Category Archives: student

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.

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

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?]

Pang Jin-Feng – update with parents’ information

Alien Registration cards, Birth Certificate, fingerprints, Form 430, passport, Photographs, student, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Update of 10/08/2018 blog post for Pang Jin-Feng–Photo retake–ears not showing

The original photos of two-year old Pang Jin-Feng did not meet Immigration Services requirements regarding photos.  Pang Jin-Feng ears coveredSince the child would probably not be returning to the U.S. for many years, a photo showing her ears was needed for identification.  She was traveling with her parents Tse Sun Pang and Pao Chi Hau of Corvallis, Oregon.
“Pang Jin-Feng Form 430 photos” 1941, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Pang Jin-Feng case file, Portland Box 100, file 5017/921.

Additional information:
In July 1941 R. J. Norens, Immigration Divisional Director, returned passport No. 404999 to Tse Sun Pang, Pan Jun-Feng’s father. His student Chinese certificate and his wife’s Alien Registration Receipt Cards were also returned.

Tse Sung Pang testified that he was also known as Jin Chung Pang. He was born on 22 March 1909 in Nanchang, China and admitted into the United States on 12 January 1938 at Seattle, WA as a student. He obtained his master’s degree at the University of Minnesota in St. Paul, MN. His wife, Pao-Chi Hau, was born 16 April 1910 in Peiping, China and was admitted in January 1938 at Seattle as a student. They married on 22 March 1938 in Minnesota. Their daughter was born on 15 June 1939. In July 1940 they moved to Corvallis, Oregon so they each could work on a doctor’s degree in the soils division at Oregon State College.

Tse Sung Pang and Pao-Chi Hau both had their fingerprints taken for their files. A copy of Pang Jin-Feng’s birth certificate was submitted to Immigration but was not included in the file. Pang Jin-Feng’s application was approved.

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

Floor plans for Schoolhouse in Gong Mee Village, China

Affidavit, floor plans, Interrogation, photos, reference sheet, student, , , , , , , ,

Yee Tom Wing Schoolhouse F
“Floor plan for Schoolhouse in China, Exhibit F” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yee Ton Wing case file, Seattle Box 805,file 7030/12842.

This file contains nine floor plans for the schoolhouse and family home in Gong Mee Village, China and an affidavit with photos of Yee Ton Wing and his father, Yee Gim Cheow. Yee Ton Wing was coming to live with his father in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio.

Additional information: 11/17/2018
Yee Ton Wing was 16 years old when he arrived in the Port of Seattle with his 12- year old brother, Yee Ton Yow, on 2 February 1940. They were students joining their father in Ohio. The transcript of Yee Ton Wing’s first interrogation was nine single-spaced typed pages long. (Eventually there were almost fifty pages of questioning.) Most of the inquiry pertained to his extended family and their village. He correctly identified photographs of his alleged father, grandfather, and uncles. He was asked things like: Where does your mother keep the rice that she cooked for your family? Who lives in the house on the first lot in the 4th row in your village? What are that person’s occupation, age, and the names of his children?
There were five diagrams of the floor plan of the schoolhouse in Gong Mee Village. They were made by the applicant, his younger brother, their grandfather, Yee Bock; their paternal uncle, Yee Gim Gin (Gane); and Yee Gim Cheow, a witness. The witness’ diagram looked considerably different than the other four. There were four diagrams of the floor plan of the 1st and 2nd floors of the family home. They were all in agreement.

Yee Ton Wing House Diagam I
“Floor plan of family home in China, Exhibit I” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Yee Ton Wing case file, Seattle Box 805,file 7030/12842.

Yee Ton Wing and his brother Yee Ton Yow were interrogated on 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 March 1940 and finally admitted to the United States on 25 April 1940 as citizens and as the sons of Yee Gim Cheow, a citizen.
The reference sheet in the file contains the file numbers, names, and relationships for Yee Ton Wing’s bother, grandfather, four uncles, aunt-in-law, cousin, and his mother.

Fong See – lonely and crying in detention

Affidavit, Caucasian witnesses, Photographs, student, Witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Fong See arrived at the Port of Seattle on the S.S. Iroquois on 22 May 1911. She was applying to be admitted to the United States as the lawful wife of Lee Yew, a merchant at On Lee Company in Portland, Oregon.  Ellis DeBruler, Immigration Commissioner, wanted to expedite her landing. She was forty-six years old with bound feet; the only Chinese woman in the detention house. She was suffering from extreme loneliness and cried a great deal.

Fong See & Lee Yew 1910 Affidavit photos
“Fong See & Lee Yew Affidavit Photos” 1910, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Fong See case file, Portland Box 13,file 2409.

On 10 September 1910 Lee Yew made an affidavit to establish his status as a Chinese merchant and that of his wife, Fong See, as the wife of a merchant so she could join him and his son in Portland.

E. Hussey, Acting Chinese Inspector in Seattle reported to J. H. Barbour, Inspector in Charge in Portland, that after inspecting the premises of the On Lee Company, reviewing its partnership list and interviewing two Caucasian witnesses, Thomas G. Farrell and John B. Coffey, he was satisfied with Lee Yew’s status as a merchant

Thomas G. Farrell, age 43, testified in 1911 that he had been living in Portland for almost 43 years. He was a merchant in wholesale groceries on Front Street. He knew many Chinese and was acquainted with Lee Yew for five or six years. Lee Yew bought his poultry and eggs from Farrell so he was at Farrell’s business at least once a week.

John B. Coffey was in the tailoring business in the Elks Building and had been living in Portland for twenty-five years. He knew many Chinese socially and through his work. He and Lee Yew were acquainted in Salem, Oregon before Lee Yew came to Portland. Coffey was a witness for Lee Yew when his son came to the U.S.

After Inspector Hussey was satisfied that Lee Yew’s mercantile status was established, he interrogated Lee Sun Hing, the son of Fong See and Lee Yew.

Lee Sun Hing was born in China and arrived in the U.S. at Sumas, Washington in 1908 and was admitted as the minor son of a merchant. He was a student and after his Lee Yew’s death he inherited his father’s interest in the On Lee Company.

Lew Yew was too sick to testify about his status as a merchant and his marriage to Fong See when she arrived in Seattle in 1911. He died within a few months after Fong See’s arrival.

Fong See was admitted as the lawful wife of Lee Yew and went to live above the On Lee Company store in Portland with her son.