Tag Archives: Montana

Lee Ah Jung & Wong Gun Fook – Helena, Montana

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Chew Fen – Merchant then Laborer – Butte, Seattle, Bismarck

Affidavit, Certificate of Identity, Certificate of Residence, Chinese Overtime Certificate, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On 12 April 1897 the following residents of the city of Butte, Silver Bow County, Montana each swore that he is acquainted with Chew Fen and that they had known him three years or more, that Chew Fen is not a laborer, he was a partner of the firm of Po Ning Tong & Company, dealers in general Chinese merchandise; and doing business at #9 West Calena street in Butte; he was not engaged in manual labor during the last year except as was necessary in the conduct of his business as a merchant, and that he was about to leave for China with the intention of returning to the United States. The affidavit was signed by: Charles. T. Lomas, general merchandise; J. A. Murray, banker; J. S. Hammond, M.D. physician, and witnessed by Francis Brooks, Notary Public.

“Chew Fen, admittance form,” 1898, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Chew Fen (Jung Won Lai), Box 901, File 7032/805.

Chew Fen returned the following year. He was thirty-five years old, a merchant for Po Ping [Ning] Tong & Co., Butte, Montana, was admitted to the United States at Port Townsend, Washington, on 19 August 1898. His admittance form says that he had a scar on the back of his left ear and small scars on the back of his neck. He had lived in San Francisco for ten years and Butte for six years. He could not speak English. He said there were cable and electric cars in Butte, there was no grass in Butte, and it was smoky and foggy. He may have been mixing up some of the characteristics of San Francisco and Butte.

On 22 July 1914 Chew Fen, applied to visit China. He testified that he was 49 years old, his married name was Jung Woon Lai, and his boyhood name was Jung Shu Fun. He had a certificate of deposit for $1,000 at Miners Savings Bank & Trust Co. in Butte. He signed his name in Chinese characters. His application was approved.

He returned on 21 July 1915. When questioned he gave the same information as when he left but added that his wife, Fong She was 39 years old, and had natural feet. He was admitted and received his certification of identity.

In May 1918, Chew Fen applied for a trip to China as a laborer. He gave his married name as Tian Wan Lai, and his boyhood name as Tian Chew Fen. There is no explanation about why these names are different than the names he gave in earlier interrogations. He first entered the U.S. at San Francisco in KS 8 [1882]. He was now living in Butte, Montana and was a laundryman for Wing Lee Laundry. He had been a merchant with the Ho Ning Hong [Po Ning Tong] & Company for seven years until the business closed.

Chew Fen returned in April 1919 and gave his marriage name as Jung Woon Lai. He testified that he had not taken any letters, money, packages, or messages from anyone in the U.S. to give to anyone in China. He had not visited with a U.S. resident or the resident’s home while in China. And he had not attended a wedding of a U.S. resident or the son of a resident. These were common questions asked of returning Chinese. Immigration probably wanted to be sure that the traveler wasn’t laying the groundwork for a “paper son” to come to the U.S. Chew Fen was admitted by a unanimous vote when he returned in May 1919 and he received his certificate of identity.

Chew Fen was living in Seattle when he applied to visit China in October 1922. His witness was Jung Bong, a cannery worker with a certificate of residence who had never been out of the United States. When Chew Fen returned to Seattle in 1923 his medical examination found that he had clonorchiasis “liver fluke, a dangerous, contagious disease.” He was detained, denied admission, and deported on 25 October 1923, a little over three weeks after he arrived.

Chew Fen was reexamined in December 1923 and was disease free. In spite of this, his certificate of identity was cancelled in May 1924. Written in red ink across an 1898 memo from James G. Swan, Port Townsend Immigration Commissioner, “Seattle, Wash., July 29, 1915, Canceled, Certificate of Identity, issued this day [signed] G. H. Mangels, Inspr.”

“Immigration Memo re: Chew Fen,” 1924, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Chew Fen,7032/805.

Chew Fen did not give up easily. He applied for readmittance in November 1924 and obtained a Nonquota Immigration Visa. Maurice Walk, American Vice Consul at Hong Kong certified a Chinese Overtime Certificate for Chew Fen and F. Pierce Grove, M.D. PhD declared Chew healthy. Chew Fen, age 57, was admitted and received a new certificate of identity shortly after he arrived at the Port of Seattle on 27 December 1924. He gave his place of residence as Bismarck, South Dakota.

“Chew Fen, Nonquota Visa” 1924, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Chew Fen,7032/805.

Chew Fen applied for a return certificate in December 1930, but the application was cancelled in June 1931. It doesn’t say who cancelled the application–immigration or Chew Fen. No reason was given and there was no more information in the file. [I have been unable to find more information from various sources.]

Ah Soon – Merchant/broker to Laborer 1913-1915

Application for laborer's return certificate, Application for return certificate as merchant, Overtime Certificate, White witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This is a continuation of Ah Soon’s 1899-1907 file posted on the blog on 27 April 2023

Quick summary of the earlier post:
Ah Soon’s file starts in 1899, when as a cook (laborer) living in Helena, Montana, he is applying to visit China. He returns in 1900. In 1907 he was a merchant living in Seattle working for Ah King Company. He visited China again in 1907 and returned in 1909.

There is no activity in Ah Soon’s file from 1909 to February 1913.

28 Feb 1913
Ah Soon applied to travel aboard under the provisions of Rule 15 of the Regulations of the Department of Commerce and Labor with the status of a domiciled broker. He had merchant status and claimed that he owned 2,000 shares of the Canton Province Mining Company in Seattle.

Ah Soon, Form 431, Application of Lawfully Domiciled Chinese Merchant, Teacher, or Student, for Preinvestigation of Status, 28 Feb 1913, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Ah Soon file, Seattle RS Box 219, RS30384.

3 March 1913
White witness, George F. Ober, a thirty-nine-year-old mining engineer in Seattle, testified that he had lived in Seattle for over three years. He knew Ah Soon was a merchant and real estate broker who bought and sold restaurants and laundries. Soon worked with Wong Shin How at a curio exhibit for an Ah King concern at the Alaska Yukon Pacific Exposition in Seattle in1909. Ah Soon was a stockholder in the Canton Province Mining Company and sold shares of the company on commission. The Mining Investment officers and trustees were President: Ah King; Vice President: Thomas W. Snaith; Secretary and Treasurer: George F. Ober; Trustee L.L. Thorp; Managers: Yee Onlai, Assistant Secretary: Louie Kee.

Ah Soon, “Mining Investment,” CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, RS Box 219, RS30384.

Joseph H. Beaven, another white witness, stated that he was fifty-four years old and a superintendent of Baptist mission work. He had known Ah Soon about twenty years. Ah Soon was employed and a stockholder at the Ah King Company. About twenty years ago Ah Soon was a cook at a restaurant in Spokane but presently had an interest in his brother’s store, the Ah King Company.

Later that day, Ah Soon testified that he had misplaced his certificate of residence but was classified as a merchant. He was a mining stockbroker, living at the Ken Chung Lung Store in Seattle. He owned 2,000 shares in the Canton Province Mining Company. He paid $.06 to acquire a share and got 15% commission on every dollar’s worth of stock he sold. He had sold over $2,000 worth of stock in a little over two years. He also sold goods on commission from the Ken Chong Lung Company. He denied doing any manual labor in the past twelve months. He signed his statement in Chinese characters.

12 March 1913
A letter from the Ellis DeBruler, Immigration Commissioner, stated that he was not satisfied that Ah Soon met the requirements to receive a return certificate as a domiciled exempt broker. DeBruler thought Ah Soon’s white witnesses also could not testify that he met the requirements.

20 March 1913
J. V. Stewart, Chinese Inspector, put a note dated 20 March 1913, into Ng Ah Soon file saying that he found Ng Ah Soon acting as cashier in the Peking restaurant in Tacoma, Washington. And J. A. Wilkens, A.S. Fulton, and watchman Sylvester, were witnesses also.

Ah Soon, “Stewart Note,”1913, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, RS Box 219, RS30384.

8 July 1913
Ah Soon testified that his “baby name” was Gong Sen, Hock (Hok) Fong was his marriage name, and his American name was Ah Soon. He was fifty years old, born in Har Ping village, Sun Ning District, China. He originally came to the U.S. through San Francisco. He had been back to China twice, in KS 24 or 25 (1898 or 1899), returning KS 26 (1900) through Port Townsend as a laborer. He went to China in KS 33(1907)  and returned in 1909 through Seattle as a merchant and a member of Ah King Company. In 1913 he was living in Tacoma and working as a laborer at the New York Laundry. He earned $40 per month. Charley Dan owned the laundry. He based his claim for a return certificate on his loan to Charley Dan for $1,100 so Charley could buy an interest in the Peking Café and buy a laundry. Ah Soon got the money from his brother, Ah King, [sometimes he says Ah King was his cousin] when he sold his interest in the Ah King Company store in Seattle. 

Ah Soon was married to Lou Shee. They had two children, a boy and a girl. Their son, Gong Sen/Kwong Sin was born in 1908, was six years old and their daughter, Ah Que, was about fourteen years old.

Ah Soon was cautioned that he should not collect any part of his loan to Charley Dan while he was in China because it would change his status and he would not be able to return to the U.S. Ah Soon signed his statement in Chinese and English. Charley Dan, baby name Men Dan, was his witness. Dan was married and twenty-eight years old. He and his wife and fifteen-month-old daughter, Annie Dan, were living at the laundry at 1508 South D Street in Tacoma. Dan was a native-born citizen. He went to China when he was six years old, returning when he was nineteen years old and was admitted at Port Townsend.

9 July 1913
A letter from the Immigrant Inspector in Tacoma to the Commissioner of Immigration in Seattle, confirmed that Ah Soon was issued a Certificate of Residence #14906 as a laborer at Helena, Montana on 24 Feb 1894. [Ah Soon status was changed from a merchant to a laborer.]

Ah Soon, “Letter 30,564,”1913, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, RS Box 219, RS30384.

5 August 1913
Ah Soon made another trip to China.

8 April 1915
Ah Soon was unable to return within the allowed one-year period because he was sick with rheumatism. He provided corroborative statements by Chin Gee Hee and Ng Kun. Ah Soon obtained a Chinese Overtime Certificate.

Ah Soon, “Overtime Certificate 25/1915,”1915, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, RS Box 219, RS30384.

9 May 1915
Ah Soon returned from China in May. Upon his arrival he testified that a son, Quong Ock was born after he left China in July 1913. He now had two sons. His daughter died about 1912.

12 July 1915
Ah Soon applied for the laborer’s return certificate to return to China. He recently had made a loan of $1,000 to Mah Fook Hing, a merchant at Yik Fong Company at 705 King Street in Seattle. Hing was interviewed and although he did not sign a promissory note, he substantiated Soon’s testimony. Ah Soon planned to leave for Hong Kong on the July 17 and would be staying at the Sam Yik Company. This is the last document in his file, so he probably did not return to the U.S.




Ah Soon – Laborer then Merchant – Member of Ah King Company in Seattle

Affidavit, Application for Admission, Application for laborer's return certificate, Application for return certificate as merchant, photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ah Soon’s Chinese Exclusion Act case file starts in 1899. His affidavit, sworn on 12 April 1899 to the Honorable Collector of Customs in Port Townsend, Washington, states that he was a laborer applying for a certificate of departure. Ah Soon was a cook living in Helena, Montana when he applied.

“Ah Soon Affidavit,” 1899, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Ah Soon file, Seattle Box RS219, File RS30384.

He returned to the U.S. on 14 March 1900 with the status of laborer and was admitted.

By 1907 Ah Soon’s life had changed. He was now living in Seattle, Washington, and a merchant at the Ah King Company. In April 1907 he started the process of obtaining the necessary documents to make a trip to China. He swore in an affidavit that he was a bona fide merchant for the Ah King Company and that he had been a member of the firm for one year and did no labor except that was necessary in the conducting of business. He was visiting China to bring his wife, Louis She, and his seven- year-old daughter, Ah Keo, back with him. He would retain his interest in Ah King Company. His photo was attached to the affidavit.

“Ah Soon Affidavit,” 1907, CEA case files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Ah Soon file, RS30384.

On 26 April 1907, G. W. Upper testified concerning the application of Ah Soon for a certificate of departure and return. Upper lived at 213 18th Avenue, Seattle. His business was in the Colman Building at West and Wheeler. He had been living in Seattle for seventeen years. The Ah King Company was formerly called Wah Yuen Company and Ah King had always been the head of it. Ah Soon managed the company while Ah King was in San Francisco on business. Soon did not do manual labor. Upper was formerly a teller at the National Bank of Commerce where Ah King Company did business and Ah Soon had the authority to sign checks on the company account. Upper did not know the amount of capital stock of the company but Ah King owned the building and paid more than $30,000 for it. They had a wholesale business and supplied Chinese camps throughout the West and Northwest.

The next day, witness Charles I. Lynch was interrogated. He had been living in Seattle for twenty-two years and was employed at the Post Office for the last eight years. He recognized a photo of Ah Soon and identified him as a member of the Ah King Company. He had known him about nine months. Some of the members of the firm were Ah King, Charley Sing, Ah Foon, and Ah Soon. Besides selling Chinese merchandise, they took contracts for cannery help for five canneries. They also sold produce from a 30-acre farm south of Seattle at Duwamish Junction.

Ah Soon was re-interviewed on 2 May 1907. He said he was 44 years old; born at Har Pong Village, San Ning, Canton, China. His other name was Hock Fong. He first came to the U.S. in KS 8 (1882), arriving in California. He was married and had one daughter. He was a laborer working for his brother, Ah King in Seattle for about two years. He was in Helena, Montana before that for over ten years working as a cook at French Charlie’s. He had a $1,000 interest at the Ah King Co. which sold Chinese groceries and general merchandise. He named ten of the members of the firm who each owned a $1,000 interest in the company.

Ah Soon said there were two other people in Seattle who were from his village, Har Pang. They were Hock Hung, in Wah Yuan’s store and Ah King. He said they were cousins. [In other interviews Ah Soon said that Ah King was his brother.] Ah Chung, a farmer, was another cousin  from Har Pong living in Waitsburg, Washington.

G. W. Upper was recalled to testify on 6 May 1907. He swore that he had known Ah Soon at least four years and that he still believed that Ah Soon had been a member of Ah King Co. for more than a year. Although he had known who Ah Soon was for four years, he knew him more intimately on a business level for the last two years.

A few days later, Ah Soon was recalled to testify. He was asked how long he knew Charles I. Lynch (about two years) and G. W. Upper (about five years). The Inspector pointed out that in his previous statement, Ah Soon said that he had only known Upper for two years. Ah Soon agreed that two years was incorrect; it was about five years.

Charles I. Lynch was also recalled on 9 May. Lynch was asked about his earlier statement that he knew Ah Soon for about nine months. Lynch said that was incorrect. He knew Ah Soon for more than a year. [To qualify as a reliable witness, the witness was required to know the affiant for one year or more.] He was sure Ah Soon still had an interest in the Ah King Co.


On 10 May 1907 Ah Soon’s Application for Preinvestigation of mercantile status for his trip to China was approved. Two days later Ah Soon left on a train for Vancouver. BC to start his trip.

Ah King, manager of Ah King Company, testified on 16 June 1908 that Ah Soon was still a member of his company. Ah Soon’s re-admittance application was approved.

Ah Soon’s 1909 Application for Admission as a Merchant included the following information: Ah Soon, Hok Fong (marriage name), age 46, height 5 feet 3-3/4 inches, scar on back of left hand, wife and two children born in Har Ping, Sun Ning, China; residence at Ken Chung Lung Company, Seattle, member of company for one and one-half years, $1,000 interest in company, twelve partners, position in firm: “traveling man;”

Mar Hing, a merchant for the Ah King Company, testified that Ah Soon was a member of the company with $1,000 interest whose name appeared on the partnership books.  Ah Soon was a temporary salesman, assistant to Ah King, and sometimes a traveling salesman for the store.

Ah Soon returned to the U.S. on 13 March 1909 and was admitted at Seattle as a returning domiciled Chinese merchant.

[Ah Soon’s file from 1912 to 1915 will continue in the next blog entry.]

Hom Sit – many details about his home and village in China

Affidavit, Certificate of Identity, Form M143, House details, Maps, photos, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hom Sit, Form M143 photo, 1938

Hom Sit, the 24-year old son of U.S. citizen Hom Tin, arrived in Seattle on the SS Princess Marguerite on 22 August 1938. Although he was married (marriage name Soong Choo) he arrived alone and was going to live with his father in Butte, Montana. His testimony for his admittance was in his native dialect, See Yip. Fung Ming was the official government interpreter. Hom Sit was born on 7 September 1914 in Ung Sing Village, Chuck Hom Section of Hoy Ping District in China. He gave the following information about his father: Hom Tin (marriage name Gwong Ai) was 50 years old, born in San Francisco, California; living in Butte, Montana; and working in the restaurant business. Hom Tin visited them in Ung Sing when Hom Sit was eight years old and stayed for two years. That is the only time they spent together. The Hom ancestral village was Check Suey. Hom Sit’s father’s deceased father was Hom Goon Bow. He was buried at Bok Dook Hill, about a mile from their village. Hom Sit’s mother was Lee Shee, a native of Wing On village. His maternal grandfather, Lee Len Ock, had died but his grandmother, Ow Shee, was 70 years old, living in Wing On. Hom Sit had three brothers, one older and two younger. He was married to Dea Shee from Choo Heung village and they had one son, Hom Ngin, born in 1937.

Ung Sing Village faced east and had eight houses in five rows. Their house was the third house in the first row counting from the north. It was a brick house with five rooms, tile floors, a court paved with stone, had two outside doors with the large door was facing south. Each bedroom had an L-shaped loft along the outside walls and had two outside windows opening above a balcony. They were fitted with iron bars and glass panes with wooden shutters on the inside. The bedrooms and kitchen had skylights fitted with glass. There was a shrine in the parlor; a partitioned room in the parlor was made of wood.

Map of Ung Sing Village
Map of Ung Sing Village

Hom Sit described who lived in the other houses, their extended families, and where they worked. There was a bamboo hedge surrounding the village with a gateway on each end. A river about 200 feet wide was in front of the village and a dirt highway was nearby. The village did not have an ancestral hall or social hall. There weren’t any fruit trees near the village but there was a banyan tree. Hom Sit attended Gung Yee School in the village for twelve years. Won Wing Hop was the principal of the school and there were three other teachers.
Hom Sit said that his father sent $800 for his wedding expenses which included putting in the wooden partition in the parlor and erecting a pavilion for the wedding.

Photos of Hom Tin and Hom Sit, 1938 Affidavit

Jack Chan was the interpreter for interrogation of Hom Tin, the alleged father of Hom Sit. Hom testified that he was a partner at the Idaho Café in Butte, Montana at 799-1/2 Utah Avenue. He was born in San Francisco and had made three trips to China–in 1907, 1913, and 1921. He went through the Port of San Francisco each time. He presented his Certificate of Identity for inspection. He had a brother, Hom Foot, living somewhere in the U.S. They were separated during the San Francisco earthquake and fire and never heard from each other again.

Hom Tin said he did not bring his son over to the U.S. earlier because of the Depression but was bringing him over now to work in his restaurant. He was asked the same long list of questions that his son had been asked. His answers were consistent with his son’s testimony, but the interrogator ended the interview by saying, “Isn’t it a fact that the applicant is not your blood son?” [The interrogators frequently asked this question, even if it was obvious that there was a blood relationship.] Hom Tin stated that Hom Sit was his blood son and the interview ended.

The Board of Special Inquiry reviewed Hom Tin’s San Francisco file and recalled Hom Sit to question him about a few discrepancies in the interviews. They considered that the alleged father had not been in China for nearly fifteen years. They concluded that the alleged father and applicant both ”testified in a straightforward manner” and there was a physical resemblance between them. The board determined that the relationship had been established. Hom Sit was admitted to the U.S. as a United States Citizen, son of an American born Chinese, on 10 October 1938, one month and a half after his arrival.

“Form 143 photo of Hom Sit; Hom Tin Affidavit; map of village” 1938, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Hom Sit case file, Seattle Box 767, file 7030/11371.

Tye Leung Schulze – 1912 – 1st Chinese American woman to vote in U.S.

Chinese interpreter, photo, , , , , , ,

Tye Leung Schulze NAPAWFNational Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF)

Tye Leung was born in California in 1887 to a family of Chinese immigrants. At 14, she escaped an arranged marriage in Montana by joining a Presbyterian Mission in San Francisco. There, she learned English and became an interpreter, helping the mission rescue trafficked Chinese women from local brothels.

In 1910 she was hired as a translator at Angel Island Immigration Station; Leung was the first Chinese American to pass the civil service exam and become a government employee. Here, she met Charles Schulze, an immigration inspector, and they fell in love.

Charles Schulze was white. At the time, interracial marriages were illegal in California. They went to Washington state to get legally married, knowing that the intense racism and prejudice from their coworkers would force them to lose their jobs.

To support their family of four children, Tye worked as a night shift telephone operator. Charles was a mechanic and repairman until he died in 1935. She was also the first Chinese woman hired to work at Angel Island. Tye continued to be an interpreter, social worker, and an involved community member in San Francisco’s Chinatown until she died in 1972.

(Shared from Facebook)

Chong Wong Chong – Portland import-export merchant

adopted, Permit to Reenter, Photographs, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Guest blogger: Sue Fawn Chung, Professor Emerita, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Chong Wong Chong (b. ca. 1863, immigrated KS 8 = 1882; pinyin:
Zhang Huangchang 张黄昌)

Chong Wong ChongIn 1928 Chong Wong Chong’s deposition to the INS described his situation and provides insight into the life of a Chinese American merchant and Chinese labor contractor.  This file is found at the NARA Seattle, RS 2870, File 12860/14-1.  He stated that he was also known as Chong (pinyin – Zhang) Ho Song, a Portland import-export merchant with the married name of Jung (pinyin – Zhang) Song Lung, who was born in Sui Soon Village, Hoy Ping (pinyin – Kaiping), Guangdong, China.  He had other names: Sam Sing and Chung (pinyin – Zhang) Sam Sing.  A later investigation using the NARA Seattle index of individuals with their occupation and birthplace led to the papers of Sam Sing, a laborer, who obviously was the same man as Chong Wong Chong.  I found Sam Sing because his birthplace was the same as Chong’s and the Seattle index notes birthplace and occupation whenever feasible.

Chong immigrated around 1882 (KS 8), landing in Portland on a small steamer from Vancouver, British Columbia, as a laborer and visited China in 1890 and 1891. On his 1891 trip, he landed in San Francisco as a merchant instead of Portland or Seattle. In 1908 he visited Canada and returned 1909.

Chong was married twice, the first time when he was seventeen and living in China.  Lee Shee, his first wife, died in ST 1 (1908) in China. From his first marriage he had two boys, Chong Shew Lun, who lived in Portland and was in the oyster business, and the older boy who remained in China; and two girls, one named Chong Choy Lun (b. 1893), who was married to a Wong and living in Helena, Montana with her husband, and the older girl, Jung Sou Lun (b. 1884), who remained in China. Within six months after the death of his first wife’s death, he married Lee Shee (b. ca. 1888; Certificate of Identity 6640)) in ST 1 (1908) of Gow How Village, Sunning (pinyin – Xinning) in his home village and his wife and two children came to the U.S. in ST 2 (1909).  Lee Shee and the children were refused admission because Chong was listed as a laborer so Chong returned to his store in Portland, then applied again for his wife and two children in ST 3 (1910) as dependents of a merchant and was successful in getting their admission on December 20, 1911. Years later, through Ancestry.com. Lee Shee gave her husband’s name as Chong Luk Dak.  They lived at 264 Flanders Street, around the corner form her husband’s store on North 4th.

Chong and his second wife had two children, a boy and girl, both born in Portland. Chong Seid Foon (September 6, 1912, American name – Charles) and Chong Heung Lon (1909-1927). The girl’s death caused his wife much grief and led to the decision to adopt Chong May Yoon (original Chinese name Jun Mui), who was born in Los Angeles to Toy and Jennie Chung (pinyin – Zhang) on April 13, 1919 and was adopted in March or April 1927 when she was eight years old.  (NARA Seattle files #30/5270, 12860/14-2, and 7030/5200). Toy Chung died in 1925 and finding herself in financial difficulties, Jennie decided to allow the Chongs to officially adopt May Yoon (later called Helen Chong Yep). Jennie brought her daughter to Portland for the adoption proceedings.  The adoption had been suggested by a Zhang clansman in San Francisco who knew of Jennie’s plight – a large family of young children without a father – and arranged the contact.

After nine years of working for the Quon Shew Lun Company, in 1909  Chong became the manager of Quon Shew Lun Company, a general merchandising firm on at 94 North 4th and later on North 3rd Street, Portland.  The firm’s capitalization was $10,000 and Chong’s share was $2,000.  He and the bookkeeper, Jung Ho Yip ($600 investment), each earned $60 per month plus room and board.  The other active member was the salesman, Jung Gow ($600 investment).  The inactive shareholders were primarily of the Jung (Zhang) clan, with a few other surnames – Wong, Ng, Leong, and Lee – who lived in China, Portland, elsewhere in Oregon, and New York. This was typical of large merchandising firms and all of the men were usually related or came from the same village in China. The company made about $2000 or more in profit annually. The store was located on rented property owned by Euro-Americans for the last ten years.

The firm also acted as the labor contractors for the cannery Libby, McNeil, and Libby [established in 1912 in Sacramento, CA and closed in 1980], and had two canneries under the management of Lee San Toy ($500 shareholder from Portland) in Alaska:  Nushagak and Ekuk.  These were fish canneries in present-day Dillingham.

Nushagak Cannery, Alaska
Nushagak Cannery, Alaska

Although Chong did not go into details, he noted that he owned property in Portland and had a Euro-American rent collector since he rented out the property.

Chong spoke English and had two Euro-Americans testify on his behalf:  the owner of the building in which his store was located and a member of the bank he used. Their depositions and long-time acquaintance with him as Chong Ho Sang put Chong in a favorable light from the perspective of the immigration officials. He was granted a permit to re-enter the United States from China. On this trip he took his wife and his recently adopted daughter, now called Helen Chong, but keeping the name May Yoon Chong in accordance with the adoption papers (NARA Seattle file #27272). They were accompanied by others, including Helen’s natural brother, Chung Gee Kay (1911-1980) (NARA Seattle files #28160/238 and 10797/10-25).

Permit to Reenter the United States for Chong Wong Chong, expiring November 1, 1929.
Permit to Reenter the United States for Chong Wong Chong, expiring November 1, 1929.

The family made several other trips to China, presumably because of business concerns of Chong Wong Chong.  Below is Helen Chong’s 1933 application from NARA Seattle.

Helen Chong
Helen Chong

Chong Wong Chong frequently traveled to China and owned a general store there.  Presumably that store supplied the Portland store with goods.  He passed away in Hong Kong In the 1950s.

In 1951 Helen returns from Hong Kong to San Francisco with her family.  (Certification of birth of Anna Chung aka Helen C. Yep, State of California Department of Public Health, dated 10-29-1962, State Fil 19-015292):  husband Yep Wing Sing, age 30 of 421 W Brand St., Richmond, Virginia; Chong (Yep) Helen, age 31, at the same address, Yip Won Yue, age 13, born in China, Yip Duck Lai, age 23, born in China, Yep Grace Woon Yuen, age 9, born in New York, Yep Ruby Woon King, age 2, born in China, and Yep Theresa Woon King, age 5, born in Hong Kong.  There is the possibility that Anna/Helen had twin boys, Henry and Douglas.  Helen passed away in San Francisco.

By Sue Fawn Chung, Professor Emerita, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Fong Gum – Chinese Woman Merchant in Butte, MT

Photographs, Witnesses, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo of Fong Gum and Sam Chong
“Photo of Fong Gum and Sam Chong,” 1902, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Mrs. Wong Cue (Fong Gum) case file, Seattle, Box 43, 31-88.

Fong Gum was born in San Francisco, California about 1876 and moved to Spokane around 1898. According to a 1902 statement in the file, Fong Gum and Sam Chong/Chung were married in Spokane County in September 1901. Sam Chung was a member of S. Chung and W. Ting firm at 127 Washington Street, Spokane, Washington.
There is nothing in the file that tells what happened to Sam Chong/Chung but Wong Cue, a merchant tailor, and Fong Gum were married in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho about 1907 or ’08. Their witnesses were Mrs. McDonald and her husband who was a street car conductor.
In 1923 Mrs. Wong Cue was the proprietress of Ladies’ Popular Garment Store, 317 South Main St., Butte, Montana. Her status with the U.S. Department of Labor Immigration Service was as a merchant independent of her husband. [This is very unusual and the only file I have seen where a woman is listed as a merchant.] Her business was in a building own by Mr. B. Marcello. He charged $30 rent per month. She paid all of her own expenses and netted about $35 to $40 each month. The store was about 30 by 80 feet and she lived in the back. For the last two years she and her husband had lived separately.
(According to Mrs. Wong Cue, her husband was living with another woman and they had two children together.)
Mrs. Wong Cue was planning a trip to China in 1923 and taking her adopted daughter, Po Lin and nephew, Lee Hoy, with her.
Mrs. Wong Cue told the immigration interviewer that she bought her merchandise stock from Hennessey’s, Symons’, and sometimes O’Connell’s. She sold ladies garments. Sometimes she made her own garments and sometimes she bought them.
Her white witnesses were Mrs. Gordon Schermerhorn, Mrs. Jane Lammie and Mr. B. Marcello. Mrs. Lammie testified that she came from Scotland almost three years ago to join her husband, a baker at Rex Bakery, who had been in Butte since 1906. Mrs. Lammie said “Mrs. Wong [Cue] is an excellent little woman.” Mr. Marcello also testified that Mrs. Wong Cue paid her rent to him and that she made her own living. Mrs. Gordon Schermerhorn testified that she was 45 year old in 1924 and born in England. She had been living in Butte for about ten years. Mrs. Schermerhorn and Mrs. Lammie were neighbors and good friends of Mrs. Wong Cue. All three witnesses testified that they were confident that Mrs. Wong Cue lived separately from her husband.
Wong Cue said that he visited his wife three or four times a week and he slept with her “the night before last.” The examining inspector asked if he had any trouble with Mrs. Cue. Wong Cue said “sometimes she gets a little cranky.” [Wong Cue was being investigated for bringing a woman into the country for immoral purposes—the woman he was living with.]
Mrs. Wong Cue application was approved and she and her daughter and nephew left for China in September 1923.
Additional information per Jill Morelli’s questions:
The file ends with Mrs. Cue’s departure. There is no further information in the file. It was important that she made her own money because she did not want to depend on her husband to get back into the country. Since he was under investigation, his status could endanger her ability to return to the U.S. She needed to show that she made her own money and lived away from her husband so she could prove she was a merchant. Merchants were exempt from the Exclusion Act. If she had merchant status she could get back into the U.S. no matter what he did.

Chung Hing Sou – Family Portrait

Birth Certificate, Draft Registration, family photo, Group Photo, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

chung-hing-suo-portrait
“Portrait of Chung Hing Sou family,” ca. 1920, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Chung Hing Sou (William) case file, Seattle, Box 1377, Case 41093/4-2.

Front row: Ah Jung (Chung Hing Jung b.1917), Hom Shee (mother, b. ca. 1872), Chung Don Poy (father, b. ca. 1850), Ah May (Chung Yut May b. 1913), Ah Joon (Chung Hing June b. ca. 1882), Chung Yut Sim (Rosie Chung b. 1900)
Back Row: Ah Lun (Chung Hing Lun b. 1909), Ah Ming (Chung Yoot Ming or Pansy b. 1902), Ah See (Chung Hing See b. 1907), Ah Hom (Chung Hing Hom b. 1904), Ah Fay (Chung Hing Fay b. 1895), Ah Sou (Chung Hing Sou b. 1893), Ah Ngo (Chung Sou Ngo or Violet Chung, b. 1897).
[Certified copies of Oregon birth certificates were presented for all the children except Ah Joon. They were all born in Portland.)
In 1922 Chung Hing Sou was applying for a Native’s Return Certificate. We wanted to visit China, get married, and bring his bride back to his home in Portland, Oregon.
Chung Hing Sou produced a certified copy of his Oregon birth certificate for proof of his citizenship. He was born on 16 August 1893 but the certificate was not filed until 13 October 1921 so he was required to show more evidence of his birth. His parents, several of his siblings and two Caucasian witnesses testified in his favor.

Hom Shee, Chung Hing Sou’s mother, age 50, testified that she came to Portland from China as a merchant’s wife when she was 20 years old. She and Chung Don Poy had eleven children together; ten were living.
Chung Don Poy testified that he had been married twice. Ah Joon (Chung Hing June) was his son from his first wife who died in China. Chung Don Poy was a merchant at Yuen Hop Company, Quon Yee Yick Company and the Gum On Wo Company before he retired.
Chung Hing Sou was known as William or Willie Chung to White people. As a child he attended Park School (later known as Ladd School). His teachers were Mrs. Sloane and Ella Ross. His report cards were used as proof of his attendance. He lived in Montana for a couple of years and registered for the draft in Flathead County in 1918. He and his brother Chung Fay were supporting the family so they were classified as Class 3B. He was a registered voter and voted in Montana once and two or three times in Portland.
William Chung’s half-brother, Chung Hing June, was a farmer in Cherryville, Clackamas County, Oregon.
(William or Willie) Chung Hing Sou’s Caucasian witnesses were George W. Wilson, a lawyer, and L. A. Pike. Wilson knew the Chung family for many years. He first met Willie about 1905 after the World’s Fair in Judge O’Day’s office. The family was purchasing a home on Lake Street. Although Willie Chung was a minor, the deed was taken out by him because he was an American citizen. About 1914 Wilson sold a house and lot at 527 Greenwood Avenue to the Chung family and William signed the deed.
The other Caucasian witness, L.A. Pike, was a Deputy Collector of Customs in Portland and worked for the Customs’ Service for thirty-one years. He was well acquainted with the parents in the family portrait and knew William and most of the other children.
H. W. Cunningham, Chinese and Immigrant Inspection recommended that Chung Hing Sou be adjudicated as a genuine native-born citizen of the United States and Chung’s application was favorable recommended by R. Bonham, Inspector in Charge.

Tom You – 1899 admittance form

Admittance form, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tom You Admittance Form
“Tom You Admittance Form,” 1899, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Tom You file, Seattle, Box 88, Case 15519.

This is an example of an early case file admittance form. Early files did not require a formal interrogation but the form included the basic information—Tom You arrived in Seattle on the S.S. Olympia. He was a partner of the Wang Hong Low Company at 11 West Street, Butte, Montana. He was 30 years old, 5 feet 6 inches, and had no distinguishing marks. He did not speak English. On 2 December 1899 Tom You received a favorable report from the Chinese Inspector Hathaway. The report was signed by H. B. Spede.
Tom You’s case is more complicated than it appeared from his final admittance form. Other paperwork in his file shows that he arrived in Seattle on 3 October 1899 and was rejected. The case was appealed and the papers were sent to the Collector of Customs in Great Falls, Montana for investigation. More testimony was obtained to verify that Tom You was a merchant and not a laborer. Affidavits in his favor were filed in Silver Bow County, Montana by John E. McCormick, Charles W. Fisher, T. M. Hodgens, Jesse R. Wharton, and C. H. Harper. These reputable white males swore that Tom You sometimes known as Hum Yu was living as a merchant and did not in any way partake in manual labor on any kind.