Substitution of the Chinese restaurant licence in late 1940s-1950s Hong Kong : corruption, compromises, and regulations in a changing socio-physical landscape

Abstract

During the late-1940s and -1950s in Hong Kong, the Legislative Council increased regulation on the consumption and distribution of food and alcohol. While these changes were motivated by the need to eliminate health code violations, circumventions of legal systems, and concerns with oversaturation, they also emphasized underlying social and political stresses. The abolition of the Chinese Restaurant Licence in 1954, for example, was replaced with the more general Restaurant Adjunct Licence, despite having provided significant revenue to the government since the late 1800s, and having catered to 98% of the population.

Considering the above, the following questions were prompted: 1) “If Chinese Restaurant Licences were so profitable in ensuring more revenue for the Colony, and were deemed necessary to the majority of the population, why were they ultimately abolished, and substituted with the Restaurant Adjunct licence?” and 2) “Did the Legislative Council’s preoccupation with food and alcohol legislation in the 1950s coincide with increased interaction among the Chinese and the westerners living in Hong Kong?” Ultimately, replacing the Chinese Restaurant Licence for the Restaurant Adjunct Licence illustrated a clash of motivations between the government and the inhabitants of Hong Kong, the use of food legislation as a form of social control that singled out groups for protection or persecution, and social and racial conflicts resulting from dismantling segregation laws and ineffective policies.

Chapter One describes the needs of post-war Hong Kong, and how they were addressed by the abolition and substitution of the Chinese Restaurant Licence. Chapter Two focusses on commensality’s shifting importance in post-war Hong Kong's food culture(s) and the dynamics among Hong Kong inhabitants and governmental bodies. Chapter Three discusses the substitution and abolition of the Chinese Restaurant Licence at length, including its after-effects via-à-vis public housing and the Building Ordinance of 1955—linked to the lack in revenue from substitution the Chinese Restaurant Licence for the Restaurant Adjunct Licence. The final chapter features concluding thoughts on how food and alcohol legislation was used by the British Government not only as a vehicle to remediate chaos and racial tension, but also as a means of social control, in post-war Hong Kong.