Category Archives: family photo

Woo Quin Lock – rejected/appealed/admitted

Affidavit, burial ceremony,, Certificate of Identity, dual marriage, family photo, Letters of recommendation, marriage custom, San Francisco file, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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

Woo Quin Lock was born on 3 March 1920 at Kwong Tung, China. He was the son of a U.S. citizen. He arrived at the Port of Seattle on 2 February 1940 on the Princess Charlotte. He was denied admittance on 12 April 1940. His case was appealed on 10 May, and he was admitted on 10 August, more than eight months after his arrival. He received his Certificate of Identity No. 83265 two days later. The exhibits submitted in his case were an affidavit by his father, Woo Yen Tong, three letters written by the applicant to his father and their translations, a sample of the applicant’s handwriting, four Woo Seattle case files and eight San Francisco files for various Woos.

Woo Quin Lock’s father, Woo Yen Tong, swore in an affidavit that he was a United States citizen and that he had proved his citizenship to the Immigration Service after his arrival at the Port of San Francisco on 14 August 1911 and was issued a Certificate of Identity No. 4752. Three photos were attached to his affidavit.

Woo Quin Kwock, Woo Quin Lock, probably Woo Koon Sang
Son: Woo Quin Lock; Father: Woo Yen Tong

“Woo Yen Tong, affidavit,” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Woo Quin Lock case file, Seattle Box 805, file 7030/12841.

During his 1940 testimony, Woo Quin Lock testified that his father sent him $1,200 in Hong Kong currency to cover his travel expenses. Chin Thick Gee a member of the Mow Fon Goon store in Hong Kong, purchased his ticket for him. His father owned two houses and a social hall in Wan Jew village. Overnight visitors stayed in the social hall which was the 8th house, 9th row, counting from the north. Gar Theung and Gar Thin, sons of his paternal uncle Get Tong were living in the building while they were guests of the family in 1938. The family owned an old house on the north side and a new house on the south side. The interrogator told Woo Quin Lock that his testimony about some of his uncles and cousins and the location of the houses did not agree with his father’s and brother’s testimony.

The case file contains more than sixty pages of documents and testimony. The following is an excerpt from the summary written by the Immigration Committee Chairman:

The alleged father, Woo Yen Tong, was originally admitted at San Francisco in 1909 as the foreign-born son of a native, Woo Gap.

Woo Yen Tong returned to China in 1919. He married Chen Shee and their son; Woo Quin Lock was born before he returned to the United States. He made several trips to China and four sons were born. Woo Quin Lock’s younger brother, Woo Quin Kwock arrived from China in 1939 and was admitted. He was a witness for Woo Quin Lock.

There were many discrepancies between the testimony of the applicant and his brother about their method and date of travel to Hong Kong, where they stayed on the way, and when they got there. The brothers did not agree on when and where their alleged younger brother attended school.

The interrogation committee decided that the relationship between Woo Quin Lock and his father and brother could not be established. They denied Lock admission to the United States, but he had the right to appeal. The case was reopened in April 1940 to reconsider the citizenship of the alleged father. Woo Yen Tong’s brother was called to testify. Woo Fong Tong (marriage name Sik Kew) presented his Certificate of Identity #10738 which was issued to him in San Francisco in 1913. He testified that he was forty-four, born (ca. 1894) in Wan Jew village, Toy San district, China. He was a laborer living in the Chicago Hotel in Spokane, Washington. He made two trips to China in 1921 and 1929 and returned through the port of San Francisco. He identified the photos that were attached to Fook Yen Tong’s affidavit and a photo of their father, Woo Gap, from his 1921 Certificate of Identify that was included in his San Francisco file. He correctly identified all the Woo photos from the Seattle and San Francisco files.

Woo Fong Tong described the burial ceremony for his father Woo Gap (the transcriber made a note that Gap was pronounced NGIP). Woo Gap died in 1929 and Woo Fong Tong took his remains, his whole body, not just his bones, back to China in a regular wooden casket which was placed in a wooden box lined with tin. After their arrival in Wan Jew village the shipping box was removed, and the casket was placed outside the village for a day for visitation by the family. Then the casket was opened briefly to give everyone one last look at the body. They had a regular burial procession with the whole family accompanying the casket to the burial place at Fong Ngow hill, about 2 lis (less than a mile) north of Wan Jew village. After Woo Gap was buried, the family worshipped at his grave.

Woo Gap was married three times and his father was married twice. There was much testimony in the case file about whether the Woo men were stepsons or half-brothers.

In May 1940, P. J. Hansen, wrote a reference letter for Woo Yen Tong, who he called Raymond Woo. Hansen stated that Woo had worked for him for nine years as cannery foreman and he considered him a conscientious and trustworthy employee. He offered his assistance in getting Woo’s son admitted to the United States.

The legal brief for the appeal on behalf of Woo Quin Lock conceded that Woo Quin Lock was a foreign-born son of Woo Yen Tong but left open the question of his father’s citizenship of the United States.  Woo Yen Tong derived his citizenship through his father, Woo Gap. Woo Gap and his second wife Lee Shee were the parents of Woo Yen Tong. Woo Gap married Lee Shee before the death of his first wife which was legal under Chinese law and custom. Woo Gap’s first wife, Chow Shee, the mother of his four sons, was ill for many years and required constant care. Woo Gap’s second wife moved into the household and cared for Chow Shee and the children. Woo Yen Ton was the son of Woo Gap and Woo’s second wife, Lee Shee. He was born before Woo’s first wife died.

Woo Quin Lock’s attorney, Edward E. Merges, brought forward a May 1918 letter written by Philip B. Jones, Immigration Officer at San Francisco to the Commissioner of Immigration at Angel Island stating the merits Woo Gap’s status as a merchant (one of the exemptions to the Exclusion Act). Woo Gap was born in the United States, a merchant in Santa Cruz, California, and well-known by the community and the immigration station. He resided with his wife and their son Woo Yen Tong. They provided a home and schooling for their son which Immigration authorities thought was sufficient proof of their relationship. They were also impressed that Woo Gap was honest about his dual marriage. Woo Yen Tong’s case was submitted to the Central Immigration Office in Washington, D.C. and it was determined that Woo Gap was a citizen of the United States. His son, Woo Yen Tong, had been admitted as the son of a citizen.  Finally, after an eight-month legal battle, Woo Quin Lock was admitted as the son a citizen on 20 August 1940. His new residence was 725 King Street, Seattle, Washington.

Ng Wing Yin – unable to prove he was the son of a U.S. citizen; deported

Affidavit, Certificate of Identity, Deportation, family photo, student, Witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

[The National Archives is still closed because of COVID-19. This file was copied before the closure in March 2020. I will let you know when the archives reopens. THN]

Ng Wing Yin arrived at the Port of Seattle on 28 January 1929 was deported after almost two months in detention. He could not prove his relationship to his alleged father, Ng Wah Lai, a U.S. citizen.

His attorney, Hugh C. Todd, wrote to the Bureau of Immigration in Washington, D.C. regarding Ng’s appeal. Ng Wing Yin was first denied admission in January 1927. His 1929 entry was his second attempt to enter the U.S. Todd argued that no one except a father would try to bring his son into the country twice. Anyone else would have given up. This application included a photo taken in 1921 of the father and son when the son was ten years old. Todd pointed out the resemblance between the two—their posture, eyes, nose, ears and chin, even the curl of the mouth. The photograph was not included in the 1927 earlier entry application.  

“Ng Wing Yin and Ng Wah Lai photo” 1921 , Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Ng Wing Yin case file, Seattle Box 1118, file 10346/10-12.

[The National Archives is still closed because of COVID-19. This file was copied before the closure in March 2020. I will let you know when the archives reopens. THN]

In 1929 Ng Wing Yin was seventeen years old and a student. He was born in Woy Lung Lee village, Sun Wei Ning District, China. He was attempting to enter the U.S. as the son of a native. His parents were Ng Wah Lai (marriage name Yuk Moon), and Mar Shee.  He presented an affidavit with a photo of him with  his father stating that his father was a United States citizen.

Ng Wing Yin was questioned about the first time he tried to enter the U.S. in 1926. He was denied, it was appealed, denied again, and he was deported. He was asked why he was trying to enter again since he was debarred the first time.  He did not reply. His only witness was his father.

Ng Wah Lai testified that he was born in Riverside, California and that he had lived in Durango, Colorado for four years and planned to go back there. He was currently working at the Kwong Man Yuen store at 701 King Street in Seattle. He showed his certificate of identity #4188 issued at Boston, Massachusetts in 1911. The only proof he had that Ng Wing Yin was his son was the photo of them together. The immigration authorities agreed that the people in the photo were Ng Wah Lai and Ng Wing Yin but that did not prove their relationship. They had no new witnesses or evidence except for the photo taken of them together in 1921. They asked Ng Wah Lai why he was going through this process again when nothing had changed. Ng said, “He is my son and is anxious to come to the U.S.”

Ng Wing Yin was unable to prove that he was the blood son of Ng Wah Lai so he was denied entry into the U.S. Their attorney appealed, it was denied, and Ng Wing Yin was deported, again.

[What do you think? Would you have admitted him?]

David Loo – Passport, father’s Hawaiian birth certificates & family photo

Birth Certificate, Cerificate of identity number, Draft Registration, family photo, Group Photo, passport, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

David Loo Passport photo 1941

David Loo, (Chinese name Lu Min-i), age 21, and his sister, Mimi Loo, age 19, arrived at the Port of Seattle, Washington, on 7 June 1941 and were admitted as U. S. citizens two days later. David and Mimi would temporarily be staying with their sister, Marion Loo, in Hollywood, California. Their father, Teddy Loo-Tin (Loo Ping-Tien or Loo Chit Sam), was born in Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii, on 16 August 1884. Their mother, Chen Kwan Har, remained in China.
Loo Chit Sam Hawaii Birth Cert 1898

Loo David's father's Hawaii Birth Cert 1894

David Loo was born in Tientsin, China on 8 September 1919. Before leaving China, David completed two years of study at the University of St. Johns in Shanghai. During his interrogation, he testified that their home had thirteen or fifteen rooms and they had three servants. (The Japanese tore down two rooms and the garage when they widened the street in front of their house leaving them with two less rooms.) They had owned a 1932 Ford V-8 but sold it about 1938. Whenever they stayed in Peking, they all rode bicycles. David’s father was an agent for a rug company. He smoked Camel cigarettes and currently had a beard and sometimes a mustache. The family traveled a good deal and two on the brothers were born in Australia. David’s witnesses were his sister, Marion, and Mrs. Bessie C. Jordan of Seattle. Jordan was his teacher at the American School in Peking for two years. David’s file includes a photo of him with his six siblings: Susane, Milton, Minto, Michael, Marion, and Mimi. David was the second youngest.
Loo David Family photos group

 

 

 

 

 

 

In April in preparing to leave China, Mimi Loo wrote to the Commissioner of the Immigration Bureau in Seattle, Washington, to inform them that she and her brother were planning on traveling to the U.S. with Mr. and Mrs. R. A. Drews, her teacher at the American School in Peking. The American Embassy had advised them to leave for the United States. Their father had registered his children at the American Consulate General in Tientsin and Shanghai and filed their records with the State Department. Their brother, Michael Loo was admitted to the U.S. at San Pedro, California, in September 1935 (file #14036/87-A) and their sister, Marian Loo, was admitted at San Francisco in May 1940 [file # not included].

Marion Loo swore in an affidavit that David Loo and Mimi Loo, the children of Loo Tim, were her siblings,

David was issued Certificate of Identity No. 84834 upon arrival. Once David was settled, he registered for the draft for military service.

[A copy of Mimi Loo’s interrogation is included in David Loo’s file. Mimi Loo’s Seattle file is #7030/13572. There is no further information in the file.]

“David Loo passport photo, ca. 1941; Loo Chit Sam & Loo Tim, born 1884, copies of Hawaiian birth certificates, 1898 & 1901; Loo family photo, ca. 1926,” Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Loo David case file, Seattle Box 825, file 7030/13566.

Emily Green Exner Chi, Sylvia and Vernon Chi – Northfield, MN

1922 Cable Act, Citizenship Act of 1934, family photo, student, USC 1489, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Chi Emily Sylvia Vernon 1941
“Photo of Emily Green Exner Chi with Sylvia and Vernon Chi ,” 1941, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chi Sylvia B case file, Seattle Box 825, file #7030/13532.

Emily Green Exner Chi and her children Benjamin, Sylvia, and Vernon Chi arrived at the Port of Seattle on 13 February 1941. Emily, Sylvia and Vernon were admitted as U.S. citizens; Benjamin was not. Benjamin’s case is complicated and will be dealt with in a later blog entry.

Emily’s Chinese name was Chi Ne Mei Lan; Sylvia Blythe Chi was Chi Po Ya; and Vernon Longstreet Chi only had a Chinese surname. They all had valid U.S. passports issued at the consulate general at Tientsin, China. Emily Green Exner, a Caucasian, was born on 8 November 1904 in Northfield, Minnesota. She married Chi Shou Yu (English name: Hilary) on 18 September 1932 at Northfield. Her husband, a citizen of China, was admitted at the Port of Seattle in 1929 with student status. They left for China a few days after their wedding. Emily did not lose her citizenship due to her marriage to an alien ineligible to citizenship because of the 1922 Cable Act and a 1931 update.

“… That no woman who was a national of the United States shall be deemed to have lost her nationality solely by reason of her marriage to an alien on or after September 22, 1922, or to an alien racially ineligible to citizenship on or after March 3, 1931, or, in the case of a woman who was a United States citizen at birth, through residence abroad following such marriage, notwithstanding the provisions of any existing treaty or convention1…”

Sylvia and Vernon Chi were born in Tientsin, China in 1937 and 1940, respectively. The Citizenship Act of 1934, Section 1993 said that a child could acquire U.S. citizenship through the mother, not just the father. There are other provisions but this was the part of the Act that pertained to them at their young ages.2

(More about this Act in Benjamin Chi’s upcoming blog entry.)

Mrs. Emily Chi does not have a separate file but since her children were so young, ages 3 and 1, she was interviewed. This information was gleaned from her interview: Her father, three brothers, and brother, Frederick S. Exner and his wife were present at her wedding. For the past eight years her husband was a manager for a manufacturer of sporting goods and they planned to employ up to 100 men. The factory was broken into three parts because of the Japanese occupation. His salary was a hundred Tientsin dollars a month with an annual bonus of 10,000 Tientsin dollars. Emily was coming to visit her elderly parents before they died and the State Department was insisting that women and children leave China [because of the war]. She and her husband owned a farm outside of Tientsin that they rented out. She was planning on visiting her brother, Dr. Frederick B. Exner, in Seattle and her father Franz Exner, a Ph.D. and her mother Hannah Blithe Exner at 100 Nevada Avenue, Northfield, Minnesota. Her mother was in poor health and Emily hope to stay about a year; applying for an extension if needed. Emily originally went to China when she was about 20 to teach in the Yu Ying School in Peking. She taught there three years and met her husband there. Her husband, Chi Shou Yu, (Seattle file 11476/1-1) was born in Wu Ching Hsien district, Man Shuang Miao village, Ho Pei providence. He studied chemistry at Cartleton College in Northfield, MN for the three years before they married.

Emily Green Exner Chi and her children Sylvia, and Vernon Chi were admitted as U.S. citizens on their day of arrival. There is no further information in the file.

1. “Title 8 – Aliens and Nationality, Chapter 12 – Immigration and Nationality, Subchapter Iii – Nationality and Naturalization, Part III – Loss of Nationality, § 1489. Application of treaties;  exceptions,”  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/pdf/uscode08/lii_usc_TI_08_CH_12_SC_III_PA_III_SE_1489.pdf

2. Orfield, Lester B. (1934) “The Citizenship Act of 1934,” University of Chicago Law Review: Vol. 2 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol2/iss1/7

Lee Gang Bong – family portraits

Affidavit, Description of village, family photo, Group Photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lee Gang Bong M143 1940

Lee Gang Bong 李境垹 arrived at the Port of Seattle on 1 January 1940 and was admitted as the son of a native, Lee Fook Loy, deceased. He was 17 years old, born 30 March 1923, and he was coming to live with his brother, Lee Chong Yin 李長恩, in Rock Springs, Wyoming.

“Lee Gang Bong, M143 photo, ”ca. 1940, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Gang Bong file, Seattle Box 803, 7030/12660.

His father, Lee Fook Loy, returned to China in November 1935 and died there in 1937 after a brief illness.Lee Fook Loy 1935

“Lee Fook Loy,  Form 430 photo, ”ca. 1935, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Gang Bong file, Seattle Box 803, 7030/12660.

Lee Gang Bong married Louie Shee in China against his wishes on 15 June 1938 when he was fifteen years old. His mother wanted someone to wait on her and she also thought he should be married before he came to the United States.

According to Lee Gang Bong’s interrogation his home village of Pon Lung in the Sui Low section of Toy San, China had 30 or 40 houses arranged in 11 rows facing west. His brick house had five rooms and tile floors with stone in the court. Each bedroom had two outside windows with on glass but fitted with iron bars and wooden shutters. They had a rice mill. Three wooden carved ancestral tablets painted green with gilt character representing their general ancestors were hanging on the back wall of the shrine loft in the living room. The village had a brick wall about five feet high on the head side and bamboo running from the back to the tail with a pond in front.

Lee Chong Yin Affidavit
“Lee Chong Yin Affidavit,” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Gang Bong file, Seattle Box 803, 7030/12660.

Upon his arrival at the Port of Seattle, Lee Gang Bong’s brother, Lee Chong Yin, was a witness for him. His interrogator asked him confrontational questions, such as: “Do you know of any American Chinese citizen that ever had a daughter born in China?” and “Insofar as you know are all children born to American citizen Chinese in China sons?” Chong Yin married Leow Shee and had a three-year old son in China whom he had never seen. He was born after Chong Yin returned to the U.S.

These family portraits are included in the file:

Lee Gang Bong Family Portrait
“Lee Gang Bong, family portraits,” ca. 1927, 1930, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lee Gang Bong file, Seattle Box 803, 7030/12660.

Mee Lin, servant girl; Ng Shee, mother; Lee Gang Bong, applicant; Lee Fook Loy, father; Lee Chong Yin, brother

Lee Gang Bong Family Portrait ca. 1930

Leow Shee, Chong Yin’s wife; Lee Gang Bong, applicant; Ng Shee, mother holding Lee Ging Shek, brother, Lee Ngook Guey, brother; Lee Fook Loy, father, Lee Chong Yin, brother

Lee Gang Bong was admitted at the Port of Seattle on 9 February 1940.
[This file researched by Hao-Jan Chang. Hao-Jan also does the Chinese characters for the blog.]

Moy Mee Ting (Georgia Moy) – Chicago, Illinois

Birth Registration, family photo, Form 430, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo of Moy Mee Ting Family
“Photo of Mrs. Moy Chuck Poy (Woo Shee) and family,” 1940, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Moy Mee Ting (Georgia Moy) case file, Seattle Box 737, 7030/10320.

Back row: Tai You (servant girl), Moy Mee Ting (applicant)
Front Row: Moy Ngoon See, Woo Shee (mother), Moy Fang Dhl, Moy Mon Dle

Moy Mee Ting 梅美清 (Georgia Moy) and her bother Moy Fang Dhl 梅宏資 (Stanley Moy) were admitted to the U. S. at the Port of Seattle on 3 September 1937 as native born U. S. citizens. Georgia was 14 years old and Stanley was a year younger. They were joining their father, Moy Chuck Poy in Chicago, Illinois. Their native dialect was See Yip Sun Ning.

Moy Mee Ting Birth Cert 1923
Chicago, Illinois birth registration, Georgia Moy, 1923; Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Moy Mee Ting (Georgia Moy) case file, Seattle Box 737, 7030/10320.

The Moy family went to Sai How Gow Dee village, China in 1927 so the children could study Chinese. The children Georgia, Stanley, and Philip (Moy Mon Dle) were all born in Chicago. Their mother Woo Shee (maiden name: Woo Yin Po) stayed in China and their father returned to the U. S. about 1929. The children and their mother moved to Ng Gong market near Gow Dee village in about 1932 because there were many floods in their former village.

Moy Mee Ting’s paternal grandfather, Moy Fang Chung (marriage name: Moy Dip Nai), was living in Detroit in 1937.

Moy Mee Ting testified that Sai How Gow Dee village had over 100 houses and she attended the Sai How School. There were over 100 students and including about thirty or forty girls. There were no women teachers. In her interview she was asked about size of the village, the number of stores, the number of stories of various buildings, who lived where, where they got their household water, how their house was lighted, where everyone slept, the number of beds, who cut her hair, why her mother had a servant girl, and many more questions.

When they moved to Ng Gong market the children attended the gospel mission school called Jing Ock. They had women teachers at this school. Chairman Inspector J. H. Gee asked Mee Ting several questions about where her mother got the money to support them after her father returned to the U.S. and where she got the white gold wrist watch she was wearing. She replied that her father had been sending her mother money and her mother gave her the watch before she left for the U.S.

Their mother accompanied them to Hong Kong. They took a boat from Ng Gong market to Ow San market, a train to Bok Gai and a steamer to Hong Kong. Their mother said goodbye onboard and a man named Chin Deung Fun oversaw them on the trip to the U.S.

Mee Ting correctly identified photos of her father, Moy Poy, (SF file 20173/13-16) (Seattle file 10724/12-10) and her mother, Wu [Woo] Yin Po (SF file 20173/17-3) and her brothers. Six pages of testimony by her brother, Moy Fang Dhl, is included in her file. The next day Moy Mee Ting was recalled to the hearing. Three more pages of testimony are included in the file. The interviewers compared her answers to her brother’s and asked about discrepancies and included more in-depth questions. Mee Ting and Fang Dhl were both admonished for saying that they had a brother named Ngoon Jee. They admitted that there was no such brother and were cautioned not to say he was a brother. They provided a group photo of the family which did not include the “extra brother.”

The Immigration committee reviewed the parents’ files from 1917 and 1921 and the family’s files from when they left the country in 1927 and voluminous current testimony and unanimously approved the admittance of Moy Mee Ting and Moy Fang Dhl.

Moy Mee Ting Form 430 1927
“Form 430 Photo of Moy Mee Ting (Georgia Moy),” 1927, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Moy Mee Ting (Georgia Moy) case file, Seattle Box 737, 7030/10320.

 

Lim Don Hing – Photos from China

Affidavit, death certificate, detention, discrepancies, family photo, Immigration Act of 1924, , , , , , ,

im Don Hing photo 3 boys
“Photos of Lim Don Hing (center) and his cousins,” ca 1925, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lim Don Hing case file, Seattle Box 768, 7030/11375.

Lim Don Hing, a student, was 18 years old when he arrived in Port of Seattle on 22 August 1938 on the S.S. Princess Marguerite. His father, Lim Sin (Thin), had recently died in Detroit, Michigan and Lim Don Hing would be joining his extended family there. He was classified as the son of a citizen. He was originally denied admittance but was approved almost five months later. He was held in detention during that time.

The Immigration Board of Special Inquiry denied Lim Don Hing’s admission to the United States on the grounds that he was not the son of the man claimed to be his father and he was not a member of an exempt class according to the Immigration Act of 1924. The chairman of the board summarized the case and listed the discrepancies between the testimony of the applicant and his cousin, Lim Lin Foon, age 14; and his uncle, Lim Quong, the witnesses. The applicant’s testimony was taken in Seattle and the witnesses’ were interrogated in Detroit. The discrepancies listed were:
1. The location of his house in his village
2. The school he and his cousins attended
3. The space between the ancestral hall school and a vacant house in front of the hall
4. Who lived in the first house, third row of their village
5. If there was a wall on one side of the village
6. Who accompanied his cousin when they left the village for the United States
7. If he ever saw his cousins at Suey Boo market
8. Whether his cousins’ mother had any dental work done
9. If they cleaned the graves of their ancestors when they visited the cemetery in 1938
10. Whether his uncle, Lim Quong, sent money to their house three years earlier
11. Although the applicant and his cousin identified themselves in two photographs, neither knew when the photo was taken [The photo was taken when they were young boys.]
The documents used in his case were the photographs, his father’ death certificate, over forty pages of testimony by the applicant and two witnesses, two Seattle exclusion files, seven San Francisco exclusion files, an affidavit, and the testimony of his attorney, John J. Sullivan.
The case was sent to U.S. Department of Labor, Immigration and Naturalization Service for review. Lim Don Hing’s admittance was approved on 10 January 1939.

“Affidavit Photos of Lim Don Hing and Lim Quong,” 1938
“Affidavit Photos of Lim Don Hing and Lim Quong,” 1938

Lim Don Hing Death Certificate

Lim Don Hing 2 boys
“Affidavit Photos of Lim Don Hing and Lim Quong,” 1938; “Death Certificate for Lim Sin (Thin)” 1938; “Photo of Lim Lin Foon and Lim Don Hing,” ca. 1928; Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Lim Don Hing case file, Seattle Box 768, 7030/11375.

Ng Yat Chin Family Portrait

family photo, Group Photo, Maps, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ng Yat Chin Portrait 1938
“Portrait of Ng Yat Chin family,“ 1938, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Ng Yat Chin case file, Seattle Box 782, 7030/11868.
Front: Ng Yat Mon, 6; Soon Shee (Ng Yat Chin’s stepmother); Ng Yat Leung, 8; Ng Yat Ming, 10
Back: Ng Sin Fun, 12 (their sister); Ng Yat Sing, 13; Ng Yat Chin, 18; Ng Yat Nom, 16; Ng Yat Hen, 15 (children of Soo Quon); Ng Yat Dong, 25 (not in photo) [ages per Chinese reckoning]
Ng Yat Chin was 16 years old when he arrived at the Port of Seattle on 11 February 1939. He was a student and admitted as a U.S. citizen, the son of a native Ng Ah Wo. His father was a Hawaiian-born U.S. citizen whose file #359-G was sent to Immigration in Seattle for their review. As the interrogation started Ng Yat Chin was reminded that it was his burden to prove that he was not subject to exclusion under any provision of the immigration and Chinese Exclusion laws, therefore having the right to enter the United States.
Ng Yat Chin was born on 12 June 1922 in Nom Chin, Lung Do section, Heung San district, China. Nom Chin was a large village with about 500 houses. Ng Yat Chin gave a very detailed description of the layout of the village and his family home. He was asked to describe his father’s double house and produce a diagram of the floor plan.
[At this point it was noted in the transcript of the interrogation that Interpreter Jick Chan replaced Interpreter Fung Ming.]
Ng Yat Chin’s father and brother also testified on his behalf. The interrogators compared a map of the house and courtyard drawn by Ng Yat Dong when he was admitted to the U.S. in November 1938 with the map Ng Yat Chin had drawn during his interrogation. The two brothers both belonged to the Boy Scouts when they lived in Nom Chin.
Ng Ah Wo was born in Hawaii and lived there until he moved to San Francisco in 1905. His citizenship status was accepted by Immigration Service on the many trips he made from the U.S. to China and back over the years.
Ng Yat Chin and his family moved to Hong Kong in 1938. His father operated Canton Noodle Company and the family lived on the third floor above the factory.
After thirty pages of interrogations and re-examinations of Ng Yat Chin, his father and brother, and in spite of minor discrepancies, Ng Yat Chin was admitted to enter the United States in March 1939.

Jeong Sing & Jeong Dong – damning evidence found in orange

Affidavit, family photo, Group Photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 damning 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.

Lin Hay (Mrs. Wong Gai Kee) and family, Portland, Oregon

Deportation, family photo, Group Photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Portrait Wong Gai family
“Wong Gai family portrait” ca. 1903, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, (Chin) Lin Hay (Mrs. Wong Gai Kee) case file, Seattle Box 65, 32/2355.
Family Portrait, ca.1903: Wong Gut Bow (born ca. 1884), Wong Gai Kee, Lin Hay (Mrs. Wong Gai), Gut Fong/Tong (born July 4, 1897) Front: twins: Gut Tung and Louie Hie (born January 1899)
(Chin) Lin Hay was born about 1863 in Gong Ming Village, Sunning District, China and first came to the United State in 1893 landing at Portland, Oregon. She arrived with her son Wong Gut Bow and daughter, Wong Toy Gew.
Wong Gut Bow died in 1903 or 1905 on a ship en route to China. He was married to Lee Shee and they had a baby daughter, Ah Gui.
In May 1907 Mrs. Wong Gai applied for admission as the returning wife of a domiciled merchant, Wong Gai, of the Gai Kee Company of Portland, Oregon. Her status was upheld based the testimony of six credible white witnesses who swore that Wong Gai had been the head of the Gai Kee Company for over twenty-five years and that he was registered by the government as a merchant. The Caucasian witnesses interviewed by John B. Sawyer, Chinese Inspector, were William Bohlander, F. H. Saylor, O.P. S. Plummer, James B. Young, F.M. Anderson and W. R. Kerrigan. They testified that Wong Gai bought and sold vegetables. Mrs. Wong Gai admittance depended of proof of Wong Gai’s status as a merchant. Mr. Sawyer carefully investigated Wong Gai’s place of business. He noted that it looked like a junk shop and did not have much inventory of goods but it had once been a thriving business. And most importantly, Wong Gai did not engage in manual labor. He kept roomers and boarders to supplement his vegetable business. Sawyer reported: “Wong Gai says he will continue producing witnesses so long as the Government is not satisfied with those examined but that no one would be better qualified to testify than those already produced.” Wong Gai kept his status as a merchant.
Mrs. Wong Gai returned with her three children, Gut Fong/Tong (born July 1897) and Gut Tung and Louie Hie (born January 1899). The twins were admitted as returning native born citizens of Portland. Her son Gut Fong/Tong, was born during her temporary visit to China, and was admitted as the minor son of a domiciled merchant. An attempt was made to bring in Ah Wong, a substitute for Mrs. Wong’s deceased son Wong Gut Bow. He was declared an impostor and was deported.

The interrogator asked Mrs. Wong Gai what doctor, White or Chinese, delivered her children. She replied, “I didn’t have any, but just did it myself.”

In 1927 Mrs. Wong Gai Kee (Chin Lin Hay), age 64, was applying for a laborer’s return certificate. Mrs. Wong’s 23-year-old son, Wong Git (Gut) Fong, also known to white people as Nick Wong, testified for his mother. He worked as a waiter at Huber’s Restaurant in Portland, Oregon. The application was given a favorable endorsement.
Other case files listed in connection with the case include files for her husband, Wong Gai; their children and grandchildren.