Category Archives: Affidavit

Chin On family file

Chin Jan Affidavid
“Chin Jan Affidavit with photos of Chin Jan and Chin On,” 1933, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin On case file, Seattle Box 594, 7030/5510.

Guest blogger –Darby Li Po Price
This week’s blog entry is by Darby Li Po Price. He researched his family in the Chinese Exclusion Act case files at the National Archives-Seattle and found many family files. The following information is from a file on his great aunt, Chin On. It includes an affidavit and testimony by his great grandfather, Chin Jan; Chin On’s application for her certificate of identity and maps of the family home in China.

Chin On Application for Certificate of Identity
“Chin On Application for Certificate of Identity with photo,” 1933, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin On case file, Seattle Box 594, 7030/5510.

The 1933 immigration application and photos were submitted by Jan Chin (great grandfather) for his daughter On Chin. She was detained three days. There are diagrams of their house in China which both drew as part of their interrogations. Jan had U.S. citizenship by native birth of immigrants.

Such documents of Chinese women are rare compared to those of men. Even though the subject of the file may be a woman most of the interrogations and affidavits are usually by the men of the family. It is also nice to see Chin On and her family together.

1933 photos of Chin Jan, and daughter Chin On, age 22, for On’s application for admission to the US. Jan requested “to have my said daughter, Chin On, come to America, so that I can give her the benefits of an American education.” Chin On had written her father the year before to ask to come to America. On arrived in Seattle via President Taft June 6, 1933, and was placed in detention.

The affidavit and application are accompanied by 30 pages of testimonies of On, Jan, and Jan’s sister Len Toy, drawings of their home in Sun Woy [Sun Wui], and detention release are in Seattle file no. 7030/5510. Interviews include extensive details on family members’ relations, lives, and homes in China and the U.S.
Jan, age 53, resided at 124 Ninth St., Portland, OR, and was a native U.S. citizen by birth from Joe Jew Chin and Dew Shee. Jan described his wife Hom Shee, age 47, and their sons in Sun Woy as Mon, age 30, Kway, 12, Wing, 7, Haw, 5; and Soon, 29, living in Chicago whose wife with their two sons lived in Sun Ning. Mon lived with his wife and two sons in another house. Mon was admitted to the U.S. in 1922; Soon in 1923. Len Toy was born in Portland, and spent a year and a half with the family in Sun Woy.

Interviews were translated between English and Chinese. The Chins spoke See Yip dialect. There were discrepancies regarding existence or placement of: a house number above the front door, ladders, stairways, doors, windows, a mirror, an alarm clock, Jan’s pocket and wrist watches, where two of On’s brother’s slept, and where Len slept. On did not remember a prior house Jan said they moved from when On was 11. On said Jan’s mother’s name was Yee Shee, Jan said Leung Shee.
On June 9, 1933 Roy Matterson, Chair of the Board of Special Inquiry concluded: “while there are a considerable number of discrepancies in the record that have not been cleared up, applicant testifies in a frank, unhesitating manner and seems to be testifying from facts and not from coached testimony and I am of the opinion that she has established her claim to being a daughter of CHIN JAN, and I therefore move to admit her to the United States as a citizen.” Admission was concurred by inspectors John Boyd and Earl Botts.

House diagrams
“Four house diagrams of house in Sun Woy City,” 1933, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin On case file, Seattle Box 594, 7030/5510.


The Reference Sheet in Chin On’s case file contains the file numbers and names of her father, grandfather, three brothers, five uncles, an aunt, sister-in-law, two nephews, cousin, and a niece.
Darby will be telling us more about his family in the coming weeks.

Advertisements

Jeong Sing & Jeong Dong – damming evidence found in orange

Photo Jeong Kew Family
“Jeong Kew Family Portrait,” 1940, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Jeong Sing and Jeong Dong case files, Seattle Box 774, 7030/11576 & 11575.

Photo: Daughter-in-law of Jeong Kew (wife of Jeong Wah), Jeong Sing (in her lap), wife of Jeong Kew, servant, Jeong Kew (father) holding Jeong Dong, and Jeong Wah (oldest son of Jeong Kew). [This portrait is 9 1/4″ by 15 1/2″ and was folded in half to fit into the file. It has been sent out for repairs.]

In a 1939 affidavit sworn by Park Johnston, an employee of the Michigan Trust Company of Grand Rapids, Michigan, he stated that he had a long acquaintance with Jeong Kew, sometimes known as Charlie Chan, owner and operator of a restaurant at 347 Division Ave South in Grand Rapids. He knew that Jeong Kew was seeking admission to the United States for his two sons, Jeong Dong, age 18, and Jeong Sing, age 17. Since Park Johnston was not personally acquainted with the people in the photograph Jeong Kew identified them for him. Johnston swore to this in his affidavit. [He did not appear to be very well acquainted with the Jeong family.]

Jeong Sing and Jeong Dong arrived in Seattle on 17 October 1938. Their cases were denied, appealed and dismissed. They were deported on 4 August 1939. Their files contain two affidavits by acquaintances, two letters of recommendation, eight exhibits (maps, photographs, and letters) affidavits by Jeong Kew with photos of him and his sons, and information from three San Francisco files and two Seattle files. There are over 150 pages of interrogations.
The most damming information in the file was a “coaching letter” written in Chinese that a guard found stuffed into an orange and left in the guard’s office.

Jeong Dong Sing translation

E. S. Krause, Senior Guard, said this about finding the orange:

Letter from guard about the orange

Many pages of the interrogations were devoted to discrepancies in witness statements, such as: who was the older of the two brothers, location of toilets in their village, if they had ever slept in the school house, if there was a servant girl staying in the family home, the number of rooms and outside windows in the school house, where the school was located, the material the family store was built from, where the applicants got their hair cut, when the applicants quit school, if there was a photo of their father hanging in the family home, and if their brother Jeong Wah smoked cigarettes.
The coaching letter and the numerous discrepancies were enough to have Jeong Dong and Jeong Sing deported.

Dong Ah Lon – denied entry, writ of habeas corpus, denied, appealed, denied, deported two years later

photos of Dong Ah Lon and Hong Dong
“Affidavit for Dong Ah Lon by Hong Dong,”1938, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Dong Ah Lon case file, Seattle Box 766, 7030/11310.

Dong Ah Lon, age 21, arrived at the Port of Seattle on 9 August 1938 on the s.s. Princess Marguerite. She was born in Ping On village, Gee Kai, Hoy Ping, China and this was her first trip out of China. She was unable to establish beyond doubt her claim for entry to the U.S. as the daughter of U.S. citizen. When her father, Dong Toy, a native born U.S. citizen, was re-admitted to the United States in 1919 after a trip to China, he claimed he had a daughter named Lan Hai and with a different birth date than Dong Ah Lon’s date of birth. Dong Ah Lon could not recall ever being called Lan Hai. Her father had died in China in 1924 so he could not be asked about the discrepancy. The immigration inspectors were suspicious about her claim that Dong Hoy was her father.

Dong Ah Lon’s brothers who were testifying in her behalf were Dong Hong, age 37, and Dong Ball, age 19. Dong Ah Long was 21. She only attended school for two years. She correctly identified photos of her father and brothers. According to her brothers she was the daughter of Dong Toy and his second wife, making Dong Hong her half-brother and Dong Ball her full brother. Dong Ah Lon seemed to be confused about the relationship. Her mother had told her she was the mother of all the children in her family. Her brothers did not agree with this.

Dong Ah Lon’s application to enter the United States was denied 9 September 1938 because she could not correctly identify her closest neighbors in her village and her testimony did not agree with her brothers about their mother/stepmother. The Board could not find any family resemblance between the applicant and her two brothers and they were not satisfied that Dong Toy was actually her father. There were twenty-two pages of testimony from Dong Ah Lon and her brothers. Most of Dong Ah Lon’s description of the village agreed with her brothers except for the location of the toilets and the direction which the school faced. There were other minor differences.

The interrogations in 1938 included the affidavit by Dong Hong with photos of him and his sister, Dong Ah Lon, and a map of Ping On village according to Dong Ah Lon.
Dong Ah Lon was set to be deported in October 1938 but a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and an order to show cause were filed by her attorney, then an order for dismissal of petition for writ of habeas corpus and a petition for re-opening. Immigration decided to examine the oldest alleged brother, Dong Yum, and the prospective husband of the applicant, Lee Lin. These interviews took place in early 1939.

[Interesting tidbit: The Acting Matron of the Deportation and Detention Division, Bertha B. Titus, reported that she took Miss Dong to Dr. O. T. Dean’s dental office at 818 Cobb Building for a tooth extracted. The charge for the gas and extraction was $4.00.]
[This file was researched by Hao-Jan Chang, NARA CEA files volunteer.]
[Continued on 16 October 2017.]

Look See, wife of Chin Quong, a manager of the Wa Chong Company

Look See (Mrs Chin Quong)to
“Photo of Look See (Mrs. Chin Quong),” 1904, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Look See case file, Seattle Box 1236, 35205/1-4.

Look See, wife of Chin Quong, a manager of the Wa Chong Company, 719 King Street, Seattle, Washington, made two trips in China—one in 1904 and another in 1917.

After the first trip Look See was re-admitted to the United States at Port Townsend, Washington on 22 June 1905. She testified that she was thirty-six years old and first came to the United States with her sister, Mrs. Chin Gee Hee, in about 1882 or 1883 when she was around thirteen years old. When asked if she knew any white men in Seattle, she replied that she knew Mr. Whitlock, a lawyer; and three white ladies: Mrs. Hambeck, a Christian teacher; Mrs. Thomas, an old lady, also a teacher; and Mrs. Greene. Chin Kee was her Chinese witness. He testified that Look See and Chin Quong had been married according to the Chinese custom for at least twenty years; they had six children—three sons and three daughters, all born in Seattle. Her maiden name was Ah Quan. Chin Gee Hee, a merchant, labor contractor, and well-known early settler in Seattle, performed their wedding ceremony in October 1886.
Look See’s husband Chin Quong testified that he had been a member of the Wah Chung (Wa Chong) firm since about 1890. There were seven partners whose capital stock equaled $60,000 [worth almost  $1,600,000 in 2017]. The partners were Chin Quong (himself), Chin Quok Jon, Woo Jen, Chin Wing, Chin Wing Mow, Chin Wing Yon, Chin Yen Gee, and Chin Ching Hock. [That adds up to eight partners but the John H. Sargent, Chinese Inspector did not ask about the discrepancy.] Chin Quong was also a manager at the Wah Chung Tai Company in Butte, Montana.
John C. Whitlock, testified that he was forty-eight years old, had lived in Seattle more than sixteen years–arriving in the spring of 1898, and since he collected the rent from the Chinese tenants of the Wah Chung building he was well acquainted with Chin Quong. Whitlock usually had to go to the building night after night to find all of the tenants. He was aware that Look See was in the detention house in Port Townsend when this testimony was taken. Whitlock, Samuel F. Coombs, Justice of the Peace; and Chin Quong all testified in affidavits in Look See’s favor in 1904 before she left for China.
Look See left Seattle again in September 1916 with her sons Chin Dan and Ah Wing, and her daughter Ah Lan. She was returning in June 1917 with her son, Chin Dan, and her daughter, her daughter’s husband, Pang Chung Cheong; and their infant son. They were admitted.
The Reference Sheet lists these files: RS 910 & 34,380, Look See; 35205/1-1, Archie Pang, son-in-law; 35205/1-2, Annie M. Chin, daughter; 35205/1-2, Victor Ernest Pang, grandson; 35205/1-5, Chin Dan, son; 36918/3-8, Chin May Goon, daughter of husband by secondary wife; 40231/2-16, Anna Pang (Annie M. Chin) Chin May Young, daughter; RS 2033, Chin Quong, husband.

Lee Kim Hoy – rejected, appealed, admitted – Canton, Ohio

1924 Family Portrait of Lee Kim Hoy
“Lee Kim (Gim) Hoy family portrait,” 1924, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Kim (Gim) Hoy case file, Seattle Box 768, 7030/11374.
1924 Family Portrait of Lee Kim Hoy, his mother, Hom Shee; his maternal uncle, Hom Jik; and his father, Lee Ben (Charley)
[This is a thick file.] Lee Kim Hoy, age 19, arrived in Seattle on 22 August 1938 on his way to join his father, Lee Ben, in Canton, Ohio. His status was listed as the son of U. S. citizen. He was denied entry on 14 October and finally admitted on 29 December more than four months after his date of arrival. The file contains two floor plans of the family home in Bow Ngin (Bo Yuen) Village, Hoy Ping District, China—one of the first floor and one of the second floor, an affidavit with photos of Lee Kim Hoy and his father, several witness statements and a family portrait. The immigration commissioner also reviewed three Seattle files and four San Francisco files of other family members.
When Lee Kim Hoy was first interrogated he was reminded that the burden of proof was on him to prove that he was not subject to exclusion under any provision of the immigration or Chinese exclusion laws. His father and brother testified on his behalf.
On day two of Lee Kim Hoy’s interrogation he was asked to describe his house in detail. Here is part of his answer:
“First floor contains four bedrooms, two parlors, two kitchens and a court; entire first floor paved with tile; court paved with cement and edge of stone; two outside doors, large door faces West; as you enter large door you go into kitchen, beyond kitchen is the court.”
He was asked to describe the windows in great detail—how many, what they are made of, and what direction they faced. Next he was asked about the bedrooms—who sleeps where, then to describe his school experience and his brother’s; to describe the village—the number of houses in each row and where the public buildings were located. He was asked about specific houses–“who lives in house on the 3rd lot, 2nd house and row from the head?”
There were many more questions; this interrogation was seven pages long. His father’s interrogation was six pages long and his brother’s was four pages. Lee Kim Hoy and his father, Lee Ben, were recalled for more questioning. They were asked about several discrepancies. The most serious one was that Lee Ben told them twice that he was single when he returned from China in 1918. In his 1938 interview he said that his son, Lee Kim Hoy, was born 3 May 1919. Lee Ben’s interrogators did not believe that Lee Kim Hoy was his son.
The conclusions of H. Z. Smith, the chairman of the inquiry, were three pages long. He noted that Lee Kim Hoy’s correct name was Lee Gim Hoy. His alleged father, Lee Ben (Charley), was born in New Orleans, Louisiana on 14 January 1902 and his birth certificate was included in his San Francisco file 17555/10-5. Lee Ben testified on two different occasions in 1918 that he had never been married. The chairman did not believe that the relationship between Lee Ben and Lee Kim Hoy had been satisfactorily established. Lee Kim Hoy was denied admission into the U.S. in October 1938 but given the option to appeal.
The application was reviewed by Immigration & Naturalization Service in Washington, D.C. Lee Gim Hoy’s attorneys were Edwards E. Merges of Seattle and Parker & Parker of Washington, D.C. A transcript of the appeal is not included in the file. Lee Kim Hoy was admitted on 29 December 1938.
Lee Kim (Gim) Hoy and Lee Ben affidavit photos
“Lee Kim (Gim) Hoy and Lee Ben affidavit photos,” 1938, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Kim (Gim) Hoy case file, Seattle Box 768, 7030/11374.

[The similarities between the father and son in the 1924 portrait and the 1938 affidavit photos may have helped in the appeal.]

Yee Gim – 1905 Spokane Merchant

Yee Gim 1905 Portrait
“Photo of Yee Gim,” 1905, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yee Gim (Ah Tai) case file, Seattle, Box RS027, RS 939.

[Riverfront Park is now located where Front Avenue/Street in Spokanes’s Chinatown was in the early 1900s] 
In 1905 Yee Gim, age 46, was a merchant, a partner at Yee Yuen Hong Kee Company, at 516 Front Street, Spokane, Washington. He had been in the United States for twenty-seven years—19 years in Port Townsend at King Tai Company and eight years in Spokane. He was returning via Port Townsend from his third trip to China. His wife, three sons and three daughters were in China.
There were seven partners in his Spokane firm. They sold Chinese goods, nut oil, rice, sugar, and tobacco. Hock Geng was the manager; Yee Gim was the bookkeeper and in charge of buying and selling goods.
The interviewer asked to see Yee Gim’s “chak chi” [Certificate of Residence or Identity]. Yee Gim did not have his papers because he was in China at the time of registering.
A witness for Yee Gim was W. D. Vincent, cashier at the Old National Bank, who had known him for over eight years. He swore that Yee Gim never worked anywhere else except as a merchant and did personal and business with the bank.
Mose Oppenheiser, in the insurance business, swore that he had known Yee Gim for about four years, that he paid bills for the firm and he had never seen him behind the counter. [If he had been working behind the counter it would have been thought that he was a laborer.]
James McGougan signed an affidavit swearing that Yee Gim was “neither a huckster, peddler, laundryman or laborer…”
In spite of the fact that Yee Gim did not have his Certificate of Residence, the testimony of his witnesses was strong enough to allow him to be admitted by A. F. Richardson, Chinese Inspector at Port Townsend.
This is an excerpt of the Chinese Exclusion Act included in Yee Gim’s file pertaining to “creditable witnesses” and “not performing any manual labor.”

 

Yee Gim Affidavit
“Yee Gim Affidavit” 1905, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yee Gim (Ah Tai) case file, Seattle, Box RS027, RS 939.

Chin King Jin – Kenneth Hazeyama, Japanese boy adopted by Chinese family

Chin King Jin (Kenneth Chin)
“Chin King Jin (Kenneth Chin) affidavit photo,” 1929, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin King Jin case file, Seattle, Box 759, 7030/11066.

Chin King Jin, was the adopted son of Chin Ne Toy and his white wife, Gertrude Copeland (Kopelian–Chinese name Dong Shee) of Seattle. He attended Pacific Grammar School. He visited China when he was seven years old and returned when he was 12. He left again when he was 14 and was returning in 1938 at age 21.
During the time he was in the U.S., he made trips to Portland and New York with his father. He gave the following information in his 1938 interrogation: his father was Chin Toy, marriage name Chin Don Koon, and he did not know his birth mother’s name. The file contained a certified copy of Chin King Jin’s birth certificate which said both of his parents were Japanese. His name was listed as Kenneth Hazeyama; his father was Fumio Hazeyama, born in Japan; and his mother was Susie Hazeyama, born in “America.” [Her maiden name was not listed. Chin King Jin did not know he was adopted so this news must have been shocking.]
Chin King Jin married Yee Shee on 17 September 1936 in China. His marriage name was Chin Suey Beow. Their son, Jun King, was born 15 September 1937. Chin King Jin’s wife and son stayed in China and lived in Woy Pon Lee Village. Chin King Jin spoke in See Yip Hoy Ping dialect.
Chin King Jin’s adopted father, Chin Ne Toy, testified that he lived at Yee Chong Company in Seattle and he had an orange ranch in Bakersfield, California. He first saw Chin Kin Jin when he was about six years old. A Japanese acquaintance brought the boy to him and said he needed a home. Chin Ne Toy’s attorney, Mr. Lysons, obtained a birth certificate from the Board of Health for the child saying he was born on 2 November 1916 and drew up a certificate of adoption in the Superior Court in Seattle. The birth certificate lists the midwife for the birth as Tsuya Hirano. The interrogator thought Chin King Jin looked white, not Japanese, and that Chin Ne Toy could not legally adopt the child because his wife was not in the U.S. [There is no further mention of Gertrude/Dong Shee but she is listed as a stepmother on the file reference sheet.]
Chin King Jin and Chin Ne Toy were interrogated several times separately. Many questions about the family village were asked—How many houses in the village? The location of their house; direction it faced? What style? How many stories? The size of tiles on each floor? Where was the open stone court? Who lived in the house? Where is the nearest market?
In spite of many unanswered questions, since the applicant had been admitted to the United States on one previous occasion in 1929 as a U.S. citizen, the inspectors unanimously approved his application and he was admitted to the U.S. as a returning native-born American citizen.