, M.A., M.B., Ch.B. (Oxon), M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, on February 3, 1932.

Following her graduation, Hilda Mo-Yin Yuen practiced medicine in Hong Kong, and then back to Kuala Lumpur and died there.

A significant social event in Chinese society at the time was documented in a report published in the Nanyang Siang Pau on Friday, July 18, 1930, on page 6 of its news column. The headline read: "Mr. Yuan Ka-tseung's Daughters Depart for England to Study Construction and Surveying." The article detailed that Mr. Yuan Ka-tseung, a prominent businessman from Kuala Lumpur, had recently sent his daughters to London, England, for further studies.

The report highlighted Mr. Yuan Ka-tseung 's prominent background as the owner of Wencheng Printing Bureau and the general agent for Hong Kong Watsons soda in Nanyang. It noted that his children were well-versed in both Chinese and Western languages, and his sons, including Mr. Sishun, had followed their father into business. The article specifically mentioned his eldest daughter, Mo-yan (Hilda), then 25 years old, who was studying medicine in Hong Kong and nearing graduation. It further stated that his second daughter, Mo-ting (22), and third daughter, Mo-yu (20), both graduates of Kuala Lumpur English Girls' High School, intended to study construction and surveying in England. They were scheduled to depart from Singapore on July 25 aboard the British mail ship 'Mooltan'. This plan for the younger daughters to specialize in fields like architectural design, civil engineering, and surveying was considered a groundbreaking endeavor in female education in the 1930s.

Secondborn

Fung Shu-lian was born on February 18, 1881, and was buried on May 26, 1916, at the age of 37.

Chiu Fung Shi, real name is  Fung Shu-lian, was born on October 13, 1881, and passed away on June 13, 1917, at the age of 36. She had several daughters. One daughter married and moved to Nanyang (Southeast Asia). Two of her daughters remained single and rented an apartment on the second floor of 4 High Street. Some of Chiu's daughters trained and worked as nurses at Nethersole Hospital.

Chiu Hu-kang, the second daughter of Chiu Fung Shi (Fung Shu-lian), was born in 1909 when her mother was 28 years old. She passed away on April 30, 1981, at the age of 72. Chiu Hu-kang was commemorated in the church history book. Her contributions included: visiting the Central District on the Tuesday after the second Sunday of each month; serving as an offering statistician on the third Sunday of each month; and visiting Happy Valley on the Tuesday after the third Sunday of each month. She also visited Shau Kei Wan on the Tuesday after the fourth Sunday of each month. Furthermore, she served as a Sunday usher, distributed weekly publications, and acted as a reserve on the fifth Sunday of each month at Hengmen. Additionally, she counted savings box donations on the fourth and fifth Sundays of each month.

Chiu Hu-an, the third daughter, married and moved to Nanyang. The fourth daughter, Chiu Hu-fu, was also commemorated in the church history book. Her contributions included serving as an offering statistician on the third Sunday of each month and counting savings box donations on the fourth and fifth Sundays of each month.

Thirdborn

Fung Shu-lan (065-3) was born approximately between 1883 and 1885, when her mother was estimated to be 24 to 26 years old. She was known as the third aunt and remained unmarried.

Forthborn

Fung Yiu-sheng (066-3) was born approximately between 1886 and 1888. His mother was estimated to be 27 to 29 years old at his birth.

Fifth born

Fung Yiu-kai (067-3) was born approximately between 1889 and 1890. At the time of his birth, his mother was estimated to be 30 to 31 years old.

 His descendants include Fung Hin-wing (tenth in rank), born in 1934, who immigrated to Australia around 1997 after a successful business career in Hong Kong. 

His wife is The 6th daughter of Seaward Woo's first wife (Ng Chiu-man)Woo Mo-ling, Moline.

Woo Mo-ling, Moline has passed away a few years ago in Syney.

 Other descendants include Fung Xianrui (fifth in rank), who died in Sydney, and Fung Cihui (ninth in rank), who resides in a nursing home.

Sixth born

馮瑞群 was born around early 1891, when her mother was approximately 32 years old. She was the sixth aunt and remained single.

Seventh born

馮耀基 was born around late 1891, when his mother, Ms. Guan, was approximately 32 years old. He lived from 1891 to 1953, passing away at the age of 62. He was originally buried on September 19, 1978, in Section E, Row 16, Plot 34. This original burial took place 25 years after his death. On July 23, 2004, his remains were exhumed, cremated, and the ashes were removed from Si En Yuan.

妙嫦 (the eldest sister) served as the offering statistician on the third Sunday of each month and as the savings box donation counter on the fourth and fifth Sundays. At one point, she worked as a night nurse at St. Stephen's College in Stanley.

妙玲 (the second sister) passed away in her sleep.

妙清 (the third sister).  Ms, Elite Fung know all three sisters well; two of them lived together, while one lived alone.

Seventh Born

Fung Yiu-wah was born on March 16, 1892, and passed away on June 14, 1916, at the age of 24. His burial took place on June 15, 1916.

The tombstone bears the inscription '同懷祿耀 彰,榮, 根, 剛立'. It is curious that his other brothers’ names were not there.

One theory said that :In traditional Chinese society, the inclusion of '某某立' (meaning 'erected by so-and-so') on a tombstone signifies more than just a name. It represents a substantial commitment, indicating active participation in the funeral, being present at the time of death, and contributing financially to the arrangements. Consequently, if a brother, for instance, was not physically present in Hong Kong, their name would not typically be listed among those who erected the tombstone. But this theory may not sound.

The tombstone also includes the inscription '少年德育會同仁泐' (inscribed by fellow members of the Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association). According to authoritative historical documents from the University of Hong Kong concerning the To Tsai Church, this association was formally established in the summer of 1907. It was founded by five enthusiastic young Christians who recognized the need for nurturing and supporting the children of fellow church members.

Ninth born

Fung Yiu Cheung, also known as Ninth Uncle, was born on June 13, 1893, and passed away on October 29, 1966, at the age of 73. Born in the Year of the Snake, he was the ninth child of his mother, who was approximately 34 years old at the time of his birth. Around the age of 30, in 1923, he traveled alone to the United States. By 1929, he had returned to Hong Kong and taken on significant church responsibilities, remaining in the city thereafter. He played a crucial role in the church during the Japanese occupation.

Fung Yiu Cheung's involvement in Christian activities began early. In the summer of 1907, he was one of the five founders of the Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association. In 1919, he served as one of six directors of the New Territories Mission, representing To Tsai Church. Other representatives included Rev. Cheung, Wong Wing Tak, Tse Kwai Fan, Kwan Ba Gu, and Wong Si Gu. That same year, resident evangelists were stationed in various New Territories chapels: Wong Shut Fong in Yuen Long, Ku Kai Tak in Tuen Mun, Law Hang Shek in Lam Tsuen, Lin Yat Tsing in Tsuen Wan, Lan Hon Shang in Tai O, and Chan Pin Kwong in Ping Shan.

Upon his return to Hong Kong, Fung Yiu Cheung became deeply involved in church administration. At 35, in March 1928, he was one of three representatives for the church's property acquisition. By August of the same year, he was one of five committee members responsible for debt clearance and fundraising for the church. In 1929, his activities included purchasing the "Universal Library" in July, pledging 30 yuan, serving on the committee for salaried staff pensions in April, and the committee for the use of "Thanksgiving donations" in September. He was appointed Chairman of the Choir in September 1931. In October 1932, as one of three church trustees, he signed an agreement with Messrs. W.K. Kwok & Co. Solicitors to safeguard the property of "Sham Oi Church." In June 1933, he was part of the committee defining qualifications for salaried staff. The church also appointed Rev. Cheung Chuk Ling and two representatives to receive important documents in October 1933.

His service continued in 1934, when he became one of four advisors for Ying Wa Girls' School in May. In September, the church subscribed to one share of Hong Kong Bible Society Ltd., and Fung Yiu Cheung was a member of the church's constitution drafting committee. In April 1935, he served on the committee for property acquisition for Wanchai Church. When the church's bank collapsed, he became a creditor for the church and was responsible for selling its Aberdeen property. He remained an advisor for Ying Wa Girls' School in March 1936 and was appointed Director of Public Banquet in May. In September 1936, Fung Yiu Cheung, along with his brothers Yiu Wing and Yiu Kei, honored their late father's will by donating HKD 1,000 from his lifelong pension fund to the church. In December, he joined the committee for designing vestments for pastors and the choir.

Fung Yiu Cheung and his brothers also played a pivotal role in education. Butsan Primary School was founded in 1920, initially serving as an enlightenment center for the Chinese Christian Church Tuen Mun Gospel Hall. It began with just nine students, growing to over forty within a decade. In 1931, recognizing the significant demand for school places, members of the New Territories Mission proposed building a dedicated school. With generous donations from Fung Yiu Cheung and his siblings, the school building was completed and officially named "Butsun School" in memory of their father, Mr. Fung But Sun. The school steadily developed until the Japanese invasion forced its closure.

On October 10, 1939, Fung Yiu Cheung was appointed as one of six deacons. During the challenging period of the Japanese occupation (1942-1945), he served as Vice Chairman of the church, with Ngan Shing-kwan as Chairman. During this time, Senior Pastor Cheung Pat Ling was arrested by military police and subjected to torture.

Ho Man Fai, also known as Ninth Aunt, was born on April 14, 1895, and passed away on February 27, 1991, at the age of 96. She attended Sacred Heart College.

Fung Miu Yung was born on February 7, 1921, and died on April 17, 1927, aged 6. Her burial date, according to cemetery computer data, was April 18, 1927. Her grave is located in Section B, Level 10, Plot 26.

Fung Miu Chun was born on January 18, 1922, and passed away on September 30, 2011, at the age of 89. She was the mother of Ms. Elite Fung Yee Lai.(the story teller) . 

Tenth Born or twin born

Fung Shu-yan was born on June 13, 1893. Her mother was approximately 34 years old at the time of her birth.

Based on her church identification number, she is possibly Fung Yiu-chang's twin sibling. If this is the case, she would have been closely related to Fung yee-lai's family. She lived a reasonably long life .However, it is peculiar that she appears to be the most enigmatic member of the Fung family, as she has never been mentioned by anyone. 

Eleventh born

Fung Yiu Wing was born in 1897 and passed away on May 8, 1938, at the age of 41. He had five sons and three daughters. He was initially interred on May 8, 1938, in Section D, Row 3, Plot 27. In 2004, his remains were exhumed, cremated, and the ashes scattered in Si Yan Garden.

He was an active member of the Hop Yat Church. At age 29, in May 1926, he served on the committee for the church's bazaar and the opening of the new church hall. In July of the same year, he was on the committee for dormitory allocation. At age 30, in May 1927, he served on the committee for amending church borrowing regulations. In July 1929, he contributed thirty dollars towards the purchase of the "Wanyou Wenku" (Universal Library). After his passing in May 1938, the church council, in November 1938, accepted donations from his wife, Mrs. Fung Yiu Wing, in his memory. These donations included $1,500 for the church fund, $1,000 for the sacred music department fund, $300 for the old age pension fund, and an additional $500 for the purchase of a phonograph.

Fung Yiu Wing's wife, Lee Chung Chun, was born in 1901 and passed away on January 25, 1973, at the age of 72. She was buried in a cemetery.

Their second son was Hin Wing.

Their daughter, Miu Fong, passed away at the age of one day. She was originally interred on January 16, 1928, in Section B, Row 9, Plot 32. In 1976, following a landslide, her name was inscribed on a memorial tablet located in Section A, Row 3.

Another daughter, Miu Ping, was born in 1930 and passed away on September 20, 1932, at a young age.

Their third daughter, Miu Wo, was born in 1931 and passed away on July 1, 1982, at the age of 51. She married into the Yu family at the age of 40 and had two sons, Yu Ka Kong and Yu Ka Bo. She resided at 3/F, 4 High Street. Her mother later sold her property and distributed the proceeds between Miu Wo and her sister Miu Hing, who was in the UK. Miu Wo was initially interred on July 1, 1982, in a temporary burial plot. Her remains were later exhumed and placed in an ossuary on February 28, 1989, specifically in Ossuary No. 3, GS Section, Plot 16. However, there is no information available regarding her niche wall.

Their daughter, Miu Hing, was born in 1938, after her father's death. She moved to the United Kingdom in 1962 at the age of 24. At that time, her sister was 31.

Twentieth born

Fung Yiu-kan (馮耀根), identified by member number 12 (reference 302-3), was born in 1898 (a year inferred from his membership number) and passed away in 1965 at the age of 67. In May 1926, at 28 years old, he served as a co-organizer for the Union Church bazaar. Later, in June 1939, at the age of 41, he was a member of the drafting committee for departmental regulations.

Au Yeung Suk-yuen (歐陽淑媛).

Fung Hin-yeung (馮顯揚) and Fung Miu-cheung (馮妙嫦) were sponsors for the church history book.

Fung Miu-hang (馮妙蘅) was registered or born in 1934.

Thirtieth born

Records indicate Fung Yiu-gang (358-3) was buried on June 1, 1923. Born on September 30, 1901, he passed away on June 1, 1923, at the age of 22. His grave is located in Section C, Row 22, Plot 37, with a stone erected in early autumn 1929.

Sponsors for the clan history book include Fung Miaochang, Fung Xianyang, the Fung Xianrui Memorial, and the Wang Congzhen Memorial. Associated names mentioned are Miaochang, Miaoling, and Miaoqing. Additionally, Zhao Xianguang, who lived from 1928 to June 30, 2024, passed away at the age of 96.

GENEALOGY OF Fung Fu（馮扶） FAMILY

馮扶， 妻馮關氏

1. 馮瑞瓊（1），夫阮嘉祥

2. 馮瑞蓮， 夫招氏

        1881/02/18       其母約22 歲時生她. 

（墳場電腦資料） 安葬日期1916/5/26 , 享年37.

                        招馮氏(生1881/10/13- 殁1917/6/13). 享年 36歲.

“招馮氏有三個女兒，一個遠嫁南洋， 二個獨身。兩人租住高街4號2樓。招氏女兒在那打素醫院學護和當謢士”

            招壼康

招馮氏（馮瑞蘭）於28歲生第二女招壼康. 招壼康(生1909-殁1981/4/30),享年72歲. 招壼康獨身,一生侍奉主:

堂史書籍贊助 : 招壼康紀念

每月第二主日後之禮拜二探訪, 中區

每月第三主日獻金統計員

每月第三主日後之禮拜二探訪, 跑馬地

每月第四主日後之禮拜二探訪, 筲箕灣

主日招待,派週刋, 每月第五主日兼後備, 橫門

每月第四,五主日儲蓄箱捐開計員

招壼安

三女壼安， 遠嫁南洋.

招壼福

四女壼福獨身,一生侍奉主:

堂史書籍贊助 : 招壼福紀念

每月第三主日獻金統計員

每月第四,五主日儲蓄箱捐開計員.

3. 馮瑞蘭（獨身）

（道濟會編號065-3） 約於 1883–1885 年間出生, 其母約 24–26 歲生她.

               馮綺麗認識她,稱呼三姨媽.應頗長壽.

4. 馮耀升

（道濟會編號066-3） 約生於 1886–1888 年        其母約 27–29 歲生他.

5. 馮耀開

（道濟會編號067-3） 約 1889–1890 年        其母約 30–31 歲生

馮顯睿（排行5）

馮顯睿妻住香港,綺麗曾訪其她. 馮顯睿在澳州悉尼去世,馮綺麗去過掃墓

馮慈惠（排行5）

馮顯榮的9家姐馮慈惠己入住老人院。綺麗以前去探她時住天欣邨.

馮顯榮（排行10）

現年約89(他本人說), 1934出生(2026-1934=92)他約於97前移民澳洲, 因在港生意很成功, 足以養老有餘,其女兒近年到悉尼陪他. 馮顯榮太太胡慕玲(原配排行七)，其岳父為胡兆熾  55 Coolawin Rd ,North Bridge 2068, New South Wales

6. 馮瑞群

（道濟會編號103-3） 約生於 1891 年初       其母約 32 歲生

                六姨媽, 獨身 .馮綺麗表示馮扶的家業由三姨媽和六姨媽打理.

7. 馮耀基

8. 馮耀華

9. 馮耀彰，妻何文輝 （九嬸）

馮妙容

馮妙珍

馮綺麗

10. 馮瑞顏

11. 馮耀榮

12. 馮耀根

13. 馮耀剛

阮英舫

註1

領洗編號（063-3）；

1879/08/16-1920/06/02，享年41；

關氏約20 歲生她 （初生即領洗）；

安葬日期（墳場電腦資料） 1920/6/4 

（回到母家後過身的）

立石1922年

1. MO-TSZ | 24/08/1897 - 23/06/1982 | 84 YR 3 MTH；  TAN KHIAM PEE | 14/10/1895 - 07/02/1947 | 51 YR 4 MTH

2. SZE YEW JOHN | 05/05/1901 - 11/08/1935 | 34 YR 3 MTH ； MABLE KHOO PEK GEOK

3. SZE SHUN CLIFFORD | 05/05/1902 - 12/05/1956 | 54 YR； LIEW LAN KUAN | 05/09/1907 - 29/06/1990 | 83 YR

4. MO LING MAUD | 03/06/1903 - 21/11/1936 | 33 YR 5 MTH； THOMAS WONG | - /08/1936

5. SZE FOON GEORGE | 19/05/1905 - 25/04/1969 | 63 YR 11 MTH； SUM KWAI YING | 17/11/1905 - 14/02/1986 | 80 YR 3 MTH

6. MO YIN HILDA （SPINSTER） | 10/01/1907 - 17/04/1990 | 83 YR 3 MTH；

7. MO TING ANGELINE | 15/07/1908 - 23/03/1999 | 90 YR 7 MTH； JOSEPH HO PAN THONG | 17/10/1909 - 01/02/1943 | 33 YR 4 MTH

8.MO YOW ESTHER | 10/11/1909 - 22/04/1977 | 67 YR 5 MTH； COMRIE JOHN TODD | 09/08/1909 - /12/1959 | 50 YR 5 MTH

9. MO CHING NELL | 05/05/1911 - 09/09/1987 | 76 YR 4 MTH； TONG SUM HONG | 27/02/1903 - 11/08/1983 | 81 YR 6 MTH

10. MO YAN CLARA | 15/11/1912； TAN SOO ANN | 23/11/1910 - 10/02/1993 | 81 YR 9 MTH

11. MO CHEONG IDA | 05/03/1914 - 17/12/1986 | 72 YR 4 MTH；  LO CHUEK HON | 28/04/1918 - 17/10/1989 | 71 YR 6 MTH

12. SZE KIN HARRY | 08/04/1915 -； CHEW SIEW KEAT | 03/07/1921 - 19/01/1999 | 77 YR 6 MTH

 Madam Sim Ngin Heong(沈銀鳳) 06/12/1894-16/04/1955 ,married with Yuen Ka Tseung at her 26.

13. SZE CHENG BOB | 10/08/1922 - 4/5/1998 | 75 YR 9 MTH； IRENE LEONG LOH-LAN

14. SZE POON JIM | 05/02/1925 - 27/09/1981 | 56 YR 7 MTH；  BETTY CHOO ENG HONG | 23/02/1926 -

15. SZE LAP LAURIE | 10/12/1925 - 19/07/1989 | 64 YR 5 MTH； MAE CHONG SOON CHIN | 03/12/1921 -

16. MO MAY MAIZIE | 06/11/1927 -；  KOH TEIK GHEE | 26/3/1926 -

"Duplicate - please delete".

--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BEGIN ---
這是一項針對19世紀香港早期殖民英語教育的全面研究，旨在釐清英皇書院的歷史淵源。研究大量運用原始檔案資料，包括香港藍皮書、政府憲報、年度教育報告等，並指出其部分研究材料為原創。文獻的核心目標是將英皇書院的歷史基礎追溯至1879年，即其前身西營盤學校成立之年，該校是1880年憲報公佈的「五所國家義學館」之一。

敘事始於1878年的中央書院事件，並闡述了港督軒尼詩推廣英語教育的努力。英皇書院的結構沿革與早期英語教學倡議緊密相連，關鍵人物包括軒尼詩總督、學務視學官伊德、校長馮扶及後來的莫理士校長。研究深入探討了馮扶的生平、早期白話學校的性質、以及英皇書院命名決策的演變，並揭示了馮扶學術背景可能存在的「醜聞」。

文獻詳細分析了1864年至1883年間的教育報告，探討了早期學校的挑戰、教學質量及政府政策的演變。它強調了學校「傳承」的概念，認為早期白話學校因教師流動而缺乏制度連續性，而1879年馮扶領導的西營盤（英語）學校則標誌著新模式的開始。最終，研究堅定地將英皇書院的歷史追溯至1879年，並提供了多項理由，包括其作為新實體的性質、實驗性教學、以及港督金文泰在1929年對此起源的官方認可。

--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY END ---

--- FULL TRANSLATION BEGIN ---
這是一項針對19世紀香港早期殖民英語教育的全面研究。其中部分研究材料是完全原創的。
本文件主要目的是釐清並追溯英皇書院的歷史創立日期。大部分引文均嚴謹地編纂自原始檔案資料，包括《香港藍皮書》、政府憲報、年度教育報告、工務局報告、立法局記錄、當年《紐約時報》、archive.org，以及美國傳教士協會的年度/月度出版物。只有一兩個特定參考資料使用了人工智能，並已在文本中明確標註。
敘事始於1878年的中央書院事件，並概述了港督軒尼詩擴展和推廣英語教育的努力。英皇書院的結構沿革與早期英語教學倡議緊密相連。這項發展的關鍵人物包括軒尼詩總督、學務視學官伊德、校長馮扶，以及後來的莫理士校長。最終，所有歷史追溯都指向1880年政府憲報公佈的五所獲批准的免費學校。
由於本專案範圍廣泛，完整的100頁手稿已編纂並託管於外部，以便閱讀和歷史保存。
標籤
教育
學校
殖民歷史
19世紀
歷史研究
政府憲報
登錄或註冊以發表評論
第一部分：引言與研究概述（第1-5頁）
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月20日 週六 - 13:23 提交
作者/編輯：劉山青 (Lau San Ching)
(1973 英皇書院 中七乙班 理科 ; 1976 香港大學 理學士)
版本：2026年5月20日
聯絡方式：
電郵：Lausanching2@gmail.com
WhatsApp：+852 94103119
本研究旨在釐清香港英皇書院的歷史前身。本研究依據嚴謹的官方和歷史檔案，包括年度《香港藍皮書》、政府憲報、年度教育報告、工務局報告、立法局記錄、當代《紐約時報》、Archive.org上的早期香港報紙、美國傳教士協會的年度和月度報告，以及各種歷史專著。文中明確標註了極少數使用人工智能輔助驗證的情況。

本文件深入探討並補充了該時期幾個關鍵的歷史片段。它深入探索了馮扶的生平及其歷史意義，檢視了早期白話學校是否有校名，並調查了這些早期機構是否存在實質性的「傳承」和制度連續性。研究還解決了1879年官方記錄中西營盤（英語）學校被列為「新成立」的謎團，並仔細重建了英皇書院的命名決策和演變。此外，它記錄了何甘棠12歲時在中央書院的軼事，探討了馮扶、孫中山博士和黑格牧師之間的歷史聯繫，並通過家譜研究證實馮扶的妻子「馮關氏（187-1）」是關元昌的長女關悅明（187-1）。研究還分析了當時華人家庭的聯姻情況，並檢視了1878年中央書院爭議對港督軒尼詩政府的深遠影響。

本研究的敘事始於1878年轟動一時的中央書院爭議，以及軒尼詩總督隨後大力推廣英語教育的努力。英皇書院的歷史前身與這項由本地教師普及英語教學的過程緊密相連。這項發展的關鍵歷史人物包括軒尼詩總督、學務視學官伊德博士、校長馮扶，以及後來的莫理士校長。

馮扶在霍華德大學
馮扶在霍華德大學，作者：lausanching
本研究指出，所有關於英皇書院前身的官方歷史記錄，最終都指向1880年由殖民地大臣批准並在政府憲報上公佈的「五所國家義學館」。

馮扶在佛山書院的肖像
馮扶在佛山書院的肖像，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允
關元昌（1832-1912），原名真榮，廣州番禺人。他是中國現代牙醫學的先驅，被尊為「中國牙醫之父」。孫中山視他為義父。

關元昌出生於廣州的一個基督教家庭。他的父親關日（字雲珠，1797-1863）是第一位華人基督教牧師，也是倫敦傳道會傳教士梁發的十位門徒之一。第一次鴉片戰爭後，關日攜家遷居英屬香港。在那裡，關元昌在倫敦傳道會開辦的英華書院擔任雜工和印刷工作。他後來師從美國牙醫兼傳教士哥倫布博士學習西方牙醫學，成為第一位註冊華人牙醫，並贏得「中國牙醫之父」的稱號。1870年，他返回廣州執業，最終定居香港。除了醫療實踐，他還深入參與倫敦傳道會的事務，積極參與大石柱教堂的遷建和香港道濟會堂的建立。

關元昌的妻子黎亞妹，出生於南海西樵的顯赫黎氏家族。她是雅麗氏何妙齡那打素醫院的第一位女舍監，也是香港第一位華人女護士。他們育有十子五女。他們的許多子女及後代在各個領域都取得了顯赫成就。

他們的大女兒關悅明（1858-1913）熱心教會事務。他們的大兒子關景垣（1860-1923）畢業於南洋水師學堂，曾任戰艦大副和海關官員。他們的四兒子關景寅（1867-1919）成為御醫和北洋海軍醫院院長。景寅的兒子包括著名建築師、K.T. Engineering Co.創辦人關頌聲（1892-1960），以及中國神經外科先驅關頌濤（1896-1980）。

他們的五兒子關景良（1869-1945）是醫生、中華醫學會的共同創辦人，也是孫中山的密友。他的第一任妻子李月娥由孫中山介紹。他的女兒關惠卿嫁給鄭潤田，他們的兒子鄭啟明（James K. M. Cheng，生於1947年）是加拿大建築師。他們的三女兒關悅英（1870-1962）是道濟會堂的第一位女長老和助產士。她的兒子容志超（1898-1970）和容志東（1908-1987）分別成為傑出的化學家和植物學家，在香港有重要的學術生涯。

他們的六兒子關景忠（1873-1923）曾任海關官員。他的女兒關傅承（Margaret Kwan Fu Shing）嫁給新加坡著名醫生胡載坤，他們的兒子胡賜道（Richard Hu Tsu Tau，生於1926年）後來擔任新加坡財政部長和衛生部長。另一位後代關凱文（Kevin Kwan，生於1973年）是美國作家。他們的八兒子關景新（1878-1948）畢業於康奈爾大學，曾任廣東省實業廳廳長。他的孫女是美國演員關家蒨（Nancy Kwan Ka Shen，生於1939年）。

他們的十兒子關景輝（1883-1943），在早期策劃刺殺慈禧太后後，赴美留學，後來在中華民國擔任多個政府職位。

馮扶晚年，可能是能找到的最後一張照片
馮扶晚年，可能是能找到的最後一張照片，作者：lausanching

馮扶的長女馮瑞瓊嫁給了吉隆坡的顯赫人物阮嘉祥。這一支發展成為一個聲望顯赫的階層。其中之一是他們的女兒阮慕燕博士。她於1932年1月獲香港大學醫學院授予學位，是香港大學第十位女執業醫生。何東夫人是第一位，於1927年獲授予學位。她在香港執業一段時間後，便回到家鄉。
「他們的五兒子關景良（1869-1945）是醫生、中華醫學會的共同創辦人，也是孫中山的密友。他的第一任妻子李月娥由孫中山介紹。他的女兒關惠卿嫁給鄭潤田，他們的兒子鄭啟明（James K. M. Cheng，生於1947年）是加拿大建築師。」……我認識鄭湯姆（James Cheng的兄弟）將近45年。
關氏家族中有一位關亨利（Henry Kwan）娶了譚艾米（Amy Tan），她是莫子（嘉祥和瑞瓊的第一個孩子）的第四個女兒。
英皇書院前校長梁植榮向馮扶致敬
英皇書院前校長梁植榮向馮扶致敬，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允

第二部分：第一章 第二節 — 西點
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月20日 週六 - 13:27 提交
記錄西點學校的最早歷史文件是威廉·羅伯施德牧師於1859年1月撰寫的報告，題為《關於香港華人教育程度和官立學校的一些注意事項等》。羅伯施德在報告中指出：「西點學校是在非常不利的環境下建立的。學校開設的地方附近住戶稀少；因此，大部分學生必須從太平山及其附近地區前來。此外，教師是一個非常沒有文化的人，充滿狡猾和欺騙。他發現自己的無知無法再隱瞞，便僱用另一個人為他講解《四書》。我對此強烈反對，因為沒有一個體面的人會為了每月四到五美元的薪水而教書，而這已是他能賺取的最高金額。因此，我要求將他解僱。他是最後一個試圖通過虛假承諾引誘學生來破壞學校的舊把戲。由於他們通常採用的手段是非法的，我告知教師們，違反英國法律者將受到嚴懲。這在很大程度上阻止了圍繞他們被政府解僱的無休止的陰謀。接替查老師的教師是倫敦傳道會的成員。他並非學識淵博，但能非常流暢地講解主要的中文教科書；我很高興地說，現在的學生人數已達61人，其中約52人在我每次探訪學校時都在場。」

《遐邇貫珍》的進一步歷史記錄闡明了免費學校的早期建立。1856年3月，該刊物記錄了「銀元---$658.17」用於各種免費學校的支出。1855年6月《遐邇貫珍》的一篇早期文章深刻地記錄了香港政府設立這些機構的最初意圖和背景，指出「自大英帝國開埠以來，王室出於憐憫，不願見兒童失學，便在鄉村設立免費學校以啟蒙兒童……」

根據1857年政府憲報，維多利亞城正式劃分為七個分區。從地理上看，西點（西點/西角）被視為西營盤（西營盤）地區內的一個村莊和重要地標。這導致這兩個名稱在早期文件中經常互換使用。例如，憲報明確規定：「維多利亞區分為七個分區。第一區，或稱西營盤——從西邊名為高威灣的小村莊，到圓形建築物的盡頭，包括文咸街一號警艇站以西的所有房屋。」——殖民地秘書處命令，1857年5月6日。

到1872年，原西點學校正式更名為西營盤學校。這純粹是名稱的變更，實質上是同一機構的直接延續。學校的教職員工薪資、教師編制和學生人數保持不變，實現了無縫過渡。儘管官方檔案中沒有詳細說明更名的具體原因，但1872年的西營盤學校本質上是1871年西點學校的直接機構延續。

第三部分：第一章 第二節 — 早期白話學校
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月20日 週六 - 13:29 提交
1858年，香港殖民政府正式規定，政府資助學校教師收取的費用受到嚴格限制，只允許收取象徵性的「茶錢」。這標誌著免費教育的開始。同年12月，政府通過第100號憲報撥款125英鎊用於建造華人校舍。1858年的一項規定明確指出，每名學生每月只需向教師支付25文銅錢。作為當時物價的參考，到1876年，一斤白米約售3仙，一銀元約等於1100文銅錢。

當時的白話學校分為三種類型：私塾（不接受政府資助）；補助鄉村學校（由政府和村民共同資助）；以及官立學校/免費學校（完全由政府資助）。政府將補助鄉村學校視為教師由村民自行選定，部分薪資由社區以實物支付的機構。根據1870年的一份報告，這些補助鄉村學校教師薪資的一半來自政府（每年約六十元），另一半則預期由村民以實物支付。1887年的一份報告進一步詳細說明，村民的貢獻約為每月30文銅錢和3斤米，價值約12仙。這種以實物支付薪資的做法被視為中國傳統習俗。

提高本地教師的素質仍然是一個持續的挑戰。補助學校的教師由於當地貧困，往往難以收取全額學費，村民與政府之間也因校舍租金問題產生摩擦。早期鄉村學校教師的背景多樣且有時令人質疑，據報導，有些人涉嫌算命、盜匪或偽造出勤記錄。儘管政府有權否決任命，但這些教師在村莊內往往擁有顯著影響力。1871年的一份報告描述了薄扶林學校的一場爭議，村民拒絕更換一名被政府認為行為不當的教師。村民、傳統教師和政府之間的這種拉鋸戰直到1876年後才開始緩解。

1887年的一份報告徹底分析了當時香港童工和家庭環境對學童出勤率的影響。它指出了關鍵的影響因素，如家務勞動、被買作家庭傭工的女孩的賣身契，以及某些村莊的漁業工作。

第四部分：第一章 — 教育報告（1864-1875年）
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月20日 週六 - 13:33 提交
1864年的教育報告指出，香港華人學校的入學人數波動顯著。每年從農曆新年到五月，入學人數達到高峰，之後便穩步下降。當時的入學數據顯示，新生比例非常高：一所學校21名學生中有10名是新生，另一所學校22名學生中有12名是新生，第三所學校51名學生中多達40名是新生。許多前一年的學生沒有回來，最終只能記住幾百個漢字，卻不理解其含義。報告將此歸因於有聲望的華人居民很少攜家帶眷在香港定居。報告總結說，除非這種情況改變，否則香港的教育發展將難以達到預期的進步。

1868年的報告（第56條）駁斥了外界對政府教育體系「不道德」的指控。報告強調，儘管當時推廣世俗教育，鄉村學校純粹教授儒家思想，但這絕非不道德。雖然儒家思想可能缺乏宗教層面，但其整體導向是促進良善。就世俗生活而言，其道德體系被認為不亞於任何古代或現代的倫理框架。

1870年的報告明確將學校系統分為三種類型：中央書院、政府資助的鄉村學校和補助學校。當時有12所政府資助的鄉村學校。經過教學效果評估，它們的運營效率排名如下，其中西營盤一地就佔據了前兩名：第二名是西營盤本地（Sai-ying P’ún, Pún-ti），第三名是西營盤客家（Sai-ying P’ún, Hak-ka）。這些學校只使用中文教科書，其教學方法與中國大陸傳統私塾完全相同。

1871年，學務視學官史釗域在他的報告（第9條）中生動地描述了華人學校傳統的「朗讀」環境：「華人學校的學生習慣於大聲朗讀課文。我的進入常常被學生視為表現勤奮的信號。不習慣這種震耳欲聾的喧囂，我的第一反應是驚訝，第二反應是憤怒。我喊道『安靜！』，但這被學生默認為『讀得更大聲！』在幾次試圖恢復秩序卻只導致更響亮的噪音後，我幾乎絕望地退到一個低年級教室，在那裡我將孩子們分成小組，以便更易於互動。」

1873年的報告指出，除了中央書院，所有其他政府學校，共計29所，統稱為「鄉村學校」。其中15所由政府全額資助和控制；其餘14所每年獲得60銀元的補助，村民負責提供校舍並承擔一半的教師薪資。然而，實際上（第4條），教師往往被迫從微薄的政府補助中扣除校舍租金，而村民承諾的另一半薪資也經常拖欠。在許多極度貧困的村莊，每月賺取5銀元的教師已被視為富裕。這解釋了村民為何不願為子女教育提供財政支持。然而，由於村民強烈堅持他們選擇教師的權利，他們會在學校開辦前同意所有條件。一旦學校成功建立，教師因無法支付租金而筋疲力盡時，村民便會以貧困為由要求政府提供額外補助。到1874年（第10條），這種不滿情緒逐漸平息。

1875年的報告（第6條）記錄了由於兩次大火和艇戶遷往銅鑼灣導致人口遷移，一些曾經繁榮的學校衰落。當時許多村民甚至認為讓孩子上學是「施恩」於政府。關於課程（第11條），除了1873年引入的地理，學校教科書委員會編纂的前三卷新教科書於1874年實施並取得了顯著成功。新科目在不影響傳統中文課程的情況下有效教授。至於「算術」，當年未被採納有兩個原因：首先，沒有足夠時間編纂合適的中文算術教科書；其次，當年教育系統的創新已被認為足夠，不宜再增加額外負擔。然而，算術並未被遺忘，將在適當時機納入課程。

第五部分：第一章 第四節 — 教育報告（1876-1883年）
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月20日 週六 - 13:44 提交
1876年（第5段）：解決了鄉村學校效率問題，特別是針對教師只在年末努力工作，而全年缺乏持續努力的習慣。
1877年：西營盤學校因被迫遷徙和新校舍建設延遲而受損，凸顯了本地學校的脆弱性以及外部環境的重大影響。
1878年：鴨脷洲學校因教師無能和疏忽而關閉，導致家長寧願支付其他學校的費用，也不願接受免費但被忽視的教育。
1879年（第6段）：有人表示，市區的官辦華人學校是不必要的，並且與本地教育的努力競爭不力。此外，「補助金計劃」的範圍通過取消「初級」限制而擴大。
1883年（第14段）：約翰·道格拉斯爵士（錫蘭時報）的一份報告考慮減少政府對教育的干預，傾向於支持自願的、補助金機構，而非直接資助的學校。
重新思考學校傳承：為何1880年以前的日期不適用
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 10:56 提交
「早期香港白話學校（—1879年）的運作方式類似於私人補習中心，學生追隨特定教師而非機構，導致教師離職時缺乏制度連續性。1879年，馮扶受伊德博士任命，建立了一種新的學校傳承模式，始於1880年的五所獲批准學校之一，與早期零散的學校教育截然不同。」

「我們都對學校傳承有概念。官立學校和教會學校各有其獨特的特點和傳統；我們在這裡討論的正是這種傳承。」

「外國人可能對其他事情有所了解，特別是與貿易相關的，但在教育方面，最遲鈍的村民和最無知的艇家婦女都會大聲宣稱自己的優越性，絲毫不懷疑會受到質疑。他們確切知道自己的孩子應該讀什麼書，何時以及如何讀，儘管所有外國人的意見都與此相反。」——1870年教育報告

「……早期白話學校，甚至是官立免費學校，本質上與清朝時期的其他華人學校相似。當一位教師離開時，一切都從頭開始，沒有留下任何制度傳承。」

「8. 砲台街學校的任命在各方面都取得了成功，而且從一開始就是如此，儘管人們擔心一開始會有所下降，因為很難預先估計更換校長會產生什麼影響。」——1875年教育報告

「當一位教師離開時，即使是學務視學官也無法預測其未來的入學情況。」

「8. 小香港學校於三月任命了一位新校長，補助金得以繼續，但條件是下次再有投訴將永久撤回。這次村民們找到了一位與前任截然不同的人，前任不肯放棄絲毫權利。現任校長沒有任何抱怨，但據傳聞，在鴨脷洲及其他鄰近地區普遍認為，他不僅沒有收到任何東西，反而每月還要向某些村民贈送禮物，以換取教導他們孩子的特權。在現任校長的帶領下，學校有了顯著改善。在1872年的效率排名中，它位列末尾。現在排名第二十，但如果人們繼續這樣做，它要達到非常滿意的狀態還需要很長時間。

11. 西營盤、上環、大王宮、灣仔和筲箕灣的學校緊隨其後。這些學校的入學人數非常多且非常規律。沒有任何地方能像筲箕灣那樣明顯地體現出一位好校長的優勢。三年前，是否應繼續嘗試在該村維持一所學校已成為一個問題。當任命一位客家校長時，失敗歸咎於人們的冷漠。當他被一位本地人接替時，類似的藉口從不缺乏。在現任校長的帶領下，本地人和客家人都利用了這所學校，並表示非常滿意。如果學校真正出現問題時，人們能更直言不諱，那麼有益的改變將會更快實現；但通常情況下，他們會刻意保持沉默，直到他們的信息不再有用。」——1873年教育報告

從本質上講，早期白話學校，甚至是官立學校，與清朝時期的其他華人學校幾乎沒有區別。當一位教師離開時，一切都從頭開始，沒有留下任何學校傳承。

當馮扶於1879年2月1日接管阿芳的學生並走進他的教室時，這所學校變得完全不同了。馮扶為學務視學官伊德博士建立了一所實驗學校。

所有歷史時間線都追溯到1880年由殖民地大臣批准的五所新學校。英皇書院的歷史追溯與西點無關，將學校的歷史追溯到1879年之前是根本無效的。

早期白話學校是否有自己的名稱
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 12:17 提交
在所有教育報告中，客家免費學校和本地免費學校始終被列為獨立實體，互不隸屬。因此，將它們稱為客家部和本地部是錯誤的。香港早期的免費學校通常沒有正式名稱，常以其所在地命名，例如「西點免費學校」。當一個地點同時設有本地和客家免費學校時，它們會通過教學語言來區分。

1858年，根據威廉·羅伯施德的建議，殖民政府撥款125英鎊設立「華人學校」，如1858年11月6日憲報所載。這些早期機構的例子包括1860年和1861年報告中提到的西點、韋伯斯特市集、寶靈頓和燈籠洲的學校，其中西點學校在1864年再次被提及。1865年的一份報告指出：「這裡，如同西點一樣，去年開設了一間新的寬敞校舍。與這所學校在同一棟建築內還有一所客家學校，該校因房屋拆遷而遭受嚴重影響。」這表明，儘管客家學校可能共用一棟建築，但它仍然是一個獨立實體。西點的客家學校直到1866年才開始記錄入學人數，最低出勤人數為三名學生，這有助於緩解此前對其可能遷往九龍的擔憂。

1902年，在愛德華·歐文（Edward A. Irving）的領導下發生了一項重大結構變革。在此之前，西營盤和灣仔等地區的白話學校與英語學校在同一屋簷下運作，但彼此之間沒有正式聯繫。到1902年4月，這些英語學校和白話學校正式連結起來，成為當時所稱的英華學校。在這種新結構中，白話學校作為初級部，英語學校作為高級部，如1902年教育報告所詳述。

第一章 第二節 — 中央書院爭議
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 12:47 提交
港督約翰·波普·軒尼詩認為推廣英語教育是殖民政府的一項重要職責。他於1878年2月11日表示：「在大英帝國，殖民政府的一項重要職責是在整個英國殖民地傳播英語。我們一再被告知，我前幾天從一位我認為有一定實踐權威的人那裡聽說，在這方面，英國政府理應效仿古羅馬政府，無論走到哪裡，都從語言開始，推行其文明。」

「中央書院爭議」開始受到公眾審視。1877年6月8日，署名「A.B.C.」致《中國郵報》編輯的信件表達了擔憂，認為軒尼詩總督對宗派學校表現出極大興趣，但尚未訪問官立中央書院。作者質疑總督是否僅憑主教的經驗形成意見，稱這種假設「荒謬」。信中指出，前任總督亞瑟·甘迺迪爵士和理查德·麥克唐納爵士都是中央書院的堅定支持者，並希望新任行政長官不會偏離這條道路。

軒尼詩最終於1878年1月5日星期六首次訪問中央書院。在1878年1月25日隨後的視察中，他回憶道：「我參觀了一個大教室，實際上是一個雙人教室，在那個通道的另一邊。我認為那個房間裡一定有一百五十名華人青年，他們正在由三名華人教師授課。他們正在閱讀中文經典。我發現這三名教授中文經典的華人教師自己完全不懂英語。這三名華人教師不會說英語；而那個特定教室裡的學生，沒有一個會說英語。」軒尼詩沮喪地發現，無論是三名華人教師還是教室裡的一百多名學生，都無法用英語與他交流。鑑於中央書院的教育開支佔整個殖民地教育預算的65%，這尤其令人擔憂。他隨後問校長兼學務視學官史釗域：「現在學校裡有多少男生會說英語？」史釗域回答：「五十到六十個；而且說得不流利。」

一個月後，在聖若瑟書院的頒獎日活動上，J.J. Francis先生火上澆油。他表示：「我驚訝地發現，在最近的中央書院考試中，只有四十或五十名男生一直在學習英語，或者能夠說任何英語。」這份聲明於1878年2月9日以「聖若瑟書院頒獎日」為題在《中國郵報》報導，隨後於2月11日以「中央書院的失敗」為題，引發了爭議。《中國郵報》指出：「我們將稍後更詳細地討論總督的演講，其中不幸地包含了一個類似的謬誤。奇怪的是，他沒有糾正弗朗西斯先生誤導性言論所造成的偏頗和不公正印象。」儘管弗朗西斯先生的斷言並不完全準確，但當時在場的軒尼詩並未糾正，似乎表示同意，導致媒體廣泛報導。史釗域後來評論了公眾的看法：「現在殖民地普遍認為，中央書院沒有嘗試教導超過五十或六十名男生英語；而且英語學習從屬於中文學習，英籍和華籍教師都將時間和精力投入到中文教學中。事實上，人們很難不相信這一點，因為正如上文所示，弗朗西斯先生在9日聖若瑟書院表示，他驚訝地發現中央書院只有四十或五十名男生在學習英語，而閣下實際上默許了這一說法，儘管涉及此事卻未提出異議。」

不斷升級的爭議導致了大量的通信。僅僅兩個月內，港督約翰·波普·軒尼詩、史釗域和殖民地秘書之間交換了19封信件，如1878年第31號憲報所載。軒尼詩指示史釗域推遲前往英國的假期，問道：「你不能因此推遲兩週出發嗎？」他要求提供所有能說英語的政府學校學生和教師名單。史釗域立即回復：「因此，中央書院成立後，所有其他學校的英語教學都被取消了。」他還表示難以改變旅行計劃：「我必須電報上海，以確保21日的船票，我沒有機會。我當然會立即犧牲自己的利益，以便能搭乘下一班輪船。」軒尼詩總督進一步要求提供中央書院每位學生的英語水平報告。史釗域提交了一份453名學生的名單，聲明「336名學生不能說『完全會說英語』」。軒尼詩仔細審查了報告，例如質疑為何一名僅入學22個月的學生被列為在中央書院學習英語10年零2個月。他隨後要求代理學務視學官伊德在重新提交報告前審查是否有任何其他錯誤。

史釗域繼續挑戰軒尼詩的立場。他在教育委員會的第五條款中投了反對票，該條款將允許中央書院學生自行決定是否學習中文。史釗域最終也迫使軒尼詩在憲報上發表公開澄清。

第一章 第二節 — 中央書院爭議的餘波
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 13:04 提交
約翰·波普·軒尼詩爵士 KCMG（1834年8月8日－1891年10月7日）是一位愛爾蘭政治家和殖民地行政官員。他於1877年至1882年擔任第八任香港總督，隨後於1883年至1889年擔任第十五任毛里求斯總督。儘管他在香港的總督任期相對較短，但他以展現傳統英國人道主義精神和改革殖民地英語教育而聞名。

作為愛爾蘭人，軒尼詩面臨英國人的偏見，我認為，英國人將他視為一個「吃馬鈴薯和洋蔥的土著」，試圖用愛爾蘭口音說「皇家」英語。他抵達香港後，不斷受到英國媒體的嘲笑。他的一些非傳統行為，例如立即拜訪主教並跪在他面前（無視傳統），引發了媒體的批評。1877年中旬，他還因優先參觀教堂而非視察中央書院而受到報紙批評。此外，他對不人道鞭刑的審查及其立場，被報紙嘲笑為「始於咆哮，終於嗚咽」。他在香港的權威不斷受到英國媒體的挑戰。

早期殖民地官員往往表現出雙重性格，不應與後來那些不那麼重要的角色，例如追逐小販的警察混為一談。那個時代的立法局是華人顯赫家族與英國權力抗衡的舞台。比較同期中英文報紙，會發現兩種截然不同的視角：中文報紙主要關注中國大陸內部的動盪，普遍不喜歡英國人。這種背景在一定程度上反映了馮扶退休後的政治活動。與此相關的是，在馮扶時代，美國的愛爾蘭移民比華人移民更早定居。這些愛爾蘭移民通常貧困，生活在貧民窟，以襲擊華人苦力而聞名。據推測，馮扶在紐約街頭販賣雪茄時，很可能與他們發生過衝突。

軒尼詩隨後對中央書院的視察引發爭議，導致「中央書院只有數十名學生會說英語」的笑話廣為流傳。他與學務視學官史釗域發生衝突，史釗域同時也是中央書院的校長。這起事件嚴重損害了軒尼詩的權威，並產生了深遠影響，不僅導致後來西營盤（英語）學校的建立，也證明了他在任期間人道主義政策的無效性。英皇書院前身的歷史具有特殊的政治意義，與皇仁書院不同；至少在1928年之前，它們無法相提並論。

根據1883年12月25日《香港每日新聞》的一篇文章，《日本郵報》似乎對約翰·波普·軒尼詩爵士在香港的施政有了更準確的評估。《日本郵報》最近評論了《毛里求斯論壇報》的一篇文章，該文章稱約翰爵士為「克里奧爾人的解放者」。儘管《日本郵報》並未完全認同《論壇報》的觀點，但它承認「製造無法滿足的政治願望，只會導致不滿和仇恨」。《香港每日新聞》指出，這準確描述了約翰爵士在香港的行為，並可能準確評估他在毛里求斯的行為。

《香港每日新聞》表示希望女王陛下政府能得出結論，不再將總督的重要職責委託給這樣的人。《日本郵報》然而，仍讚揚前總督的良好意圖，指出「約翰爵士的目標是盡可能消除華人居民所承受的市政和政治障礙」。它進一步引用了「英國文明的基本原則，即納稅人應有權對其支配發言」。儘管承認平衡華人與英國居民訴求的複雜性，《日本郵報》的文章斷言，這些訴求的平等化應是公正施政的最終目標。

《日本郵報》質疑香港華人居民市政和政治障礙的真實程度，以及毛里求斯克里奧爾人所面臨的困境。它暗示約翰·波普·軒尼詩爵士製造了虛構的不滿，然後聲稱自己解決了這些問題，似乎在毛里求斯也採取了同樣的做法。他被描述為一個「職業慈善家」，為了個人野心和聲譽而利用人性中最美好的本能。《日本郵報》認為約翰爵士在香港的行為導致了不滿和仇恨，而毛里求斯的克里奧爾人並未受到任何障礙。

支持約翰爵士的《論壇報》報導稱，當一名政府服務的克里奧爾醫生在休假期間指定一名英國醫生作為其臨時替代者時，總督表示不悅。《日本郵報》將此解讀為克里奧爾人認為他們的新總督是反英的，指出他的態度「被這類人解讀為表明希望將毛里求斯交給毛里求斯人」，換句話說，就是賦予克里奧爾人政治自由和代議機構。

儘管「政治自由和代議機構」聽起來很有吸引力，但文章認為，在一個皇家殖民地，這些權力必須由宗主國政府控制。它建議這些殖民地應被賦予對其純粹市政事務的完全控制權，而毛里求斯人已經擁有這些權力。文章指出，自然的種族區別一直存在並將繼續存在，但在毛里求斯沒有政治上的種族區別，除了該島是英國屬地而其人民在語言和情感上是法國人所暗示的區別。克里奧爾人的政治願望（如果有的話）傾向於這個方向。他們並未積極反對英國王室，但他們「骨子裡是法國人」。文章總結說，英國政府派遣一位過去歷史表明他會不遺餘力地煽動不滿，並向這些人民灌輸他們是「受苦受難的民族」的總督，是不明智的。香港的英文報紙也呼應了這一觀點，當軒尼詩被調往毛里求斯後接受當地自治要求時，報紙對他進行了嘲諷。

在這些批評之後，約翰·波普·軒尼詩爵士決定用「五所獲批准學校」取代中央書院的預備班或初級班。這些學校旨在「取代中央書院提供基礎教育」，並確保「對於其他完全由政府資助的官立學校，應盡快安排所有學生學習英語」。巧合的是，伊德博士遇到了剛返回香港的馮扶，並推薦他擔任這所新的、實驗性的西營盤（英語）區政府學校的校長。

1880年憲報公佈的1879年教育報告中，馮扶的新學校仍被稱為西營盤（本地），但在評級中首次使用了「西營盤（英語）」。1879年之前，殖民政府從未設立過此類學校。另一所類似的學校，灣仔（英語），直到1885年才出現。儘管馮扶利用了第三街的舊址，但它現在是一所「國家義學館」——香港五所新的政府免費學校之一，旨在「取代現有的中央書院教授初級學生」。馮扶確實採用了「中央書院教授初級學生」的教學方法。

第一章 第二節 — 軒尼詩總督的新教育政策
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 13:13 提交
軒尼詩總督的新教育政策包括幾項關鍵舉措。其中一項是公開考試，以選拔最佳教師擔任黃泥涌的校長和英語教師。在七名候選人中，有18歲的何東。一份評估指出，「除了何東，所有人都不知道如何用英語提問」。然而，陳文光最終贏得了這個職位，儘管他僅兩年後便辭職。

1880年9月，灣仔設立了一所師範學校，利用一所政府小學，旨在培訓華人英語教師。A.J. May被任命為校長。然而，這所師範培訓機構僅運作了兩年（1881年教育報告）。

此外，馮扶被派往西營盤自願教授英語，從而建立了一所實驗性區學校。

進一步的改革包括改變中央書院的課程表，每天專門安排五小時的英語教學。

軒尼詩還遊說英國王室建造五所新學校。儘管「五所獲批准學校」的第一批實體建築是在他退休很久之後才進行的。那是1910年西營盤學校在高街的新校址。

當然，最重要的改革是補助宗教學校的法規。由於其複雜性，我在此不打算處理。

第一章 第二節 — 馮扶在西營盤執教23年
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 13:39 提交
馮扶在西營盤學校的23年教學生涯始於他返回香港後遇到伊德博士，後者推薦他擔任校長職位。伊德是倫敦傳道會（LMS）的牧師，屬於公理宗，美國傳教士協會和美國公理宗海外傳道部（ABCFM）也屬此宗，馮扶與他們有聯繫。這種與伊德和倫敦傳道會的聯繫後來對馮扶而言，比他與美國傳教士協會的淵源更為重要。返回後不久，馮扶與道濟會堂長老關元昌的長女關悅明結婚。

1888年的一份美國傳教士報告提到一位「黃沃」在伊德博士的指導下，在香港的福音堂忙於基督教工作和傳教。伊德指出，黃沃的一位聽眾在工作三週後便主動要求受洗。

馮扶於1879年2月1日上任，一年內，他的學校便獲得高度讚揚。在1880年2月中央書院以外的政府學校頒獎典禮上，伊德向軒尼詩總督稱讚馮扶的學校是最好的。伊德表示：「考慮到這些英華學校，我發現馮扶先生在西營盤第三街開辦的英語學校應被歸類為最好的學校。我相信這所學校的考試成績完全可以與中央書院相應班級的成績媲美。」他解釋說，這所學校於1879年初開辦，約有61名學生，最初提供英語和中文教學，但幾個月後，幾乎所有家長都選擇只學英語。伊德在按照補助金計劃標準檢查學生時，對「異常高的成績」感到驚訝，並承認馮扶在美國接受過大學教育，是一位稱職的教師。

到1883年，包括西營盤、灣仔、赤柱和黃泥涌在內的英華官立學校繼續取得良好成績。當年的一份報告特別強調了西營盤學校的表現：「在標準一、二、三中受檢的52名男生中，有49名及格，三名不及格的均在標準一。總人數中無人閱讀不及格，3人聽寫不及格，8人算術不及格；在32名地理受檢者中，1人不及格；而9名提交語法者全部以優異成績通過。」報告總結說，該校提供了「非常徹底的教育，並獲得了非常高的『非常好』平均分數」，而且馮扶「全年保持的優良紀律……使他的學校遠遠領先於其他政府區學校」。然而，報告遺憾的是馮扶缺乏「更寬敞健康的校舍，以充分發揮其才能」。

英語教學成本高昂，需要引進受過培訓的教師、昂貴的教材和歐洲式住宿，這是殖民地學校面臨的普遍挑戰。儘管如此，西營盤學校的學生表現出色。1883年8月，代理學務視學官觀察到，包括西營盤在內的一些區學校的學生具備足夠的英語知識，可以進行高級學習。為了解決每月1美元學費的阻礙，他建議舉辦一項競賽，每年提供四個高級學校的免費獎學金。軒尼詩總督批准了，四名當選男生中有三名來自西營盤，他們都以優異成績通過了考試，其中一名在六年級獲得了第一名。

西營盤（英語）學校在教育年度報告中一直被評為第一名，直到1890年此類評級停止公佈。1881年9月，阿爾弗雷德·J·梅先生被任命為新師範學校的校長，西營盤學校的學生可以與中央書院的學生競爭入學。1881年12月，西營盤學校有一名學生與中央書院的九名學生一同通過了師範學校的試用期考試。西營盤（英語）學校被指出「提供與中央書院低年級相同的教育類型」，並作為「中央書院的生源」，在1884年取得了良好進展。伊德在1885年重申，這些學校「表現出明顯良好的成績」，其最優秀的學生可以成為監察員和見習教師，最終在自己的村莊擔任教師。到1887年，馮扶上任第八年，伊德的評估略有轉變，指出「這些學校的考試成績尚可」。

1890年，馮扶將學校遷至高街與薄扶林道交界處的新校舍，該校舍提供了「三間教室……可容納186名兒童」，解決了此前對住宿的擔憂。然而，到1893年，官立學校面臨來自補助學校日益激烈的競爭。儘管官立學校通常擁有更好的設施，但它們開始遇到與英皇書院後來相似的問題。儘管西營盤、灣仔和黃泥涌的英華學校仍顯示出「非常好的成績並深受人們讚賞」，但報告強調「住宿不足或不合適以及幾乎完全缺乏受過適當培訓的教師」是主要困難。補助學校的教師薪資和晉升取決於他們的效率，因此被認為更為勤奮。這導致一些官立學校的入學人數下降，導致1893年1月11所學校關閉，同年晚些時候又有兩所學校關閉，如果它們的學生人數少於25人且附近有其他學校。補助學校經常填補這一空白。

到1895年，馮扶執教的第十六年，學務視學官開始將這些官立學校視為負擔。報告指出：「這些學校的教師是沒有受過特殊技術培訓的本地人」，並建議如果「自願努力能在這些地方承擔工作，政府在英華教育領域的努力可以僅限於皇仁書院的運作」。伊德在1896年仍擔任學務視學官，但在1897年，新任學務視學官A. W. Brewin明確表示：「我不認為他們所做的工作像補助學校那樣有效。」這種觀念的轉變可能就是A. Morris在1928年提到「曾有人提議關閉它」時所指的。

儘管這些批評日益增多，西營盤學校在某些方面仍表現良好。1899年3月，十名男生競爭皇仁書院的免費獎學金，其中四名獲獎者中有兩名是西營盤學校的學生，這表明其學術實力持續強勁。

然而，1901年，學務視學官愛德華·歐文（Edward A. Irving）對幾所政府區學校進行了改革。他發現西營盤、灣仔和油麻地學校「在英語科目完全由華人教授的情況下，處於幾乎令人滿意的狀態」，但他建議進行「徹底重組」。他對馮扶學校在1902年的評估尤其嚴厲：「在灣仔和西營盤（英語學校），英語、算術和地理教授到四年級。中文書面語的學習完全被忽視，因此最高年級的學生完全無法用自己的語言正確地寫出幾句話。作為它們的本質——聲稱教授英語的學校——同樣嚴重的錯誤是，從最低到最高年級，口語英語的練習幾乎完全被忽視。」歐文對馮扶的負面看法似乎由來已久，據報導，他在1924年的一次活動中開玩笑說馮扶是一位長壽的退休金領取者，暗示了一種輕蔑的態度。

馮扶於1903年2月1日退休，並於2月13日開始領取退休金。他降職前的年薪為720美元，每年住房津貼為72美元。然而，威廉於1902年12月25日上任後，馮扶被降為一級助理教師，薪水為624美元，這是他最終的工作薪水。他於1903年2月16日開始領取336.4美元的退休金。1928年，在由金文泰總督主持的英皇書院開幕典禮上，儘管有2000多名嘉賓出席，馮扶卻明顯缺席官方嘉賓名單。

第一章 第三節 — 莫理士 (1905-1934)
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 14:58 提交
當W.H. Williams被任命時，政府英語學校已由歐洲籍校長領導。歐洲籍校長是殖民時代的職位，在英國招募，需具備教學資格。例如，A. Morris持有A.C.P.評估實踐證書（英國/專業教學），這比文學學士學位低兩個級別。根據1929年教育報告，「英語教師通常從英國任命……成功的候選人被要求在畢業後，在英國修讀教育文憑課程，然後才來殖民地。」

這些歐洲籍校長享有顯著的福利。服務三年後，他們有權享受為期六個月的英國假期，與妻子乘坐頭等艙輪船旅行。他們的起薪為每年270英鎊，一張頭等艙往返輪船票約為每人88英鎊。他們還獲得歐洲式住宿和每年180美元的中文輔導津貼。相比之下，1878年，中央書院聘請了第四位助理教師，月薪120美元，住房津貼30美元（1878年第32號憲報）。

W.H. Williams執教至1905年1月1日，隨後被調往維多利亞英童學校擔任校長，並於同年12月辭職。

A. Morris於同年5月12日被任命，此前數月學校一直處於空缺狀態，學生人數顯著下降。在1906年英籍政府學校頒獎日上，A. Morris向總督抱怨道：「我的任期從六月底開始。在暑假開始時，我提交了一份關於我發現學校狀況不佳的報告。教職員工包括3名英華助理教師、一名白話教師和我本人。全年入學人數非常少，每月最高平均人數為49人，最低為35人，而全年平均人數僅為44人。」

從A. Morris時代起，三所主要英籍政府學校的角色變得更加突出。馬修·內森總督在1906年表示：「我們也開始通過取消其最低年級，並將三所主要英華學校（灣仔、西營盤、油麻地）作為皇仁書院的生源，來提高該機構的整體水平。」此外，「每年有兩名免費學生從鴨脷洲進入西營盤學校，從燈籠洲進入灣仔學校。」

A. Morris發展了童軍活動和聖約翰救傷隊，兩者都受到殖民地官員的高度重視。何甘棠因此成為西營盤學校的主要支持者。童軍活動包括1921年11月的一次盛大開幕閱兵。

「西營盤學校童軍（香港第七旅）的成立典禮於昨日下午在薄扶林大學足球場舉行，在何甘棠先生（該旅贊助人）等眾多學生家長和朋友的見證下進行。」1922年頒獎日報告指出：「我們的童軍在威爾斯親王殿下訪問期間出席了港督府，當時羅國忠巡邏隊長因在堅尼地城泳灘救起一名男孩的英勇行為，獲殿下授予鍍金十字勳章。」

1924年，元朗橋發生了一起涉及多名童軍的重大巴士事故。1924年教育報告指出：「在孔教練的能幹領導下，以及林、劉兩位助理教練的協助下，童軍工作取得了良好成績。在西灣、大埔墟、電訊灣、松林和荃灣等地成功舉辦了營地活動。清明節假期期間，一些童軍在青山公路前往元朗營地途中，捲入了一場巴士相撞事故。三人受傷——一人死亡。這起事故給童軍活動蒙上了一層陰影，並引起了全球的同情。童軍總監羅伯特·貝登堡爵士發來一封特別嘉獎信，表彰孔教練在巨大考驗和困境中的奉獻精神和堅韌不拔。」《香港每日新聞》於1924年4月7日報導了「可怕的巴士事故：新界橋上相撞。兩名乘客死亡，全部受傷。昨日下午，新界發生了一起可怕的巴士相撞事故。兩輛相向行駛的巴士在元朗的一座橋上相撞。兩輛巴士都完全損毀，兩名乘客因傷勢過重死亡。另有兩人，截至昨晚深夜，預計無法生還，另有七人受重傷。幾乎所有其餘乘客都受到驚嚇和輕微擦傷。」

關於香港聖約翰救傷隊，「西營盤學校舊生——何甘棠先生——救傷隊分部於週日上午在大學足球場接受了埃里·史釗域·泰勒爵士的檢閱，該場地承蒙借用……出席者包括泰勒夫人、何甘棠先生（分部贊助人）、B. Ralphs先生（聖約翰救傷隊海外專員）、A. Morris先生（分部總監）以及其他對救傷工作感興趣的人士。」A. Morris先生作為總隊總監，擔任高級職位，並與總督一同進行檢閱。

學校在其他領域也表現出色。在國際象棋方面，《中國郵報》於1917年7月18日報導：「今天中午舉行了一場有趣的儀式，榮譽的H.E. Pollock先生，御用大律師，將香港學校國際象棋聯賽的挑戰盾頒發給今年的獲勝者——西營盤學校。」

另一份1917年10月4日的報導詳細介紹了一場受歡迎的比賽：「西營盤學校對米德爾塞克斯團（B連）。昨晚，西營盤學校1917年國際象棋冠軍隊成員前往柯士甸山，與米德爾塞克斯團第25營B連進行了一場友誼賽。度過了一個愉快的夜晚，經過激烈的角逐，西營盤的男生以13(1)比2(1)獲勝。第一、二、三棋盤的比賽尤其有趣，吸引了大量觀眾。」

游泳也很受歡迎，1920年頒獎日報告指出：「游泳很受歡迎，大多數學生都是熟練的游泳者。學校在帝國日舉行年度水上運動會。在校際田徑運動會中，學校表現良好。」

西營盤學校學生的書法一直受到讚揚；1921年，有報導指出：「全校的書法繼續獲得特別讚揚；在最近的『Vere Foster國際寫作比賽』中，該校一名學生提交的作品被評為『具有顯著優點，值得特別表揚』，並排名『第四』。」

學校持續取得優異的學術成績。1918年頒獎日報告指出：「三位舊生的名字出現在最近的大學名單中，一位通過了大學入學考試，兩位獲得了醫學院的資格。」1920年，「四名來自該校的男生進入皇仁書院，並通過了香港大學的入學考試。」到1923年，「十三位舊生的名字出現在最近的大學考試名單中：大學入學考試3人；高級本地考試1人；初級本地考試1人。其中一位羅棟勳，獲得了艾倫·莫理士紀念獎學金進入皇仁書院，並在那裡獲得了更多榮譽，他因獲得中華民國總統獎學金而脫穎而出。」1923年教育報告補充說：「四年級甲班的所有34名男生都成功通過了皇仁書院三年級的入學資格考試。」1924年頒獎日報告進一步強調了成就：「大學入學考試：一人，邱鳳漢（物理優異），作為艾倫·莫理士紀念獎學金得主進入皇仁書院；高級考試一人；初級考試十二人，其中一人鄭耀文，也持有艾倫·莫理士紀念獎學金，獲得了多達五個優異成績。」

其傑出校友包括羅棟勳。1941年，在香港保衛戰前夕，香港政府任命華人律師羅棟勳為警務處副處長（特別警察）。不幸的是，他在香港日佔時期去世。

學校還展現出強烈的慈善和人道主義精神。1923年1月30日，有報導稱：「學校表現出色。通過班級募捐和自我犧牲，學生們向汕頭賑災基金捐贈了800美元。我們的童軍協助慈善機構進行街頭募捐，並為同一目的籌集了11,000美元。此外，當我們不幸失去我們的班長時，學校主動承擔了全部喪葬費用，並向悲痛的老母親捐贈了一筆可觀的款項。」

1924年頒獎日報告進一步強調了學校的人道主義努力：「這個孩子在病了幾天後去世了。最後的儀式由同學安排，喪葬費用由學校支付，並向悲痛的父母捐贈了一筆可觀的款項。我從未見過比這更令人印象深刻的景象，這支送葬隊伍，井然有序、莊重地沿著外面的道路行進，全校師生都參加了。『一絲憐憫使全世界親如一家。』」

其他值得注意的活動包括體育和國際交流。在排球方面，學校的隊伍非常成功，1924年報告指出：「我們的排球隊連續第二年未輸一場比賽，再次驕傲地持有初級排球盾。」

學校還接待了外國教育代表團的訪問。1924年，「對教育感興趣的紳士們多次來訪。來自台灣的日本教育委員會於一月來訪，並帶走了學生們手工製作的地圖作為紀念品。隨後，大學副校長、教育學教授和註冊主任也來訪，之後是斐濟群島的教育總監。」

1924年的一份報告還提到夏季活動的一項創新：「從五月到暑假，經教育總監批准，上午課程從上午8:30開始。這項創新很受歡迎，可以推廣。十九年前，同樣的實驗取得了巨大成功：學校從上午7:30開始上課；下午則用於戶外活動——游泳和郊遊。」

西營盤學校在A. Morris領導下取得的輝煌成就，於1928年由英皇書院繼承。當時三所主要的英籍政府學校中，西營盤學校迅速脫穎而出。從1928年到至少1930年，它是唯一一所提供大學預科班（一年級）的政府區學校。

1926年12月，學校接待了暹羅王子的訪問。1928年的一份演講指出：「1926年12月訪問學校的暹羅王子對他所看到的一切印象深刻，就像示巴女王在參觀耶路撒冷聖殿後不得不說『一半都沒說完』一樣。」當時，泰國需要改革其基礎教育，王子和公主被派往國外學習其他系統，並訪問了西營盤學校。王子表示，「國王和政府特別關注基礎教育的發展，這將是他此行觀察的重點。」總督為他舉辦了宴會，因為「達尼王子，暹羅國王的幼子，正在進行一次教育考察。他將在回國後向父親匯報。」

西營盤學校在師資培訓方面也發揮了作用。正如《香港大學歷史》（第279頁）所指出：「師資培訓（第四組）仍然是藝術課程中最受歡迎的。政府教育總監與大學教育學教授之間有著密切的合作，特別是在蘭斯洛特·福斯特於1926年被任命為該系主任之後。福斯特勤奮地引入英國最新的教育理念，於1930年提議對政府的師資培訓政策進行徹底審查。這導致副校長向殖民地教育總監提交了一份正式建議，建議改革該系統。然而，政府採取了謹慎的態度；儘管它同意繼續為其學校招聘研究生教師，並維持師範生獎學金制度，但一項引入研究生教育文憑的提議，最初於1924年提出並一再推遲，再次被擱置。教學實踐（『學校方法』）是1920年代特別關注的問題，而西營盤官立學校在英皇書院於1928年開辦之前，必須承受大量實習教師的壓力，其容量可能嚴重超負荷。」

第一章 第三節 — 頒獎日及其他
永久連結 由 lausanching on Sun, 06/21/2026 - 15:05 提交
1880年，在英華學校中，馮扶先生在西營盤第三街開辦的英語學校被認為是最好的。

到1904年，在西營盤學校學生朗誦後，歐文先生提交了學校進度的年度報告。他指出，這三所學校自1901年以來一直作為免費機構存在，為當地兒童提供基礎英語和中文教學。華人教師表現出色，他們採用歐洲和美國常見但對香港而言具有革命性的教學方法。除了英語課程，還開設了白話課程，但很少有男生真正理解他們死記硬背的內容。歐文先生觀察到，如果男生不學習自己的語言，他們在英語學習上也會遇到困難，常常死記硬背幾本教科書卻不理解。這個舊系統已被新系統取代，學校的組織在英籍教師的領導下完全重塑。上次考試的結果顯示顯著改善，特別是在基礎地理和一年級算術方面。儘管作文仍然薄弱，但口語英語有了顯著進步，高年級男生據報導「勇敢地」說英語，正如拿破崙曾評價威靈頓的法語一樣。中文水平中等，西營盤在三所學校中取得了最好的成績。

1905年，區學校的教學此前並未超出五年級。然而，在過去一年中，引入了六年級和七年級，儘管結果不盡如人意。男生們一旦找到工作便頻繁輟學，打斷了他們教育的連續性。鑑於大多數男生在五年級（甚至更早）後便離開學校，成為當地公司的初級文員，月薪在15到30美元之間，因此對他們的表現進行了個人調查。來自兩家航運公司、一家批發公司、兩家大型零售公司和三家工程公司的雇主提供了反饋。儘管承認有例外情況和取得良好進展的男生，但關於普通男生離校後的普遍證詞令人擔憂。雇主表示，來自英華學校的男生擅長清晰地抄寫信件和較好地聽寫，但他們「缺乏應變能力，缺乏一般智力，並且沒有表現出雇主所期望的進步和對工作的興趣，而他們對實用數學的無知令人震驚」。提供了這些缺點的例子，並試圖暗示雇主可能對初級文員期望過高，但遭到了具體事例的反駁。雇主引用了那些兩三年後仍然無法管理辦公桌、無法向外國公司撰寫適當的商業信函，或因缺乏商品知識或無法應用所學知識而無法智能地處理本地和內陸華人公司的報價和估價的男生。一個例子是，一位高級文員使用原始方法將30英鎊兌換成美元，耗費了一整張大張紙，並重複核對相同的數字。

到1906年，幾項教育創新在學務視學官的同意下成功實施。這些包括乘船旅行、徒步旅行、游泳和繪畫練習。約有30次郊遊前往殖民地的重要工廠和名勝古蹟，師生們都積極參與，據信這對男生們的身心和道德都有益。這些旅行中收集的標本為學校博物館做出了貢獻，並得到了英國製造公司的寶貴捐贈。繪畫，包括徒手繪畫、幾何和筆觸，首次被教授。夏季期間，組織了游泳派對，並教導男生游泳。有人建議舉辦校際游泳比賽，類似於足球和衛生比賽，但應有更多限制，以平衡弱勢學校的競爭環境，這將極大地鼓勵這項有用、健康和受歡迎的運動。然而，由於學生人數少，學校無法參加衛生盾牌比賽。

1910年，西營盤作為最大的區學校，成績最不理想，被灣仔和油麻地超越。考官指出中文作文差，並表示男生們的舉止有待改進。呼籲來年在這方面有所改進。儘管受到這些批評，西營盤在衛生檢查中獲得了良好報告。

1918年頒獎日報告強調了所有班級良好的閱讀和會話能力，特別是初學者，他們從莫理士夫人（一位英籍女教師）那裡獲得了最初的英語教學。四年級分為兩個部分，儘管一些算術試卷較弱，但仍表現出色。五年級也分為兩個部分，表現非常好，甲組算術有輕微弱點，乙組算術和地理有輕微弱點。六年級分為三個部分（第三部分為新入學男生），甲組表現出色，乙組算術有困難，丙組在中期考試中取得了非常值得稱讚的成績。七年級分為三個部分（兩個為新入學），所有科目都取得了非常好的成績。八年級表現非常好，儘管觀察到算術有趨弱的傾向。初學者班分為三個部分教學，取得了優異成績，英語教學尤其成功。西營盤學校校長與學生之間的關係被描述為「特別融洽」。三位前學生在最近的大學名單中被提及：一位通過了大學入學考試，兩位獲得了醫學院的資格。學校的社交生活維護良好，雷先生將國際象棋選手的效率提高到很高水平。學校隊伍贏得了香港學校國際象棋聯賽盾牌，由榮譽的H. E. Pollock先生，御用大律師，在七月的一次活動中頒發。

1923年，學校的童軍在威爾斯親王殿下訪問期間出席了港督府，羅國忠巡邏隊長因在堅尼地城泳灘救起一名男孩的英勇行為，獲殿下授予鍍金十字勳章。歐文先生總結時表示，他希望西營盤學校能越來越多地成為大學的培訓基地，旨在培養學生達到大學入學標準。

施勳爵士於1924年向學生們宣布，大量面磚已從台灣運抵，消除了完成新校舍的任何進一步延遲藉口。他希望1925年將是他們遷入校長所稱「應許之地」前的最後一年。新的西營盤將成為一所高級學校，類似於皇仁書院，為西區的男生提供極大的便利。當年大量申請者被拒絕，證明了校長及其同事的成功工作和學校的受歡迎程度。施勳爵士還讚揚了學校童軍隊的個人工作，這使他們成為真正職責的典範。他最後讚揚了學校的高水平熟練程度，並表示希望一旦新校舍啟用，作為殖民地主要政府學校之一，將迎來一個長期的進步時期。

1929年，總督強調了家長們對學校表現出的濃厚個人興趣，他們應校長的邀請大量參加了課程。他強調，這種興趣以及由此產生的教職員工與家長之間的融洽關係對學校的成功至關重要，應予以培養。他隨後提議成立舊生會，指出自1879年西營盤學校（演變為英皇書院）開辦以來，已有4,856名舊生，目前約有900名學生。他引用了這種協會對皇仁書院的巨大價值，並表示相信它對英皇書院同樣有益。

1930年頒獎日報告介紹了受歡迎的課外活動。木工課非常受歡迎，令校長在他東方25年的教學生涯中感到驚訝。多達120名中級學生自願參加了這門課，課後從下午5點到7點舉行。取得了優異的成績，學生們製作了桌子、門框、毛巾架、櫥櫃、刀盒和救傷隊的夾板，此外還練習了接合製作。攝影班也吸引了許多帶相機的學生，愛好者常常工作到晚上9點。校長建議，在大學業餘攝影展中設立一個學生組，將提供寶貴的激勵。

閣下向與會者致辭，比較了皇仁書院（一個擁有傳統的老牌機構）和英皇書院（一個年輕的、需要建立傳統的機構）。他指出，英皇書院在短短三年多時間內，學生人數已增加一倍多，達到其最大容量940人。他強調了英皇書院提供的物質優勢，擁有東方最好的校舍之一，不惜成本配備了現代教育愛好者所期望的一切，這與皇仁書院在周圍環境不利的情況下仍能蓬勃發展形成對比。

1932年，觀察到一個令人失望的趨勢：夏季期間高年級學生人數減少，因為許多有前途的學生成功通過了競爭性入學考試，進入了北京海關學院、黃埔海軍學校或廣州嶺南大學等機構，導致21名學生流失。考試制度的另一個令人擔憂的方面是，不及格的男生會轉到其他學校，因為不及格被視為「丟臉」。強烈建議監護人合作，確保他們的受監護人留在同一所學校和班級再讀一個學期。

1933年，英皇書院救生班的學員成功通過了皇家救生協會的熟練證書和銅質獎章測試。考試在中華體育會游泳館舉行，由該協會香港官方代表C. W. Brand先生監督。所有二十名考生，包括陳德俊、香耀年、方浩端、溫樹文、鍾思源、梁永流、陳展安、崔偉成、陳新培、胡喜德、戚瑞廷、吳雄昌、周永泉、李寶田、吳尚輝、陳國樑、成景良、謝成方、劉寶佳和黃銳文，均告成功，考官讚揚他們的高水平熟練程度。訓練該班的陳錫培先生因取得優異成績而受到祝賀。英皇書院宣布準備為學校郊遊、泳灘和游泳運動提供合格的救生員，並邀請申請這些服務。

1934年，英皇書院受歡迎的校長阿爾弗雷德·莫理士先生將於下月退休，他將於6月18日慶祝60歲生日，此前他已從事教育和公共服務30年。在這三十年中，莫理士先生將畢生精力奉獻給教育事業，先後擔任舊西營盤學校和英皇書院的校長。數百名年輕人，主要是華人，受益於他的指導，如今在香港和中國各地擔任要職。十六年多來，他還深入參與慈善工作，特別是聖約翰救傷會和救傷隊，並擔任專員。他為香港和新界設立了免費護理中心、站點和診所，為病患和貧困人士提供了寶貴的幫助。

英皇書院和西營盤學校的舊生會成員，以及由周壽臣爵士領導的殖民地華商，在告羅士打大廈為莫理士先生舉辦了一場歡送會。除了教育活動，莫理士先生的廣泛仁慈深受人民讚賞，他還在新界村莊設立了十多個診所，提供免費治療和藥物，治癒了無數病人。

一場為癌症研究籌款的音樂會定於英皇書院禮堂舉行。節目中包含一個引人注目的新項目：前著名華人演員梅蘭芳、小楊和月羅的同事林小梅先生，承諾將穿著戲服表演虞姬的歷史舞蹈。該舞蹈講述了虞姬在項羽戰敗絕望之際，為安慰他而舞，隨後自殺以避免被敵人俘虜的故事。

1935年，英皇書院向威廉·皮爾爵士兒童保護基金捐贈了20美元，使認捐總額達到17,583.60美元。通知稱該基金將於6月底關閉，進一步的捐款將由榮譽司庫A. McKellar先生和郭贊先生欣然接受。

收到了特別的銀禧紀念特刊，即《英皇書院雜誌》七月號，該刊物以其可讀性和對所有過去和現在成員的興趣而聞名。雜誌以學校在銀禧紀念日的入口作為卷首插畫，並附有香港銀禧慶典的精美照片，包括白天和夜晚的，以及國王和王后的全頁肖像。

英皇書院舊生會正式成立，會議在學院舉行，由代理校長W. L. Handyside先生主持，80多名舊生出席。根據通過的章程，其宗旨是為舊生提供一個法人實體，加強學院與校友之間的關係，並鼓勵他們之間的互動。普通會員資格向所有英皇書院「舊生」、過去和現在的教職員工以及學院級長開放，年費為2美元。當選的下一年幹事為：會長 – W. Kay先生，副會長 – A. White先生，榮譽秘書 – 鍾漢基先生，榮譽司庫 – 何子健先生，以及總務委員會成員 – 孫文、胡喜德、李山忠、羅雄瑞、林慕德、歐天煥和李兆聯先生。

1936年，香港英語學校的學生人數顯著減少，引發了對英語學校系統的批評。許多人認為有必要改進以提高教育效率並達到普遍標準。八年制課程，過度強調英語而中文教學相對膚淺，常常導致學生轉學到中國大陸學校時不及格，且學費高昂。因此，該系統的發展停滯不前。根據教育總監的報告，香港英語學校的學生總數從18,036人減少到17,086人，減少了950人。報告還指出，香港共有58,394名華人學生，其中17,086人就讀於英語學校。

英皇書院公佈了大學入學成績，黃文漢在英語和化學方面獲得優異成績。通過考試的學生包括陳啟禧（三角學優異）、陳啟謙、陳德俊、David W. La Chang、張學榮、周學志、周潤培、方桂德、何啟賢、何鐵佑、葉泰生、高作炎（英語優異）、林耀斌、梁文寶、李才俊、李潤根（化學優異）、廖兆華、馬超東、馬成輝、文順儀、梅浩俊、吳華慶、吳志道、鮑國森、沈永康、鄧漢釗、鄧樹成、杜瑞源（化學、代數優異）、Theodore To、黃錦添（化學、代數、幾何優異）、胡永恩（幾何優異）、余鵬飛、楊玉雅和余耀軒。

英皇書院分部在年度救護水上運動會中獲得最高積分。

關於涉及華人「Y」和英皇書院的羽毛球問題，英皇書院秘書約翰·鮑先生表示，他們的回答將是「不！」他解釋說，他的大多數球員最近才開始打球，陳和胡是他們唯一真正有經驗的球員。相比之下，華人「Y」的球員都來自海峽殖民地，從小就打球，大多數人曾參加新加坡協會聯賽的「B」組，該組比當地「A」組強得多。

1937年，凱先生闡述了關於教育的進步觀點，指出「考試和考試成績並非我們的全部目的。大多數教育當局現在都承認，考試絕非衡量學生能力的萬無一失的測試。既然如此，我認為一個男孩的整個未來（往往如此）取決於他在某次特定考試中的表現，這是完全錯誤的。應該更多地考慮學生的學校記錄、品格、領導能力等。」他指出，只有10%到15%的高年級男生進入大學，然而這個小比例卻在很大程度上決定了課程。目前正在努力改變這一點，由教育署舉辦並於當年引入的新學校證書考試，不具備大學入學資格。希望進入大學的證書獲得者需要至少再在學校學習一年。

1938年，英皇書院排球隊和籃球隊在澳門巡迴賽中均取得勝利。在他們對陣「咆哮」隊的第一場比賽中，他們贏得了兩場比賽。一百多名觀眾觀看了激動人心的比賽，經驗豐富的英皇書院隊伍始終展現出卓越的技術。儘管有強勁的球員，「咆哮」隊因缺乏協調而落敗，排球以0-3失利，籃球在最初佔優勢後以42-47失利。

1940年，在英皇書院畢業典禮上，署理總督指出，9月，四年級幾乎完全從區學校轉入並集中在英皇書院和皇仁書院，導致英皇書院有五個四年級班。校長H. G. Wallington先生表示擔憂，在31名通過考試的學生中，有五名是二年級的男生，他們以私人學生身份入學。他表示，在考試前他並不知道此事，儘管很高興他們通過了，但他不認為這是好事。他解釋了他的擔憂：「一方面，以這種方式通過的男生通常太年輕，無法進入大學，必須浪費一年才能入學。此外，他們通常會離開，從而使學校提前一年失去一些最好的學生。如果允許非大學預科班的學生入學，我看不到任何理由，為什麼在未來幾年，三、四年級的男生不應該碰碰運氣，只要他們能找到校外的人簽署入學表格。」

英皇書院公佈了八年級新生錄取名單，常規錄取50名，備取10名。錄取學生需於9日上午8:15在學校禮堂集合進行分班，不接受轉學生。常規錄取名單包括：廖少雄、歐家雄、李宏忠、郭明生、陳心宏、曾正明、陳海燦、余樹華、蔡大健、文義雄、黃少達、林植清、麥沾光、曾冠友、容冠成、謝兆坤、孫祖、麥少平、陳有根、李冠章、唐大坤、陳定忠、楊英燦、陳文志、呂乃文、姚振騰、林成章、麥炳坤、呂貴生、陳耀華、容樹榮、關乃成、吳權華、潘球、葉世燦、李景偉、彭漢明、彭樹騰、陳沛志、陳輝佳、葉泰志、羅樹志、梁乃模、梁志強、姚光、彭漢華、彭正光、楊偉德、洪國根、李景良。備取名單包括：梁成、葉德光、呂協成、梁炳忠、黎銳叔、古康榮、張義田、吳景棠、周亮明。

香港七所英文中學於春季舉行年度田徑運動會，檢閱一年來的成就。英皇書院的田徑運動會定於本月21日舉行。在英皇書院乒乓球錦標賽中，香港頂尖選手潘世安成功衛冕冠軍，他曾多次贏得學校年度比賽。他與「華沙巴多斯」尤其聞名。

1940年英文中學會考成績公佈，英皇書院在男校中表現最佳，而庇利羅士女校和聖心書院則是女校中的佼佼者。此外，經審查後，另有50名申請救濟的學生獲批。

1941年，英皇書院在週三的「乙組」比賽中擊敗中華隊，取得顯著勝利。這次勝利尤其值得稱讚，因為英皇隊的一名球員羅啟賢因腿傷受阻，實際上成了「乘客」。儘管羅和林在所有三場比賽中都失利，但另外兩對，陳和鍾（贏得全部三場）以及胡和廖（贏得兩場），帶領球隊取得了勝利。中華隊的表現令人失望，但希望他們能通過像蔡永釗這樣的球員的更多練習而有所改進。

英皇書院在加路連山徑舉行了第十一屆年度田徑運動會，創下了不少於十項新紀錄。第二校長夫人J. J. Ferguson女士頒發了獎品。1939年冠軍冼國斌重新奪得高級組冠軍，黃文英則加冕初級組冠軍。西社以163分贏得社際冠軍。新紀錄包括：100米（初級）黃文英12又2/5秒；400米（高級）冼國斌58又1/5秒；跳高（初級）程景周5呎3/4吋；小童跳遠李卓生14呎6吋；200米（初級）梁耀高26又3/5秒；小童跳高李卓生4呎2吋；1500米（高級）廖善志5分19又2/5秒；跳遠（初級）黃文英17呎11吋；400米（初級）黃文英64又4/5秒；以及110米高欄（高級）黃錦林18又4/5秒。

第一章 第四節 — 英皇書院為何要追溯歷史？
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 15:24 提交
英皇書院的歷史應追溯至西營盤學校。

馮扶初上任時，只有部分家長願意讓孩子學習英語。然而，馮扶極具魅力，一年之內，所有學生都渴望學習英語。在1880年2月的頒獎典禮上，學務視學官E. A. Odell向總督致辭，表達了他的滿意，並表示：「然而，我必須解釋，這所學校全年都採用自選原則，經閣下允許，我將其作為實驗應用於這所學校。」1883年的教育報告進一步讚揚了馮扶的學校：「這，加上馮扶先生全年保持的優良紀律，使他的學校遠遠領先於其他政府區學校；令人遺憾的是，他沒有更寬敞健康的校舍，以充分發揮其才能。」

由於空間不足，政府於1891年在高街與薄扶林道交界處建造了一座新校舍，該項目已於12年前獲得英國王室批准。這座單層建築很快就不敷使用。到1908年，在莫理士任期內，又加建了一層，莫理士本人也住在校舍內，如1908年工務報告所載。即使是兩層的西營盤學校也很快變得不夠用。到1914年，加建第三層的計劃已列入預算，但政府接管伊利沙伯中學後，批准的擴建項目被撤回。西營盤學校已成為政府區學校中最重要的學校，其原址已不足以建造新建築。尋找新址成為立法局非官方議員與政府之間爭論的焦點。

1917年，榮譽的波洛克先生在立法局提出擔憂：「關於西營盤學校，我想幾個月前有一個委員會報告了那所學校。我想他們提到了教室空間不足的問題。」閣下回應：「太平紳士代表所提及的西營盤學校報告，譴責了這所學校的選址。它狹窄擁擠，被大量建築物包圍。唯一的真正補救辦法是將學校完全搬遷。這是一個昂貴且相當困難的項目。該地區的官地非常稀缺。這是一個總有一天會發生的問題，但目前我看不到任何立即的補救辦法。」

到1918年，幾位華人議員不懈地追究此事。經過廣泛談判，政府與天主教會交換了土地，如文件HKRS58-1-80-37所載，題為「西營盤學校——住宿不足。建議遷往更合適的地點。羅馬天主教堂地段I.L. 2364，寶雲道。」到1921年，該項目開始實現，其中「第10項為西營盤學校新建築的啟動提供了資金，該建築將建在般咸道的一個地段上，該地段可能在明年獲得。」從1917年到1927年，新西營盤學校的建設在立法局辯論了18次，新校舍一直為西營盤學校所用。A. Morris正準備接管這所新學校，並確實以西營盤學校校長的身份接管了它。

《香港每日新聞》於1923年1月30日報導了西營盤學校的年度頒獎典禮，引用A. Morris的話：「學校全年滿員，許多潛在學生無法入學。學校預計新校舍將完工，屆時將容納更多學生。」1923年的工務報告詳細說明了新西營盤學校的場地平整，隨後於1924年簽訂了上層建築的合同。有趣的是，1925年的工務報告指出「新英皇書院取得了良好進展」，而1926年的報告則簡單地提到了「111. 般咸道學校」。

1925年10月，政府公佈了西營盤學校的計劃。為回應榮譽的P. H. Holyoak先生在立法局會議上的提問，殖民地秘書表示：「如果沒有不可預見的情況發生，希望能在1926年6月30日之前完成並開放西營盤學校。工程主要因罷工而延遲了約兩個月。」工務局局長在1926年4月22日的官方會議記錄中證實，「結構工程將於6月完成」，儘管家具和設備可能會延遲。到1926年4月，新的般咸道校園建設已基本完成，「學校當局已佔用部分建築」。學校於6月部分啟用，建築完工，家具（除書桌外）於7月底提供。儘管書桌交付延遲，學校在暑假後於9月全面啟用。不到一個月後，媒體已經知道學校被命名為英皇書院。1926年6月22日《香港每日新聞》的一篇社論，題為「香港英皇書院」，指出：「英皇書院在大學附近建成，為殖民地提供了遠東最好的校舍之一。然而，僅有建築並不能成就一所學校，幸運的是，第一任校長莫理士先生將帶著一個成熟且顯著成功的組織。西營盤學校是他經過二十一年艱苦努力從非常小的規模發展起來的，可以肯定地說，在那段時間裡，他的學生會跟隨他到任何其他區學校。」這引發了爭議，一位讀者提交了一封信，建議「保留『學校』一詞，並稱學生為『學童』會更明智。」

1927年，新落成的英皇書院大樓被軍方佔用。「學院於一月開學時有644名學生，但農曆新年假期期間（1927年2月2日星期三），大樓被移交給軍方。八至五年級（含）的學生暫時轉移到伊利沙伯中學，其餘學生轉移到皇仁書院。」校長A. Morris先生被調往教育署，莫理士夫人被調往維多利亞英童學校。其餘教職員工隨班級轉移。1927年教育報告證實：「二月，英皇書院被軍方接管，用作緊急醫院。學生部分安置在皇仁書院，部分安置在伊利沙伯中學……年底，英皇書院歸還給本部門，準備在新年前重新開學。」莫理士於1928年1月26日返回學校擔任校長。

正如馮扶於1891年將學校從第三街遷至高街一樣，A. Morris將學校從高街遷至般咸道。唯一的區別是，在他擔任校長期間，學校的名稱被遠方的權威機構更改了。名稱更改並不意味著一所新學校的開始。例如，前西點（本地）學校更名為西營盤（本地）。同樣，香港大學醫學院更名為李嘉誠醫學院，但其前身仍是1887年成立的香港華人醫學堂。一種觀點認為，教育署正式終止然後內部重新聘用A. Morris。如果是這樣，所有老教師都應該經歷同樣的過程。事實上，1928年公務員編制確實有所變動，A. Morris的任命日期列為1927年1月1日，臨時女教師Ellen L. Philips的任命日期為1926年10月10日。這些變動是因為校舍被移交給軍事醫院，與名稱更改無關。

西營盤學校在A. Morris領導下取得的輝煌成就，於1928年由英皇書院直接繼承。當時三所主要的英籍政府學校中，西營盤學校迅速脫穎而出。從1926年到至少1930年，它是唯一一所提供大學預科班（一年級）的政府區學校。1926年教育報告指出：「學生在通過四年級考試後不再被送往皇仁書院，而是留在英皇書院，該校現在設有大學預科班。」1927年教育報告指出皇仁書院的最大入學人數，「包括來自英皇書院的192名學生」，表明學生轉學。有人認為英皇書院是一所新學校，因為課程不同，理由是「它有一個新名稱」和「它有大學預科班」，因此「它是一所新學校」。然而，時代在變，後來所有政府學校都可以提供大學預科班，這當然沒有使它們成為「新學校」。早在1923年，即將離任的學務視學官歐文先生就曾表示希望西營盤學校提供大學預科班，他說：「他希望看到學校培養學生達到大學入學標準。」

1924年12月，殖民地秘書施勳爵士在西營盤學校年度頒獎典禮上致辭時，明確表示新校址是西營盤學校的延續。他表示希望1925年將是他們遷入「應許之地」前的最後一年，屆時西營盤將成為一所高級學校，類似於皇仁書院。他最後評論了學校的高水平，並表示希望「當新學校建成後，它們將作為殖民地主要政府學校之一，開啟一個長期的進步時期。」

有幾個令人信服的理由支持英皇書院的歷史應追溯至西營盤學校：

1. 在立法局和政府文件中，新的般咸道校園一直被稱為西營盤學校的擴建。

2. 在過渡期間，立法局文件中提及「英皇書院」時，常附有「當時的西營盤學校」或「新西營盤學校」等註釋，表明是指建築物而非新機構。

3. 竣工後的更名純粹是為了紀念喬治五世國王，並履行對其祖母維多利亞女王的承諾。

4. 大學預科班的引入是自然發展；所有其他中學後來都提供了此類課程，改變了皇仁書院的地位。課程的這種變化並不能證明它是一所新學校。

5. A. Morris與原教職員工和學生一同遷至新址，代表著自然的延續，明確展示了其教育傳承和社區傳遞。

6. A. Morris的合同修改僅僅是因為新校舍在當年被軍方佔用了11個月。

7. 在1928年的開幕典禮上，金文泰總督和A. Morris都確認英皇書院的前身可追溯至1879年。這一主張得到了包括馬丹先生在內的歷任校長的認可，直至1976年。

8. 在金文泰總督看來，名稱更改只是一種形式，與學校的傳承或A. Morris的工作無關。因此，教育總監在2016年教育報告中僅簡要提及，甚至沒有強調英皇書院和皇仁書院聯合招收政府學校男生進行大學預科教育，因為他的前任在西營盤學校時期就已表達了這一意圖，反映了普遍趨勢。

9. 1928年的一篇社論證實：「莫理士在西營盤的名聲早已家喻戶曉，深受愛戴，但後代子孫將有理由尊崇英皇書院的莫理士之名。」

第一章 第五節 — 為何追溯至1879年而非更早？
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 15:34 提交
英皇書院前身的歷史常被追溯至1879年，所有官方文件都將其與「1880年憲報公佈的五所新學校」聯繫起來。例如，1910年教育委員會報告指出，西營盤新區學校建築的興建（1882年或1880年批准的五座新建築中的第一座）於1890年秋季開始。該項目是更大規模倡議的一部分，因為M. Hicks-Beach爵士已批准10,000美元用於建造五所學校。殖民地秘書德比於1882年12月進一步詢問這些「五所獲批准學校」，質疑它們是否推薦了比先前批准的更昂貴的學校類型。

然而，到1890年，這筆款項僅足以在高街建造第一座校舍。

1926年9月，1891年創立的西營盤學校遷至般咸道宏偉的新校舍，並由喬治五世國王陛下更名為英皇書院。儘管1926年教育報告指出該校「創立於1891年」，但這個日期特指其建築物的竣工，這是維多利亞女王承諾的五所學校中的第一所。然而，該機構的歷史被認為早於此。在1928年的開幕典禮上，校長A. Morris明確表示：「西營盤學校的歷史可追溯至1879年。」金文泰總督在同一活動中表示同意，指出：「這所學校在另一個名稱和另一個校舍下的歷程已經很長，可追溯至1879年。因此，明年它將慶祝其金禧。」

有幾個理由支持英皇書院的機構歷史始於1879年。首先，1879年出現的西營盤（英語）學校是一個新實體，與西營盤（本地）學校不同，後者不教授英語，並被英國人以不同方式看待。例如，1869年教育報告強調了「鄉村學校」的普遍狀況，沒有特別考慮英語教學。1856年成立的西點學校於1882年更名為西營盤（本地）和西營盤（客家）。1879年之前，中央書院是唯一一所教授英語的政府免費學校。

其次，1879年的學校標誌著英語教育的重大轉變。A. Morris儘管知道更早的學校，但仍將從美國歸來的馮扶先生稱為這所新學校的「第一任校長」。同樣，《工商晚報》報導馮扶是「香港第一位在主要教授英語的政府學校擔任校長的華人」。這種區別至關重要，因為儘管1879年之前許多政府學校都有華人校長，但它們不像中央書院那樣主要側重於英語教學，中央書院則有外籍校長。這所新學校也是軒尼詩總督英語教學改革下的一項實驗性舉措，作為一項實驗，它以「自選原則」運作。

最後，也是最決定性的一點，金文泰總督於1929年正式認可了1879年的起源。在頒獎典禮上，他建議成立舊生會，指出自「西營盤學校（演變為英皇書院）於1879年開辦以來」，舊生人數達4,856人，應將他們納入其中。這份聲明是在學校更名後發表的，明確將英皇書院的校友歷史與1879年聯繫起來，鞏固了其在該年的機構基礎。

第一章 第五節 — 英皇書院如何得名？
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 15:39 提交
關於英皇書院命名過程的線索出現在1928年3月的一份報紙報導中。報導指出：「——學校將以英皇書院的驕傲名稱聞名，它將提供大學預科標準的高等教育。閣下，學院因您而得名，因為您會記得在1926年3月，當您參觀尚未完工的建築時，您選擇了英皇書院這個名稱，這是我們所有人都引以為傲的稱號。」（《香港每日新聞》，1928年3月6日）。這引發了疑問：新的般咸道校舍在1926年3月仍在建設中，到年底也未完全投入使用。為什麼總督會從繁忙的日程中抽出時間參觀施工現場並會見A. Morris？為什麼學校在正式啟用前就被命名了？

原來這個倉促的決定與另一件事有關。英國王儲愛德華於1926年3月15日訪問香港，代表喬治五世國王頒授榮譽。在此次訪問中，金文泰獲頒聖米迦勒及聖喬治勳章騎士司令勳銜。當時，般咸道校舍是香港最重要的新落成建築之一。作為感恩的表示，金文泰將其作為獻禮。然而，一所中學作為這樣的獻禮似乎有些不足，因此它被提升為「學院」的地位。然而，在英國，通常只有像三一學院和國王學院這樣的機構才被稱為「學院」。因此，當公眾得知這一情況時，他們向報紙投書，批評這一決定：「應盡一切可能讓學童和女學童保持在適當的位置，並嚴格避免使用『學院』和『畢業典禮』等術語。」

整個命名過程很可能發生在1926年3月。從總督和A. Morris後來的演講中，顯然他們從未將這次更名視為一所新學校的開辦。1926年教育報告明確指出：「學校名稱已從『西營盤學校』更改為『英皇書院』。」1926年4月22日《中國郵報》的一篇報導進一步揭示，儘管教育署仍使用「西營盤學校」，但工務局已使用「新般咸道學校」——一個此前從未出現過的新術語。工務局在4月的招標中也使用了「般咸道學校」的名稱，表明政府內部已意識到學校的更名。

這又引發了另一個問題：為什麼1925年工務局報告第23頁會出現「新英皇書院取得了良好進展」這句話？這很可能是因為完整的報告是在次年（1926年）11月4日提交給立法局的。這是標準做法，屆時整個更名過程已經完成。這也表明命名過程發生在施工期間。值得注意的是，莫理士在1925年休了十個月的假，在英國度假並為新校舍採購物品。

舊校舍於1926年3月移交給白話師範學校。《1926年行政報告》指出，「白話師範學校為這所於3月在舊西營盤學校校舍開辦的新機構提供了核心。」立法局於4月批准了過渡安排，指出「需要780美元用於租用兩套公寓供白話中學使用」，因為「結構工程將於6月完成，但他無法給出家具和設備的確切日期。有些會很晚，但這不會妨礙學校在6月底後繼續在那裡運作。」西營盤學校學生的搬遷安排也已完成。八年級（分為四個班）轉移到新英皇書院大樓，先佔用體育館，然後是頂樓的教室，七年級在清明節假期（1926年4月5日）後也加入了。學校其餘部分在暑假後於9月遷入英皇書院。

到1925年12月，工程仍在進行中，對原有設計進行了「一些改動和增補……特別是所有教室牆壁都鋪設了瓷磚護牆板，主入口處增設了花崗岩門廊」。1926年的進度報告進一步詳細說明了這一點：4月12日，「電線和供水系統均已接近完工。主入口處的花崗岩門廊正在建造中，磚砌工程普遍正在清理。學校當局已佔用部分建築。」到7月28日，「主入口處的花崗岩門廊已接近完工。」

應特別注意主入口花崗岩門廊設計的改動。A. Morris在1928年表示，「設計和圖紙是達班先生的作品，他的方案後來在眾多競爭者中脫穎而出，被選為現在新加坡萊佛士學院的設計。」花崗岩門廊的設計是建築物的重要部分，不可能在接近完工時才改動。這可能與般咸道的拓寬有關。然而，拓寬般咸道需要招標，儘管這不是一個小項目，但在那些年份沒有找到相關招標。與西營盤學校相關的招標包括：「般咸道學校場地平整、地基鋪設和擋土牆建造招標」（1922年11月）和「般咸道學校上層建築招標——工程包括在般咸道學校現有地基上建造」（1924年3月）。從英皇書院的花園牆來看，般咸道的拓寬似乎也不太可能影響主入口設計。另一種可能性是，主入口上的原始名稱是「西營盤學校」，在得知即將更名後，計劃被修改了。達班先生在設計圖紙時應該包含了學校的名稱，而那個名稱當然是「西營盤學校」。

第二部分 第一章 — 馮扶登場
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 15:51 提交
馮扶，生於1849年2月5日，卒於1934年1月19日，是霍華德大學開辦三年後，美國傳教士協會（AMA）要求入學的三名年輕華人之一。美國傳教士協會在紐約市五點工業之家找到了這三名男子，這是一個為貧困者提供援助、英語教學和宗教指導的慈善組織。這三人都是來自廣東省的廣東人，最初以勞工身份抵達美國。

20歲的馮扶出生於廣州鶴山，15歲時成為孤兒。他被賣到古巴，在那裡擔任家僕，險些逃脫了甘蔗園苦力般的奴役生活，然後抵達美國。21歲的蔡阿華作為船上的艙務員來到美國。18歲的梁星在中國學習了六年簿記後，才航海來到美國。像馮扶一樣，梁星在入學前也只在美國待了六個月。作為接受美國傳教士協會全額獎學金的條件，他們三人都被要求放棄「異教」。

1870年2月20日，三人進入霍華德師範學校（模範學校），其預備課程要求具備基本的閱讀、算術、拼寫和地理知識。他們在霍華德大學學習了兩年，馮扶和梁星於1872年在該校受洗。這些學生在同儕中很受歡迎，學業成績優異。同學科尼利厄斯·斯科特在1872年寫道：「馮扶非常善於交際、有禮貌且風趣。梁星也善於交際且性情溫和。我們前幾天晚上在踢足球，在追球時我們撞到了一起，我比較重把他撞倒了；他只是跳起來繼續踢球，什麼也沒說。」

這三人唯一已知的照片，攝於1870年左右，顯示他們處於不同的同化階段。雖然有些人已穿上西式服裝，但另一些人仍保留著辮子，這是他們在中國法律下必須留的長辮。值得注意的是，馮扶沒有留辮子，這表明蔡阿華和梁星是照片中留辮子的人。這些照片是約1870年的半色調印刷品，很可能是19世紀照相館典型的「名片照」或類似的小尺寸蛋白照片。這種肖像照，費用為一到五美元，在霍華德大學學生中很受歡迎。這些照片收藏於霍華德大學圖書館的摩爾蘭-斯賓加恩研究中心，目錄條目為「Affoo, Fung」、「Awah, Choy (Student)」和「Assing, Leon (Student)」，表明它們是在他們入學後不久拍攝的。

在霍華德大學學習之後，梁星的後續故事仍然未知。然而，馮扶和蔡阿華都留在了美國。馮扶搬到舊金山，成為華人傳教學校的教師。蔡阿華留在華盛頓特區，在賓夕法尼亞大道開設了一家茶店，該地區後來成為唐人街。1874年，蔡阿華成為美國公民，次年，他與一名愛爾蘭裔女子結婚。他的結婚證書將他的種族列為「白人（蒙古人種）」。到1876年底，蔡阿華在西北12街721號擔任茶葉銷售員，到1880年，他在西北L街431號擔任雜貨商。

美國傳教士協會（AMA）在南北戰爭後的主要任務是為獲釋奴隸提供教育和傳教。然而，在1870年之前的幾年裡，強大的長老會教派決定將其傳教工作擴展到美國的華人勞工。與早期的德國和愛爾蘭移民不同，華人勞工常被認為固執且不願同化，導致與美國工人關係緊張。美國傳教士協會的記錄被認為是馮扶背景最原始的記載。

1870年5月的一期美國傳教士協會月刊刊登了「我們的華人受保護者」，指出三名年輕華人已被送往霍華德大學完成學業。文章描述馮扶是一名20歲的孤兒，在15歲被送往古巴擔任家僕之前，在中國上學六年。他已在紐約待了六個月，閱讀水平達到「三年級讀本」。如果根據這份記載計算，馮扶可能於1869年7月離開古巴，抵達紐約，在貧民窟開始他的美國生活。

美國傳教士協會對華工的興趣，是在古巴苦力貿易的嚴酷背景下產生的。1867年，據報導，澳門有六到八個倉庫每年向秘魯和古巴運送3萬到4萬名苦力。這些苦力由華人和葡萄牙招募代理人提供，其中許多人聲名狼藉，涉嫌海盜行為。香港憲報記錄了1857年26艘船運載9,600名華人苦力到古巴的死亡率為14%，據報導許多人跳海。一位華人移民彭阿甘回憶說，他被從澳門綁架，捆綁並關押在苦力營中，然後被運往古巴。美國傳教士協會於1869年12月舉行的第23屆年會通過決議，在美國華人中開展積極的傳教工作，並為「古巴即將到來的解放」後的「基督教工作」做好準備。

馮扶於1869年5月從古巴奴役般的環境中逃脫後，抵達紐約，並在五點工業之家安頓下來。儘管該機構通常收容五至十六歲的街頭兒童，但當時它已擴大，20歲的馮扶在那裡住了大約半年。來自古巴的他，可能只懂西班牙語。

《紐約時報》報導了五點工業之家與華人移民的工作。1869年3月，為「成年華人」設立了夜間課程，學員們熟練地用英語和中文朗讀聖經課程，展現了他們的勤奮和學習熱情。萊爾斯巴克夫婦（Mr. and Mrs. Railsback），五點的傳教士，因其「與華人合作出色」而聞名，他們舉辦夜間課程，甚至探訪他們的家、攤位和作坊。1869年10月的一份報告描述了華人班級舉辦的節日，約有四十名參與者，其中許多人白天製作和銷售雪茄，展示了他們在英語方面的進步。該機構旨在將他們培養成「同胞的教師和領袖」。馮扶白天可能販賣雪茄，鑑於當時紐約類似情況的華人青年數量有限，他很可能是這些夜間課程和社交活動的參與者。

第二部分 第二章 — 馮扶在霍華德大學
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 16:03 提交
馮扶與梁星、蔡阿華於1870年2月抵達霍華德大學，正值冬季學期（1月3日至3月29日）。該大學當時的學術日曆還包括秋季學期（9月13日至12月20日）和春季學期（4月3日至6月12日），隨後是為期十三週的暑假。1870年2月18日，他們提交了入學申請。兩天後，即1870年2月20日，他們被錄取為非分類學生。到1870年11月，他們已皈依基督教，並於1872年1月21日由後來成為霍華德大學校長的蘭金博士施洗為浸信會教徒。這次洗禮吸引了許多見證人，美國傳教士協會對其傳教工作的成功表示感謝。

霍華德大學《教職員生名錄》的記錄顯示，馮扶在1869-70和1870-71學年均為非分類學生。在1871-72學年，他們進入模範學校的A班。據推斷，馮扶及其同伴在1872-1873學年曾暫停學業，這與霍華德大學可能停辦一年期間相符。

此推斷源於1872-1873年缺乏已出版的《教職員生名錄》，以及學生升學率顯著下降。例如，在預科部，1871-72學年47名初級班學生中，只有13名進入1873-74學年的中級班。同樣，在師範部，1871-72學年25名中級班學生中，只有2名升入1873-74學年的高級班；在大學部，1871-72學年24名一年級學生中，只有1名進入1873-74學年的14名二年級班。

這段混亂時期很可能是由於早期組織不善和資金不足造成的，儘管《黑人教育的基石》並未明確提及停辦。如果此推斷正確，馮扶及其同伴將暫停學業一年。在此期間，他們的生活費由美國傳教士協會資助，他們可以在華盛頓特區找到工作，或被分配到霍華德大學的工業部門，從事皮革和家具製造。

在這次推斷的停學一年後，馮扶及其同伴於1873-74學年恢復學業，進入預科部的初級班。他們於1874年6月春季學期結束後離開大學。馮扶儘管曾在紐約五點工業之家的夜校學習小學教科書，但並未正式上過小學，因此他被霍華德大學模範學校錄取是合適的。模範學校作為預科部的附屬小學運作。

與許多「為求學而努力挖掘」的學生不同，他們通過攜帶鎬或鏟子，勞動於排水山丘和平整土地，馮扶及其同伴很幸運地獲得了生活費資助。這與其他申請者的困境形成鮮明對比，例如一位19歲的孤兒寫道：「我能以任何方式進入你們學校嗎？我是一個19歲的白人男孩，孤兒且貧窮，沒有錢，想受教育。」馮扶在校期間也可能從事各種兼職工作，因為大學有工業企業，包括計劃中的「鞋廠和皮革廠」。

模範學校作為「實踐與觀察學校」，旨在為學生進入師範部或預科部做準備。入學候選人必須年滿十二歲，並通過算術（包括長除法）、閱讀、拼寫（兩個音節的常用詞）和地理基礎知識的考試。其課程包括閱讀、拼寫、書法、繪畫、語法、地理、美國歷史、心算和筆算、盧米斯初級代數和自然歷史，分為A、B、C班。

模範學校，包括小學A、B、C、D年級，設在喬治亞大道上的一棟大型木結構建築中，該建築以前曾是德國舞廳和啤酒館。後來在其下方增設了一個非分級班，為模範學校的學生做準備，這說明了「霍華德大學如何走向人民」。

預科課程本身旨在為學生進入大學部做準備，其初級課程包括拉丁語、算術、古代地理、代數和歷史。當年，A班的58名學生中，有14名進入預科初級班（該班有36名學生），4名進入師範部初級班（該班有23名學生）。其他班級的入學人數幾乎為零。

霍華德大學在此期間面臨著嚴峻挑戰，被描述為1874年至1877年的「混亂時期」或「無政府狀態」，此前是1866年至1874年的「早期階段」。該大學飽受財政困難和腐敗醜聞困擾。到1874年，情況嚴重到必須減薪，75,000美元的貸款申請被拒絕。1874年，美國傳教士協會撤回了資金，導致馮扶及其同伴離開。此後多年，霍華德大學再無華人學生。在此動盪時期，一些學生找到了不參加課程也能賺錢的方法，記錄顯示：「他們不償還債務，儘管許多人賺的錢比他們的老師還多。」

馮扶和他的兩位同伴住在米納爾堂（Miner Hall）地下室的29號房間，這是一棟三層樓的女子宿舍，可容納一百名學生和教員。食宿費每年從一百多美元到兩百美元不等。米納爾堂於1961年被拆除，其原址現為教育學院。

馮扶性格的罕見一瞥來自科尼利厄斯·斯科特於1872年11月4日寫給父母的信。斯科特形容馮扶「非常善於交際、有禮貌且風趣」。他還提到了梁星善於交際和性情溫和，講述了一次足球比賽中，梁星被較重的斯科特意外撞倒後，「只是跳起來繼續踢球，什麼也沒說」的事件。科尼利厄斯·斯科特本人於1873年6月16日從預科部畢業，同年作為一年級新生進入大學部，後來成為一位博學的牧師。

馮扶的同伴之一蔡阿華也取得了成功。他可能比馮扶早一年離開學校，並於1874年成為美國公民。他與一位愛爾蘭裔女子結婚，並在賓夕法尼亞大道開設了蔡氏茶店，這是華盛頓特區最早的華人企業之一。這家歷史悠久的茶店位於西北賓夕法尼亞大道300號街區，成為該市最初唐人街的基石，後來遷至西北E街819號。

第二部分 第二章 — 與美國傳教士協會的通信
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 16:07 提交
三位華人青年在華盛頓特區的霍華德大學學習，其中一位是馮扶，以下信件的作者。他抵達美國時，在美國僅待了18個月，沒有受過英語教育。儘管他在15歲去古巴之前，在家鄉的私塾學習了六年，但他可能已經忘記了一切，因為在貧民院上夜校之前，他是文盲。他的學術水平可能相當於高中一年級，英語寫作能力大約是高中水平。

華盛頓特區 1871年1月9日

親愛的S先生，

感謝您上週四送來的禮物，我收到了。它讓我感到非常舒適。我無法用言語表達您的好意，但「上帝」知道您在這個世界上所做的一切。正如聖經所說：「親愛的，如果我們的心不責備我們，我們就可以在上帝面前坦然無懼。」

我們的學校上週三開始了冬季學期。我很高興我有些事情可做，因為學習對每個人來說都是最好的事情，它會引導我走向一條好的道路。這個學期，我學習的書與上學期相同。我今天也學到了一個寶貴的教訓，我想分享一下。這是一個關於一位母親教導她的小孩子祈禱的故事。一天晚上，當小女孩大聲背誦主禱文時，她的母親打斷了她。「這是怎麼回事？」她問，「當你祈求日用飲食時，你總是加上一些我聽不懂的東西？你必須告訴我那是什麼。」小女孩沉默而羞愧地看著她的母親。「你在我們的日用飲食之後說了什麼？」母親追問。「親愛的媽媽，別生氣，我只是說，『還要加上很多奶油。』」

我非常喜歡這個教訓，因為那個小女孩說得很真實，因為我也像她一樣，在我的日用飲食上加上很多奶油。但當我背誦主禱文時，我不是那樣說的。在「我們的日用飲食」之後，我只是說，「免我們的債，如同我們免了人的債。」我每天都是這樣說的。

上週三，我去了總統府，見到了格蘭特將軍，並與他握手。我與這裡的朋友們度過了一個愉快的聖誕節，希望您也玩得很開心。

蔡阿華和梁星向您致以萬分感謝。上帝保佑您，親愛的朋友S。

您摯愛的，

馮扶。

華盛頓特區，1872年3月30日。

親愛的先生，

自從上次在霍華德大學見到您以來，我感到非常高興，我希望您能多留一會兒，直到我放學，這樣我就可以和您談談，告訴您我將來希望能夠做些什麼。我在這裡大約兩年了，我覺得我學到了許多有用的東西，這對我的未來大有裨益。

除此之外，我還學到了另一件最重要的事情：與上帝，我們的救贖主耶穌基督和好。我知道我曾是一個異教徒，我發現自己生活在黑暗中，所以我正在努力抓住這個機會，這將在來世帶來巨大的快樂。當我讀約翰·班揚的書《天路歷程》時，它極大地吸引了我的心靈。在我看來，它將向我展示我生命中的一切，並告訴我如何在地球上生活得快樂。我非常喜歡那本書，因為它的文字對我來說不難讀，而且容易理解。

您最摯愛的，

馮扶。

1872年6月5日。

當我在中國時，我從未想過我會來到美國，當我來到紐約時，我沒有想過我會有機會來到霍華德大學這所學校學習基督的教義。但上帝將我置於您和其他一些朋友的照顧之下，我得到了很好的照顧。現在我可以看到我的生命掌握在主的手中。我只能仰望祂的引導，看看我將來是否能夠效仿您現在為我樹立的榜樣，並且我可以在另一個世界獲得快樂；這就是我所渴望的。

前幾天，當我讀到美國傳教士協會的報紙《進步增刊》中關於我在舊金山的同胞的文章時，當我讀到他們在那裡成立了一個華人基督徒班級，每週與美國基督徒會面學習和祈禱時，我感到非常高興。我希望通過這個機會，他們能繼續更親近上帝，加入基督的軍隊，這樣他們就能有能力讓那些崇拜偶像的人轉而崇拜在天上的真神。我渴望我自己也能與這些基督徒一同參與，在舊金山或中國，無論上帝的旨意引導到哪裡，一同工作。

我正在準備成為一名英語教師，因為我知道他們需要這種語言。我希望這些基督徒能成功；那麼我將有好的夥伴和好的幫助。

您真誠的，

馮扶。

馮扶似乎很喜歡寫信給龐德牧師。最後一封信是在他第二年暑假前寫的。據信，他可能在第三年暫停學業為學校工作，而他第四年預科部的課程可能要求很高，使他沒有時間寫作。他在預科部學習了一年。

第二部分 第三章 — 馮扶在舊金山
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 16:18 提交
馮扶在大學期間表達了他對傳教工作的渴望。在1872年3月30日的一封信中，他寫道：「我在這裡大約兩年了，我覺得我學到了許多有用的東西，這對我的未來大有裨益。除此之外，我還學到了另一件比所有事情都更好的事；那就是與上帝，我們的救贖主耶穌基督和好。」幾個月後，在1872年6月5日，他進一步闡明了他的願望：「前幾天，當我讀到美國傳教士協會的報紙《進步增刊》中關於我在舊金山的同胞的文章時，當我讀到他們在那裡成立了一個華人基督徒班級，每週與美國基督徒會面學習和祈禱時，我渴望我自己也能與這些基督徒一同參與，在舊金山或中國，無論上帝的旨意引導到哪裡，一同工作。」

當馮扶於1874年6月離開霍華德大學時，龐德牧師在舊金山的傳教學校工作才剛剛開始。龐德牧師整合了加州各地為華工設立的零散傳教學校，並在1874年4月指出：「我一收到任命為監督的委任狀，就寫信給每位教師，並得到了及時的回覆。」1874年6月，一項新的運動開始，呼籲建立一座教堂，並通過華人皈依者的慷慨捐助而得以實現。

馮扶前往舊金山，並於1875年2月前被任命為教師。

他積極參與新成立的華人基督教青年會的工作。在1878年1月發表的一篇演講中，馮扶表示：「我只想簡單談談華人基督教青年會，我已是其成員約三年。這個協會成立至今還不到四年。」

他還在1875年10月5日與加州總會建立的新興且有前途的附屬機構「加州華人傳教團」中發揮了重要作用。他帶領13名華工皈依，促使龐德牧師寫道：「除了阿扶報告的13人皈依外，洛杉磯學校報告2人，斯托克頓學校報告2人；12月總共有17人。這是一個幾乎讓我微弱的信仰感到震驚的拯救成果——一次豐收。」

同年，馮扶將「華人基督徒協會」的華人會員規則翻譯成英文，並掛在牆上。這些規則「最初以中文撰寫，並以該形式一致通過，裝裱後掛在協會房間的牆上，以便每個打算加入協會的人都能閱讀和理解」，由他翻譯。

馮扶受邀在主日學校的年度野餐會上發言。一份報告指出：「上週五，伍德沃德花園（一個著名的地標）向華人傳教團和主日學校開放，舉行年度野餐會。出席人數眾多，——但當天的亮點是馮扶的英文演講。」他非常受歡迎，再次受邀在普利茅斯華人主日學校的年會上發言。他的傳教工作非常成功，並受邀作見證。龐德牧師在1876年2月號中提及「馮扶在普利茅斯華人主日學校週年紀念會上的發言」。

1876年8月，馮扶前往奧克蘭教學和傳教。

為教會教授英語是有薪職位，但這只是一種手段；傳教才是他真正的使命。27歲的他，在學業結束後找到了自己的真正使命，如魚得水，以極大的熱情投入工作。他的成就受到高度讚揚，被認為是一顆冉冉升起的新星。馮扶獲得長老會牧師T. M. Oviatt在給龐德牧師的信中的讚揚，信中寫道：「我附上上週《太平洋報》上馮扶的簡短演講。他在同胞和美國基督徒中都贏得了很高的聲譽：他是一個精神極佳、能力非凡的人。」T. M. Oviatt進一步報導了馮扶在洗禮中的協助：「

大約一年前，在奧克蘭拜訪麥克萊恩弟兄的教會時，當時有幾位華人皈依者在那裡受洗並公開宣信，他們在那裡和這裡都努力詢問，以更完美地了解上帝的道，應他們迫切的要求，這三位在這裡由長老會仔細審查，馮扶和甘先生（您很熟悉）協助，他們被認為值得受洗和接納。」

1877年農曆新年期間，馮扶將華人基督教青年會的房間裝飾得富麗堂皇，以迎接新年，與鄰近的寺廟爭奪信徒。當時，基督教堂和焚香的華人寺廟是激烈的競爭對手。基督徒接受焚香祭祖是後來的事。一份報告描述了新年活動：「除夕夜，我們聚集在一起守歲迎新。晚上11點到12點之間，我們感謝上帝。從凌晨12點到1點半，我們祈求上帝賜予我們力量。我們大約凌晨2點半上床睡覺以休息。大約6點，我們的朋友和學生開始前來拜年；中午時分，許多來自鄉下的基督徒弟兄也到了。我們從下午1點開始唱詩和講道。儘管我們的傳教所離一個華人『神廟』只有四五扇門的距離，但許多同胞離開了那裡，來到這裡聽我們傳講耶穌。」到1877年8月，馮扶成為舊金山教會中央學校的教師，這是一所由教會租用的大型學校。馮扶和其他助手有自己的休息室，他在那裡有效地擔任牧師的助手。

1878年10月，馮扶為「美國傳教士協會」年會撰寫了一篇文章，介紹了中央學校的主日聖經班工作。他描述了這個班級：「週日我們有『聖經班』，從上午11:30開始，持續一個半小時。我們唱詩約半小時，無論是中文還是英文，然後禱告，然後讀聖經的一章。他們每節經文都跟著我讀，然後我將其翻譯成中文；解釋後，我會對每節經文或段落發表一些我在平日研究過的評論。讀完一章後，我會就預先選定的主題講約十分鐘，然後我們的一位弟兄會禱告；然後我們一同唱頌讚詩，並以主禱文結束。」

「加州華人傳教團」第三屆年會於1878年10月11日的記錄顯示，他是舊金山中央學校的教師。1878年6月號介紹了他的聖經班工作，題為「中央傳教所的安息日崇拜——聖經班，作者：馮扶」。他當時可能仍在舊金山主持主日禮拜。在1878年10月號中，他發表了一篇題為「更多關於香港傳教所」的文章，表達了他回港後開始傳教工作的希望。

據推斷，他於1878年中後期返回香港，會見了伊德博士，並被推薦到西營盤學校。時間線非常緊湊，因此他不太可能在擔任西營盤學校校長之前在香港中央書院任教。離開美國時，馮扶受龐德牧師委託，收集華人皈依者對在香港開展傳教工作的看法。

第二部分 第四章 — 12歲的何甘棠
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 16:26 提交
何甘棠，何東的同父異母兄弟，是社區中的傑出人物，尤其在莫理士校長任職西營盤學校期間。他頻繁出席頒獎典禮並支持學校活動，特別是童軍和聖約翰救傷隊。根據1921年11月31日《中國郵報》報導，何甘棠作為西營盤學校童軍（香港第七旅）的贊助人，出席了在薄扶林大學足球場舉行的成立典禮。同月早些時候，11月1日，西營盤學校舊生何甘棠救傷隊分部在大學足球場接受了埃里·史釗域·泰勒爵士的檢閱。出席者包括泰勒夫人、B. Ralphs先生（聖約翰救傷隊海外專員）和莫理士先生（分部總監）。除了贊助，何甘棠還被譽為香港聖約翰救傷隊的創始人，並在最初的十二年裡是其唯一的支持者。

一個引人入勝、此前未被記錄的歷史細節揭示了何甘棠在馮扶領導下建立西營盤（英語）學校的間接作用。這發生在何甘棠年僅12歲時，比馮扶成為學校校長早兩年。學生的名字很少出現在公開記錄中，但在學務視學官史釗域奉軒尼詩總督之命提供名單時，在中央書院學生名冊（第310號）上發現了他的名字。記錄顯示他是華人，12歲，已入學一年，並註明「完全不會說英語」。Ryan Ka Chun Iu的《早期殖民香港的官立中央書院與精英網絡》中的歷史記錄證實，他於1877年11歲時入讀中央書院。畢業後，他於1886年開始在怡和洋行保險部擔任華人代理。這條時間線證實他完成了中央書院的學業，從最高年級畢業。

中央書院的入學門檻很高，只通過考試招收精英學生。何甘棠據報英語水平不足並不罕見，因為學校早期並不重視口語英語，低年級學生主要專注於中文。1920年教育報告指出：「二十年前，我們在英語教育方面的努力很大程度上是沒有意義的，因為口語英語的教學幾乎完全被忽視。」它進一步解釋說，在預備班，英語發音的初步知識教學「留給了本地助理教師，他們自己的發音也絕非完美」。學校還面臨嚴重的過度擁擠問題。1874年教育報告強調：「現有住宿僅限於基本坐位。每個教室平均容納100名男生……三個或更多教師必須在同一教室同時教學。」這意味著超過150名低年級學生，包括何甘棠，常常擠在一起上中文課，進一步說明了挑戰性的學習環境。因此，大多數低年級華人學生，如何甘棠，都被評估為英語能力極低。

華人學生與外籍學生英語水平的差異最終導致了分校教育的呼聲。何東後來將油麻地的一所學校捐贈給政府，規定所有種族都可接受包容性教學。然而，政府已決定為歐洲兒童設立獨立學校。1903年11月19日的官方記錄證實，為歐洲兒童和「較高階層華人」兒童設立獨立學校的請願書獲得批准。何東在九龍新建成的學校，原意為混合種族學校，隨後被指定為歐洲兒童使用。作為回報，政府承諾在油麻地建造一所替代學校。在1906年頒獎典禮上，進一步指出何東同意將其羅便臣道學校保留給歐洲英籍兒童，而非所有國籍兒童，條件是在油麻地為華人男生提供一所同樣好的學校。這座建築的建造部分履行了這一條件，標誌著香港教育史上的重大發展。

第二部分 第五章 — 馮扶、孫中山、黑格牧師
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 16:31 提交
龐德牧師，一位來自香港的舊金山助手，負責灣區的華人工作，自然希望將傳教工作帶回香港，為美國傳教士協會服務。一位資深助手甘先生的演講闡明了這項倡議的背景。

甘先生在演講中回憶道：「十年前，我們的華人弟兄首次感到在中國建立傳教所的需要。最初三年，我們常常在彼此之間表達對這個傳教所的強烈渴望，但從未想過告訴我們的監督龐德牧師。直到大約七年前，在我們通常的週三下午聖經班上，偶然提及海外傳教的話題，我們才告訴龐德牧師我們如此渴望的事情。他立刻表示贊同。香港被選為這個傳教所的所在地，龐德牧師要求那些能寫信的人寫信，解釋為什麼這個傳教所如此需要。他隨後將這些信件轉交給美國傳教士協會。」甘先生補充道：「1879年10月初，我參加了在芝加哥舉行的年會。我感到聖靈感動，為此發出了懇切的呼籲。我在東部參加的所有會議上也為此發言。」

龐德牧師要求支持者寫這些信的日期可能不正確；它應該發生在1878年，當時馮扶即將返回香港。在1878年10月號的《傳教士》中，龐德牧師寫道：「關於在香港建立傳教所的提議，我上個月提議將其與我們的加州傳教所緊密聯繫起來，我請我們的助手馮扶弟兄就此問題諮詢華人弟兄的意見。不久之後，我開始收到信件，現在我手頭大約有二十封。我認為這些信件的摘錄會引起《傳教士》讀者的興趣。其中一些我可以逐字複製；另一些則需要對其英文進行輕微修改以求清晰。然而，這些想法是他們自己的，表達方式將盡可能少地修改。首先，阿扶自己說：『我上週日在會議上告訴弟兄們您對在香港建立傳教所的看法。他們非常高興；他們的臉上洋溢著喜悅。他們都一致希望這項事業能盡快完成。』」

馮扶當時雄心勃勃，金錢並非他的主要考量。如果美國傳教士協會同意，他可能會在這所傳教學校任教，走上一條不同的道路。沒有馮扶，殖民地推廣英語的歷史可能會延遲數年。然而，這個十字路口間接導致了孫中山生命中的一個重要轉折點。美國傳教士協會與美國國會有著密切聯繫，其使命是通過提供教育和宗教指導來幫助南北戰爭後大量獲釋的奴隸。要在香港開展傳教工作，他們需要修改章程。他們在1880年的年會上解決了這個問題：「委員會認識到在中國建立傳教所的困難，但也看到將海外工作與國內工作聯繫起來的巨大直接和間接優勢，他們建議董事會認真考慮這個提議，並在更徹底的調查後，如果發現可行且不干擾協會的其他工作或中國其他福音傳教團的工作，則付諸實施。」

實際準備工作於1882年開始，美國傳教士協會內部進行了廣泛討論。龐德牧師在1882年1月號中設想了傳教所：「兩名美國傳教士，在香港的一些財產，在較大村莊和一些地方租用的教堂，以及華人傳教士微薄的津貼；這就是全部。」

美國公理宗海外傳道部（ABCFM）的查爾斯·羅伯特·黑格醫學博士、神學博士，出生於瑞士，於1883年從美國抵達中國。他於1917年7月13日在美國加利福尼亞州克萊蒙特去世。他在香港和廣州從事教育和傳教工作，並以施洗孫中山博士而聞名。黑格牧師的參與始於1883年。龐德牧師在1883年2月報導：「2月最值得紀念的事件——就我們的工作而言——是美國董事會在香港，並通過香港向我們大多數華人來自的華南地區傳教的啟動。黑格牧師，我們太平洋神學院的應屆畢業生，一年多來一直是該州安提阿一位非常成功且深受愛戴的牧師，他已向董事會自薦為海外傳教士，並應我們的建議和要求被任命負責這項新工作，並於2月16日星期五在伯大尼教會被按立為傳教士。」

到1883年7月，傳教工作正在進行中。華人基督徒公理會在其上次年會上投票決定捐贈500美元用於建立這個香港傳教所，並承諾將來盡力提供幫助。黑格牧師和李森，由美國董事會派遣，在華南地區建立傳教所，他們已在工作。已租用了一所房屋，並為華人提供英語教學的夜校。通過在一定程度上使用聖經作為教科書，將福音真理灌輸給學生的計劃，在加州取得了巨大成功，因此被採納。到1883年10月，「黑格弟兄已在香港設立總部，並在那裡建立了一所與我們加州學校各方面都相似的學校。」

這顯示了信仰的力量，他們以微薄的資金迅速在香港展開工作。1883年，查爾斯·羅伯特·黑格在香港中環必列者士街2號傳道並建立了美國公理會傳道所。原建築是一棟三層樓的房屋，用作傳道所、學校和住所。該傳道所成為早期皈依者的精神家園，其中最著名的是孫中山博士，他於1883年6月在那裡受洗。

關於黑格為孫中山施洗，有兩封信被廣泛引用。在1884年5月5日寫給克拉克的一封信中，黑格寫道：「……目前，我們傳教所在內地約有七名成員，這裡有兩名，我上個安息日為其中一名年輕人施洗，他正在官立中央書院就讀。我們昨天舉行了一次非常愉快的聖餐禮……」同樣，在1884年5月5日寫給龐德的附言中，黑格指出：「……我們昨天舉行了一次愉快的聖餐禮，並接納了一名華人進入教會……」

孫中山和查爾斯·羅伯特·黑格都於1883年初抵達香港，充滿活力。當時香港有許多教堂，這引發了一個問題：為什麼孫中山選擇在這個小小的租賃場所受洗？以他非傳統的性格，他會迅速評估一個人，只有在獲得信任後才能建立友誼。從信件中可以推斷，孫中山喜歡黑格。有一種說法是孫中山在合一堂向馮扶學習英語。作為一名優秀的學生，孫中山主要需要與外國人交談才能學習口語英語，這使得黑格成為理想人選。合一堂、必列者士街和中央書院都位於附近。馮扶、黑格和孫中山很可能是朋友。馮扶在返回香港之前的建議，儘管沒有按計劃實現，卻間接促成了孫中山和黑格之間的關係。

第二部分 第六章 — 馮扶的退休生活
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 17:11 提交
馮扶從未被列為公務員，除了他在西營盤學校任職的1879年至1903年期間。關於他生平的一些誤解源於A. Morris在1928年英皇書院開幕典禮上的介紹，以及馮扶去世後的報紙報導。當我的研究接近尾聲時，我看到了這三份報導，並感覺有些不對勁。我可能無意中發現了一樁150年前的醜聞。英國當局可能後來意識到這一點，但由於涉及前任總督和學務視學官，他們可能不願採取行動。

值得注意的是，不是公務員並不完全排除在中央書院任教的可能性，因為當時並非所有華人教師都以公務員身份領薪；臨時教學職位是通過雜項開支資助的。然而，馮扶曾擔任華人教師的說法被時間線不符所駁斥。在他葬禮期間，馮扶的幾位兒子在香港。三家媒體都犯了同樣的錯誤報導，稱他曾在哈佛大學學習，這很奇怪。

我忽略了一個細節：伊德在1880年頒獎典禮上向軒尼詩總督介紹馮扶。伊德說：「我知道馮扶先生，這位在美國受過大學教育的校長，是一位完全稱職的教師。」1881年教育報告也指出：「在西營盤，有一位在美國華盛頓霍華德大學受過教育的本地教師教授英語，而同一棟建築內還有另一所政府學校只教授中文，因此那些希望在學習英語的同時學習中文的人有機會這樣做。然而，很少有人利用這個機會，大多數人每天都只在這裡學習英語，並有私人機會保持他們的中文知識。」馮扶沒有隱瞞他在霍華德大學的歷史。伊德擁有圖賓根大學的博士學位，他會非常清楚獲得文學學士或文學士學位的要求。馮扶甚至沒有完成大學預科部的學業。這表明他向伊德謊報了他的學術資格，而伊德則輕信了他的說法。

A. Morris在1928年表示：「西營盤學校的歷史可追溯至1879年，那一年政府決定在西點（西營盤（英語））設立一所免費學校，並任命從美國歸來的馮扶先生為第一任校長，他是在中央書院的助理教師競爭考試中被選中的，並在那裡任職一年。」然而，沒有他曾在中央書院任教的記錄，而且時間線也不符。馮扶在西營盤學校任職之前，沒有，也不可能在中央書院任教。華人只能參加華人教師職位的考試。馮扶在15歲之前只在中國上學「六年」，不可能通過中央書院的入學考試。3月舉行的考試要求考生完成諸如「2. 解釋。——選自十三經中的任何段落」和「5. 文學。——十三經中任何一部的導論」等任務。

報紙報導，大概是來自他的兒子們，稱馮扶27歲（1876年）返回香港，成為煤炭商人。然而，馮扶於1874年中離開大學，並於1875年2月前受聘為教師。在此期間，他積極且持續地參與舊金山的傳教工作。在那個時代，跨洋旅行並非易事。訃告中提到馮扶27歲（1876年）返回香港後生意失敗，這可能很重要，因為訃告很少包含負面細節。27歲時，馮扶正在舊金山教書。他是孤兒，似乎沒有家庭財富。儘管他可能在古巴擔任家僕期間以及在霍華德大學休學一年期間賺了一些錢，但可能不會超過一千銀元。這引發了一個問題：他是否離開大學，返回香港進行包辦婚姻，然後在戰時對煤炭的需求中，迅速失去所有錢並背負巨額債務？他可能隨後返回美國尋求教會的庇護。這個時間線是合理的，因為當時前往舊金山的三等艙票價約為100銀元。

這引導我們調查馮扶妻子的背景。關悅明是關元昌的長女，出身名門。馮扶的岳父關元昌是中國第一位受西方訓練的牙醫，岳母黎亞妹是中國第一位女教師、護士和法庭翻譯。關氏家族對現代中國做出了許多重要貢獻。馮扶的長女馮瑞瓊於1879年8月16日出生。馮扶可能在1878年底左右與關悅明結婚。當時，道濟會堂是一個排他性社團，每年只接納約20名新生洗禮成員。這與美國傳教士協會的記錄相符，表明馮扶於1878年底匆忙返回香港。他很快被伊德博士認可，並於1879年2月1日被任命為西營盤英語學校校長。

兩份英文報紙訃告同時報導：「逝者的次子馮耀榮先生是馮強橡膠廠的董事總經理，該廠是香港和華南地區最大的同類企業之一。」然而，馮強橡膠廠的實際董事總經理是馮日興。總督於1934年12月參觀該廠，馮日興在場。在1935年的一個案件中，馮日興代表公司作證。馮耀榮可能因其在上海擔任律師的經驗而被馮強的核心團隊接納。

馮扶退休後從未擔任灣仔學校校長。1903年4月20日的官方記錄顯示，討論了教育撥款。討論中，榮譽的R. Shewan詢問這些學校是否是華人學校，主席回答：「是的。這些是華人學習英語的學校，稱為英華學校。」當被問及是否由外籍校長負責時，主席確認：「是的。新制度是每所學校——西營盤、灣仔和油麻地——都有一位外籍校長。不過，我可能要提一下，油麻地的校長不是歐洲人；他是一位在美國受過教育的華人，英語知識淵博，因此他能夠勝任英語校長的工作。」投票獲得通過。當時的政策規定，政府區學校應由「外籍校長」領導。這裡提到的灣仔學校校長是楊熙，他從1904年到1910年任職，隨後是威廉·柯文。後來的校長包括1914年的威廉·凱、1918年的亞瑟·羅伯特·薩瑟蘭和1923年的雷金納德·約瑟夫·伯貝克。馮扶於1934年去世。因此，馮扶從未在灣仔學校擔任任何職位，包括校長。威廉·凱於1914年9月9日被重新任命為灣仔學校校長。他最終從皇仁書院返回，於1934年6月18日接替A. Morris擔任新英皇書院的校長。英皇書院設有以他命名的「凱社」，證明了英皇書院與西營盤英語學校之間的歷史淵源。

馮扶退休後的生活記錄在兩份歷史文獻中。第一份是馮自由的《革命逸史》。1905年7月，中國同盟會東京總部成立。孫中山認識到自庚子事變以來黨務停滯不前，香港和廣東的陳少白及同志們不和，於8月10日派遣馮自由到香港組織同盟會，並擔任《中國日報》記者。當時的編輯人員包括呂薪、廖平庵和陳春生，馮扶擔任翻譯。這簡短的提及不應被低估。它發生在馮自由受孫中山委託在香港發展黨務之際。《中國日報》辦公室是興中會的總部。這表明馮扶在退休後立即積極參與政治，很可能是黨員。儘管他沒有出現在1928年3月英皇書院開幕典禮的官方嘉賓名單上，該典禮有兩千多名與會者，但他很可能在其中。這段時期是中國的動盪時期，許多中國知識分子對英國人抱有保留態度。1928年5月21日，《香港華字日報》報導了同盟會在「香港第一公園」（現香港動植物公園，俗稱「政府花園」）噴泉處舉行的公眾紀念活動。四百人出席，場面盛大。馮扶可能在其中。司徒華在60年後組織了類似的聚會。馮扶具有俠義精神。他參與興中會為他的人生畫上了圓滿的句號。

馮扶的長女嫁給了南洋富商阮嘉祥。阮嘉祥是屈臣氏在南洋的總代理，也是孫中山同盟會的支持者。馮扶的次女嫁給了南洋的趙氏家族，他們也可能是顯赫的家族。然而，她36歲便早逝。她可能因未能為趙家生兒子而婚姻不幸。馮扶將她的三個幼女帶回香港，並供奉她的神主牌。趙氏的三個女兒中有兩個未婚，馮扶的五個女兒中也有兩個未婚，這可能與相關情況有關。馮扶留在香港的長子馮耀彰，與何家進行了包辦婚姻，娶了何文輝。然而，這也是一個自由戀愛和年輕人反叛的時代。馮家高度西化，他們的子女包辦婚姻可能較少。馮扶留在香港的次子馮耀榮，變得非常傑出。他早期在上海擔任律師，賺取了大量金錢。返回香港後，他成為橡膠大亨馮強的副手，馮強是孫中山革命的著名支持者。馮扶的姻親也為現代中國做出了貢獻。馮扶精心培養了他的人脈網絡，他周圍的許多人都與孫中山的革命有關，這反映了當時許多華人資產階級對孫中山寄予厚望。馮自由的簡短描述可能具有重要意義。孫中山紀念館一張顯示馮扶參與船隻接待的照片進一步說明了他的地位。比較那個時代的英文和中文報紙，會發現華人精英普遍不信任英國人。

馮扶返回香港後，第二份提及他的歷史記錄出現在美國傳教士協會1889年的年度報告中，其中喬傑特表示：「我見過曾奇、馮扶和我在香港的所有朋友。」黑格牧師在香港的傳教工作鼓勵了許多來自舊金山的助手返回，喬傑特是其中的關鍵人物。

他的訃告報導：「慈善工作也引起了他的關注，他在青山為貧困男孩建立的一所免費學校將永遠作為他的紀念。」為紀念其父，馮扶的兒子馮耀彰資助興建了佛山學校。該校於1920年創立，最初是中華基督教會屯門福音堂的啟蒙機構。最初只有九名學生，十年內增至四十多名。1931年，新界傳教團成員認識到對學位的巨大需求，提議建造一所新學校。在包括馮耀彰在內的兄弟們的捐助下，校舍建成，並正式命名為「佛山學校」，以紀念其父馮佛山先生（馮扶）。這個啟蒙機構很可能是馮扶本人創立的，這解釋了為何他的訃告特別提到「他在青山為貧困男孩建立了一所免費學校」。然而，一個問題出現了：馮扶在1920年已是71歲。如果他自願在青山建立一所免費學校，那更可能是在他年輕、更活躍的時期。

1960年
1960年，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允
佛山學校
佛山學校1970年，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允
第二部分 第七章 — 葬禮
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 19:04 提交
馮扶，生於1849年2月5日，於1934年1月19日去世，並於1934年1月21日安葬於薄扶林華人基督教墳場。他的妻子關馮氏（真名關悅明），生於1859年1月17日，於1933年9月2日去世，並於1933年9月4日安葬。馮扶在墳場的「郇崗」區佔有三塊墓地。他的墓碑上列有他的孫子：聰、信、禮、榮、榮、才、陽、光。

「郇崗」（Waan Gong）區具有深厚的基督教精神意義。「郇」在聖經中代表上帝的居所、聖城，以及選民聚集之地，象徵著天國的榮耀。「崗」意指高地或山丘。因此，將墓地命名為「郇崗」象徵著它是「上帝的聖山」，反映了基督徒在死後安息於主懷抱並在天堂重聚的信仰。薄扶林華人基督教墳場於1882年獲得香港政府撥地後建立，是香港第一個永久性的華人基督教墳場。「郇崗」區是其核心原始區域之一。

這座墳場以安葬許多對香港基督教發展和辛亥革命產生重大影響的先驅而聞名。其中包括區鳳墀（1847-1914），孫中山的中文老師和革命密友；謝纘泰（1872-1938），輔仁文社和興中會的核心革命者，以及《南華早報》的共同創辦人；鄭士良（1863-1901），三合會領袖和興中會關鍵成員，領導了惠州起義；以及李煜棠（1851-1936），廣東著名商人，辛亥革命的關鍵財政支持者。該墳場也是現代文學、教育和學術界名人的安息之地，如許地山（1893-1941），著名作家和新文化運動先驅；馬建（1883-1959），傑出學者，接替許地山擔任香港大學中文系主任；吳素貞（1890-1979），著名女教育家，聖保羅男女中學長期校長；以及林子豐（1892-1971），銀行家和教育家，創辦並擔任香港浸會學院首任院長。另一位安葬於此的著名人物是馮瑞生（1858-1932），他比馮扶小八歲，可能認識他。

新聞摘要

著名華人教育家馮扶先生於1934年1月19日星期五凌晨3時55分，在香港西營盤第三街1號寓所逝世，享年85歲。他已退休近三十年。在他去世前約十四個月，他曾中風，導致行動不便，去世前幾天病情惡化。他被譽為一位極其謙遜和善良的人，深受廣大朋友和學生的喜愛。

他的葬禮於1934年1月21日星期日在薄扶林華人基督教墳場舉行，由張竹林牧師在墳場禮拜堂主持儀式。他的三代家人隨行。馮先生深受敬重，送葬隊伍龐大，許多人乘坐汽車隨行。根據他的遺願，棺木採用中式風格，裝飾著鮮花，由身著制服的抬棺者抬行。送葬隊伍的其他顯著特徵包括一幅逝者的大幅照片，由華蓋轎子抬著，以及兩支西式樂隊演奏適當的音樂和讚美詩。大量的鮮花輓聯需要五輛貨車運往墳場。

新聞還報導：

「馮扶是首批接受外國教育的華人之一。他年幼時隨親戚前往美國，在哈佛大學學習，獲得教育學位。（這是不正確的）他27歲時返回香港，短暫擔任煤炭商人，但不幸失敗。香港政府認識到他深厚的教育知識，隨後任命他為政府學校校長，使他成為第一位擔任此職的華人。在他去世前四十多年，他曾擔任西營盤官立學校（後來擴展為英皇書院）和灣仔官立學校（也稱為灣仔峽官立學校）的校長。他還在皇仁書院擔任高級教授。他在20世紀初從政府服務中退休，留下了卓越的工作記錄，並因其善良和沉靜的品格而贏得普遍尊重。他對教會活動，特別是中華基督教會的發展，表現出濃厚的興趣，擔任其長老之一，也是英華書院的委員會成員。他的慈善工作包括在青山為貧困男孩建立一所免費學校，這將作為他的紀念。

馮扶先生育有五子二女，以及多名孫輩。他的五子二女中有四子二女出席了葬禮。他的次子馮耀榮先生是馮強橡膠廠的董事總經理，該廠是香港和華南地區最大的同類企業之一。」

第二部分 第七章 — 家譜
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年6月21日 週日 - 19:32 提交
本文詳細介紹了馮扶及其家人對香港教會和教育機構的貢獻，以及多位個人的生平資料。

馮扶（又名馮佛山，1849-1934）是一位傑出人物，其家族三代都是虔誠的基督徒。他於1908年擔任道濟會堂執事，協助張竹林牧師處理教會事務。馮扶也是1914年英華書院復校委員會的成員。

馮扶與妻子關悅明女士育有龐大家庭。他們的孩子包括：

長女

馮瑞瓊生於1879年8月16日，於1920年6月2日去世，享年41歲。根據墳場記錄，她於1920年6月4日安葬，墓碑於1922年豎立。她沒有與丈夫合葬，而是在去世前回到娘家，留下年幼的孩子。

馮扶在吉隆坡的長女婿
馮扶在吉隆坡的長女婿
阮慕燕，第六個孩子，生於1905年。她是香港大學醫學院首批十位女畢業生之一，僅次於何東夫人。慕燕於1924年19歲時入讀香港大學攻讀學士學位，並於1926年3月進入醫學院。

她的醫學學習經歷了多次考試。1926年12月，阮小姐通過物理、化學、有機化學和生物學，完成了第一級學位考試。1928年12月，她通過解剖學和生理學。到1930年5月，她完成了第三級學位考試，通過了初級病理學和藥理學。（當時，第二年結束時的初級解剖學和初級生理學考試，即現在的第二級學位考試，尚未設立。）她於1931年5月通過高級病理學、法醫學和公共衛生。最後，她於1931年12月通過內科、外科和婦產科，從而完成了最終學位考試。香港大學醫學學士學位於1932年1月11日授予阮小姐。此記錄由醫學院院長L.T. Ride，文學碩士，醫學學士，外科學士（牛津），皇家外科醫學院院士，皇家內科醫學院執業醫師，於1932年2月3日簽署。

畢業後，阮慕燕在香港執業，然後回到吉隆坡並在那裡去世。

阮慕燕
阮慕燕，作者：lausanching
當時華人社會的一項重要社會事件，記錄在1930年7月18日星期五《南洋商報》新聞欄第6頁的一份報導中。標題為：「袁家祥先生女兒赴英學習建築與測量」。文章詳細介紹了吉隆坡著名商人袁家祥先生最近送女兒們赴英國深造。

報導強調了袁家祥先生顯赫的背景，他是文成印刷局的老闆，也是香港屈臣氏汽水在南洋的總代理。報導指出他的孩子們精通中西語言，他的兒子們，包括世順先生，都追隨父親經商。文章特別提到他的長女慕燕（Hilda），當時25歲，正在香港學習醫學，即將畢業。報導還指出他的次女慕婷（22歲）和三女慕瑜（20歲），兩人都是吉隆坡英籍女子中學的畢業生，打算在英國學習建築和測量。她們定於7月25日乘坐英國郵輪「Mooltan」從新加坡啟程。這項讓年幼女兒專攻建築設計、土木工程和測量等領域的計劃，在1930年代被認為是女性教育的開創性嘗試。

馮扶在吉隆坡的孫女
馮扶在吉隆坡的孫女，

次女

馮樹蓮生於1881年2月18日，於1916年5月26日安葬，享年37歲。

招馮氏，真名馮樹蓮，生於1881年10月13日，於1917年6月13日去世，享年36歲。她育有數名女兒。其中一名女兒結婚並移居南洋。她的兩個女兒保持單身，在高街4號二樓租住公寓。招氏的一些女兒在那打素醫院接受培訓並擔任護士。

招壺康，招馮氏（馮樹蓮）的次女，生於1909年，當時她的母親28歲。她於1981年4月30日去世，享年72歲。招壺康在教會史書中被紀念。她的貢獻包括：每月第二個主日後的星期二探訪中區；每月第三個主日擔任奉獻統計員；每月第三個主日後的星期二探訪跑馬地。她還每月第四個主日後的星期二探訪筲箕灣。此外，她擔任主日招待員，分發週刊，並在每月第五個主日擔任橫門的後備。此外，她還在每月第四和第五個主日清點儲蓄箱捐款。

招壺安，三女，遠嫁南洋。

招壺福，四女，也在教會史書中被紀念。她的貢獻包括每月第三個主日擔任奉獻統計員，以及每月第四和第五個主日清點儲蓄箱捐款。

三女

馮樹蘭（065-3）約生於1883年至1885年間，當時她的母親估計24至26歲。她被稱為三姨媽，終身未婚。

四子

馮耀升（066-3）約生於1886年至1888年間。他出生時，母親估計27至29歲。

五子

馮耀開（067-3）約生於1889年至1890年間。他出生時，母親估計30至31歲。

他的後代包括馮顯榮（排行第十），生於1934年，在香港事業成功後於1997年左右移民澳洲。

馮扶的孫子馮顯榮在佛山學校前
馮扶的孫子馮顯榮在佛山學校前，「承蒙馮菁華女士惠允」

馮顯榮於2019年參觀英皇書院，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允
馮顯榮於2019年參觀英皇書院，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允，作者：lausanching
他的妻子是胡兆熾第一任妻子（吳昭文）胡慕玲的第六個女兒。

胡慕玲已於幾年前在悉尼去世。

其他後代包括在悉尼去世的馮顯睿（排行第五），以及住在養老院的馮慈惠（排行第九）。

六女

馮瑞群約生於1891年初，當時她的母親約32歲。她是六姨媽，終身未婚。

七子

馮耀基約生於1891年末，當時他的母親關女士約32歲。他生於1891年，卒於1953年，享年62歲。他最初於1978年9月19日安葬於E區16排34號。2004年7月23日，他的遺骸被掘出、火化，骨灰從思恩園移走。

妙嫦（長姐）每月第三個主日擔任奉獻統計員，並在第四和第五個主日清點儲蓄箱捐款。她曾一度在赤柱聖士提反書院擔任夜班護士。

妙玲（次姐）在睡夢中去世。

妙清（三姐）。馮菁華女士對這三姐妹都很熟悉；其中兩位住在一起，一位獨居。

七子

馮耀華生於1892年3月16日，於1916年6月14日去世，享年24歲。他於1916年6月15日安葬。

墓碑上刻有「同懷祿耀 彰,榮, 根, 剛立」。奇怪的是，他其他兄弟的名字沒有在上面。

有一種說法是：在傳統華人社會中，墓碑上刻有「某某立」不僅僅是一個名字。它代表著一種實質性的承諾，表明積極參與葬禮，在去世時在場，並為安排提供財政支持。因此，如果一位兄弟，例如，不在香港，他們的名字通常不會列在豎立墓碑的人當中。但這種說法可能不成立。

墓碑上還刻有「少年德育會同仁泐」（中華基督教青年德育會同仁敬立）。根據香港大學關於道濟會堂的權威歷史文獻，該協會於1907年夏季正式成立。它由五位熱心的年輕基督徒創立，他們認識到培養和支持教會成員子女的需要。

九子

馮耀彰，又稱九叔，生於1893年6月13日，於1966年10月29日去世，享年73歲。生於蛇年，是母親的第九個孩子，他出生時母親約34歲。約30歲時，即1923年，他獨自前往美國。到1929年，他已返回香港並承擔了重要的教會職責，此後一直留在香港。他在日佔時期在教會中發揮了關鍵作用。

馮耀彰很早就參與基督教活動。1907年夏季，他是中華基督教青年德育會的五位創始人之一。1919年，他擔任新界傳教團的六位董事之一，代表道濟會堂。其他代表包括張牧師、黃永德、謝桂芬、關八姑和黃四姑。同年，駐堂傳道員被派駐新界各禮拜堂：黃述芳在元朗，古啟德在屯門，羅恆石在林村，林逸清在荃灣，藍漢生在大澳，陳炳光在屏山。

馮耀彰回港後，深入參與教會行政。35歲時，即1928年3月，他是教會物業收購的三位代表之一。同年8月，他是負責教會債務清理和籌款的五位委員會成員之一。1929年，他的活動包括7月購買「萬有文庫」，認捐30元，4月擔任受薪職員退休金委員會成員，9月擔任「感恩捐款」使用委員會成員。他於1931年9月被任命為詩班主席。1932年10月，作為三位教會受託人之一，他與W.K. Kwok & Co.律師事務所簽署協議，以保障「深愛堂」的財產。1933年6月，他是界定受薪職員資格委員會的成員。教會還於1933年10月任命張竹林牧師和兩位代表接收重要文件。

他的服務持續到1934年，5月他成為英華女校的四位顧問之一。9月，教會認購了香港聖經公會有限公司的一股，馮耀彰是教會章程起草委員會的成員。1935年4月，他擔任灣仔教會物業收購委員會成員。當教會的銀行倒閉時，他成為教會的債權人，並負責出售其鴨脷洲物業。1936年3月，他仍是英華女校的顧問，並於5月被任命為公共宴會總監。1936年9月，馮耀彰與其兄弟耀榮和耀基，為紀念已故父親的遺願，從其終身退休金中捐贈了1,000港元給教會。12月，他加入了牧師和詩班服裝設計委員會。

馮耀彰及其兄弟在教育方面也發揮了關鍵作用。佛山小學於1920年創立，最初是中華基督教會屯門福音堂的啟蒙中心。最初只有九名學生，十年內增至四十多名。1931年，新界傳教團成員認識到對學位的巨大需求，提議建造一所專用學校。在馮耀彰及其兄弟姐妹的慷慨捐助下，校舍建成，並正式命名為「佛山學校」，以紀念其父馮佛山先生。學校穩步發展，直到日軍入侵迫使其關閉。

1939年10月10日，馮耀彰被任命為六位執事之一。在日佔時期（1942-1945）的艱難歲月裡，他擔任教會副主席，顏成坤擔任主席。在此期間，主任牧師張拔靈被軍警逮捕並遭受酷刑。

何文輝，又稱九嬸，生於1895年4月14日，於1991年2月27日去世，享年96歲。她曾就讀於聖心書院。

馮妙容生於1921年2月7日，於1927年4月17日去世，享年6歲。根據墳場電腦數據，她的安葬日期是1927年4月18日。她的墓地在B區10層26號。

馮妙珍生於1922年1月18日，於2011年9月30日去世，享年89歲。她是馮菁華女士（講故事的人）的母親。

馮耀彰和他的女兒馮妙珍，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允
馮耀彰和他的女兒馮妙珍，承蒙馮菁華女士惠允，作者：lausanching
十子或雙胞胎

馮樹顏生於1893年6月13日。她出生時，母親約34歲。

根據她的教會身份證號碼，她可能是馮耀彰的雙胞胎姐妹。如果是這樣，她將與馮菁華的家人有密切關係。她活了相當長壽。然而，奇怪的是，她似乎是馮家最神秘的成員，因為從未有人提及她。

十一子

馮耀榮生於1897年，於1938年5月8日去世，享年41歲。他育有五子三女。他最初於1938年5月8日安葬於D區3排27號。2004年，他的遺骸被掘出、火化，骨灰撒在思恩園。

他是合一堂的活躍成員。29歲時，即1926年5月，他擔任教會義賣會和新教堂大廳開放委員會成員。同年7月，他擔任宿舍分配委員會成員。30歲時，即1927年5月，他擔任修訂教會借貸條例委員會成員。1929年7月，他捐贈30美元購買「萬有文庫」。1938年5月他去世後，教會理事會於1938年11月接受其妻馮耀榮夫人為紀念他而捐贈的款項。這些捐款包括教會基金1,500美元，聖樂部基金1,000美元，養老金基金300美元，以及額外500美元用於購買留聲機。

馮耀榮的妻子李忠珍，生於1901年，於1973年1月25日去世，享年72歲。她安葬在一個墳場。

他們的次子是顯榮。

他們的女兒妙芳，出生一天後去世。她最初於1928年1月16日安葬於B區9排32號。1976年，因山泥傾瀉，她的名字被刻在位於A區3排的紀念碑上。

另一個女兒妙萍，生於1930年，於1932年9月20日幼年去世。

他們的三女兒妙和，生於1931年，於1982年7月1日去世，享年51歲。她40歲時嫁給余家，育有兩子余家康和余家寶。她住在高街4號三樓。她的母親後來賣掉房產，將所得分配給妙和和在英國的妹妹妙卿。妙和最初於1982年7月1日安葬於臨時墓地。她的遺骸後來被掘出，並於1989年2月28日安放在骨灰龕中，具體位置是3號骨灰龕，GS區16號。然而，沒有關於她壁龕的信息。

他們的女兒妙卿，生於1938年，在她父親去世後。她於1962年24歲時移居英國。當時，她的妹妹31歲。

二十子

馮耀根，會員編號12（參考302-3），生於1898年（根據其會員編號推斷），於1965年去世，享年67歲。1926年5月，28歲的他擔任協和堂義賣會的共同組織者。後來，1939年6月，41歲的他擔任部門規章起草委員會成員。

歐陽淑媛。

馮顯揚和馮妙嫦是教會史書的贊助人。

馮妙蘅於1934年註冊或出生。

三十子

記錄顯示馮耀剛（358-3）於1923年6月1日安葬。他生於1901年9月30日，於1923年6月1日去世，享年22歲。他的墓地在C區22排37號，墓碑於1929年初秋豎立。

族譜贊助人包括馮妙嫦、馮顯揚、馮顯睿紀念和王從真紀念。提及的相關名字有妙嫦、妙玲和妙清。此外，趙顯光，生於1928年，於2024年6月30日去世，享年96歲。

馮扶家族家譜
永久連結 由 lausanching 於 2026年7月28日 週二 - 11:26 提交
馮扶家族家譜

馮扶， 妻馮關氏
馮瑞瓊（1），夫阮嘉祥
馮瑞蓮， 夫招氏
       1881/02/18       其母約22 歲時生她.

（墳場電腦資料） 安葬日期1916/5/26 , 享年37.

                       招馮氏(生1881/10/13- 殁1917/6/13). 享年 36歲.

「招馮氏有三個女兒，一個遠嫁南洋， 二個獨身。兩人租住高街4號2樓。招氏女兒在那打素醫院學護和當謢士」

           招壼康
招馮氏（馮瑞蘭）於28歲生第二女招壼康. 招壼康(生1909-殁1981/4/30),享年72歲. 招壼康獨身,一生侍奉主:

堂史書籍贊助 : 招壼康紀念

每月第二主日後之禮拜二探訪, 中區

每月第三主日獻金統計員

每月第三主日後之禮拜二探訪, 跑馬地

每月第四主日後之禮拜二探訪, 筲箕灣

主日招待,派週刋, 每月第五主日兼後備, 橫門

每月第四,五主日儲蓄箱捐開計員

招壼安
三女壼安， 遠嫁南洋.

招壼福
四女壼福獨身,一生侍奉主:

堂史書籍贊助 : 招壼福紀念

每月第三主日獻金統計員

每月第四,五主日儲蓄箱捐開計員.

馮瑞蘭（獨身）
（道濟會編號065-3） 約於 1883–1885 年間出生, 其母約 24–26 歲生她.

              馮綺麗認識她,稱呼三姨媽.應頗長壽.

馮耀升
（道濟會編號066-3） 約生於 1886–1888 年        其母約 27–29 歲生他.

馮耀開
（道濟會編號067-3） 約 1889–1890 年        其母約 30–31 歲生

馮顯睿（排行5）
馮顯睿妻住香港,綺麗曾訪其她. 馮顯睿在澳州悉尼去世,馮綺麗去過掃墓

馮慈惠（排行5）
馮顯榮的9家姐馮慈惠己入住老人院。綺麗以前去探她時住天欣邨.

馮顯榮（排行10）
現年約89(他本人說), 1934出生(2026-1934=92)他約於97前移民澳洲, 因在港生意很成功, 足以養老有餘,其女兒近年到悉尼陪他. 馮顯榮太太胡慕玲(原配排行七)，其岳父為胡兆熾  55 Coolawin Rd ,North Bridge 2068, New South Wales

馮瑞群
（道濟會編號103-3） 約生於 1891 年初       其母約 32 歲生

               六姨媽, 獨身 .馮綺麗表示馮扶的家業由三姨媽和六姨媽打理.

馮耀基
馮耀華
馮耀彰，妻何文輝 （九嬸）
馮妙容
馮妙珍
馮綺麗

馮瑞顏
馮耀榮
馮耀根
馮耀剛

阮英舫

註1

領洗編號（063-3）；

1879/08/16-1920/06/02，享年41；

關氏約20 歲生她 （初生即領洗）；

安葬日期（墳場電腦資料） 1920/6/4

（回到母家後過身的）

立石1922年

1. MO-TSZ | 24/08/1897 - 23/06/1982 | 84 YR 3 MTH；  TAN KHIAM PEE | 14/10/1895 - 07/02/1947 | 51 YR 4 MTH
2. SZE YEW JOHN | 05/05/1901 - 11/08/1935 | 34 YR 3 MTH ； MABLE KHOO PEK GEOK
3. SZE SHUN CLIFFORD | 05/05/1902 - 12/05/1956 | 54 YR； LIEW LAN KUAN | 05/09/1907 - 29/06/1990 | 83 YR
4. MO LING MAUD | 03/06/1903 - 21/11/1936 | 33 YR 5 MTH； THOMAS WONG | - /08/1936
5. SZE FOON GEORGE | 19/05/1905 - 25/04/1969 | 63 YR 11 MTH； SUM KWAI YING | 17/11/1905 - 14/02/1986 | 80 YR 3 MTH
6. MO YIN HILDA （SPINSTER） | 10/01/1907 - 17/04/1990 | 83 YR 3 MTH；
7. MO TING ANGELINE | 15/07/1908 - 23/03/1999 | 90 YR 7 MTH； JOSEPH HO PAN THONG | 17/10/1909 - 01/02/1943 | 33 YR 4 MTH
8.MO YOW ESTHER | 10/11/1909 - 22/04/1977 | 67 YR 5 MTH； COMRIE JOHN TODD | 09/08/1909 - /12/1959 | 50 YR 5 MTH
9. MO CHING NELL | 05/05/1911 - 09/09/1987 | 76 YR 4 MTH； TONG SUM HONG | 27/02/1903 - 11/08/1983 | 81 YR 6 MTH
10. MO YAN CLARA | 15/11/1912； TAN SOO ANN | 23/11/1910 - 10/02/1993 | 81 YR 9 MTH
11. MO CHEONG IDA | 05/03/1914 - 17/12/1986 | 72 YR 4 MTH；  LO CHUEK HON | 28/04/1918 - 17/10/1989 | 71 YR 6 MTH
12. SZE KIN HARRY | 08/04/1915 -； CHEW SIEW KEAT | 03/07/1921 - 19/01/1999 | 77 YR 6 MTH
Madam Sim Ngin Heong(沈銀鳳) 06/12/1894-16/04/1955 ,married with Yuen Ka Tseung at her 26.

13. SZE CHENG BOB | 10/08/1922 - 4/5/1998 | 75 YR 9 MTH； IRENE LEONG LOH-LAN

14. SZE POON JIM | 05/02/1925 - 27/09/1981 | 56 YR 7 MTH；  BETTY CHOO ENG HONG | 23/02/1926 -
15. SZE LAP LAURIE | 10/12/1925 - 19/07/1989 | 64 YR 5 MTH； MAE CHONG SOON CHIN | 03/12/1921 -
16. MO MAY MAIZIE | 06/11/1927 -；  KOH TEIK GHEE | 26/3/1926 -
--- FULL TRANSLATION END ---

--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BEGIN ---
This extensive document meticulously traces the origins of King's College, Hong Kong, arguing that its history should be formally recognized as beginning in 1879 with the establishment of Saiyingpun (English) School, rather than the commonly cited 1926 or 1928. The author, a 1976 alumnus, utilizes a wide array of historical sources including government reports, gazettes, newspaper archives, and missionary records to build this case. Key figures in this narrative are Governor John Pope Hennessy, who championed English education after the "Central School Incident" of 1878, and Mr. Fung Fu, the first headmaster of the experimental Saiyingpun (English) School.

The document details Fung Fu's remarkable life journey, from his humble beginnings as an orphan in Cuba and New York's Five Points House of Industry, to his education at Howard University, and his subsequent career as an influential educator and missionary in San Francisco before returning to Hong Kong. His appointment in 1879 marked a pivotal moment for English education in the colony, as his school quickly distinguished itself and served as a model for future Anglo-Chinese institutions. The narrative also explores the continuous development of Saiyingpun School under successive headmasters, particularly A. Morris, highlighting its academic excellence, extracurricular achievements, and the eventual legislative debates and construction of its new premises on Bonham Road, which was later renamed King's College.

The author contends that the renaming and relocation of Saiyingpun School to King's College in 1926/1928 represented a natural evolution and expansion, not the creation of an entirely new institution. Evidence presented includes the continuity of staff and students, the legislative intent for the new building to house Saiyingpun School, and statements from governors and headmasters acknowledging the 1879 lineage. The document also delves into the broader socio-political context of colonial Hong Kong, including the impact of the Central School Incident on educational policy, the role of Chinese elites like Ho Kom-tong, and Fung Fu's later involvement in revolutionary activities and his family's significant contributions to the Chinese Christian community.
--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY END ---

--- FULL TRANSLATION BEGIN ---
Contents
Editor 9
Introduction 9
Part One 10
Chapter One 10
West Point 10
Early Chinese Schools 11
Government Education Reports (OCR) 13
1864 13
1868 13
1870 14
1871 14
1873 14
1874 15
1875 15
1876 15
1877 16
1878 16
1879 16
1883 16
The Issue of School Lineage/Continuity 17
The Issue of School Names 18
Chapter Two 19
The Central School Incident 19
The Far-Reaching Impact of the Central School Incident 22
Hennessy's New Policies Included: 24
Fung Fu's 23 Years at Saiyingpun School 25
The American missionary v.42 1888 25
“12. --- English teaching, to be thorough, requires a staff of trained English masters who have to be imported and kept at a great cost. English teaching also requires a comparatively larger staff, more expensive materials, and larger house-accommodation than Chinese teaching. Owing to this inherent costliness of English teaching, all schools in the Colony which teach English or which, like the Central School and five other Government schools, or like the Hongkong Public School, give an English education with Chinese teaching in addition, are far too expensive to derive very much benefit from the Grant-in-Aid system at its present rates of payment.” 26
20. The Anglo-Chinese Schools of the Government, located at Saiyingp’ún, Wántsai, Stanley and Wongnaich’ung have shown good results in 1883 as formerly. ---: “Saiyingp’ún. Out of 52 boys examined in Standards I, II and III, 49 passed, the three failures being in Standard I. Of the total number none failed in reading, 3 in dictation, 8 in arithmetic; of the 32 examined in geography 1 failed; while the 9 that presented grammar all passed with great credit. The whole School gave evidence of a very thorough education and obtained a remarkably high average of ‘very good’ marks, which were in fact much in the majority. This, taken together with the excellent discipline maintained by Mr. FUNG FU throughout the year, places his school far ahead of the other Government District Schools; and it is much to be regretted that he has not a more commodious and healthy building in which to give his abilities freer scope.---1883 Edu Report 26
Chapter Three 30
European Master 30
Scouting Activities 31
Hong Kong Daily Press 1924-04-07 31
Terrible Bus Accident 31
Two passengers killed, All Injured. 32
Hong Kong St. John Ambulance Brigade 32
CHESS MATCH. 32
Handwriting 33
Past Achievements 33
Distinguished Alumni 33
Charity 34
Humanitarianism 34
Volley-ball 34
Visits by Foreign Educational Organizations 34
Summer Half-Day Extracurricular Activities 34
Thai Prince's Study Tour 35
Chapter Four 35
Why King's College History Should Be Traced Back to Saiyingpun School 35
1927 Military Occupation 39
Morris Returned to This School as Headmaster on January 26, 1928. 39
The Issue of Changed Curriculum 40
“SIR CLAUD’S SPEECH. 40
Reasons: 41
Chapter Five 41
Why King's College's Predecessor Began in 1879 41
Reasons Why King's College's Predecessor Should Begin in 1879: 43
The Process of Naming King's College 44
Arrangements for the Relocation of Saiyingpun School Students by Class Level. 45
1926 Construction Progress 46
Part Two 47
Chapter One 47
Fung Fu's Background 47
Howard Fall 2012 P.23 47
Chinese Americans in Washington D.C. 48
Higher Education 48
“ OUR CHINESE PROTEGES. 49
Photos 50
“The American Missionary Association's Concern for the Cuba Coolie Trade 50
Cuba Coolie 1867 50
Resolutions at the 23 Annual Meeting of “The American Missionary Association”, Dec.,1869 50
CHINESE IN CALIFORNIA, Feb., 1870 51
Days in Cuba 51
CHINESE COOLIES. 51
Circular Daily 1882-10-03 51
Fung Fu Lived in the New York Five Points House of Industry for About Half a Year, Learning English. During the Day, He May Have Sold Cigars on the Street. 52
New York Times----March 9, 1869 52
New York Times-- April 25, 1869 52
October 5, 1869 52
Nov. 13, 1869 53
February 7, 1870 53
March 15, 1870 54
THURSDAY, JULY 7, 1870 54
New York 54
Chapter Two 55
Fung Fu at Howard University 55
Howard University Calendar 55
Events 55
Catalog of the Officers and Students of Howard University 55
Why did Howard University not publish Catalog of the Officers and Students of Howard University for 1872-1873? 56
Model School 57
Fung Fu's Accommodation 58
Fung Fu's Baptism 58
Fung Fu's Character 59
Choi Awah 59
Fung Fu's Correspondence with the Church 60
First Letter For April, 1871. 83 60
Second Letter 61
Third Letter 61
Chapter Three 62
Fung Fu in San Francisco 62
Fung Fu Had Already Expressed His Aspiration for Missionary Work While at University. 62
Fung Fu's Departure Time from the U.S.: 65
Chapter Four 66
A Historical Anecdote: Ho Kom-tong and Saiyingpun School 66
China Mail 1921 Nov. 31 66
Large Class Teaching 68
Chapter Five 69
Fung Fu, Sun Yat-sen, Rev. C. R. Hager 69
JEE GAM’S (朱金) ADDRESS 69
They Resolved at the 1880 Annual Meeting. 70
Rev. C. R. Hager Appears in 1883 71
Chapter Six 73
Fung Fu After Retirement 73
Civil Service Ranks 73
managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory 74
Fung Fu's Departure Time from the U.S.: 75
Business Failure 75
Fung Fu Never Served as Headmaster of Wanchai School After Retirement. 76
Official Record of Proceedings, 1903.04.20 76
Fung Fu Only Had Two Historical Records After Retirement. 77
The First Was His Inclusion in Feng Ziyou's "Anecdotes of the Revolution." 77
Fung Fu's Political Marriage. 77
Fung Fu's Church Work. 78
Chapter Seven 79
Fung Fu and His Sons' Contributions to the Church 79
Fung Fu and Fung Kwan's Descendants 79
Fung Shui-king 79
Yuen Mo-yin 79
Fung Shui-lin 79
Fung Shui-lan 79
Fung Yiu-sing 79
Fung Miu-yung 79
Fung Miu-chun 79
Fung Lai-lee 79
Epitaph 80
Three Generations of Converts 82
Fung Fu 83
Fung Yiu-wing 83
Fung Yiu-cheung 83
Fung Yiu-wah 83
Kwan Yuet-ying 83
Paterson School 84
Tai O Primary School 84
Union Church Handover 84
Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association 84
Assisting Cheung Chuk-ling 85
Joint Petition Requesting More Female Missionaries to Hong Kong 85
Joint Petition for Funding 85
Early Development and Challenges of Ying Wa College's Re-establishment 86
Fung Shui-king 86
Interpretation of the Epitaph 87
Biography and His Eldest Daughter 87
Fung Lai-lee's Oral History 89
Fung Shui-lan 90
Fung Yiu-wing: 90
Fung Yiu-kun 90
Afterword 91
Appendix 91
Investigation into Fung Fu's Wife, Ms. Kwan's Maternal Family 91
Kwan Yuen-cheong 91
Lai Ah-mui (058-1) 92
Fung Kwan (187-1) 92
Kwan Yuet-ying (130-1) 92
Kwan King-fai 92
Fung Fuk is Not Fung Fu 94
Is Fung Chung the Same Person as Fung Fu? 96
Fung Cheuk-san 96
Google Drive 97
BB 97
Civic Establishments 97
Pensions 97
Education Reports 97
Education Reports OCR 97
Prize Distribution Day 97
Public Works 97
Saiyingpun School Quarterly Reports 97
Legislative Council 97
Gazette 97
New York Times Archive 97
China Mail Collection 97
Fung Fu 97
Morris 97
Hennessy 97
Wong Nai Chung 97
Resources 97
Reference 97
PDF 97
Original Materials Awaiting Verification 97
South China mission, 1906. By Hager, C. R 97
Howard University Library Moorland-Spingarn Research Center. 98
Joint Letter 98
Market Property Exchange Rates and Other References 99
Property 99
Mr. Chadwick’s reports on the sanitary condition of Hong Kong 100
Editor 101

Editor
Lau San-ching
1976 King's College Science Sixth Form Graduate
Version: May 20, 2026

Contact:
Lausanching2@gmail.com
94103119 (WhatsApps)
Introduction
The main purpose of this document is to clarify the predecessor of King's College. The information comes from Blue Books, Gazettes, annual education reports, Public Works Department reports, Legislative Council records, contemporary New York Times articles, Hong Kong newspapers from archive.org, annual reports and monthly publications of the American Missionary Association, and various books. Only one or two citations use artificial intelligence, which are specifically noted.
The document involves several historical anecdotes from that era, namely:
Fung Fu's personal biography.
Did early Chinese schools have names?
Did early schools have a lineage/continuity?
Why was Saiyingpun (English) in 1879 a new school?
The naming process of King's College.
An incident involving Ho Kom-tong at age 12.
Some past events involving Fung Fu, Sun Yat-sen, and Rev. C. R. Hager.
Fung Fu's first wife, Fung Kwan, was Kwan Yuet-ming, the eldest daughter of Kwan Yuen-cheong.
Fung Fu's political marriage.
The impact of the Central School Incident on Hennessy.

The story begins with the Central School Incident in 1878 and Governor Hennessy's efforts to promote English education. The predecessor of King's College is related to English education. Key figures include Governor Hennessy, Inspector of Schools Eitel, Headmaster Fung Fu, and later Headmaster Morris. All official records of King's College's predecessor point to the five government-approved national free schools gazetted in 1880.

Part One
Chapter One
West Point
The earliest record of the school at WEST POINT is "A few notices on the extent of Chinese education and the Government Schools of Hongkong, etc"----William Lobscheid Jan 1859
WEST POINT
The school at West Point was established under very unfavorable circumstances. There were few families living about where the School was opened; most of the pupils had therefore to come from Tai - ping - shan and its neighbourhood. Besides, the teacher was a very illiterate man, full of cunning and deception. Finding that his ignorance could be no longer concealed, he engaged another man to explain the Four Books for him. To this I strongly objected, because no respectable man would teach a School for four to five dollars a month, and that was the greatest share he could get. I therefore desired his removal. He was the last who tried the old tricks of ruining the School by seducing the pupils under false promises. As the means which they generally employ are illegal, I acquainted the teachers that transgressors of the British laws should be summarily punished. This put in a great measure a stop to the unceasing intrigues on their dismissal from Government service. The teacher who was appointed in the place of Cha was a member of the London Missionary Society’s congregation. He is not a very learned man, but able to explain the principal Chinese school - books with great facility; and I am happy to state, that the number of pupils now amounts to 61, of whom about 52 have always been present, when I visited the School.”

In the Chinese and Foreign Monthly Magazine (遐邇貫珍) in March 1856, it was recorded: "Various free schools --- silver --- 658.17 yuan". In June 1955, it noted: "Since the British opened the port, the Royal family has established free schools in villages and fields to enlighten children, out of compassion and unwillingness to see them remain ignorant..."

In 1857, the Gazette divided Victoria into seven districts. West Point was a village within the Saiyingpun district and also a landmark. The two names were used interchangeably in the early days.
. “The District of Victoria is divided into Seven Sub-districts.
No. 1, Or SEI-YING-POON-From the small village Westward, called Cowee-wan, to the end of Circular Buildings, including all the houses on Bonham Strand, West of No. 1 Police Boat Station.”---- By Order, Colonial Secretary’s 6th May.

West Point (school) was renamed Saiyingpun in 1872. This was a change of school name; the teachers' treatment and students, etc., did not change. The reason for the renaming is unknown, but 1972 Saiyingpun was a direct extension of 1971 West Point.

Early Chinese Schools

In 1858, the government gazetted that in fully funded schools, teachers "shall only be given twenty-five cash per student per month as tea money, and no further expenses shall be given," which was probably equivalent to about one catty of rice. This marked the beginning of the colonial government's free education policy. In December of the same year, the Gazette (100) allocated £125 for the "erection of Chinese school houses."
In 1876, the price of one catty of rice was about 3 cents, and 1 yuan was equivalent to 1100 cash.

“A persistent challenge is raising the moral and intellectual standards of the native teachers”--1858Ed.Report

Chinese schools were divided into private schools without government funding; schools receiving half government funding; and fully funded schools, also called Government schools or free schools.
In the eyes of the government, they were merely: “The Village Schools, which are free schools supported entirely by Government,” no different from other Chinese schools in China.
“These schools differ from the ordinary Village Schools simply in this, that the villagers provide the school-house and select the master, who gets, or is supposed to get, one half of his salary, in kind, from the parents of his scholars and the other half, amounting to sixty dollars a year, from government.”1870 Ed.Report
The situation for unfunded village schools was:
“In the Aided Village Schools (also giving an ordinary Chinese education in the vernacular) a small charge is made by the village communities amounting, on an average, to 30 cash and 3 catties of rice (total value about 12 cents) a month for each child in actual attendance.”—1887Ed.Report
“each of the three masters is allowed five dollars a month, and the villagers make up the amount of his salary principally in kind, which seems to be the ordinary way of paying school-masters in China.”---1868 Ed.Report
In these types of schools, the government paid half of the teachers' salaries, and the rest was collected from parents. However, as most villages were too poor, this part might not be collected. That half of the approximately five-dollar monthly salary was already quite good for village school teachers. Theoretically, the school building should be provided by the village. But often, villagers demanded rent from the government, believing that sending their children to school was a favor to the government.
Because these village school teachers often opposed the government. Some worked as fortune-tellers and traditional doctors, some as bandits, and some bought off students to falsify attendance records. Although the right to veto teacher appointments was a right after government funding, they often managed to win over people's hearts, making it impossible for the government to replace problematic teachers.
“31. The school at Pok-fú Lam was added in the course of the year, and the grant was withdrawn from Shek Shán, where the people refused to change the master, although he stood convicted of repeated instances of neglect and disobedience. He is a very cunning old man, and holds some mysterious sway, I suspect of a fortune-telling nature, over the ignorant villagers.”---1871Ed.Report

This tug-of-war between villagers and the government was resolved around 1876. ---1876Ed.Report

The main problem faced by early education was student attendance:
“There are hardly any industries in this Colony that employ great numbers of children. One Sugar-Refinery employs a small gang of children in packing cube sugar in tins, and public road-making gives parents an opportunity to employ their children in breaking small stones (to be mixed with cement), but there is very little interference at present with school attendance arising from these sources. The employment of children by their parents in carrying loads of soil or bricks to or from building sites has decreased significantly during the last 10 years. The principal causes that interfere with school attendance in the Colony are domestic employment within the family, bond-servitude in the case of purchased servant girls, and fishing in the case of a few villages.” –1887Ed. Report

Government Education Reports (OCR)

1864
The attendance at Chinese Schools is very fluctuating, and this peculiarity is not confined to those in Hongkong. The numbers increase from the Chinese New Year to the month of May, when the attendance is greatest. From that time to the close of the year the numbers steadily decrease.
At the commencement of last year, of the 21 enrolled at one of the Schools 10 of the pupils were new; of another 22 at her 12 were new; of another 34 at another 20 were new; and of another 51 no fewer than 40 were new. Many of the pupils of the previous year must therefore have left School, perhaps never to return, with no other attainment than the simple retention in their memories of the names of a few hundred characters, of the meaning of which it is not too much to say that they knew absolutely nothing.
This state of things would be very much improved if the children of the more respectable Chinese attended the Schools, at these seldom bring their families to the Colony; and, so long as this is the case, it is greatly to be feared that Education will not make that progress here which those interested in it could wish to see.
1868
56 Many things connected with the schools are bad, and no feasible suggestion for their improvement will be disregarded, but I must demur to calling the whole system immoral. So far is this from being the case that the present state of things, be it what it may, is the result of a determination to put down immorality in such of its aspects as neglect of duty, hypocrisy, falsehood, and deceit. Because the education is secular, it is not, therefore, immoral. Because in the Village Schools it is Confucianism, pure and simple, neither is it immoral. Confucianism may be defective, but its whole tendency is for good. As far as this life is concerned, it is second to no system of morality, ancient or modern; and that there may be no mistake on this point, it may not be out of place to state what Confucianism really is.

1870
The state of these schools will be best understood by considering them under the following divisions: The Central School, the Village Schools supported by Government, and the Schools receiving Grants-in-aid.
The Village Schools, which are free schools supported entirely by Government, are twelve in number. They stand in the following order of efficiency, as tested by an examination of each school:
2. Sai-ying P’ún, (Pún-ti.)
3. Sai-ying P’ún, (Hak-ka.)
Chinese books alone are used and the mode of instruction is such as would be found in any native village school in China

1871
9. The normal state of a Chinese school is that the lessons are shouted at the pitch of the voice. My entrance was the signal for a startling display of this diligence. Unaccustomed to such a deafening din, my first feeling was surprise, and my second anger. I shouted “Silence!” This was tacitly interpreted to mean “Read louder!” Another attempt at order meeting with a fresh accession of noise, I retreated, almost in despair, to one of the lower class-rooms, where I had interviews with my young friends in more manageable detachments.----F. Stewart

1873
3. The Village Schools, a name which has been given to all the Government schools except the Central School, are 29 in number. Of these, 15 are supported solely by Government, and are under its complete control. The remaining 14 receive aid to the extent of $60 a year, the villagers undertaking to provide a school-house and to pay half of the master’s salary. These aided schools are subject to the usual inspection, and Government puts a veto on the appointment of a master if he is not able to pass the required examination.
4. Such is the theory, but the practice does not quite accord with it. There is no room for doubt that, in most cases, the master has to pay the rent out of the small grant given to the school; and the moiety of his salary which the village undertakes to provide is as often unpaid as not. In many of the villages the people are extremely poor, and the master passes rich with his five dollars a month. On no other ground can much of the reluctance of the people to contribute towards the education of their children be explained: but, as they cling strongly to what they consider their right to select a master, they are ready to promise whatever may be required of them; and then, when the school has been fairly started, and the master tires of paying the rent, the villagers plead poverty and request an additional allowance to provide a school-house.

1874
10. The Village Schools that are partly supported by the Government have not recently caused much difficulty. A few of the masters are still dissatisfied with how the villagers fulfill their part of the agreement, but the majority are content to let things remain as they are.
1875
6. Twelve years ago, the two schools at this place were very flourishing, but event after event occurred to withdraw the people elsewhere. Two large fires dealt the first blow. Then, the boat people were relegated to Causeway Bay; and now the houses in the Bazaar are nearly all untenanted. The school children come principally from the various clusters of houses which lie scattered between Wán-tsai Gap and the Temple at Tang-lung Chau. The boat people have never forgiven their being sent from their former rendezvous, and they show their resentment by depriving us of the opportunity of educating their children. Incredible as it sounds, many of the people think they are conferring a favour on the Government by allowing their children to attend the schools.

11. In addition to geography introduced into all the schools in 1873, the first three books of the School Book Committee’s series came into use last year, with highly satisfactory results. The new subjects were, as a rule, well taught, without any injury to the ordinary Chinese lessons. Arithmetic, which was referred to last year, was not adopted for two reasons; first, because time could not be found for the compilation of a suitable Chinese text book, and, secondly, because even if it had been ready, there was sufficient innovation for one year without it. It will not be lost sight of, and, when opportunity offers, it also will find its appropriate place in the schools.
1876
5. One drawback to the efficiency of the Village Schools has now been very happily removed. It had long been but too evident that the masters reserved their energies for the closing weeks of the year, instead of applying themselves with sustained effort to the whole year’s work
1877
The two schools at Sai Ying-p’in suffered severely by their removal. The building had to be handed over, in a pressing emergency, to the Medical Department. Temporary accommodation was provided as near as possible to the old site, and a new school-house was to be built in the course of a few months; but the delay in building the new hospital has prevented the erection of the new school, and the falling off referred to is partly accounted for. These native schools require the most delicate handling. Circumstances which of themselves need hardly affect any school have often serious consequences to them, as was pointed out when the old building had to be handed over.

1878
The Aberdeen school had to be closed in the middle of the year owing to the incompetency and neglect of the master, in consequence of which the villagers preferred to send their children to the three other schools in the village, or to Stanley, or to Canton to school and to pay there for their education rather than having them gratuitously under the charge of a master who did not attend to his duties properly.
1879

6. However, in the town, all purely Chinese schools maintained by the Government are, in my opinion, not only unnecessary but also compete injuriously with native self-help in Confucianist education without providing a better education.
The removal of the word “elementary” from the Schedule is of significant importance. The Grant-in-aid Scheme, until St. Paul’s College first joined, was limited to supporting native elementary education.

1883
14.--- the Lieutenant-Governor, the Hon. Sir JOHN DOUGLAS, made lately the following remarks as reported by the Ceylon Times of 20th December, 1883: “We are having it in contemplation to withdraw, as far as the Government is concerned, from any active interference with education, otherwise than education in the vernacular, in these large centres of population, and therefore it becomes of special interest to us to ascertain whether institutions like this, which are worked upon the Grant-in-Aid system, are ready and able, when the Government Schools are discontinued, to take the place of the institutions that we have been supporting entirely at the cost of the Government.”

The Issue of School Lineage/Continuity
We all have a concept of school lineage/continuity, and government schools and mission schools each have their own characteristics and traditions. What is discussed here is these aspects of school lineage.
From the education reports from 1870 to 1879, we see that many students in Chinese schools followed their teachers; more precisely, parents chose teachers.
“Foreigners may know something of other matters, especially if they have reference to trade, but, in the matter of education, the dullest villager and the most ignorant boat-woman loudly proclaim their superiority, without the slightest suspicion of its being questioned. They know exactly what books their children are to read, and when and how they are to be read, the opinion of all foreigners to the contrary notwithstanding.” ---1870 Education Report
At that time, a school had only one teacher, who lived there and taught all classes. We can think of it as a modern private tutoring center.
“8. The appointment to the school in Battery Road was successful in every way, and was so from the first, although it was feared that there would be a falling off at the start, so difficult is it to calculate beforehand what will be the effect of a change of master.” -1875 Education Report
When the teacher left, the inspector of schools did not know the future enrollment situation.
“8.A new master was appointed to the school at Little Hongkong in the month of March, and the grant was continued, with the understanding that on the next complaint it would be permanently withdrawn. The villagers have, this time, got a man of a very different temper from that of the previous one, who would not bate a tittle of his rights. The present master makes no complaints, but it is currently reported and generally believed in Aberdeen and other adjacent places that, instead of receiving anything, he has to give monthly presents to certain of the villagers for the privilege of getting their children to teach. The school has improved considerably under the present master. In order of efficiency it was last on the list in 1872. It is now twentieth, but it will be long before it is in a very satisfactory state, if the people continue to do as they have been doing.
11. The schools at Sai-ying Phún, Shéung Wán, Tái Wong Kung, Wántsai and Sháu-kí Wán come next in order. At these, the attendance is very large and very regular. At no place has the advantage of a good master been so evident as at Sháu-kí Wán. Three years ago, it had become a question whether any further attempt should be made to maintain a school in the village. When a Hákká master was appointed, failure was attributed to the indifference of the people. When he was succeeded by a Púnti, similar excuses were never wanting. Under the present master, both Púntis and Hákkás avail themselves of the school, and express themselves as highly satisfied. If the people were more straightforward when anything is really amiss with a school, salutary changes would be effected more rapidly; but, as a rule, they are studiously silent until their information is no longer of any use.”—1873 Education Report
Even government-run Chinese schools in the early days were essentially similar to other Chinese schools in the Qing Dynasty. When a teacher left, everything started from scratch, so there was no school lineage.
It was precisely in this situation of no school lineage that when Fung Fu took over A. Fong's students in 1879 and sat in his classroom, the school became different. Fung Fu created a revolutionary school for Inspector of Schools Eitel.
All "date back" claims trace back to the five new schools approved by the British Crown in 1880, which has no connection to West Point. Tracing back further is not valid.

The Issue of School Names

1) In all education reports, Hakka free schools and Punti free schools were listed independently. They were not subordinate to each other. Calling them Hakka Department and Punti Department is incorrect.
2) Early free schools in Hong Kong did not have names.
West Point refers to a free school located at West Point. When a place had both Punti and Hakka free schools, they were distinguished by language.
Under the recommendation of William Lobscheid, the colonial government spent £125 in 1858 to build "Chinese Schools" ---Gazette (100) Nov, 6, 1858
For example,
1860, 1861 schools at West Point and in Webster’s Bazaar, Bowrington, and Tang-lung-chow;
1864 school at West Point.
1865: "Here, as at West Point, a new and commodious School-room was opened last year, ---In the same building with this School there is also one for Hakkas, which has suffered very severely from the removal of the houses."
The Hakka school at West Point only appeared in 1866. Here it is seen, "In the same building with this School there is also one for Hakkas", which makes it incorrect to refer to the free schools of that time as Hakka Department and Punti Department.
1866: The Hakka school at West Point only had enrollment records, with a minimum attendance of 3 people, dispelling last year's concerns about not having to move the school to Kowloon.
The real change came with EDWARD A. IRVING in 1902. "Under the same roofs as the English Schools, but not otherwise connected with them, were the Vernacular Schools of Sai Ying Pun and Wan Tsai--
Before my departure from the Colony in April, the following changes had been made in the English and Vernacular Schools at Sai Ying Pun and Wan Tsai, now known as the Anglo-Chinese Schools of those two places:
The English and Vernacular Schools were linked together in such a way that the Vernacular School became the Lower School and the English School the Upper School.”----1902 Education Report

Chapter Two
Hennessy believed that promoting English education was the responsibility of colonial officials.
“--in the great Empire of England an important duty of colonial Governments was to spread the language of England throughout the British colonies.
Over and over again we have been told, and I heard it from an authority the other day to whose practical opinion I attach, some weight, that in that respect the English Government is supposed rightly to imitate the ancient Government of Rome, and wherever it goes throughout the world it imposes its civilisation by beginning with its language.. ---Pope Hennesy 11th February, 1878

The Central School Incident

To the Editor of the "CHINA MAIL:"
8th June, 1877.
SIR,
I understand that His Excellency the Governor has taken great interest in the denominational schools of the Colony, having been escorted by the two Bishops around their various institutions. These movements of His Excellency you have noticed in your local news column, but I have not yet seen any account of the Governor's visit to the Government Central School. It is not for a moment to be supposed that Mr. Hennessy has not yet made himself personally acquainted with the ins and outs of that admirable department; and your reporting staff needs to be more diligent than they appear to be. So many rumours are flying about concerning what the Governor is going to do and what he is not going to do, that the public naturally look for these reports.
Of course, if Mr. Hennessy has not yet looked at the School, and is forming all his opinions on the local experience of the aforementioned episcopate, then your newspaper is not to blame. But this is a supposition so preposterous that I cast it to the four typhoons of heaven. Sir Arthur Kennedy was a warm supporter of Mr. Stewart and his "numerous family," and we have been told on the best authority that our present Governor intends to follow in his footsteps. Sir Richard MacDonnell used to make some of his best speeches in the Central School. Have they and we all been wrong in this matter? And are we to be put right by our new administrator of affairs? I sincerely hope not.
Yours anxiously,
A.B.C.

Hennessy first visit to Central school at 1878/01/05, Saturday

25TH JANUARY, 1878
“I visited one large classroom, indeed a sort of double classroom, on the other side of that passage. In that room I should think there must have been a hundred and fifty Chinese youths who being instructed by three Chinese teachers. They were reading the Chinese classics. I found that the three Chinese teachers who were instructing them in the Chinese classics had themselves no knowledge whatever of the English language. These three Chinese teachers spoke no English; and of the pupils in that particular class - room not one could speak English --- .” –Pope Hennesy

Governor J. Pope Hennessy inspected the Central School in 1878, entering a classroom where three Chinese teachers and over a hundred students could not communicate with him in English. The Central School's education budget accounted for 65% of the entire colonial education expenditure.
J. Pope Hennessy asked the headmaster, also Inspector of Schools, Frederick Stewart, "How many of the boys now in the school speak English?"
Frederick Stewart replied: "From fifty to sixty; and that imperfectly."
A month later, at the Prize Day at St. Joseph's College, Mr. Francis added fuel to the fire.
“However, what can be said of the misrepresentation made by Mr. J.J. Francis regarding the teaching of English in the Government School? His words were, “I was astonished to find that, at the recent examination of the Central School, only forty or fifty of the boys had been learning English, or were able to speak any English at all.”
Prize Day at St. Joseph’s College----China Mail 1878-02-09
“Failure of Central School”---- China Mail 1878-02-11
“ We will address the Governor’s speech, which unfortunately contained a similar fallacy, in more detail later. It is peculiar that he did not correct the unfair and unjust impression created by Mr. Francis’s misleading remarks.”
Mr. Francis's statement was, of course, inconsistent with the facts, but Hennessy, who was present, not only did not correct it but seemed to agree with him. This incident caused a stir and was widely reported by the media.
“13.The belief now abroad in the Colony is that no attempt is made at the Central School to teach more than fifty or sixty of the boys English; and that the study of that language is subordinated to the study of Chinese, which both the English and the Chinese masters devote their time and their energies to teach. Indeed, it is difficult to see how people could believe otherwise, considering that Mr. FRANCIS, as appears above, stated at St. Joseph’s College on the 9th instant, that he was astonished to find that only forty or fifty of the boys at the Central School were being taught English, and that His Excellency practically endorsed the statement by allowing it to pass unchallenged although touching upon it.”---F. Steward.

In just two months, J. Pope Hennessy, Frederick Stewart, and the Colonial Secretary exchanged 19 letters. 1878 Gazette No.31

J. Pope Hennessy asked Frederick Stewart to first account for his work and postpone his leave to England: "Could you not therefore postpone your departure for a fortnight?" He demanded a list of all government school students who could speak English and their teachers.

Frederick Stewart immediately replied: "Accordingly, when the Central School was established, the teaching of English was abolished in all the other Schools."

Frederick Stewart: "I had to telegraph to Shanghai to secure a passage for the 21st instant, and that I have no chance I should, of course, at once sacrifice my own of being able to get one by the following steamer."

Governor J. Pope Hennessy demanded Frederick Stewart to provide the English proficiency of every student at the Central School.

Frederick Stewart submitted the list: "I enclose a list of the names, 453 in number, of all the scholars on the books of the Central School,—336 (pupils) cannot be said to “speak English” at all."

J. Pope Hennessy carefully reviewed the report and asked why one student, who had only been enrolled for 22 months, had studied English at the Central School for 10 years and 2 months. He requested Acting Inspector of Schools, E. J. Eitel, to check the report for any other errors before submitting it to him.

Frederick Stewart voted against the fifth clause in the Education Committee, which allowed students at the Central School to decide for themselves whether to study Chinese.
Frederick Stewart also forced Hennessy to issue a Gazette to publicly clarify the matter.

The Far-Reaching Impact of the Central School Incident
Sir John Pope Hennessy KCMG (August 8, 1834 – October 7, 1891) was an Irish politician and colonial administrator, who served as the eighth Governor of Hong Kong and the fifteenth Governor of Mauritius.
Governor of Hong Kong 1877–1882; Governor of Mauritius 1883–1889
Sir John Pope Hennessy governed Hong Kong for only a short period. However, he demonstrated the traditional British humanitarian spirit. He not only reformed English education in Hong Kong.
Hennessy was Irish. In the eyes of the British, he was a potato and onion-eating native, speaking with an Irish accent while trying to sound regal.
In Fung Fu's time, the Irish in America had settled earlier than the Chinese. They were also poor and loved to beat up Chinese people in the slums. Fung Fu probably had to fight them while selling cigars in New York.
Hennessy was constantly ridiculed by the English media when he first arrived in Hong Kong. He immediately visited the bishops, disregarding tradition, and knelt before them, which was questioned by the media; he preferred visiting churches to inspecting the Central School, and was complained about in newspapers in mid-1877; his review of the inhumane flogging system was mocked by newspapers as a half-hearted effort.
His authority was constantly challenged by the British in Hong Kong. Some of his actions were indeed unconventional. When he left his post as Governor of Hong Kong and was assigned to Mauritius, he accepted local demands for self-governance, which was mocked by Hong Kong English newspapers. This article can be seen as a final assessment of him.
Early colonial officials had a dual nature; they cannot be viewed uniformly with the later "big-headed green-uniformed" hawker chasers. In that era, the Legislative Council was a battleground between Chinese prominent families and British power. If one reads both English and Chinese newspapers simultaneously, one can see two completely different worlds. Chinese newspapers only focused on domestic turmoil and did not like the British. This somewhat reflects Fung Fu's political activities after retirement.

Hennessy's subsequent inspection of the Central School stirred up a hornet's nest, leading to the "only dozens of students at the Central School can speak English" joke. He clashed with Inspector of Schools and concurrently Central School Headmaster Stewart.
This incident severely damaged his prestige. This incident not only gave birth to the later Saiyingpun School and King's College but also had far-reaching implications. It can be said that his humanitarian ideals were not implemented during his tenure.
The history of King's College's predecessor is an event with special political significance, completely different from Queen's College and incomparable.

NPDP18831225
Hong Kong Daily Press 1883/12/25
*NEWS FOR THE ENGLISH MAIL*
*SIR JOHN POPE HENNESSY AND HIS POLICY*
The Japan Mail appears to be developing a more accurate assessment of Sir John Pope Hennessy’s administration of the government of Hong Kong. Recently, an article from the Mauritius Argus, which hailed Sir John Pope Hennessy as the liberator of the Creoles, was commented upon. The Japan Mail, while not fully supporting the views expressed, acknowledged that “disaffection and hatred can be the only results of creating political aspirations which it is impossible to gratify.” This accurately describes Sir John’s actions in Hong Kong and may prove to be an accurate assessment of his actions in Mauritius.
It is hoped that Her Majesty’s Government will reach a similar conclusion to that of Sir John’s supporters and no longer entrust the important duties of a governor to such an individual. The Japan Mail still credits the former governor with good intentions, stating that “Sir John’s aim was to remove, as far as possible, the municipal and political disabilities under which the Chinese residents labour.” The article continues by stating that “it is a fundamental principle of British civilization that men who pay taxes ought to have a voice in their disposal.” While acknowledging the complexities of balancing the claims of Chinese and English residents, the article asserts that the equalization of those claims should be the ultimate goal of a just administration.
The Japan Mail questions what the municipal and political disabilities of the Chinese residents of Hong Kong are and what hardships the Creoles in Mauritius face. It is suggested that Sir John Pope Hennessy manufactured imaginary grievances and then took credit for addressing them. He appears to be following the same course in Mauritius. He is seen as a representative of the “professional philanthropist,” who exploits the finest instincts of humanity for personal ambition and notoriety.
The Japan Mail believes that Sir John’s actions in Hong Kong have led to disaffection and hatred. The Japan Mail also believes that the Creoles in Mauritius are not under any disabilities. The Argus, a journal that supports Sir John Pope Hennessy, published a statement that a Creole doctor in government service named an English doctor as his locum tenens during a leave of absence, and the governor expressed displeasure at this. The Japan Mail believes that the Creoles see their new governor as anti-English. The Japan Mail states that the new governor’s attitude “is interpreted by this class as indicating a desire to give Mauritius to the Mauritians,” or, in other words, to give the Creoles political liberty and representative institutions.
Political liberty and representative institutions are a well-sounding phrase. However, in a Crown colony, such a possession must be under the control of the home government. Such colonies should be given full control over their purely municipal affairs. The Mauritians possess this. Natural race distinctions have always existed and always will exist, but there are no political race distinctions in Mauritius, except those implied by the fact that the island is a British possession while its people are French in language and sympathy. The political aspirations of the Creoles, so far as they have any, tend in that direction. They have not been actively disaffected to the British Crown, but they are at heart French. It was injudicious for the English government to send as governor among such a population a man whose past history has shown that he would lose no opportunity of fomenting discontent and impressing them with the idea that they are a hardly used race.
After being provoked, J. Pope Hennessy resolved to replace the preparatory classes or lower grades of the Central School with five new schools. "take the place of the Central School in giving an Elementary Education--" and "That with regard to the other Government Schools entirely supported by Government, arrangements be made, as soon as possible, to teach the boys English in all of them."
It so happened that E.J. Eitel met Fung Fu, who had just returned to Hong Kong, and recommended him to be the headmaster of this new, experimental District Government School, where Chinese taught English---- Saiyingpun (English).
In the 1879 Education Report published in the 1880 Gazette (108), although Fung Fu's new school was still referred to as Saiyingpun (Punti), Saiyingpun (English) was used for the first time in the grading. The colonial government had never had such a school before 1879. Another Wantsai (English) only appeared in 1885.

Although Fung Fu used the old site on Third Street, it was already a national free school "approved by the imperial court to build five new national free schools in Hong Kong --- these new free schools can replace the current national grand academy for teaching beginners," and Fung Fu indeed taught according to the methods of "teaching beginners at the national grand academy."

Hennessy's New Policies Included:
1. Publicly examine the best teacher to be headmaster and teach English at Wong Nai Chung. At that time, 18-year-old Ho Tung was one of 7 candidates. He was assessed as: "all except Ho Tung were ignorant of the art of asking questions in English." Chan Man Kwong won. He resigned after only two years.
2. In September 1880, a normal school was established in Wanchai using a government elementary school to train Chinese English teachers, with A.J. May as headmaster. However, this normal school only lasted for 2 years. —1881EdReport
3. Arrange for Fung Fu to teach English on a voluntary basis in Saiyingpun, running an experimental district school.
4. Change the class schedule at the Central School to 5 hours of English daily.
5. Lobby the British Crown for the construction of five schools.

Fung Fu's 23 Years at Saiyingpun School

Upon his return to Hong Kong, Fung Fu met Eitel and was recommended to be the headmaster of Saiyingpun School. Eitel's London Missionary Society, the American Missionary Association, and ABCFM (American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions) all belonged to the Congregational Church. The two sides had always been in contact.
The American missionary v.42 1888
“Wong Ock,--- - he is busy in Christian work, preaching in one of the Gospel Halls in Hong Kong under the direction of Dr. Ernest J. Eitel. ---. A note from Dr. Eitel speaks of one of Wong Ock’s hearers offering himself for baptism, though the work had been in operation for only three weeks.”—Rev. Pond

Another thing is that shortly after Fung Fu returned to Hong Kong, he married Kwan Yuet-ming, the eldest daughter of Kwan Yuen-cheong, an elder of the To Tsai Church. Eitel (Ernst Johann Eitel, 1838-1908) was a pastor of the London Missionary Society. This destined Fung Fu's later relationship with the British London Missionary Society to be far superior to his origins with the American Missionary Association. (This will be discussed later).

Less than a year after Fung Fu took office on February 1, 1879, he received high honors. Eitel praised his school as the best to Governor Hennessy at the secondary school awards ceremony in February 1880.
**I. ANGLO-CHINESE SCHOOLS**
1. **Very good:**
* Sai-ying-pún, Mr. Fung Fú
* Wong-nai-chung, Mr. Chan Man-kwong
“Considering these Anglo-Chinese Schools first, I found that the English School kept by Mr. Fung Fú in Third Street, Sai-ying-p’ún, should be classified as the best school. I am confident that the examination results from this school are fully comparable to those of the Central School in corresponding classes. However, I must explain that this school operated throughout the year on the optional principle, which, with Your Excellency’s permission, I applied to this school as an experiment. The school opened at the beginning of 1879 with approximately 61 pupils. Initially, the parents of 15 pupils expressed their desire for their children to be taught both English and Chinese, while the rest opted for English only. After a few months, with one exception, all parents chose exclusively English instruction. I examined the children according to the Grant-in-aid Schedule standards and was surprised by their exceptionally high results, although I knew that Mr. Fung Fú, the master, who had a collegiate education in America, was a thoroughly competent teacher.” --Eitel
—prizes distribution day to Government Schools outside the Central School.

1883
“12. --- English teaching, to be thorough, requires a staff of trained English masters who have to be imported and kept at a great cost. English teaching also requires a comparatively larger staff, more expensive materials, and larger house-accommodation than Chinese teaching. Owing to this inherent costliness of English teaching, all schools in the Colony which teach English or which, like the Central School and five other Government schools, or like the Hongkong Public School, give an English education with Chinese teaching in addition, are far too expensive to derive very much benefit from the Grant-in-Aid system at its present rates of payment.”
20. The Anglo-Chinese Schools of the Government, located at Saiyingp’ún, Wántsai, Stanley and Wongnaich’ung have shown good results in 1883 as formerly. ---: “Saiyingp’ún. Out of 52 boys examined in Standards I, II and III, 49 passed, the three failures being in Standard I. Of the total number none failed in reading, 3 in dictation, 8 in arithmetic; of the 32 examined in geography 1 failed; while the 9 that presented grammar all passed with great credit. The whole School gave evidence of a very thorough education and obtained a remarkably high average of ‘very good’ marks, which were in fact much in the majority. This, taken together with the excellent discipline maintained by Mr. FUNG FU throughout the year, places his school far ahead of the other Government District Schools; and it is much to be regretted that he has not a more commodious and healthy building in which to give his abilities freer scope.---1883 Edu Report

“. In August last, when Acting Inspector of Schools, I observed some boys at the Government District Schools at Saiying-p’ún, Wántsai, &c. who possessed a sufficient knowledge of English to do themselves credit by a more advanced course of study at this school. I found, however, on enquiry that a small fee of $1 a month was the deterrent, I therefore suggested to the Government that 4 boys from these five schools should be elected annually by competition to free education at this school; provided that there should not at present be more than 12 such free scholars at any one time. His Excellency the Governor was pleased cordially to approve of my suggestion; four boys were then immediately elected, three from Saiying-p’ún and one from Stanley, all of whom have passed a creditable examination in the 5th and 6th classes, one boy obtaining the first prize in the 6th class.”—1883 Supplement

Until the 1890 education annual report, Saiyingpun (English) was consistently rated as Rank 1.

Mr. ALFRED J. MAY was appointed as the new headmaster of the normal school in September 1881. Students from Saiyingpun School could compete with students from the Central School to enter this normal college.
“In December, after three months of probation, the ten Students were examined by the Inspector of Schools and passed: satisfactorily. Of these ten Students, nine were formerly pupils at the Government Central School: The other one was a pupil of the Government Elementary School at Saiyingp’ún.”---GOVERNMENT NORMAL SCHOOL, March 3rd, 1882.

Saiyingpun (English) –”provide the same type of education as the lower half of the Central School. These schools made good progress in 1884 and serve as feeders to the Central School.”
Later developments showed that the New Government School could not "take the place of" but merely served "as feeders to the Central School."

In 1885, Eitel still said: "showed decidedly good results. -- As the smartest of the boys drafted from those outside Schools into the Central School occasionally rise to be Monitors and Pupil-teachers, some of them will eventually be available as teachers in their own villages."

In 1887, Eitel said "The examinations of these schools showed fair results," this was Fung Fu's 8th year in office.

In 1890, Fung Fu moved into the new school site at the junction of High Street and Pokfulam Road. "Three class rooms are provided and fitted up to accommodate 186 children."
By 1893, government schools had to compete with aided schools. Although government schools generally had better facilities, they faced problems similar to those of King's College in recent 20 years.
“The AngloChinese Schools at Saiyingpun, Wantsai and Wongnaichung have shown very fair results and are greatly appreciated by the people.
The main difficulties, however, under which all these Schools labour consist in the insufficiency or unsuitability of the accommodation and in the almost total absence of properly trained teachers.
Government Schools, having all their expenses provided by Government, have as a rule better and roomier accommodation, superior school materials and a larger staff than the religious Grant-in-Aid Schools. Nevertheless, the latter are annually growing in public favour for the reason that the teachers of Grant-in-Aid Schools, whose salaries or promotion depend upon the efficiency and results of their teaching, are as a rule compelled by self-interest to be more painstaking in attending to the progress of each individual scholar. The attendance of some Government Schools sank of late so low that eleven Schools had to be closed on 1st January, 1893, in accordance with the rule lately established by the Government, to support no School having fewer than 25 scholars in average attendance, provided that there are in the neighbourhood other Schools within easy reach. In the course of the year two more Government Schools were closed for the same reason, but Grant-in-Aid Schools were in each case ready to step in and fill up the gap.”

By 1895, Fung Fu's 16th year of teaching, the Inspector of Schools considered these government schools a burden.
“The teachers of these Schools are natives who have had no special technical training. The examination shewed, however, fairly good results in three of these Schools.
If voluntary effort would take up the work in these places, the Government might well confine its efforts in the sphere of Anglo-Chinese education to the working of Queen’s College.”

E. J. Eitel was still Inspector of Schools in 1896. In 1897, the new Inspector of Schools, A. W. Brewin, said: “I do not consider the work done by them as effective as that done by Grant-in-Aid Schools:”

This might be what Morris referred to as "—at one time it was proposed to close it down—".

In fact, in 1899, Saiyingpun School's results were still quite good. "Ten boys competed for the Free Scholarships at Queen’s College in March, and four scholar- ships were awarded. Two of the successful boys had been educated at the Saiyingpoon school, one at Wantsai and one at Wongnaichung. There were no competitors from the Yaumati school."

In 1901, Inspector of Schools EDWARD A. IRVING wanted to reform several government district schools. "Three of these Schools - at Saiyingpun, Wantsai and Yaumati - are in as nearly a satisfactory state as can be expected so long as English subjects are taught exclusively by Chinese. The Report of the Education Committee recommends a complete reorganization of these Schools. The fourth School at Wongnaichung is less satisfactory."

In 1902, EDWARD A. IRVING's comments on Fung Fu were unfriendly. "At Wan Tsai and Sai Ying Pun (English Schools), English, Arithmetic, and Geography were taught up to the Fourth Standard. The study of the Chinese Written Language was entirely neglected, and in consequence scholars in the uppermost class were quite incapable of composing a few sentences correctly in their own language.
Being what they were-schools professing to teach English an equally serious fault was that from lowest to highest Standard the practice of colloquial English was almost entirely neglected.”
EDWARD A. IRVING may have always held a negative opinion of Fung Fu. Before his retirement and return to England in 1924, he still made Fung Fu a laughingstock. "The school was housed in this building, though it then did not have the upper storey they were gathered in that morning. The total staff consisted of three Chinese masters, and the Headmaster was Mr. Fung Fu, who was now retired on pension and had been an example of the proverb that “pensioners were long-lived” and he had set him a good example. (Laughter)."

Fung Fu was not among the guests at the opening ceremony of King's College in 1928, presided over by Governor Clementi. There were over two thousand guests at that opening ceremony, filling King's College, and Fung Fu might have been among them, but he was not listed as a guest.

He retired on February 1, 1903, and began receiving a pension on February 13. His annual salary before retirement was 720 yuan. His housing allowance was 72 yuan per year.
He began receiving a pension of 336.4 yuan on February 16, 1903, with his last official salary being 696 yuan. Because William took office on December 25, 1902, Fung Fu was demoted to 1st Assistant Master, with a salary of 624 yuan.

Chapter Three
Morris Era
1928speech
European Master
W.H. Williams was already employed during the era when Government English Schools were headed by European Masters.
European Master was a colonial rank. They were recruited in the UK and met teacher qualifications, such as A. Morris. His qualification was A.C.P. Assessment Practising Certificate (UK/Specialist teaching). His academic qualification was two levels lower than a Bachelor of Arts.
“English Masters usually appointed from England…. successful candidates being required, after graduation, to take an Education Diploma Course in England before coming out to the Colony.” ---1929 Edu Report

European Masters could enjoy a half-year holiday in England with their wives, traveling first-class by cruise ship, after three years of teaching. Their starting salary was £270 per annum. They could return to England for holidays with their wives every three years. A first-class round trip by cruise ship cost about £88 per person. European Masters also enjoyed European-style accommodation terms and an annual Chinese tutoring allowance of 180 yuan.
In 1878, the Central School offered a monthly salary of 120 yuan and a 30 yuan housing allowance to recruit a fourth assistant master. (1878 Gazette No.32)
W.H. William taught until January 1, 1905, when he was transferred to Victoria British School as headmaster, and resigned in December of the same year.
A. Morris was appointed on May 12 of the same year. There was a vacuum of several months, and student numbers dropped significantly. A. Morris complained to the Governor at the English government school prize-giving day in 1906. "My tenure of office has been from the end of June. At the commencement of the summer vacation, I submitted a report on the unsatisfactory condition in which I found the school. The staff consists of 3 Anglo-Chinese assistants, a vernacular master, and myself. The number in attendance throughout the year has been very poor, the highest monthly average being 49 and the lowest 35, while the average for the year is only 44;"
From Morris's era onwards, the role of the three main English government schools became more important.
“We have also commenced to raise the general standard of that establishment by doing away with its lowest classes and making the three principal Anglo-Chinese Schools (Wantsai, Saiyingpun, Yaumetei) feeders for Queen’s College.”—Governor Matthew Nathon. 1906
“Two free scholars are yearly admitted from Aberdeen into Saiyingpun School, and from Tanglungchan into Wantsai School.”---1906

Morris developed scouting activities and the St. John Ambulance Brigade. Colonial officials at the time attached great importance to these two activities. Ho Kom-tong thus became a major supporter of Saiyingpun School.

Scouting Activities
There was a grand opening parade for scouting activities in November 1921.
“The inauguration ceremony of the Saiyingpun School Boy Scouts (7th Hongkong Troop) was held on the University Football ground, Pokfulum, yesterday afternoon in the presence of a large gathering of the parents and friends of the boys. including Mr. Ho Kom-tong, the Patron of the Troop.”

“Our Scouts attended at Government House during the visit of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, when Patrol Leader Lo Kwok Chung was decorated by H.R.H. with the gilt cross for gallantry in saving a boy from drowning at Kennedy Town bathing beach.” 1922 Prize Distribution Day

Major bus accident in Yuen Long in 1924
“Under the able leadership of Scout-master Kong, assisted by assistant Scout-masters Lam and Lau, good scout work has been done. Successful camps were held at Sai Wan, Taipo Market, Telegraph Bay, Pinewood, and Tsin Wan. During the Tsing Ming holidays a number of scouts were involved in a motor-bus collision, on the Castle Peak Road, while proceeding to camp at Un Long. Three were injured-one fatally. The accident, which cast a gloom over scouting, evoked world-wide sympathy.
A special letter of commendation, addressed to Scout Master Kong, for devotion to duty and endurance under great trial and distress, was received from the Chief Scout, Sir Robert Baden Powell.”—1924 Education Report
Hong Kong Daily Press 1924-04-07
Terrible Bus Accident
Crash on Bridge in New Territories
Two passengers killed, All Injured.
A terrible motor-bus crash occurred in the New Territories yesterday afternoon. Two motor-buses, traveling in opposite directions, collided on a bridge at Un Lung. Both buses were completely wrecked, and two passengers died from their injuries. Two more were, at a late hour last night, not expected to live, and seven others were seriously injured. Practically all the remaining passengers suffered from shock and superficial injuries.

Hong Kong St. John Ambulance Brigade
In the Hong Kong St. John Ambulance Brigade (Old Boys' Detachment), there was "The Saiyingpun School Old Boys’ -Mr. Ho Kam Tong-Ambulance Division was inspected by Dr. Sir Erie Stewart Taylor on Sunday morning on the University Football Ground which was kindly loaned for the occasion... Amongst those present were Lady Taylor, Mr. Ho Kom Tong (Patron of the Division) Mr. B. Ralphs (St John Ambulances Commissioner Overseas) Mr. Morris (Superintendent of the Division), and others interested in Ambulance Work."
Mr. A. Morris held a very high position as Corps Superintendent, inspecting alongside the Governor.

CHESS MATCH.
In chess, there was, "China Mail 1917/07/18, An interesting ceremony took place today at noon, when the Hon. Mr. H.E. Pollock, KC, presented the Challenge Shield of the Hongkong Schools’ Chess League to the winners for this year – the Saiyingpun School.
And the once-thriving "China Mail 1917/10/04 SAIYINGPUN SCHOOL v. MIDDLESEX REGT. (B. COY.).
Last evening, the members of the Saiyingpun School chess championship for 1917 visited Mount Austin for a friendly match with B Company, 25th Middlesex Regt. An enjoyable evening was passed, and after a keen struggle, the Sayingpun boys won by 13(1) games to 2(1). The games on boards 1, 2 and 3 were particularly interesting and attracted a large number of spectators.”

Swimming
“Swimming was popular, and most pupils were proficient swimmers. The school held its annual aquatic sports on Empire Day. In the Inter-Schools Athletic Sports, the school performed well”----1920 Prize Distribution Day

Handwriting
The handwriting of Saiyingpun School students was praised in many sessions. In calligraphy, "Handwriting throughout the school continues to merit special praise; at a recent “Vere Foster’s International Writing Competition,” one pupil from this school sent in a copy which was adjudged to be “of conspicuous merit and deserving of special commendation,” and was ranked “fourth.”“ -1921

Past Achievements
“The names of three old pupils appear in recent university lists, one as having passed the Matriculation Examination and two as having qualified for the Medical Faculty.” -1918 Prize Distribution Day
“During the past year, four boys from the school who proceeded to Queen’s College passed the Matriculation Examination of the Hong Kong University.” -1920 Prize Distribution Day
“The names of thirteen old scholars figure in the recent University examination lists: Matriculation, 3; Senior Local, 1; Junior Local, 1. One, Lo Tung Fan, who won the Alan Morris Memorial Scholarship to Queen’s College where he obtained further honours, has distinguished himself by gaining the President of China Scholarship.” ---1923 Prize Distribution Day
“All the boys in Class 4A, thirty-four in number, succeeded in passing the qualifying entrance examination to Class 3 at Queen’s College.” –1923 Ed Report
“Matriculation: One, Yau Fung Hon, (Distinction in Physics) went to Queen’s College as an Alan Morris Memorial Scholar; Senior, one; junior, twelve, one of whom, Cheng Iu Man, also holding an Alan Morris Memorial Scholarship, gained no less than five distinctions.”
---1924 Prize Distribution Day

Distinguished Alumni
Lo Tung Fan.
“Thirteen old scholars were listed in the recent University examinations: 3 in Matriculation, 1 in Senior Local, and 9 in Junior Local. One, Lo Tung Fan, who won the Alan Morris Memorial Scholarship to Queen’s College, where he obtained further honors, distinguished himself by gaining the President of China Scholarship.---1923 Prize Distribution Day”
“On the eve of the Battle of Hong Kong in 1941, the Hong Kong government had appointed Chinese barrister Lo Tung Fan as Deputy Commissioner of Police (Special Constabulary). Unfortunately, he died during the Japanese occupation of Hong Kong.”—Wiki

Charity
the school has done splendidly. From class collections and self-denial, the scholars contributed $800 to the Swatow Relief Fund. Our Scouts assisted the Charitable Associations in street collections and were instrumental in raising $11,000 for the same purpose. Again, when we were unfortunate to lose our head boy, the School came forward, defrayed the whole of the funeral expenses, and handed a substantial sum to the bereaved and aged mother.--- 30 Jan., 1923
Humanitarianism
“The lad succumbed after a few days’ sickness. The last rites were arranged by classmates, the funeral expenses paid by the school, and a substantial sum handed to the bereaved parents. Never have I witnessed a more impressive sight than this funeral procession, wending its way up the road outside, in an orderly, decorous manner, attended as it was by the whole school – masters and pupils. “One touch of pity makes the whole world kin.” ---1924 Prize Distribution Day

Volley-ball
“For the second year in succession our Volley-ball team has not lost a single game, and is again the proud holder of the Junior Volley-ball shield.”--1924

Visits by Foreign Educational Organizations
“Gentlemen interested in education visited on a number of occasions. The Japanese Education Commission from Formosa called during January, and carried away souvenirs of their visit In the form of maps the handwork of our pupils. Later, the Vice-Chancellor of the University, the Professor of Education and the Registrar went round, and subsequently the Director of Education of the Fiji Islands.”--1924

Summer Half-Day Extracurricular Activities
“From May to the Summer Vacation, with the approval of the Director of Education, the morning session commenced at 8.30 a.m. The innovation was popular and could be extended. Nineteen years ago this same experiment was tried with the greatest success: school commenced at 7:30 a.m.: afternoons were devoted to outdoor activities -swimming and excursions.”---1924

Saiyingpun School's brilliant achievements under A. Morris were inherited by King's College in 1928. Among the three main English government schools at the time, Saiyingpun School quickly became preeminent. From 1928 to at least 1930, it was the only government district school that could teach matriculation classes, Class 1.

Thai Prince's Study Tour
“The Siamese Prince, who visited the school in December 1926, was much impressed with what he saw, and like the Queen of Sheba, who, after viewing the Temple at Jerusalem, was constrained to say, “The half has not been told.”—1928 Speech
At that time, Thailand needed to reform its primary education, and sent princes and princesses abroad to learn from experience. They visited Saiyingpun School. "The Prince stated that the King and the government were particularly focused on the advancement of elementary education, which would be the primary focus of his observations during the tour."
The Governor hosted a banquet. "Prince Dahni, a younger son of the King of Siam, was on a tour to inquire into education. He was to report to his father upon his return home."

Teacher Training
“Teacher training (Group 4) continued to be the most popular of the arts courses. There was close co-operation between the government's Director of Education and the University's Professor of Education, especially after Lancelot Forster was appointed to the Chair in 1926. Forster was diligent in introducing the latest educational ideas from Britain, in 1930 proposing a radical review of the government's policy on teacher training. This resulted in a formal submission from the Vice-Chancellor to the colony's Director of Education, suggesting that the system government. The government took a cautious approach, however; while it agreed to continue recruiting graduate masters for its schools and to maintain the scholarship system for teacher trainees, a proposal to introduce a post-graduate diploma in education, first mooted in 1924 and endlessly postponed, was once again put on hold.
Teaching practice ('school method') was a particular concern in the 1920s and the capacity of the Sai Ying Pun government school must have been seriously overstrained by the large number of student teachers who undertook their practical work there until King's College opened in 1928,” ---History of HKU page 279

Chapter Four
Why King's College History Should Be Traced Back to Saiyingpun School

In the early days of Fung Fu's tenure, only a portion of parents were willing to let their children learn English, but Fung Fu was very humorous, and within a year, all students were willing to learn English.
At the awards ceremony in February 1880, Inspector of Schools Eitel addressed the Governor: "However, I must explain that this school operated throughout the year on the optional principle, which, with Your Excellency’s permission, I applied to this school as an experiment."
Inspector of Schools Eitel expressed his satisfaction to the Governor.
"This, taken together with the excellent discipline maintained by Mr. FUNG FU throughout the year, places his school far ahead of the other Government District Schools; and it is much to be regretted that he has not a more commodious and healthy building in which to give his abilities freer scope.”---1883 Ed Report

Due to insufficient school premises, the government built a school building, which had been approved by the British Crown 12 years earlier, at the junction of High Street and Pokfulam Road in 1891.
The single-story school building quickly became insufficient. By A. Morris's era in 1908, another story was added. A. Morris moved into the school dormitory. —1908 Public Work P.20
The two-story Saiyingpun School also quickly became insufficient. By 1914, the original plan was to expand a third story, but after the government took over Ellis Kadoorie School, it withdrew the approved project. —1914 Public Work
Saiyingpun School was already the most important among the Government District Schools. The original site area was no longer sufficient to build a new school building. Finding a new site for a new school building became a battleground between unofficial members of the Legislative Council and the government.

In 1917, HON. MR. POLLOCK: "With regard to Saiyingpun School, I think there was a committee which reported on that school a few months ago. I think they mentioned something about the class-room accommodation being deficient."
HIS EXCELLENCY: "The Saiyingpun School report, to which the hon. member representing the Justices of the Peace referred, condemned the site of this school. It is cramped and crowded in by a large number of buildings. The only real remedy is to remove the school altogether. That is an expensive and rather difficult project. Crown land in that vicinity is very scarce. It is a matter which will doubtless come one of these days, but, in the meantime I do not see any immediate remedy."
By 1918, several Chinese councilors relentlessly pursued the matter. After much negotiation, the government exchanged land with the Catholic Church. "File No. HKRS58-1-80-37 Title SAIYINGPUN SCHOOL - INSUFFICIENCY OF ACCOMMODATION. PROPOSED REMOVAL TO A MORE SUITABLE SITE. I.L. 2364 SITE FOR ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, BROADWOOD ROAD".
By 1921, the project began to materialize. "Item 10 provides a sum for beginning the new buildings for Saiyingpun School on a site on Bonham Road, which will probably be acquired during next year."
By Official Record of Proceedings, 1926.04.22 "Saiyingpun School
HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK called attention to an Education Department vote for $1,410 for “rent of school” and the explanatory note that the new Sai Ying Pun School premises were not available at the commencement of the year, and until they are ready an additional sum of $780 is required for the rent of two flats for the Vernacular Middle School. A progress report relating to the new school laid before the Council said: “The building is now in a fairly advanced state of completion.” He wondered whether the Director of Public Works could give the Committee more definite information.”
From 1917 to 1927, the construction of the new Saiyingpun school building was debated 18 times. Throughout the Legislative Council debates, the new school building was intended for Saiyingpun School. Morris had always been preparing to take over this new school building. And he did indeed take over this new school building as the headmaster of Saiyingpun School.
“Hong Kong Daily Press 1923-01-30
The annual prize-giving at Saiyingpun School
“The school remained full throughout the year, and many prospective pupils were unable to secure admission. The school anticipated the completion of its new building, which would accommodate a greater number of students.” –A. Morris

1923 Public Works
Site Formation of New Sai Ying Pun School
1924 Public Works
Contracts were let for the superstructure of the Sai Ying Pun School
1925 Public Works
Good progress was made on the New King’s College
1926 Public Works
111. Bonham Road School.

In October 1925, the government advertised Saiyingpun School.
SAIYINGPUN SCHOOL TO OPEN ON JUNE 30?
In reply to the question asked by the Hon. Mr. P. H Holyoak at the Legislative Council meeting to-day, the Colonial Secretary stated that if no unforeseen circumstances arise, it is hoped to complete and open Saiyingpun School by the 30th June, 1926. The work was delayed for about two months mainly owing to the Strike.
Official Record of Proceedings, 1926.04.22
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS replied that the structural work would be completed in June, but he could not give an exact date as regards furniture and fittings. Some would be quite late, but there would be nothing to prevent the school being carried on there after the end of June.

By April 1926, the construction of the new Bonham Road school building was almost complete. "The school authorities have occupied a portion of the building."
“The School was partially occupied in June. The building was completed and the furniture, with the exception of desks, provided by the end of July. The school was fully occupied, after the summer holidays, in September. There was some delay in the delivery of new desks from home, the first consignment arriving before the end of December. “
Less than a month later, the media already knew the school was named King's College: Hong Kong Daily Press 1926-06-22 editorial said, "HONGKONG, JUNE 22ND, 1926.
KING’S COLLEGE, HONGKONG.
The completion of King’s College near the University provides the Colony with one of the best school buildings in the Far East. However, buildings alone do not make a school, and it is fortunate that the first Headmaster, Mr. Morris, will take with him a full-grown and conspicuously successful organization. Sai Ying Pun School has been made by him from very small beginnings in twenty-one strenuous years, and it is safe to say that his flock would have followed him to any other District School during that time.”
The matter caused controversy, and a reader submitted a letter, "it would have been wiser to have kept the word “School” and to call the students “Schoolboys.”“.

1927 Military Occupation
“The College began the year well with 644 pupils in January, but during the Chinese New Year Holidays (Wednesday, February 2nd, 1927.) the building was handed over to the Military. Boys in Classes 8 to 5 (inclusive) were transferred temporarily to the Ellis Kadoorie School and the remainder to Queen’s College.
(Since February of the previous year, the school had accommodated over 400 boys from King’s College,---Ellis Kadoorie School 1928 Prize Distribution Day.)
The Head Master, Mr. A. Morris, was transferred to the Education Office where he gave welcome and valuable assistance and Mrs. Morris to the Victoria British School where she very ably took the place of the Head Mistress, Mrs. Clark, who was on leave. The remaining Members of the Staff were transferred with their Classes to Queen’s College or the Ellis Kadoorie School.
This arrangement continued until 31st December. The Reports upon Queen’s College and the Ellis Kadoorie School contain references to this arrangement.”
“In February, King’s College was taken over by the Military Authorities for use as an emergency hospital. The pupils were accommodated partly in Queen’s College and partly in Ellis Kadoorie School. The fact that the work of both these schools proceeded so smoothly and satisfactorily despite every difficulty is highly creditable to their Headmasters and Staffs.
At the end of the year, King’s College was restored to this department to be ready for the reopening of school at the New Year.”---1927 Education Report

Morris Returned to This School as Headmaster on January 26, 1928.
Just as Fung Fu moved from Third Street to High Street in 1891; A. Morris moved from High Street to Bonham Road. The only difference is that during his tenure as headmaster, the school was renamed from a distant location.
Renaming does not mean the beginning of a new school. The former West Point (Punti) was also renamed Saiyingpun (Punti). Similarly, the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Medicine was renamed Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong. Its predecessor was still the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese, founded in 1887.
One argument suggests that the Education Department formally terminated and re-contracted A. Morris internally. If so, all old teachers should have been treated similarly.
In the 1928 Civil Establishment, there were indeed changes. A. Morris's date of appointment was January 1, 1927. Temporary Mistress Ellen L Philips started earlier, on October 10, 1926.
The changes here were due to the school premises being handed over to the military hospital, and had nothing to do with the renaming.

The Issue of Changed Curriculum
Saiyingpun School's brilliant achievements under A. Morris were inherited by King's College in 1928. Among the three main English government schools at the time, Saiyingpun School quickly became preeminent. From 1926 to at least 1930, it was the only government district school that could teach matriculation classes, Class 1.
“Boys are no longer sent to Queen’s College after passing this (Class 4) Examination but remain at King’s College, which now has classes preparing for the Matriculation Examination.”---1926 Education Report
“Queen’s College: The Maximum Enrolment (including 192 from King’s College) was 787 (537 in 1926).”—1927 Education Report
Some argue that because of the different curriculum, King's College was a new school. The underlying logic would be: "it had a new name" and "had matriculation classes" then "a new school."
But times change, and later all government schools could have "matriculation classes," and they certainly would not become "a new school" because of this.
In 1923, the outgoing Inspector of Schools had already hoped that Saiyingpun School would add matriculation classes. "Mr. Irving said --- He would like to see the school educate boys up to the matriculation standard.”--Hong Kong Daily Press 1923-01-30

Until December 1924, the Governor, speaking at the annual prize-giving ceremony of Saiyingpun School, clearly stated that the new school site was a continuation of Saiyingpun School.
“SIR CLAUD’S SPEECH.
Addressing the pupils before proceeding to the prize-giving, Sir Claud Severn said that facing bricks had arrived in large quantities from Formosa and that there was no longer any excuse for delay in the completion of their new premises. He expressed the hope that 1925 would be their last year before entering what their headmaster had referred to as “the Promised Land.” Saiyingpun would then become a senior school, similar to Queen’s College, and would be extremely convenient for boys living in the Western districts.
---
Concluding, he remarked upon the high standard of proficiency maintained by the school and expressed the hope that when the new school came into being, they would inaugurate a long period of progress as one of the main Government schools in the Colony. “

Reasons:
The reasons why King's College's history should be traced back are:
1. In Legislative Council and government documents, the new Bonham Road school building was intended for the expansion of Saiyingpun School.
2. During the transition period, Legislative Council documents referred to "King's College" with annotations such as "then Saiyingpun School" or "New Saiyingpun School." This referred to the school building, not the school itself.
3. The subsequent renaming after completion was purely to dedicate it to King George V and fulfill his grandmother Queen Victoria's promise.
4. The addition of matriculation classes was a general trend; all other secondary schools later offered matriculation classes, and the status of Queen's College changed accordingly. This is not a reason for the birth of a new school.
5. A. Morris moving with the original staff and students to the new school site is a natural continuation. Its educational lineage and tradition are undeniable.
6. A. Morris's contract change in 1927 was purely because the new school premises were occupied by the military for 11 months that year.
7. At the opening ceremony in 1928, Governor Clementi and A. Morris both confirmed that King's College's predecessor dated back to 1879. This statement was passed down until Headmaster Mr. Madan in 1976.
8. In Governor Clementi's eyes, the renaming was merely a formality, unrelated to its lineage or A. Morris's work. Therefore, the Director of Education only briefly mentioned it in the 2016 education report, not even mentioning King's College and Queen's College jointly receiving government school boys for matriculation classes, because this intention had already been stated by his predecessor. At that time, it was still Saiyingpun School. This was the general trend.
9. The 1928 editorial stated, "The name of Morris of Saiyingpun is already well known and well-loved, but future generations will have cause to honor and revere the name of Morris of King’s."
Chapter Five
Why King's College's Predecessor Began in 1879

In all official documents, the predecessor of King's College points to the five new schools gazetted in 1880, not extending beyond 1879. Although Fung Fu only truly entered the Queen's Royal School 12 years later, his beginning in 1879 has been counted into this history.
“Saiyingpun School.-The erection of one new District School- building, the first on the list of five new buildings sanctioned in 1882, (1880)has been commenced, in the autumn of 1890, at Saiyingpun, and promises to be a good model of a District School-building.” ---REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE. No. 3 1910

The "1882" mentioned here should refer to the second diplomatic note. At the time of Sir M. HICKS-BEACH, he approved 10,000 yuan for the construction of five schools, but when construction began in 1890, 10,000 yuan was only enough to build the first school building on High Street.
:
These "five sanctioned schools" were again inquired about by the Colonial Secretary in December 1882: "I also approve the recommendation of the Commission in paragraph 5, so far as relates to building five new schools, but I do not clearly understand whether they recommend a more expensive class of school than was approved by Sir M. HICKS-BEACH, and I wish for information on this point.--- Derby"

“Saiyingpun School, which had an honourable career since it was founded in 1891, passed on to a higher destiny in September. In its magnificent new quarters on Bonham Road, re-named by His Excellency King’s College, great achievements are expected from it under the able headmastership of Mr. Morris.” --1926 Education Report.
Here, "founded in 1891" refers to the school building, not a new school.

“Saiyingpun School dates back to 1879, “--- A. Morris at opening ceremony at 1928.
“The career of the school under another name and in another premises has already been a long one, dating back to 1879. Next year, therefore, it will celebrate its jubilee.’---Governor Sir Cecil Clementi in the same occasion.

Before 1979, Saiyingpun (Punti) did not teach English. In the eyes of the British, it was always so: "The state of the Village Schools needs, this year, no special consideration. What they are, how they are conducted, how they advance, and how they fall-off, with the reasons for this, as far as the system can be assigned, are points which have been too frequently mentioned to require repetition.” ---1869 Education Report

Reasons Why King's College's Predecessor Should Begin in 1879:

1. When Saiyingpun (English) appeared in 1879, it was already a new school unrelated to Saiyingpun (Punti).
2. West Point School was founded in 1856, and in 1882 it was renamed Saiyingpun (Punti) and Saiyingpun (Hakka). Before 1879, no government free school, except Central School, taught English. A. Morris knew that Saiyingpun School existed before Fung Fu, so why did he say: "appointed as the first Headmaster Mr. Fung Fu a returned student from America"? This is because the school in 1879 was a new school.
3. Similarly, why did the Industrial and Commercial Evening News report: "Fung Fu, an English teacher in Hong Kong, was the first Chinese to serve as headmaster in a government school"? They all knew that before 1879, there were many government schools, all with Chinese headmasters. This refers to a government school primarily teaching English. Others, like Central School, were all headed by foreigners. Industrial and Commercial Evening News, January 19, 1934, Friday.
4. It was a new experimental school for Hennessy's English education reform. "However, I must explain that this school operated throughout the year on the optional principle, which, with Your Excellency’s permission, I applied to this school as an experiment."
5. In 1926, when newspapers widely reported the renaming of Saiyingpun School to King's College, there was an opinion that it was inexplicable. "it would have been wiser to have kept the word “School” and to call the students “Schoolboys.”“ The Director of Education explained the reason for the renaming in that year's education report, which is the only official explanation. "Saiyingpun School,-- was founded in 1891, --its magnificent new quarters on Bonham Road, re-named by His Excellency King’s College". Here it says that the school name was changed by King George V. Its former school building was completed in 1891. And the 1891 school building was the first of the five schools promised by Queen Victoria. Therefore, the history of King's College is related to English education.
6. After the renaming in 1929, Governor Clementi stated that the King's College Old Boys' Association included all alumni from 1879 onwards.

Old Boys' Association
The Governor also highlighted the notable personal interest shown by parents, who responded in large numbers to the Head Master's invitation to observe classes. He stressed that this interest and the resulting cordial relationship between staff and parents were crucial for the school's success and should be encouraged. He then suggested that former pupils, numbering 4,856 since the Saiyingpun School (which evolved into King's College) opened in 1879, with nearly 900 boys currently in attendance, should form an Old Boys' Association. He cited the great value such an association had for Queen's College and expressed confidence it would be equally valuable for King's College.---1929 Prize Distribution Day

The Process of Naming King's College

Clues to the naming process of King's College were reported in newspapers in March 1928.
“--school to be known by the proud title of King’s College, which is to provide for higher education up to the Matriculation Standard. ----
To your, Sir, the College, is indebted for its name, for you will recollect that in March, 1926, when you visited the building in its incomplete state, you selected the style King’s College, a title of which we all can be justly proud. “------Hong Kong Daily Press 1928-03-06

The new Bonham Road school building was still under construction in March 1926. Why did the Governor take time out of his busy schedule to visit A. Morris at the construction site? And why did he not name it when it was officially in use? It was not fully operational by the end of 1926.

It turns out that this hasty decision was related to another event. The Prince of Wales (Prince Edward) visited Hong Kong on March 15, representing King George V to confer honors. Cecil Clementi was awarded the Knight Commander of St. George.
At that time, the Bonham Road school building was the most important newly completed building in Hong Kong. Cecil Clementi, in gratitude, offered it as a tribute. But using a secondary school as a tribute seemed somewhat lacking. So it was upgraded to a College. However, in Britain, only Trinity, King's, etc., were called Colleges. So when the public became aware, they submitted letters to newspapers criticizing it: "it would have been wiser to have kept the word “School” and to call the students “Schoolboys.”“.

The entire naming process should have occurred in March. From the later speeches of the Governor and A. Morris, it can be seen that they never considered this renaming as the opening of a new school.
“The name of the School has been changed from ‘Saiyingpun School’ to ‘King’s College’”---1926Ed Report
In the newspaper report of April 22, China Mail 1926-04-22, it can be seen that while the Education Department was still using Saiyingpun School, the Public Works Department was already using New Bonham Road School. A new term that had not appeared before.
Public Works also used the name Bonham Road School in its April Tender. This shows that the government internally already knew about the school's renaming.

However, why does the Report of Public Works 1925, page 23, contain the sentence, "good progress was made on the New King’s College"? This is likely because this complete report was submitted to the Legislative Council on November 4 of the following year. This was customary practice. By then, the entire renaming process had been completed. This also indicates that the naming process occurred during the construction period.

Morris took a ten-month long leave in 1925, vacationing in England and purchasing for the new school building.
The old school building was handed over to the Chinese Normal School in March 1926. "Vernacular Normal School provided a nucleus for this new institution which was started in March in the premises of the old Saiyingpun School.”---Administrative Reports for the Year 1926

The Legislative Council approved the transitional arrangements in April.
“$780 is required for the rent of two flats for the Vernacular Middle School”, because” structural work would be completed in June, but he could not give an exact date as regards furniture and fittings. Some would be quite late, but there would be nothing to prevent the school being carried on there after the end of June.”

Arrangements for the Relocation of Saiyingpun School Students by Class Level.
Class 8 (in four divisions) was transferred to the New King’s College building, (may be March 1926)(occupying first the Gymnasium and later, the Class-Rooms on the top floor where they were joined by Class 7, after the Ching Ming Vacation.( April 5th, 1926)
The remainder of the School removed into King’s College, in September after the Summer Vacation.

By December 2025, construction was still ongoing, "A few alterations and additions have been made to the original design, notably the provision of tile dados to all Classroom walls, and a granite Portico to the Main Entrance."

1926 Construction Progress

“The electric wiring, and installing of water service are both almost completed. ---The erection of granite portico to front entrance is progressing and brickwork generally is being cleaned. ---The school authorities have occupied a portion of the building.”---12th April, 1926.

the granite portico to front entrance is nearly completed-----28th July, 1926.

It is particularly important to note the design change of the granite portico at the front entrance. "the designs and drawings were the work of Mr. Dawbarn whose plan have since been selected from amongst many competitors, for the now Raffles College at Singapore.”—1928 A. Morris.
The design of the granite portico was the most important part of this building, and it was fundamentally impossible to change it at the last minute. This might be related to the widening of Bonham Road. But if Bonham Road were to be widened, tenders would definitely have to be issued. This was not a small project, but no relevant tenders could be found in those years.
Tenders related to Saiyingpun School include:
“Tender for Formation of Site, Laying Foundations and Building Retaining Walls for Bonham Road School”--November, 1922.
“Tender for Bonham Road School Superstructure-- The work consisting of Erection on Existing Foundations of Bonham Road School.”---March, 1924.

From the garden wall of King's College, it seems that the widening of Bonham Road did not affect the gate design. Another possibility is that the original school name on the gate was Sai Ying Pun School, and after learning that it was about to be renamed, the design was changed. Mr. Dawbarn should have included the school name in his design drawings. That would naturally have been "Sai Ying Pun School".

1933 King's College Entrance Exam Results
Industrial and Commercial Evening News 1933-01-04
Hong Kong Industrial and Commercial Daily News 1933-01-05

Chapter Six
Summaries of King’s College/SaiYingPun(English) from 1880-1940

Part Two
Chapter One
Fung Fu's Background

Fung Fu was born on February 5, 1849, and died on January 19, 1934.

Howard Fall 2012 P.23
Just three years after Howard University opened, the American Missionary Association requested the admission of three young Chinese men. --
They found three at New York City’s Five Points House of Industry, a charitable organization that helped the destitute find work and instructed them in English and religion. All three were Cantonese from the Guangdong province who had come as laborers.
Fung Affoo, 20, orphaned at 15, arrived by way of Cuba, where he had worked as a house servant, narrowly escaping slavelike conditions as a coolie laborer in the sugar cane fields.
Choy Awah, 21, had come to America as a ship’s cabin boy.
Leong Sing, 18, had studied to be a bookkeeper for six years in China before sailing to the United States. Like Fung, he had been in America for only six months.
All three were asked to renounce “paganism” as a condition of accepting the association’s offer of a full scholarship.
On February 20, 1870, the trio entered Howard’s Normal School (Model School), whose preparatory course of study required a basic knowledge of reading, arithmetic, spelling, and geography. They stayed for two years, and Fung and Leong were baptized at Howard in 1872.
The only known photos of them, taken in 1870, show them in various stages of assimilation. Two had given up their Chinese robes and caps for Western clothing, but two had not yet cut off their queues, the long, signature braids of hair they were required to wear under Chinese law.
The men were popular and did well in their studies. Cornelius Scott, a schoolmate, wrote in 1872 that “Fung is very sociable, polite and funny.
Sing is also very sociable and good-natured. We were playing football the other evening and in running at the ball we came in contact with each other and I being the heavier knocked him down; he just jumped up and went on playing and said nothing about it.”

Chinese Americans in Washington D.C.
Higher Education
Educational opportunities drew several Chinese students to Washington. In February 1870, three young men from Guangdong were admitted to Howard University’s Normal School (Model School) for prospective teachers. Fong Ah Foo, Choy Ah Wah, and Leong Ah Sing had each arrived by different means and with a different background.
Fong, orphaned at fifteen years old, had worked as a house servant in Cuba.
Choy gained his passage as a cabin boy.
Leong had studied to be a bookkeeper in China before emigrating.
All three had been living at the Five Points House of Industry, a Methodist-sponsored mission to New York City’s poor. The American Missionary Association appealed to Howard University to admit the three and provided them with full scholarships—after they renounced “paganism.” In 1872, both Fong and Leong were baptized at the university.
Although Leong’s subsequent story is unknown, both Choy and Foo remained in the United States. Fong moved to San Francisco and became a teacher at the Chinese Mission School. Choy remained in Washington and opened a tea shop on Pennsylvania Avenue in the area that became Chinatown. In 1874, he became a citizen of the United States, and in the following year, he married a woman of Irish descent. The marriage certificate gives his race as “White (Mongolian).”
Choy or Chow was a tea salesman at 721 12th Street NW by the end of 1876, and a grocer at 431 L Street NW by 1880.

Fung Fu was born on February 5, 1849, in Heshan, Guangzhou. At the age of 15, he was sold to Cuba. In May 1869, he arrived in New York and was taken in by the charitable organization Five Points House of Industry. On February 18, 1870, he was sponsored by the American Missionary Association to enter university. His name appeared multiple times in the annual reports and monthly publications of the "American Missionary Association," the earliest being in the May 1870 issue.
“ OUR CHINESE PROTEGES.
Our readers will remember that at the annual meeting, held in Ohio, last October, it was voted that the American Missionary Association, extend its benefit to the Chinese, in our land. Three young Chinamen have accordingly been sent to Howard University, to complete the education begun in China. Perhaps a short sketch of them, would interest our friends.
Fong Affoo, is twenty years of age. and an orphan. He attended school in China, for six years. Five years since, he was sent, as a Coolie, to Cuba, where he was employed as a house servant. He has been in New York six months, and reads in the Third Reader.”

The records of the "American Missionary Association" should be the most original account of Fung Fu's background; all subsequent historical books and reports are based on this. Regarding his background, if calculated this way, Fung Fu likely left Cuba in July 1869, arrived at the New York Five Points House of Industry, and began his American life.

The New York Times October 5, 1869, has a small news item worth noting. "This institution is succeeding in teaching them our language and training them to be the teachers and leaders of their countrymen who will soon flock to our shores." Fung Fu and the other two were products of the "American Missionary Association's" will. The time, place, and all aspects align. It can be inferred that Mr. and Mrs. RAILSHACK's evening group was the starting point of Fung Fu's story.

Photos
https://archive.org/details/howarduniversity00dyso/page/n273/mode/2up
Only one photo of Fung Fu in America remains. It was published in Dyson Walter's 1941 book "Howard University, the capstone of negro education: a history, 1867-1940". Later publications like Howard 2012 also cited this photo, but misidentified it, because Fung Fu did not wear a queue. "Choy and Leon both wear braided cues."
This is a circa-1870 halftone print. These images are “cartes-de-visite” or similar small-format albumen prints typical of 19th-century portrait studios.
In that era, taking photos at a portrait studio cost about one to five yuan, so many Howard students liked to take photos at portrait studios.
At that time, there were only three Chinese people in Washington D.C. (Chinese Americans in Washington D.C. page 9).
The three were quite noticeable, and it is possible that their photos were preserved locally. However, Fung Fu should have brought such precious photos back to Hong Kong, where he could have had someone paint them to preserve them.
The collection location of this photo is the Howard University Library Moorland-Spingarn Research Center.
“ Affoo, Fong, n.d. box P134-1”;
“ Awah, Choy (Student), ca. 1870 box P134-2”;
“Assing, Leon (Student), ca. 1870 box P134-2”
This indicates that the three of them took the photo together when they first entered school.
https://dh.howard.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=finaid_p…

The American Missionary Association's Concern for the Cuba Coolie Trade
Cuba Coolie 1867
..There are at Macao six or eight depots from which about 30,000 or 40,000 coolies are shipped every year to Peru and Cuba. The coolies are furnished to the depots by recruiting agents, Chinese; or Portuguese, many of them men of very disreputable character, and not a few more than suspected of being connected with piracy.
Resolutions at the 23 Annual Meeting of “The American Missionary Association”, Dec.,1869
Resolved, That it is the duty of this Association to inaugurate and prosecute a vigorous missionary work among the Chinese in the United State.
Resoved, That this Association should hold itself in readiness to follow with Christian labors the soon-coming emancipation in Cuba.
CHINESE IN CALIFORNIA, Feb., 1870
One of our former missionaries at Andersonville, now resides in California. She writes: Nothing in your letter so gratified me as the mention of the resolution of the “A. M. A.” at the annual meeting, regarding the Chinese work. The first missionary work which opened to my hand here on the Pacific coast was just in advance of the A. M. A.’s resolution.
Days in Cuba
In the year Fung Fu was 8 years old, the Hong Kong Gazette (50) recorded that 14% of the 9600 Chinese coolies transported to Cuba by 26 ships of a certain country in 1857 died, because "Many of the Chinese jumped overboard."

CHINESE COOLIES.
CUBA. A Chinese emigrant, named Pang Akan, gives some account of the treatment of the Chinese in Cuba.--- Pang was kidnapped and carried from Macao, where, bound hand and foot, he suffered for days in the vile recesses of a barracoon-- 1047 kidnapped men shipped---

Circular Daily 1882-10-03

Recent News from America, August 14th, Western Calendar
News from Chicago, America, states that a Chinese laborer previously wished to travel from Cuba to America by steamship, then take a land route to San Francisco, and then return to China by steamship.
This matter had been reported to American officials. It is now heard that the customs officer of Baltimore wrote to the Treasury Department, asking for a decision on whether to approve the Chinese request.
An acting official replied that America had implemented the Chinese Exclusion Act. All Chinese people were prohibited from entering American territory, and customs officers were ordered not to allow any Chinese person to land at Baltimore.
Yesterday, a ship carrying four or five hundred Chinese laborers arrived from Cuba, wishing to disembark there. Now, the customs officer, having received orders from the acting official, again prohibited them from landing and strictly enforced the ban.
It is subsequently heard that the ship will be transported by sea to San Francisco. According to this, returning to China from Cuba by first taking a land route to San Francisco from America, and then a steamship from San Francisco, is thousands of miles longer than returning directly by sea from Cuba. The new American law is truly against human nature. One might ask, regarding its so-called "United States" and "federation," does not the name itself make one laugh ironically?
Detained upon Landing
A letter from San Francisco, dated August 15th, Western Calendar, states that yesterday, a Sydney steamship arrived in San Francisco. Its Chinese helmsman was not allowed to disembark due to lack of a license. He is currently detained on a pontoon boat. It is heard that a helmsman named Ah Hing will accompany the Sydney ship's captain ashore. If detained, he can go to court to argue. The strictness of American law is truly such that it rejects people from thousands of miles away.

Fung Fu Lived in the New York Five Points House of Industry for About Half a Year, Learning English. During the Day, He May Have Sold Cigars on the Street.
New York Times----March 9, 1869
Five Points House of Industry.
The schools of the Five Points House of Industry held their Spring reception yesterday afternoon. A large number of ladies and gentlemen were present. Mr. HALLIDAY, Superintendent, presided. The exercises were very interesting, the children doing their respective parts in a highly creditable manner.
About two months since an evening class for grown Chinese was established, and the members of this class read lessons from the Scriptures in English and Chinese very proficiently, considering the time they have been learning English. It was stated that the Chinese are very industrious students and extremely anxious to learn. Another interesting exercise was the ABC’ roundelay by all the children, in which a thunder-storm was represented by the clapping of hands and stamping of feet. Songs, choruses and recitations were rendered with pleasing effect, and the whole proceedings were gone through with admirably. Rev. Dr. PRIME delivered a brief address. At 4 P. M. 400 children sat down to an excellent dinner provided by the institution. The average number clothed and daily fed by the institution 18 224.

New York Times-- April 25, 1869
Mr. and Mrs. RAILSBACK, our new missionaries, are doing, I think, a most excellent work with the Chinese, -----Every evening except the Sabbath more or less come to receive lessons, and some come during the day; and, in addition, Mr. and Mrs. RAILSBACK go to houses where they are to instruct them; and in some instances, Mr. RAILSBACK goes to their stands and workshops to give and hear their lessons.
October 5, 1869
New York Times
The class of Chinamen taught by Mr. and Mrs. RAILSHACK, at the Five Points House of Industry, held one of their unique festivals in the dining room of the institution last evening.
About forty were present, the entertainment consisted of songs by members of the class, with accompaniments upon instruments from the Flowery Land, speeches in Chinese and English and refreshments. This institution is succeeding in teaching them our language and training them to be the teachers and leaders of their countrymen who will soon flock to our shores.
They make and sell cigars through the day and spend two hours each evening with their books, and are said to learn very rapidly. Those who have strong prejudices against John would do well to look in upon him as he pores over his spelling book or mingles socially with his fellows.
Note: This paragraph is important because the evening school run by Mr. and Mrs. RAILSHACK could not have trained English teachers. This refers to the original intention of the "American Missionary Association." The timing also matches. Fung Fu was likely an attendee. He sold cigars during the day. The three of them may have been selected in October to be sent to Howard University for training.
Nov. 13, 1869
New York Times
The Chinese Pupils at the Five Points House of Industry.
Last night the Chinese pupils, numbering some thirty young men and boys, together with about a dozen Cubans, who attend evening school at the Five Points House of Industry, were entertained at a sociable by Rev. S. P. TALLIDAY, Superintendent of the institution. They were all neatly dressed, and looked quite intelligent. A number of visitors, including several ladies, were present. After prayer. Rev. E. Folsom, of the Presbyterian Missionary Board, from Canton, addressed the pupils in the Chinese language. number of the Chinese pupils next read each a verse from the Scriptures in English, indicating much progress. They had been in attendance at school some only two and others three months. One of them repeated a whole chapter from the Gospels. Another repeated the Lord’s Prayer in Chinese. The meeting was then addressed by Rev. E. P. Sur, of the American Missionary Society, and Rev. Mr. HALLIDAY. Mr. TELUZE, a Belgian, performed in good style sacred airs from Norma” on the accordion. There was a fruit supper in the course of the evening.
Note: Fung Fu may also have been present.
February 7, 1870
The House of Industry Extending Itself—The New Wing to be Dedicated To-Day—Interesting Bit of History.
Thirty-five years ago, the Five Points Mission Sunday School was kept in the second story of an old wooden building in Orange-street, over a carpenter’s shop.
March 15, 1870
Work of the Past Year.
(Inmates in Five Points)Of those 1,177 were women, 357 boys, 231 girls. Situations were found for 761; eight died in the House and 230 remain, the balance having left of their own accord.
THURSDAY, JULY 7, 1870
An Hour With an Oriental Conjuror at the Five Points House of Industry
They all presented a wretched appearance, however, such as is usually observable about the pig-tailed cigar venders who are seen on the streets. Several of them, in fact, were discovered to be connected with that trade.
The majority of them were ascertained to be residents of the “slums” in the Sixth Ward, and not a few of them were reported to be intractable and indifferent subjects to the attentions bestowed on them by the officers of the House of Industry in the efforts made toward their reform, and the Introduction of American manners and customs among them.
New York
The primary work of the American Missionary Association was to address the educational needs of freed slaves after the Civil War and to evangelize among African Americans. It was a powerful Presbyterian denomination in the United States.
Several years before 1870, it resolved to evangelize among Chinese laborers in the U.S. However, Chinese laborers, unlike earlier German and Irish immigrants, were very stubborn, unwilling to assimilate, and had tense relations with American laborers.
For evangelism, the American Missionary Association found three young Chinese men from the Five Points House of Industry, a well-regulated poverty relief organization in New York, and sponsored them to attend Howard University, hoping that after graduation they could teach and evangelize for the church in San Francisco as helpers.
Fung Fu was almost sold as a coolie in Cuba, and it would have been difficult for him to escape Cuba in that era. It so happened that a Cuban national hero launched a movement to liberate slaves. Fung Fu may have been rescued by American missionaries and sent to New York. Due to geography, those from Cuba mostly went to the East Coast.
The Five Points House of Industry only took in street children aged five to sixteen. Fung Fu and the other two were already 20 years old. Coincidentally, the Five Points House of Industry expanded that year. Fung Fu only stayed for half a year.
Most people from Cuba made a living by making and selling cigars. Fung Fu and others may have joined this trade. Coming from Cuba, he only knew Spanish, not English. Mr. and Mrs. RAILSBACK of the Five Points House of Industry hosted Cuban refugees in the evenings, teaching English, evangelizing, and holding social gatherings. Fung Fu may have been an attendee. Because in that year, there would not have been many Chinese youths in similar circumstances.

Chapter Two
Fung Fu at Howard University

Howard University Calendar
Fall Term Sept., 13 -Dec., 20
Winter Term Jan., 3 -Mar., 29
Spring Term April 3 -June 12
Summer Vacation (Thirteen Weeks)

Events
February 18, 1870 Admitted to university
February 20, 1870 Howard University unclassified student
1870 converted before Nov.
Jan. 21st, 1872 Baptist

Catalog of the Officers and Students of Howard University
1869-70 unclassified student
1870-71 unclassified student
1871-72 Model School Class A
1872-73 (lack of information)
1873-74 Preparatory Department Junior Class
June 1874 Left university

Why did Howard University not publish Catalog of the Officers and Students of Howard University for 1872-1873?

In the Preparatory Department, 13 of its 47 junior class students in 1871-72 entered the middle class of 1873-74.
In the Normal Department, 2 of its 25 middle class students in 1871-72 entered the senior class of 1873-74. The curriculum also changed.
In the Collegiate Department, 1 of its 24 freshman class students in 1871-72 entered the 14-student sophomore class of 1873-74.
From this, it can be inferred that Howard University suspended operations for one year in 1872-1873. This may have been due to its early turmoil and lack of funding, but "the capstone of negro education" did not mention this.
If the inference is correct, then Fung Fu and the other two suspended their studies for one year. In that era, they had the "American Missionary Association" supporting their living expenses, and they could find work in D.C., or be arranged to work in the industrial department of Howard University, making leather and furniture.

Fung Fu and the other two arrived at Howard University in February 1870, during the Winter Term. They joined the Model School as unclassified students. They still could not pass the regular admission exam in the new semester of 1871 and remained unclassified students for another year. They entered Class A of the Model School in 1871-72, suspended their studies for one year in 1872-1873, then entered the Junior Class of the Preparatory Department in 1873-74 for one year, and left the university after the Spring Term in June 1874.
Fung Fu was sponsored to enter the elementary school (practicing school) attached to the Faculty of Education for practical training. At that time, King's College was also used for similar purposes by the University of Hong Kong's Faculty of Education, and was also called a practicing school, which was a common practice in Britain and America at the time.

Although Fung Fu had studied elementary school textbooks at the night school of the New York Five Points House of Industry, he had not attended elementary school, so entering Howard University's Model School was appropriate. The Model School was an elementary school attached to the Preparatory Department.
The three of them had living expenses, making them more fortunate than the work-study students who came to school with shovels.
“Is there any way in which I can enter your school. I am a white boy 19 years of age an orphan and poor and have no money and want an education. ----”
The applicants who were accepted brought with them, in many instances, a pick or shovel or spade. They came to dig, literally, to dig their way through school. It was they who, in a large measure, drained the hill, graded it, and cut the first streets through this section of the county.”-- the capstone of negro education

Model School
Candidates for admission to the Model School must be at least twelve years of age, and pass satisfactory examinations in Arithmetic (through long division). Reading, Spelling (common words of two syllables), and Elements of Geography.
This is intended to be a school of “practice “ and of “observation.” and is so arranged that those who complete its course of instruction will be prepared to enter either the Normal or Preparatory Department.
Reading, Spelling, Penmanship, Drawing, Grammar, Geography, United States History, Mental and Written Arithmetic, Loomis’s Elementary Algebra, and Natural History, arranged according to the yearly attainments of the A, B, and C, classes.”
“This department was opened in a large frame building on Georgia Avenue just below W or Pomeroy Street. This building had been used as a German dance hall and beer saloon. A Preparatory Department was soon added. Then, in order to prepare pupils to enter these departments, namely, the Normal and Preparatory Departments, a Model School, including the elementary grades, A, B, C, and D, was established in the same building. Finally, to prepare pupils to enter the Model School, an ungraded class was established beneath it. In this way, Howard University went down to the people.”—” the capstone of negro education”

That year, of the 58 students in Class A, 14 entered the Preparatory Junior with 36 students; 4 entered the Normal Department Junior (23 students). Other classes had almost zero.
The Preparatory Course was designed for those preparing to enter the Faculty of Arts.
The Preparatory Department Junior Course curriculum was:
“First term: Harkness’ Arnold’s First Latin Book; Arithmetic (written and mental) reviewed; Ancient Geography; Reading and Spelling.
Second term: First Latin Book continued, Loomis’ Elementary Algebra, Worcester’s Outlines of History.
Third term: Hanson’s Caesar; Harkness’ Prose Composition: Algebra continued. History-outlines, continued”
However, at that time, Howard University was plagued by funding and corruption scandals. It was in a period of anarchy. In 1874, the American Missionary Association withdrew its funding. Fung Fu and others also left. For many years thereafter, Howard University had no Chinese students.
“Like the history of Europe, the history of Howard University is easily divided into four periods: an early period, a period of confusion, a middle, and a modern period. The early period in the history of Howard University from 1866 to 1874, like that of Europe, was one during which soldiers were in control. Its Ceasar was Oliver Otis Howard, upon whose retirement confusion reigned. The second period, from 1874 ‘to 1877, was therefore a period of disorder—anarchy.”
“By 1874, however, conditions were again so bad that a further reduction in salaries was necessary.--- Another evidence of the disintegration of the University is a letter dated July 16, 1874, in which an application of the University for a loan of $75,000 is denied.” —” the capstone of negro education”
Some students found ways to earn extra money without attending classes. They were not to be trifled with.
““They do not pay their debts although many make more money than their teachers.”

Fung Fu may also have worked various part-time jobs while at school. At that time, the university had a shoe factory.
But probably the most ambitious scheme was a plan to erect a “Shoe factory and tannery.” -—“ the capstone of negro education”

Fung Fu's Accommodation
“Miner Hall for young ladies is three stories in height above the basement, and will accommodate one hundred students and instructors. The basement is completely arranged and furnished for all purposes of a Boarding Hall.”
Fung Fu and the other two were arranged in basement No. 29 M. H. of the girls' dormitory. The boarding fees ranged from over a hundred to 200 yuan per year. Miner Hall was razed in 1961, and the current site is the School of Education.

Fung Fu's Baptism
The baptism of the three at that time attracted a large number of witnesses. Dr. Rankin later became the president of Howard University.
“I find a letter from Rev. E. P. Smith, then your Field Secretary, dated Feb. 18, 1870, making an application for the reception of three Chinese young men to our institution, named Fung Affoo, Leong Sing and Choy Awah. The two first named, he regarded as men of great promise. they having indulged hope in Christ, were last Sabbath baptized by Dr. Rankin, in the name of the Holy Trinity, and The friends of the Missionary Association have great reason for gratitude for the success which has thus far attended their labors. The past success should be the occasion of a new impulse in the work of the world’s evangelization.”—D.B.Nichols

Fung Fu's Character
This is the only record of Fung Fu's character in his legendary life.
Cornelius Scott wrote in a letter to his parents on November 4, 1872 that “Fung is very sociable, polite and funny.
Sing is also very sociable and good-natured. We were playing football the other evening and in running at the ball we came in contact with each other and I being the heavier knocked him down; he just jumped up and went on playing and said nothing about it.”
Cornelius Scott graduated from the Preparatory Department on June 16, 1873, and joined the Collegiate Department as a Freshman in the same year. That year, Fung Fu was in the junior class of the Preparatory Department. Cornelius Scott later became a very learned pastor.
“Hazing at Howard University has not turned out to be as profitable an amusement as at some other educational institutions--- The latter subsequently armed himself with a large piece of wood and a chisel laying in wait for the man whom he had attempted to haze, struck him over the head, knocked him down, and when he got up, began to cut into him with the chisel.” --1878, The New York Tribune

Choi Awah, who was sponsored with Fung Fu, also achieved success. He probably left school a year earlier and opened the first tea shop in D.C. "He became a U.S. citizen in 1874, married a woman of Irish descent, and opened a tea shop on Pennsylvania Avenue"
Choi Awah
The first Chinese-owned businesses in Washington were founded in the mid-1870s: Choy’s tea shop on Pennsylvania Avenue, in what would become Washington’s first Chinatown at 819 E Street NW.
The historic Choy’s tea shop was located in the 300 block of Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C..
Founded in the mid-1870s by Choy Ah Wah (Choi Awah), it was one of the first Chinese-owned businesses in the District and a cornerstone of the city’s original Chinatown.

Fung Fu's Correspondence with the Church

First Letter For April, 1871. 83
THE BEST WORD FOR KINDNESS.
We have three Chinese youths studying at Howard University, Washington, D. C. Affoo, the writer of the following letter, is one of them. He has been in America only 18 months, and had no education in English and scarcely any in Chinese when he came.
D.C. Jan 9, 1871
Dear Mr. S
I thank you for your kind present which I received last Thursday. It keeps me very comfortable. I could not find out a word to say how was your kind- ness, but “God.” He knows how you doing in this World. For the Bible said, Beloved, if our heart condemns us not, then have we confidence toward God. Our school commenced last Wednesday (Winter Term), I am glad that I have something to do, for it is a best thing for everybody’s to study, for it will guide me to a good way. In this term I am studying same books which I did last term, except I had a good lesson which I received to day for tomorrow. It was a woman who has taught her little children to pray, as one evening the little girl was saying the Lord’s prayer aloud. “But her mother stopped her in the middle of her prayer. ‘How is it,’ she asked, that when you have prayed for daily bread, you always add something I can not understand? You must tell me what that is.” “The little one lay silent, and ashamed, and looked at her mother. What is it you said after our daily bread? ‘Dear mam- ma, don’t be angry, I only said, and plenty of butter on it.” This lesson I like it very much, for that little girl said very truly, for my daily bread I put plenty of butter on it too as another. But when I say the Lord’s prayer, I do not say in that way, after our daily bread I just say, and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. That is the way I say it every day.
Last wednesday I have been to the Presidents Building, and saw Gen. Grant. and shook hands with him. And I have a nice time Christmas with my friends here, I think you enjoyed yourself very much.
Choy Awah, and Leon Sing they send many thanks to you. Dear Friend S. “God” bless you.
Yours affectionately,
FUNG AFFOO.

This indicates that although Fung Fu had attended a private school for six years before going to Cuba at age 15, he might have forgotten everything. He was illiterate before attending night school at the Five Points House of Industry.

Second Letter
WASHINGTON, D. C., March 30th, 1872.
Dear Sir-
Since I saw you here last time at Howard University. I felt quite happy, and I felt like to have you stayed a little longer till my school out, so that I could talk to you, and tell you what I desire will be able to do by-and-by. As I been here about two years, I feel that I have been learned many useful things which will do me a great deal good in my future. Beside that I have learned another thing better than all; that is, reconcile with God Jesus Christ, our Redeemer. I know that I was a heathen, and find out that I am living in the darkness, so that I am trying to seize this opportunity, which will be great pleasure in the after life. As I am reading the John Bunyan’s book, Pilgrim’s Progress, it got very much interested my mind; it seems to me it would show me everything in my life, and tells me how to be happy while I lived on earth. I fond that book very much, for the words not so hard for me to read, and ease to understand them.
Yours most affectionately,
FUNG AFFOO.
Third Letter
June 5th, 1872.
When I was in China, I never thought I would be here in America, and when I came to New York, I did not think that I have the opportunity to come to this school at Howard University to learn the doctrine of Christ; but God has been placed me under the care of you and some other friends, that I comfortably been keeping. Now I can see the life of mine is in the hand of the Lord. I can but only look up to him for guide, and see if I will be able in my future to do the same example which you are doing for me now, and that I may gain the pleasure in another world; that what I desire. As I had been read the A. M. A. paper “Advance Supplement” the other day, about my countrymen in San Francisco, when I read about that they formed a Chinese Christian class there, to meet weekly for study and prayer with the American Christian, I felt so happy, and I hope by this opportunity that they will keep on and on live nearer to God, and get into the army of Christ, that they may have the power to turn from those who are worshiping the idols to worship that true God who is in heaven, and I desire that I myself will be able to take a part with these Christian men, work together in San Francisco or China, wherever may be if God’s will. I am preparing myself to be a teacher of English, I know that they need this language. I hope these Christian men will be successful then I have the good partners, good help.
Yours truly,
FUNG AFFOO.

Fung Fu seemed to enjoy writing to Rev. Pond. The last letter was before the summer vacation of his second year. He might have suspended his studies in his third year to work for the school, and the coursework in the Preparatory Department in his fourth year must have been very demanding. He had no time to write letters.
Fung Fu studied in the Preparatory Department for one year. His academic qualification was probably only equivalent to high school first year. His English writing ability was roughly at a high school level.

Chapter Three
Fung Fu in San Francisco

Fung Fu Had Already Expressed His Aspiration for Missionary Work While at University.
“--As I been here about two years, I feel that I have been learned many useful things which will do me a great deal good in my future. Beside that I have learned another thing better than all; that is, reconcile with God Jesus Christ, our Redeemer.—March 30, 1872

“--As I had been read the A. M. A. paper “Advance Supplement “ the other day, about my countrymen in San Francisco, when I read about that they formed a Chinese Christian class there, to meet weekly for study and prayer with the American Christian, --and I desire that I myself will be able to take a part with these Christian men, work together in San Francisco or China—”June 5th, 1872.

When he left Howard University in June 1874, Rev. Pond's missionary school work in San Francisco had just begun. He organized schools for evangelizing Chinese laborers scattered throughout California.
Immediately upon receiving my commission as superintendent, I wrote to each of the teachers and received prompt replies.---April 1874
A New Movement ---Call for a Church---Generous contribution of Chinese Converts to secure it-----June 1874
Fung Fu went to San Francisco and was hired as a teacher before February 1875. He also actively participated in the work of the newly established Chinese Young Men's Christian Association.
I have only a few words to say about the Chinese Young Men’s Christian Association, of which I have been a member about three years. This Association was organized not quite four years ago---Address by Fung Affoo Jan 1878 issue
He also played an important role in the newly established "California Chinese Mission", converting 13 Chinese laborers.
“The organization of the new and promising auxiliary, the “California Chinese Mission,” in connection with the General Association of California, Oct. 5th, 1875”
“ a letter of Rev. Mr. Pond: “Besides the thirteen conversions reported by Affoo, two are reported from the Los Angeles school, and two in the school in Stockton; a total of seventeen during the month of December. It is an amount of saving result-a harvest- that almost staggers my weak faith. ”
In the same year, he translated the Chinese membership rules of the "Association of Christian Chinese" into English and hung them on the wall. "-- Originally written in the Chinese language, and in that form adopted unanimously framed, and hung on the wall in the room of the Association, so as to be read and understood by every one proposing to join the Association. Translated into English by Fung Affoo"
He was invited to speak at the annual picnic of the Sunday school. "On Friday last, Woodward’s Garden was opened to the Chinese Missions and Sunday-schools, for their annual picnic.
The attendance was large, -- But the gem of the occasion was an English address by Fung Affoo,” Woodward’s Garden was a famous landmark.
He was very popular and was invited again to speak at the annual meeting of the Plymouth Chinese Sunday School.

His missionary work was very successful, and he was invited to give testimony. The following are the remarks made by Fung Affoo at the anniversary of Plymouth Chinese Sunday School, alluded to by us—Rev. Pond ---Feb., 1876 issue
Fung Fu went to Oakland in August 1876 to teach and evangelize.

Teaching English for the church was a paid job, merely a means; evangelism was his calling. At 27, having completed his studies, he found his calling and immersed himself in the work with passion, achieving highly praised results. He was, so to speak, a rising star. Fung Fu was praised by Presbyterian pastor T. M. OVIATT in a letter to Rev. Pond.

“I inclose from last week‘s “Pacific” a brief address by Fung Affoo. He is winning a high place in the esteem both of his own countrymen, and of American Christians: a man of most excellent spirit and of rare ability.” –Rev. Pond

“Visiting Bro. McLean’s church at Oakland, nearly one year ago, when several Chinese converts were there baptised, and made a public profession, they inquired diligently, there and here, to know the ways of God more perfectly, and at their urgent request, these three were examined carefully by the session here, assisted by Fung Affoo and Jee Gam, (whom you well know,) and they were found worthy of baptism and reception.”--- T. M. OVIATT.

During the Chinese New Year in 1877, Fung Fu elaborately decorated the rooms of the "Chinese Young Men's Christian Association" to welcome the new year, competing with nearby temples for believers. At that time, Christian churches and Chinese temples that burned incense were arch-enemies. It was only later that Christianity accepted believers burning incense to worship ancestors.

“On New Year’s eve we gathered together to watch the old year out and welcome the new year. The hour between 11 and 12 o’clock we spent in thanking God --- From 12 o’clock to half past 1 A. M., we prayed God to give us strength --We retired to bed about half past 2 o’clock A. M. to get rest, ---About 6 o’clock our friends and pupils commenced coming to give us New Year’s calls;--- and about noon many of our Christian brethren from the country arrived. We commenced singing and preaching at one o’clock P. M.----and though there is a Chinese “Joss house just four or five doors from our Mission, many of our countrymen left it and came over to hear our preaching of Jesus.”

Fung Fu became a teacher at the San Francisco Church's Central School in August 1877 or earlier. It was a large school rented by the church. Fung Fu and other helpers had their own lounge. He served there as an assistant to the pastor.
In the October 1878 annual meeting of the "American Missionary Association," Fung Fu wrote an article introducing the work of the Central School's Sunday Bible study class.
“ On Sunday we have the “Bible-class,” commencing at half-past eleven A. M., and continuing for one hour and a half. We sing about half an hour either in Chinese or in English, then offer a prayer, and then read a chapter from the Bible. Each verse they read after me, then I translate it into Chinese; when through interpreting, on each verse or paragraph I make some remarks which I have studied out during the week days.
After we get through the chapter, I speak about ten minutes on a subject selected from that chapter beforehand, then one of our brethren offers prayer; we then unite in singing the Doxology, and close with the Lord’s Prayer.”
Fung Fu's Departure Time from the U.S.:

1878 Monthly

Fung Fu could not have taught at the Central School in Hong Kong before Saiyingpun School. His appointment date of February 1, 1879, is confirmed.
In the Third Annual Meeting of "California Chinese Mission" on October 11, 1878, he was recorded as a teacher at the San Francisco Central School.
In the June 1878 issue, his work in the BIBLE CLASS was introduced. He was likely still in San Francisco leading Sunday services around that time.
“SABBATH WORSHIP AT THE CENTRAL MISSION. -BIBLE CLASS. By Fung Affoo. “
In the October 1878 issue, he published "More about a mission at Hong Kong," expressing his hope to start missionary work after returning to Hong Kong.
It is inferred that he returned to Hong Kong in mid or late 1878, met Eitel, and was recommended to Saiyingpun School. The timing was quite tight. He probably could not have taught at the Central School before becoming headmaster of Saiyingpun School.
Before leaving the U.S., Fung Fu was entrusted by Rev. Pond to gather Chinese believers for missionary work in Hong Kong.
Fung Fu's records in the AMA annual reports and monthly publications during his time in San Francisco.
Chapter Four
A Historical Anecdote: Ho Kom-tong and Saiyingpun School
Ho Kom-tong, Ho Tung's half-brother, often attended Saiyingpun School's prize-giving ceremonies and donated to school activities, especially scouting and the St. John Ambulance Brigade, during Headmaster Morris's era.
China Mail 1921 Nov. 31
The inauguration ceremony of the Saiyingpun School Boy Scouts (7th Hong Kong Troop) was held on the University Football ground, Pokfulum, yesterday afternoon in the presence of a large gathering of the parents and friends of the boys, including Mr. Ho Kom-tong, the Patron of the Troop.
China Mail 1921 Nov., 1
The Saiyingpun School Old Boys’ -Mr. Ho Kam Tong-Ambulance Division was inspected by Dr. Sir Erie Stewart Taylor on Sunday morning on the University Football Ground which was kindly loaned for the occasion... Amongst those present were Lady Taylor, Mr. Ho Kom Tong (Patron of the Division) Mr. B. Ralphs (St John Ambulances Commissioner Overseas) Mr. Morris (Superintendent of the Division), and others interested in Ambulance Work.

The Government Central School and the Elite Network in Early Colonial Hong Kong by RYAN KA CHUN IU
“Ho Kom-tong founded the St. John Ambulance Brigade in Hong Kong, and he was the sole supporter of the organization for its first twelve years. “ --p114

Ho Kom-tong appeared in an incident at the age of 12, indirectly contributing to the establishment of the new Saiyingpun (English) under Fung Fu. This incident has never been mentioned by any historian. Ho Kom-tong himself may not have known, as he was only 12 at the time, and Fung Fu became headmaster of this school two years later.

The student list of the Central School usually did not appear in public view. But precisely because Hennessy ordered Inspector of Schools Frederick Stewart to provide the list, Ho Kam Tong's name appeared.
He was listed as no. 310. Chinese, age 12, enrolled for one year. "cannot be said to speak English at all"
12-year-old Ho Kom-tong's role in this incident was one of "a hundred and fifty Chinese youths." He saw the Governor in this large classroom that year. "and of the pupils in that particular class - room not one could speak English." At that time, the Central School had only 435 students. Over 150 students represented all the lower-grade students crowded together for Chinese classes, and Ho Kom-tong must have been among them.

The Government Central School and the Elite Network in Early Colonial Hong Kong by RYAN KA CHUN IU Page133
“He (何甘棠)enrolled in the Central School in 1877 at the age of eleven. After graduation, he started his career as a Chinese agent at the Jardine Matheson & Co.’s insurance department in 1886. “

The numbers match perfectly; he studied at the Central School until he graduated from the highest grade.
Admission to the Central School required an examination, and all admitted students were elites. Ho Kom-tong was assessed as unable to speak English because the Central School at that time did not emphasize spoken English, and lower-grade students primarily studied Chinese.
“Twenty years ago, our effort in English education was largely meaningless, because the teaching of spoken English was almost entirely neglected. The standard reached by a few pupils, as shown by the Oxford Local results, was, if at all, little below what it is now.”1920 Educational Report
The Central School had eight (or nine) grades, with Class 1 being the highest. Its lower grades were taught English by six local teachers, but "In the first instance, in the Preparatory Classes, where the first rudiments of English pronunciation are taught, the teaching of English was left in the hands of native assistants, whose own pronunciation is by no means perfect."

Large Class Teaching
“13. The existing accommodation is limited to bare sitting room. Each class-room contains on an average 100 boys, which is as many as can be seated in it. There is thus no means of efficiently working the school. Three or more masters have to teach simultaneously in the same class-room; whereas, with adequate accommodation, classes could be drafted off into side rooms, which would enable the masters to teach in greater quietness, and therefore with greater efficiency.”—1874 Ed Report
This method of several grades of students sitting in the same classroom was still common in Hong Kong after the war, around 1958.
When I was young, my family was poor and lived in Yau Ma Tei, Mong Kok. For some reason, my parents had enough money for me to attend school in a tong lau next to our home. My younger siblings, of course, did not have this good fortune.
About ten children were divided into three classes and sat in three rows. The teacher would lecture to a certain grade of children at intervals, while the rest sat quietly. There was a blackboard.
During recess, which was the teacher's break time, he would sell white radish cakes in a corner. I had no pocket money. In the courtyard, there was a large oil drum, and I could just drink the water from it, where many mosquito larvae swam around. If I were a bit taller, falling in would have been disastrous. The teacher relied on this for his livelihood.
Most of those lower-grade Chinese students of Ho Kom-tong were rated as "E, cannot be said to speak English at all."

Afterword:
The situation later evolved into one where some foreign children had excellent English, but Chinese students could not keep up, leading to problems in co-education; Ho Tung later donated the Yaumati school to the government, with one condition being inclusive teaching, but the government had already decided to run separate schools for British children based on race. Later, the government compromised, agreeing to have foreign teachers teach English in government district schools, and the matter was resolved.

Official Record of Proceedings, 1903.11.19
“Petitions were received from the European residents praying for the establishment of a school for the separate instruction of European children, and from Chinese residents praying for the establishment of a school for the education of the better classes of Chinese. Both proposals were approved. The English school has been established in Kowloon by kindness of Mr. Ho Tung, by whose permission a school just completed by him, at considerable expense, and presented to the colony as a mixed school for both races, was devoted to the purpose of a school for Europeans, the Government undertaking to replace it by building a school in Yaumati, which is now in course of construction. The school for the children of the better classes of Chinese has been established by private enterprise.”
1906 Prize Distribution Day
“Mr. Ho Tung consented, at the request of the Government of Hong Kong, that the school, which is lower down Robinson Road and which was built at his expense, should be maintained for European British children, instead of, as he had originally intended, being maintained for children of all nationalities. He made it a condition of his consent that an equally good school should be provided for the Chinese boys of Yau Ma Tei, and this building has been erected in part fulfillment of that condition.”

Chapter Five
Fung Fu, Sun Yat-sen, Rev. C. R. Hager

As a San Francisco helper from Hong Kong and Rev. Pond, who was responsible for Chinese work in the Bay Area, it was perfectly logical to hope to bring missionary work back to Hong Kong for the "American Missionary Association." A senior helper, Jee Gam,'s speech highlighted the ins and outs of the situation.

JEE GAM’S (朱金) ADDRESS
It was ten years ago when our Chinese brethren first felt the need of a mission in China,---- For the first three years, we often expressed our great desire among ourselves for this mission, but never thought of telling our superintendent, Rev. W. C. Pond.
Not a word was said to him until, at our usual Wednesday afternoon Bible class about seven years ago (?), when the subject of foreign missions was accidentally mentioned. We then told Rev. W. C. Pond what we so much desired. He at once approved of it. Hong Kong was chosen for the seat of this mission, and Mr. Pond requested that those who were able to write a letter should do so, explaining why this mission was so much needed. He accordingly forwarded these letters to the American Missionary Association.
--
In early October 1879, I -- attend its annual meeting at Chicago.-- I felt moved by the Holy Spirit to make an earnest plea for it. I also spoke for it at all the meetings I attended while East. “
Mr. Pond's request for them to write letters to supporters might be incorrect in its date. It should have happened in 1878, when Fung Fu was about to return to Hong Kong.
Oct., 1878 Issue
“Regarding the proposition for a mission in Hong Kong, which I proposed last month to be closely connected with our Californian Mission, I asked our helper, Bro. Fung Affoo, to consult the Chinese brethren on the subject and get their opinions. Soon after, I began receiving letters, and I now have about twenty on file. I thought that extracts from these letters would interest the readers of the *MISSIONARY*. Some of them I can copy verbatim; others will need slight revisions to their English for clarity. However, the ideas are their own, and the expressions will be modified as little as possible.
First, Affoo himself says: “I told the brethren at the meeting last Sunday what you said to me about establishing a mission at Hong Kong. They were very glad; their faces beamed with joy. They all wish, with one accord, that this enterprise will be accomplished before long.”---Rev. Pond

Fung Fu was ambitious at the time, and money was not the primary consideration. If the "American Missionary Association" had agreed, he might have taught at this missionary school and taken a different path. Eitel could not find another suitable candidate to replace Fung Fu in 1879.
Without Fung Fu, the history of English promotion in the colony would have been delayed by several years. But this crossroads in life brought about the beginning of Sun Yat-sen's life.
The "American Missionary Association" had close ties with the U.S. Congress. Its mission was to help the large number of freed slaves after the Civil War, providing education and religion. To evangelize in Hong Kong, they needed to amend their constitution.
They Resolved at the 1880 Annual Meeting.
“3. That while your Committee recognize the difficulties in the way of establishing a mission in China, they also see that there would be great advantage, both direct and indirect, in thus connecting a foreign with the home work, and they recommend the Board to give serious consideration to the proposition, and to carry it into execution, if, on a more thorough inquiry, it shall be found practicable to do so without interfering with the other work of the society, or with the work of other Evangelical missions in China.”
Actual preparations began in 1882, with extensive discussions within the "American Missionary Association."
“Two American missionaries, a little property in Hong Kong, a rented chapel here and there in the larger villages and the small stipends of the Chinese evangelists; this would be all.”—Rev. W. C. Pond 1882 January Issue

1.’ Hager, Rev. Charles Robert, M.D., D.D. ABCFM. Born in Switzerland. Arrived in China from the United States in 1883. Died July 13, 1917 at Claremont, California. U. S. A. Laboured in Hongkong and Canton in educational and evangelistic work. Baptized Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Sketch in Chinese Recorder, December1917, pages 797-8.---The China Mission Year Book Page369

Rev. C. R. Hager Appears in 1883
“BY REV. W. C.POND. The memorable event of the month of February—so far as our work is concerned —is the inauguration of the mission of the American Board to Hong Kong, and through Hong Kong to those districts of South China from which most of our Chinese have come. Rev. C. R. Hager, a recent graduate of our Pacific Theological Seminary, and for more than a year past a very successful and greatly beloved pastor at Antioch, in this State, having offered himself to the Board as a Foreign Missionary, was at our own suggestion and request appointed to take charge of this new work, and was ordained as a Missionary at Bethany Church, on Friday, Feb. 16.”

“ The Congregational Association of Christian Chinese, at its last annual meeting, voted to give $500 toward the establishing of this Hong Kong mission, and do all in its power to help in the future---
Rev. C. R. Hager and Lee Sam, sent by the American Board to establish a mission in those districts of South China from which the Chinese in America have come, are already at work. A house has been rented and an evening school for the instruction of the Chinese in English provided for. The plan for instilling the truths of the Gospel into the minds of the scholars by using the Bible to some extent for a text- book, which has been so successful in California, will be adopted.”-- 1883July Issue
“Bro. Hager has established his head-quarters at Hong Kong and has gathered there a school similar in all respects to ours in California.”---1883 October Issue

Here we can see the power of faith; they quickly began their work in Hong Kong with meager funds.
“In 1883, Charles Robert Hager preached and established the American Congregational Mission Preaching Hall at 2 Bridges Street in Central, Hong
Original Building: A three-story house that served as a preaching hall, school, and residence
The mission was founded as the American Congregational Mission Preaching Hall and became the spiritual home for early converts, most famously Dr. Sun Yat-sen, who was baptized there in June 1883.”---AI Data.

Two letters are widely cited, stating that Hager baptized Sun Yat-sen.
“...At present there are some seven members in the interior belonging to our mission, and two here, one I baptized last Sabbath, a young man who is attending the Government Central School. We had a very pleasant communion service yesterday...” - Hager to Clark, 5 May 1884, ABC 16.3.8: South China v.4, no.17, p.3
“...We had a pleasant communion yesterday and received one Chin”American Missionary Association”n into the church...” - Hager to Pond, 5 May 1884, ABC 16.3.8: South China v.4, no.18, p.3 postscript

Sun Yat-sen and Charles Robert Hager both arrived in Hong Kong in early 1883, full of vigor. At that time, there were many churches in Hong Kong, so why did Sun Yat-sen choose to be baptized in this small rented place?
With his adventurous and heroic character, he would quickly judge a person, and only after gaining his trust could a friendship be formed. From the letter, it can be seen that Sun Yat-sen liked Hager.
It is said that Sun Yat-sen learned English from Fung Fu at the Union Church. For an excellent student like Sun Yat-sen, he would only need to converse with foreigners to learn spoken English. Hager was the best choice. The Union Church, Bridges Street, and the Central School were all nearby. Fung Fu, Hager, and Sun Yat-sen should have been friends. Fung Fu's suggestion before returning to Hong Kong, though unsuccessful, indirectly contributed to Sun Yat-sen's relationship with Hager.
Logically, Hager should have sought out Fung Fu first when he arrived in Hong Kong. However, this was not the case. In [For The Pacific] The First Sabbath in Hong Kong, "After I had carefully made my toilet, and quietly surveyed the scene from a third-story verandah, and been invited to partake of a little breakfast-tea, I repaired to the house of Mr. Wang Ching Kai (a California Chinese) and found Lee Sam there."
Wang Zhengjie was a wealthy merchant who helped Rev. Hager rent "a 3-story house at 2 Bridges Street in Central, Hong Kong" as a base and for his own residence. Lee Sam (李均森) was also a core member of the California group. They had a significant connection to Sun Yat-sen's later baptism.
Fung Fu also belonged to the California group. His students included:
Kong Wing-wen (江永文): He was a student at “Saiyingpun Fung Fu School” before enrolling in the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese in 1887—the same inaugural class as Dr. Sun Yat-sen.
Lau Sz-fuk (劉四福): Also a former student under Fung Fu, he joined the Hong Kong College of Medicine in 1887 and graduated in 1895 with a degree in Western medicine. ------Christian Weekly, Issue 2002, "Chen Shaobai's Medical Studies in Hong Kong with Photo Evidence," King's College History Museum.

Fung Fu's connection through his father-in-law explains why he joined the London Missionary Society instead of the American church.
Chapter Six
Fung Fu After Retirement

Fung Fu was never listed in the civil service except during his tenure at Saiyingpun School from 1879 to 1903. There are several misconceptions surrounding his life story, appearing in A. Morris's introduction at the 1928 King's College opening ceremony and in newspaper reports of his death.
As my investigation neared its end, I saw these three reports and felt something was amiss. I might have inadvertently touched upon a scandal from 150 years ago. The British might have known later but dared not act because it involved a former governor and inspector of schools.

Civil Service Ranks
It should be pointed out that not being in the civil service does not completely rule out the possibility of having taught at the Central School, because not all Chinese masters at that time were paid as civil servants; a temporary teaching position was covered by miscellaneous expenses. The reason for denying Fung Fu's past as a Chinese master is that the timing does not match.

At the funeral, several of Fung Fu's sons were in Hong Kong. The three media outlets made the same mistake reporting that he studied at Harvard University, which is impossible.

I have overlooked one thing all along. That is Eitel's introduction of Fung Fu to Governor Hennessy at the 1880 awards ceremony.
“I knew that Mr. Fung Fú, the master, who had a collegiate education in America, was a thoroughly competent teacher.” --Eitel

“At Saiyingp’ún there is a native Master, educated at Howard University, Washington, U.S.A., teaching English, whilst there is another Government school in the same building teaching only Chinese, so that those who wish to learn Chinese in addition to English, have an opportunity of doing so. But few, however, avail themselves of it, and the majority devote the whole of each day to learning here English only, having private opportunities to keep up their Chinese knowledge.”---1881 Education Report
Fung Fu did not conceal his history at Howard. Eitel received his doctorate from the University of Tübingen. He could not have been unaware of the path to obtaining a B.A. or A.B. from the Faculty of Arts.

Fung Fu had not even completed the preparatory department, the precursor to collegiate college. This means he misrepresented his academic qualifications to Eitel, and Eitel believed his one-sided account.

A. Morris said in 1928: "Saiyingpun School dates back to 1879, in which year the Government decided to establish a Free School at West Point (English School at Saiyingpun), and appointed as the first Headmaster Mr. Fung Fu a returned student from America, and who was selected after a competitive examination as an assistant teacher for the Central School where he remained for one year." But this history of him teaching at the Central School cannot be found, and the timing does not match.

Newspapers reported that he "returned to Hong Kong at the age of twenty-seven to engage in coal trading," which was, of course, what his son said. That was 1876. Fung Fu left university in mid-1874, and was hired as a teacher before February 1875. He actively participated in missionary work in San Francisco, without interruption. In that era, crossing the ocean was not a simple matter.

managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory
The obituaries in two English newspapers both stated: ". The second son of the deceased, Mr. Fung Yiu wing, is the managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory, one of the largest concerns of its kind in Hongkong and South China."
The highest manager of Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory should be Fung Yat-hing (馮日興). The Governor visited the factory in December 1934, and Fung Yat-hing was present. In a case in 1935, Fung Yat-hing testified on behalf of Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory. Fung Yiu-wing was probably accepted into the core team by Fung Keong due to his experience as a lawyer in Shanghai.

Fung Fu's Departure Time from the U.S.:

A. Morris said in 1928: "Mr. Fung Fu a returned student from America, and who was selected after a competitive examination as an assistant teacher for the Central School where he remained for one year."

Fung Fu did not, and could not have, taught at the Central School in Hong Kong before Saiyingpun School.

Chinese could only be examined for Chinese Master. Fung Fu had only studied for a few years before the age of 15, "He attended school in China, for six years." It was impossible for him to pass the examination for the Central School. The examination was held in March, and candidates had to complete:
“ 2. Explanation.-Select passages from any of the thirteen classics,
5. Literature. Prolegomena to any of the thirteen classics,”

Business Failure
The obituary mentioned that Fung Fu's business failure at the age of 27 (1876) might have been a significant event. Obituaries rarely mention negative things.
Fung Fu was about 26 years old when he left university and taught in San Francisco for about half a year. He was an orphan and seemed to have no family wealth. Although he might have earned some money during his time as a house servant in Cuba and during a year of leave from Howard University, it probably did not exceed a thousand silver dollars.

Does this mean that he left university, his mother urged him to marry, and he returned to Hong Kong. In those turbulent times, coal was a big business.
He quickly lost all his money and incurred significant debts. He had no choice but to return to America and seek refuge with the church, leaving his pregnant wife in Hong Kong. This is plausible in terms of timing; a third-class ticket to San Francisco at that time cost about 100 silver dollars.
Here, we need to investigate the background of his wife, Ms. Kwan. Kwan Yuet-ming was the eldest daughter of Kwan Yuen-cheong, a prominent family. Fung Fu's father-in-law was Kwan Yuen-cheong, China's first dentist; his mother-in-law, Lai Ah-mui, was China's first female teacher, female nurse, and female court interpreter. The Kwan family contributed significantly to modern China in more than ten ways.
Fung Fu's first daughter, Fung Shui-king, was born on August 16, 1879. Fung Fu likely married Kwan Yuet-ming and had his first child shortly after returning to Hong Kong. At that time, the To Tsai Church was an exclusive club, admitting only about 20 new infant baptism members each year.

This aligns with the American Missionary Association's information on Fung Fu: he hastily returned to Hong Kong in late 1878, was quickly recognized by Eitel, and became the headmaster of Saiyingpun School (English) on February 1, 1879.

Fung Fu Never Served as Headmaster of Wanchai School After Retirement.
Official Record of Proceedings, 1903.04.20

EDUCATION VOTE.
The Governor recommended the Council to vote a sum of $7,538.16 in aid of the vote for Education, Personal Emoluments, made up as follows:─
Half salary of master and supervisor, Saiyingpun School, from 25th December, 1902, to 31st January, 1903, and full salary from 1st February to 31st December, 1903, at £270 per annum $3,342.16

Hon. R. SHEWAN─Are these schools Chinese schools?
The CHAIRMAN─Yes. These are schools for Chinese learning English, called Anglo-Chinese schools.
Hon. R. SHEWAN─Are they in charge of foreign masters?
The CHAIRMAN─Yes. The new system is to have a foreign master at each of these schools─
Saiyingpun, Wanchai, and Yaumati. I may mention, however, that the master at Yaumati is not an European; he is a Chinese educated in America and has a good knowledge of English, so that he is able to do the work of an English master.
The vote was agreed to.

At that time, the policy had already decided that foreign masters would be headmasters of government district schools. The headmaster of Wanchai School mentioned here was Young Hee. Young Hee served from 1904 to 1910, followed by William Curwen; in 1914, William Kay became headmaster; in 1918, Arthur Robert Sutlerland became headmaster; in 1923, Reginald Joseph Birbeck became headmaster. Fung Fu died in 1934. Therefore, Fung Fu never served as headmaster or in any position in Wanchai.
William Kay was transferred back to Wanchai School as headmaster on September 9, 1914. He later returned from Queen's College and took over from A. Morris as headmaster of the new King's College on June 18, 1934. King's College has a Kay House, named in his honor. This confirms the connection between King's College and Saiyingpun School (English).

Fung Fu Only Had Two Historical Records After Retirement.
The First Was His Inclusion in Feng Ziyou's "Anecdotes of the Revolution."
https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/%E9%99%B3%E5%B0%91%E7%99%BD%E6%99%82%…

“In July of the Yisi year (1905), the Tokyo headquarters of the Tongmenghui was established. The Premier, seeing that party affairs at home and abroad had long been stagnant since the Gengzi Incident, and that Shaobai and comrades in Hong Kong and Guangdong could not reconcile, specially dispatched me in early August to Hong Kong to organize the Tongmenghui and serve concurrently as a reporter for the "China Daily." At that time, the writers were Lu Xin, Liao Ping'an, and Chen Chunsheng, and the translator was Fung Fu.”

These few words should not be underestimated. This was when Feng Ziyou was appointed by Sun Yat-sen to develop party affairs in Hong Kong. The "China Daily" office was equivalent to the headquarters of the Revive China Society. This indicates that Fung Fu actively participated in politics immediately after his retirement. He might have been a party member. In March 1928, he was not on the guest list for the opening ceremony of King's College. Over two thousand people attended, and Fung Fu should have been one of them.
At that time, China was in turmoil. Chinese intellectuals generally disliked the British.

Hong Kong Chinese Daily News 1928-05-21 Tongmenghui Public Memorial The so-called "Hong Kong First Park" refers to the fountain in Hong Kong Zoological and Botanical Gardens (commonly known as "Governor's Garden"). Four hundred people attended, a very grand occasion. Fung Fu might have been one of them. Szeto Wah held similar gatherings 60 years later.
Fung Fu had a chivalrous character. His involvement in the Revive China Society's work brought a fulfilling end to his life.
Fung Fu's Political Marriage.
Fung Fu's eldest daughter married Ruan Jiaxiang, a wealthy merchant from Nanyang. Ruan Jiaxiang was the general agent for Watson's in Nanyang. He supported Sun Yat-sen's Tongmenghui.
Fung Fu's second daughter married into the Zhao family in Nanyang. The Zhao family might also have been prominent, but Zhao Fung died young at 36. Zhao Fung might have had a difficult marriage because she could not bear sons for the Zhao family. Fung Fu brought Zhao Fung's three young daughters back to Hong Kong and arranged for Zhao An-yi.
Two of Zhao's three daughters remained single, and two of Fung Fu's five daughters remained single, which might be related. Fung Fu's eldest son who stayed in Hong Kong, Fung Yiu-cheung, was married into the Ho family, marrying Ho Man-wai. In that era, it was already a time of free love, and also a rebellious era for young people. Fung Fu's family was very Westernized. Parental arranged marriages might have been less common.
Fung Fu meticulously cultivated his social network, and many people around him were associated with supporting Sun Yat-sen's revolution. Although many Chinese capitalists at the time had high hopes for Sun Yat-sen.
Feng Ziyou's description might carry significant weight. The photo of Fung Fu helping Sun Yat-sen disembark at the Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall somewhat illustrates his status. If one compares the English and Chinese newspapers of that time, one can see that Chinese elites did not trust the British very much.

The second mention of Fung Fu after his return to Hong Kong was in the 1889 "American Missionary Association" annual report. "I have seen Tsing Ki, Fung Foo and all my friends at Hong Kong." -- JOE JET
Rev. Hager's missionary work in Hong Kong encouraged many San Francisco helpers to return. JOE JET was one of the main figures.

Fung Fu's Church Work.
The obituary mentioned:
“Philanthropic work also claimed his attention, and a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys will always remain as a memorial to him”
Fung Fu's son, Fung Yiu-cheung, funded the construction of Paterson Primary School in memory of his father.

“The school was founded in 1920, originally as the enlightenment center of the Church of Christ in China Tuen Mun Gospel Hall. At its inception, there were only nine students, which increased to over forty in the following decade.
In 1931, the New Territories Mission members, recognizing the high demand for school places, proposed building a school; with donations from brothers Fung Yiu-cheung and others within the Lord, the school building was completed and officially named "Paterson School" in memory of their father, Mr. Fung Paterson.”

This enlightenment center may have been founded by Fung Fu, which is why the obituary specifically mentioned it. "a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys."
However, there is a question: Fung Fu was 71 years old in 1920. If he volunteered to run a free school in Castle Peak, it should have been during his younger, more vigorous years.

Chapter Seven

Fung Fu
Fung Fu 1849/2/5-1934/1/19
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1934/1/21
Kwan Fung (Kwan Yuet-ming) 1859/1/17-1933/9/2
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1933/9/4
Grandchildren at the time of burial: Cong; Xin; Li; Rong; Rong; Cai; Yang; Guang
Epitaph
Fung Fu occupies three graves in the Zion Hill section.
The meaning of the name "Zion Hill" (pronounced Huan Gang) is a name with strong Christian spiritual connotations: Zion (Zion): In the Bible, also translated as "Sion," it represents God's dwelling place, the holy city, and the gathering place of the chosen people, symbolizing the glory of the Kingdom of Heaven. Hill: refers to a high place or hill. Comprehensive meaning: Naming the cemetery "Zion Hill" symbolizes that this resting place is "God's holy mountain," embodying the religious belief of Christians resting in the Lord after death and gathering in the Kingdom of Heaven in the future. 2. Background and historical origin of the "oldest area": The Pokfulam Chinese Christian Cemetery was granted land by the Hong Kong government in 1882, making it the first permanent Christian cemetery for Chinese people in Hong Kong. The "Zion Hill section" was one of the core original sites during the early establishment of the cemetery. Famous people resting: The Zion Hill section and adjacent early areas are where many pioneers who had a profound impact on the development of Christianity in Hong Kong and the Xinhai Revolution, early Chinese pastors, and missionaries are buried.
Other Famous People
Fung Shui-sang
Eight years younger than Fung Fu, definitely knew Fung Fu.
1857/-1932/3/23 Died at 75
Section A, Level 5, Grave 9
Born on the 17th day of the 9th month of the Wuxu year at an auspicious hour (October 23, 1858)
Died on the 16th day of the 2nd month of the Renshen year at Chen hour (March 22, 1932)
Right side birth and death: Born: 17th day of 9th month of Wuxu year at auspicious hour (October 23, 1858) Died: 16th day of 2nd month of Renshen year at Chen hour (March 22, 1932) Left side inscription and time (most crucial): Inscribed by: Sons En-sheng, Cui-lian, Cui-huan, Xiu-lan, etc. Date of inscription: Auspicious day in Autumn, 1932. Correction and puzzle: Zoom in and carefully examine the inscription on the left side. It reads "Autumn month, 1932". His "諱" (given name) is Luxiang, and "瑞生" should be his courtesy name or alias.

Pokfulam Road Cemetery is one of the cemeteries in Hong Kong with the most people related to the Xinhai Revolution: [1]
• Au Fung-chi (1847–1914): Sun Yat-sen's Chinese teacher and revolutionary confidant. He worked for the Chinese Affairs Department and was an elder of the early To Tsai Church. Sun Yat-sen's Chinese name "Sun Yat-sen" was given by him.
• Tse Tsan-tai (1872–1938): A core revolutionary of the Furen Literary Society and the Revive China Society, and one of the founders of the English "South China Morning Post." He designed China's first airship, the "Weiyuan."
• Cheng Shi-liang (1863–1901): Triad leader and key member of the Revive China Society. He was commissioned by Sun Yat-sen to launch the Huizhou Uprising and was later assassinated by the Qing court in Hong Kong.
• Li Yuk-tong (1851–1936): Famous wealthy merchant from Guangdong, a key financial pillar (financier) of the Xinhai Revolution. He served as the financial minister of the Hong Kong branch of the Tongmenghui, and his son Li Zi-zhong also joined the revolution. [1, 2, 3, 4]
2. Modern Literary, Educational, and Academic Masters
• Xu Dishan (1893–1941): Pen name "Luo Huasheng," a famous modern Chinese writer and pioneer of the New Culture Movement. In 1935, he was recommended by Hu Shi to serve as head of the Chinese Department and professor at the University of Hong Kong, contributing greatly to higher education in Hong Kong. He died in 1941 from overwork.
• Ma Jian (1883–1959): Renowned scholar, who succeeded Professor Xu Dishan as head of the Chinese Department at the University of Hong Kong after his death.
• Hu Su-zhen (1890–1979): Famous female educator, who served as headmistress of St. Paul's Co-educational College for 36 years, nurturing countless early Hong Kong elites.
• Lin Zi-feng (1892–1971): Hong Kong banker and educator, founder and first president of Hong Kong Baptist College (now Hong Kong Baptist University), and a prominent Chinese leader of the Baptist Church. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Obituary

Hong Kong Daily Press 1934-01-20
Page 8
Death-
Fung—On Friday, Jan 19, at 3 Third Street, Hongkong, Fung Fu, aged 85

OBITUARY
It is with regret that we record the death of Mr. Fung Fu, a Chinese educationalist, who passed away on Friday morning at the age of 85.
The deceased, a graduate of Harvard University, USA, had been headmaster of Salyingpun Government School and Wanchai Government School some four decades ago. He had been in retirement for nearly thirty years and was an exceptionally unassuming and good-natured man, well-liked by a large circle of friends and students.
Mr. Fung took much interest in the activities of the Church, having been an elder of the Church of Christ in China and a committee member of the Ying Wah Boys' College. Included in his philanthropic work, the late Mr. Fung supported a free school at Castle Peak for poor children.
The deceased leaves five sons and two daughters, as well as a number of grandchildren. It is understood that the funeral will be held at the Chinese Christian Cemetery tomorrow at 2 p.m.

https://archive.org/details/NPTG19340122/page/n4/mode/1up?q=fung+fu+
Hong Kong Telegram 1934 Jan 22 Monday Page 5
https://archive.org/details/NPTG19340122/mode/2up?q=fung+fu+
Hong Kong Telegram Page 5

LATE MR, FUNG FU.
FUNERAL OF FORMER HEADMASTER
Three generations walked behind at the passed the mortal remains of Mr. Fung Fu octogenarian schoolmaster, at the funeral which took place yesterday at the Chinese Christian Cemetery at Poculum. At the ripe age of 85, Mr. Fung passed away at his residence at Third Street, Saiyingpun, on Friday night, leaving five sons, three daughters, and a number of grandchildren to mourn his loss, together with the many hundreds of Chinese residents of this Colony and elsewhere who had been his pupils. The profound respect in which the deceased was held was evidence by the large procession of mourners following in cars behind the coffin which, in obedience to his dying wish, was of native style and encased in a beflowered catafalque, borne along by a number of uniformed bearers. Other features were a large photograph of the deceased carried before the cortege in a canopied chair, and two European style bands playing appropriate music and hymns. It took five trucks to carry the mass of floral tributes.
A Memorial service was held at the Cemetery Chapel prior to interment, the Rev. Mr. Cheung Chuk-ling officiating.
Deceased’s Career
Contemporary of the late Dr. Wu Ting fang, Sir Ho Kai and others in the small and since dwindling number of Chinese who were among the first to receive a foreign education, the late Mr. Fung was sent to the United States, where he studied at Harvard University. He returned to Hongkong after graduation, and took up a number of educational posts, as far back as four decades ago being appointed Headmaster of the Saiyingpun Government School and of the Wanchai Government School. The Saiyingpun school has since passed out of existence as a result of expansion into the present King’s College, but the Wanchai school, which is also known as Wanchai Gap Government School, is still functioning.
At the beginning of the present century, M. Fung retired from Government service, leaving behind a record of exceptional good work, strengthened by the general esteem felt for a fine character, in which a good nature and a quiet mode were outstanding traits. He took a keen interest in Church activities in connexion particularly with the development of the Church of Christ in China (中華基督教會), being one of its elders, and was also a member the Committee in charge of Ying Wah Boys ‘ College. Philanthropic work also claimed his attention and a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys will always remain as a memorial to him. Four of his five sons were present at the funeral yesterday, as well as two daughters and a large number of grandchildren. The second son of the deceased, Mr. Fung Yiu wing, is the managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory, one of the largest concerns of its kind in Hongkong and South China.

https://archive.org/details/NPKSE19340119/page/n3/mode/1up

China Mail 1934 Jan 22 Monday Page6
FUNERAL OF LATE MR. FUNG FU
Once Headmaster of Government Schools.
TRIBUTES OF RESPECT
The remains of the late Mr. Fung Fu who died at his residence at Third Street, Saiyingpun, on Friday night, at the age of 85, were interred yesterday at the Chinese Christian Cemetery, Pokfolum. The preliminary service in the chapel was performed by the Rev. Cheung Chuk ling. An immense procession followed the coffin, while the masses of floral tributes required five motor trucks to transport them to the cemetery. Mr. Fung Fu was, among the first Chinese to receive a foreign education. Sent to the United States, he graduated at Harvard University and on his return to Hong Kong took up a number of educational posts, being appointed Headmaster of the Saiyingpun Government School, which has since expanded into King's College, and the Wanchal Government School, more than 40 years ago, He took a keen interest in Church activities, in connexion particularly with the development of the Church of Christ in China, being one of its elders, and was also a member of the Committee in charge of Ying Wah Boys College. Philanthropic work also claimed his attention, and a free school which he has established at Castle Peak for poor boys will always remain as a memorial to him. Four of his five sons were present at the funeral yesterday, a well as two daughters and a large number of grandchildren. The second son of the deceased, Mr. Fung Yiu wing, is the managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory, one of the largest concerns Its kind in Hong Kong and South China
Educator Fung Fu Passed Away This Morning
Mr. Fung Fu, an English teacher in Hong Kong, was the first Chinese to serve as headmaster in a government school. He first served as headmaster of Saiyingpun School (now King's College), then as headmaster of Wanchai School, and as a senior professor at Queen's College. Tens of thousands of students passed through his hands, and he was respected by all in the education sector. Mr. Fung, aged eighty-five, had been retired and enjoying a government pension for a long time. Fourteen months ago, he unfortunately suffered a stroke, which left him immobile. A few days ago, his condition suddenly worsened, and he passed away this morning at 3:55 AM. Those who heard the news were deeply saddened. Mr. Fung was benevolent and charitable throughout his life, and had eight sons and five daughters. His sons are all prominent figures in society, either as industrialists or in the legal profession. His fifth son, Fung Yiu-wing, is currently the manager of Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory. He inherited his father's ambition and was extremely filial, living with his father at their old residence at No. 3 Third Street, Saiyingpun. When his father was critically ill, he telephoned his siblings to come to Hong Kong to attend to him. It is understood that Mr. Fung Fu, as a child, went to America with relatives and later entered Harvard University, where he obtained an honorary degree in education. He served as a teacher in America. At the age of twenty-seven, he returned to Hong Kong to engage in coal trading, but unfortunately failed. Later, the Hong Kong government learned of his extensive research in education and invited him to be a headmaster of a government school. Mr. Fung's funeral will be held tomorrow at 1 PM, and the burial will take place at the Chinese Christian Cemetery at 2 PM on Sunday afternoon.
Industrial and Commercial Evening News
January 19, 1934 Friday
https://archive.org/details/NPKSE19340119/page/n3/mode/1up

Fung Fu and His Sons' Contributions to the Church
Fung Fu and Fung Kwan's Descendants
Fung Shui-king
1 Fung Shui-king (063-3) 1879/08/16-1920/06/02 Kwan was about 20 years old (baptized at birth), died at 41.
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1920/6/4 (This indicates that Fung Fu's two daughters both died after divorcing their husbands and returning to their maternal home.)
Erected in 1922
Yuen Mo-yin
Third daughter, ranked sixth, born in 1905
Hilda Mo-Yin Yuen was probably one of the top ten female graduates of the University of Hong Kong Medical Faculty. The first was Eva Ho Tung.
She entered the University of Hong Kong in 1924 at the age of 19, and obtained her first degree in 1926.
She entered the HKU Medical Faculty in March 1926, and obtained her HKU MB and BS degrees in 1932.

In December 1926 MISS YUEN passed the examination in PHYSICS CHEMISTRY ORGANIC CHEMISTRY and BIOLOGY thus completing the 1ST DEGREE EXAMINATION.
In December 1928 she passed the examination in ANATOMY PHYSIOLOGY and in MAY 1930 passed the examination in JUNIOR PATHOLOGY PHARMACOLOGY thus completing the 3RD DEGREE EXAMINATION.
(At this period the examination at the end of the second year in JUNIOR ANATOMY JUNIOR PHYSIOLOGY now known as the 2ND DEGREE EXAMINATION had not been instituted.)
In May 1931 she passed SENIOR PATHOLOGY and MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE PUBLIC HEALTH and in December 1931 passed in MEDICINE SURGERY and OBSTETRICS GYNAECOLOGY thus completing the FINAL DEGREE EXAMINATION.
The Degree of MB BS of the University of HongKong was conferred on MISS YUEN on the 11th JANUARY 1932
(LT Ride MAMBChB Oxon MRCSLRCP )
DEAN
FACULTY OF MEDICINE
3RD FEBRUARY 1932

II. Summary of Nanyang Siang Pau Newspaper Report in 1930
The headline and main text of the report primarily documented the social news of Ruan Jiaxiang sending his daughter to study in England, which was a sensational event in the Chinese community at the time:
Report Date: July 18, 1930 (Friday)
Publication Page: Nanyang Siang Pau, Page 6, News Column
News Headline: "Mr. Ruan Jiaxiang's Daughter Goes to England to Study, Plans to Learn Construction and Surveying"
Key Points of Original Report (approx. 165 characters):
“Kuala Lumpur, Mr. Ruan Jiaxiang, is the owner of the Civil Printing Bureau, and also the general agent for Watson's Soda in Nanyang. Mr. Ruan's children, both Chinese and Western educated, his sons such as Mr. Si Shun, all follow their father's ambition and engage in business.
His eldest daughter, Mo-yin, now twenty-five years old, is studying medicine in Hong Kong and is about to graduate.
His second daughter, Mo-ting, now twenty-two years old, and third daughter, Mo-yu (female radical), twenty years old, both graduated from the English Girls' School in Kuala Lumpur. Now, the two sisters wish to study in England, enrolling in construction and surveying. They plan to depart from Singapore on the British mail ship "Mooltan" on the twenty-fifth of this month.”

Protagonist and Event: The report covers Mr. Ruan Jiaxiang's "daughter," a gentleman and merchant from Kuala Lumpur, who had departed earlier to study in London, England.
Field of Study: The text specifically highlights that Miss Ruan's trip to England was to specialize in "construction and surveying" (i.e., modern architectural design, civil engineering, and surveying). This was a groundbreaking endeavor for female education in the 1930s.
Mention of Family Background: The report then immediately cites the strength of her family members, stating: "Mr. Ruan Jiaxiang of Kuala Lumpur is the owner of the Civil Printing Bureau and also the general agent for Watson's Soda in Nanyang," clarifying the Ruan Jiaxiang and Ruan Jiaqun's strong commercial background in the local area to the public.
Practicing in Hong Kong

Her sisters
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/celebrating-women-architecture-pioneers-…
The London Records (The Architectural Association Archive)
You can search the Architectural Association (AA) School of Architecture Archives or look up the AAXX100 Exhibition records. They explicitly document: [1]
• The Pioneer Sisters: Esther and her sister Angelique (Yuen Mo-ting and Yuen Mo-yow) are officially recorded as the very first Asian female students ever admitted to the AA in London in 1930. [1, 2]
• The Return and Triumph: The archives note that after initial family financial struggles, Angelique took up teaching, but Esther persisted. She worked for the highly esteemed British colonial firm Booty & Edwards in Kuala Lumpur, saved her money, returned to London in May 1947, won several prestigious scholarships, and fully completed her AA credentials. [1, 2]
2. The Firm: "Yuen & Todd"
The online archives explicitly confirm her marriage and business. In 1954, she married John Comrie Todd (Uncle Jock's full legal name!). Together, they legally registered and ran their own private architectural firm named Yuen & Todd. [1, 2]
Navigating the Ancestry Family Network Profile for Yuen Ka Tseung will allow you to see the photos your relatives have uploaded. The network profile currently lists 96 historical records and 30 active family photographs tied to his immediate lineage. [1]
Uncovering details about his extensive household—which he shared with his wife, Madam Sim Ngin Heong—reveals a clear picture of his 16 children. Several of Aunt Esther's siblings left distinct public and professional footprints across Malaya and Singapore: [1, 2]
• Yuen See Shun (思舜 / Yuen C. Shun): As mentioned in the 1930 Nanyang Siang Pau report, he initially followed his father's commercial footsteps in Kuala Lumpur. He later carved out a prominent media career working for The Straits Times in Singapore, where he spent years before his passing in May 1956. [1, 2]
• Dr. Yuen Hilda Mo-yin (阮慕顏): The brilliant sister who broke medical glass ceilings at the University of Hong Kong in 1932 before returning to practice clinical medicine in the family's home region. [1]
• Yuen Angelique Mo-yow (阮慕予): The youngest sister who boarded the steamer to London alongside Aunt Esther in July 1930. When family printing-press finances fluctuated during the Great Depression, she pivotally transition into teaching to help the family, showing incredible resilience.
• Robert Yuen: He relocated to Singapore along with their mother, Madam Sim, managing the family's regional affairs and private estates through the mid-1950s. [1]
Ka Tseung Yuen
Birth
17 Sept, 1874 - Hong Kong
Death
29 March, 1940 - Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Mother
Not Available
Father
Yik Tseun (Ying Fong - 2nd name) Yuen
Born in Hong Kong on 17 Sept, 1874 to Yik Tseun (Ying Fong - 2nd name) Yuen. Ka Tseung Yuen married Ngin Heong Sim and had 16 children. He passed away on 29 March, 1940 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
https://www.ancestry.com.au/genealogy/records/ka-tseung-yuen-24-rgs7zp
photos
The Sunday Standard, 17 April 1955

Ho Yuk Phooi (何旭譜) is another legendary figure in Perak’s history whose family story directly mirrors the grit, ambition, and pioneering spirit of the Yuen family. [1, 2, 3]
If your family tree connects to him, you are linked to one of the most famous founding families of Batu Gajah and the Kinta Valley tin rush. His life story is highly documented by his grandson, the famous Malaysian medical doctor and historian, Dr. Ho Tak Ming, in his acclaimed historical book Generations: The Story of Batu Gajah. [1, 2, 3]
His remarkable historical legacy breaks down into these milestones:
1. From an Extraordinary Matriarchal Beginning
Ho Yuk Phooi’s empire began with his incredibly industrious mother, Kwok Soo Kha (郭蘇嘉). [1]
• She arrived in Taiping, Perak, in 1892 as a penniless, 31-year-old widow from Guangdong with two small young children. [1]
• Starting out as a domestic servant for British colonial officers, she saved everything she earned and opened a traditional Chinese medicine shop. [1]
• She boldly branched out into subleasing colonial "Revenue Farms" (licenses for legal gambling parlors and pawnshops), amassing a massive fortune. By her passing in 1917, she owned blocks of shophouses across Taiping and Ipoh, along with sprawling rubber estates in Batu Gajah. [1]
2. The Government Service & A Sudden Tragedy
Inheriting his mother's sharp mind, Ho Yuk Phooi joined the Federated Malay States Clerical Service in 1902 at just 19 years old. [1]
• In March 1903, he was appointed as the Second Clerk of the Kinta Sanitary Board in Batu Gajah. Working in the Kinta Land Office, he became a deeply trusted and highly paid civil servant. [1, 2]
• In 1914, at the age of 32, tragedy struck. He began suffering from severe, early-onset glaucoma, which began rapidly destroying his vision and forced him to resign from his secure government career. [1, 2]
3. Rising as a Tin Mining & Planting Tycoon [1]
Refusing to let blindness break him, and backed financially by his mother’s Taiping enterprise, Ho Yuk Phooi completely pivoted. [1]
• He applied for government mining concessions and launched his first gravel-pump tin mining company near Pusing. [1]
• His mining operations were wildly successful. He aggressively expanded into massive rubber and coconut plantations, cementing his status as an elite pioneer of the Kinta Valley tin boom alongside figures like William Kellie Smith. [1, 2, 3]
• He became a major philanthropist, serving as the President of the Perak Ku Kong Chow Association, Vice President of the Perak Chinese Maternity Hospital, and was eventually appointed a Justice of the Peace (JP). [1, 2]
4. The Family Sanctuary: 1 Market Street
The physical heart of his legacy was the magnificent family bungalow he built at 1 Market Street, Batu Gajah. For decades, it served as the bustling ancestral home where the large Ho clan gathered for Chinese New Year, a scene preserved in the historical photographic collections of the IpohWorld Heritage Archives. [1, 2]
Like your grandfather Yuen Ka-cheung, Ho Yuk Phooi used his tremendous wealth to champion elite education for his descendants. His grandchildren and great-grandchildren became some of modern Malaysia's most prominent doctors, writers, and professionals. [1, 2, 3, 4]
________________________________________
How does Ho Yuk Phooi link into your family tree? Is there a marriage connection between the Yuens of Kuala Lumpur and the Hos of Batu Gajah (perhaps through one of Aunt Esther’s 15 siblings)?
9 sites
• The Ho's Of Batu Gajah - Ho Yuk Phooi And Family - Ipoh World
In 1902 Yuk Phooi joined the Federated Malay States Clerical Service (at 19 years old) and was initially posted to Telok Anson

Fung Shui-lin
2 Fung Shui-lin (064-3) 1881/02/18 Her mother was about 22 years old
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1916/5/26 Died at 37
Zhao Fung (Fung Shui-lan) 1881/10/13-1917/6/13 Died at 36
“The second generation Zhao Fung had three daughters, one married far away in Nanyang, two remained single. The two lived in a rented apartment on the second floor of 4 High Street. Zhao’s daughters studied and worked as nurses at Nethersole Hospital.”

Zhao Hukang
Zhao Fung's (Fung Shui-lan) second daughter, Zhao Hukang, was born when she was 28.
1909-1981/4/30 Died at 72, (68, 1913--30/4/1981)
Church History Book Sponsor: In memory of Zhao Hukang
Visits on the second Tuesday after the second Sunday of each month, Central District
Offering counter on the third Sunday of each month
Visits on the second Tuesday after the third Sunday of each month, Happy Valley

Visits on the second Tuesday after the fourth Sunday of each month, Shau Kei Wan
Sunday usher, distributing weekly publications, also standby on the fifth Sunday of each month, Hengmen
Savings box donation counter on the fourth and fifth Sundays of each month
Zhao Hu'an
Third daughter, Hu'an, married far away in Nanyang
Zhao Hu'fu
Fourth daughter, Hu'fu
Church History Book Sponsor: In memory of Zhao Hu'fu
Offering counter on the third Sunday of each month
Savings box donation counter on the fourth and fifth Sundays of each month
Fung Shui-lan
3 Fung Shui-lan (065-3) Approx. 1883–1885 Her mother was about 24–26 years old when she gave birth.
Third aunt, single

Fung Yiu-sing

4 Fung Yiu-sing (066-3) Approx. 1886–1888 His mother was about 27–29 years old when she gave birth.

Fung Yiu-hoi
5 Fung Yiu-hoi (067-3) Approx. 1889–1890 His mother was about 30–31 years old when she gave birth.
Fung Hin-wing (ranked tenth)
Currently about 89 (he says), born in 1934 (2026-1934=92). He immigrated to Australia before 1997, as his business in Hong Kong was very successful, enough for retirement. His daughter recently moved to Sydney to accompany him. Fung Hin-wing's wife, Hu Mu-ling (first wife, ranked seventh), her father was Hu Zhao-chi. 55 Coolawin Rd, North Bridge 2068, New South Wales
Fung Hin-rui (fifth)
Fung Hin-rui's wife lives in Hong Kong, Lai-lee visited her.
. died in Sydney. Lai-lee visited her grave.

Fung Chi-wai (ninth)
Fung Hin-wing's ninth sister, Fung Chi-wai, has moved into a nursing home. Lai-lee used to visit her when she lived in Tin Yan Estate.

Fung Shui-kwan
6 Fung Shui-kwan (103-3) Early 1891 Her mother was about 32 years old when she gave birth.
Sixth aunt, single
Fung Yiu-kei
7 Fung Yiu-kei (132b-3) Late 1891 Kwan was about 32 years old when she gave birth, died at 61.
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 2004/7/23 Si En Garden Died at 62
Born 1891-1953 Originally buried in Section E, Level 16, Grave 34 on 1978/9/19, cremated and ashes scattered in 2004. (Buried 25 years later)
Miu-cheung (eldest)
Offering counter on the third Sunday of each month; savings box donation counter on the fourth and fifth Sundays of each month
At that time, she worked as a night nurse at St. Stephen's School in Stanley.
Miu-ling (second)
Passed away in her sleep
Miu-ching (third)
Lai-lee has met all three, two lived together, one lived alone.

Fung Yiu-wah
1892/3/16 (Ren-chen) -1916/6/14 (Bing-chen) Died at 24
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1916/6/15
Epitaph: Tong Huai Lu Yao Zhang, Rong, Gen, Gang Li
(In traditional Chinese society, engraving "某某立" (erected by so-and-so) on a tombstone is not just a name; it represents the substantial responsibility of "participating in the funeral, personally seeing off the deceased, and funding the arrangements."
• If the elder brother was not present in Hong Kong, according to custom, their names would not be listed as "erectors.")
Comrades of the Youth Moral Education Association inscribed this.
According to authoritative documents from the University of Hong Kong on the history of To Tsai Church, in the summer of 1907, five enthusiastic young Christians, witnessing the lack of nurturing for fellow church members' children, initiated and formally established the "Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association."

Fung Yiu-cheung
9 Fung Yiu-cheung (Uncle Nine) (227-3)* 1893/06/13 (Twins) His mother was about 34 years old when she gave birth (ranked ninth).
1893/6/13 – 1966/10/29 Died at 73 Gui-si year, born in the year of the snake.
Fung Yiu-cheung went to the U.S. alone at about 30 years old (1923). By 1929, he was already involved in church work in Hong Kong and should not have left Hong Kong thereafter. During the Japanese occupation, he took on major church responsibilities.
One of the five founders of the Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association in the summer of 1907.
35 years old In March 1928, he was one of the three representatives for the church's property transfer; in August, one of the five members of the committee for clearing debts and raising funds for the church.
In July 1929, he purchased the Wan You Wen Ku (Universal Library), pledging thirty yuan; in April, he was a member of the committee for paid staff pensions; in September, a member of the committee for the use of thanksgiving donations.
September 1931 Chairman of the Choir.
October 1932 One of the three church trustees, signed with Messrs. W.C. Kwok & Co. Solicitors to safeguard the property of Deep Love Church.
June 1933 Committee for stipulating qualifications for paid staff; October, church appointed Pastor Cheung Chuk-ling and two representatives to receive relevant important documents.
May 1934 One of the four advisors for Ying Wa Girls' School; September, church subscribed for one share of Hong Kong Bible Society Limited, Fung Yiu-cheung was a member of the church's constitution drafting committee.
April 1935 Committee for property transfer of Wanchai Church; church's bank failed, Yiu-cheung was a creditor of the church; responsible for selling Aberdeen property.
March 1936 Advisor for Ying Wa Girls' School; May, chairman of public banquet; September, Yiu-cheung, Yiu-wing, Yiu-kei, etc., following their late father's will, allocated one thousand Hong Kong dollars from the pension fund to donate to the church; December, committee for designing pastor and choir vestments.
Church staff:
In October 1939, on Double Tenth Day, he was appointed as one of the six deacons.
1942 to 1945 Yan Cheng-kun (Chairman), Fung Yiu-cheung (Vice Chairman) ---- church staff.

New Territories Mission
In 1919, the trustees of the New Territories Mission, representing the To Tsai Church, included: Pastor Cheung, Wong Wing-tak, Tse Kwai-fan, Fung Yiu-cheung, Kwan Ba-gu, and Wong Si-gu, totaling six people. In the same year, the resident evangelists for the various gospel halls in the New Territories were as follows: Yuen Long—Wong Shut-fong, Tuen Mun—Gu Kai-tak, Lam Tsuen—Law Heng-shek, Tsuen Wan—Lin Yat Tsing, Tai O—Lan Hon Shang, Ping Shan—Chan Pin Kwong.
[Paterson Primary School was founded in 1920, originally as the enlightenment center of the Church of Christ in China Tuen Mun Gospel Hall. At its inception, there were only nine students, which increased to over forty in the following decade.

In 1931, the New Territories Mission members, recognizing the high demand for school places, proposed building a school; with donations from brothers Fung Yiu-cheung and others within the Lord, the school building was completed and officially named "Paterson School" in memory of their father, Mr. Fung Paterson. From then on, Paterson gradually took on the scale of a school, until the Japanese invasion, when it was forced to suspend classes.]

Union Church during Japanese Occupation
On the 21st, Pastor Cheung Pil-ling was arrested by the military police and subjected to severe torture.
Those who died and came back to life again.
Ho Man-wai (Aunt Nine)
1895/4/14—1991/2/27 Died at 96. Attended Sacred Heart Canossian College.
Fung Miu-yung
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1927/4/18
1921/2/7 -1927/4/17 Died at 6
Section B, Level 10, Grave 26
Fung Miu-chun

Miu-chun 1922/1/18-2011/9/30 Died at 89
1922/2/18-2011/9/30 Died at 89
Daughter Fung Lai-lee

Fung Shui-ngan
10 Fung Shui-ngan (228-3) 1893/06/13 (Twins) Her mother was about 34 years old when she gave birth.
According to her church number, she might be Fung Yiu-cheung's twin sister. If so, she should have a very close relationship with Fung Lai-lee's family. But it's quite strange, she seems to be the most mysterious one in the Fung family. No one ever mentioned her. Her lifespan was not short.

Fung Yiu-wing
11 Fung Yiu-wing (279-3) 1897 His mother was about 35–36 years old, died at 41.
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1938/5/8 Originally buried in Section D, Level 3, Grave 27, cremated and ashes scattered in Si En Garden in 2004.
Fung Yiu-wing 1897-1938/5/8 5 sons and 3 daughters.
29 years old May 1926 Union Church property sale committee; new church opening committee.
July Allocation of dormitory committee.
30 years old May 1927 Amendment of church loan committee.
July 1929 Purchased Wan You Wen Ku, pledged thirty yuan.
May 1938 Church trustee passed away.
November 1938 Church approved acceptance of Mrs. Fung Yiu-wing's donation of one thousand five hundred yuan to the church fund, one thousand yuan to the sacred music department fund, three hundred yuan to the pension fund, and an additional five hundred yuan for the purchase of a phonograph, in memory of Mr. Fung Yiu-wing.
Li Cong-zhen
Fung Yiu-wing's wife, Li Cong-zhen, was buried in the cemetery, died at 72, 1901-1973/01/25.
Hin-wing
Second son
Miu-wo (ranked 3)
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1982/7/1 Buried in the rotating burial plot. Bones collected and placed in the ossuary, but no information on the niche wall.
(Miu-wo probably had a difficult marriage. Later, her mother sold the house and divided the money between her two daughters, Miu-wo and Miu-hing (in UK).)
Miu-hing informed me that Miu-wo had been buried. After they sold the house (on Lyttelton Road), Lai-lee no longer knew where they were.
Burial Date: 1989/2/28 (Ossuary No. 3 - GS Section - Grave 16)
Third daughter Miu-wo 1931-1982-07-01 Died at 51
“She was married and had 2 sons “married to a Yu, married at 40.
Miu-wo's sons are Yu Jia-gang, Yu Jia-bao.
Lived on the 3rd floor of 4 High Street, Lai-lee was very familiar with her.
Miu-ping (ranked 4) (1930-20/9/1932)
Miu-hing (ranked 6)
Miu-hing (born after her father's death) Born in 1938, went to England in 1962, aged 24, her sister was 31.
Miu-wo was a twin, the fourth was Miu-ping, who did not survive.
Miu-fang
Father: Fung Yiu-wing, Mother: Ms. Li, Age at death: 1 day, Date of death: Unknown, Church of Christ in China Union Church, 1928-01-16 Originally buried in Section B, Level 9, Grave 32, after an accident (landslide) in 1976, name inscribed on the memorial stone (location: Section A, Level 3).

Fung Yiu-kun
12 Fung Yiu-kun (302-3) Died 1965? Died at 67
1898 -1965 (Inferred as 1898 based on membership number)
28 years old May 1926 Union Church property sale committee
41 years old June 1939 Committee for drafting regulations for various departments
Au Yeung Shuk-yuen

Fung Hin-yeung
Church History Book Sponsor: Fung Miu-cheung, Fung Hin-yeung

Fung Miu-hang
(Registered/born in 1934)
Fung Yiu-gang
13 Fung Yiu-gang (358-3)
Burial Date (Cemetery Computer Data) 1923/6/1
Died at 22 1901/9/30-1923/6/1 Fung Fu was 74 at the time of his death.
Section C, Level 22, Grave 37 Stone erected in early autumn 1929.

To be categorized
Church History Book Sponsor: Fung Miu-cheung, Fung Hin-yeung, In memory of Fung Hin-rui, In memory of Wang Cong-zhen
(Miu-cheung, Miu-ling, Miu-ching)
Zhao Hin-kwong (died at 96, 1928--2024-06-30)

Three Generations of Converts
From Ip Sum-ming's "Heaven's Way Reaches Down: A Study of the Missionary Work of the To Tsai Church, Chinese Self-Governing Church in Hong Kong (1843-1926)," it is understood that Fung Fu was a deacon of the To Tsai Church in 1908, assisting Pastor Cheung Chuk-ling in taking over church affairs; he participated in the re-establishment of Ying Wa College in 1914, serving as a member of the board of trustees for its re-establishment.

His sons and daughters, three generations, converted. Fung Yiu-wing, Fung Yiu-cheung, and his youngest son, Fung Yiu-wah, who died before him, also held important positions in the church.

The following statistical tables primarily use membership rosters as warp and other church documents as weft, to outline the proliferation of various Christian families. The membership rosters span over half a century, starting from 1867 and ending in 1904. They are divided into four parts: the first part is "Register of church members, and of baptisms, beginning from 1st March 1867", recording 485 members; the second part is "New List of Church Members only", covering 1881 to 1902, recording 629 surviving members from the old list and new members; the third part is "Register of the Children", covering 1881 to 1904, recording 411 child members; the fourth part is "Register of Baptism 1902-1904", believed to be a continuation of the second part, recording 30 adult members. In the following statistical tables, the number after the name is the member number, and the number after the member number is the part number from the above four parts, for easy retrieval. For example, Ho Fuk-tong (013-1) means Ho Fuk-tong's member number is 13.

Three Generations of Converts (P.138)
Fung Fu (Paterson) (194-2)
Fung Kwan (187-1)
Fung Shui-king (063-3) Fung Shui-lin (064-3) Fung Shui-lan (065-3) Fung Yiu-sing (066-3) Fung Yiu-hoi (067-3) Fung Shui-kwan (103-3) Fung Yiu-kei (132b-3) Fung Yiu-wah (163-3) Fung Shui-ngan (228-3)
Fung Yiu-wing (279-3) Second son, ranked fifth
Fung Yiu-gang (358-3)
Fung Yiu-cheung (227-3)* (ranked ninth) Fung Miu-chun
Fung Yiu-kun (302-3)

Fung Fu
Ying Wa College Re-establishment Board of Trustees
To Tsai Church Elders

Fung Yiu-wing
First generation member of To Tsai Church Education Department (replacing his elderly or deceased father)
(Ying Wa College) School Board Executive Member
Book donations: "European Land Reform", "Women's Suffrage Movement", "Women's Issues"
Union Church Deacon

Fung Yiu-wing ranked fifth, being the second son. In 1934, he was the "managing director of the Fung Keong Rubber Manufactory."
“In 1934, Overseas Lianhua published detailed plans to develop a new studio on the Kowloon side of Hong Kong to concentrate on sound film production. The board members were all prominent figures within the local Chinese community, such as: --; Fung Yiu-wing, Deputy Chief of the famous Fung Keung Rubber Manufacturing Co.;”

Fung Yiu-cheung
Church Council Chairman (1936)
Union Church Vice Chairman (1942-43)
Ranked ninth.

Fung Yiu-wah
Ying Wa College Re-establishment Board of Trustees
Died before Fung Fu

Kwan Yuet-ying
Third daughter: Kwan Yuet-ying (Kwan Yuet Ying, 1870–1962), the first female elder of To Tsai Church, also a midwife, and wife of Yung Sing-kiu. Yung Sing-kiu, also known as Yung Kai, was a cousin of Yung Wing. They had eight sons and three daughters.
Obituary: Great-grandmother Mrs. Yung née Kwan passed away peacefully on December 29, 1962, at the age of 93.
1869-1962
This indicates that the obituary refers to Kwan Yuen-cheong's third daughter: Kwan Yuet-ying (Kwan Yuet Ying, 1870–1962), the first female elder of To Tsai Church, also a midwife, and wife of Yung Sing-kiu.

Paterson School
With donations from brothers Fung Yiu-wing and Fung Yiu-cheung, deacons of the Church of Christ in China Union Church (formerly To Tsai Church in Hong Kong), the school building was completed and named "Paterson School" in memory of their father, Fung Paterson (Fu, 1849-1934).

Tai O Primary School
The school was founded in 1917, formerly known as "Tai O Free School." Initially, the London Missionary Society and To Tsai Church jointly dispatched Pastor Willis to Tai O to conduct evangelistic work, renting a private house on Tai Ping Street as a preaching hall. In 1913, literacy classes were opened to teach children to read and write, marking the church's pioneering efforts in education in Tai O, named "Tai O Free School." In 1925, it was officially established as "Tai O School" under the name of the Church of Christ in China, with Pastor Li Shu-gui, the circuit pastor of the New Territories Mission, concurrently serving as the school principal. Subsequently, the school gradually gained acceptance among the community, and student numbers continuously increased. The original site became insufficient, so it moved to 6-8 Market Street and received government subsidies to expand its classes. Later, with donations from Mrs. Wong Kwok-kuen and Mrs. Fung Yiu-wing, enthusiastic members of the Church of Christ in China Union Church, a church and school building was constructed at 24-26 Market Street, completed in 1941, divided into male and female school buildings. Since then, the Church of Christ in China Jacob's Church and Tai O School obtained permanent school premises.

Events
Union Church Handover

Section Four: Handover and Takeover of the New Territories Mission
When the New Territories Mission was first established, it was jointly run by the To Tsai Church in Hong Kong and the English-dominated Union Church, with the London Missionary Society acting as an advisor. However, as the indigenization movement of the Chinese church continued to develop and deepen, the To Tsai Church joined the Church of Christ in China, and its affiliated churches and related church properties naturally fell under the purview of the Church of Christ in China. However, the New Territories Mission was jointly run by the To Tsai Church and the Union Church, and the property rights of many properties were held in trust by missionaries of the London Missionary Society or foreign members of the Union Church. Therefore, many problems arose during the takeover process.
In the trend of church unity, out of national sentiment and dignity, Chinese believers adopted a positive attitude towards church autonomy. Therefore, the Chinese trustees (i.e., representatives of the To Tsai Church) unanimously agreed to hand over the New Territories Mission to the Church of Christ in China, while the Western trustees "used the economic talent of the district association as a concern" as an excuse, resulting in "long-term disagreement."
--The Church of Christ in China Union Church (formerly To Tsai Church) established a "New Territories Committee" to handle related matters to ensure a smooth handover. The committee consisted of five members elected by the congregation, including: Fung Yiu-cheung.
Page 297

Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association
Until the summer of 1907, five young men, formerly members of the Pui To Youth Self-Reliance Association—Fung Yiu-wah, Fung Yiu-cheung, Ho Tak-wing, Ho Siu-lau (1890-1923), and Wong Siu-bun (1890-1944)—initiated the reorganization of the To Tsai Church's youth gathering, and drafted its objectives and regulations, officially naming it the Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association.
P.113

Assisting Cheung Chuk-ling
In terms of church organization, under the concerted efforts of the elders, the To Tsai Church continued to implement the three-self principles. In terms of self-propagation, Pastor Pearce believed that the To Tsai Church had continuously developed into a "witnessing church," which shows that the church's development direction, supported by the elders, did not change due to personnel changes. When there was a vacancy in the pastoral office, Au Fung-chi sought an ideal candidate among various denominations. As a result, he found Cheung Chuk-ling from the Basel Mission. According to Cheung's self-account:
In 1908... in winter, through the introduction of Elder Au Fung-chi, I was asked to take over church affairs. At that time, I was very young and often feared I was not up to the task. Fortunately, Elders Au Fung-chi, Ho Kan-fu, Ko Cheuk-sing, Fung Fu, Lai Fuk-chi, Wan Man-kai, and Western pastors Pearce and Willis constantly helped, so that no mistakes were made.
This shows that from the death of Tang Siu-ting until Cheung Chuk-ling first took office, the church elders played an extremely important role in the operation and pastoral care of the church, leading to a situation where elders and pastors jointly provided pastoral care. This situation only gradually changed after Cheung Chuk-ling was ordained as a pastor.
P.69

Joint Petition Requesting More Female Missionaries to Hong Kong
However, when Miss Smith left Hong Kong two years later, the To Tsai Church again faced the problem of insufficient female missionaries. This time, Pastor Wang Yuk-cho and seven elders: Lu Ting-sin, Wen Kam-chung, Kwan Yun-fat (1836-1901), Ho Kan-po, Wong Sing, Tang Kam-chun, Fung Chung-ling (Fu, ? - 1934), jointly wrote to the London headquarters, requesting more female missionaries to be sent to Hong Kong to assist in developing women's work.
See the letter of thanks from the To Tsai Church pastors and elders (Wang Yuk-cho, Kwan King-tong, Wen Kam-chung, Fung Fu, Tang Siu-ting, Ho Kan-po, Lai Fuk-chi) to the London Missionary Society, Native Agents to the Directors of the London Missionary Society (14 March 1891), in Council of World Mission Archive, South China, Incoming Letters, Box 11, Folder 5 (1891).
P.98

Joint Petition for Funding
Facing this situation, Protestant Christianity, which had only restarted in the late 19th century, was clearly at a disadvantage. Therefore, in the early stages of its work, Wang Yuk-cho and others could only conduct visits and evangelism, and could not find a foothold for gathering and preaching. Therefore, in May 1900, he, along with the elders of the To Tsai Church, jointly wrote to the London Missionary Society, requesting funding for the development of a new church:
The letter was jointly signed by Pastor Wang Yuk-cho and To Tsai Church elders Ho Kan-po, Ko Cheuk-sing, Lai Fuk-chi, Fung Fu, Au Fung-chi (i.e., Au Fung-chi), Wan Tuen-mo, Tang Chun, and Wong Ping-po (i.e., Wong Sing). See Council of World Mission Archive, South China Incoming Letters, Box 14, Folder 5, Jacket C (1900).
Page 65

Early Development and Challenges of Ying Wa College's Re-establishment
The University of Hong Kong was built in 1911, and missionaries realized that this university was an important stepping stone for the church to raise its social status. However, it was also a public resource, and the church had to face competition from other denominations and other religions. In fact, the church's work in this area had lagged behind local Chinese and many religious groups, which was undoubtedly detrimental to the next generation and the long-term development of the church. Therefore, the church had to establish higher quality secondary schools to strengthen the cultivation of young Christians to enter university for education, in order to enhance the social status of individual believers and the church. In addition, the "Morrison Hall" donated by the London Missionary Society to the University of Hong Kong was completed and put into use in 1913. At that time, the university's dormitories were donated and managed by different missionary societies, such as St. John's College, completed in 1912, which was built and managed by the Church Missionary Society with an Anglican background. Missionaries worried that the halls would be put into service, but there would be a lack of students from church secondary schools connected to the London Missionary Society enrolling in the university, which seemed not an ideal match. To cooperate with the London Missionary Society's missionary work in the newly established university, the To Tsai Church, with the support of the London Missionary Society, established the Ying Wa College Re-establishment Board of Trustees to coordinate the re-establishment. Ying Wa College finally reopened on February 9, 1914, after being closed for nearly sixty years, with the school site selected at 9 Caine Road, Hong Kong Island.

Organizing Trustees: Au Fung-chi, Wan Man-kai, Fung Fu, Lai Fuk-chi, Ko Cheuk-sing, Willis, Lau Pak-wai, Yip Shun, Wong Wing-tak, Chan Chi, Chan Chor-nam, Chan San-luen, Tam Ha-si, Ho Sum-yu, Fung Yiu-wah, Ho Siu-lau, Cheung Sau-pang, Wong Kwai-tam, Luk Lun-po, Kwan Sum-yin.

Fung Shui-king Verification
Business Failure

In 1874, the import price of coal was about ten to fourteen yuan per ton.
Fung Fu's son, Fung Yiu-wing, was a very prominent businessman. His obituary mentioned that Fung Fu's business failure at the age of 26 might have been a significant event. Obituaries rarely mention negative things.
Fung Fu was about 26 years old when he left university and taught in San Francisco for about half a year. He was an orphan and seemed to have no family wealth. Although he might have earned some money during his time as a house servant in Cuba and during a year of leave from Howard University, it probably did not exceed a thousand silver dollars.
The obituary did not specify where he failed in his investment. There are two possibilities here:
Firstly, he left university, his mother urged him to marry, and he returned to Hong Kong to get married. After marriage, he naturally had to support a family. In those turbulent times, coal was a speculative business, which suited Fung Fu's character.
He quickly lost all his money and incurred significant debts. He had no choice but to return to America and seek refuge with the church, leaving his pregnant wife in Hong Kong. This is plausible in terms of timing; a third-class ticket to San Francisco at that time cost about 100 silver dollars.
Therefore, tracing the birth year of his first wife, Fung Kwan's eldest daughter, Fung Shui-king, is particularly important. The inscription for her eldest daughter on the tomb of Ruan Jiaxiang's first wife in Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, was missing. After cross-referencing with traditional Chinese numerals, her birth and death dates were determined.

Fung Fu's father-in-law was Kwan Yuen-cheong, China's first dentist; his mother-in-law, Lai Ah-mui, was China's first female teacher, female nurse, and female court interpreter. The Kwan family contributed significantly to modern China in more than ten ways. Based on this inference, Fung Fu's first daughter, Fung Shui-king, was born on August 16, 1879. Fung Fu married Kwan Yuet-ming and had his first child shortly after returning to Hong Kong. At that time, the To Tsai Church was an exclusive club, admitting only about 20 new infant baptism members each year.
Interpretation of the Epitaph
Part of the year inscription on the epitaph is missing. The character "千" (qiān, thousand) in "生於X千年八月十六日子時" (born on the 16th day of the 8th month of the X thousand year, at Zi hour) indicates that it is a Suzhou numeral, a numerical notation popular among scholars at the time.
After decoding, Fung Fu's first child was born on August 16, 1879, and died on June 2, 1920, at the age of 41. The second child, Zhao Fung Shui-lan, was born on October 13, 1880, which does not contradict the female pregnancy cycle.
The burial information indicates that she was buried two days after her death (waiting list). Fung Shui-king had left Nanyang and returned to Fung Fu's home before her death, which probably means she had divorced.
The tomb of Ruan Jiaxiang's first wife, Ms. Fung, was laid to rest in 1922. This indicates that there were two burials. Fung Fu erected a new tomb two years after her death, giving her a grand burial. This may indicate a severance of ties.

Biography and His Eldest Daughter
1879: Fung Fu (Fung Paterson) became the headmaster of Saiyingpun Government School and married Kwan Yuen-cheong's daughter, Kwan Yuet-ming, in the same year.
1879: Fung Fu and Kwan Yuet-ming gave birth to their eldest daughter (i.e., Yuen Mo-yin's mother, Fung Shui-king).
Around 1904: Fung's eldest daughter reached marriageable age and married Ruan Jiaxiang, a wealthy Chinese merchant in Nanyang (Kuala Lumpur), owner of the Civil Printing Bureau and general agent for Watson's Soda in Nanyang.
1905 (31st year of Guangxu, Qing Dynasty): Ruan Jiaxiang and Fung Shui-king (26 years old) gave birth to their eldest daughter, Yuen Mo-yin.
1930 (News on July 18): 25-year-old Yuen Mo-yin was about to graduate from medical school in Hong Kong. This was exactly 51 years after her maternal grandparents (Fung Fu and Kwan Yuet-ming) married in 1879.

YUEN HILDA MO-YIN
1907/01/10 - 1990/04/17 passed away at 83
She entered HKU at age 19 for her first degree, before the Medical Department at 1926.
Medical Register Information and Technical System (MeRITS)
30436 YUEN HILDA MO-YIN
The Granddaughter: Their daughter—and the granddaughter of Fung Fu—was indeed Dr. Hilda Mo-yin Yuen (阮慕賢). She was born in Kuala Lumpur on January 10, 1907, and lived a long life there until her passing on April 17, 1990

[Actually we went to the same kindergarten at St. Mary's School in Kuala Lumpur in 1947. (St Mary's is actually a girl's school but its kindergarten was co-ed at that time.) Naturally, we do not remember much of this phase of our lives. I understand that we both enrolled in the Batu Road School, a feeder school of the V.I. and, later, Kavye transferred to the Pasar Road School, the other feeder school. In 1955, we were reunited in Form 1C at the V.I.
At that time I was still playing the violin. That year I teamed with Johnny Lim and played Bizet's Habanera from Carmen at the School Concert. It wasn't my first concert. As a young child I was exposed to playing for audiences in church (every Easter and Christmas) and at old folks homes. My gratitude goes to my aunt, Dr Hilda Yuen, who gave me the violin scholarship. Her annual philanthropic mission was to bring cheer and gifts to the poor residing at old folks homes and I was always part of her entourage. I also played my first school concert at the Batu Road School in my first year at school. Then in my third year, in Standard 1, I actually was placed second in the school's talentime. I remember I played Bells Of Scotland at that time.---- My Romance With Music - A Nostalgic Walk by Stanley H.T. Loh]

• #30431: Dr. Kok Sau Hor, Cecilia (University of Hong Kong)
• #30432: Dr. Yong Chong Chew (University of Hong Kong)
• #30435: Dr. Young Cheang Keng (University of London)
• #30436: Dr. Yuen Hilda Mo-Yin (University of Hong Kong) [1]

Yes, Dr. Hilda Yuen Mo-Yin (袁慕蓮) did practice medicine in Kuala Lumpur, Malaya. [1, 2]
She is a highly significant figure in the historical timeline of female medical practitioners in the region, bridging the medical histories of Hong Kong and Malaysia: [1]
• The HKU Connection: Dr. Hilda Yuen graduated with her MBBS from the University of Hong Kong (HKU). Records indicate she was publishing clinical case studies in obstetrics as early as 1937. [1, 2]
• Practice in Kuala Lumpur: Following her education and training, she relocated to British Malaya and became a fully registered medical practitioner under the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC registration entry #30436). [1]
• Legacy and Philanthropy: Based in Kuala Lumpur, she was known both for her professional practice and her local philanthropic efforts. She historically funded musical scholarships (such as violin programs) and conducted regular charity missions to old folks' homes and impoverished communities across the city. [1]

Fung Sau-sung Verification
In Ip Sum-ming's "Heaven's Way Reaches Down: A Study of the Missionary Work of the To Tsai Church, Chinese Self-Governing Church in Hong Kong (1843-1926)," Fung Sau-sung is listed as Fung Fu's third generation, but the only possibility is a marriage between Fung Shui-ngan and Fung. Fung Lai-lee flatly denied this because she had visited the elderly Fung Sau-sung. He was the headmaster of Paterson Primary School from 1965-72.
Mr. Fung Sau-sung (1971-1991, founding headmaster, transferred from Paterson Primary School of the same system) (died in 2018) 1937-2018 Obituary Union Church Deacon, founding headmaster of Ho Fuk Tong Primary School.
According to Fung Sau-sung, former chairman of the Executive Committee of the Church of Christ in China Hong Kong Council, in his article "A Review of Tuen Mun Church History": "In March 1933, the New Territories Mission of Hong Kong ceased operation after twenty-nine years, transferring all their purchased gospel halls, schools, and other buildings to the management of the Church of Christ in China Guangdong Association... The property transfer ceremony was grandly held at the Hong Kong Union Church." Quoted from "Centennial Thanksgiving Special Issue of the Church of Christ in China Tuen Mun Church (1908-2008)" ----Page 298

Zhao Fung Epitaph Verification
Variant Characters
The "tablet heading" is for female disciples.
Biblical Reference: In the Bible, Acts 9:36 describes Tabitha (Dorcas), a Christian woman who was full of good works and acts of charity, with the original text being "a female disciple."
Historical Evidence: In the late Qing Dynasty and early Republic of China, Chinese Christianity became self-governing and promoted gender equality. Progressive women who were baptized at that time, upon their death, often did not use feudal titles such as "妣 (deceased mother), 孺人 (lady), 淑人 (virtuous lady)," but proudly engraved "基督徒 (Christian)" or "女徒 (female disciple)" horizontally on the tablet heading to declare themselves followers of Christ.
Local Example: In the famous early Christian villages of the New Territories in Hong Kong (such as the tomb of Peng Le-san's mother in Chung Him Tong Village, Fanling), their century-old tombstone clearly and deeply engraves "Christian Female Disciple, Mrs. Wong of the Peng Family..." This aligns perfectly with the stone tablet of the early To Tsai Church (Union Church) prominent Zhao Fung family, in terms of historical background and denominational ethos.
“36In Joppa there was a disciple named Tabitha, which, when translated, means Dorcas. She was always doing good and helping the poor. 37About that time she became sick and died, and her body was washed and placed in an upstairs room. 38Lydda was near Joppa; so when the disciples heard that Peter was in Lydda, they sent two men to him, urging him, “Please come at once!” 39Peter went with them, and when he arrived he was taken upstairs to the room where Tabitha lay. All the widows stood around him, crying and showing him the robes and other clothing that Dorcas had made while she was still with them. 40Peter sent them all out of the room; then he knelt down and prayed. Turning toward the dead woman, he said, “Tabitha, get up!” She opened her eyes, and seeing Peter she sat up. 41He took her by the hand and helped her to her feet. Then he called the believers and the widows and presented her to them alive. 42This became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord. 43Peter stayed in Joppa for some time with a tanner named Simon.”----This may indicate that Zhao Fung died of illness. Zhao Fung died at 37.

When Fung Lai-lee heard this, she immediately said "female disciple." She doesn't know clerical script, which indicates that this was already ingrained in her long-term memory.

Fung Yiu-sing's Legal Work Verification
Fung Lai-lee asked her uncle: "My 90-year-old uncle Fung Hin-wing in Australia said: Fung Yiu-wing graduated from HKU Law, then went to Shanghai as a lawyer, and earned a lot of money."
Basically, the early HKU Arts graduates' roster has been checked, and no second-generation Fung Fu had enrolled.

However, the earliest students at the University of Hong Kong to encounter legal knowledge were in 1924. At that time, it was not through an independent law faculty, but by adding legal subjects to the Faculty of Arts. In 1930, HKU had 15 Arts graduates. Fung Yiu-sing was born in 1886. This means he graduated from HKU Arts at the age of 40, catching up with the first batch of HKU graduates with legal knowledge.

In the historical context of 1925, if Fung Yiu-sing, the son of Fung Fu, an elder of To Tsai Church, studied law and political science courses newly offered by Professor George Williams Keeton at the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Arts, he would have received theoretical and constitutional enlightenment in Anglo-American Common Law. [1]
If he later chose to become a lawyer in Shanghai, this was a very typical and lucrative "treaty port elite route" in Republican Shanghai during the 1920s-1930s. As Shanghai at that time had extraterritoriality and both public and French concessions, he would primarily have three ways to practice there:

Method 1: Obtain British Barrister Qualification, Enter the "British Supreme Court for China"
This was the top-tier, most profitable career path for HKU Arts graduates at the time.
1. Further Study in the UK: Fung Yiu-wing, leveraging his HKU degree and excellent English proficiency, would pursue further studies at an Inn of Court in London to qualify as a British Barrister.
2. Practice in Shanghai: Upon returning to China, he would not enter local Chinese courts but directly practice at the "British Supreme Court for China" in the Shanghai International Settlement.
3. Advantage: At that time, all foreign commercial litigation involving foreign taipans and major banks (like HSBC) in Shanghai had to be represented by barristers with British licenses. HKU graduates' bilingual advantage (Cantonese, English, Mandarin) would make him a legal bridge between foreign and Chinese merchants in the Shanghai International Settlement.

Method 2: Pass the Republic of China Judicial Examination, Join the "Shanghai Bar Association"
If he wished to practice in the Chinese community, Chinese industrial and commercial enterprises (such as Commercial Press, Rong family enterprises), and the official "Shanghai District Court," he would have to follow the Nationalist Government's regulations:
1. Equivalent Academic Qualification or Supplementary Courses: According to the Provisional Regulations for Lawyers and later the Lawyers' Law of the Republic of China, applicants for a lawyer's license must be graduates of law departments from domestic or foreign universities. Fung Yiu-wing studied Arts (including law subjects) at HKU. He would need to apply to the Ministry of Education of the Republic of China for academic recognition, or take short supplementary courses in Civil Law (e.g., criminal law, civil law) at a renowned law school in Shanghai (such as Soochow University Law School, Fudan University).
2. Registration with the Ministry of Justice: Pass the lawyer qualification examination or review by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of China and obtain a lawyer's certificate.
3. Join the Bar Association: Publicly declare and join the influential Shanghai Bar Association, officially appearing in the Mixed Court (later renamed Jiangsu Shanghai Special District Court) in the Chinese sector and concessions. [1]

Method 3: Join the Shanghai Municipal Council or Foreign Firms, Serve as "Legal Advisor/Chinese Lawyer"
In early 20th century Shanghai, one didn't necessarily have to appear in court every day to be considered a lawyer; non-litigation legal services were equally extensive:
1. Comprador and Legal Advisor: Fung Yiu-wing could leverage the strong network of HKU alumni in the industrial and commercial sectors to join large foreign firms or Chinese banks (such as Shanghai Commercial & Savings Bank) as an in-house legal advisor. [1]
2. Concession Administrative Lawyer: Employed by the Shanghai Municipal Council of the International Settlement to handle complex foreign-related legal documents concerning land, taxation, and contracts within the concession. Such positions held very high social status in Shanghai at the time.
Summary
Fung Yiu-sing's legal knowledge acquired at HKU Faculty of Arts in 1925 was the starting point for developing rigorous legal logic and top-notch English legal reasoning skills. Upon arriving in Shanghai, he was at the intersection of the Common Law system (Hong Kong) and the Civil Law system (Republic of China) and the foreign-related legal system of the concessions. His methods would be either "using a British license to overpower foreign-related lawsuits" or "supplementing Republican laws to integrate into the local Shanghai legal community." [1]
1. Number of Bachelor of Arts graduates from HKU in 1925: There were only about 10 to 15 Bachelor of Arts graduates from the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Arts in 1925. Historical background: At that time, HKU adopted a very strict elite education system. In the first decade or so of its establishment, the total number of graduates from all faculties (Medicine, Engineering, Arts) combined usually only ranged from 20 to over 30 per year. For example, the most famous Arts graduate in 1925 was Irene Ho Tung, the first local Chinese female university student and daughter of Sir Robert Ho Tung (later renamed Irene Cheng). 2. Number of students taking Professor Keeton's law courses: The number of students who opted for Professor Keeton's "Law and Politics" course was estimated to be in the single digits (around 3 to 5). Reason one: It was not an independent major. At that time, the course was merely an elective general education course for second or third-year Arts students, alongside history and literature, rather than an independent law department. Reason two: Impact of strikes. The Canton-Hong Kong Strike, which shook Hong Kong, broke out in June 1925. Many Chinese students at HKU left school, dropped out, or participated in social movements, leading to very low class attendance and enrollment in the latter half of the year. Professor Keeton himself even wrote an article in the British "Nineteenth Century Review" magazine in November 1925, complaining about the complex attitude of Chinese students towards academic classes under the political tide at the time.

https://www.lawyers.org.cn/info/df196ccc01a14b04b37bac752ee6cd53

Chinese and Foreign Monthly Magazine
August 1, 1855, Issue No. 8
Since the British opened the port, the Royal family has established free schools in villages and fields to enlighten children, out of compassion and unwillingness to see them remain ignorant. Recently, it has been heard that in Stanley, Hong Kong, many do not attend the free schools. When asked why, it is because their parents do not like their children to read Christian scriptures, and they dislike the absence of the God of Literature (Wen Chang Di Jun) in the school. However, Christian scriptures consistently teach people to do good and shun evil, which greatly benefits one's body and mind, and is believed in by Britain. Chinese people residing in Hong Kong are under British rule, so what is wrong with reading these scriptures? As for parents who firmly do not wish their children to read these scriptures, they can write to the teacher of the school, asking them to only read Chinese classics. The British will certainly not force anyone to convert to Christianity. As for establishing the position of the God of Literature, the Royal school will certainly not allow it, as it violates God's commandments and is also of no benefit to people, which is truly meaningless. Now that Hong Kong is peaceful and prosperous, it is a time for cultural and educational development. Therefore, new teachers are being appointed in various schools to teach astronomy, geography, mathematics, and other subjects in English. This will greatly benefit the younger generation. Parents, please consider this carefully.

Youth Moral Association
YMCA
Chapter Seven
Five Chinese Christian Social Elites and the Social Participation of Chinese Churches

In the summer of 1907, five young men, formerly members of the Pui To Youth Self-Reliance Association—Fung Yiu-wah, Fung Yiu-cheung, Ho Tak-wing, Ho Siu-lau (1890-1923), and Wong Siu-bun (1890-1944)—initiated the reorganization of the To Tsai Church's youth gathering, and drafted its objectives and regulations, officially naming it the Chinese Christian Youth Moral Education Association.

Kwan Ki-cheong, who returned to Hong Kong after studying dentistry in the United States, was the pioneer of dentistry in Hong Kong; and taking the Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital in Hong Kong as an example, it was the first hospital in Hong Kong to provide Western medical services to the general public, and also ran a Western medical college. Many students of the Western medical college had close ties with the To Tsai Church, or belonged to Christian youth groups, such as Kwan Yuen-cheong's sons Kwan King-leung and Kwan King-hang, Au Fung-chi's son Au Si-sum, Wang Yuk-cho's sons Wang Chung-yik and Wang Chung-hing, and Ho Fuk-tong's grandson Ho Ko-chun, all of whom were students of the Western medical college.
If Wan Man-kai's Western medical background represented Chinese acceptance of Western civilization, then Ho Lai-sun's YMCA background could represent Chinese acceptance of Western organizational and lifestyle models. The YMCA movement originated in the United States. The Hong Kong YMCA was established in 1901 with donations from the Li Ki-tong brothers and quickly flourished in Hong Kong. In addition to evangelism, the YMCA introduced a new lifestyle model to Hong Kong youth at the time and created many innovative social service models. Before World War II, the YMCA was an important ministry for Chinese Christians in Hong Kong. After the 1950s, as various social service organizations blossomed in Hong Kong, the relative influence of the YMCA declined. The YMCA, in addition to Bible study and preaching, also ran day and night schools, commercial vocational schools; it also had outdoor sports fields, ice cream parlors, libraries, gyms, indoor swimming pools, etc. These activities were quite new and avant-garde in Hong Kong Chinese society in the early 20th century. Chinese youth, like Western youth, played ball, drank ice drinks, swam, and attended lectures. This was a lifestyle model that their parents' generation did not have. The YMCA represented that Hong Kong Chinese realized that in addition to the lifestyle and values inherited from Chinese society, there was another world.
The To Tsai Church had a very close relationship with the YMCA. In addition to Ho Lai-sun's involvement in YMCA work, his wife Wong Ching was a director of the YWCA. The To Tsai Church also had Ho Siu-lau (former general secretary), Au Fung-chi (former secretary), Sin Tak-hing (former general secretary of YWCA), Wong Yuk-mui (former deputy general secretary and general secretary of YWCA), Cheung Chuk-ling, Ma Wing-chan, Wan Man-kai, Au Ping-kwong (all of whom served as directors). The leadership of the YMCA was not entirely from the To Tsai Church, but the To Tsai Church should have been an important pillar of the YMCA, and the church's participation in YMCA affairs was consistent with its open attitude towards Western culture.
The To Tsai Church represented a group of Chinese who had contact with missionaries, were influenced by the West, and were concerned about China's development. They were both church leaders and actively participated in various changes of the era. Although the times were different and the ministries involved varied, this attitude of caring for both the church and society remained consistent.
More noteworthy is the Women's Department. It is believed that the Union Church was very advanced in gender equality at that time. For example, half of the trustees were women. The Women's Department once ran a free school for girls, specifically for female church members over twelve years old who had dropped out of school, using the Pui Tak Girls' School as its site. There was also a Women's Encouragement Association at that time, which discussed organizing a women's choir. Unfortunately, there is not much information about the Women's Department, so it cannot be introduced in detail.

New Territories Mission

The founding principle of the London Missionary Society was to have local people manage the church themselves. When the development of believers at a mission station reached a certain level, arrangements would be made for local people to take over governance. This was established at the time of its founding.
At the beginning of this period, the church had several evangelistic ministries. Some developed rapidly, while others stagnated. These will be discussed separately below.
According to the reports of Pastor Willis and Wong Shut-fong, the London Missionary Society sent a delegation from the UK to Hong Kong at the end of 1903. After an inspection, they believed that work in the New Territories should be actively developed. In 1904, the To Tsai Church and the Union Church jointly organized the New Territories Mission. The two churches each selected six representatives to form a board of trustees, and the ordained missionaries of the London Missionary Society's Hong Kong office served as advisors to the board. This kind of action-based evangelism almost without exception suffered overt or covert rejection and obstruction from villagers, which further demonstrated the piety of the New Territories believers. There was also a more moving situation, where church members offered their own homes as gospel halls. For example, the Sheung Shui Church was originally the home of fellow church member Liao Sau-pang, and the Sha Po Church was originally the residence of fellow church member Wong Kam-tai.

In 1919, the trustees of the New Territories Mission, representing the To Tsai Church, included: Pastor Cheung, Wong Wing-tak, Tse Kwai-fan, Fung Yiu-cheung, Kwan Ba-gu, and Wong Si-gu, totaling six people. In the same year, the resident evangelists for the various gospel halls in the New Territories were as follows: Yuen Long—Wong Shut-fong, Tuen Mun—Gu Kai-tak, Lam Tsuen—Law Heng-shek, Tsuen Wan—Lin Yat Tsing, Tai O—Lan Hon Shang, Ping Shan—Chan Pin Kwong.

Many worked tirelessly, and the Lord's way prospered. By 1923, the number of baptized members in the New Territories exceeded one thousand. In the same year, Li Shu-gui was appointed to head the New Territories work, ordained the following year, and appointed as the circuit pastor for the New Territories, putting the work on a more organized track. Later, when the Church of Christ in China Guangdong Association was established, the New Territories Mission was taken over by the Sixth District Church Affairs Department. Although it was no longer subordinate to the To Tsai Church in terms of organization, the enthusiasm of its members for evangelism and donations did not diminish in the slightest.
During this period, everything developed steadily. The established foundations were strengthened and deepened. In terms of ministry, there were also several record-breaking achievements, including: the first choir established – Elder Wang Chong-guang's youth choir; the first fellowship organized – Fung Yiu-wah and others' youth moral education association; the first New Territories church school – Yuen Long's True Light School; the first church in Macau – the Zhi Dao Church in Hac Sa Wan. In addition, the work of the founding period continued to develop and achieved significant results, such as the official establishment of the New Territories Mission in 1904, and Pastor Pearce's separate theological classes.
In February 1908, Elder Tang Siu-ting died of illness. Elder Tang served for six years, diligently and faithfully, setting an example for all. He was taken by the Lord, and his merits followed him.
Under the leadership of Pastor Cheung, the To Tsai Church also initiated three external evangelistic ministries: the prison evangelistic team, the marine evangelistic society, and the "Ta Kwong Pao" (Great Light Newspaper).
The main members of the prison evangelistic team were pastors and evangelists; lay members did not participate. Pastor Cheung and Pastor Pearce were the most diligent, regularly visiting prisons to evangelize and lead Bible study classes. Although they faced much blasphemy and slander, there were also those who sincerely sought the truth, repented, and converted, some of whom were baptized and joined the church after their release.
The target of the Marine Evangelistic Society was the boat people, starting around 1911. Pastor Willis was very interested in this ministry and therefore contributed the most. As the boat people were relatively conservative in their thinking, this work was even more difficult than evangelism in the New Territories. It was not until 1916 that a female believer was reported to have been baptized. In the same year, the church appointed Wong Wing-tak, Li Kam-chuen, and Ng Man-hin as trustees of the society.

"Ta Kwong Pao" (Great Light Newspaper)

In 1912, the elders of the To Tsai Church, in order to strengthen the church's influence in society, prepared to publish a Christian daily newspaper. They aimed to "base on the Gospel, promote morality, and shape good character in many aspects." Soon after, the newspaper was published and named "Ta Kwong Pao." Ho Kai, Au Fung-chi, and Cheung Chuk-ling were among the main writers. In addition to the above objectives, the newspaper also strongly refuted comments from non-Christians about Christianity, becoming the voice of the church in southern China at that time.
Ying Wa College

Ying Wa College was originally founded by Dr. Robert Morrison in Malacca. When Hong Kong was opened, it was moved to Hong Kong by Principal Dr. James Legge. It later ceased operation in 1856. In 1911, the Arthington Trust proposed that the London Missionary Society establish a secondary school in Hong Kong to educate Chinese youth. If this school was successfully established and employed a European headmaster, the Trust promised to cover the headmaster's salary and allowances for five years. The members of the To Tsai Church were most excited by this news. Upon hearing the news, various preparatory activities immediately began, including organizing a school board, registering, selecting a school site, and appointing a headmaster.

Union Church during Japanese Occupation

1940
・February・
The church council passed a resolution that for future withdrawals, the signatures of any two of the three property management committee members and the treasurer would be effective.

・March・
The church council passed a resolution to accept a donation of two thousand yuan in shares from the will of Ms. Wong Chin-wah, an old member of the To Tsai Church.
The Women's Department organized air defense training classes.

・June・
The church dispatched Deacon Single Leung Chui-ling and Mr. Ko Kwun-hun to participate in the Christianized Family Movement organized by the National Christian Council.
The Church of Christ in China Guangdong Association held its fifteenth annual meeting at the church.
Deacon Au Yeung Pin passed away.

・July・
Accepted Miss Li Wai-kwan, a female student from Chung Chi Bible Seminary, for summer internship at the church.

・August・
The Sacred Music Department held a Chinese and Western classical music concert to raise funds for wounded soldiers and refugees.
The church council passed a resolution to designate the late Pastor Pearce's legacy of seven thousand four hundred sixty-seven yuan and six cents as the basic fund for the church's evangelistic expansion, with only the interest to be used and the principal not to be touched.
Mr. Ho Pak-kui, a church trustee, passed away.

・October・
Repaired the broken ground in front of the church.

1941
・February・
The Air Defense Department designated the church as an air defense post.
・March・
The Youth Department organized a lecture series on "Further Education and Career Choices," inviting experts such as Dr. Chu You-guang, Dr. Liu Rui-heng, Dr. Lin Cheng-fang, Master Xu Dishan, and Professor Li Pei-wen to speak.

・June・
The church launched a campaign to raise funds for war bonds.

・July・
The National Council of the Church of Christ in China ordained Mr. Chow Ting-kit as a pastor at the church.

・September・
The church performed the national defense play "The Eve" to raise funds for war bonds.

・October・
Evangelist Mr. Lu Tu-guang resigned from his position as evangelist at the church to accept an invitation from the Darwin Methodist Church in Australia. The Youth Department held a farewell meeting.

・November・
The church constitution passed its first reading.

・December・
The constitution passed its second reading.

On the 8th, the Japanese attacked Hong Kong, and the government issued an emergency notice.
On the 25th, Hong Kong surrendered.

1942

・January・
Implemented Holy Communion twice a month (first Sunday and third Sunday).
Choir suspended.

・February・
Due to frozen public funds, staff had to be reduced, and Cheung Wai-chi voluntarily resigned.
The Mid-Levels Self-Defense Corps operated in the annex, providing protection for the church and receiving rice rations.

・March・
Mass evacuation, Sunday attendance significantly reduced.

・April・
On the 23rd, the military police disbanded the self-defense corps.
Repaired the large window at the back of the church.
The church council held a quiet meeting in a corner of the main hall.
Due to a significant reduction in trustees, the number of trustees was revised to eleven, with seven constituting a quorum.
Sunday school resumed, with Fung Kwai-hing and volunteer workers Mr. and Mrs. Li Shui-sun teaching.

・May・
The Japanese government conducted its first detailed investigation of the church.
Chairman of the church council Yan Cheng-kun was designated as the representative for filing, not to be changed easily, with his resume and photo submitted.
Church site registration was delayed due to the need for drawing, and was never completed (no incident occurred later).

・June・
Bell ringing prohibited. After much negotiation, only chiming was allowed, not striking the hours. Double chimes were used on Sundays for distinction. Special application was required for weddings and funerals.

・July・
The military police conducted a second detailed investigation of the church, leaving no stone unturned, which was extremely difficult to bear.
The dormitory resumed five electric lights.

・August・
Volunteer workers Mr. and Mrs. Li resigned and returned to their hometown. Only the pastor and female evangelist remained on staff.

・October・
Allied air raid.

・November・
Third investigation of the church's income and expenditure, and membership roster.

1943
・January・
The military police conducted a fourth detailed investigation of the church, strongly criticizing Protestantism and praising Catholicism.

・February・
On the 27th, the Hong Kong Christian Council was elected and established, holding its opening ceremony at the church. Government officials supervised the election, and Wang Ai-tang and Liu Yue-sheng were forced to serve as chairman and vice-chairman.

・March・
The Cultural and Educational Department convened a religious consultation meeting, with representatives from Christianity, Confucianism, Islam, and Buddhism all required to attend.
Fifth review of the number of church members, income and expenditure, church property, etc.

・April・
Sunday school textbooks used the public edition specially commissioned by the General Assembly.
The military police's special high-level department conducted a sixth inquiry, requesting the church to provide detailed written answers to various questions.
Trustee Ko Kwun-hun passed away.

・June・
The church's public property registration was completed, and the church accepted the evangelist certificates specially issued by the government to the General Assembly for entry and exit.
Hong Kong currency was prohibited. It was decided to cleverly arrange public funds, with the chairman, treasurer, and director all aware.
The Sixth District Council ceased operations and officially transferred to the General Assembly for takeover.
The new Cheung Chau Church was temporarily lent to the local federation for use, and a contract was signed.

・July・
Major air raid.

・August・
The church's construction director, Chan Siu-ha, passed away.
On the 16th, the military police conducted a seventh investigation, focusing on the resume of the head pastor and the resumes of twenty working church members.

September
The Japan Christian Council dispatched Pastor Shikishima Takamori to Hong Kong to supervise the affairs of the General Assembly.
On the 13th, the Navy occupied the church's Aberdeen property, not renting it out, but still collecting taxes.
On the 28th, the Union Church certificate was issued and hung in the secretary's office.

October
On the 7th, the eighth investigation of the church was conducted, with a deadline of one week to submit all answers. Pastor Samejima was asked to request an extension.
On that day, the known number of church members was 866 males, 109 females, and 123 children.
Monthly fee: 174.17.
On the 14th, the government conducted its ninth inquiry into the church's current situation.
On the 21st, Pastor Cheung Pil-ling was arrested by the military police and subjected to severe torture.
Those who died and came back to life again.

November
The head pastor was released and took three months' leave for medical treatment, remaining under surveillance.

December
Three representatives were sent to the General Assembly's winter conference, where officials gave instructions.
On the 13th, the dispatch team conducted its tenth investigation into the church's founders, income and expenditure, etc.
On the 25th, Christmas Day, the choir resumed.

1944

January
To accommodate company employees attending the meeting, it was decided to start worship at 11:00 AM on Sunday.

February
Pastor Cheung resumed his duties after his leave.

・March・
Union Monthly resumed.
The Youth Moral Education Association resumed its gatherings, held on Sunday afternoons.
The government conducted a household census, and the church staff were listed.

・April・
The Cultural and Educational Department conducted its eleventh investigation into the detailed origins, resumes, academic qualifications, children, and salaries of evangelists, and also investigated the history of Ying Wa Girls' School and Boys' School.

・May・
The church and its members joined the Christian Cooperative.
The annex was burglarized for the first time.
The monthly publication needed to be inspected.
Ying Wa Girls' School was re-occupied and renamed Sakura-in Primary School, with a small archway built.

・June・
The annex was burglarized again, losing two radios and over ten brass window latches.
The choir vestments were stored at Pastor Cheung's residence to prevent theft.

・July・
After the Sunday worship meeting, it resumed at 11:30 AM.
Deacon Lam Chak-sang passed away in Macau.
The Cultural and Educational Department renamed the church "Hong Kong Christian Union Church," prohibiting the continued use of "Church of Christ in China Union Church," and ordered a new stamp to be carved for filing.

・August・

The government conducted its twelfth investigation into the Union Church's land deed, demanding back taxes. It was replied that the deed was stored in the London Missionary Society's iron safe and could not be submitted.

・October・
Increased food rations for the poor.
On the 14th, the military police conducted their thirteenth detailed investigation of the church, leaving no stone unturned.
On the 19th, the military police conducted their fourteenth investigation into the chairman's resume, the church's election method, and the current trustees.
On the 29th, Deacon Wong Si-gu passed away.

Fung Fu's Wife, Ms. Kwan's Maternal Family Investigation
Kwan Yuen-cheong
Father-in-law Kwan Yuen-cheong (1832–1912): Hailed as the "Father of Chinese Dentistry," he was China's first registered Chinese dentist. He had a profound relationship with Dr. Sun Yat-sen, who even respectfully called him "Godfather."
Another clear example is the Kwan Yuen-cheong family (1832-1912). Kwan Yuen-cheong came to Hong Kong with his father Kwan Yat (courtesy name Yun-cheung, 1797-1863) at a young age. He was initially employed as a worker at the London Missionary Society Hospital. Later, when James Legge founded a printing house, Kwan Yuen-cheong changed his profession to printing. Soon after, due to Kwan Yuen-cheong's diligence and youthful intelligence, he was appreciated by Dr. Lechler, who selected him as an apprentice and taught him Western methods of dentistry. In 1870, he moved his entire family to Guangzhou and practiced medicine in the Xiguan area, earning the title of "Father of Chinese Dentistry." By 1887, Kwan Yuen-cheong's family returned to Hong Kong to settle and became elders of the To Tsai Church, tirelessly promoting church affairs. Although Kwan Yuen-cheong did not participate in educational work, his family had many teachers. His fourth brother Kwan Yun-fat (courtesy name Hok-wing, 1836-1901) taught at the "National Queen's Grand Academy" (now Queen's College) for over thirty years. Although he did not directly participate in the educational ministry of the To Tsai Church, his experience in the education sector, coupled with his position as an elder of the To Tsai Church, must have greatly assisted the church's educational work.
In addition, Kwan Yuen-cheong's wife, Kwan Lai (birth name Ah-mui, 1840-1902), also actively supported the educational ministry of the To Tsai Church. Kwan Lai was originally from a prominent family in Xiqiao, Nanhai. Due to the Taiping Rebellion remnants causing chaos in Guangdong, her family sought refuge in Guangzhou. She was adopted by Mrs. Ko Sam-kwai in 1891 and then moved to Hong Kong, where she enrolled in a girls' school run by the wives of London Missionary Society missionaries (the predecessor of Ying Wa Girls' School).
In 1858, arranged by Mrs. Ko Sam-kwai, she married Kwan Yuen-cheong. In 1863, she was hired as a teacher at the London Missionary Society's girls' free school. As the London Missionary Society did not send female missionaries to Hong Kong to develop women's work in the early stages of establishing its mission station, early girls' education in Hong Kong was handled by the wives of missionaries. However, many missionary wives could not sustain educational services long-term due to household duties or marriage. Therefore, by the 1860s, the London Missionary Society gradually entrusted girls' educational ministry in Hong Kong to the wives and daughters of local pastors and elders. Kwan Lai was then assigned to teach at several girls' schools. First, in 1863, Kwan Lai was hired as a teacher at the London Missionary Society's free school. The school had 10 students, six boys and four girls. In 1868, she taught at the Aberdeen Street free school, with 12 students. In 1869, she transferred to the Union Church girls' free school, with six students. From the numbers, Kwan Lai's schools at the time were one-person missionary schools, providing basic literacy education for children. In the 1870s, Kwan Lai moved to Guangzhou with her husband, returning to Hong Kong in the mid-1880s. In 1887, she became the headmistress of the Staunton Street girls' free school, established in 1878, until her retirement in 1897. ---Page 343

Lai Ah-mui (058-1)
Mother-in-law Lai Ah-mui (Kwan Lai): Hong Kong's first Chinese female teacher, first female court interpreter, and also Hong Kong's first Chinese female nurse, who once taught English to Dr. Sun Yat-sen.
16 Kwan Lai (Lai Ah-mui 1887-1897) Staunton Street Girls' Free School Part I, No. 58 page 342

Fung Kwan (187-1)
Kwan Yuen-cheong's eldest daughter Kwan Yuet-ming (187-1) has the same To Tsai Church membership number as Fung Kwan. According to Ip Sum-ming's "Heaven's Way Reaches Down: A Study of the Missionary Work of the To Tsai Church, Chinese Self-Governing Church in Hong Kong (1843-1926)," she is indeed the same person.

Kwan Yuet-ying (130-1)
Among them, the third daughter, Kwan Yuet-ying, married Yung Sing-kiu, a cousin of Yung Wing (a core revolutionary); the seventh son, Dr. Kwan King-leung, was a close classmate of Sun Yat-sen at the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese, and also a close friend of the "Four Bandits."

Kwan King-fai
Beyond the thrilling tale of his early assassination attempt on Empress Dowager Cixi, Kwan King-fai's (Kwan King Fai, 1883–1943) life story is deeply intertwined with modern Chinese revolution, the establishment of the Republic, and a prominent Hong Kong family:
I. Rescue and Exile After Failed Assassination
Brother's Rescue: Kwan King-fai, in his youth, plotted to assassinate Empress Dowager Cixi. The plot was exposed, and he was arrested. Fortunately, his fifth elder brother, Kwan King-hin (a pioneer of modern Western medicine and former official at the Beiyang Medical School), leveraged his connections to rescue him, thus sparing him from the death penalty and securing his release.
Study Abroad in the U.S.: To evade subsequent political retaliation and purges by the Qing government, Kwan King-fai was immediately sent by his family to study abroad in the United States after his release. [1]
II. Return to China and Political Career in the Republic
Republican Official: After the fall of the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the Republic of China, Kwan King-fai returned from his studies in the U.S. and dedicated himself to the early nation-building efforts.
Transportation Construction: Leveraging his Western-acquired professional knowledge, he served as the Director of the Shantou Highway Bureau and other areas for the Republican government. Subsequently, he also served as a committee member of the Guangzhou Municipal Government, playing a crucial role in the early highway and municipal transportation planning in the Guangdong region. [1]
III. Prominent Family Background and Connection to Sun Yat-sen
Godfather Relationship: His father, Kwan Yuen-cheong, was a pioneer of modern Chinese dentistry, revered as the "Father of Chinese Dentistry." Sun Yat-sen, during his early medical studies in Hong Kong, had a very close relationship with the Kwan family, even respectfully calling Kwan Yuen-cheong his godfather.
Revolutionary In-laws: His eighth elder brother, Kwan King-sun, married Yang Shun-wah, the sister of Yang He-ling, one of the "Four Bandits," thus making the Kwan family in-laws with the core circle of the anti-Qing revolution.
Classmate and Close Friend: His seventh elder brother, Kwan King-leung (courtesy name Sum-yin), was a classmate of Sun Yat-sen in the first graduating class of the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese. After graduation, the two jointly planned revolutionary organizations and medical relief work. [1, 2, 3]
IV. Internationally Renowned Hollywood Descendants
Grandniece Nancy Kwan: Kwan King-fai's eighth elder brother, Kwan King-sun, had a son named Kwan Wing-hong, a famous Hong Kong architect. Kwan Wing-hong's daughter is Nancy Kwan. In the 1960s, she gained global fame with the films "The World of Suzie Wong" and "Flower Drum Song," becoming one of the most renowned Chinese legendary actresses in Hollywood history. [1]
. Background of the Plan: Assassination Waves by Royalists and Revolutionaries
Kwan King-fai (born 1883) was active in the early 1900s, a period when "assassinationism" was most prevalent in modern China. [1]
Intersection of Two Factions: After the Hundred Days' Reform (1898), the "Royalist Faction (Company to Save the Great Qing Emperor)," led by Kang You-wei and Liang Tie-jun, repeatedly plotted to assassinate Cixi by making bombs in Beijing, Wuhan, and other places; at the same time, Sun Yat-sen's Revive China Society and other "revolutionary factions" actively launched uprisings and assassinations in southern China.
Kwan King-fai's Motivation: Kwan King-fai was deeply influenced by his family and Sun Yat-sen's revolutionary ideas (his father Kwan Yuen-cheong was Sun Yat-sen's godfather, and his elder brother Kwan King-leung was Sun Yat-sen's classmate). At that time, he was in his early twenties, full of youthful vigor, and thus secretly participated in or organized assassination attempts against Empress Dowager Cixi. [1, 2, 3, 4]
2. Possible Execution Methods of the Assassination Plan
Although the details of Kwan King-fai's personal actions were not fully disclosed in the Qing court'

關振容(元昌)(009)

關黎氏(妻,058-1)

關亞連(妹,056-1)

莫禮智(112-1)

關景宗(157-1)

關國開(188-1)

關景雲(190-1)

關景賢(103-1)

關月明(187-1)

關月平(189-1)

關月霞(643-4)

關景良(108-1)

莫明德(171-3)

關頌韜(315-3) 關頌聲(316-3)

關頌堅(317-3)

關建民(179-3) 關蕙馨(295-3)

關建安(296-3) 關芳馨(359-3)

關建倫(383-3) 關肇祉(1925)

關肇元(1932) 關肇頤

關肇荃 關慧莊 關慧珍

關建唐

關文婥(1924)

關文婕(1924)

關月英(130-1)

容啟鴻(360-3) 容啟恩(410-3)

容星橋(夫,576-2)

容應鸞(1926) 容啟祥

容啟兆容啟東 容慕

容希韞

容啟文

容應熙(1925)

關景星

關肇崑 關瑤

關瑤章

關瑤楨 關瑤勳

關潤發(010-1)

關寵氏(妻,057-1)

關月桂(104-1)

關澤城(156-1)

關澤光(193-1)

關月好(436-1)

宋應麟(男,415-2)

宋應科(男,374-2)

宋蘇氏(妻,520-2)

關月嬋(125-1)

關澤霖(192-1)

關月靈(194-1)

關澤德(437-1)

宋顯耀(252-3) 宋玉鶯(253-3)

宋顯為(319-3)

馮扶(拔臣)(194-2)

馮關氏(187-1)

高錫安(332-3)

楊月華(楊雲甫女)

馮瑞瓊(063-3) 馮瑞蓮(064-3)

馮瑞蘭(065-3) 馮耀升(066-3)

馮耀開(067-3) 馮瑞群(103-3)

馮耀基(132b-3) 馮耀華(163-3)

馮瑞顏(228-3) 馮耀榮(279-3)

馮耀剛(358-3)

馮耀彰(227-3)*

馮壽松

馮妙珍

Hong Kong Daily Press 1895-06-12

Mr. Tseng Lai-sun, whose death is announced, was born sixty-nine years ago. At fifteen, he went to the United States to study, subsequently entering the class of '47 at Hamilton College, Clinton, New York. Upon returning to China, Mr. Tseng Lai-sun joined the missionaries at Canton, assisting Dr. Chalmers in his mission work. He did not stay there long, as shortly afterwards he entered into business with the firm of Bower, Hanbury and Co. (now Iveson and Co.). There he made a firm friend of Mr. Thomas Hanbury. Subsequently, Mr. Tseng Lai-sun entered into partnership with Mr. E. E. Clapp of the firm of Clapp and Co. But business falling, the late gentleman renounced this line of life and entered the official one, joining the late Viceroy Tao Taung-tang at Foochow as Instructor and Superintendent of the Foochow Naval School.

In 1872, Mr. Tseng Lai-sun took charge of the first batch of Chinese students to the United States, but returned to China in 1874, joining the service of Viceroy Li Hung-chang, with whom he remained up to the day of his death. Mr. Tseng Lai-sun was the Viceroy's Chief Secretary at the Chefoo Convention of 1876, held on account of the murder of the late Mr. Margary in Yünnan. He had assisted at nearly every important transaction with foreign powers with which Viceroy Li had been concerned for the past twenty years.

He was to have joined the Viceroy on his recent mission to Japan, but this eminent statesman told Mr. Tseng Lai-sun to remain at Tientsin to assist the acting Viceroy Wang, saying to him: "You are old and so am I, but I have to go because there is no help for it. Hence you are excused."

The late Mr. Tseng Lai-sun leaves a widow, two sons, and two daughters, the eldest being Mrs. N. P. Andersen and the second Mrs. W. W. Buchanan, who is also a widow.  N. C. Daily News

Fung Foo, a member of the California mission, visited Hong Kong in 1878. He reported that Wan Tsing-kai, described as "the most active deacon of the London Missionary Society congregation in Hong Kong," expressed the strong need for Chinese people in Hong Kong to learn English. Wan urged Fung to stay in Hong Kong and establish a night-school for English, similar to successful models in California.

Immediately after his arrival in Hong Kong, Hager wrote an account for *The Pacific* about his first Sunday. He recounted visiting the Wan family: "After breakfast I went to the house of Mr. Wang [sic] Ching Kai and found Lee Sam there. The family were all gathered together for morning worship, and though the place was far from being anything like our own, it was quite comfortable and pleasant. The family consisted of the father and his two sons, a nephew, and the wife of the eldest son. Two other sons belong to the family, but they were not present."

The Wan family members can be identified from the London Missionary Society congregation register and other sources. The father, Wan Kam-tseung, also known as Wan Tsing-kai (1813-1915), arrived in Hong Kong in 1854 from the San Ning (Toi Shan) District of Kwangtung. A carpenter by trade, he acquired property over the years, mainly shops in the Chinese business district. He was baptized in Hong Kong on April 3, 1864, and naturalized as a British subject in 1900. Hager did not mention Wan's wife, Wan Yan-shi, though she was alive during his visit, perhaps in the countryside. Church records indicate six sons and a nephew. Hager provided details about the elder son: "The married son is one of the returned Chinese American students who have engaged in teaching in the Government school, but he leaves soon for Shanghai, to engage in mechanics there." His wife, Kwan Yuet-ping, a pupil of Miss Noyes from Canton, appeared to be a pleasant lady, though Hager noted she "cannot talk a word of English." Her husband, Ping-chung,溫秉忠 the returned student from America, spoke English quite distinctly. Kwan Yuet-ping關月屏  was a daughter of Kwan Yan-cheung,關元昌 and her brother was a fellow-student and friend of Sun Yat-sen in medical school. Mrs. Wan, née Kwan, is described on her gravestone in the Colonial Cemetery, Happy Valley, Hong Kong, as "an exemplary Christian, eleven years the president of the Women's Christian Temperance Union, translator of Christian Temperance Literature." Given her work as a translator, Hager's statement about her English ability may be questioned; she might have been shy or remained quietly in the background, as was customary for young Chinese ladies in mixed company. Her mother had also conducted a school teaching English to Chinese girls, making it unlikely her daughter would not have learned the language.

It was through Wan Ping-chung, the returned student and husband of Kwan Yuet-ping, that Sun Yat-sen became connected to the Soong family, from which his second wife came. Continuing Hager's description of his first Sunday in Hong Kong: "I was asked to unite in prayer with the family and after we had listened to an exposition of 2 Timothy 2:1 (Now therefore, my son, take strength from the grace of God which is ours in Christ Jesus), then we sang 'Gates Ajar' in Chinese as well as we could, after which we were led in prayer by Lee Sam." In the afternoon, Hager attended the Chinese service at Union Church, pleasantly surprised by the well-filled house and the participation in the sacrament, a contrast to the smaller morning gathering. Rev. E.C. Edge conducted the service, with his wife vigorously leading the singing, beating time with her fan. Following the service, there was a Sunday school, though Hager felt it "hardly deserves the name," with only thirty or forty attendees, mostly soldiers and sailors, and just one Chinese class. The school's poor state inspired the new missionary to consider opening a Sunday school specifically for Chinese. In the evening, he attended a service of the Hong Kong Christian Association at the Temperance Hall, where the preaching was "not metaphysical, but pure gospel," delivered by Rev. D.D. Jones, an independent who later worked with Hager.

Hager mentioned that the eldest son of the Wan family was a returned student from America. Wan Ping-chung had gone to America in 1873 at the age of 12, as part of the second group of students sent by the Chinese Government under the Chinese Educational Mission. It was during his studies in America that he met the father of Soong Ching-ling. Emily Hahn, in a book on the Soong sisters, describes the meeting of two Chinese Educational Mission students with Charlie Soong. Charlie, or Soong Yau-ju as he was called before leaving Boston, had been adopted by his mother's childless brother, thus changing his surname from Han to Soong. His uncle ran a silk and tea store in Boston, where young Soong Yau-ju assisted and learned the business. Hahn's account of this meeting, though its basis (documentary, oral tradition, or author's imagination) is unclear, links the students' interaction with the shop-boy to his decision to run away from Boston and strike out on his own. She describes the students' influence: "The two young students talked to the wistful little boy behind the counter, telling him of their life at school and of the camp where they were sent each summer.... They visited the shop frequently and kept criticizing young Soon—that is, how he spelled his name in those days—for remaining behind the counter and being satisfied with night school, in America, where a first-class education was so easy to obtain.... Yan-ju listened, his mouth watered for a similar chance."

When Charlie Soong asked his uncle for permission to attend school full-time, he was refused. Taking matters into his own hands, he ran away, went to sea, and eventually ended up in Wilmington, South Carolina. There, he found patrons who sent him to Methodist Trinity College in South Carolina. After two years, he transferred to Vanderbilt University in Tennessee to study theology. Upon his return to China, he served for a time as a Methodist preacher in Shanghai. The two students who inspired the shop-boy in the Boston tea and silk store were Wan Ping-chung, son of a deacon in a Hong Kong congregation, and Niu Shang-chou from Shanghai, a member of the first group of students in the Chinese Educational Mission.

The boys from the Chinese Educational Mission were recalled to China in 1882, and Charlie Soong returned in 1886. In time, each married a daughter of the Ni family of Yuyao, Zhejiang. The Ni family was Protestant, though earlier generations on the female side had been Roman Catholic. Shortly after his return, Charlie married Ni Kwei-tseng. Niu Shang-chou married Ni Kuei-chin. Wan Ping-chung married Kwan Yuet-ping in Hong Kong, and after her death, he married Ni Sieu-tsang, the third of the sisters. Thus, three adolescents in Boston—two students and one shop clerk—married three sisters. One of these sisters became the mother of Dr. Sun Yat-sen's second wife, forging interlocking relationships among China coast Christian families. The Penang-born medical doctor, Wu Lien-teh, in his autobiography *Plague Fighter*, speaks of Wan Ping-chung and his connections with the Soong family: "About the year 1901, I met Mr. Wen Ping-chung, most jolly of all the early returned students from America, then serving as English Secretary."