In April 1931 Ng Chin Gar 伍傳家 applied for a laborer’s return certificate, form 432. The Seattle Immigration Service wrote to the immigration office in El Paso, TX requesting a copy of his immigration file #5032/84-200. Ng Chin Gar handed over his certificate of identity #40650 which was issued to him as a “Columbus refugee” in El Paso, TX in 1923. It would be given back to him when he returned from his trip. They verified that he had the necessary $1,000 liberty bond. To qualify for reentry into the U.S., he had to return within one year and still be the owner of the $1,000 bond. Since he fulfilled all the requirements for a laborer under the Chinese Exclusion Act, the El Paso office recommended that Ng be issued a return certificate. While waiting for the approval of his documents, he was staying at the Wah Yuen store in his departure city, Seattle. He returned to the Port of Seattle in April 1932 and was admitted.
“Ng Chin Gar, Form 432, Return Certificate photo,” 1934, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives-Seattle, Box 911, File 7032/1072.
Ng Chin Gar applied again for a return certificate in 1934. He was working as a kitchen helper in Austin, Texas. He was married with two sons, ages 12 and 6 years old. In his application, he stated that he originally arrived as a refugee with the U.S. army and was admitted near Columbus, New Mexico, in 1917. He went to Mexico when he was twenty years old (ca.1912).
The Immigrant Inspector Roy M. Porter made a note saying: This certificate bears the following indorsement: “Registered under Public Resolution No. 29 approved November 5, 1928.”
[This was part of a later effort to standardize and reaffirm the validity of Chinese registration certificates issued under earlier exclusion laws.]
In 1935, Ng Chin Gar was unable to return within the one-year deadline because his wife was ill. He applied to Charles L. Hoover, the American Consulate General in Hong Kong for an Overtime Certificate. Ng was asked why his wife’s mother couldn’t take care of her. Hoover approved the certificate because he thought if Ng appealed, it was likely the certificate would be approved. Ng was admitted to the Port of Seattle on 22 May 1936.
The following information is not included in the Ng Chin Gar’s CEA file:
Army camp Columbus, N.M., auto truck supply train about to leave for Mexico / Shulman . New Mexico Columbus, 1916. [?] Photograph. https://www.loc.gov/item/2002719615/.
In April 1931, Wang Chi Che 王季茝 (Chi Che Wang) was applying for a Return Permit so she could attend the annual meeting of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology in Montreal, Canada. Wang Chi Che’s file contains a Form of Chinese Certificate from 1907 when she originally arrived in the U.S.as a Section 6 student. A photo was attached and the document was signed by M. P. Boyd, American Vice Consul General in Charge, Shanghai, China.
Wang Chi Che (Chi Che Wang), Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives-Seattle, Box 908, File 7032/1000.
Wang Chi Che had the documents she needed to enter Canada temporarily in 1931 but was applying for the documents she would need to reenter the United States after she attended the meeting. She planned to go by way of Detroit, Michigan.
In February, Thomas Thomas, District Director of Immigration in Cincinnati, wrote to the Immigration office in Seattle asking them to furnish a landing record of Miss Chi Che Wang. She arrived as a sixteen-year-old student on the SS Minnesota in August or September 1907. She had not left the country since she arrived.
The Seattle office sent a summary of the 6 March 1931, six-page interrogation of Chi Che Wang.:
She was born in Soo Chow, China on 30 October 1891 and was admitted to the U.S. as a student in August 1907.
Attended Walnut Hills Boarding School in Natick, Massachusetts to improve her English, then Wellesley College.
Employed as head of the Department of Biochemistry at Michall Reese Hospital in Chicago from April 1920 to April 1930.
Did biological research work at the Marine Laboratory at Woods Hole, Massachusetts
Taught biochemistry in the Department of Home Economics at Chicago University.
Since December 1939, employed as Senior Fellow, in charge of the Department of Metabolism of the Pediatric Research Foundation in Cincinnati, receiving a salary of $4,500 a year.
Member of Honorary Scientific Society of Sigma Psi, American Chemical Society, American Society of Biological Chemists, Society of Experimental Biology and Medicine, and Institute of Medicine-Chicago section.
Speaks English fluently and idiomatically.
Information in Chi Che Wang’s interrogation that was not included in the summary: 1. Living at 825 Locust Street in Cincinnati, Ohio. 2. Her sister, Chi Tsau Wang, a Theology student, was living at the International House in Berkeley, California.
After a review of Chi Che Wang’s documents in 1931, a Return Permit was issued to her. A Reentry Permit was issued to her in 1939 with no additional paperwork.
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.]
“Charley Kee (Ng Hock On) Affidavit,” 1892, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Ng Hock On, Box 891, File 7032/547.
In December 1892, Yim Gee [in later testimony he is known as Yim Kee, Charley Kee, and Ng Hock On 伍學端], asked for permission to file an affidavit to certify he was a merchant at the Gim Lung Company in Port Townsend, Jefferson County, Washington. He was twenty-six years old and was born in Canton, China. He landed in San Francisco in 1880 and came to Port Townsend in 1889. His photograph was included in the document. Two white witnesses, J. W. Jones and L. B. Hastings, swore that he was a reputable citizen and they had known him for more than two years.
Charley Kee applied for a Certificate of Departure for a trip to China in 1900. Although his application was approved, there is nothing in the file that shows that he left the U.S.
In 1911 while working as a merchant and partner at King Chung Lung & Co. in Seattle, (Ng) Hock On, applied for preinvestigation of his status as a merchant. He was forty-seven. His childhood name was Yim Kee and he was born in Sai Ping Hong village. His wife was of the Lee family and they had two sons. His elder son, Tai Jung, was 18 years old and going to school in Seattle. His other son, Tai Sin, was in China. His firm sold Chinese goods in Pendleton, Walla Walla, Umatilla, and other nearby towns.
Ah King, a prominent Chinese citizen in Seattle, and manager of the King Chung Lung Co., was a witness for Hock On 學端. There were nine other partners. Ah King testified that Hock On paid $500 for his interest in the company and was a bona fide partner. Hock On’s application required two credible (Caucasian) witnesses. His witnesses were C. M. Rodman, a salesman for the Norris Safe & Lock Co., and J. J. McAvoy, a storekeeper. His application with his photo was approved.
“Ng Hock On, Form 431,” 1911, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Ng Hock On, Box 891, File 7032/547
Hock On returned in May 1913. During his admission interview he said he wanted to surrender his “choc chee” (Certificate of Residence) and obtain a Certificate of Identity. [His Certificate of Residence is in his file but did not apply for a Certificate of Identity.]
“Charley Kee, Certificate of Residence,” 1894, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Ng Hock On, Box 891, File 7032/547.
He applied for another trip to China in 1921. He gave his American name as Charlie Kee. He was still a partner at King Chung Lung Company at 707 King Street in Seattle. The capital stock of the company was a little over $35,000 and the company did over $70,000 in business in 1920. Kee’s Caucasian witnesses were Daniel Landon, an attorney, and Victor K. Golden, an automobile mechanic. B. A. Hunter, Examining Inspector, visited the store and saw no reason to doubt Kee’s testimony.
Hock On returned to the U.S. in May 1925. He declared he had four sons. His son, Ng Tai Sheung was admitted in April 1926 and his son, Ng Tai Der was admitted in July 1927 at Seattle. They were attending school in Pullman, Washington.
In 1930 Hock On was again applying for a reentry permit for his upcoming trip to China. The Seattle District Commissioner wrote to the Commissioner in Washington, D.C., asking that they compare Kee’s Certificate of Residence with their original record. The original certificate agreed with the duplicate on file at D.C., so they issued a Return Permit.
“Ng Hock On, “Permit to Reenter the U.S,” 1930, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Ng Hock On, Box 891, File 7032/547.
Hock On returned to Seattle in August 1931. He applied for another trip to China in July 1934. This time he was applying as a laborer. He left Seattle on 21 July 1934. There is nothing in the file to indicate that he returned to Seattle but there is 1949 correspondence between immigration offices in Seattle, Walla Walla, Spokane, Washington; Vancouver, B.C.; and San Francisco, California; pertaining to Hock On’s sons Lee Tin Yee and Ng Tai Dor, and Ng Tai Sheung.
Hock On’s Reference Sheet lists the name and file numbers for his wife and four sons.
Elise Chung Lyon was born in Stawell, Australia, about one hundred forty miles from Melbourne. She first come to the United States in 1923 from China with her husband Bayard Lyon. They lived in Elkhorn, Wisconsin with their three children, Marguerite, Hugh, and David. Her brother Fred Mowfung Chung also lived in Elkhorn. Elsie’s exempt status was “wife of citizen, admitted to U.S. prior to July 1, 1924.” She had reentry permits from 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, and 1934, each with her photograph attached. When she arrived in 1934, she was forty-seven years old. Her file does not have much personal information. Elsie’s 1929 Form 505, Certificate of Admission of Alien, lists her occupation as lecturer.
“Elise Chung Lyon Reentry Permit Photo,” 1932, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, National Archives at Seattle, Elsie Chung Lyon (Mrs. Bayard Lyon), Box 879, File 7032/263.
Elsie’s file does record a confusing incident with immigration authorities upon her arrival in Seattle from China via Vancouver, B.C. on Saturday, 10 November 1928. She was returning from a three-month tour of China. Mrs. Lyon, a lecturer on international relations, and nine other Chinese passengers were threatened with being locked up by immigration authorities for the weekend. David Young, a representative of the Seattle Chinese consulate, managed to get Mrs. Lyon released to his custody as a matter of courtesy.
A 13 November 1928 newspaper article titled, “Chinese Wife of American is Held Here”1is included in her file. The article quoted Elsie Chung Lyon, “I’m rather sorry now that I did not suffer myself to be locked up because I would be better able to understand the indignation my countrymen feel on entering this country.” She noted that her papers were in order and she had been admitted two times previously without a problem. She promised that she would take the matter up with Secretary Kellogg in Washington, D.C. [Frank Billings Kellogg served in the U.S. Senate and as U.S. Secretary of State.] The article or the 1928 forms in her file do not say exactly why Lyon was being held or what happened to the other Chinese passengers.
In September 1929, Mr. J. J. Forster, Steamship General Passenger Agent of Vancouver, British Columbia wrote a letter to Mr. Luther Weedin, Commissioner of the U.S. Department of labor in Seattle concerning a compliant of Mrs. Elsie Chung Lyon about the ports of entry for readmittance to the United States. Mrs. Lyon was complaining that she had not been told the requirements covering her entry. Forster explained:
1. All Chinese ports of entry are not advised when return permits are issued. 2. The Vancouver office did not know where the permit was issued or which port she departed to China from. 3. Chinese with return permits are entitled to admission to the U.S. through any port designated as a port of admission for Chinese.
Rules of October 1, 1926, governing the admission of Chinese gives the following on Ports on Entry: “No Chinese person, other than a Chinese diplomatic or consular officer, shall be permitted to enter the United States at any seaport other than at the ports of Port Townsend or Seattle, Wash.; Portland, Oreg.; San Francisco, San Pedro, or San Diego, Calif; New Orleans, La.; New York, N.Y.; Boston, Mass.; San Juan or Ponce, P.R.; and Honolulu, Hawaii.”
According to her file, Elsie Chung Lyon continued traveling without any problems. The last entry notes that she left from San Francisco on 19 October 1936. “See Imm. File 117/9/36.”
Other information not included in the file: On 12 September 1947, Elsie Chung Lyon’s letter to The New York Times criticizing General Wedemeyer’s statement on China was published. Lyon had recently worked seventeen months with the Chinese Nationalist Army in China and thought she was more able than Wedemeyer to evaluate the miserable and dehumanizing condition of the Chinese people and their need for honest leadership. She did not want America to continue “to grant aid to the present tyrannical regime…”
Death Information and Obituary for Elsie Chung Lyon: Elsie Chung Lyon, the daughter of Mow Fun Chung and Mow Fung Huishe of China, was born in Australia in 1887. She died at Fort Worth, Texas on 16 Dec 1963 at age 76 years.2 Elsie graduated as a registered nurse from London School of Nursing and Medical Administration in England and was a registered nurse at the American Bureau for Medical Aid to China. She served as a lieutenant colonel in the Nationalist Chinese Army during World War II. After her return to the U.S., she translated English language nursing texts into Chinese. Her translation of Midwifery for Nurses (Hu shi jie chan xu zhi ) by Henry Russell is listed in the National Institutes of Health library catalog.3 Elsie Chung Lyon became a U.S. citizen in 1947. She was survived by a son David in Missouri, a son Hugh in Virginia and a daughter, Mrs. Margaret McHarg of Bellevue, Washington.4
[This file is the combined effort of the Chinese Exclusion Act Indexing team at the National Archives at Seattle. Rhonda Farrer indexed the file. She was intrigued by the story and shared it with Joyce Liu. Joyce found the NYT’s article. They gave me a copy of their findings. From there I obtained Elsie’s death certificate and obituary and wrote it up for the blog. THN]
Alice Elinor, “Chinese Wife of American is Held Here” Seattle Post Intelligencer, Seattle, WA, p3. ↩︎
Elsie Chung Lyon, 16 Dec 1963, Texas Department of State Health Services; Austin Texas, USA; Texas Death Certificates, 1903–1982, Ancestry.com ↩︎
See September 2024’s blog entry for the details of Ng Back Ging’s file up to his admittance to the U.S. in 1926.
In 1929 Ng Back Ging wanted to make a trip to China. The Immigration Act of 1924 made it more complicated to get approval for his trip. The 1924 Act prevented immigration from Asia except under certain circumstances. It capped total immigration to 165,000 and set the nationality quotas to 2% based on the 1890 census
The First Supplement to Chinese General Order No. 13 fixed this problem. It said that if the husband or father who was admitted before July 1, 1924, has maintained his status as a merchant, the wives and minor children admitted after June 30, 1924, would be lawfully admitted to the United States.
“H. E. Hull Correspondence #55476/519,” 20 November 1929, “The First Supplement to Chinese General Order No. 13,” Ng Back Ging, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Box 837, file 7031/120.
The Immigration Act of 1924 as it relates to Ng Buck Look and his son Ng Back Ging: 1. Ng Buck Look, a merchant, was the father of Ng Back Ging. Ng Buck Look was lawfully admitted to the United States prior to 1 July 1924. 2. Ng Buck Look, the father, maintained his merchant status. 3. Ng Back Ging, his son, was lawfully admitted after 30 June 1924.
In late December 1929 Ng Back Ging applied for a Predetermination of Status Under General Order No. 13 to make a trip to China. He swore that his American name was Harold Ng and he was not married. He was born on 11 January 1913 in Mun Low village, Sun Woy District. He wanted to get treatment for his leg which was broken in August 1928 and was not healing. Since his arrival in 1926 he attended Pacific College in Seattle. He was asked some of the same questions he was asked during his 1926 interview. His answers were consistent with his earlier testimony. His father was interviewed again and testified that he had worked at Lin Shing Jewelry Store in Vancouver, B.C. for about two years before he came to Seattle. He showed the interviewer his papers from his admittance in 1926.
William Francis Roark and Ralph E. Olsen were interviewed and swore in an affidavit that they had been residents of Seattle for several years and were not Chinese. They knew Ng Buck Look for more than one year and believed that he was a member of the Quong Chong Company in Seattle, and he had not performed any manual labor during that time. Olsen was in the wholesale meat business and Roark was a passenger agent for the Milwaukee Railway. They both stated the Quong Chong Company was not associated with a restaurant, laundry, or gambling house.
Purely G. Hall, examining inspector, visited the company and reviewed three current years of the partnership books and noted that the gross sales for 1929 were over $40,000. He recommended that Ng Back Ging receive his certificate.
Ng Back Ging left for China after in December 1929 and returned to Seattle on 3 November 1930 and was admitted to the United States.
“Ng Back Ging, Precis,” 1930, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Ng Bok Ging, Box 837, file 7031/120
Ng Buck Look wanted to bring his son, Ng Back Ging, to the United States. Ng Buck Look (sometimes referred to as Ng Bok Look or Bok Look; marriage name: Yip Gee), was born in China and came to the United States in 1923. In August 1925 he swore in an affidavit that since his arrival, he had been a buyer and partner for the Quong Chong Company on King Street in Seattle, Washington. He and his wife, Wong Shee, had three sons, one of them passed away at the age of two years old. Ng Bok Look completed his affidavit and attached photos of himself and his son, Ng Back Ging, who was classified as the minor son of a merchant.
In March 1926, Ng Back Ging, age fifteen, arrived in the Port of Seattle. He testified that he was born in Mun Low village, Sun Woy district, China. He had not seen his father in five or six years. His father had lived in China and Canada before coming to Seattle. His grandfather was a farmer in their village and his great grandfather was dead. The interrogator asked about his mother’s and father’s extended families. He described the village where he grew up, the houses, and the neighbors. His family had a red marriage paper with his great grandparents and grandparents’ names listed. He was asked about the tiles or stones in the house and the court, if they had a sewing machine or ancestral tablets, what the floors were made of, where the large and small doors, the windows, and the bedrooms were located, if they had a rice mill or pounder, and any pictures on the walls. Ng Back Ging was asked for details about his neighbors, their families, their houses, and the village. Where was the shrine? Was there a wall around the village, what was it made of? Is there a pond or stream near the village? Any land for growing rice or any stores? Is there a watch tower? Who are the watchmen? Who is the head of the village? He described his school experience. His testimony was over six pages long.
A. Brattstom, a white witness for Ng Buck Look, was interviewed. He was a salesman for the Mutual Paper Corporation and he sold paper, twine, bags and other paper goods to Buck Look at the Quong Chung Co. He knew Buck Look was a partner with Sam Choi. Brattstom was in the store at least once or twice a week.
Ng Dok Foon, the manager of Quong Chung Co. also testified. There were eleven partners in the firm, six of them were active. Their annual total sales were between $24,000 and $25,000. There was no gambling on the premises. The interpreter examined the company’s books and the figures agreed with the testimony. Ng Dok Foon lived in the same village as Buck Look and could verify all the information that had been given in the interviews.
There was a lengthy interview of Ng Buck Look. He described his father, Ng Dok Baw, who was about fifty-seven years old and worked in their home village in the rice fields. Buck Look’s mother had died, and his father remarried. He had five brothers and one sister. One of his brothers, Bok Fook, came to the U.S. and lived in somewhere in Oklahoma. He described his other siblings, their spouses and children, and the other details that his son described.
John A. Thompson, a meat cutter at Fair Market on King Street, was also a witness. He verified Ng Buck Look’s photo, and their testimony agreed. They were in each other’s stores frequently, sometimes once or twice a day. He considered Ng Buck Look “a pretty good merchant.”
Ng Buck Look was recalled, and five more pages of testimony were taken. He was asked about his father, the neighbors and their houses and families, slave families, ancestral halls, fishponds, walls around the city, watch towers, bridges and streams, markets, his son’s school experience, details about Ng Dok Foon [to make sure their testimonies agreed]. Ng Bok Look originally entered North America through Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. He paid a $500 head tax when he arrived. He took one trip back to China while he lived in Canada. He planned to stay in Vancouver but decided to make a short visit to the U.S. He found a business opportunity in Seattle, so he decided to stay. Ng Buck Look did not have his Canadian documents with him, but he was allowed to go retrieve them. He presented a receipt for $500 head tax he paid, and a card showing his admittance into Vancouver on 12 March 1923 under Certificate of Identity 9, No. 45482.
Ng Back Ging, CEA , Canadian CI 5, 1914 & CI 9, 1923, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7031/120.
9 March 1926, the Department of Immigration and Colonization in Canada sent the Seattle Immigration office certified documents showing Ng Buck Look’s original entry to Canada. They added a reminder that Ng Buck Look had forfeited his right to be readmitted to Canada by remaining away longer than the statutory period of two years.
Finally, the Board of Special Inquiry (BSI) agreed that Ng Back Ging should be admitted. His father’s merchant status was confirmed, the books of his company were examined and cleared, and two statutory witnesses other than Chinese had been examined. His father was a member of one of the oldest Chinese stores in Seattle. There were no discrepancies in all the testimony. The father and son resembled each other and had similar mannerisms. The father was in China at the right time to conceive a son with Ng Back Ging’s date of birth. The decision to admit Ng Back Ging was unanimous. He was admitted on 13 March 1926.
In March 1908, Mar Hing was about to go to Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, to get married. James Shea and Frank Jobson, both residents of Seattle for more than five years, swore in an affidavit that they knew Mar Hing more than two years. He was a merchant, partner, and cashier for the Ah King Company who performed no manual labor. A photo of Mar Hing was attached to the affidavit and signed by affiants.
“Mar Hing Affidavit,” 1908, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Lee Wing Hing, Box 1007, file 7032/3680.
According to Mar Hing’s 1908 affidavit he had been a resident of the State of Washington for more than twenty years and was currently living in Seattle. He had a $500 interest in the Ah King Company where he bought and sold general merchandise and was a cashier. He was visiting Victoria to marry Lee Wong Hing. They would be returning to Seattle in a few days. He attached a current photo of Lee Wong Hing.
“Lee Wing Hing Affidavit,” 1908, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Lee Wing Hing (Mrs. Mar Hing) file 7032/3680.
Lee Wong Hing was interviewed when the couple arrived in Seattle. She had been living in Victoria for nine years with her parents. Her father, Lee Hong Gue, was a Chinese interpreter and merchant. Lee Wong Hing and Mar Hing were married according to Chinse custom and English law. The certificate was inspected by the inspector and approved but not included in the file. Lee Wong Hing was admitted to the United States as a member of the exempt class, the wife of a domiciled Chinese merchant.
The following year, Lee Wong Hing and her infant son, Gim Wing visited Victoria in July for a few weeks, returned, and were admitted on 21 August 1909. Daniel Landon, Frank L. Mitten, and her husband, were witnesses for her
“Lee Wing Hing Application,” 1909, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Lee Wing Hing (Mrs. Mar Hing) file 7032/3680.
[About this time Lee Wong Hing’s started appearing on documents as Lee Wing Hing.} In the summer of 1917, Lee Wing Hing, now twenty-nine years old, and the mother of five children, ages one to nine, applied to visit her family in Victoria. The children Harry (Mar Wing), Clarence (Mar Lun), Howard (Mar Shew), James (Mar Gum Shu), and Myra (Mar Saung Gew) were all born in Seattle. Their family physician, Dr. U. C. Bates, identified the family from their photo. Miss Won Mee Menie, age eleven, accompanied them on the trip.
“Lee Wong Hing Family photo,” 1917, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Lee Wing Hing (Mrs. Mar Hing) file 7032/3680.
Lee Wing Hing made a few brief trips to Victoria and Vancouver from 1943 to 1944. By then she had eight children, five were living in Seattle and three were in the U.S. Army. Harry was working in a mine in Oregon, Clarence was working in a shipyard in Seattle, James and Howard were both in the Army, and Howard was stationed in Alaska. In February 1944 Lee Wong Hing and three friends applied to go to Victoria for a weekend to attend a wedding. She registered under the Alien Registration Act of 1940 and renewed it when it was about to expire. When asked why she was getting her card revalidated, she said she “may want to visit Canada again.” Her file lists another trip to Canada in May 1944.
Lee Wing Hing’s Reference Sheet lists the file numbers for four sons, one daughter, and her children’s helper in 1917, Won Mee Menie. One son and one daughter were born after the 1917 trip are not included on the list. [These file numbers would be helpful for anyone researching the family.]
[Additional information not included in the file: Lee Shee Mar Hing died 18 January 1946, age 56, Seattle, Washington.1 Mar Hing died 10 October 1939 in Seattle, Washington.2
“Washington Deaths and Burials, 1810-1960,” FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/Entry for Lee Shee Mar Hing and Lee Mar Hing, 26 Jan 1946. ↩︎
“Washington Death Certficates, 1907-1960,” FamilySearch, Https://familysearch.org/,Henry Maary Hing, 10 Oct 1939. ↩︎
[Thank you, Hao-Jan Chang telling me about this file. thn]
In March 1939 Edwin Low Yow started the process of obtaining a Citizen’s Return Certificate at Immigration and Naturalization Service in Seattle. He testified that his full name was Edwin Low Yow and the American version was Edwin Low. He was twenty-three years old, a cab driver, and was born on 25 September 1915 at Killisnoo, Alaska. He presented a certified copy of this birth certificate to the Immigration Inspector. His father, Low Yow, was born in China, and his mother, Martha James, was an Alaska (full blood) Eskimo native. Low Yow was a cannery contractor in Alaska and spent most of the summer months there for several years.
“Low Yow Edwin, Form 430 photo,” 1939, Chinese Exclusion Act Case Files, RG 85, National Archives-Seattle, Low Yow Edwin, Seattle file Box 783, #7030/11920.
Edwin’s mother, Martha James, died about 1916 when Edwin was about one-year old and his sister, Amy Low Yow, was about two years old. Their father, Low Yow, lived in Seattle when he was not working in Alaska. He also had a second wife, Chin Suie Heung (American name Helen), in Seattle.
Helen did not know that her husband had another wife in Alaska until after Martha James (his other wife) died. Low Yow brought the children to his home in Seattle when they were small and asked his second wife to take care of them. He did not admit that he was the children’s father until he was on his death bed. He died at age sixty-three at Seattle in March 1927.
Low Yow and Helen had four children; two died in infancy. Their surviving daughters were Daisy and Rose. Daisy married G. D. Graves and they lived in Seattle. Rose married Harley Tong. She spent five years in China with Harley then returned to Seattle and he remained there.
“Mrs. Law Yow, Interview” 1939, CEA Case Files, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, Low Yow Edwin, #7030/11920.
[Notice the inconsistent spelling of Low and Law throughout the document.]
Edwin’s sister, Amy Low Yow, was a witness for her brother. She was married to Willard Jew and they lived in Seattle. Edwin planned to leave for China through San Francisco so he applied for a Return Certificate through the office there and his paperwork was transfer to a San Francisco file. Immigration requested his parents’ death certificates. Amy obtained a certified copy of her father’s Seattle, King County, Washington, death certificate. She did not have enough information to get a copy of the certificate for her mother who died in Alaska.
Edwin and Amy’s stepmother, Helen, testified that she was born in San Francisco about 1881 and her childhood name Chin Suie Heung before she married and became Mrs. Law Yow. [She doesn’t mention that Helen was part of her name.] Her testimony about her daughters Daisy and Rose agreed with Edwin and Amy’s.
Edwin presented a copy of his birth certificate as proof of his citizenship. His application was approved.
The Reference Sheet in Edwin’s file contains the file numbers for his stepsister, Rose, and her husband, Harley.
“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) Affidavit,”1891, Chinese Exclusion Act case files, Record Group 85, NARA-Seattle, Box 1007, Lock Ling Seattle Box 1007, file 7032/3676.
On 18 August 1891, Rossell G. O’Brien, Brigardier General of the Washington National Guard, signed an affidavit stating that Lock Loon (Lock Ling) of the Chung-Lee Co., Olympia, Washington, wished to visit Victoria, B.C. before making a trip to China. The document certified that Lock Ling was entitled to return to Olympia, Washington. James C. Horr, Mayor of Olympia, added a note saying that he knew Lock Loon personally. Lock Loon signed his affidavit in Chinese characters. An undated form from the Treasury Department said Lock Ling was admitted.
[Lock Ling’s file contains many pages and forms and covers the years 1891 to 1944. Sometimes the information is repetitive; frequently it is confusing and raises other questions. The file and therefore this summary is not meant to be a biography. Immigration officials used a series of interviews, affidavits, witnesses, and other documents to evaluate if they should admit someone to the United States. There were numerous restrictions and they wanted to make sure they were not admitting laborers, or anyone deemed unacceptable under the Chinese Exclusion Act. It was a complicated system.]
[The names Lock Ling and Lock Loon are interchangeable in these documents. This summary of the files will use the name the way it was spelled in the actual document.]
Rev. Clark Davis and C. P. Stone of Seattle were witnesses for Lock Ling’s trip to China in July 1897 and when he returned in September 1898. Lock Ling moved from Olympia and was then working at Mark Ten Suie Company in Seattle.
In October 1902 Lock Ling wished to make another trip to China. He swore in an affidavit that he was thirty-six years old and had lived in the United States for twenty-one years. He was currently a merchant for Coaster Tea Company. They sold teas, coffees, and spices in Seattle. He wanted to visit his family in China and bring back is son, Locke Loui, who was fifteen and a student. He attached his photo and a photo of his son to his affidavit. Harold N. Smith and Clark Davis were his witnesses. His application was approved.
Section 2, S.21039 of the Chinese Exclusion Act was updated and made stricter in 1893. It was no longer enough for a witness to testify that an applicant had not engaged in manual labor for at least one year before his departure from the United States, the testimony had to show specifically the kind of work the applicant did during the entire year. This did not present a problem for Lock Ling.
On his return trip in July 1904, he was admitted at Port Townsend, Washington. The record does not show if his son, Locke Loui, was with him.
In March 1910 Lock Ling (Lock Loon) declared in an affidavit that he was forty-four years old; that he had been in the United States for twenty-eight years; had been a resident of Seattle for sixteen years; that he was a merchant for the last three years with Wing Long & Company; had recently sold his interest in the business; and became of member of Hong Chong Company. He wanted to visit his second wife, Lee See at Sing Ning City, Canton. His first wife had died, and he wanted to bring his son, Lock Kim, age thirteen and a student at Canton University, back to Seattle with him. He attached photos of himself and his son to his affidavit.
“Lock Ling (Lock Loon) and Look Kim Affidavit,”1910, CEA, RG 85, NARA-Seattle, file 7032/3676.
P. K. Smith and George O. Sanborn, both citizens of Seattle, swore in affidavits that they knew Lock Ling more than three years. They swore he was a merchant and performed no manual labor except what was necessary to conduct business as a merchant.
When Lock Ling was interviewed, he testified he was married and had three sons, Lock Loy, Lock Yen/Ying, and Lock Kim, and a daughter. His son Lock Ying was admitted in 1908 and living in Seattle; and Lock Loy was declared insane in a hospital in Steilacoom and went back to China. Lock Ling had been back to China four times, once before the Exclusion Act was passed.
The Immigration Inspector made a note on Lock Ling’s interview saying Lock Ling was well known as a salesman for Wing Long Company. His new firm, Hong Chong Company, had forty partners. He would be their treasurer; they sold drugs and general merchandise. The company was not incorporated under Washington State law but according to Chinese custom. They had a four-year lease from Mrs. W. D. Hofius for the four-story brick building, still being built for $950 per month.
Lock Ling’s application was approved, and he left for China in March 1910. He returned in October 1912 and was interrogated when he arrived. He gave his marriage name as Yin Ling and his childhood name as Lock Lung. He was returning from his fifth trip to China with his third wife, Wong Shee, his son Lock Kim and his daughter, Lock Mee. He had three sons and a daughter with his first wife who died about 1902. His sons Lock Loy, age 24, had been in the U.S. but went back to China about 1909 and Lock Yen, age 19, was in Seattle. His son and daughter, Lock Gim and Lock Mee, were in the detention house waiting for approval to enter the U.S. Lock Ling’s second wife, Lee Shee had a son, Lock Goey, who was still living in China. When Lee Shee died, her son Lock Loy carried the incense jar to the cemetery. Lock Ling then married Wong Shee according to the Chinese custom. For the ceremony, she did not wear a veil but the tassels from her coronet hung down over her face. She was brought to his house in a regular red, blue, and green sedan chair.
When asked, Lock Ling described his property in China: a house and rice land worth $3,000 Chinese money, and a building in Hongkong worth about $15,000 Hongkong money. He boasted that he went to China five times and a child was born as a result of each trip. In January 1943, Lock Ling (Lock Loon), age seventy-five, applied for a Laborer’s Return Certificate to visit Vancouver, B.C. He qualified because he owed his daughter, Lock Mee Oye, born and residing in Seattle, Washington, more than $1,000. He presented Immigration authorities his Certificate of Residence #55720 which was issued in Portland, Oregon in 1894. It showed that he was born 11 May 1868 in China and entered the United States with his father about 1882 at San Francisco at the age of fifteen. He lost his original Certificate of Residence #44577 so he presented his replacement certificate. His application was approved, and his current photo was attached to the document. Lock Ling and his wife went to Vancouver and returned to Seattle four days later.
Lock’s Reference Sheet shows three files were brought forward and gives file numbers for his wife, four daughters, and two sons.
[According to Hao-Jan Chang, CEA NARA volunteer and Locke family expert, Yen Ling Lock and former Governor Gary Locke are distantly related. They have common ancestors, starting from the first generation to the third generation. Yen Ling Lock is of the19th generation. Gary Locke is of the 25th generation.]
