Hong Kong’s Border Controls, the IRO and Resettlement for European DPs

I recently came across a letter from G. Findlay Andrew, Chief of the International Refugee Organisation (IRO) Far East office, to the Chief of Police in Hong Kong, D.W. Macintosh. The letter was written in 1950, when the Hong Kong Government instituted new border controls between China and Hong Kong in an attempt to limit the number of Chinese refugees entering the colony. Findlay Andrew was anxious to ensure that the IRO’s Resettlement and Repatriation Programme for European displaced persons (DP’s) would continue as normal despite the new Special Emergency Measures introduced in 1950. The IRO promises to honour Hong Kong’s new regulations, but also asks for leniency and exemption.

Findlay’s letter is illuminating in a number of ways. Firstly, we see the extent of the IRO’s involvement in European DP matters in Hong Kong (the IRO was founded in 1948 when it took over from UNRRA. In 1952 its operations ceased and the IRO was replaced by today’s UNHCR). The IRO helped thousands of Jewish and non-Jewish refugees leave China from 1948 to 1952, many transited through the port of Hong Kong, which Findlay refers to as a ‘distribution centre’. Secondly, the IRO’s close working relationship with the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, and Horace Kadoorie in particular, is revealed. Thirdly, the letter shows the complexities of migration for non-Chinese and non-British ‘alien’ DP’s from China. As described below, there were bureaucratic nuances for each type of migration, whether individual, group or mass. I’ve written about the complexity in which Russian ‘refugee transients are onforwarded’ to their destinations here. We also glean that surprisingly, very few DP’s ever set foot in Hong Kong. Many were detained on ships and were not permitted to land on shore. Finally, as we’ve seen elsewhere in this blog in relation to Chinese refugees, the colonial government was loath to take on any social welfare responsibilities for DP’s, hence the IRO’s commitment to ‘provide the necessary accommodation and maintenance’.

For further information on the IRO’s work in China with Chinese displaced persons and Cold War politics, see Meredith Oyen’s article ‘The Right of Return’.

Here’s the letter below.

—————————————

Letter from G. Findlay Andrew to D.W. Macintosh, 9 May 1950

As you are aware the IRO has during the past two years had a very large number of transients pass through the colony en route to the countries which have granted them reception visas. Due to the present development of events in China, Hong Kong has become increasingly a distribution centre from which the refugee transients are onforwarded to their destinations. No repatriate or resettler is brought out of China under the auspices of the IRO unless they have a valid destination visa. Their movements, however, have to be influenced by the following factors: –

  • Their departure from China has to be within the validity period of their ‘exit’ permit.
  • Their arrival at destination has to be before the expiration of their visa.

Generally speaking the movements fall under three categories:

  1. Individual movements with IRO Travel Certificate
  2. Group movements under direct IRO and / or American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee auspices. These are usually composed of groups of several hundred persons. The group of 260 who passed through on the S.S. General Gordon on the 4th Is a good example of such a movement.
  3. Mass movements none of which has, or is likely, to pass through Hong Kong.

The individual movements carry along the lines of ordinary transients who submit their individual applications for transit visas and conform to all details to the Government’s requirements. The Group movements are usually dealt with under a ‘bloc’ transit visa and this operation is dealt with under the discretion of the IRO, combined in the case of the Jewish DPs, with the AJJDC. These are usually ship to plane movements. There have been exceptions, however, when suitable surface transport has been available. In this latter case it has meant the group having to be kept in Hong Kong till the sailing of the oncarrier. During this period of detention the IRO has provided full maintenance with accommodation ashore or afloat and has assumed the responsibility for the departure at first opportunity.

With the reduced number of passenger vessels calling at this port together with very heavy advanced bookings, surface onforwarding is becoming increasingly difficult and it is increasingly apparent that IRO will have to rely more on aircraft for future movements. Where the numbers of any groups are sufficient to warrant the charter of a plane the problem will be simplified but where transients have to wait for schedule passenger planes there may be the necessity of a short stay-over in the colony.

I have set forth in detail the foregoing as a background for the following requests which are the main purpose of this letter –

  1. That under the new regulations the Resettlement and Repatriation Programme of the IRO may continue to receive the sympathetic cooperation of the Police and Immigration authorities of the Colony.
  2. That if, and when, unexpected happenings occur, such as the delay of a sailing or flight, due consideration may be given to the assurances and guarantee of the International Refugee Organisation. During such enforced delays the IRO will provide the necessary accommodation and maintenance.
  3. On the other hand, I would give you the assurance of the International Refugee Organisation, Far East Mission’s sincere desire to conform, in spirit as well as in the letter, with every requirement of the regulations. I know that in expressing this wish, I can also speak for the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee which is represented in the colony by Horace Kadoorie.

Resolution and Reflection in 2019

I’d like to wish all readers of this blog a happy new year, whether you’re reading from India, Israel, Canada, Britain, Hong Kong, or elsewhere in the world.

New Years are typically a time for resolutions – promises kept to a perceived ‘better’ version of ourselves. Instead of embracing the latest fad diet or paying for a new – and expensive – gym membership, I’ve been thinking about alternative resolutions for 2019. Many pertain to this blog: I’ve resolved to post more frequently and write more about Hong Kong, while continuing to cover topics such as Shanghai Refuge and refugee issues more generally.

The start of a new year often prompts reflection, and as part of this appraisal process I’ve been looking through my blog posts from the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. Here’s a summary of my posts so far, many of which reflect the ark of my PhD:

2015 – 2016: In October 2015 I begin my research ‘journey’. Tentatively, and for the first time, I start to piece together the lives of Jewish refugees who fleetingly lived in Hong Kong in the 1930s and 1940s. During these early months the blog is populated by posts about immigration control in Hong Kong, a topic discussed at length by super-star historians such as Agnes Ku and Mark Chi-kwan. I also write about wider ‘Asia Rescue’ literature as my interest is piqued by the release of a film called ‘Rescue in the Philippines’.

Throughout 2015 and 2016 the British media is awash with polarising stories on what becomes known as the European ‘Migrant Crisis’. As of September 2018, one in five migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea from Libya have either drowned or disappeared. In June 2016, the United Kingdom votes for Brexit, thanks in part to an anti-immigrant rhetoric pushed by the Leave campaign. (As an aside I’m interested to see the television adaptation of the controversial referendum which aired on Channel 4 today).

In Autumn 2016 I start my month-long fellowship at the American Jewish Archives (AJA). The fellowship prompts a couple of blog posts about the post-war immigration landscape in the United States and life in Shanghai after the war. At the AJA I meet lovely American researchers and attend some interesting lectures, including a talk by Stephen Porter, author of ‘Benevolent Empire’.

2017: In November 2016 and during my time in Ohio, Trump assumes power in the U.S. on a nationalistic and anti-immigration platform. I write a couple of articles on the ‘Modern Refugee’, a piece influenced by Peter Gatrell’s work. I start to think about the incarceration and detention of refugees from a historical perspective – namely the role of camps to detain and control thousands of Chinese refugees in Hong Kong in the 1930s and 1940s. I spend a couple of weeks in New York holed up at the JDC and UN archives during a particularly nasty snow blizzard. I write a couple of pieces about the Jews of Shanghai and Hong Kong (namely the Sassoons and the Kadoories) and Hong Kong’s Portuguese and Indian communities.

2018: In 2018 I think a lot about ‘humanitarianism’. I attend some interesting events on this topic too, including a lecture on the ITS Archive at the Wiener Library, a talk on World Refugee Day and a conference in Switzerland on ‘Dealing with Jewish Refugees During World War Two’. I post a series of blogs on the Shanghai Jewish Youth Association and write about the Jewish community of Tientsin and refugee memory of Shanghai.

So what’s in store for 2019? I hope to write more articles about the history of the Jewish community in Hong Kong, particularly during the Inter War years, as well as some lesser known aspects of Hong Kong’s history.

 

 

 

The UNHCR’s First Mission to Hong Kong, 1952

UNHCR Hong KongIn the 1950s Hong Kong became a base of international humanitarianism as NGOs opened offices in the colony to help assuage the Chinese refugee crisis. The newly formed United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) dispatched a mission to Hong Kong in 1952 – its original remit was actually to help Europeans displaced in China (see letterhead above). Other organisations were founded to help Chinese refugees who were, according to the UNHCR deputy commissioner James Read, ‘living in the most primitive circumstances … their houses are shacks and lean-tos, put together from a few pieces of wood and corrugated iron … sanitary arrangements are non-existent’. These included voluntary organisations rooted in Hong Kong’s Chinese communities, Kaifong Associations, global Christian missions and politically influenced secular NGOs, which dispensed housing, food and sanitation for Hong Kong’s growing refugee population.

For further reading on this subject, I recommend:

Laura Madokoro’s new book (Elusive Refuge, Chinese Migrants in the Cold War, 2016) takes a comprehensive look at white settler immigration policy towards Chinese refugees during this era – I haven’t had a chance to read it as yet but it’s certainly on my ‘to read’ list!

 

 

Lord Kadoorie: Industrialist and Historian

Kadoorie Family Bio_Lawrence Kadoorie
A rare photograph of Lawrence Kadoorie in his youth

I’ve written elsewhere about Lawrence Kadoorie’s efforts to preserve and interpret Hong Kong’s Jewish history. Below is an excerpt from the Review of Community Affairs, written by Lawrence in 1986, on the early Jewish presence in Hong Kong:

The Jewish Community of Hong Kong was Sephardic in origin – most of the families having come from Baghdad via India. It was the practice of the Sassoons to bring their relatives out from the city to work for them in their firm, which firm was first established in Hong Kong in 1841. The Sassoon’s mess which housed their offices and residential quarters for their staff was situated where the new Hong Kong Bank Headquarters now stands. Legend has it that an uncle of mine, Moses Kadoorie, was the first person to import a stage coach to which he harnessed four China ponies driving in state from Central to the race course.

To the best of my knowledge, today the only remaining descendants of the Sassoons living in Hong Kong are the Kadoories and EZEKIEL Abraham, all of whose families are related and originated from Baghdad which until the First World War was part of the Ottoman Empire.

The first European Jewish families to settle in Hong Kong were mostly French from Alsace-Lorraine. Prominent amongst them was the family who established Sennet Freres, the leading Jewellers here for many years.

The original site intended for the Synagogue was on a piece of land between MacDonnell Road and Kennedy Rod overlooking Garden Road which, at the time, was just above Hong Kong’s business district.

Due to pressure from Mr. Bellilios, a then leading member of the Community, the land was exchanged for the present site, at Robinson Road, which was then considered the more desirable residential area of Hong Kong. I, myself, was born in a house on Robinson Road known as ‘Terra Verde’.

At that time, Government did not impose a specific Building Covenant on new sites. My father purchased an area adjoining ‘Terra Verde’ upon which he built six tennis courts and a summer pavilion. When asked how he intended to fulfil the Building Covenant, he pointed to the Summer House. As a result, all future Building Covenants were made more specific.

Finding Hong Kong History

Today’s blog post is a brief overview of where and how to find Hong Kong history online. I’ll save the list of archives for another day!

First of all, the Old Hong Kong Newspapers web page on the Hong Kong Public Libraries website is an excellent resource for anyone looking for primary source material on Old Hong Kong. You can search within a wide selection of Chinese and English language newspapers, including the China Mail and the Hong Kong Daily Press, by entering key words in the search engine.

Speaking of newspapers, you can also purchase access to the South China Morning Post Historical Archive, with the first issue stretching back to the newspaper’s founding in 1903. Although there is a paywall (which doesn’t come cheap), the search engine is powerful and the newspapers easier to download than on the Public Libraries website.

Now let’s turn to government records. Of course, the Public Records Office, with its excellent Carl T Smith Collection (and recently updated website), should be the very first port of call for any Hong Kong historian. But for those working outside of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Government Reports Online, a Hong Kong University Library digital initiative, is the next best thing. It provides digital access to four major government publications, namely: the Administrative Report, Hong Kong Hansard, Hong Kong Sessional Papers and Hong Kong Government Gazette. Simply type in a key word, set the date parameters, and off you go.

You can also download council meetings of the Legislative Council from 1858 until 1997 here.

Blogs and websites administered by historians and enthusiasts are another excellent resource. Over at the crowd-sourced and award winning Gwulo website, you can find obscure links to all corners of the internet, anecdotal evidence, memoir, photographs, GPS tagging and more. Its strength lies in the site’s comments section, where relatives and old Hong Kongers regularly post messages and recollections of people, places and events, allowing users to trace the lives of the most marginal figures in the darkest corners of Hong Kong’s history. Similarly, check out Tony Banham’s Hong Kong War Diary for everything on the 1941 defence of Hong Kong and the ensuing occupation. Brian Edgar’s thoughtful blog traces his family’s history and along the way examines race, war and colonialism in Hong Kong through an academic lens. The Hong Kong History Project blog, a relatively recent newcomer to the Hong Kong blogging scene, has all kinds of useful information including a must-read annotated bibliography by historian Vaudine England and a directory of academics working at universities around the world. The project is based at the University of Bristol and aims to encourage new research into Hong Kong’s politics, society, culture and economy.