¹ For a biographical sketch of Ch'ü-yün, Yang, see Yang Ch'ü-yün lüeh-shih (Hong Kong, 1927Google Scholar) by an unknown author; also Tzu-yu, Feng, Ko-ming i-shih [Fragments of the History of the Revolution], I (Changsha, 1939), 6–8Google Scholar; and V (Shanghai, 1947), 8–15; and Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui ko-ming shih-yao [A Brief Revolutionary History of the Hsing-chung hui] (reprint; Taipei, 1956), p. 55.Google Scholar When a Chinese or Japanese author has two or more works cited for the second time, a shortened form of the English translation of the title is given.

² Tai, Tse Tsan, The Chinese Republic: Secret History of the Revolution (Hong Kong, 1924), p. 8.Google Scholar Tse's book first appeared in serial form in the columns of the Kong, HongSouth China Morning Post of Nov. 1924.Google Scholar

¹ Tse Tsan Tai was born in Sydney, Australia, on May 16, 1872, six years after his parents (natives of Kwangtung Province) had immigrated there. He received elementary education at the Grafton High School. At seven, he was baptised (in old age, Tse called himself a “Christian” and “also a staunch supporter of Confucius and his teachings”). At fifteen, he returned to Hong Kong with his mother, two younger brodiers and three sisters. There he completed his education at Queen's College (high school) and entered the Hong Kong government service, where he remained ten years, chiefly performing clerical duties connected with Public Works. Tse, , The Chinese Republic, pp. 6–7Google Scholar; and Duncan, Chesney, Tse Tsan Tat (London, 1917), p. 1.Google Scholar

⁴ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, pp. 7–8.Google Scholar

⁵ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 2.Google Scholar

⁶ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hut, p. 55.Google Scholar

⁷ For an analysis of the Fu-jen wen-she, see Hsing-jui, Wang, “Ch'ing-chi Fu-jen wen-she yü ko-ming yün-tung ti kuan-hsi” [The Fu Jen Literary Society and the Revolutionary Movement of the Ch'ing Period], Shih-hsüeh tsa-chih [Historical Magazine], I, No. 1 (Chungking, Dec. 5, 1945), 35–45.Google Scholar

⁸ In his autobiographical sketch written for Herbert A. Giles in 1896 in London, Sun Yat-sen stated that he had been born on November 22, 1866. After a thorough investigation by die Kuomintang authorities many years later, it was proved to be an error. See Lu, Tsou, Chung-kuo kuo-min tang shih-kao [Draft History of the Kuomintang] (3rd ed.; Chungking, 1944), IV, 1194.Google Scholar

⁹ Committee for the Compilation of Materials on the Party History of the Central Executive Committee of the Kuomintang (chief editor: Chia-lun, Lo), ed., Kuo-fu nien-p'u ch'u-kao [Chronology of Sun Yat-sen's Life: A Preliminary Draft] (Taipei, 1958), I, 1–45Google Scholar; hereafter cited as Kuomintang, Chronology of Sun.

¹⁰ Kuomintang, , Chronoolgy of Sun, I, 45–50Google Scholar; also Feng, , Fragments, III (Chungking, 1945), 28.Google Scholar Cf. Sharman, Lyon, Sun Yat-sen: His Life and Its Meaning (New York: John Day, 1934), p. 32Google Scholar, and Jansen, Marius B., The Japanese and Sun Yat-sen (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1954), p. 61.Google Scholar Both Sharman and Jansen date Sun Yat-sen's trip to North China in an attempt to see Li Hung-chang as having occurred in 1893 instead of 1894.

¹¹ For the text of Sun Yat-sen's letter to Li Hung-chang, see Yat-sen, Sun, Kuo-fu ch'uan-chi [Collected Works], ed. Committee for die Compilation of Materials on the Party History of the Central Executive Committee of the Kuomintang (revised ed.; Taipei, 1957), V, 1–12.Google Scholar The letter was edited first by Ch'en Shao-pai in Canton and then by Wang T'ao in Shanghai. See Ch'en Shao-pai, pp. 7–8; but according to Hsiang-lin, Lo, Kuo-fu chih ta-hsüeh shih-tai [The College Period of Sun Yat-sen] (Chungking, 1945), p. 15Google Scholar, n. 59, the letter could not have been edited by Wang T'ao. In any event it was subsequently published in the Shanghai Wan-kuo kung-pao (Chinese Globe Magazine) of October 1894. No record can be found that Sun had ever mentioned it in subsequent years (Kuomintang, Chronology of Sun, I, 54). It was discovered shordy after his death by a Chinese historian in 1925. Sheng, Hua, “Kuo-fu shang Li Hung-chang shu fa-hsien ti ching-kuo” [Discovery of Sun Yat-sen's Letter to Li Hung-chang], Taipei Chung-yang jih-pao (Central Daily News), Sept. 11, 1956.Google Scholar For a biographical sketch of Wang T'ao, consult Hummel, Arthur W., ed., Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1943–1944), II, 836–839.Google Scholar

¹² Tsou, , Draft History, I, 26.Google Scholar

¹³ Kuomintang, , Chronology of Sun, I, 55Google Scholar, n. 13. Among the Kuomintang historians, Tsou Lu was almost the only one who insisted that the Hsing-chung hui was founded in Macao in 1892. His version has been adopted by some American and Japanese historians, but his source was solely based on the unauthorized and incorrect Chinese translation of Sun Yat-sen's Kidnapped in London. For Tsou's four articles on the subject written between 1942 to 1944 at Chungking, , see his Ch'eng-lu wen-hsiian [Selected Works] (Shanghai, 1948), pp. 458–84.Google Scholar For an able refutation of his argument, see Feng, , Fragments, III, 23–30Google Scholar and 123–129.

¹⁴ Committee for die Compilation of Materials on the Party History of the Central Executive Committee of the Kuomintang (chief editor: Chia-lun, Lo), ed., Ko-ming wen-hsien [Documents of the Revolution], III (Taiwan, 1953), 16–18Google Scholar; hereafter cited as Kuomintang, Documents.

¹⁵ Kuomintang, , Chronoolgy of Sun, I, 53.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Feng Tzu-yu and practically all the Kuomintang publications in the past have given “February 21, 1895” as the founding date of the Hong Kong Hsing-chung hui (for example, Feng, , fragments, V, 10Google Scholar; but according to Kuomintang, , Chronology of Sun, I, 56Google Scholar, “February 18, 1895”). Tse Tsan Tai in his book previously cited gives no specific date except “in the spring of 1895” (p. 9), and records the “13th of March 1895” as me date of his “first meeting with Sun Yat-sen and others” (p. 4). It may be mentioned that with reference to the early Hsing-chung hui data, the Kuomintang historians often relied on tile writings of Feng Tzu-yu who, in turn, relied on Tse's book which has no Chinese translation.

¹⁷ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 8.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Cheng Shih-liang was a graduate of a German missionary school in Canton. Having studied briefly at the Canton Hospital School where he came to know Sun Yat-sen, Cheng returned to his native village in eastern Kwangtung and opened a pharmacy shop. Ch'en Shao-pai attended briefly the College of Medicine for Chinese. He was probably the closest comrade of Sun Yat-sen through the Hsing-chung hui period, but he sunk into oblivion after 1906. For their biographical sketches, see Feng, Fragments, I, 5 and 37–38; also Te-yün, Ch'en, ed., Ch'en Shao-pai hsien-sheng ai-ssu lu [An Obituary Record of Ch'en Shao-pai] (Canton, 1934?).Google Scholar

¹⁹ For the texts of the two regulations of the Hsing-chung hui, see Kuomintang, , Documents, III, 2–6.Google Scholar Sharman, p. 36, describes the regulations of the Hong Kong Hsing-chung hui as if they were the regulations of the Honolulu branch. Some Chinese publications also fail to distinguish the two.

²⁰ Ch'eng-yü, Liu, “Hsien tsung-Ii chiu te lu” [My Reminiscences of Sun Yat-sen], Kuo-shih kuan kuan-k'an [Publications of the National Historical Bureau], I, No. 1 (Nanking, Dec. 1946), 48–49.Google Scholar Liu claimed that Sun Yat-sen personally revealed this story to him one day in the former's newspaper office in San Francisco. No specific date was given by Liu, but it was probably in 1910.

²¹ For example, Tzu-yu, Feng, Chung-kuo kp-ming yiin-tung er-shih-liu nien tsu-chih shih [Twenty-Six Years’ Organizational History of the Revolutionary Movement] (Shanghai, 1948), p. 16Google Scholar; and Hsi-ch'i, Ch'en, T'ung-meng hui ch'eng-li ch'ien ti Sun Chung-shan [Sun Yat-sen Prior to the Founding of the Tung Meng Hui] (Canton, 1957), p. 33.Google Scholar

²² Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 10Google Scholar; and Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 9–10.Google Scholar Many Western sources have given September 9, 1895 as the date of Sun Yat-sen's first failure. For example, Sharman, p. 39; Chen, Stephen and Payne, Robert, Sun Yat-sen (New York: John Day, 1946), p. 32Google Scholar; and “Sag-gitarius” (pseud.), The Strange Apotheosis of Sun Yat-sen (London: Heath Cranton, 1939), p. 15.Google Scholar

²³ Tsou, , Draft History, IV, 1229.Google Scholar In Canton, Sun Yat-sen attempted to organize an agricultural association. His announcement can be found in his Collected Works, V, 13–14.

²⁴ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 9.Google Scholar

²⁵ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 9.Google Scholar

²⁶ Sun's defeat was a “great blow” to him (Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 10–11Google Scholar), and “it always rankled in his breast” (Tse, p. 9). Up to this time the chairmanship of the Hsing-chung hui was apparently open. Two dubious sources, however, give different versions. In Yang Ch'ü-yän lüeh-shih previously cited, pp. 8–9, it is stated that on Sept. 30, 1895 Huang Yung-shang resigned from the chairmanship in favor of Yang Ch'ü-yün. So stated in “Shun-te Yu-lieh hsien-sheng pa-shih k'ai-i jung-shou cheng-wen ch'i-shih” [An Announcement for Contribution of Articles in Commemoration of the Eighty-First Birthday of Yu Lieh] (Hong Hong, 1935), p. 4, but with a variant date: “Feb. 21, 1895.”

²⁷ Memorial of Kwangtung Governor Tan to the Throne reporting die attempted revolt of Oct. 26, 1895; reprinted in Tzu-yu, Feng, Chung-hua min-kuo k'ai-kuo chien ko-ming shih [Revolutionary History Prior to die Founding of the Republic of China], I (Shanghai, 1928), 27–29.Google Scholar Both the scale and scope of the attempted revolt have been exaggerated by subsequent accounts. Several thousand rebels are said to have been mobilized: the number increased after each telling; e.g., Ch'en Hsi-ch'i, , Tung-meng hui, p. 35Google Scholar (otherwise a careful study). For Sun Yat-sen's own account written abou a year after the event, see his Kidnapped in London (London, 1897), pp. 20–27.Google Scholar It is significant that at that time Sun did not claim to be tie leader of the revolution.

²⁸ Sun Yat-sen was, however, occasionally aboard ships which put in at Shanghai and Hong Kong, but he did not go ashore, with the exception of when on two occasions (early 1902 and January 1903) he stayed in Hong Kong for a few days. See Feng, , Fragments, IV (Shanghai, 1946), 71Google Scholar; Tse, p. 21; and Kuomintang, , Chronology of Sun, I, 108Google Scholar and 113. Many fantastic and imaginative accounts on Sun Yat-sen's adventures in the interior of China after 1895 have been written in the West. For example, an entire chapter of Bishop Restarick's, Henry B. book, Sun Yat-sen: Liberator of China (Yale University Press, 1931Google Scholar), is devoted to the “Unlucky Plan of Revolt in 1904,” in which Sun Yat-sen was found at the secret headquarters in Canton personally directing the plot with a Chang Chau. Restarick claimed to have obtained the information from Chang himself, who was “a public notary of the Territory of Hawaii'l Sharman, p. 102, also gives (rather skeptically perhaps) a full page to Restarick's “vivid narrative” of this revolt, and has the date “corrected” as having occurred in 1906.

²⁹ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, pp. 10Google Scholar, 12, and 13.

³⁰ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, p. 35.Google Scholar

³¹ For an autobiographical sketch of Miyazaki Torazö and the story of his acquaintance with Yatsen, Sun, see his San jū san nen no yume [The Thirty-Three Years’ Dream] (Tokyo, 1926), pp. 117–183Google Scholar; also Jansen, pp. 54–58 and 64–68.

³² Sun Yat-sen was lured into the Chinese legation in London on October 11, 1896, but was released twelve days later. His Kidnapped in London was written afer the episode. For a source book on die event, see Chia-lun, Lo, Chung-shan hsien-sheng lun-tun pei-nan shih-liao k'ao-ting [A Critical Study of the Official Documents Concerning Dr. Sun Yat-sen's “Kidnapped in London”] (Shanghai, 1930).Google Scholar

³³ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 36 and 41.Google Scholar

³⁴ Tsc, , The Chinese Republic, pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

³⁵ In his autobiography, Sun Yat-sen called the event the “merger of secret societies in the Yangtze Valley, Kwangtung, Kwangsi, and Fukien provinces into the Hsing-chung hui.” (Sun, , Collected Works, I, 36Google Scholar). This was criticized by a Communist historian as “far-fetched.” See Meng-yüan, Yung, ed., Chungkuo chin-tai shih tzu-liao hsüan-chi [Selected Source Materials on Modern History of China] (Peking, 1954), P. 542.Google Scholar

³⁶ Kuomintang, , Chronology of Sun, I, 87–88Google Scholar; Miyazaki, p. 183. Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 17Google Scholar ff., mistakenly identifies the new organization as the T'ung-meng hui, which did not come into existence until 1905.

³⁷ For a personal account on the relations between the revolutionaries and the reformers, see Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 23–26Google Scholar, 32–34, 36–39, and 41–44.

³⁸ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, pp. 14–15.Google Scholar

³⁹ Tse, , The Chinese Republic, p. 15.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Feng, , History Prior, I, 47.Google Scholar Three Letters of Liang Ch'i-ch'ao to Sun Yat-sen written during this period are reprinted in facsimile in Feng's book, I, 44–47. Unless otherwise mentioned, all translations in this article have been made by the present author.

⁴¹ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, p. 45.Google Scholar

⁴² Feng, , Fragments, IV, 92.Google Scholar

⁴³ For die Chinese text of tie letter, see Sun, , Collected Works, V, 16–19.Google Scholar Judging by the content, the letter was written after tie foreign legations in Peking had been besieged by the Boxers and the Manchu soldiers.

⁴⁴ Cf. Jansen, , The Japanese and Sun Yat-sen, p. 90.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ The letter is reprinted in Feng, , Fragments, IV, 98–100.Google Scholar Interestingly enough it cannot be found in any of Sun Yat-sen's Collected Worlds compiled by the Kuomintang. Two persons mentioned in the letter require a word of explanation. Li Chi-t'ang was a son of a wealthy Chinese merchant in Hong Kong. Induced to join the Hsing-chung hui by Yang Ch'ü-yün, he generously contributed funds for the cause. Yung Wing, the “first Chinese student in the United States,” had met Tse Tsan Tai and Yang Ch'ü-yün in Hong Kong early in April 1900. He was on his way to the United States again. They exchanged views on the political situation of China, and Tse wrote to Sun suggesting the latter to meet Yung when Yung arrived in Japan. Tse, p. 18. It is not clear how Sheng Hsüan-huai came into the picture.

⁴⁸ Letter of Sun Yat-sen to Hirayama Shū, dated July 24 [1900]. Sun, , Collected Works, V, 20.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 46–47.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 46–47.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Feng, , Fragments, V, 16–22.Google Scholar The memorial of the Kwangtung Governor Te Shou to the Throne reporting on this revolt is reprinted in Ch'un-sheng, Ch'en, “Keng-tzu Hui-chou ch'i-i chi” [An Account of the Waichow Revolt of 1900], Chien-kuo yüch-k'an [Chien-kuo Monthly], V, No. 3 (Nanking, July 1931), 10–12.Google Scholar One of the by-products of the Waichow revolt was the enhancement of Sun Yat-sen's prestige in China; for his name was now mentioned along with that of K'ang Yu-wei, the respectable “tutor of the emperor.” See Chien-nung, Li, Chung-kuo chin-pai nien cheng-chi shih [The Political History of China in the Last One Hundred Years] (Shanghai, 1947), p. 212Google Scholar; for an English version, see Teng, Ssu-yu and Ingalls, Jeremy, trans, and ed., The Political History of China, 1840–1928 (Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, 1956), p. 183.Google Scholar The official memorials linked the action of the revolutionaries with the attempted armed revolt of the reformers led by T'ang Ts'ai-ch'ang and Lin Kuei in 1900 on the Yangtze River, although there was no coordination between them. See the memorial of the Kwangtung governor, reprinted in Ch'en Ch'un-sheng, pp. 10–12, and the memorial of Governor-General Chang Chih-tung on the attempted armed revolt of the reformers, reprinted in Chung-kuo shih-hsiieh hui (Chinese Historical Association), Hsin-hai kp-ming [Revolution of 1911] (“Chung-kuo chin-tai shih tzu-liao ts'ung-k'an” [Collection of Materials on Modern History of China]; ed. Ch'ai Te-keng and others; Shanghai, 1957), I, 264–269.

⁵⁰ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 48–49.Google Scholar Official Kuomintang historians have sometimes hinted that Yang Ch'ü-yün “betrayed” die revolution because of this alleged compromise. See Mu-han, Teng, “Sun hsien-sheng tzu-shu shih-i” [Notes on Sun Yat-sen's Reminiscences], Chien-kfio yiieh-k'an, I, No. 4 (Aug., 1929), 82–83.Google Scholar The accusation does not seem justified’ under the circumstances.

⁵¹ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, p. 52.Google Scholar The attempt on the life of the Kwangtung governor was part of the operation of the Waichow revolt. The aim was to make disturbances in the provincial capital while military actions were being taken on the coastal areas of the province. The bomb went off, but the governor was unhurt. Shih Chien-ju, who was responsible for the plot, confessed after capture that it was through Yang's introduction and influence that he had joined the Hsing-chung hui, and consequendy Yang was warned by his friends to go away. Although Hong Kong was dangerously near Canton, he did not flee. For the Kwangtung governor's bulletin on the case, see Feng, , Fragments, V, 32–33Google Scholar; for a biographical sketch of Shih Chien-ju, see Mu-han, Teng, “Shih Chien-ju shih-lüeh,” Chien-kuo yiieh-k'an, II, No. 6 (Nanking, April 1930), 61–64.Google Scholar

⁵² Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, pp. 52–54Google Scholar; Feng, , Fragments, V, 13–14Google Scholar; and Tse, p. 20. Yang Ch'ü-yün was survived by his wife, one son, and two daughters. Sun Yat-sen in Japan raised some funds for the family.

⁵³ Shao-pai, Ch'en, Hsing-chung hui, p. 55.Google Scholar