Category Archives: Documents

Documents in the file

Sarah Lee Wong – Canadian Citizen’s complicated file

Affidavits, Birth Certificate, Canadian form 257,, Cerificate of identity number, Liberty Bond, marriage license, Photographs, student, Wife of merchant, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There are over 110 pages in Sarah Y. Lee’s case file. Besides the photos required on various immigration documents, the file includes a wedding portrait of Sarah and Stephen Y. Wong, their marriage announcement in a local newspaper, a copy of their marriage license, and an invitation to their wedding banquet.

1924
On July 22, 1924, Sarah Y. Lee, a citizen of Canada of Chinese race, age 25, height 5’2”, dark eyes, dark hair, entered the U.S. for a brief visit. She was required to obtain a $500 Liberty Bond guaranteeing that she would not become a public charge. Her Canadian form C.I. 10 stated that she was also known as Kim Yuck, a student, and born on 26 July 1899. Her last place of residence was 223 Moss Street, Victoria, B.C. She was the daughter of Lee Deen (Tom Deen), a Chinese contractor and farmer in Coquitlam, B.C. Sarah was planning on traveling in the U.S. and visiting her brother, a student at Marquette College, Milwaukee, Wisconsin then returning to Canada in about one month. Her father swore in an affidavit that he held securities worth at least $10,000 including gold and received revenue from real estate. He had sufficient means to support his daughter. A $500 bond was taken out to assure that Sarah, an alien, temporarily admitted to the U.S. would return before the required date.

Sarah Y. Lee Affidavit photo, 1924, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Wong Sarah Lee, Box 858, File 17031/587.
Sarah Y. Lee Affidavit photo, 1924, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Wong Sarah Lee, Box 858, File 17031/587.

Sarah swore that she was not addicted to narcotic drugs and was not “engaged in buying, selling, dealing in or use of any such drug or ‘Dope.’” Sarah Y. Lee was admitted for three months to the U.S. at Seattle as a Section Six Traveler. She returned to Canada before the deadline in 1924. A certified copy of Sarah’s birth certificate was included in the file. She was born in Burnaby, New Westminster, B.C. Her parents were Lee Deen and Sim Shee.

1926
Sarah applied to visit the U.S. again in January 1926. She planned to travel and visit friends in San Francisco, Fresno, and Los Angeles and return to Victoria in six months. The examining inspector, Mr. Faris, knew Sarah’s father and that the family was friends with Mr. Lee Shek Yew, a Dominion Chinese Immigration Agent in Victoria. Faris believed that Lee would return when required so he didn’t think the bond was necessary. He approved her application. Her Canadian C.I. 10 form rated her father’s and brother’s financial worth at $60,000.

On 20 May 1926 the Immigration Commissioner, received a letter from Sarah Y. Lee saying she had married (6 February 1926) a Chinese merchant from Fresno, California a few months previously. She was now Mrs. S. Y. Wong and had started her paperwork to establish her permanent residence in the U.S. with the status of wife of a merchant. Immigration started an investigation to see if the man she had married was a merchant according to the Chinese Exclusion Act.

[Yikes – this probably added 80 pages to Sarah Y. Lee’s file. Sarah was admitted into the U.S. on 23 January for six months as a single temporary visitor. She married a little over two weeks later. One has to wonder if this was all pre-planned. The marriage license was taken out on 4 February. They had a formal wedding banquet the evening after the wedding.]

Sarah’s husband, Wong Tin Yuen (Stephen Y. Wong/Wong Yuen) who was born at Wong Lit village, Hoy Ping district, China, was interviewed by James P. Butler, Immigration Service in Fresno. Wong originally arrived in the U.S. in1910 with the status of the son of a merchant. His San Francisco file 12017/28119 was reviewed. Wong had applied for a return permit in 1925 and his permit was denied. Wong had two businesses. He worked at the Chinese Bazaar on Fulton Street for four or five hours a day. He was manager at San Sam Sing Company and worked there two or three hours a day. The San Sam Sing Company had never filed a partnership list with the county clerk or filed an income tax return. During the previous year, there had been no gambling or lottery business conducted in the store and no manual labor for the last year. Because he was involved in two businesses he needed two white witnesses for each business. Wong Lung (Wong Dock Tay), Stephen’s father, was interviewed. His testimony agreed with his son’s.

Mrs. Stephen Y. Wong (Sarah Y. Lee) was interviewed by Immigration Services on 12 July 1926. She said she had no intension of staying in the U.S. when she left Canada in January. She was not engaged to get married at that time. She was visiting Mr. and Mrs. Cuyler Wong and Mr. and Mrs. J. J. Vogel in Fresno. Sarah said she had known her husband since 1924. They met in San Francisco during her earlier trip.

On 20 July 1926, Sarah Y. Lee’s attorney wrote to Luther Weedin, Commissioner of Immigration in Seattle and included an application for Sarah Y. Lee to stay in the U.S. as the wife of a merchant. The attorney mentioned that Sarah came from a highly respected family and her father and brother had a substantial financial standing. She married Wong Tin Yuen (Stephen Y. Wong) in Fresno on 6 February 1926. He enclosed a copy of the marriage license, a copy of invitation to the wedding banquet, a newspaper announcement, and a photo of the bride and groom.

Sarah Lee Wong
Stephen Y. Wong and Sarah Y. Lee, Wedding Portrait, 6 February 1926, Fresno, California

[It gets complicated.]

Sarah needed to change her status from section six traveler to that of a wife of a merchant. This resulted in mounds of paperwork. In September G. E. Tolman, Assistant Commissioner General of the Bureau of Immigration in Washington, DC denied Mrs. S. Y. Wong (Sarah Y. Lee)’s application to change her status and said that she could not remain in the U.S. He suggested that she return to Canada and from there apply for admission to the U.S. as wife of a merchant. She should notify immigration services that she was leaving the U.S., obtain an affidavit showing that her husband was a merchant in Fresno, attach photos herself and her husband, take it to the American Consul near her home in Fresno to secure a visa, then apply for admission to the U.S. She needed to show that her husband had been a merchant for at least one year prior to her arrival.

1927
In January 1927, Mrs. Sarah Y. Wong wrote to the Seattle immigration office explaining that she had not followed through on changing her status because she has been unable to travel for health reasons. In February, the clerk at immigration services asked Mrs. Wong if she was “an expectant mother,” and when did she planned on returning to Canada. Mrs. Wong said her child was due in March and she would probably leave in May or June. She insisted that she was under a doctor’s care and could not travel. Immigration decided to let her stay until 1 June 1927. In April, Mrs. Wong asked if she could stay until August. She was again told in great detail what she must do when applying for her readmittance to the U.S. Sarah needed an affidavit showing proof that her husband was a merchant, and they were legally married.

In July, Stephen testified that his son, Eugene Wong (Wong You Jin) was born 6 February 1927 in Fresno. His white witnesses were Frank Ennis, an advertising agent; and Leo F. Jarvis, an insurance broker. Their testimony agreed with Stephen’s. Stephen’s business information was updated and showed that both businesses were successful and providing an income. Stephen Y. Wong receives a favorable recommendation for merchant status. They family left for Canada on 9 September 1927.

Vintage black and white photograph featuring a man and a woman. The man is on the left, wearing a suit and bow tie, with a neutral expression. The woman is on the right, wearing a simple top and also displaying a neutral expression. Handwritten text is visible on the left side.
Stephen Y. Wong and Sarah Lee Wong Affidavit photo, 1927, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Wong Sarah Lee, File 17031/587.

Mrs. Sarah Wong filed her Canadian form 257, Declaration of Non-Immigrant Alien about to Depart for the United States, with the American Consular Service and received her passport visa. In her interrogation she said her father Lee Deen, died on 29 June 1927 and her mother, Lee Shim Shee, died in January 1925, both in Coquitlam, B.C. She listed her siblings as Thomas Lee, age about 43, was living in Port Hammond, B.C.; William, age 20 or 21; Gordon Lee, age 10 or 11, living in Canton, China; oldest sister, Mrs. G. T. Lang, Cardston, Alberta; Anna Lee, 16, student, Port Hammond; Arthur Lee,14, student, Shanghai; Lorraine, 9, student, Canton City. Sarah Lee Wong and family arrived at the Port of Seattle on 19 September 1927. The next day they were admitted and Sarah received her Certificate of Identity #58369.

1935
In June 1935, Stephen Y. Wong swore in an affidavit that he was the husband of Sarah Lee Wong and the owner of Chinese Bazaar in Fresno, CA. His photo was attached to the form. In his interview with immigration Stephen said that he and his wife Sarah Wong were applying to visit Canada and taking their eight-year-old son, Eugene, and two-year old daughter, Maylene with them. Their son, Avery, born in 1929, died in 1931.

Immigration Agent Butler’s summary of the Wong family’s applications says that Stephen Y. Wong’s business, Chinese Bazaar, which dealt with Oriental art goods and novelties, had steadily grown since 1925, his white witnesses were fully qualified, and he was the sole owner of the businesses. Stephen and Sarah Wong both received endorsements. The family visited Canda and return in September 1935.

1940
Stephen Y. Wong applied to leave the U.S. for a visit to Canada in 1940. His white witness was Miss Jo Fitzpatrick, a bookkeeper for Dr. Max M. Goldstein and for the Merchants Credit Association. She had purchased art at the Wong business, the Chinese Bazaar, and known the Wong family about ten years. Frank Ennis was a witness for Wong again. Stephen and Sarah Wong and their children, Maylene, age seven, and Shannon, age three, were interviewed. Stephen was asked the same questions as he had for previous trips and he gave the same answers with some updates. His sales were about $7,500 in 1939 with a profit of $1,200. Their sons Eugene and Avery died in 1936 and 1931, respectively.

Seven-year-old Maylene was interviewed and pointed to her mother when asked. When shown a photograph of a man, she identified him as “my daddy, Stephen.” She also identified her two-year-old brother, Shannon, who was deemed too young to be questioned. Certified copies of the children’s birth certificates were reviewed and approved. Stephen and Sarah’s photos are attached to their affidavit.

On 22 August 1940, Sarah applied for a Nonimmigrant Visa at the American Foreign Service at Vancouver, B.C. and was granted a passport visa under section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act of 1924, wife of merchant (Chinese) resident in United States in exempt status. Her photograph was attached to the document.

The Wong family returned to the Port of Seattle on 25 August 1940 and were admitted. All four applied for certificates of identity. They were approved and sent to the San Francisco immigration office about a week after their arrival at Seattle. The family made another trip to Canada in August 1944. The reference sheet included in the file contains the name and file numbers for Sarah Lee Wong’s husband, brother, two sons and daughter. Their photos are probably included in their files.

Thank you to Joyce Liu, CEA Indexing Project volunteer, for telling me about this file.

Lock Ling (Lock Loon) – Olympia and Seattle Business Owner

Affidavit, Affidavits, Certificate of Residence, marriage custom, Photos over several years, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1891 Lock Ling Affidavit
“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) Affidavit,”1891, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Box 1007, Lock Ling Seattle Box 1007, file 7032/3676.

On 18 August 1891, Rossell G. O’Brien, Brigardier General of the Washington National Guard, signed an affidavit stating that Lock Loon (Lock Ling) of the Chung-Lee Co., Olympia, Washington, wished to visit Victoria, B.C. before making a trip to China. The document certified that Lock Ling was entitled to return to Olympia, Washington. James C. Horr, Mayor of Olympia, added a note saying that he knew Lock Loon personally. Lock Loon signed his affidavit in Chinese characters. An undated form from the Treasury Department said Lock Ling was admitted.

[Lock Ling’s file contains many pages and forms and covers the years 1891 to 1944. Sometimes the information is repetitive; frequently it is confusing and raises other questions. The file and therefore this summary is not meant to be a biography. Immigration officials used a series of interviews, affidavits, witnesses, and other documents to evaluate if they should admit someone to the United States. There were numerous restrictions and they wanted to make sure they were not admitting laborers, or anyone deemed unacceptable under the Chinese Exclusion Act. It was a complicated system.]

[The names Lock Ling and Lock Loon are interchangeable in these documents. This summary of the files will use the name the way it was spelled in the actual document.]

Rev. Clark Davis and C. P. Stone of Seattle were witnesses for Lock Ling’s trip to China in July 1897 and when he returned in September 1898. Lock Ling moved from Olympia and was then working at Mark Ten Suie Company in Seattle.

In October 1902 Lock Ling wished to make another trip to China. He swore in an affidavit that he was thirty-six years old and had lived in the United States for twenty-one years. He was currently a merchant for Coaster Tea Company. They sold teas, coffees, and spices in Seattle. He wanted to visit his family in China and bring back is son, Locke Loui, who was fifteen and a student. He attached his photo and a photo of his son to his affidavit. Harold N. Smith and Clark Davis were his witnesses. His application was approved.

“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) and Locke Loui Affidavit photos,”1902, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.
“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) and Locke Loui Affidavit photos,”1902, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.

Section 2, S.21039 of the Chinese Exclusion Act was updated and made stricter in 1893. It was no longer enough for a witness to testify that an applicant had not engaged in manual labor for at least one year before his departure from the United States, the testimony had to show specifically the kind of work the applicant did during the entire year. This did not present a problem for Lock Ling.

On his return trip in July 1904, he was admitted at Port Townsend, Washington. The record does not show if his son, Locke Loui, was with him.

In March 1910 Lock Ling (Lock Loon) declared in an affidavit that he was forty-four years old; that he had been in the United States for twenty-eight years; had been a resident of Seattle for sixteen years; that he was a merchant for the last three years with Wing Long & Company; had recently sold his interest in the business; and became of member of Hong Chong Company. He wanted to visit his second wife, Lee See at Sing Ning City, Canton. His first wife had died, and he wanted to bring his son, Lock Kim, age thirteen and a student at Canton University, back to Seattle with him. He attached photos of himself and his son to his affidavit.         

“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) and Look Kim Affidavit,”1910, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.
“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) and Look Kim Affidavit,”1910, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.

P. K. Smith and George O. Sanborn, both citizens of Seattle, swore in affidavits that they knew Lock Ling more than three years. They swore he was a merchant and performed no manual labor except what was necessary to conduct business as a merchant.

When Lock Ling was interviewed, he testified he was married and had three sons, Lock Loy, Lock Yen/Ying, and Lock Kim, and a daughter. His son Lock Ying was admitted in 1908 and living in Seattle; and Lock Loy was declared insane in a hospital in Steilacoom and went back to China. Lock Ling had been back to China four times, once before the Exclusion Act was passed.

The Immigration Inspector made a note on Lock Ling’s interview saying Lock Ling was well known as a salesman for Wing Long Company. His new firm, Hong Chong Company, had forty partners. He would be their treasurer; they sold drugs and general merchandise. The company was not incorporated under Washington State law but according to Chinese custom. They had a four-year lease from Mrs. W. D. Hofius for the four-story brick building, still being built for $950 per month.

Lock Ling’s application was approved, and he left for China in March 1910. He returned in October 1912 and was interrogated when he arrived. He gave his marriage name as Yin Ling and his childhood name as Lock Lung. He was returning from his fifth trip to China with his third wife, Wong Shee, his son Lock Kim and his daughter, Lock Mee.  He had three sons and a daughter with his first wife who died about 1902.  His sons Lock Loy, age 24, had been in the U.S. but went back to China about 1909 and Lock Yen, age 19, was in Seattle. His son and daughter, Lock Gim and Lock Mee, were in the detention house waiting for approval to enter the U.S. Lock Ling’s second wife, Lee Shee had a son, Lock Goey, who was still living in China. When Lee Shee died, her son Lock Loy carried the incense jar to the cemetery. Lock Ling then married Wong Shee according to the Chinese custom. For the ceremony, she did not wear a veil but the tassels from her coronet hung down over her face.  She was brought to his house in a regular red, blue, and green sedan chair.

When asked, Lock Ling described his property in China: a house and rice land worth $3,000 Chinese money, and a building in Hongkong worth about $15,000 Hongkong money. He boasted that he went to China five times and a child was born as a result of each trip. In January 1943, Lock Ling (Lock Loon), age seventy-five, applied for a Laborer’s Return Certificate to visit Vancouver, B.C. He qualified because he owed his daughter, Lock Mee Oye, born and residing in Seattle, Washington, more than $1,000. He presented Immigration authorities his Certificate of Residence #55720 which was issued in Portland, Oregon in 1894. It showed that he was born 11 May 1868 in China and entered the United States with his father about 1882 at San Francisco at the age of fifteen.  He lost his original Certificate of Residence #44577 so he presented his replacement certificate. His application was approved, and his current photo was attached to the document. Lock Ling and his wife went to Vancouver and returned to Seattle four days later.

“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) Form 432,”1943, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.

Lock’s Reference Sheet shows three files were brought forward and gives file numbers for his wife, four daughters, and two sons.

[According to Hao-Jan Chang, CEA NARA volunteer and Locke family expert, Yen Ling Lock and former Governor Gary Locke are distantly related. They have common ancestors, starting from the first generation to the third generation. Yen Ling Lock is of the19th generation. Gary Locke is of the 25th generation.] 

Suey L. Moy – born in Indiana, resident of Chicago, Illinois

Affidavits, Birth Certificate, Form 430, Group Photo, Interrogation, photos, Witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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

In October 1900, Dr. E. R. Bacon, a practicing physician and surgeon in Lovell, Lane County, Indiana, swore that he knew B. Harley Moy and his wife Agnes T. Moy, and that he delivered their baby son, Suey L. Moy, on 8 September 1898.

B. Harley Moy swore in an affidavit that he was born in China and had lived in the United States for over fifteen years. After arriving in the U.S., he lived with his father in San Francisco, California, for a short time, then moved to Chicago, Illinois, for ten years where he attended school. He travelled around and visited New York City before settling in Lovell, Indiana, where he ran a Chinese bazaar or emporium which he called Harley Moy’s. He married Agnes. F. Anderson, of Chicago, in 1896. In 1900 he was applying to visit China with his young son.

Daniel Lynch, the postmaster of Lowell, and Frank E. Nelson, a cashier at the State Bank of Lowell, both swore in an affidavit that B. Harley Moy had been a resident of Lowell for over two years and was employed in the mercantile business; he was well known by the local residents and that he had a wife and son. A 1900 certified transcript of Suey L. Moy’s 1898 birth certificate is included in his file.

In 1912 Suey L. Moy, age fourteen, wanted to return to the United States. His mother, Agnes T. (Anderson) Moy, started the process to get him readmitted. She swore in an affidavit that she was born in Sweden, immigrated in 1893, and was now a resident of Chicago. During her 1913 interview, Agnes stated that her husband, Harley, owned a restaurant called Ningpo and they lived in an apartment above it. They had four children, Suey who was in Gow Lee, On Fun, China with his paternal grandparents, and a daughter, Helen Moy, born in 1901; and two sons, Boyd Moy (Suey Tang Moy), born in 1905, and Frank Moy (Suey Wing Moy), born in 1907. The three younger children had not been out of the U.S.

“Suey L. Moy photo” 1900, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Suey L. Moy case file, Seattle Box 1392, file 41410/14-30.
“Moy family photo” 1900, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Suey L. Moy case file 41410/14-30.
“Suey L. Moy form 430 photo” 1912, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Suey L. Moy case file, 41410/14-30.

Included in the 1912 application was a photo taken about 1900 of Suey L. Moy at about age one and a group photo of Agnes and her three younger children.

During B. Harley Moy’s interrogation, he testified that the initial “B” in his name stood for Billy, his American nickname. He was forty-two years old and married in 1897. His brother, Moy Dung Goon, was living in Chicago. His family home in China had a big door and a little door. Moy Dung Gee lived across from the little door. [The interrogators often asked the applicant details about the big door and the little door, probably so they could see if the interviewee would give the same answer during their return trip interview.]

Harley and Agnes gave slightly different answers about the date and place of their marriage, however it was close enough for the interrogators to approve Suey L. Moy’s application. But first, as part of the application investigation, the Seattle Immigration Service wrote to Immigration office in Vancouver, B.C. asking if they had any information on the 1900 departure of B. Harley Moy and his son leaving through Portal, North Dakota. Although they could not find the departure information, the Vancouver office thought the evidence of his U.S. citizenship was enough to admit him when he returned in 1913.

In February 1922, Suey L. Moy applied for another trip to China. During his interview he said his father was born in San Francisco. [According to the earlier testimony Suey L. Moy’s grandfather was born in San Francisco and his father was born in China] His parents, B. Harley and Agnes Moy divorced about 1921. Suey L. Moy presented a certified copy of his birth certificate.

“Suey L. Moy 1898 birth certificate, No. 4847” 1922, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Suey L. Moy case file 41410/14-30.

Suey L. Moy returned on 28 May 1923. He reported that he married Lai Shee while in China and they had a son, Moy Jun Wing. He was admitted.

Chin Shik Kuey (James) – Yakima, Washington

Affidavit, Affidavits, Form M-490, Interrogation, Photographs, Witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Chin Shik Kuey photo, age 3
“Photo of Chin Shik Kuey, Form M143,” 1940, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin Shik Kuey case file, Seattle Box 807, 7030/12930.

[It must have been very cold the day his photo was taken. James is wearing a big heavy coat and he doesn’t look very happy.]
[Researched by Lily Eng, Data Entry Volunteer, for the Chinese Exclusion Act files. Chin Shik Kuey is her uncle.]

Chin On 陳安 made a trip to China in November 1935 and upon his return in June 1937 he claimed his son, (James) Chin Shik Kuey, was born on 2 January 1937 at Wah Lok village, Hoy San, China.
In November 1939 Chin On swore in an affidavit that he was born in Seattle, resided in Yakima, and was in the restaurant business. He had made six trips to China since 1893. His intention was to bring his son, Chin Shik Kuey, to live with him in Yakima. The affidavit contained photos of Chin On and his son. He was seeking admission for his son with the status of son of an American citizen which would make him an American citizen in his own right under Section 1993 of the Revised Statues of the United States.

1939 Affidavit Photos of Chin On and Chin Shik Kuey,
“Affidavit Photos of Chin On and Chin Shik Kuey,” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin Shik Kuey case file, Seattle Box 807, 7030/12930.

At the age of three, Chin made the trip from his village to Hong Kong with his father’s Yakima business partner, Ng Mon Wai, and his wife. From there they boarded the (Empress of Asia) Princess Charlotte and arrived at the Port of Seattle on 13 April 1940. Chin was admitted three days later as the son of Chin On, a citizen. Since James was so young the interrogators only asked him his name and then quizzed his father. Chin On, marriage name Dee Bon, was 52 years old and born in Seattle. He was the cashier and buyer for the Golden Wheel Restaurant in Yakima, Washington. He had four sons with his first wife. They were Chin See Wing, married and living in Ellensburg; Chin See Chong, married and living in Yakima; Chin Fon Yung, married and attending school in Yakima; and Chin Moy On, age 11, attending school in Ellensburg. The wives and children of his three older sons were living in China. Chin On claimed the mother of Chin Shik Kuey died in 1939. Chin On planned to take his son, who he now called James, to Yakima and hire a nurse to take care of him until he was old enough to go to school.

Ng Mon Wai, marriage name See Suey, was a witness for James Chin Shik Kuey. Ng was a merchant and manager of the Golden Wheel Restaurant. He and his wife brought the boy on the ship from China to Seattle. Ng Mon Wai’s wife, Chan Yuen Mui, also testified. Her status for entering the U.S. was as the wife of a merchant. She was not interested in caring for a three-year old child and did not interact with James on their voyage to Seattle.
Chin Shik Kuey was admitted to the United States as a U. S. citizen, son of Chin On, a native. The notice of his admittance into the United States was signed on 16 April 1940 by Marie A. Proctor, District Commissioner of Immigration, Seattle District. Chin Shik Kuey’s finger prints were included in the file with this cautionary note.

cautionary note
“Form M-490,” 1940, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chin Shik Kuey case file, Seattle Box 807, 7030/12930.

Wong Ming Bow – 1897, arrested, held two months, tried, declared U.S. citizen, released

Certificate of Discharge, Certificate of Identity, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wong Ming Bow 1897 Discharge papers
“Discharge Papers – Wong Ming Bow,” 1897, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Wong Ming Bow case file, Seattle, Box 577, 7030/4947.

Wong Ming Bow was born in San Francisco about 1876. His parents took him back to China when he was four years old. In 1882 while the family was in China the United States passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. Wong Ming Bow returned to the United States in 1897 when he was 21 years old. He entered at Malone, New York and was immediately arrested. He did not have the proper papers and could not prove he was a United States citizen. Wong and about nine or ten other Chinese were held in a three-story brick building for about two months. Wong was finally issued his discharge papers by U. S. Commissioner William P. Badger at Malone on 27 July 1897. Unlike most discharge papers, his did not include his photograph. This document was the only proof he had of his citizenship. It was very precious—without it he could be deported.
Wong made trips back to China from Buffalo, New York in 1907 and 1911. Each time his discharge papers were reviewed. The “discharge certificate was sent to Inspector George W. Ketchum at Malone who compared it with the docket and found it genuine. Commissioner Badger identified the signature on the certificate as his own.”
In an interview with Wong on 7 July 1911 he said his father came to get him when he was arrested in 1897. This is the only detail given about the 1897 arrest and it does not mention what documents his father used to prove the Wong was born in San Francisco and a citizen of the United States. Evidently it was enough for the commissioner to issue the discharge papers.
There were several correspondences between Buffalo, Boston and Vancouver, B.C. immigration offices trying to locate the necessary paper work in Wong’s file. On 10 July 1911, the commissioner in Boston wrote to the Inspector in Vancouver, B. C. saying, “the papers in this case can be easily located, no doubt, by reference to the large books entitled “Record of arrivals and disposition of Chinese Persons,” at Malone, which were packed in the box marked M 6, from which the serial number can be ascertained. Inasmuch as the card index at Malone was not started until January 1, 1909, this case cannot be found by reference to that.” [It is not known who underlined these passages.]
In 1913 Wong Ming Bow was issued a certificate of identity No. 10150. It was a sturdy document and much easier and safer to carry around than his discharge papers. Wong’s certificate is not included in the file but to see an example see (Chin) Lin Hing’s certificate .
[There is much more information on Wong Ming Bow and his family in the files. Get more details on next week’s entry.]

Dong Suey Heong (Rose Dong) of Sacramento

Affidavits, Form 430 Native’s Return Certificate, photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo of Miss Rose Dong (Dong Suey Heong)
“Dong Suey Heong (Rose Dong) statement photo,” 1936, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Dong Suey Heong file, Seattle, Box 700, Case 7030/8867.

Miss Rose Dong (Dong Suey Heong) left Sacramento, California for Canton, China in June 1936 with her American teacher, Miss Hartley. She left before her application for her Form 430, Native’s Return Certificate, was completed and approved. Her mother, Quan Shee, died in Sacramento on 15 November 1934 and her father, Dong Haw, was unable to help her with her paper work before she left. Donaldina Cameron, Special Director Chinese Case Work at Presbyterian Mission Home in San Francisco, a friend of Miss Dong’s late mother helped with the necessary forms, certificates and affidavits so Miss Dong could get back into the United States. Miss Cameron was well known on the West Coast for her work with the Chinese. She wrote letters to Mr. Raphael P. Bonham of the Seattle Immigration office and Mr. Philipps Jones of Angel Island Immigration Service. Rose Dong was only gone one month and needed to get back on time to start the autumn semester for the Junior College at Sacramento. Miss Cameron testified that Rose had three younger sisters: Ella, Laura and Evelyn, and a younger brother, Richard; that she had been friends with Rose’s mother for many years and first met Rose about five years previously.
Rose Wong’s father Dong Hoo (Dong Haw), a merchant and manager of Yick Chong Company in Sacramento swore in an affidavit that Rose Wong was his lawful blood daughter, born 24 March 1916 in Sacramento. Immigration authorities requested affidavits of supporting witnesses willing to give testimony in Rose’s behalf and a copy of her mother’s death certificate. A copy of Rose’s birth certificate is also in the file.
Rose returned through San Francisco on 19 August 1936 and was admitted six days later. She was paroled to Miss Cameron. Rose’s paper work was completed and approved with the assistance of Donaldina Cameron.

Lee Shee – Red Marriage paper

Documents, , , , ,

Lee Shee Red Marriage Paper
“Red Marriage Paper for Lee Shee and Gum On,” Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Shee file, Seattle, Box 154, Case 2150/10-3.

Lee Shee, wife of Gum On of 937 Race Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, arrived in Seattle on 20 July 1924 with their two sons, Yue Dok, age 16; and Yue Bun, age 10 years. The sons were admitted to the United States as sons of a U.S. citizen but Lee Shee was detained at the Immigration Quarters in Seattle for six months. In December she was nine months pregnant and Immigration allowed her to land temporarily. A bond for $1,000 was taken out to assure that she left at the required deadline. Eventually the bond was extended until July 1929. Lee Shee, her husband, and children returned to China in April 1929.
During the interrogation the immigration inspectors asked Gum On if he could provide any evidence to show that he was married. Gum On gave them his Red Marriage Paper. It stated that he was married to Lee Shee and listed four generations of his family–his parents, grandparents, great grandparents, and great, great grandparents. A translation of the document is not included in the file and the inspectors did not comment on it.

[Hao-Jan Chang, a volunteer who works with the Chinese Exclusion Act case files at NARA-Seattle, reads and writes Chinese. He translated the Red Marriage Paper and verified that it contained the marriage information for Gum On and Lee Shee.]

Yung Hin Lun – Chinese Prince Visits Seattle

Certificate of Identity, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yung Hin Lun Certificate of Identity
“Yung Hin Lun, Certificate of Identity, #22775” 1916, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yung Hin Lun file, Seattle, Box1211, Case 35100/1731.

Yung Hin Lun was admitted to the United States as a Section Six student at Yale, New Haven, Connecticut in 1918. He made several trips back to China and returned again in 1920 with a merchant status. Henry M. White, U.S. Commissioner of Immigration in Seattle said that although Yung Hin Lun was not in the U.S. long enough to obtain merchant status “there appears to be absolutely no question that Yung Hin Lun is in no sense a laborer but is on the contrary a Chinese of unusually high class…”
Yung Hin Lun was an electrical engineer for China Metals and Welding Company with offices in Hong Kong and New York. His white witnesses were Mr. L. Fowle and Mr. Merle Walker, Guarantee Trust Company, New York City. Fowle said Yung Hin Lun’s family owned a large bank in China with a branch on Wall Street.
A Seattle Times article on 2 September 1919 had this headline, “Chinese Prince Visits Seattle, Acts as Secretary to Mission, Scion of Imperial Kwang Hsu, Family Perturbed Because identity is Discovered. Spends 2 Years in U. S.” With the article are photos of Prince Hin Lun and B.M. Chan.
Yung Hin Lun served in a secretarial capacity for Dr. T. Hsieh, representative of the Chinese Merchants’ Guilds, who was in the U.S.to promote Chinese diplomatic and commercial interest. They were accompanied by B. M. Chan, a multi-millionaire banker from Havana, Cuba.

Dr. Ying Tak Chan – Granted Permanent Residence by Private Law

Documents, File, , , , , ,

Chan Ying Tak H 1689
“Dr. Ying Tak Chan,” Committed to the Committee of the Whole House…, 82 Congress, 2d Session, Serial Set Vol. No. 11576, House of Representatives Report No. 1689 (http://genealogybank.com : accessed 9 Mar 2016).

[This information is not included in Dr. Ying Tak Chan’s Chinese Exclusion Act case file (Case 7031/503) but it highlights the extremely low immigration quota for the Chinese until 1965.]

Although the Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed by President Roosevelt in December 1943, there was still a severely restrictive quota which only allowed about 105 Chinese to immigrate to the U.S. each year. (Remember, China was our ally during WW II.) This was an ethnicity quota—not just for Chinese from China but Chinese from anywhere in the world. Congress finally did away with the National Origins quota system in 1965.1

Dr. Chan went to China in 1933 to visit family but stayed to practice and teach at the Kwong Wah Medical College in Canton. She moved to Hong Kong when the Sino-Japanese War started in 1937. During World War II she was a contract surgeon with the U.S. Army Air Force in China. She returned to the United States when the Chinese Communists took over mainland China.2

According to Private Law 638, Chapter 307, on 17 May 1952, enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, Dr. Ying Tak Chan was lawfully admitted to the U.S. for permanent residence and upon payment of the required visa fee and head tax. The Secretary of State notified the quota-control officer to deduct one number from the appropriate available quota.3

Dr. Chan, age 62, died on 26 November 1968, after cardiovascular surgery at Georgetown University Hospital.4

Sources:
1. “Repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act, 1943,” U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian, (https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/chinese-exclusion-act-repeal : accessed 11 Mar 2016).
2. “Dr. Ying Tak Chan, 62, Ex-School Physician in D. C.,” Evening Star, Washington, District of Columbia, 27 Nov 1958, p. 24 (http://genealogybank.com : accessed 9 Mar 2016).
3. “An Act for the relief of Doctor Ying Tak Chan,” Private Law 638, Chapter 307, S. 853, Superintendent of Documents, United States Printing Office, (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-66/pdf/STATUTE-66-PgA71.pdf : 9 Mar 2016).
4. “Dr. Ying Tak Chan,” Evening Star.