Category Archives: Application for Pre-investigation Status

Lee Ah Jung & Wong Gun Fook – Helena, Montana

application for citizen's return certificate, Application for Pre-investigation Status, Application for return certificate as merchant, Board of Special Inquiry, Group Photo, passport, San Francisco file, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The file for Lee Ah Jung starts in May 1919. It refers to an 1889 U.S. District Court of California certified judgment file in San Francisco for Lee Ah Jung and his wife Wong Gun Fook. Copies of the judgment are not included in this file but were sent to San Francisco for review and to certify their correctness. Lee Ah Jung was applying for a passport as a United States citizen. Wong Gun Fook’s birth certificate was included in the packet. Lee Ah Jung arrived at the port of San Francisco on 16 May 1898 on the S.S. Doric.

The San Francisco immigration officer could not find any files on Lee Ah Jung and Wong Gun Fook for the dates given. They did find an arrival date for Wong Gum Fook (SF file 10282/107) with her alleged mother Chin Shee (SF file 10282/106), and her brother Wong How (SF file 10282/4463) on 7 October 1908. Wong Lung (SF file 9778/152), husband of Chin Shee, and father of Wong Gun Fook, appeared as a witness for them.

“Lee Ah Jung family photo,” 1919, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Lee Ah Jung and Wong Gun Fook, Box H002, Helena file 3/1112. 
Lee Ah Jung, Wong Gun Fook, Lee How Kun/Kum (1), Lee Fong Hoe/Hai (2), Lee Gin Wah (3), Lee Tai Ling (4), and Lee Gat/Goat Oye (5)
The immigration inspector signed his name across the photo. It looks like the stockings for Lee Gin Wah #3 have a pattern but it is the signature.

Their documents were sent to the Bureau of Immigration in Washington DC on 3 June 1919, then their Immigration Officer wrote to Immigration office in Helena informing them that they had not followed proper procedures to obtain the necessary papers for Lee Ah Jung and family to travel to China. They listed five points that needed to be corrected or improved.

  1. The Bureau of Immigration does not issue passports. The State Department requires proper requests.
  2. Return certificates have not been requested for investigation.
  3. Requests for pre-investigation of status have not been received.
  4. The Bureau has not received birth information on Lee Ah Jung’s wife or children.
  5. It is customary to examine all applicants for return certificates.

Wong Gun Fook was interviewed in Helena, Montana on 24 June 1919. She was 27 years old, born on the 3rd floor of a building on Dupont Street in San Francisco in April, but she was not sure of the day or year. Her parents were living. Her father was in San Francisco, and her mother was living in Canton City, China. Her only sibling, a brother, died many years ago. The last time she saw her father was in during the 1915 San Francisco Exposition. She married Lee Ah Jung in San Francisco according to Chinese custom in 1909 and then moved to Helena, Montana. They had five children, all born in Helena from 1910 to 1918 and had all of their birth certificates. Phil Baldwin, the examining inspector, asked Wong Gun Fook to identity the people in an old group photo. She said they were her father, Wong Lung, her mother, Chin She, and herself at about seven years old. Baldwin thought the photo was a good likeness of her even though it was taken when Wong Gun Fook was a child. That photo was not included in the file but there was a recent photo of Wong Gun Fook with her husband and their five children. During her interview Fook described her former home in Canton, China, as a big house with four rooms facing south on Hung Dock Street and 4th Alley with an outside door and four inside doors.

Lee Ah Jung was interviewed the same day as his wife and his 1889 court discharge papers were examined. He was born in San Francisco, and his marriage name was Lee Hing Sing. His family was from Hen Kai, a small village about thirty-five miles from the coast in China. It had about nine or ten houses, all homes of his relatives. He explained who lived where, the direction their house was facing, and the names of their children. He was asked if he was going to adopt and children when he was in China. He said, “No, Sir, I have enough.”

When Lee Ah Jung signed his Form 430, Application for Alleged American Citizen for the Chinese Race for Preinvestigation, instead of signing his own name he signed the name of his infant son, Lee Gat/Goat Oye, in English and Chinese 李月愛. This error was not caught by any of the immigration officials but does add a little confusion to the file.  

On 10 July 1919, The Assistant Commissioner-General of the Bureau of Immigration, Washington, DC, said they were satisfied with the applications and documents they received, and approved the return certificates for the family. Lee Ah Jung and his wife Wong Gun Fook could now apply for their passports.

The next document in Lee Ah Jung’s file is a letter dated 22 March 1941 from Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) saying that Lee Fong Hai, son of Lee Ah Jung and Wong Gun Fook, arrived at the Port of San Francisco on s s. President Coolidge on 13 March 1941 and was admitted two days later. There was no communication between any immigration office about the Helena file since 1919. Lee Fong Hai’s sister, Lee How Kun/Kum, arrived at San Francisco on the s.s. President Coolidge on 3 July 1941. She was admitted on 22 July after being approved by a board of special inquiry.

There are 186 Chinese Exclusion Act case files at National Archives at Seattle for Helena, Montana. Only 4 of them start in the 1890s–1 each in 1894 & 1899 and 2 in 1896, and the other files start in 1900 and later. The destination for these Chinese entering the United States was in Montana or Idaho, and 1 each in Washington, New York, Utah, and Oregon and 2 in New Jersey.

[Thanks Hao-Jan Chang, NARA CEA volunteer, for replicating the Chinese symbols for the signature.]

Hui Hin, minor son of merchant in Spokane

Application for laborer's return certificate, Application for Pre-investigation Status, Application for return certificate as merchant, Disapproved status, laborer, Lengthy Interrogation, manual labor, merchant, student, , , , , , , , ,

In 1936 Hui Cheung, Hui Hin’s father, wanted his son to visit China for a few months before returning to Spokane, Washington. His status would be as the son of a merchant. As the laws became stricter on Chinese immigration, it became harder for a merchant to prove his status as a merchant. Although in many cases, Hui Hin’s father, Hui Cheung, would probably have been thought of as a merchant, a strict reading of the Act put him in the manufacturing category and therefore a laborer. Being a merchant would have most likely assured his son’s readmittance to the United States.
   Hui Hin was originally admitted to the United States at the Port of Seattle on 12 December 1927 as a student and the minor son of Hui Cheung, a merchant at Wing Wo Chinese Medicine Company in Spokane, Washington. Hui Hin was nine years old. He settled in, was called by the American name, Bill Huie, and attended school at Hawthorne School, Washington School, and Louis & Clark High School in Spokane.

“Hui Hin Affidavit photo,” 1927, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Hui Hin file, Seattle Box 860, 7031/636.

   Cheung started the paperwork to get approval for the trip. Two white witnesses swore that Hui Cheung was a merchant. Hui Hin’s application for predetermination of his status as the minor son of merchant was disapproved and his right of appeal to the local Secretary of Labor was disapproved by the District Director of Immigration and Naturalization at Seattle on the grounds that Hui Cheung is not a merchant within the meaning of the law and regulations but was engaged in manufacturing but he did have the right to appeal to the Secretary of Labor in Washington, D.C.
   On the day Immigrant Inspector Herbert Nice stopped in to observe the Wing Wo Chinese Medicine Company he found Hui Cheung washing medicine bottles in the sink. Cheung said it was because regular clerk was at lunch. The inspector verified that it was lunch time. Next, Inspector Nice found herbs cooking on the stove in the kitchen. Cheung said that was also the duty of the clerk who was at lunch. Nice asked Hui Cheung to explain the company’s process of making the medicine. Cheung said the medicinal herbs were sent from China to San Francisco, then shipped to Spokane. One of the clerks would cook the herbs to make the medicines. Dr. Hui Yut Seng, the other partner in the company, would see the patient and prescribe the medicine. The clerk would fix the medicine and give it to the patient. Inspector Nice concluded that Hui Cheung was engaged in manual labor and that his application should be denied.    Hui Cheung swore in an affidavit that he was one of the partners and owners of the Wing Wo Chinese Medicine Company on Wall Street in Spokane. He had been a partner since 1918 and had not engaged in manual labor of any kind.  
   Hui Hin was interviewed twice in 1936 about his life in his village in China before he came to the U.S. when he was nine years old. There were six pages of questions about his deceased grandparents, where they were buried, number of houses in his village, where the front door of their house was located, the size of doors, what were they made of, he was asked to draw a diagram of his village, tell how many rooms in his house, color of tile floor, if there was a courtyard, any skylights, a rice mill, rice pounder, any pictures, a balcony, any clocks, where everyone slept, who lived in the houses in the village, who lived in the first house in the fourth row, how far away was the school, were there gardens or farms, what did they grow, was there a river or steam, any bridges, where was the market, how old when your father visited, (He was 7 or 8), and about three more pages of questions. He did not know many of the answers. His answers were compared to his 1928 interview. The Immigration Inspector also had some doubts that Hui Hin was Hui Cheung’s son. Hui Hin could not remember his mother’s name, the names of his grandparents and various neighbors, or details about his home and village. Hui Hin was nine when he entered this country, and it was now eight years later. He may have been nervous about the interview. He knew how important it was to get everything correct. It was understandable that he would not remember his village and classmates in great detail.
   Immigration reviewed Hui Cheung file. Hui Cheung had made two trips to China as a laborer. The interviewer noted that one of his trips shows him being admitted in April 1918 which would have made it possible for him to “render his paternity of the applicant possible.”
   When Hui Cheung returned from his 1927 trip to China, he and his witnesses had lengthy interrogations. Clearly, Immigration was not comfortable about Hui Cheung current status as a merchant or that Hui Hin was his son. Cheung answers were not always consistent from one trip to the next. In 1918 he stated that he had two sons and a daughter. In 1927 he says he never had a daughter or any children that died.
   Hui Hin did not make his 1936 trip to China. His application was disapproved, and no appeal was filed.

“Ad for Wing Wo Chinese Medicine Co.,” Sanders County Ledger, Thompson Falls, MT 11 Nov 1932 p3, Newspapers_com

Chin Wah – Hoping to return to Salt Lake City from Paris, France in 1925

Affidavit, Application for Pre-investigation Status, Certificate of Residence, photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

[The National Archives is still closed because of COVID-19. This file was copied before March 2020. thn]

In early October 1925, Julian M. Thomas, Counsellor at Law in Paris, France, wrote to the U.S. commissioner of Immigration in Seattle, Washington, requesting the necessary papers to allow Chin Wah to return to the United States. Chin Wah claimed that he was well-known in Seattle, Washington in 1904 by both the Wa Chong Company and the Quong Tuck Company and many other residents of the city including A.W. Ryan, a policeman; Charles Phillips, a detective; Fred Lyson, a lawyer; and Lee Hoey, a Chinese person.

In June 1904, L. Dan swore in an affidavit that he had lived in the U.S. for more than twenty years and that he knew Chin Wah’s parents when their son, Chin Wah, was born. Dan testified that after Chin Wah’s parents died, Chin lived with him. L. Dan’s wife, Wong Sine, was a sister of Chin Wah’s mother. A. W. Ryan and Charles Phillips, both white citizens of the U.S., and residence of Seattle for more than fifteen years also swore that Chin Wah was born in Seattle. These affidavits were drawn up to prove that Chin Wah was a native-born citizen of Chinese parentage.

“L. Dan, affidavit,” 1904, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin Wah case file, Seattle RS Box 222, file RS 30543.

In 1913 in his pre-investigation interview to make a trip to China, Chin Wah testified that he was living in Salt Lake City, Utah, and working at the Grand Restaurant at 47 West 2nd South Street as a cook and sometimes a waiter. He said he was born at North 512 [414 in 1925] Washington Street, Seattle, Washington on 15 January 1890, the son of Chin Chung (Ching/Gin/Gen} [the spelling varies throughout the documents] and Wong Shee. His father died in Sitka, Alaska in 1899. He and his mother moved to Portland, Oregon about 1901. She died a year later. After her death, he went back to Seattle and lived over the store of Quong Gwa Lung Company with his uncle, Ng Yee Loots (L. Dan) and his aunt, his mother’s sister. He attended the Methodist Mission school on Spring Street for about two years. Other places he lived in Washington state were Cle Elum, Ellensburg, Yakima, and Pasco before going to Salt Lake City, Utah about 1910. While in Salt Lake City he worked for U.S. District Judge John A. Marshal, Mr. William H. Childs as a cook, and Captain Burt at Fort Douglas.

“Chin Wah, Form 430 photo,” 1913, CEA, NARA-Seattle, file RS 30543

D. A. Plumly, the examining inspector at Salt Lake City, sent Chin Wah’s application and the original affidavits of the witnesses to Louis Adams, Inspector in Charge at Denver, Colorado. Adams sent everything on to Immigration in Seattle and requested that they re-examine the witnesses since they were residents of Seattle. Adams noted that Inspector Plumly did not expect a favorable report. [There is no explanation of why the documents were sent to Denver.]

J. V. Stewart, the Seattle Chinese Inspector, interviewed all the 1904 witnesses again in 1913. He thought the witnesses only knew someone they thought was Chin Wah as a small child but since they had not seen Chin Wah for many years they could not be sure of his identity. Stewart thought Lee Hoey was a “manufactured witness” and the other witnesses’ information was so vague they could have been talking about several different children. Stewart noted that Chin Wah’s parents did not appear in the 1895 Seattle census of Chinese and rumors said that Ah Dan was known as a gambler and connected with other fraudulent cases. Based on this information Stewart did not approve Chin Wah’s application.

L. Dan was also known as Ah Dan or his married name Ng Yee Yin. He was fifty years old and was born in China. He did not have a certificate of residence. He was living in Port Townsend, Washington and was a merchant with the Yee Sing Wah Kee Company when he was required to register in 1894. [According to the Geary Act of 1892, Chinese who were not registered for a certificate of residence could be arrested and sent to China even if they were born in the United States.] L. Dan lived in Tacoma, Washington, for a year before moving to Seattle where he got to know Chin Gin and his son Chin Wah.

Witness Charles Phillips testified that he was 48 years old and had live in Seattle twenty-six years. He was a city detective. He knew Chin Wah when he was a young child and after being cross examined, he said that he could not state unequivocally if Chin Wah was the son of Chin Ching/Gin.

Witness Lee Hoey, also known as Lee Tan Guhl, stated that he was 66 years old and born in China. He showed the interrogator his certificate of residence. He had lived in Seattle fifteen or twenty years and remember the big fire in June 1889.  He identified a photo of Chin Wah although he had not seen him in over ten years. The interrogator asked Lee Hoey how much he was being paid to testify in this case.  Hoey denied the charge.

A.W. Ryan, another witness, testified in 1913 that he was 56 years old and a sergeant for the Seattle police force for about twenty years. Although he swore that he knew Chin Wah in 1904, he could not be sure that this was the same person in 1913.  Ryan said that at the time of Chin Wah’s birth in 1890 there were only four or five Chinese women in Seattle and maybe twenty-five children. It was his impression that the person he testified in behalf of in 1913 was Chin Wah was the same boy he knew in 1904 but he could not swear to it. Therefore the immigration commissioner, Ellis deBruler, did not approval Chin Wah’s return certification because he did not believe that Chin Wah was born in the U.S.

In October 1925, based on the information and witness statements in Chin Wah’s file, the documents were not approved so were no papers to forward to Paris so Chin Wah could be allowed to return to the U.S.

[This file does not tell us when Chin Wah left the U.S. or why he left when his application for departure was not approved. Without the approval, he would have known that it would be extremely difficult to re-enter the U.S. There are no clues about what he was doing between 1913 and 1925 or why was he investigated in Denver, Colorado, or what was he doing in Paris, France, in 1925. If he had been allowed to arrive at a port in the U.S. and then interrogated, some of these questions may have been answered. Unfortunately, we may never know the rest of Chin Wah’s story.]

Tam Sing – native-born U.S. citizen returns after 31 years in China

Affidavit, Application for Pre-investigation Status, Board of Special Inquiry, Caucasian witnesses, Cerificate of identity number, Certificate of Residence, Form 430 Native’s Return Certificate, San Francisco file, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In May 1894 Tam Sing 譚勝 registered in the first district of California as a native-born Chinese person and received certificate of residence No. 81,385.

In 1897 Tam Sing visited China and married Wong Shee at Wing Wah Toon village. His marriage name was Hoy Gui. He returned to the U.S. four years later. In 1902 he visited China again.Tam Sing 1902 MerchantBefore he left San Francisco in 1902, Tom Sing [this is the only document where he is referred to as Tom instead on Tam] swore in a Declaration of Chinese Merchant that he was

“a merchant in good standing, and a member of the firm of Lun Chong & Company, engaged in buying and selling Chinese Mdse. and Provisions, at a fixed place of business, to wit: at 819-821 Dupont Street, San Francisco…”

His witnesses were Henry Mohr, Charles N. Peck, and William M. Dye.

Tam Sing returned to the U.S. in 1905.

Tam Sing [of the Hom Clan] swore in an affidavit in Salt Lake, Utah in July 1908 to the following information:

Tam Sing, son of Tam Shuck Dip, a San Francisco merchant, and Lee Shee, was born in San Francisco on 29 September 1876.  He stayed in the U.S. when his parents returned to China with his brother in 1886. His father died at his home in Wing Wah Toon, Sun Ning, Canton, China the following year. His mother and brother remained in their village.

On this trip to China Tam Sing was hoping to bring back his two minor sons. Unfortunately, his wife and two sons died in 1908 during an epidemic. It isn’t clear if Tam Sing arrived in their village before or after their deaths.

Later Tam Sing married Jee Shee. They moved to Toy San City and had five sons and two daughters. He worked at Sai Ning market.

Thirty-one years later Tam Sing was applying to return to the United States.

When he arrived in Seattle in 1939, he was interviewed before a Board of Special Inquiry. Tam Sing testified that when in the U.S. he lived mostly in San Francisco but was in Ogden, Utah and Montello, Nevada from 1906 to 1908. He satisfied his interrogators by answering several questions about the history and topography of San Francisco. Because he had been away in China for so many years, Tam Sing did not have any witnesses who could vouch for him. He presented a 1908 certificate of membership in the Native Sons of the Golden West with his photo attached; a letter from the Citizens Committee dated 1906; a receipt for Red Cross funds dated 1906; and a 1906 acknowledgement receipt of money from Chinese residents of Montello, Nevada.

After careful consideration the Board members believed the applicant to be the same person as the photograph and description on his certificate of residence. Tam Sing was admitted thirty-seven days after he arrived in Seattle on the Princess Marguerite on 23 August 1939. He surrendered his 1894 Certificate of Residence and was issued a Certificate of Identity in 1941 when he was planning a temporary trip to China.

Tam Sing’s Form 430, Application of Alleged American Citizen of the Chinese Race for Preinvestigation of Status, lists his San Francisco file number 53828.

“Tam Sing/Tom Sing, photos and documents” 1902, 1908, 1941; Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Tam Sing case file, Seattle Box 794, file 7030/12347.

 

Wong F. Pershing – Seaman on the U.S. S. Explorer

Application for Pre-investigation Status, Form 430, Photographs, reference sheet, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In 1917 Wong F. Pershing’s father, Wong Chun Wah, applied to Immigration for pre-investigation as a merchant intending to visit China. The examining inspector believed that the place Wong was working, W. J. London Company, was involved in gambling. The inspector did not believe Wong qualified as a merchant according to the exclusion law. Wong abandoned his connection with this employer and became a merchant for the Quan Yuen Chong Company, a legitimate and bona fide mercantile concern. His status as a merchant was reinstated.

1921 Form 430 of Pershing Wong with Hersheys Chocolate bar.

Form 430 Photo of Wong F. Pershing,” 1942, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Wong F. Pershing case file, Seattle Box 827, file 7030/13628.

Wong Chun Wah again applied to take his wife and three sons, Raymond, Pershing and Chester, to China with him in 1921. Wong showed Immigration Inspector B. A. Hunter the Seattle birth certificates for his children. They were issued return certificates but did not use them. The family did not travel to China and several more children were born in Seattle.

Pershing F. Wong was applying to visit Vancouver, British Columbia by bus via Blaine, Washington in October 1941. He had three days of leave from the merchant marines. He was a seaman on U.S. S. Explorer, Coast and Geodetic Survey ship. He gave the following information in his interview: his Chinese name was Wong Gok Way. He was born on 27 October 1919 in Seattle, the son of Wong Chun Wah (Wah Fat) and Ann Quan Gee. His mother died in Virginia Mason Hospital in Seattle in 1930. Pershing had five brothers and one sister. He had attended Garfield high school before joining the marines. Ensign John Guthrie of the Explorer verified that Pershing F. Wong was the correct name for W. F. Pershing Wah, the name he used on his original application.

The Reference Sheet list the file numbers for his father, mother, two brothers, and sister.

Additional information not included in the file:
A newspaper article from the 6 February 1945 issue of the Seattle Daily Times, states that Pershing Wong was the only Chinese deck officer sailing out of Seattle in the American merchant marines; he was a member of the Masters, Mates & Pilots’ Association; and joined the merchant marines in 1941. Wong had just spent 110 days in the Pacific combat area.  It was a turbulent time, besides the heavy WW II bombing, three navy craft were sunk by a typhoon.

According to Pershing F. ‘Perky’ Wong’s obituary in the 14 July 1999, Oregonian newspaper, he retired as a captain in 1985.

Updated 19 January 2025

George and James Mar – brothers of Roy Sing Mar and Ruby Mar Chow in Seattle

Application for Pre-investigation Status, Birth Registration, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mar Jim Sing M143 1933

Mar King Sing andMarJim Sing

“Photos of George and James Mar, Form 430,” 1932, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Mar King Sing (George King Sing) and Mar Jim Sing (James Mar) case files, Seattle Box 538, 7030/3747 and 7030/3748.

George and James Mar – brothers of Roy Sing Mar, DDS (1927-2018) and Ruby Mar Chow (1920-2008), owner of Ruby Chow Restaurant and first Asian American elected to Seattle King County Council in 1973.

Mar King Sing 馬日勝 (Chinese name Mar Yet Sing) was the eldest son of Mar June (Jim Sing) and Wong Shee黃氏; (黃)巧云 . They had ten children; all born in Seattle, WA: George Mar, Jim Sing Mar, William Mar, Ruby Mar, Mary Mar, Alice Mar, Henry Mar, Roy Mar, Edwin Mar, Coleman Mar.

Birth Certificate, 12788, George King Sing,.
1915 Seattle, WA Birth Certificate, 12788, George King Sing,. File 7030/3747

George Mar was born on 19 February 1915 but his birth certificate incorrectly states that he was born on 29 March 1915. He was applying for his citizen’s return certificate so he could be employed by the Dollar Steamship Line on their steamers to the Orient.

James Mar (Mar Jim Sing), George’s younger brother, was born 29 May 1916. He presented his Seattle birth certificate #12786 as evidence of his citizenship. He was applying for employment with American Mail Line and hoping to go to China with the company.

When they applied their father was visiting China and their mother, home in Seattle, was a witness for both of her sons. Their Form 430, Application of Alleged American Citizen of the Chinese Race for Pre-investigation of Status, was approved. They visited their father in Hong Kong and returned to Seattle on the S.S. President Taft on 12 July 1932.

Additional information not in the file:
Their brother Roy S. Mar, DDS, died in Seattle on 14 March 2018. According to his obituary in the Seattle Times, 25 March 2018, page B4, Mar served in the U.S. Navy and became the first Chinese American to graduate from the University of Washington Dental School.
Obituary of Roy S. Mar

Their sister, Ruby married Edward Shue Ping Chow. They established the celebrated Ruby Chow’s restaurant in Seattle in 1948. Ruby helped create the Wing Luke Museum and became the first Asian American elected to the King County Council in 1973. She died in 2008.

See Seattletimes.com, seattlepi.com, HistoryLink.org, Wikipedia.org for more information on Ruby Chow.

 

Yick May Gum (Katherine Lillie Shan) – Chinese and a wee bit of Irish

Actor, Application for Pre-investigation Status, Form 430, photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yick May Gum Katherine Shan photo
“Yick May Gum (alias Katherine Lillie Shan) Form 430 photo” 1930, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yick May Gum (Katherine Shan) case file, Portland Box 92, 5017/552.
[There are only a few Chinese Exclusion Act files where one of the parents is Irish. Here is one of them in anticipation of St. Patrick’s Day.]
Katherine Lillie Shan applied for her Native’s Return Certificate on 19 June 1930 in Portland, Oregon. She was working for the Orpheum Theatre circuit and they were performing in Canada. She gave the interviewer her Chinese name as Yick May Gum and said she was the daughter of Yick Bing Shan and Gertrude [maiden name not listed]. Katherine was born at 108 third Avenue, New York City on 11 June 1912. Her mother was a white woman of Irish descent who was born in Denver, Colorado. Katherine attended P.S. No. 60 grade school in New York City and then went on to Norfield Seminary [possibly Northfield Mount Herman School]. Her father was a witness for her. Her mother was working in their restaurant on the day of the interview. Katherine had two older brothers back in China whom she had never met.
R. P Bonham, Immigration District Director in Portland sent a telegram to Immigration Service in New York City on June 19 requesting Yick May Gum’s Native Return Certificate but they could not find her file. He interrogated her the next day.
Katherine’s Application of Alleged American Citizen of the Chinese Race for Pre-investigation of Status, Form 430, is included in the file with a note saying “Application withdrawn and birth certificate returned to applicant on June 24, 1930.” Signed: R. J. Norene

[There is no more information in the file. Some files do not tell us very much. This one leaves us with more questions than answers. A cross reference sheet was not included in the file so there is no reference to her father’s file and he wasn’t found in the Seattle index.]