Page:Eminent Chinese Of The Ch’ing Period - Hummel - 1943 - Vol. 2.pdf/297

 譚泰 (1594–1651), was a supporter of the powerful Regent,. In 1644 he was made a duke, but owing to a feud with Soni (see under ) and others, was reduced to a viscount in 1645 and to a commoner in 1646. For two years (1646–48) he served as Dorgon's private advisor. In 1648 he was given the title, Chêng-Nan Ta-chiang-chün 征南大將軍, and the command of all the armies in Kiangsi who were fighting the forces of. For quelling Chin's revolt in 1649 he was again made a viscount, rising in 1650 to president of the Board of Civil Office. After the decease of Dorgon (December 31, 1650), Tantai transferred his allegiance to Emperor Shih-tsu and then did his full share in persecuting many who had been Dorgon's supporters. For this show of loyalty he was again made a duke (March 25, 1651). However, on October 1, 1651, he was charged with arrogant conduct, with interference in the affairs of the other five Boards, and with nepotism in office. In the course of his trial all those whom he had offended or wronged while Dorgon was in power came out to bring charges against him. He was finally ordered to be executed.

[1/232/1a; 3/263/16a; 4/3/8b; 7/2/24b; 11/1/12a; 34/147/1a; China Review, vol. IX, 1880–81, pp. 169–71; Tung-hua lu; Shun-chih, 8:8.]

2em

YAO Ch'i-shêng 姚啟聖, 1624–1684, Jan., Ch'ing official, was a native of K'uai-chi, Chekiang. As a youth he was daring and ambitious. Having killed two Manchu soldiers who had kidnapped a commoner's daughter, he changed his name and in 1659 joined the family of a related clansman with whom he enlisted in the Chinese Bordered Red Banner. He took first place in the examination for the chü-jên degree which, in 1663, was again open to members of Banner families after having been closed to them in the six preceding years. As a chü-jên, he was appointed to the post of magistrate of Hsiang-shan, Kwangtung. Finding his predecessors in jail, owing to a large deficit in the official accounts, he evinced extraordinary generosity by offering to help pay off their debts. In 1669 he was removed from office on the apparently false charge of higher officials that he had broken certain prohibitions of the coastal trade.

When revolted from the Manchus in 1674 and invaded Chekiang from Fukien, Yao Ch'i-shêng rushed to the camp of the Manchu commander,, and placed at his disposal a horde of ruffians whom he and his son, Yao I 姚儀 , had gathered. Appointed acting magistrate of Chu-chi, Chekiang, he rose rapidly, and when the rebel, Kêng, finally surrendered in 1676, Yao was made commissioner of finance of Fukien, and two years later governor-general of the same province. After Kêng's surrender he was engaged mainly in sweeping the forces of the Chêng family from China proper, and finally succeeded, in 1680, when was compelled to retreat to the Pescadores and Formosa. For this exploit he was rewarded with the honorary presidency of the Board of War and in the same year with the title of Junior Guardian of the Heir Apparent. Chêng Ching was on the point of signing an agreement with the Manchu commander of the Fukien garrison, but Yao objected to Chêng's terms of peace, particularly to his demand for the retention of Hai-ch'êng, a few miles up the estuary from Amoy, as a permanent trading port with Formosa.

In the meantime Yao Ch'i-shêng had been trying to get control of a formidable fleet of ships—manned by sailors upon whom he felt he could rely—for a naval expedition against Formosa. Chêng Ching died in 1681, and soon thereafter his eldest son, Chêng K'o-tsang (see under ), who was selected to succeed him, was strangled. Chêng's younger son, Chêng K'o-shuang (see under ), was then nominally put in power but the real ruler of Formosa was Chêng K'o-shuang's father-in-law, Fêng Hsi-fan (see under ). Yao Ch'i-shêng regarded this chaotic interval as the psychological moment for an attack on Formosa and entrusted the execution of his plan to. Thus a powerful fleet with a well-trained landing force finally brought Formosa to capitulate (September–October 1683, see under ). Yao's report of the victory, which was dispatched by land, reached the Court about twenty days later than Shih's which was sent by sea. This is said to be the reason why Yao's real merits as the co-ordinator and supporter of the campaign were suppressed, and he was left unrewarded. His death occurred early in the following year—hastened, it is said, by disappointment and chagrin.

[1/266/1a; 3/159/15a; 4/15/1a; 香山縣志 Hsiang-shan hsien-chih; 5/68b; Fukien t'ung-chih 899