Tag Archives: laundryman

Lock Yet – Laborer to Merchant – Olympia to Holquim

Affidavit, Certificate of Residence, laborer's return certificate, Lost Certificate, merchant, Status Change, White witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In 1901 Lock Yet, a Chinese laborer from Olympia, Washington, wanted to visit his family in China, stay for one year, and bring his son back to the U.S. He filled out all the necessary paperwork according to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. He wanted to assure that he would be able return to the U.S. with his son. In an affidavit, Lock Yet stated that he had been a resident of Olympia since 1894. He had applied for and received a Certificate of Residence #43944. He described himself as thirty-eight years old, shallow complexion, brown eyes, and very large thick lips. The Act required that a laborer wanting to leave be owed more than $1,000 that could only be collected when he return. Lock How, Lock Wing, and Lock Sing, all from Olympia, each owed him more than $400, fulfilling the requirement. Lock Yet completed his affidavit by attaching a photo of himself.

“Lock Yet, Affidavit, page 1” 1901, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Lock Yet, Box RS256, file RS32260.
“Lock Yet, Affidavit, page 1” 1901, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Lock Yet, Box RS256, file RS32260.

P. J. O’Brien and W. W. Bellman were Lock Yet’s witnesses. Their testimony agreed with Lock Yet’s. G. C. Israel, a Notary Public, also swore in an affidavit that he had personal known the witnesses for the past five years, they were reputable businessmen living in Olympia, and their statement were trueful.

Lock Yet hoped to leave from Port Townsend. There are no documents in his file showing his paperwork was approved, or that he left for China and returned with his son.

The next documents in the file are from August 1913. Lock Yet left Olympia by train to Hoquiam, Grays Harbor, Washington. He lost his Certificate of Residence somewhere on the tripso he applied for a new one and attached a current photo of himself in American clothes. His attorney, Sidney Moor Heath, sent a letter to the Immigration Office in Seattle explaining the situation. Lock Lad, owner of the Foo Lee Laundry, in Hoquiam, testified that he had known Lock Yet for twenty-five years and had seen his original certificate in the past but neither of them could find it. Parker Ellis, Immigrant Inspector, wrote a letter In October 1913 regarding the lost certificate. Ellis mentioned Lock Yet’s 1901 visit to China.  Ellis DeBruler, Immigration Commissioner at Aberdeen, wrote back saying that Lock Yet was admitted through the Aberteen port in late 1902 and had his certificate with him at the time. Lock Yet’s Certificate of Residence was officially declared lost and a duplicate #144502 was issued to him.

In October 1914, Lock Yet applied for a Return Certificate. He swore in an affidavit that he was fifty years old, a resident of Hoquiam, Washington for the last year, after living in Olympia for twenty years and had no relatives in the United States. His marriage name was Jung Lun. His wife and son, Lock Sang, age 13, were living in his native village. He stated that he made a trip to  China in 1901 and return in 1902. [This trip  is not recorded in his file.] Liw Ting swore in an affidavit that he owed Lock Yet $1,000. Liw Ting was fifty-three years old, the owner of Nanking Noodle House in Hoquiam and knew Lock Yet for fifteen years. Lock Yet’s application was approved and he left for Git Lung, Sunning district, China. When he returned in November 1915, he told Immigration that another son, Lock Ying, was born shortly before he left China to return to the United States.         

Lock Yet, 1914, Application of Lawfully Domiciled Chinese Laborer Return Certificate, Form 432,
“Application of Lawfully Domiciled Chinese Laborer Return Certificate, Form 432,” 1914, CEA,
RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Lock Yet, File RS32260.

   In 1918, Lock Yet wanted to change his status from laborer to merchant so he could bring his older son over from China to live with him. He now had a $300 interest in the Kung Yick Company and was working as a salesman. His salary was $25 a month. In October, Lock Yet applied for a Preinvestigation of Status as a Merchant. Immigration Inspector G. H. Mangels interviewed Lock Yet at the store, in his sickbed. He was very ill with influenza. He denied working as a laundryman, oyster fisherman, cannery man, or other manual labor during the last twelve months. He stated that he had been to China twice. In 1901 he left from Seattle and returned in 1902 through Port Townsend. [This 1901-1902 trip information is not documented in the file.] His second trip was in 1913 when he went through Seattle and returned in 1914. His status was a laborer both times.

[According to the Exclusion Act, it was necessary to have two white witnesses who were U.S. citizens, swear in an affidavit that the Chinese person wishing to be classified as a merchant had been a merchant during the last full year and had done no manual labor. The white witnesses were considered more credible than Chinese witnesses.]

Grant Talcott, a fifty-four-year-old jeweler who had lived in Olympia since 1873 was interviewed by Immigration Inspector G. H. Mangels. Talcott said he was acquainted with most of the Chinese in Olympia, and he recognized a photo of Lock Yet. Even though he had known Lock Yet for twenty-five to thirty years, he didn’t know his name. He called him “boy.” Talcott saw Lock Yet in the vicinity of the Kung Yick Company so he assumed he had some business there. The Inspector questioned if Talcott knew much about Lock Yet. Talcott admitted that he signed the affidavit that Tom O’Leary prepared without inspecting it closely.

Joseph Zemberlin was also a witness for Lock Yet. He swore that he was fifty years old, a fish dealer who lived in Olympia for over thirty years. He had known Lock Yet for about one and a half years. He saw him working in the store many times.

George G. Mills, testified that he had lived in Olympia for fifty-two years, since he was an infant. He was a hardware merchant. He was acquainted with all the Chinese in Olympia. He rambled on about how he probably saw Lock Yet in town or at the store.

Inspector Mangels interviewed Lock You, the manager of Kung Yick Company. The Inspector noted that they had Lock You’s family history from when they interviewed him when his son was admitted. There were ten members of his firm; four were active. They sold Chinese general merchandise and had about $1,400 in inventory. Lock You also ran the Lew Café where he employed six people, including two white women. Mangels reviewed the partnership and salary books

Inspector Mangels wrote up a summary of the interviews for the Seattle Immigration Office. He said Mills and Talcott were both men of high standing and that they positively identified Lock Yet’s photo. He did not place as much confidence in Zamberlin’s testimony.

[After reading Mangles reaction to Talcott’s testimony, it was surprising that he had more confidence in Talcott’s testimony than in Zamberlin’s.]

Mangels was impressed with Lock Yet’s knowledge of the store’s goods and prices and that despite Lock Yet being very ill, he testified to obtain his certificate. He thought Lock Yet had become a merchant just so his son could enter the country and then would probably go back to being a laborer.

Lock Yet’s status as a merchant was approved.

There is no information in the file to show when or if Lock Yet left for China and returned to the U.S.

Huie Taong  – Restaurant Owner, The New York Café, Ellensburg, WA

Application for laborer's return certificate, Certificate of Residence, Geary Act of 1892, hookworm, laborer, Marriage name, minor son of merchant, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Huie Taong arrived in the U.S. at the Port of San Francisco in 1872. From there he went to Ellensburg, Washington, and worked as a cook and ran a laundry.  As a laborer, according the 1892 Geary Act which renewed the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, he was required to obtain a Certificate of Residence. His certificate described him as a laundryman, thirty-seven years old, five feet three and three-fourth inches, with a scar in the center of his forehead. It was signed and dated May 3, 1894 by Henry Blackman, the Collector of Internal Revenue in Portland, Oregon. Huie Taong’s photograph was attached to the document.

“Certificate of Residence No. 127194, Huie Taong, 1894, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Huie Taong , Seattle Box 44, file 31-223.

In 1905 Huie Taong applied for a Return Certificate so he could go to China and legally return to the U.S. He swore in an affidavit that he had property worth more the $1,000. It consisted of a one-fourth interest in the California Restaurant in Ellensburg, Kittitas County, Washington, valued at about $2,000. His interest was $500. Suey Gin owed him about $700 and Lew Fong owed him $500.

Affidavit for Application for Return Certificate, 1905, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Huie Taong Box 44, file 31-223.

The information in affidavits by Suey Gin and Lew Fong agreed with Huie Taong.
Eight Ellensburg residents signed a statement certifying that the knew Huie Taong and believed his statement was true. They were: O. Henman, Post Office; L. R. Thomas, Sheriff; M E. Flynn, Mayor; J. C. Hubbell, Mgr. Water Co; P. H. W Ross, banker; E. H. Snowden, banker; B. F. Reed, Creamery Proprietor; Austin Mires, City Attorney.

The Chinese Inspector, Mr. A. F. Richardson, visited the California Restaurant several times and was impressed with the people and the place. The restaurant was leased to Wing Yick Tong Company from J. E. Farrell for $50 a month. Because it was doing such a good business, Richardson recommended that Huie Taong’s Return Certificate be approved.

Huie Taong returned from his trip to China to Port Townsend, Washington, and was admitted as a laborer on 31 March 1906. He was forty-six years old, weighed 154 pounds, stout with a large brown mark inside his left forearm, a large scar about two inches long in the center of his forehead, and moles on his jaws and temple. Lew Fong and Suey Gin still owed him over $1,000. He did not have an official note but he kept a small book where he recorded the amounts owed him.

On 24 October 1908, Huie Taong applied to go to China again as a laborer. His “baby name” was Huie Doo Taong and his “marriage name” was Huie Tai Ball. He still had a $500 interest in the California Restaurant and debts due from Suey Gim and Lew Fong. He attached a current photo of himself to the application. The interrogator warned Huie Taong that he must return to the United States with one year and that during his absence his property must not be disposed of, or his debts collected.

Huie Foy was a witness for this trip. He was forty-five years old, born in China, had a Certificate of Registration, and owned the Loy Lee Laundry in Ellensburg. He came to the U.S. in 1882 and bought his laundry from Hop Lee in 1907. He had been back to China twice. He had known Huie Taong for about twenty years and owed him $500.

Sam Wah was also a witness for Huie Taong. He was in the hop business and a partner in the California Restaurant which he described as the best business in town. The prices were so low for hops the last two years that he borrowed $700 from Huie Taong.

Huie Taong’s application was approved on in late November 1908 and a few weeks late he left for China.

Huie Taong returned to Ellensburg in November 1909.  In his interview for admission, he said that while he was in China he and his wife had adopted a seven-year-old boy named Huie Hong Jack whose birthplace in China was not known.

Huie Taong applied for another trip to China in November 1912. He based his application on having a $1,000 deposit at the Washington National Bank of Ellensburg. His Return Certificate was approved.

Huie Taong returned to China in October 1913. His wife had died and he remarried. His current wife and adopted son were in China.

In July 1920 Hui Taong, now using his complete name, Huie Doo Taong, was the chief owner and manager of a large restaurant wanted to change his status from laborer to merchant so he could bring his family to the U.S.  He asked his lawyer, Mr. E. E. Wagen, to help him. Wagen told him that since he managed a large restaurant and did no manual labor, he should be considered a merchant under the Chinese Exclusion Law. The New York Café, did between $40,000 and $50,000 in business per year.

Wagen checked with Hon. Henry M. White, Commissioner of Immigration who told the attorney the rules and documents needed:

“The practice is for the father to have drawn up an affidavit by himself in which his present status is described and information given as to his right of domicile in the country. In this affidavit he should mention something about his family in China, especially the son he purposes having join him in this country. To this affidavit there should be attached a photograph of both the father and the son. The foregoing paper should be supplemented by the joint affidavit of two white persons who the status of the father during the last past year. These men should be prepared to state definitely what the particular daily work of the applicant has been during the year. The practice is to prepare the affidavit in duplicate, to send the duplicate to this office for filing and future use, and the original to the boy in China to be used by him in obtaining transportation to the country.”

“Under the supreme court decision which permits the minor sons of exempts to come to this country, it is particularly stated that they are admitted to assume the exempt status of their resident parent. Under the law, therefore, such persons cannot become laborers while in the United States. It would be contrary to the law for Huie Doo Taong to bring his son to this country to place him in school for a short time, and then to have him work as a laborer, no matter if working for him in his own restaurant.”1

After hearing that he qualified as a merchant, Huie Doo Taong started the process to bring his son, Huie Hong Jack, to the U.S. to continue his education. Attorney Wagen swore in an affidavit that he knew Huie personally, that Huie had done no manual labor in the last year, and he had filed Huie’s income tax return with an income of more than $90,000 for the café for the year 1919. Huie filed an affidavit with all the pertinent information and included photos of himself and his son. The paperwork was approved and Huie sent it to the Consulate in Hongkong.  

Huie Hong Jack arrived at the Port of Seattle on 6 January 1921. He completed the interrogation process but was found to have hookworm. He received hospital treatment and when he was certified disease free, he was admitted to the U.S. as the minor son of a domiciled Chinese merchant on 28 January 1921.

Huie Taong made is final trip to China in December 1923 and there is no indication from his file that he returned to the United States.

Thank you, National Archives CEA volunteer, Lily Eng, for alerting me to this file and making copies for me. Lily’s grandfather worked at the New York Café as a waiter and became a partner in the early 1930s. Her father worked there when he first immigrated to the U.S. until he started his own restaurant in Yakima in 1951.

  1. “White to Wagen, Correspondence 35038/372, 19 July 1920,” CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Huie Taong, file 31-223.

Chear Cheo CHIN 陳超 (1871 – 1939) by Kevin Lee

bound feet, Chinese Exclusion Act, File, laborer, merchant, Partnership list, Seattle City Directory, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

[A big thank you to Kevin Lee for sharing his family stories on the blog.]

Chear Cheo CHIN 陳超 (1871 – 1939) by Kevin Lee
Better known in English as Cheo CHIN or CHIN Cheo, he spent 58 years of his 67½ year lifetime as a resident of the United States. He was born CHAN Don Fun (pronounced Gon Foon in the local Toisan dialect) on 22 August 1871 in the village of Mi Kong (Mai Gong), Hoi Ping (Kaiping) county, Kwangtung (Guangdong) Province, Imperial China.

He was the 2nd out of 6 consecutive generations – soon to be 7th– of my family to have lived, for a lengthy period of time, in Seattle, Washington State.

CHIN Cheo became “a well-known merchant in Seattle” (as described by Henry A. Monroe, Notary Public, lawyer and later U.S. Commissioner of Immigration), having established the Wing Sang store in Washington over a century ago.

Much of his life was pieced together from his sizeable 60 page National Archives file (almost 1 page for every year in the United States), case # 39184/2-12 (previously 682, 15844 and 30206) located at Sand Point Way, Seattle, along with his 2 Seattle-based sons’ case file numbers 28104 and 7031/325.

He was originally accompanied by his rice-farmer father, CHAN Gin Heung AKA CHIN Yen Hing (1845/46 – 1918/19), on a 21-day voyage across the Pacific Ocean to San Francisco, California in 1881 (“KS 7” or during Emperor Kuang-Su’s 7th year of reign), aged 9½ years old.

The hazardous journey across the wide ocean was made possible by Britain defeating Imperial China in 2 Opium Wars, which opened up 5 ports (including Canton and Hong Kong – both nearby to Mi Kong village) for Western trade, and the 1868 Burlingame Treaty (which legitimised Chinese citizens’ ability to emigrate to the USA). China was a poor country for various reasons (foreign intrusion and pilfering of riches, corruption of the Manchu government, floods and droughts) and therefore, men needed a way to support their families.

As discovered by reading the case file of CHIN Cheo, the borders into the USA prior to 1882 were porous. CHIN Cheo and his father, CHAN Gin Heung AKA CHIN Yen Hing, arrived into the port of San Francisco without any identity documents, stating to an Immigration Inspector decades later, that “we carried no papers at that time.”

Chinese immigrants – almost entirely males – came in droves; 300,000 arrived into the United States from the time of discovery of gold in California in 1849 until the enactment of the Chinese Exclusion Act (CEA) in 1882. When the CEA was passed through Congress and signed-off (after an initial veto) by the U.S. President Chester Arthur, it stemmed the flow of Chinese immigrants when it became a trickle for over 60 years, until it was repealed in 1943.

CHIN Cheo was determined to establish his life in Seattle, as a man of respect in the Chinese community. On the other hand, his father decided that he needed to head back to Mi Kong, China, to see his wife, Tom shee (my great great grandmother), after spending 13 years in the United States working as a laundryman.

CHIN Cheo studied English in Seattle, until about 12 years old. He then began working as a laborer (his tanned complexion from photos in his NARA case file suggests some time was spent outdoors), as a cook in Fort Madison, WA, and finally as a merchant/businessman for over 2 decades in the Chinatown International District. He accumulated significant savings, which he trustingly lent to other Chinese citizens to establish businesses in Seattle. Presumably, he was able to recover all the funds that he had lent out, as he lived a comfortable life in Seattle. Some of his funds, unfortunately, were gambled away by playing mahjong onboard steamships to China in 1899, 1903, 1912, 1919 and on ships returning to the USA in 1900, 1904, 1913 and 1921. Each of his 4 trips back to China, as an adult, produced a child or the adoption of a child.

CHIN Cheo was the organiser, founder, and managing partner of the Wing Sang Company (Seattle) also known as Wing Sang & Co., Seattle, in November 1908 (Chinese calendar) or December 1908 (Western calendar).

The 12 partners each put in capital of US$500, however, only 3 – 4 were active at any one time and drew a salary of US$50 per month. The first 7 partners listed below were specifically named by CHIN Cheo during Immigration interviews, with the last 5 assumed to be:

  1. CHIN Cheo
  2. CHONG Chew – the only one who held a US$600 partnership share
  3. CHIN Sinn / Sing / Sim AKA Dan Way – the bookkeeper
  4. MAW Wing Lee A.K.A. MAH Lee
  5. Sho Hong
  6. CHEONG Lai (pronounced Cheng Ai) – lived in Bremerton, WA
  7. TAN Wing (pronounced Ton Wing) – lived in Bremerton, WA  
  8. GAR Fun
  9. Mar Dan
  10. Bing Tong (named in the 1915 Seattle City Directory)
  11. Foo Loan (named in the 1922 Seattle City Directory)
  12. Kwan You (named in a 1930 Seattle Times advertisement)

The Wing Sang Company / Wing Sang & Co., Seattle sold general Chinese merchandise including rice, tea, wine, oil, miscellaneous goods, herbs, drugs/medicines. It held inventory valued at US$2,000 in October 1911, and US$3,000 in December 1912 and April 1926.

The Wing Sang Company / Wing Sang & Co., Seattle was variously located at:

  • 655 – 659 Weller Street (January 1910);                                                                                                
  • 415 – 417 7th Avenue South, Telephone: Elliott 1576W (1911 – 1921);                                      
  • 412 Seventh Ave South (1922 – beyond 1930).                                                                                   

CHIN Cheo was also simultaneously a silent partner in Sang Loon Company / Sang Yuen Co. , having purchased a US$500 interest in 1923. It was newly-opened at 660 King Street, Seattle that year. He then became an active partner on 2 June 1930, ordering groceries, doing-up packages, marking-up prices, and arranging delivery to customers.

He resided at the back of the shop of Wing Sang (Seattle) for 2 decades, and then moved to an upper level apartment above the Sang Loon/Yuen Company in 1930.

CHIN Cheo was determined in life to leave a legacy inside both the village of Mi Kong, China (where his house and treasure chest are currently owned by his adopted son’s son) and in Seattle, USA (where his personal effects such as hat, ties, and spectacles are still being kept by a great granddaughter).

CHIN Cheo left behind 3 blood-related children, via Love SEETO or SEE TOW shee, who have all featured on this Seattle blog website (in addition to a 4th child – an adopted son from the markets near Mi Kong):

CHIN Cheo brought children into this world (the 1st born was in 1900 at age 29) and grandchildren (the 1st born was in 1926 when he was 55) – yet he never really knew them.

His 1st wife, Love SEETO was born in 1875 in Ngo Lew How village, in the Chikan (Chek-ham) region, Hoiping county, was foot-bound, and became heart-broken in 1918 upon learning that their no. 1 son, CHIN Wing Quong died in Seattle at the young age of 18 from self-medicating.

His 2nd wife was FONG / FUNG shee, whom he married at age 49 in 1920 (the 10th year of the Republic of China or “Rep. 10”) during his final trip back to Mi Kong village. He had no children with her, during the brief time he spent with her, before he sailed out of Hong Kong on board the S.S. Empress of Japan on 20 September 1921.

In a quirk of history, his granddaughter Siu Lung Yu’s 余小濃 future husband had a grandfather, LEE Sing Lip (1906 – 1993) and great grandfather, CHENG Fai Sin, both living in Seattle & Vancouver during the early 1900’s, and whom CHIN Cheo most likely knew.

He finally died on Monday 6 March 1939 at 11PM due to cancer of the sigmoid, a part of the bowel, after suffering obstructions for 17 days, and was buried in the Old Chinese Section of Mount Pleasant Cemetery, 700 West Raye Street, Seattle. Hundreds turned out for his funeral, where he was addressed as 陳公 (pronounced as “Chun gūng“) meaning Elder CHAN or Mr CHAN, Senior – a mark of respect for one of Seattle’s early and most reputable Chinese merchants.

Application of lawfully domiciled Chinese merchant, teacher, or student for pre investigation of status, made by 41-year-old CHIN Cheo 陳超, manager of Wing Sang Co., 17 December 1912, National Archives-Seattle file #39184/2-12
CHIN Cheo 陳超 AKA CHIN Don Foon’s family relationships (including the author’s grandmother CHIN Hai Soon AKA “Ah Shoon, age 11, Female”) summarised onto 1 page by 2 U.S. Immigration Inspectors, after arriving back to Seattle on 10 October 1921 from his final trip ever in China, National Archives-Seattle file #39184/2-12
55-year-old merchant CHIN Cheo 陳超 standing behind the counter of Wing Sang Company / Wing Sang & Co., located at 412 Seventh Ave South Seattle, on Saturday 12 December 1926. 2 nd from left, sitting on the bar stool, is his recently-sponsored 13-year-old son, Donald Wing Ung CHIN 陳榮 棟 [photo courtesy of Julie A. Chan]
Descendants of CHIN Cheo 陳超 in December 1981 / January 1982 at his 77-year-old daughter CHIN Hai Soon / CHAN Mei Chen’s 陳美珍 matrimonial house in Num Bin Toon / Chuen (the Yee village) [photo courtesy of Kevin Lee]
Descendants of CHIN Cheo 陳超 in November 2013 at his Mi Kong (Mai Gong) village house [photo courtesy of Julie A. Chan]
Final resting place of CHIN Cheo 陳超 with his and Love SEETO / SEE TOW shee’s portraits, in the Old Chinese section of Mount Pleasant Cemetery, 700 West Raye Street, Seattle [photo courtesy of Kevin Lee]