Kainei

English

Etymology

From Japanese 會寧(かいねい) (kainei).

Proper noun

Kainei

1. (historical, in reference to Japanese Korea) Synonym of Hoeryong: the Japanese-derived name
   • 1928 July, C. Walter Young, “Chinese Colonization in Manchuria”, in The Far Eastern Review‎^[2], volume XXIV, number 7, →OCLC, page 299, column 1:

     The mineral resources of Kirin province have never been adequately studied. They are known to include, however, in addition to the gold and copper now being mined in the T’ien Pao Shan district contiguous to the proposed Huining (Kainei in Japanese) terminus of the Kirin-Tunhua-Huining railway, also aluminum in the valley of the Mutan, north of Tunhua.

   • 1929 December, Ransford S. Miller, “Railway Development in Chosen”, in The Far Eastern Review‎^[3], volume XXV, number 12, →OCLC, page 570, column 1:

     This line is a continuation of the Seoul-Gensan line and extends from Gensan, in South Kanko Province, to Kainei (Korean “Hoiryong”; Chinese “Huining”), in North Kanko, a distance of some 383.8 miles.

   • 1931, C. Walter Young, “Japanese Loans and Options concerning Manchuria: 1917-1918”, in Japan's Special Position in Manchuria: Its Assertion, Legal Interpretation and Present Meaning‎^[4], published 1971, →ISBN, →LCCN, →OCLC, page 247:

     The project for a railway from Kirin City, the capital of Kirin province, to Huining,* a city on the Korean side of the Manchurian-Chosen border, which has so far been realized only in part with the completion of the construction of the Kirin-Tunhua railway in 1927, was first made the subject of agreements with the Japanese Government in 1907 and 1909.

     * Kainei, in Japanese; Hoiryong, in Korean.

   • 1932 April 13, T. A. Bisson, “Railway Rivalries in Manchuria between China and Japan”, in Foreign Policy Reports‎^[5], volume VIII, number 3, New York, N.Y.: Foreign Policy Association, →ISSN, →OCLC, page 30, columns 1–2:

     The uncompleted extension of this line from Tunhua to Huining (Kainei) on the Korean border is subject to controversy, with Japan claiming an exclusive right to finance its construction, a right which is not admitted by the Chinese.

   • 1938, Stanley F. Wright, “From the Revision that Failed to the Peking Tariff Conference of 1925-1926”, in China's Struggle for Tariff Autonomy: 1843-1938‎^[6], Paragon Book Gallery, →OCLC, page 406:

     The influx into the Chientao (間島) of Corean farmers, hunters, and trappers had long been a burning question before the Governments of China and Japan finally agreed by the Chientao Convention of 1909 or China-Corean Frontier Agreement to recognize the Tumen river as the boundary between Corea and China, and to open Lungchingtsun (龍井村) along with three other places to foreign residence and trade. A Chinese Custom House was accordingly opened here on 1st January 1910, but was made subordinate to the Hunchun (琿春) Customs.² It remained in this subordinate position till July 1924 when the head office was transferred to Lungchingtsun,³ while Hunchun—at which in accordance with the Manchurian Convention of 1905 a Custom House had been opened on 27th December 1909—fell into the position of a branch office. The reason for this deposition of Hunchun was the advent in 1923 of the T’ien T’u (天圖) light railway which running through Lungchingtsun to Yen Chi Fu (延吉府) connected both places with the frontier district of Kaishantun, and thence through Kainei (Hui Ning 會甯) to the Corean port of Seishin.

   • For more quotations using this term, see Citations:Kainei.