chinese immigration act essay

The Chinese Exclusion Act: Annotated

The passing of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 marked the first time the United States prohibited immigration based on ethnicity and national origin.

The passage and signing of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act set a number of precedents in United States immigration law. First, it barred an entire nation’s population from entering the US, as well as from obtaining citizenship, based on ethnic (then “racial”) origin. Secondly, it superseded any and all laws regarding Chinese immigration, some of which had been passed by individual states (most notably California). The period of exclusion of Chinese immigrants by the US didn’t truly end until 1965.

For Asian American and Pacific Island History Month, JSTOR Daily has annotated the Exclusion Act with scholarship that examines the political, social, and economic forces in play preceding and following the escalation of anti-Chinese legislation and violence in the US, a period roughly beginning during the California Gold Rush of 1848. All articles are free to read and access, and we hope this illuminates a sometimes obscured and shameful part of American history for our readers, students, and teachers.

________________________________________________________________

An Act to execute certain treaty stipulations relating to Chinese.

Whereas in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities within the territory thereof: Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled , That from and after the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this act, and until the expiration of ten years next after the passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States be, and the same is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension it shall not be lawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or having so come after the expiration of said ninety days to remain within the United States.

SEC. 2. That the master of any vessel who shall knowingly bring within the United States on such vessel, and land or permit to be landed, any Chinese laborer, from any foreign port or place, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars for each and every such Chinese laborer so brought, and maybe also imprisoned for a term not exceeding one year.

SEC. 3. That the two foregoing sections shall not apply to Chinese laborers who were in the United States on the seventeenth day of November, eighteen hundred and eighty , or who shall have come into the same before the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this act, and who shall produce to such master before going on board such vessel, and shall produce to the collector of the port in the United States at which such vessel shall arrive, the evidence hereinafter in this act required of his being one of the laborers in this section mentioned; nor shall the two foregoing sections apply to the case of any master whose vessel, being bound to a port not within the United States, shall come within the jurisdiction of the United States by reason of being in distress or in stress of weather, or touching at any port of the United States on its voyage to any foreign port or place: Provided, That all Chinese laborers brought on such vessel shall depart with the vessel on leaving port.

SEC. 4. That for the purpose of properly identifying Chinese laborers who were in the United States on the seventeenth day of November eighteen hundred and eighty, or who shall have come into the same before the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this act, and in order to furnish them with the proper evidence of their right to go from and come to the United States of their free will and accord, as provided by the treaty between the United States and China dated November seventeenth, eighteen hundred and eighty, the collector of customs of the district from which any such Chinese laborer shall depart from the United States shall, in person or by deputy, go on board each vessel having on board any such Chinese laborers and cleared or about to sail from his district for a foreign port, and on such vessel make a list of all such Chinese laborers, which shall be entered in registry-books to be kept for that purpose, in which shall be stated the name, age, occupation, last place of residence, physical marks of peculiarities, and all facts necessary for the identification of each of such Chinese laborers, which books shall be safely kept in the custom-house.; and every such Chinese laborer so departing from the United States shall be entitled to, and shall receive, free of any charge or cost upon application therefor, from the collector or his deputy, at the time such list is taken, a certificate, signed by the collector or his deputy and attested by his seal of office, in such form as the Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe, which  certificate shall contain a statement of the name, age, occupation, last place of residence, persona description, and facts of identification of the Chinese laborer to whom the certificate is issued , corresponding with the said list and registry in all particulars. In case any Chinese laborer after having received such certificate shall leave such vessel before her departure he shall deliver his certificate to the master of the vessel, and if such Chinese laborer shall fail to return to such vessel before her departure from port the certificate shall be delivered by the master to the collector of customs for cancellation. The certificate herein provided for shall entitle the Chinese laborer to whom the same is issued to return to and re-enter the United States upon producing and delivering the same to the collector of customs of the district at which such Chinese laborer shall seek to re-enter; and upon delivery of such certificate by such Chinese laborer to the collector of customs at the time of re-entry in the United States said collector shall cause the same to be filed in the custom-house anti duly canceled.

SEC. 5. That any Chinese laborer mentioned in section four of this act being in the United States, and desiring to depart from the United States by land, shall have the right to demand and receive, free of charge or cost, a certificate of identification similar to that provided for in section four of this act to be issued to such Chinese laborers as may desire to leave the United States by water; and it is hereby made the duty of the collector of customs of the district next adjoining the foreign country to which said Chinese laborer desires to go to issue such certificate, free of charge or cost, upon application by such Chinese laborer, and to enter the same upon registry-books to be kept by him for the purpose, as provided for in section four of this act.

SEC. 6. That in order to the faithful execution of articles one and two of the treaty in this act before mentioned, every Chinese person other than a laborer who may be entitled by said treaty and this act to come within the United States, and who shall be about to come to the United States, shall be identified as so entitled by the Chinese Government in each case , such identity to be evidenced by a certificate issued under the authority of said government, which certificate shall be in the English language or (if not in the English language) accompanied by a translation into English, stating such right to come, and which certificate shall state the name, title or official rank, if any, the age, height, and all physical peculiarities, former and present occupation or profession, and place of residence in China of the person to whom the certificate is issued and that such person is entitled, conformably to the treaty in this act mentioned to come within the United States. Such certificate shall be prima-facie evidence of the fact set forth therein, and shall be produced to the collector of customs, or his deputy, of the port in the district in the United States at which the person named therein shall arrive.

SEC. 7. That any person who shall knowingly and falsely alter or substitute any name for the name written in such certificate or forge any such certificate, or knowingly utter any forged or fraudulent certificate, or falsely personate any person named in any such certificate, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor ; and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned in a penitentiary for a term of not more than five years.

SEC. 8. That the master of any vessel arriving in the United States from any foreign port or place shall, at the same time he delivers a manifest of the cargo, and if there be no cargo, then at the time of making a report of the entry of the vessel pursuant to law, in addition to the other matter required to be reported, and before landing, or permitting to land, any Chinese passengers, deliver and report to the collector of customs of the district in which such vessels shall have arrived a separate list of all Chinese passengers taken on board his vessel at any foreign port or place, and all such passengers on board the vessel at that time. Such list shall show the names of such passengers (and if accredited officers of the Chinese Government traveling on the business of that government, or their servants, with a note of such facts), and the names and other particulars, as shown by their respective certificates; and such list shall be sworn to by the master in the manner required by law in relation to the manifest of the cargo. Any willful refusal or neglect of any such master to comply with the provisions of this section shall incur the same penalties and forfeiture as are provided for a refusal or neglect to report and deliver a manifest of the cargo.

SEC. 9. That before any Chinese passengers are landed from any such line vessel, the collector, or his deputy, shall proceed to examine such passenger, comparing the certificate with the list and with the passengers ; and no passenger shall be allowed to land in the United States from such vessel in violation of law.

SEC.10. That every vessel whose master shall knowingly violate any of the provisions of this act shall be deemed forfeited to the United States, and shall be liable to seizure and condemnation in any district of the United States into which such vessel may enter or in which she may be found.

SEC. 11. That any person who shall knowingly bring into or cause to be brought into the United States by land, or who shall knowingly aid or abet the same, or aid or abet the landing in the United States from any vessel of any Chinese person not lawfully entitled to enter the United States, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned for a term not exceeding one year.

SEC. 12. That no Chinese person shall be permitted to enter the United States by land without producing to the proper officer of customs the certificate in this act required of Chinese persons seeking to land from a vessel. And any Chinese person found unlawfully within the United States shall be caused to be removed therefrom to the country from whence he came , by direction of the President of the United States, and at the cost of the United States, after being brought before some justice, judge, or commissioner of a court of the United States and found to be one not lawfully entitled to be or remain in the United States.

SEC. 13. That this act shall not apply to diplomatic and other officers of the Chinese Government traveling upon the business of that government, whose credentials shall be taken as equivalent to the certificate in this act mentioned, and shall exempt them and their body and household servants from the provisions of this act as to other Chinese persons.

SEC. 14. That hereafter no State court or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizenship; and all laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed.

SEC.15. That the words “Chinese laborers”, wherever used in this act shall be construed to mean both skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining.

Approved, May 6, 1882 .

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

Get Our Newsletter

Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

Privacy Policy   Contact Us You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

More Stories

• Power over Presidential Records

• A Utopia—for Some—in India

• Islands in the Cash Stream 

Wooden Kings and Winds of Change in Tonga

Recent posts.

• Ice, Art, and a Living Earth
• In the Mood for “Fake” Music?

Support JSTOR Daily

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Causes and effects

What is the Chinese Exclusion Act?

How did the chinese exclusion act affect chinese immigrants who were already in the united states, why was the chinese exclusion act repealed, how did the chinese exclusion act affect america.

Chinese Exclusion Act

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• National Archives - Chinese Exclusion Act (1882)
• The Canadian Encyclopedia - Chinese Immigration Act
• Office of the Historian - Repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act, 1943
• Yale Law School - Lillian Goldman Law Library - The Avalon Project - Chinese Exclusion Act; May 6, 1882
• GlobalSecurity.org - Chinese Exclusion Act
• CNN - On this day 141 years ago, a new law began reshaping America. More than a century later, Congress apologized for it
• Bill of Rights Institute - The Chinese Exclusion Act
• Densho Encyclopedia - Chinese Exclusion Act
• Chinese Exclusion Act - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

The Chinese Exclusion Act (formally Immigration Act of 1882) was a U.S. federal law that was the first and only major federal legislation to explicitly suspend immigration for a specific nationality. The basic exclusion law prohibited Chinese labourers—defined as “both skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining”—from entering the United States . The passage of the act represented the outcome of years of racial hostility and anti-immigrant agitation by white Americans.

Chinese communities in the United States underwent dramatic change because of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Families were forced apart, and businesses were closed down. Because of the severe restrictions on female immigrants and the pattern of young men migrating alone, a largely bachelor society emerged. Under the continuing anti-Chinese pressure, Chinatowns were established in urban cities where the Chinese could retreat into their own cultural and social colonies.

When did the Chinese Exclusion Act end?

The Chinese Exclusion Act ended in 1943 when it was repealed with the passage of the Magnuson Act, which permitted an annual quota of 105 Chinese immigrants.

Various factors contributed to the repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1943, such as the calming of the anti-Chinese sentiment of previous decades, the establishment of quota systems for immigrants of other nationalities who had rapidly increased in the United States, and the political consideration that the United States and China were allies in World War II .

The Chinese Exclusion Act significantly decreased the number of Chinese immigrants in the United States : according to the U.S. national census, there were 105,465 in 1880, compared with 89,863 by 1900 and 61,639 by 1920. It signaled the shift from a previously open immigration policy to one where criteria were set regarding who—in terms of ethnicity, gender, and class—could be admitted. Immigration patterns, immigration communities, and racial identities and categories were significantly affected.

Chinese Exclusion Act , U.S. federal law that was the first and only major federal legislation to explicitly suspend immigration for a specific nationality. The basic exclusion law prohibited Chinese labourers—defined as “both skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining”—from entering the country. Subsequent amendments to the law prevented Chinese labourers who had left the United States from returning. The passage of the act represented the outcome of years of racial hostility and anti-immigrant agitation by white Americans, set the precedent for later restrictions against immigration of other nationalities, and started a new era in which the United States changed from a country that welcomed almost all immigrants to a gatekeeping one.

The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed by Congress and signed by Pres. Chester A. Arthur in 1882. It lasted for 10 years and was extended for another 10 years by the 1892 Geary Act, which also required that people of Chinese origin carry identification certificates or face deportation . Later measures placed a number of other restrictions on the Chinese, such as limiting their access to bail bonds and allowing entry to only those who were teachers, students, diplomats, and tourists. Congress closed the gate to Chinese immigrants almost entirely by extending the Chinese Exclusion Act for another 10 years in 1902 and making the extension indefinite in 1904.

The Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed in 1943 with the passage of the Magnuson Act, which permitted a quota of 105 Chinese immigrants annually. Various factors contributed to the repeal, such as the quieted anti-Chinese sentiment , the establishment of quota systems for immigrants of other nationalities who had rapidly increased in the United States, and the political consideration that the United States and China were allies in World War II .

Many scholars explain the institution of the Chinese Exclusion Act and similar laws as a product of the widespread anti-Chinese movement in California in the second half of the 19th century. The Chinese had constituted a significant minority on the West Coast since the middle of the 19th century. Initially, they laboured in gold mines, where they showed a facility for finding gold. As a result, they encountered hostility and were gradually forced to leave the field and move to urban areas such as San Francisco , where they were often confined to performing some of the dirtiest and hardest work. Americans in the West persisted in their stereotyping of the Chinese as degraded, exotic, dangerous, and competitors for jobs and wages. Sen. John F. Miller of California, a proponent of the Chinese Exclusion Act, argued that the Chinese workers were “machine-like…of obtuse nerve, but little affected by heat or cold, wiry, sinewy, with muscles of iron.” Partly in response to that stereotype , organized labour in the West made restricting the influx of Chinese into the United States one of its goals. In other words, the exclusion was the result of a grassroots anti-Chinese sentiment. Other scholars have argued that the exclusion should be blamed on top-down politics rather than a bottom-up movement, explaining that national politicians manipulated white workers to gain an electoral advantage. Still others have adopted a “national racism thesis” that focuses on endemic anti-Chinese racism in early American national culture .

The exclusion laws had dramatic impacts on Chinese immigrants and communities . They significantly decreased the number of Chinese immigrants into the United States and forbade those who left to return. According to the U.S. national census in 1880, there were 105,465 Chinese in the United States, compared with 89,863 by 1900 and 61,639 by 1920. Chinese immigrants were placed under a tremendous amount of government scrutiny and were often denied entry into the country on any possible grounds. In 1910 the Angel Island Immigration Station was established in San Francisco Bay . Upon arrival there a Chinese immigrant could be detained for weeks to years before being granted or denied entry. Chinese communities underwent dramatic changes as well. Families were forced apart, and businesses were closed down. Because of the severe restrictions on female immigrants and the pattern of young men migrating alone, there emerged a largely bachelor society. Under the continuing anti-Chinese pressure, Chinatowns were established in urban cities, where the Chinese could retreat into their own cultural and social colonies.

The excluded Chinese did not passively accept unfair treatment but rather used all types of tools to challenge or circumvent the laws. One such tool was the American judicial system . Despite having come from a country without a litigious tradition, Chinese immigrants learned quickly to use courts as a venue to fight for their rights and won many cases in which ordinances aimed against the Chinese were declared unconstitutional by either the state or federal courts. They were aided in their legal battles by Frederick Bee , a California entrepreneur and attorney who was one of the principal American advocates of the civil rights of Chinese immigrants and who represented many of them in court from 1882 to 1892. They also protested against racial discrimination through other venues , such as the media and petitions.

Some Chinese simply evaded the laws altogether by immigrating illegally. In fact, the phenomenon of illegal immigration became one of the most significant legacies of the Chinese-exclusion era in the United States. Despite the disproportionate time and resources spent by U.S. immigration officials to control Chinese immigration, many Chinese migrated across the borders from Canada and Mexico or used fraudulent identities to enter the country. A common strategy was that of the so-called “ paper son ” system, in which young Chinese males attempted to enter the United States with purchased identity papers for fictional sons of U.S. citizens (people of Chinese descent who had falsely established the identities of those “sons”). Thus, Chinese exclusion was not only an institution that produced and reinforced a system of racial hierarchy in immigration law, but it was also a process that both immigration officials and immigrants shaped and a realm of power dominance, struggle, and resistance.

The impact of the exclusion laws went beyond restricting, marginalizing , and, ironically, activating the Chinese. It signaled the shift from a previously open immigration policy in the United States to one in which the federal government exerted control over immigrants. Criteria were gradually set regarding which people—in terms of their ethnicity , gender, and class—could be admitted. Immigration patterns, immigration communities, and racial identities and categories were significantly affected. The very definition of what it meant to be an American became more exclusionary. Meanwhile, Chinese-exclusion practices shaped immigration law during that time period. Believing that courts gave too much advantage to the immigrants, the government succeeded in cutting off Chinese access to the courts and gradually transferred administration of Chinese-exclusion laws completely to the Bureau of Immigration, an agency operating free from court scrutiny. By 1910 the enforcement of the exclusion laws had become centralized, systematic, and bureaucratic .

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Chinese Exclusion Act

By: History.com Staff

Updated: August 9, 2022 | Original: August 24, 2018

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first significant law restricting immigration into the United States. Many Americans on the West Coast attributed declining wages and economic ills to Chinese workers. Although the Chinese composed only 0.002 percent of the nation's population, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act to placate worker demands and assuage concerns about maintaining white "racial purity."

Chinese Immigration in America

The Opium Wars (1839-42, 1856-60) of the mid-nineteenth century between Great Britain and China left China heavily in debt. Additionally, floods and drought contributed to an exodus of peasants from their farms, and many left the country to find work. When gold was discovered in the Sacramento Valley of California in 1848, a large uptick in Chinese immigrants entered the United States to join the California Gold Rush .

Following an 1852 crop failure in China, over 20,000 Chinese immigrants came through the custom house in San Francisco (up from 2,716 the previous year) looking for work. Violence soon broke out between white miners and the new arrivals, much of it racially charged. In May 1852, California imposed a Foreign Miners License Tax of $3 month meant to target Chinese miners, and crime and violence escalated.

An 1854 California Supreme Court case, People v. Hall , ruled that the Chinese, like Black Americans and Native Americans , were not allowed to testify in court, making it effectively impossible for Chinese immigrants to seek justice against the mounting violence. By 1870, Chinese miners had paid $5 million to the state of California via the Foreign Miners License Tax, yet they faced continuing discrimination at work and in their camps.

Purpose of the Chinese Exclusion Act

Meant to curb the influx of Chinese immigrants to the United States—particularly California—the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 suspended Chinese immigration for ten years and declared Chinese immigrants ineligible for naturalization.

President Chester A. Arthur signed it into law on May 6, 1882. Chinese-Americans already in the country challenged the constitutionality of the discriminatory acts, but their efforts failed.

Geary Act of 1892

Proposed by California congressman Thomas J. Geary , the Geary Act went into effect on May 5, 1892. It reinforced and extended the Chinese Exclusion Act’s ban on Chinese immigration for an additional ten years. It also required Chinese residents in the United States to carry special documentation—certificates of residence—from the Internal Revenue Service .

Immigrants who were caught not carrying the certificates were sentenced to hard labor and deportation, and bail was only an option if the accused were vouched for by a “credible white witness.”

China’s government protested these discriminatory laws, but with anti-immigrant sentiment at fever pitch in the United States, there was little they could do. Chinese Americans were finally allowed to testify in court after the 1882 trial of laborer Yee Shun , though it would take decades for the immigration ban to be lifted.

Impact of Chinese Exclusion Act

The Supreme Court upheld the Geary Act in Fong Yue Ting v. United States in 1893, and in 1902 Chinese immigration was made permanently illegal. The legislation proved very effective, and the Chinese population in the United States sharply declined.

American experience with Chinese exclusion spurred later movements for immigration restriction against other "undesirable" groups such as Middle Easterners, Hindu and East Indians and the Japanese with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924 .

Chinese immigrants and their American-born families remained ineligible for citizenship until 1943 with the passage of the Magnuson Act . By then, the U.S. was embroiled in World War II and sought to improve relations with an important Asian ally.

READ MORE: Before the Chinese Exclusion Act, This Anti-Immigrant Law Targeted Asian Women

Chinese Immigrants and the Gold Rush. PBS . Chinese Immigration and the Chinese Exclusion Acts. The State Department .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Learning Resources

The chinese exclusion act:, read for understanding.

In 2020 the  United Nations  reported a rise in Anti-Asian racism and Xenophobia during the COVID-19 flu pandemic. As you explore these learning resources, you will learn more about the role Chinese Americans have played in shaping our nation's past, and the ways in which American policies and discrimination have limited immigrants past and present.

Key Vocabulary

How have u.s. policies limited asian-american citizenship, statue of liberty.

commons.wikimedia.org

• Look for patterns in your list.  What do some or all of your words have in common?
• What does your list tell you about how you view the Statue of Liberty?

A Chinese Immigrant Reacts to the Statue of Liberty

This letter, originally published in the New York Sun in 1885, was written by Saum Song Bo in response to a fund-raising campaign for the building of a pedestal for the Statue of Liberty. Three years earlier, Congress had passed the Chinese Exclusion Act.

shec.ashp.cuny.edu

A CHINESE IMMIGRANT’S VIEW -- Read this letter written in 1885 by a Chinese immigrant to a New York newspaper, three years after Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act.  This act suspended Chinese immigration to the U.S. for 10 years and denied Chinese immigrants the right to become naturalized citizens . As you read, your teacher may provide you a copy of this “4 C’s” graphic organizer , adding at least 1 idea for each category.

"The 4 C's" Organizer

docs.google.com

• What shaped Chinese immigrant Saum Song Bo’s view of the Statue of Liberty and of being an American citizen?
• How does this example show how a U.S. policy limited Asian-American citizenship?
• How did Americans try to purge Chinese-Americans from the U.S.?

American Panorama - Foreign Born

dsl.richmond.edu

Examine Chinese immigration in the 1800s by making a copy and completing this Data Organizer . 

NAH Data Organizer for "Foreign-Born Population" map

• From 1850 to 1900, how would you describe the changes in the Chinese-born population in the U.S.?
• Click on the 1880 vertical line in the “Population over Time” timeline.  In your own words, summarize the story box in the lower right-hand corner.  
• How did the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 affect the number of Chinese-born people in the 30 years after the act was passed?
• Conduct online research to answer these questions, based on the data: What accounts for the changes in the Chinese-born population from 1850 to 1900?  (What was going on in China from 1850 to 1900?  What was going on in the U.S.?)

Here are some suggestions for trustworthy sites: PBS: The Story of China , BBC China Timeline , Library of Congress Timeline of U.S. History

Home | Story of China | PBS

www.pbs.org

China profile - Timeline

A chronology of key events in the history of China

www.bbc.com

Printable Timeline  | 1850 to 1899  | Timeline  | Articles and Essays  | Library of Congress

www.loc.gov

A STORY OF GOLD, JOBS, AND RACISM: Many Chinese immigrants escaped instability in China and moved to the western U.S. in the 1800s in search of gold, factory jobs, or work building the American rail system.  Read this Bunk article excerpt called “The Forgotten History of the Campaign to Purge Chinese from America” .  

The Forgotten History of the Campaign to Purge Chinese from America

The surge in violence against Asian-Americans is a reminder that America’s present reality reflects its exclusionary past.

www.bunkhistory.org

After you read, complete a separate “4 C’s” organizer and share your ideas from each column of the chart in your small groups.

• How does the data you examined fit into the story of Asian-Americans in the U.S.?

What prompted the Chinese Exclusion Act, and what have been its lasting consequences?

In the shadow of chinese exclusion — backstory archive.

Imagine living in a country without the ability to become a citizen. Meanwhile, you endure discrimination and outright hostility on a daily basis because of your ethnicity. This was the struggle of Chinese people living in the U.S. for decades. In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act barred immigration for Chinese laborers and declared the Chinese ineligible for citizenship.

backstory.newamericanhistory.org

• What is the most important point?
• What are you finding challenging, puzzling or difficult to understand?
• What question would you most like to discuss? 
• What is something you found interesting?

NAH "Take Note" Listening Guide - Chinese Exclusion Act

BEFORE EXCLUSION BECAME LAW: Laws can sometimes be the product of a place’s developed norms or attitudes.  How did the attitudes and actions toward Chinese-Americans in California and the American West in the mid-1800s lead to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882? 

The California Klan’s Anti-Asian Crusade

Whereas southern Klansmen assaulted Black Americans and their white allies, western vigilantes targeted those they deemed a greater threat: Chinese immigrants.

The Bloody History of Anti-Asian Violence in the West

One of the largest mass lynchings in the United States targeted Chinese immigrants in Los Angeles.

• What were the attitudes and events that led to the Chinese Exclusion Act, and what has been the lasting legacy of the Act?

How could we compare and contrast the history of the Chinese Exclusion Act and the history of Jim Crow laws in America?

Racism has always been part of the asian american experience.

If we don’t understand the history of Asian exclusion, we cannot understand the racist hatred of the present.

Read the Bunk excerpt, “ Racism Has Always Been Part of the Asian American Experience ”.  Make a copy, or your teacher will provide you a copy of this Reading Guide that contains a Summary Sentence and the 4 C’s thinking routine .

NAH Reading Guide - Summary & "The 4 C's"

After you complete the Reading Guide, answer this question: Compare the history of the Chinese Exclusion Act and the history of Jim Crow laws.   To do that, complete the Comparison Research Guide to organize your findings.  Use the Bank of Sources on the guide to build your answer.

NAH Comparison Research Guide

STEP #1 Use the Bank of Sources below to answer this question: Compare the history of the Chinese Exclusion Act and the history of Jim Crow laws. Skim through the sources. Use their information to complete the chart below. BANK OF SOURCES Guo, Jeff. “The Real Reasons the U.S. Became Less Rac...

Your teacher may ask you to record your answers on an exit ticket.

What can Americans today learn from the Chinese Exclusion Act?

Nah reflection guide.

Rewiring American History

• Why do you think the history of the Chinese Exclusion Act matters today?  
• What lessons should we Americans draw from it?

“A Chinese Immigrant Reacts to the Statue of Liberty · SHEC: Resources for Teachers.” Social History for Every Classroom. American Social History Productions, Inc. - City University of New York. Accessed July 6, 2021. https://shec.ashp.cuny.edu/items/show/950 .

Luo, Michael. “The Forgotten History of the Campaign to Purge Chinese from America.” The New Yorker. Accessed July 6, 2021. https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-forgotten-history-of-the-purging-of-chinese-from-america .

Nelson, R. K., Nesbit, S., Ayers, E. L., Madron, J., & Ayers, N. (n.d.). “Foreign Born” in American Panorama, ed. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/foreignborn/#decade=2010 .

“Project Zero's Thinking Routine Toolbox.” PZ's Thinking Routines Toolbox | Project Zero, www.pz.harvard.edu/thinking-routines .

“To Be a Citizen?” BackStory. Virginia Humanities. Accessed July 6, 2021. https://www.backstoryradio.org/shows/to-be-a-citizen/#segment-in-the-shadow-of-chinese-exclusion .

Waite, Kevin. “The Forgotten History of the Western Klan.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, April 6, 2021. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/california-klans-anti-asian-crusade/618513/ .

Waite, Kevin. “The Bloody History of Anti-Asian Violence in the West.” History & Culture - Race in America. National Geographic, May 10, 2021. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/the-bloody-history-of-anti-asian-violence-in-the-west .

This work by New American History is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) International License . Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at newamericanhistory.org.

Comments? Questions?

Let us know what you think about this Learning Resource. We’d also love to hear other ideas or answer questions from you!

Search The Canadian Encyclopedia

Enter your search term

Why sign up?

Signing up enhances your TCE experience with the ability to save items to your personal reading list, and access the interactive map.

• MLA 8TH EDITION
• Chan, Arlene. "Chinese Immigration Act". The Canadian Encyclopedia , 30 May 2023, Historica Canada . www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act. Accessed 25 June 2024.
• The Canadian Encyclopedia , 30 May 2023, Historica Canada . www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act. Accessed 25 June 2024." href="#" class="js-copy-clipboard b b-md b-invert b-modal-copy">Copy
• APA 6TH EDITION
• Chan, A. (2023). Chinese Immigration Act. In The Canadian Encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act
• The Canadian Encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act" href="#" class="js-copy-clipboard b b-md b-invert b-modal-copy">Copy
• CHICAGO 17TH EDITION
• Chan, Arlene. "Chinese Immigration Act." The Canadian Encyclopedia . Historica Canada. Article published March 07, 2017; Last Edited May 30, 2023.
• The Canadian Encyclopedia . Historica Canada. Article published March 07, 2017; Last Edited May 30, 2023." href="#" class="js-copy-clipboard b b-md b-invert b-modal-copy">Copy
• TURABIAN 8TH EDITION
• The Canadian Encyclopedia , s.v. "Chinese Immigration Act," by Arlene Chan, Accessed June 25, 2024, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act
• The Canadian Encyclopedia , s.v. "Chinese Immigration Act," by Arlene Chan, Accessed June 25, 2024, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act" href="#" class="js-copy-clipboard b b-md b-invert b-modal-copy">Copy

Thank you for your submission

Our team will be reviewing your submission and get back to you with any further questions.

Thanks for contributing to The Canadian Encyclopedia.

• Chinese Immigration Act

Article by Arlene Chan

Updated by Clayton Ma

Published Online March 7, 2017

Last Edited May 30, 2023

The anti-Chinese movement took root after the first wave of Chinese immigrants began arriving in British Columbia for the gold rush of 1858. The second major Chinese influx to the province came as labourers for the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway (1881–85), a labour force much needed for the development of Western Canada but not desirable as citizens for a “White Canada forever.” This popular phrase among politicians and the media was derived from the White Canada policy laid down in the Immigration Act of 1910. While the act did not name any racial or ethnic groups, it did allow for the restriction of “immigrants belonging to any race deemed unsuited to the climate or requirements of Canada,” the ethnic basis for Canadian immigration policy until 1967 ( see Prejudice and Discrimination ).

After the completion of the CPR, agitation against the “yellow peril” gathered momentum, resulting in over 100 provincial laws and policies that restricted the rights of Chinese residents. (The “yellow peril” reference to Chinese and Japanese people originated in the late 1800s after they arrived as labourers in the United States and Canada; it expressed Western prejudice towards East Asian immigrants.) The Canadian government’s most racist and exclusionary law, however, was the Chinese Immigration Act of 1885. Under that law, a $50 head tax was levied on all Chinese immigrants. The head tax was increased to $100 in 1900 and to $500 in 1903. It became clear that this punitive entry fee did not discourage Chinese immigration , as intended. The Chinese population tripled during the head-tax era, from 13,000 in 1885 to 39,587 in 1921. A harsher solution was required: exclusion.

On 1 July 1923, Dominion Day, now called Canada Day , the Chinese Immigration Act , a new law with the same name, was passed. The Chinese in Canada referred to this day as “Humiliation Day” and refused to join in its celebrations for many years.

Community Life

From the government’s point of view, the Chinese Immigration Act was an overwhelming success. During the exclusionary period, fewer than 50 Chinese immigrants were allowed entry. The population decreased by 25 per cent, from 39,587 in 1921 to 32,528 by 1951. Not only did the law ban Chinese immigration , it also intentionally disrupted family life and stunted community growth.

In 1941 there were 29,033 Chinese men in Canada, over 80 per cent of whom were married with wives and children left behind in China. Enduring this family separation, these “married bachelors” lived alone. A mere handful had the financial means to make a trip to China a few times during the exclusionary years to either marry or visit their wives and children. Whether or not they were Canadian-born or naturalized, they were not allowed to sponsor family members to join them in Canada.

With the absence of family life, the Chinese community found support through their traditional associations, not only for socialization and relaxation, but also for financial aid, banking services, social services and employment and housing assistance. These organizations, some of the membership of which was based on shared surnames, some on common place of origin, provided a haven for the bachelor society.

Political associations, on the other hand, were competitive in signing up members, regardless of surnames and place of birth. Differences in political ideologies resulted in conflicting views about events unfolding in China. There were rare instances, however, that brought disparate groups together. The passing of the Chinese Immigration Act was one such occasion. A national federation of Chinese organizations was one of many that exhausted all legal and political avenues to repeal the Act, which they named the “forty-three harsh regulations.”

Economic Life

At the onset of the Chinese Immigration Act , prejudice and discrimination were already well entrenched. Chinese people were reduced to second-class status as an inferior race ( see Racism ). Legislation barred them from the right to vote , to hold public office or to own property, limited employment and housing and imposed many other restrictions. Protests from White workers and labour unions hampered their ability to earn a living. Still burdened by paying off debts incurred by the head tax , they also earned lower wages. Bearing such harsh conditions, Chinese people retreated into small businesses such as laundries, restaurants and grocery stores. Employment as cooks and servants, domestic work that was undesirable to White workers due to the low pay and social status, was also willingly endured rather than the alternative of returning to China and sacrificing the earnings that supported their families there.

The urgency to earn money for families in China was so great that desperate times called for desperate solutions. An illegal immigration scheme gathered momentum from the head-tax era, one that arranged for people, mostly males, to come to Canada with fraudulent papers claiming false identities. These “paper sons” adopted new surnames, then came under the identity of someone who was entitled to return to Canada but did not. The price was high, not only for the cost of the fake identity, but also the subsequent years of living in fear of being deported back to China and keeping secret their real names, even from their descendants.

The Great Depression (1929–39) added an additional layer of hardship. The Chinese unemployment rate soared as high as 80 per cent in Vancouver , a sharp contrast to the city’s overall jobless rate of 30.2 per cent in 1931. Loss of face was a deeply entrenched cultural value and a hindrance to seeking help outside of their community. Although most Chinese people turned to their traditional associations for financial assistance, those who had to rely on the government received less money than expected. Relief payments of $1.12 per week to Chinese people in Alberta , as an example, were less than half of what was given to other Albertans.

The War Years, 1937–45

News from China did not bring any comfort during the exclusionary years. Civil wars pitted the ruling Nationalist Party ( Guomindang ) against military warlords and rising Communist forces. Beyond these internal conflicts were external threats from Japan, starting with small-scale incidents that escalated to the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War in 1937 and the occupation of China. The flow of letters and remittances (money sent home) was interrupted, particularly after the Japanese captured Hong Kong , a major communication hub between China and North America. The safety and well-being of family members in China was unknown.

The outbreak of the Second World War in 1939 marked a turning point in Chinese Canadian history. The war provided an opportunity to volunteer for service, ultimately to prove one’s loyalty and patriotism and gain the right to vote . The issue, however, polarized the Chinese community into two factions: “Serve first, demand rights after” versus “No vote, no fight.”

The declaration of war against Japan in 1941 was another tipping point. Canada and China were now allied, fighting together against a common enemy. The military policy of barring Chinese recruits was reversed in 1944 in an amendment to the National Resources Mobilization Act of 1940. An estimated 600 Chinese people, including several women, enlisted in all three branches of the Canadian Armed Forces .

The war’s end in 1945 brought lessening hostility, favourable media coverage and growing esteem for the Chinese community’s war effort in military service, fundraising and Victory Loan drives. Politicians, labour unions and war veterans joined church leaders in demanding the Canadian government repeal its anti-Chinese legislation. An additional pressure point in 1945 was the United Nations ’ Charter of Human Rights and subsequent Universal Declaration of Human Rights . Canada, as a signatory country, contravened these new universal rights with its anti-Chinese policies.

In 1947, Canada repealed the Chinese Immigration Act . As much as the language of exclusion was removed, Chinese immigrants were still treated inequitably due to Order-in-Council , P.C. 2115. This order stipulated that entrance was limited to only spouses and children (under the age of 18) of Canadian citizens at a time when only 8 per cent of Chinese-born residents were naturalized citizens. For other immigrants, there were no such restrictions. Delegations of Chinese and non-Chinese individuals made annual visits to Ottawa to lobby for an immigration policy that would ease family reunification. Men in the bachelor society who dreamed of bringing their families to Canada were largely disappointed for another 20 years.

In 1967, immigration restrictions on the basis of race and national origin were finally removed. Chinese immigrants could now apply for entry on equal footing with other applicants.

Apology and Redress

Nationwide campaigns lobbied the federal government for over 20 years to apologize for the injustices of its past anti-Chinese immigration policies . On 22 June 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper formally apologized for the head tax (1885–1923) and exclusionary legislation (1923–47). Symbolic payments were made to surviving head-tax payers and to the spouses of deceased payers. A community fund was designated for projects to commemorate and educate Canadians about the past injustices endured by the Chinese Canadian community. An apology by Christy Clark , premier of British Columbia , followed on 15 May 2014, and a $1 million legacy fund was promised for educational initiatives.

In 2023, the federal government recognized the exclusion of Chinese immigrants from Canada from 1923 to 1947 as an event of historical significance.

Significance

The Chinese Immigration Act successfully halted the influx of Chinese immigrants into Canada and severely restricted economic, social and community development for 24 years. After the Second World War , the repeal of this discriminatory legislation, the gaining of the right to vote and the establishment of the Canadian Citizenship Act in 1947 were the first steps to increased and more equitable inclusion into Canadian life. The Chinese in Canada could now assume their rightful place as valued Canadian citizens .

• immigration
• Chinese Canadians
• racial discrimination

Further Reading

Peter Li, The Chinese in Canada (1998)

Lisa Mar, Brokering Belonging: Chinese in Canada’s Exclusion Era, 1885-1945 (2010)

Anthony B. Chan, Gold Mountain: The Chinese in the New World (1983)

Harry Con, Ronald J. Con, Graham Johnson, Edgar Wickberg and William E. Willmott, From China to Canada: A History of the Chinese Communities in Canada (1982)

External Links

Exclusion of Chinese Immigrants (1923-1947) National Historic Event

Recommended

Chinese head tax in canada, internment of japanese canadians, child migration to canada.

Make a gift to PBS News Hour and your donation will be doubled !

Support Intelligent, In-Depth, Trustworthy Journalism.

What do you think? Leave a respectful comment.

Adrian De Leon, The Conversation Adrian De Leon, The Conversation

• Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/the-long-history-of-racism-against-asian-americans-in-the-u-s

The long history of racism against Asian Americans in the U.S.

In a recent Washington Post op-ed , former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang called upon Asian Americans to become part of the solution against COVID-19.

In the face of rising anti-Asian racist actions – now at about 100 reported cases per day – Yang implores Asian Americans to “wear red, white, and blue” in their efforts to combat the virus.

Optimistically, before Donald Trump declared COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus,” Yang believed that “getting the virus under control” would rid this country of its anti-Asian racism. But Asian American history, my field of research , suggests a sobering reality.

A history of anti-Asian racism

Up until the eve of the COVID-19 crisis, the prevailing narrative about Asian Americans was one of the model minority.

The model minority concept, developed during and after World War II, posits that Asian Americans were the ideal immigrants of color to the United States due to their economic success.

But in the United States, Asian Americans have long been considered as a threat to a nation that promoted a whites-only immigration policy. They were called a “yellow peril”: unclean and unfit for citizenship in America .

In the late 19th century, white nativists spread xenophobic propaganda about Chinese uncleanliness in San Francisco. This fueled the passage of the infamous Chinese Exclusion Act , the first law in the United States that barred immigration solely based on race. Initially, the act placed a 10-year moratorium on all Chinese migration.

In the early 20th century, American officials in the Philippines, then a formal colony of the U.S., denigrated Filipinos for their supposedly unclean and uncivilized bodies . Colonial officers and doctors identified two enemies: Filipino insurgents against American rule, and “tropical diseases” festering in native bodies. By pointing to Filipinos’ political and medical unruliness, these officials justified continued U.S. colonial rule in the islands.

On February 19, 1942, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 to incarcerate people under suspicion as enemies to inland internment camps.

While the order also affected German- and Italian-Americans on the East Coast, the vast majority of those incarcerated in 1942 were of Japanese descent. Many of them were naturalized citizens, second- and third-generation Americans. Internees who fought in the celebrated 442nd Regiment were coerced by the United States military to prove their loyalty to a country that locked them up simply for being Japanese.

In the 21st century, even the most “multicultural” North American cities, like my hometown of Toronto, Canada, are hotbeds for virulent racism. During the 2003 SARS outbreak, Toronto saw a rise of anti-Asian racism , much like that of today.

In her 2008 study, sociologist Carrianne Leung highlights the everyday racism against Chinese and Filipina health care workers in the years that followed the SARS crisis. While publicly celebrated for their work in hospitals and other health facilities, these women found themselves fearing for their lives on their way home.

No expression of patriotism – not even being front-line workers in a pandemic – makes Asian migrants immune to racism .

Making the model minority

Over the past decade, from Pulitzer Prizes to popular films , Asian Americans have slowly been gaining better representation in Hollywood and other cultural industries.

Whereas “The Joy Luck Club” had long been the most infamous depiction of Asian-ness in Hollywood, by the 2018 Golden Globes, Sandra Oh declared her now famous adage: “It’s an honor just to be Asian.” It was, at least at face value, a moment of cultural inclusion.

However, so-called Asian American inclusion has a dark side.

In reality, as cultural historian Robert G. Lee has argued , inclusion can and has been used to undermine the activism of African Americans, indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups in the United States. In the words of writer Frank Chin in 1974, “Whites love us because we’re not black.”

For example, in 1943, a year after the United States incarcerated Japanese Americans under Executive Order 9066, Congress repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act. White liberals advocated for the repeal not out of altruism toward Chinese migrants, but to advocate for a transpacific alliance against Japan and the Axis powers .

By allowing for the free passage of Chinese migrants to the United States, the nation could show its supposed fitness as an interracial superpower that rivaled Japan and Germany. Meanwhile, incarcerated Japanese Americans in camps and African Americans were still held under Jim Crow segregation laws.

In her new book, “ Opening the Gates to Asia: A Transpacific History of How America Repealed Asian Exclusion ,” Occidental College historian Jane Hong reveals how the United States government used Asian immigration inclusion against other minority groups at a time of social upheaval.

For example, in 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration signed the much-celebrated Hart-Celler Act into law. The act primarily targeted Asian and African migrants, shifting immigration from an exclusionary quota system to an merit-based points system. However, it also imposed immigration restrictions on Latin America.

Beyond model minority politics

As history shows, Asian American communities stand to gain more working within communities and across the lines of race, rather than trying to appeal to those in power.

Japanese American activists such as the late Yuri Kochiyama worked in solidarity with other communities of color to advance the civil rights movement.

A former internee at the Jerome Relocation Center in Arkansas, Kochiyama’s postwar life in Harlem, and her friendship with Malcolm X, inspired her to become active in the anti-Vietnam War and civil rights movements. In the 1980s, she and her husband Bill, himself part of the 442nd Regiment, worked at the forefront of the reparations and apology movement for Japanese internees. As a result of their efforts, Ronald Reagan signed the resulting Civil Liberties Act into law in 1988 .

Kochiyama and activists like her have inspired the cross-community work of Asian American communities after them.

In Los Angeles, where I live, the Little Tokyo Service Center is among those at the forefront of grassroots organizing for affordable housing and social services in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood . While the organization’s priority area is Little Tokyo and its community members, the center’s work advocates for affordable housing among black and Latinx residents, as well as Japanese American and other Asian American groups.

To the northwest in Koreatown, the grassroots organization Ktown for All conducts outreach to unhoused residents of the neighborhood, regardless of ethnic background.

The coronavirus sees no borders. Likewise, I think that everyone must follow the example of these organizations and activists, past and present, to reach across borders and contribute to collective well-being.

Self-isolation, social distancing and healthy practices should not be in the service of proving one’s patriotism. Instead, these precautions should be done for the sake of caring for those whom we do and do not know, inside and outside our national communities.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

Adrian De Leon is an assistant professor of American studies and ethnicity at the University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.

Support Provided By: Learn more

Support PBS News:

Educate your inbox

Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else.

Thank you. Please check your inbox to confirm.

Unit 4 Immigration, Migration, Refugees

Chapter 4 chinese immigration, educator tools.

Ask yourself:

• Why did the federal government discriminate against a single ethnic group?
• What debt, if any, do Canadians owe to those who were victims of injustice in the past?
• Is exclusion ever fair? Why would one group exclude another?

Dr. Joseph Wong talks about the Chinese Head Tax

On this page you will have the opportunity to consider the concept of exclusion and by examining a timeline you will learn about the prejudice and discrimination faced by Chinese immigrants beginning at the end of the nineteenth century. You will share your views of how the government could respond to demands to redress injustices such as the head tax.

This really happened

Between the years 1881 and 1885, almost 15,000 men were recruited from China to help build the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR). As soon as the railroad was completed, the Chinese were considered an employment threat to Canadian workers, so the federal government moved to restrict Chinese immigration to Canada. Chinese immigration started in 1885 in response to the gold rush in British Columbia. The first federal anti-Chinese bill was passed in 1885, imposing a $50 head tax upon every person of Chinese origin entering the country. No other ethnic group was targeted this way.

By 1903, the head tax was increased to $500 and the government was able to collect $23 million from the Chinese through this policy. Meanwhile, Chinese immigrants continued to come to Canada. In 1923, Parliament passed the  Chinese Immigration Act  (aka  Chinese Exclusion Act ) excluding all but a few Chinese immigrants from entering Canada. When the  Chinese Immigration Act  was repealed in 1947, a number of activists campaigned against the federal government to seek redress for the head tax. Since 1993, the House of Commons attempted to make offers to repay the Chinese. Finally, in 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made an apology for the policy and offered repayment to those Chinese citizens who were penalized with the head tax. There were only approximately 20 Chinese Canadians alive in 2006 who had paid the head tax.

It is interesting to note that the Chinese population in the past few decades has increased favourably. In recent years, Chinese top the list of immigrants moving to Canada.

Creating a Visual Timeline

Each of the events highlighted in the timeline would have been reported by journalists throughout the country. Choose one of the events and create an illustration that might have appeared on the front page of the newspaper. What headline would accompany the illustration? You may choose to present your drawing in the form of a political cartoon.

Once completed, the class can arrange visual images in sequential order by creating a display or PowerPoint presentation.

Reporting events

Imagine that you are a journalist reporting on the event. What information would you offer your readers about the Chinese immigration experience? How might your report include the 5 W’s of reporting? Who? What? Where? When and Why? How does this event tell part of the story of immigration? What point of view might you use to present your article?

Responding to the Story of Chinese Immigration

Working in groups of three, record your reactions about a topic or issue and consider the views of others. Share your responses with two others to discover whether their opinions are similar or different from your opinion.

› Questions to Consider

• How did you react to the story of Chinese immigration? What surprised you?
• What are your opinions about any form of exclusion?
• Why do you think a federal government would discriminate in such a way? Was there any sound reasoning to imposing a head tax on the Chinese?
• Do you think apologies and payments are enough to compensate for the treatment of the Chinese?

› Take a blank piece of paper and fold it twice, to make four rectangles. Number the spaces #1, #2, #3, #4.

• In #1, write your response to one of the questions to consider connected to the issue of Chinese immigration. You might share your gut reaction, give an opinion, raise questions, or make a connection.
• Exchange papers with another person in the group. Read the response that is written in #1. Then, write your response to it in space #2. What did the response in space #1 invite you to think about?
• Repeat the activity one more time. Read both responses on the sheet you receive, and write a response to both in #3.
• The sheet is returned to the person who wrote the first response. Read all three responses on your sheet, and then write a new response in #4.
• As a follow up, the group can discuss the topic of Chinese immigration. Groups can share responses in a whole class discussion.

A Personal Response to Exclusion

A. Complete the following statements:

• For me, the word exclusion means . . .
• A story I know about exclusion is . . .
• One way to make up for an exclusion is . . .

B. Work in groups to share your responses. The following questions can guide your discussion:

• Is being excluded ever fair?
• Why might someone (or a group) exclude others?
• What does the story of exclusion of Chinese Immigrants remind you of – both personally and globally?

How Should Government Respond to a Past Injustice?

Key concepts › redress.

1. a. A relief from distress

1. b. A means or possibility of seeking a remedy

2.  Compensation for a wrong or loss: reparation

Source : Merriam-Webster

Chinese Head Tax and Exclusion Act: Addressing the Issue of Redressing

After the  Chinese Immigration Act  was repealed in 1947, a number of activists, including Wong Foon Sien, began campaigning the federal government to seek redress for the head tax. But it took almost 60 years until an apology was offered. Why did it take so long?

During the 1980s, over 4,000 head tax payers and their family members approached the Chinese Canadian National Council (CCNC) to register their head tax certificates. A redress campaign unfolded that included meetings, increased media profiles, research, publications and presentations in many communities. Although Prime Minister Brian Mulroney made an offer of individual medallions, a museum wing and other measures, these offers were rejected outright by the Chinese Canadian groups. In 1993, Jean Chretien’s cabinet openly refused to provide an apology or redress. The CCNC persevered raising the issue wherever they could, including a submission to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. In 2001, an Ontario court declared that the Canadian government had no obligation to redress the head tax levied on Chinese immigrants.

It was not until 2003, when Paul Martin was appointed prime minister, that there was a sense of urgency since there were only a few dozen surviving Chinese head tax payers. The issue continued to be a hot topic that was brought forth by politicians during federal elections. As part of his conservative party platform, Stephen Harper promised to work with the Chinese community on redress, a promise that he kept when elected in 2006. He stated, “Chinese Canadians are making an extraordinary impact on the building of our country. They’ve also made a significant historical contribution despite many obstacles . . . The Chinese community deserves an apology for the head tax and appropriate acknowledgement and redress.”

June 22, 2006—House of Commons

Finally, in a speech to the House of Commons on June 22, 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered an apology for the head tax. In his speech, Harper said, “We feel compelled to right this historic wrong for the simple reason it is the decent thing to do . . . a characteristic to be found at the core of the Canadian soul.” 

Harper’s government offered symbolic payments of $20,000 to living head tax payers as well as to living spouses of deceased payers. Only an estimated 20 Chinese Canadians who paid the tax were still alive in 2006.

Funds were also established for community projects to educate Canadians about the impact of past wartime measures and restrictions.

Statements from the Calgary Chinese Culture Centre tell us how Chinese people reacted to the Harper apology.

Alex Louie, a Chinese veteran said, “All I ever wanted was an apology for the government to set the record straight.” Another early pioneer, Mary Mah, stated, “The sorrow and the hardship cannot be erased. But we can now begin to feel, in truth, I did not expect to see this, I don’t know about you, but I’m feeling very Canadian.”

Knowing that the Harper government extended an apology and compensation to the Chinese, we still need to consider whether an apology is enough (see  unit three: The Komagata Maru ). In order to fight against all forms of discrimination today, are we not obliged to keep alive the memory of past forms of discrimination? History is something that cannot be changed and a past injustice is not a wound that can be healed—or can it?

Writing a Position Paper

• What do you think can be learned from the Chinese Canadian experience?
• Do you think a group or the government owe a debt to someone for a past injustice?

For this activity you will have an opportunity to share your views on the concept of redressing an injustice. Write a position paper in which you support or oppose the responsibility of the Canadian government to apologize and respond in some manner to the wrongs committed by the governments of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

› Consider one or more of the following points that could be included in your paper.

• What would be considered a fair government response to victims and their children?
• What suggestions can you offer about how Canadians should best respond to the head tax?
• Does a government response to the Chinese set an unrealistic precedent for complaints for other injustices?
• How does a redress serve a useful social purpose? What is the best path to inclusion for all minority groups in Canada?
• What differences exist between our ideas of right and wrong in today’s society compared to those that existed in the past 100 years on the topic of immigration?

Every effort has been made to gain permission from copyright holders to reproduce borrowed material. The publishers apologize for any errors and will be pleased to rectify them in subsequent reprints and website programming

Other chapters on Immigration, Migration, Refugees:

• Overview: Who Gets In? Who Does Not?
• Chapter 1: The MS St. Louis
• Chapter 2: Vietnamese Boat People
• Chapter 3: Italian and Irish Immigration
• Chapter 5: Migration and Refugees

Home — Essay Samples — Arts & Culture — Chinese Culture — The Chinese Exclusion Act

The Chinese Exclusion Act

• Categories: Chinese Culture

About this sample

Words: 1180 |

Published: Mar 3, 2020

Words: 1180 | Pages: 3 | 6 min read

Works Cited

• Chan, A. (2004). Chinese Canadian National Council: Historical Background. In Beyond Golden Mountain: Chinese Cultural Communities in Canada. University of British Columbia Press.
• Lamb, W. K. (2007). Chinese Canadians and the Chinese Exclusion Act: A Long History of Discrimination. In Asian Americans and the Media. Polity Press.
• Li, P. S. (2016). The Chinese in Canada (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
• McKenzie, A. M. (1999). Hidden Regime: China's Ban on Chinese Immigration to Canada, 1923-1947. In A Gentleman of Substance: The Life and Legacy of John Redpath (1796-1869). McGill-Queen's University Press.
• Rekai, C. (1997). The Chinese Exclusion Act: A Reference Guide. ABC-CLIO.
• Roy, P. (2007). The Chinese in British Columbia: From Racial Exclusion to Multiculturalism. University of British Columbia Press.
• Sunahara, A. (1988). The politics of racism: The uprooting of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War. Lorimer.
• Tung, C. (1999). Redress and the Japanese Canadian community: The road to justice. University of Toronto Press.
• Yee, P. (2015). The Chinese Labour Corps: Forgotten Workers in the First World War. In Moving the Mountain: Beyond Ground Zero to a New Vision of Islam in America. Lexington Books.
• Zhang, L., & Li, P. S. (2010). Building the Pacific Railway: The Chinese and the Making of the Canadian State. Fernwood Publishing.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Arts & Culture

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1340 words

1 pages / 1367 words

1 pages / 1814 words

3 pages / 1348 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Chinese Culture

Chess is boring, right? Most students my age wouldn't think it could be used in making life decisions, but not for main character Waverly in the Amy Tan short story, “Rules Of The Game”. In this story, the author uses the [...]

Tan, Amy. 'Rules of the Game.' The Joy Luck Club, Vintage Books, 1989, pp. 158-166.

Carron, A. V. (2017). Group dynamics in sport. Routledge.Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Anchor.Hsu, C. (2001). Confucianism and Modernization: Industrialization and Democratization of the Confucian Regions. Journal of [...]

Mulan is a Disney movie that debuted in 1998. The movie is set in China during the time of the Hun invasion. Mulan does not like to conform to the traditional Chinese daughter and is somewhat a tomboy. Therefore, Mulan takes it [...]

The "Celebrated Cases of Judge Dee," revolved around a very prominent district magistrate named Judge Dee Goong An, a man famous for his ability to solve mysterious cases. Judge Dee digs deep to solve each case and was [...]

Manhattan's Chinatown stands as a testament to the enduring legacy of Chinese immigration to the United States. Established in the 1870s, this vibrant neighborhood has evolved into one of the largest and oldest Chinese ethnic [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Handout A: Background Essay – The History of Immigration Law in the United States

Background Essay—The History of Immigration Law in the United States

Directions: Read the background essay and answer the critical thinking questions at the end. In addition, formulate your own questions about the content discussed.

In the modern era, nation-states are defined as much by their borders as by their unique laws, forms of government, and distinct national cultures. Since the early years of the United States’ history, the federal government has sought, with varying degrees of success, to limit and define the nature and scale of immigration into the country. In the first seventy years of the nation’s history, immigration was left largely unchecked; Congress focused its attention on defining the terms by which immigrants could gain the full legal rights of citizenship. Beginning in the 1880s, however, Congress began to legislate on the national and ethnic makeup of immigrants. Lawmakers passed laws forbidding certain groups from entering the country, and restricted the number of people who could enter from particular nations. In the 1920s, Congress enacted quotas based upon immigrants’ national origin, limiting the number of immigrants who could enter from non-Western European countries. In the 1960s, immigration policy was radically transformed and the policies of the preceding generations were abolished. Through these reforms, which still determine the United States’ immigration policy today, greater numbers of Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans are permitted to enter the country than immigrants of European background, giving preferred status to these immigrant groups.

Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the Congress to “Establish a Uniform Rule of Naturalization.” The first national law concerning immigration was the Naturalization Act of 1790, which stated that any free white person who had resided in the U.S. for at least two years could apply for full citizenship. Congress also required applicants to demonstrate “good character” and swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. Blacks were ineligible for citizenship.

In 1795, naturalization standards were changed to require five years’ prior residence in the U.S., and again in 1798 to require 14 years’ residence. The 1798 revision was passed amidst the anti-French fervor of the Quasi-War and sought to limit the influence of foreign-born citizens in federal elections. During Thomas Jefferson’s presidency, the 1798 standards were repealed to require five years’ residence once more. As immigration patterns changed over time, especially in the late 1840s and early 1850s as Irish and Germans replaced the British as the primary immigrant groups, federal immigration law remained largely unchanged. Despite anti-immigrant agitation in the 1850s and the rise of nativist political groups, no limits or quotas were imposed on immigration.

Questions still lingered about the nature of citizenship for black Americans. In December 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified, abolishing slavery in all of the states. Were emancipated slaves citizens, or not? Through the end of the Civil War, slaves had not been considered citizens and possessed none of the rights of their white countrymen. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 established that freedmen were indeed citizens. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confirmed the position set forth in the Civil Rights Act. The amendment stated that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The amendment prohibited the states from curtailing the privileges of federal citizenship. The construction of the citizenship clause indicates that anyone born in the U.S. is automatically a citizen, and this is what federal law has maintained ever since. However, there is disagreement as to the meaning of the citizenship clause, and whether it was intended to clarify the status of emancipated slaves, or whether it was written to apply to all peoples regardless of context.

During the congressional ratification debates, members made clear the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment. Senator and Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens argued in 1866 that the Fourteenth Amendment was the final fulfillment of the principles of the Declaration of Independence, a law designed to ensure equal rights for all Americans no matter their race or prior status under the law. Senator Jacob Howard, one of the chief authors of the citizenship clause, reassured Congress by saying the amendment “will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens” or had been born to foreign diplomats. Senator John Bingham echoed his colleague’s remarks and said the citizenship clause reasserts “that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of our Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen.”

The question remains whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause should be interpreted as a protection of the rights of citizenship of former slaves, or if it is a blanket protection for all persons born in the United States no matter their parents’ national allegiance or legal status. Current law favors the latter interpretation, and there is ongoing controversy whether children born of unnaturalized or illegal immigrants should be granted automatic citizenship.

After the Civil War, the American economy boomed as industry grew and the American West was settled and organized into new states. On the Pacific coast, the high demand for labor drew thousands of Chinese immigrants into the country to work in a variety of capacities. Most often, they worked building railroads or in mines. Others farmed or ran businesses in California’s growing cities. By the late 1870s, opposition to Chinese laborers had grown substantially, stemming from a combination of racism and the belief that Chinese laborers unfairly competed with white American laborers and stole economic opportunities from workers more deserving. Eventually, Congress passed the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act barring virtually all new immigration from China. The act was extended in 1892 and on a permanent basis beginning in 1902. Other laws further restricted the rights and privileges of Chinese immigrants already in the United States. The Scott Act of 1888, for example, forbade Chinese immigrants who left the United States from returning. It was not until World War II, when China was a military ally of the United States, that the ban on Chinese immigration was lifted.

For most of the 1800s, the main sources of immigrants to the United States were British, Irish, German, Scandinavian, and Central European peoples. By the 1880s, immigration patterns shifted toward Eastern and Southern European groups, especially Italians, Poles, Russians, and other Slavic peoples. Most were pulled to the United States by the promise of better opportunities and improved quality of life. The dramatic change in the ethnic makeup of this “new wave” of immigrants caused alarm among nativists, racialists, and pro-Protestant interests. One legislative response to this was the Immigration Act of 1917 which created the Asiatic Barred Zone, a vast area of Asia from which no person could immigrate to the U.S. The prohibited areas included most of the Middle East, South Asian countries like Persia and British-ruled India, as well as central Asia and Southeastern Asia.

In another response to the growing number of immigrants arriving from Eastern and Southern European countries, Congress passed the Emergency Immigration Act of 1921, which placed limits on the number of people entering the country based upon prescribed quotas. The law used the 1910 Federal Census to determine existing numbers of foreign-born citizens already living in the U.S. It then required that a number equivalent to only 3% of the already resident population from a certain country could be admitted. Therefore, for example, if 100,000 Bulgarians already lived in the U.S., only 3,000 Bulgarian immigrants could enter annually thereafter. This scheme became known as the National Origins Formula. The goal of federal policy sought to ensure that new waves of immigrants from outside western and central Europe could slowly integrate into American society and so could better embrace American notions of civic virtue, self-government, and productivity.

This law was followed a few years later by the Immigration Act of 1924 which decreased the quota from 3% to 2% and used the 1890 census instead of the 1910 census as the reference point for its quotas. Because Congress chose to utilize the 1890 census, which showed a higher proportion of residents from more desirable European countries like Germany and Great Britain, the law created artificially low quotas for the new immigrants. Furthermore, it placed low caps on arrivals from majority non-white nations, like those in Africa and the Middle East. In the first year of its enactment, the law permitted 51,000 German immigrants, for example, but only 100 from the Arabian Peninsula.

Latent anti-immigrant hostility erupted during both World Wars. Anti-immigrant antagonism has not always been racially motivated. In World War I, German-Americans (even those born in the United States) were subjected to discrimination and harassment for their national background. In some communities, German-Americans were lynched by mobs while others had their businesses boycotted or closed. Americans born in Germany were forced to register with the government as “enemy aliens,” and some states prohibited the use of the German language in school instruction. Most Lutheran churches ceased conducting services in the German language and adopted English instead. During World War II, Japanese-Americans were subjected to even worse treatment and were forced into internment camps for the duration of the war. In February 1942 President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 requiring Japanese-Americans to report for forced relocation to prisoner camps away from the Pacific coast. Fred Korematsu challenged the legality of Roosevelt’s directive, but in Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the internment of Japanese-Americans was constitutional.

The quotas and restrictions of the 1920s remained largely in place until the administration of President Lyndon Johnson, who undertook a sweeping reform project of many of the most important public policy sectors. As part of his reform agenda, Johnson signed into law the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which ended use of the National Origins Formula. Under the new law, 120,000 immigrants were to be admitted annually from Western Hemisphere nations in Latin and South America. 170,000 people per year would be admitted from Asia, Africa, and Europe combined. The reforms of 1965 initiated a substantial change in the ethnic and national origin of immigrants and this accounts for the rapid growth of the non-European population seen today. Instead of a movement of people almost solely from Europe, immigration today is dominated by non-European peoples from all parts of the world. Further, the 1965 reform provided an avenue for immigrants’ families to come to the United States after them, as family immigration is usually not counted in the overall quota. With minor revisions, the standards set forth in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 remain in effect today and still determines from which countries the United States draws its new citizens.

CRITICAL THINKING OR HOMEWORK QUESTIONS

• Describe the Naturalization Act of 1790. According to this law, who could become citizens of the United States? What racial boundaries to citizenship did the law define? What were the conditions of gaining full citizenship?
• What is naturalization and why were law makers in the years around 1800 concerned with defining how long citizens must be in the country to become naturalized?
• Describe the debate over the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. How do most Americans in the present day interpret the law? How did its framers explain the law at the time?
• What were some of the reasons that the Chinese were forbidden to immigrate? When were these immigration restrictions lifted?
• Describe the challenges faced by immigrants and the descendants of recent immigrants during World War I and World War II. What did the Supreme Court rule in Korematsu v. U.S. ?
• What were the primary changes brought about in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965? How was this law different from the laws enacted in 1921 and 1924?

Chinese immigrants in the U.S Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

The history of migration and immigration of communities across the world has been considerably long and debatable following a number of unforeseen circumstances that result from such activities.

There have been substantial arguments rising from communities living in world-renowned cities with issues regarding discrimination, nepotism, and prejudice lingering among them. Currently, population surge within big cities and towns across the world might have resulted from much immigration activities that historically have been part of global discussions (Yin 12).

The story of Chinese migration in the United States has been in constant documentation in literature, with its initial immigration story quite long and tantalizing. Numerous socio-economic motivational factors might have influenced Chinese first immigration to North America (Yin 13). This essay seeks to examine the Chinese immigration to the United States and its impacts.

History of Chinese immigrants

The Chinese American history is typically a story that entails ethnic Chinese or Chinese Americans migration and immigration activities into the US, which is distinguished in three major immigration waves beginning with the 17 century.

The history of the Chinese Americans’ immigration into the United States is a long historical issue that literature is always anticipating to cover and somehow tormenting for those who experienced real events while somewhat fruitful for the modern immigrants (Olson 4).

According to literature documented by Olson, the immigration trends associating the Chinese people into the US began as early as 1700 century when in the 1780s, a group of approximately 100 Chinese explorers journeyed Pacific Ocean towards North America (4).

They decided to settle on the Western coast of Canada and subsequently began exploring the Northwest of Pacific Ocean (Olson 4). A continued influx of Chinese migrants from China slowly began surging into the US thus occupying few regions that finally became populated with Chinese American towards the 1800s, with Lewis and Clark, who were American explorers, marking important events.

Chinese American immigration in 1800s-1900s

The mid-1800 century witnessed substantial immigration trends of Chinese Americans, with several Chinese men traversing the US to join their earlier fellow fortune hunters (Olson 4). This move was in the 1850s when thousands of Chinese populace flocked into the US with their major focus directly intended to occupying the present-day California.

The notion behind this immigration trend towards California at the time hinged upon accounts of the gold rush or simply presence of gold in the American West, especially in California (Olson 4). At this time, fortunately or unfortunately, few Chinese men found the unintended fortune that included working as cooks, labourers, servants, and even launderers (Olson 4).

Factually, as postulated by Olson, “by the 1860s, most of the California’s gold had been mined and Chinese fortune looked elsewhere to make money” (4). During this crucial moment before fortune hunters could imagine of the aggravation, the United States needed railroad and the Central Pacific Railroad of the US was currently employing labourers to engage in land clearing and laying tracks.

The United States, during this epoch, wanted to construct a railroad that would connect the gradually developing western terrain with the already established Eastern States. Since the Chinese fortune hunters for gold could no longer access the gold itself, most Chinese labourers opted to join the construction workforce to build America’s earliest transcontinental railroad and others became agricultural labourers (Olson 4).

The immigration trends involving Chinese immigrants gradually became uncontrollable as it approached the 1880s, only twenty years from the gold rush disappointment and at this time, there were approximately 300, 000 Chinese American residing in the US (Olson 4).

A majority of the Chinese immigrants occupying California as manual contract labourers began experiencing torment since they possessed very little personal freedom, although this has normally appeared as a common historical fallacy to those who understand the history well (Yin 14). This moment marked a great wave of immigration of not only Chinese immigrants, but also millions of new communities that were assembling in cities and towns within the US.

Motivations for Chinese migration to the U.S

A continuum of intertwined factors from social, economic, and political issues might have contributed to the unending Chinese Americans’ migration trends that accustomed the American nation back in the years (Behnke 4).

According to Behnke’s own presumptions, “immigrants have many different reasons for leaving home and they may leave homes to escape poverty, war, or harsh governments, or even want better living conditions for themselves and their children” (4).

The case of motivational factors that triggered Chinese American immigrants is no expectation from the aforementioned issues articulated under such presumptions. For numerous decades, the US has remained renowned as a nation that proffers many socio-economical opportunities and this aspect might have triggered the Chinese to move to the US (Behnke 4).

Economically, relative to America’s economical reputation coupled with Chinese economic misfortunes of Chinese pre-historical era akin to other immigrants, the majority of Chinese immigrants were running away from poverty, hardships, and even the emergence of Taiping Rebellion (Chen 15). Therefore, the aspiration to change their future was the first motivational factor that stirred them.

Gold has been the most precious natural resource that almost each human being anticipates to possess. According to Yin, among the major motivational factors that triggered the movement of Chinese immigrants into the US was the presence and discoveries of gold around John Sutter’s Sawmill by around 24 th of January 1848 (12).

Yin affirms, “Although some individuals arrived in the New World as early as the eighteenth century, it was until the Gold Rush years that Chinese immigration became large enough to have a significant impact on the American society” (12). In essence, the discovery of gold in California was the most motivational aspect that precipitated enormous immigrations continentally into the US.

At this time, informants were becoming more dexterous in producing and disseminating gold-related information that connected the US to great riches, hence making the Chinese overwhelmingly convinced to visit this country of opportunities (Yin 14). Notions of Americans as wealthy people and fortune hunters tales began penetrating into Guangzhou (Canton), which was China’s south provincial capital, thus subsequently rising migration morale.

Harsh political realities of the 1800 century were among the major reasons that motivated the Chinese immigrants to seek peace in the US. Apart from the Gold rush and Gold Mountains, remunerative wages as well as the Chinese imaginings to shape their future living standards and political repression factors have a significant contribution as impellent factors of Chinese immigration to the US. Economic situation was more catastrophic, particularly in Guangdong province in China and with little recovery from devastative events of Opium War, the Chinese could not anticipate for any better living in their homeland (Yin 13).

Coupled with their inability to meet the unremitting taxes following impositions by the Qing government that enacted the treaty of Nanjing-based on British terms, peasants and farmers were forced by that regime to sell their possessions including land and this element impelled them to seek abode in the US in 1850s (Yin 13). Subsequently, to discourage peasants from joining rebels, the Qing regime adopted extreme terrorism policy to execute males from villages that supported rebels, which impelled them to leave their motherland.

Development of anti-Chinese sentiments in the late 1800s

The Chinese immigration and settlement into the US did not receive a soft landing as Native Americans felt the itch of these migration events. As economic hardships, internal turmoil, and favorable rich America reports and cheap ship fares propelled massive Chinese immigration, the American government was eying on these movements (Chen 93).

As businesses across the ocean commenced with a massive influx of Chinese immigration activities that had began being much welcomed due to Chinese aptitude to provide the much-required labor force, the American government had no much interest in the initial period (Chan 98).

The stalemate gradually began when Native Americans noticed the devastating American economy that was by then undergoing depression with jobs becoming scarce and the first thing they thought of was getting rid of the Chinese immigrants (Olson 6). This move attracted attrition between the Native Americans and the Chinese over the dwindling vacancies, with the Americans blaming the Chinese immigrants of the economic misfortune and this element pushed the natives to seek ways of evicting the aliens.

Average Americans and their government as well-considered early migration trends characterized by normal sailing, merchandizing and domestic matters as minor curiosities (Yin 15).

Gradually, news about the confrontation between the Chinese immigrants and the Native American was spreading rapidly, which led to the American government intervention. This intervention led to the development of anti-Chinese sentiments fueled by aggravations and the US government first intervened in 1882 when the congress imposed the Chinese Execution Act, which led to a dramatic decrease of Chinese immigrants from the approximated 105,465 people to 61,639 in the 1920s (Chen 155).

Californians at this moment had already developed innermost grudge against the Chinese as the government’s effort to support deportation of the immigrants triggered discrimination, racial prejudice, and even violence in almost all the entire zones that they occupied (Behnke 5).

According to Yin (16), the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act barred the Chinese from acquiring American citizenship and the Chinese reputation in the US was constantly dwindling from what the Americans crowned them for, including their industriousness and honestly.

How Chinese Immigration in the 1800’s impacted the United States

After the Chinese migration into the US solidified following their craving for equity and justice in the country, which resulted from their triumphant retaliation against the discriminatory laws and regulations, they finally settled and attracted even more immigrants into the country (Chan 99).

Subsequently, the Chinese women population that was initially restricted began surging in the country to establish complete settlements with their husbands and families in California and other American States (Chan 94). Noticeably, the favourable reception that the early Chinese immigrants enjoyed had already created much impact on the United States stretching from social, cultural, to economical influence to the American society (Yin 16).

In essence, as pressure on the Chinese reduced and political pressure on their eviction vanished, the Chinese began participation in several socio-cultural activities accustomed to the American Natives. With their women and children, the Chinese immigrants filled almost all cities and towns in the US and their interaction with the Americans created a mixture of communal association, while contributing to both affirmative and negative impacts.

Affirmative contributions of Chinese Americans

Chinese immigrants did not only flavor the American nation with a blend of cultures, but they also had quite a significant contribution to the growth and development of the present-day United States (Olson 8).

China possessed strong artistic skills, which is among the reasons why they have managed to survive the hostilities in the US as the experiences in incorporating true-life stories to art became Americans’ anticipation. Behnke posits, “Despite struggling to survive through prejudice, discrimination, and violence, Chinese Americans went on to make important contributions to science, art, literature, music, film, and business in their new country” (5).

The consumption of the Chinese artistic culture was growing rapidly, Americans were becoming fond of it, and coupled with their merchandising and crafts skills, the American society began changing their perceptions against the Chinese immigrants (Behnke 6). Chinese immigrants and other immigrants from various parts of Southern Europe, Eastern, and Asian regions increased during the crucial American industrial era, consequently contributing to the American growth.

As Chinese merchants were becoming busier creating trading routes and connections between Western Asia and Europe trading with Chinese silk and other homemade goods, numerous Chinese migrants were busy seeking opportunities to work in different sectors in the American interior (Behnke 10). While the harsh conditions in their homeland could not allow talented Chinese farmers to practice farming on their own soil, the art of farming that has currently deepened its roots in the US was by then cherished (Chan 105).

In fact, as postulated by Olson (6), the attrition between the Native Americans and the Chinese immigrants due to the United States’ economic misfortunes hardened them even more and forced them to seek a different kind of jobs in restaurants, laundries, small factories, and homes subsequently influencing economic growth.

According to the literature documented by Yin (118), apart from economical and cultural influence, in learning and education, the Chinese American literature grew exponentially within American schools and this aspect contributed to several aspects of education in the contemporary United States.

Negative contributions of Chinese Americans

The immigration of Chinese nationalists into the United States might not have been actually tasty and much of the events happening in the country might have resulted from such Chinese emigrational events.

As postulated by Yin (11) the Chinese immigration in the US has a history of plea and protest against discriminatory coupled with laws that impel mistreatment, something that is not actually bad. However, these processions have greatly attributed to the erosion of significant rules and regulations that might have been imperative in controlling illegal immigration in the US (Behnke 8).

The immigration trends of the 1800s triggered by the stubborn and needy Chinese might have contributed heavily to the insecurity ramifications in the US fuelled by pounding immigration into the current America, with any race fighting for space and inclusion in American soil (Chen 142). To the later, the scramble for inclusion of numerous races in the US is quite evitable with great fear of terrorism attacks and other security matters salient in the entire United States.

The first legislation of its kind that recorded great history in the US was the aforementioned Exclusion Act of 1882 that barred Chinese women, who were Chinese labourers’ wives, from visiting the United States (Chan 96).

Back to the Chinese traditions, the Chinese society has been patriarchal and the only tolerable role for the married Chinese women by that moment were serving their husbands, parents-in-law, and bearing children (Chan 95). Such issues became historical when Chinese women began inflowing into the US following the abolition of the Exclusion Act and this ruling provided women with favourable conditions to migrate to the US (Chan 98).

The presence of Chinese women in the US did not only spur Chinese immigration into the US, but there was also a perception of staining major American cities with indecent behaviours. Chan (104) asserts that since Chinese men labourers were still earning meagre wages, their women decided to find possible means of supporting their husbands, and finally they ended engaging in unlawful prostitution that tinted the American cities.

The modern Chinese Americans

Finally, Chinese immigrants managed to conquer almost all discriminatory regulations by fighting on civil-liberty grounds, subsequently leading to an influx of massive Chinese populace to seeking abode in the US (Behnke 19).

The American congress in 1943 harmoniously withdrew the Chinese Exclusion Act, and in few years, the United States had set its focus on the World War II, thus giving an opportunity to immigration again. In the mid to late 1900s, Chinese immigration into the US increased substantially. Currently, approximately 10 million Asian people in total have managed to acquire American citizenship and settled in the US, with Chinese Americans making the largest populace (Olson 7).

Contemporary, a stroll around the United States’ major cities is reminiscent of traveling several countries continentally, with groceries and shops offering foreign products and selling international foods (Behnke 4). Chinese Americans are currently the most spread and populated immigrants occupying the largest portion of Native American immigrants in the modern days.

Based on the recent 2000 US census, Chinese Americans are approximately 2.4 million with permanent settlements in the US (Behnke 5). Generally, combined with other Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, they sum up to about 16 million immigrants residing in the US.

Chinese Americans are still suffering from poor communication in the US given the fact that during immigration, few of them managed to muddle through the US educational system (Yin 19). English proficiency in the Chinese Americans in the modern days gives them a hard time to cope with the ever-changing American lifestyle, including unrelenting medical challenges as chronic cancer and hepatitis B that kills thousands of them annually (Yin 130).

Still dwelling in low-cost rentals and others in America’s rural suburbs, Chinese are still suffering from discrimination and prejudice despite their great contribution to the growth and development of the American economical, social, and cultural endeavors. The majority are still languishing in poverty and living below the United States’ poverty line.

Scarcity of reliable sources may hamper the ability to determine the exact dates when the Chinese officially began migrating to the United States. Nonetheless, substantial literature links the events of the 1850s in China to the beginning of serious Chinese emigrational activities towards the US.

The Chinese immigration of 1800s into the US might have been very influential in triggering transnational migration towards the country with tales of California Gold, political, and economic misfortunes behind such movements. Chinese Americans have undergone severe torment prior to their emigrational activities to the US, including racial discrimination and prejudice.

Currently, despite having acquired permanent settlement and citizenships, Chinese Americans are still suffering from discrimination, ethnic bias, and healthcare inequalities following their inabilities to communicate proficiently in English. Intuitively, immigration to the US might never halt following its closer connection with wealth and power, especially in the current decades and Asians are still on the move to find fortunes in the US.

Works Cited

Behnke, Alison. Chinese in America, Minneapolis : Lerner Publications, 2005. Print.

Chan, Sucheng. The exclusion of Chinese women 1870-1943, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1875. Print.

Chen, Jack. The Chinese of America , New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1980. Print.

Olson, Kay. Chinese Immigrants, 1850-1900, Minnesota: Capstone Publisher, 2002. Print.

Yin, Xiao-Huang. Chinese American Literature since the 1850s, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2000. Print.

• Impact of the Black Death
• Older People and the Labour Market in Australia
• William Moraley Biography
• Myths About Immigration in the U.S.
• Mexican Immigrants in Carolina
• Assimilation in American Life
• Immigration, Socioeconomic and Upward Mobility and Cultural Assimilation
• The Success of the Second Generation Immigrants
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, December 19). Chinese immigrants in the U.S. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-immigrants-in-the-u-s/

"Chinese immigrants in the U.S." IvyPanda , 19 Dec. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-immigrants-in-the-u-s/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Chinese immigrants in the U.S'. 19 December.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Chinese immigrants in the U.S." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-immigrants-in-the-u-s/.

1. IvyPanda . "Chinese immigrants in the U.S." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-immigrants-in-the-u-s/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Chinese immigrants in the U.S." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/chinese-immigrants-in-the-u-s/.

Research Our Records

Chinese Immigration and the Chinese in the United States

Introduction.

The next significant exclusionary legislation was the Act to Prohibit the Coming of Chinese Persons into the United States of May 1892 (27 Stat. 25). Referred to as the Geary Act, it allowed Chinese laborers to travel to China and reenter the United States but its provisions were otherwise more restrictive than preceding immigration laws. This Act required Chinese to register and secure a certificate as proof of their right to be in the United States. Imprisonment or deportation were the penalties for those who failed to have the required papers or witnesses. Other restrictive immigration acts affecting citizens of Chinese ancestry followed. During World War II, when China and the United States were allies, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an Act to Repeal the Chinese Exclusion Acts, to Establish Quotas, and for Other Purposes (57 Stat. 600-1). This Act of December 13, 1943, also lifted restrictions on naturalization. However until the Immigration Act of October 1965 (79 Stat. 911) numerous laws continued to have a restrictive impact on Chinese immigration.

Certain Federal agencies were particularly active in enforcing the exclusion laws. Initially the Customs Service took the lead because of the maritime nature of immigration. In 1900 the Office of the Superintendent of Immigration, which had been established in the Department of the Treasury in 1891, became the chief agency responsible for implementing Federal regulations mandated by the Chinese exclusion laws. This office evolved into the present Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Both the Chinese Bureau within the Customs Service and the Chinese Division of the INS employed "Chinese" inspectors, people designated to enforce the Chinese exclusion laws. Immigration- related decisions made by these Federal officials were sometimes appealed to Federal courts, which also heard criminal cases involving Chinese alleged to be living in the United States illegally. Many of the records created to implement the Chinese exclusion laws are now in the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration's (NARA) Regional Archives. The records are a major resource for the study of Chinese immigration and Chinese-American travel, trade, and social history from the late-19th to mid-20th century. Because many documents relate to individual immigrants, they are invaluable for the study of Chinese and Chinese-American family history. These records document the rationale and actions of Federal officials and other persons involved with Chinese exclusion policies and the strategies and activities of Chinese and Chinese Americans who struggled against the prohibitive effects of those policies. Records in NARA's Regional Archives are not arranged according to subject, but are kept in numbered record groups established for the Government agencies that created or received them. Although arrangement by record group (abbreviated RG) makes subject access more difficult at times, it preserves the organizational and contextual integrity of the records, making them more easily understood. Often records in one record group can be linked with those in another. For example, an INS case file in RG 85 may include the case file number of a related district or circuit court case in RG 21 and vice versa. INS case numbers can sometimes be retrieved from information provided on passenger arrival lists in Customs Service (RG 36) files. Records related to the Angel Island Immigration Station can be found in Public Health Service (RG 90) files.

This reference information paper is organized by Federal agency/record group as follows:

• a brief history of the Federal agency that created or received the records; the Regional Archives that holds the records;
• the specific source (usually the local office of a Federal agency) of the records;
• description(s) of the records including, whenever possible, date span, quantity, system of arrangement, availability and explanation of finding aids, reference to related microfilm publications, and other information useful to researchers.

The majority of the records cited in this publication are open to the public for research. In some instances NARA is not able to provide public access due to the Freedom of Information Act, which exempts specific categories of information from public disclosure. Individual immigration case files relating to events more than 75 years old are generally open for research. Documents in case files relating to events less than 75 years old may be subject to privacy restrictions defined in the Freedom of Information Act. To gain access to files restricted because of privacy concerns, researchers, including family members, can act as authorized representatives of the subject of the file by providing NARA with evidence of the subject's consent. If the subject of a file is deceased, protection of privacy is not applicable but researchers are asked to provide documentation of the subject's death. NARA also requires that a researcher provide identification, such as a valid driver's license, before it provides access to original records.

A number of different series of microfilmed records are cited in the text, including National Archives Microfilm Publications (designated by an M or a T ), microfilmed regional records available only at one Regional Archives (designated by an I ), and microfilm accessioned as a record copy from a Federal agency (unnumbered).

Although only some Regional Archives have identified records from Federal district courts (RG 21), courts of appeals (RG 276), and the Customs Service (RG36), it is likely that information related to Chinese immigration, Chinese exclusion, and Chinese Americans can be located in the 12 Regional Archives holding original records.

The author wishes to thank Nancy Malan, Regional Archives System, and the following regional archives staff members for their contributions to this publication: Kellee Blake, Eileen Bolger, Michael Brodhead, John Celardo, Suzanne Dewberry, Scott Forsythe, Bill Greene, Margaret Hacker, Don Jackanicz, Susan Karren, Laura McCarthy, Lisa Miller, Robert Morris, Dan Nealand, James Owens, Neil Thomsen, Martin Tuohy, Beverly Watkins, and Paul Wormser.

District Courts of the United States Record Group 21  

Administrative History U.S. district and circuit courts were created by the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789. The jurisdiction and powers of these Federal courts have varied with subsequent legislation, but district courts have been principally criminal, admiralty, and bankruptcy courts, hearing noncapital criminal proceedings, suits for penalties or seizures under Federal laws, and litigation involving an amount in excess of $100 in which the United States is the plaintiff. The circuit courts heard appeals from the district courts and were given exclusive original jurisdiction over actions involving aliens, suits between citizens of different States, and law and equity suits where the amount in dispute exceeded $500. In 1891 the appellate jurisdiction of the circuit courts was transferred to the newly created courts of appeals (see RG 276). The Judiciary Act of 1911 abolished the circuit courts and provided for the transfer of their records and remaining jurisdiction to the district courts.

Most States initially had one district and one circuit court with additional districts and subdivisions created as the business of the courts increased. In 1812 circuit courts were authorized to appoint U.S. commissioners to assist in taking bail and affidavits. Commissioners' functions were expanded by subsequent legislation and court rules. Their powers have included authority to issue arrest warrants, examine persons charged with offenses against Federal laws, initiate actions in admiralty matters, and institute proceedings for violation of civil rights legislation.

Territorial district courts generally were established by the organic act that created the territory. They heard Federal civil, criminal, and bankruptcy actions in addition to having civil and criminal jurisdiction similar to that of State courts. Records created by a territorial court acting in its capacity as a Federal court often became the property of the Federal district court upon statehood. Occasionally these records are held by State archives.

Most court records are case files arranged by type of action, such as civil or criminal, and then numerically by case number. They usually include original papers issued by the court or filed by attorneys, such as affidavits, complaints, decrees, depositions, exceptions, findings of fact, indictments, judgments, motions, opinions, and subpoenas. Bankruptcy case files may include schedules of assets and liabilities. Older case files sometimes include exhibits, though after the 1940's exhibits were usually returned to the litigating parties upon conclusion of the proceedings. Transcripts of testimony are occasionally found. Early case files, especially those before 1900, sometimes offer only a fragmentary record of proceedings, though information concerning a case can sometimes be found in other sources such as court record books and published accounts.

Records of a case can usually be located by the name of the court and case number. The number can sometimes be determined from docket, minute, or order books. Docket books provide a summary of proceedings in each case; minute books are a daily, chronological record of court proceedings; and order books provide the text of each order or judgment. These books often have indexes to the names of the parties involved in the proceedings. Such books are not available for all courts. There is no cumulative index by subject, case name, or other access point. Additional information is sometimes available from the clerk of the court where the case was heard.

Of special interest to researchers studying Chinese-American immigration are thousands of case files relating to habeas corpus actions brought in both circuit and district courts during the late 1800's and early 1900's to contest the Chinese exclusion actions of Federal immigration officials. Court cases resulting from implementation of Chinese exclusion laws are interfiled among other court cases from civil, criminal, and admiralty courts and in court commissioners' files. Besides court proceedings, some files contain exhibits such as passports, photographs, transcripts of interrogations by immigration officials, and certificates of identity from Chinese consulates.

Criminal case files document Federal action taken against Chinese who allegedly entered the United States illegally. Case files may contain complaints, decrees, indictments, judgments, opinions, passports, photographs, subpoenas, Section 6 certificates from Chinese consulates, and transcripts of interrogations.

Post-1943 naturalization documents provide information that may prove helpful to researchers of family history and other topics. (The Chinese exclusion laws barred most Chinese immigrants from becoming naturalized United States citizens during the years of exclusion.) Naturalization records kept by the Federal courts may include such documents as declarations of intention, depositions, and certificates of and petitions for naturalization.

Also documented in Federal court files are cases relating to such matters as illegal contract labor and merchants' alleged violations of Federal tax provisions on cigars, liquor, opium, and other goods. Common law, equity, and bankruptcy case files provide information on the operations of businesses, some of which may have been owned by Chinese or Chinese Americans.

The 1905 Supreme Court case United States v. Ju Toy established the Department of Commerce and Labor as the final level of appeal and due process for immigrants and returning travelers claiming United States citizenship. Thereafter immigrants could appeal to Federal courts only on procedural grounds. As a result of this decision the number of Chinese immigration cases heard in Federal court diminished significantly.

District Court Records at NARA's Northeast Region (Boston) in Waltham, Massachusetts

• Chinese exclusion (deportation) case files, 1901-1918 (4 inches.) The cases relate to Chinese who appealed deportation orders issued by U.S. commissioners. Arrangement varies. Some cases for the period 1901-1902 are numbered consecutively and are recorded in the general dockets. Later cases are arranged alphabetically by the name of defendant.

District Court Records at NARA's Mid Atlantic Region in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

• Criminal case files, 1882-1942 . Finding aids include criminal case file docket books and defendant name indexes in individual docket books.

District Court Records at NARA's Great Lakes Region in Chicago, Illinois

• Declarations of intention, 1887-1909 (2 volumes, less than 1 cubic foot.) These declarations of intention by about 20 Chinese nationals renouncing allegiance and fidelity to Kuang Hsu, Emperor of China, provide only each individual's name, signature, nationality, and filing date. They are noteworthy because they were filed during the period when the Chinese exclusion laws prohibited the naturalization of Chinese, yet the U.S. district court in Marquette accepted them. They were filed in the rather remote Upper Peninsula of Michigan, suggesting that a certain number of Chinese were residing in the region. Finding aids include a list of declaration numbers, names, and filing dates.
• Criminal case files, 1863-1966 (113 cubic feet.) Finding aids include a list of case numbers, each with the name of defendant, name of the Michigan town where the offense was committed, filing date for the earliest document in the case file, and number of pages in the file.

District Court Records at NARA's Central Plains Region in Kansas City, Missouri

• Northern and Southern Districts of Iowa
• Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri
• Criminal case files, 1890-1920 (for all districts above.) Finding aids include docket books containing name indexes of defendants.

District Court Records at NARA's Southwest Region in Fort Worth, Texas

• General case files, 1806-1932
• Equity case files related to the deportation of Chinese, 1915-1919. Docket books with indexes are available as finding aids.
• Index to Chinese residing in Galveston , no date. This bound volume lists Chinese who lived in Galveston and met immigration requirements for residence in the United States. The entries are arranged alphabetically by name.
• Equity case files relating to deportation of Chinese, 1892-1915
• Equity Case Files from the Western District Court of Texas at El Paso Relating to the Chinese Exclusion Acts, 1892-1915, (M1610). Roll 1 contains an index.

District Court Records at NARA's Rocky Mountain Region in Denver, Colorado

• Mixed civil case files, 1900-1911
• Criminal case files, 1890-1911 Docket books with indexes are available as finding aids.

District Court Records at NARA's Pacific Region (Riverside) in Riverside, California

• Dockets and case files, 1882-1912 . Most cases were first heard by a U.S. commissioner. A territorial justice sanctioned the decision or heard an appeal. For cases not appealed the commissioners' dockets are the best source of information. Some dockets contain indexes.
• Criminal case files, 1912- . An index is available.
• U.S. commissioners' dockets, 1912. These dockets contain a summary of the actions taken during a hearing before a U.S. commissioner. They are arranged numerically by case number. Photographs of the defendants are often attached to the docket sheet.
• General case files, 1887-1907
• Civil and criminal case files, 1907- . Indexes are available.
• Criminal case files, 1929- . Cases from 1929-1952 are indexed.

District Court Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) in San Bruno, California

• Records of U.S. commissioners, habeas corpus cases involving Chinese, 1884-1893
• Civil and appellate case files, 1863-1911. Several case files document actions brought by Chinese Americans to contest alleged discriminatory policies of the City and County of San Francisco. Indexes to the names of the parties involved are available on microfiche.
• Admiralty (private) case files, 1851-1955. Indexes are available on microfiche. Related records include microfilm number I 19, Memorandum books, habeas corpus cases, 1882-1906. This microfilm reproduces five registers, arranged numerically by case number, of habeas corpus cases in admiralty files. The registers list the name of the petitioner, place of detention, name of the attorney, and final disposition of the petition. They are not indexed.
• Habeas corpus case record book, 1892-1899.
• Petition and record of naturalization, 1907- Index to Naturalization in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, 1852-c. 1989, M1744
• Application for writ of habeas corpus case files, 1900-1952
• Habeas corpus docket books, 1900-1959
• Chinese deportation case files, 1927-1940
• Chinese deportation docket book, 1927-1940
• Naturalization case files, 1927-1959

District Court Records at NARA's Pacific Alaska Region (Seattle) in Seattle, Washington

• Civil, criminal, and U.S. commissioner case files, 1860-1942. Habeas corpus cases, appeals of INS rulings, cases relating to the failure to register as a Chinese resident of the United States and receive a certificate of identity and other criminal activity including smuggling, and some civil cases involving Chinese defendants and plaintiffs. Oregon cases are filed under judgment roll number rather than docket number. Finding aids include docket books and plaintiff and defendant indexes.

Bureau of the Census Record Group 29

The holdings of each Regional Archives include microfilm copies of the U.S. population census for all States from 1790 through 1920. The censuses provide information about residents of organized Chinese communities in the United States as well as Chinese individuals and families living outside these communities. Indexes are available for most census records. Soundex indexes, based on the way a name sounds rather than its spelling, exist for the 1880, 1900, 1910, and 1920 censuses.

U.S. Customs Service Record Group 36

Administrative History The Customs Service, created by an act of July 31, 1789, became part of the Department of the Treasury when that department was established in September 1789. The Service enforced numerous laws and regulations pertaining to the import and export of merchandise, collected tonnage taxes, controlled the entrance and clearance of vessels and aircraft, regulated vessels involved in the coastwise and fishing trades, and protected passengers. The Bureau of Customs was established on March 3, 1927, to supervise these activities, and in 1942 it assumed the responsibilities of the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation relating to the registering, enrolling, licensing, and admeasurement of merchant vessels. These responsibilities were transferred to the Coast Guard in 1967.

The act that established the Customs Service in 1789 also provided for the creation of collection districts in various coastal, inland, river, and Great Lakes ports. A collector of customs in each district collected customs revenue; enforced customs and neutrality laws; and administered aspects of commerce, immigration, and navigation laws, such as the documentation of vessels and protection of American seamen and passengers

Prior to 1900, when the INS assumed enforcement of the Chinese exclusion laws, the collector of customs was involved in administering the Chinese exclusion policy. Correspondence and policy records document the activities and opinions of customs officials who carried out these duties.

Customs Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (Riverside) in Riverside, California

• Letters sent, 1882-1918
• Incoming letters, 1883-1908. These letters relate to a variety of administrative actions. Letters specifically relating to the Chinese reflect concern that aliens were being smuggled from Mexico to California via ships landing near Santa Barbara. They are arranged chronologically in volumes, some of which are indexed by subject or addressee.
• Outgoing letters, 1885-1909. Letters sent regarding the Revenue Cutter Service, 1894-1913
• Special agents' letters sent, 1885-1909
• Letters received from the Treasury Department, 1881-1919
• Special agents' letters received, 1894-1909. Many of these letters concern the enforcement of the Chinese exclusion laws.
• Outgoing letters, 1904-1916
• Incoming letters, 1902-1916. Calexico was established as an entry point along the border with Mexico. Most of the incoming letters concerning Chinese immigration relate to the capture of individuals who attempted to cross the border illegally. They are arranged chronologically.
• Correspondence of the deputy collector in charge . Situated just north of the border with Mexico, the Campo office's main duty was to regulate traffic crossing the border. The correspondence reflects concern about Chinese entering the United States illegally and discusses an investigation of members of the Campo Chinese community.

Customs Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) in San Bruno, California

• Letters sent to the Secretary of the Treasury, 1869-1912 (70 volumes, 9 cubic feet.) The records relate to all collection district functions and to local and regional political and economic matters, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire. They are arranged chronologically by date sent.
• Letters received from the Office of the Secretary of the Treasury, 1895-1912 (60 volumes, 13 linear feet.) Arranged chronologically by date sent. Most volumes after 1886 are indexed alphabetically by name of addressee.
• Letters received, 1894-1928 (250 volumes, 43 linear feet.) Letters received from U.S. and foreign customs offices; other Federal agencies such as the Consular Service and the INS; and merchants, brokers, and steamship companies. Arranged chronologically by date received.
• Letters sent to other Federal agencies and to the general public, 1895-1915 (38 volumes, 3 linear feet.) Arranged chronologically by date sent and indexed alphabetically by name of addressee.

Customs Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (Seattle) in Seattle, Washington

• Letters received from "Chinese" inspectors, 1897-1902.
• Addressee files of letters sent re: Chinese and immigrants, 1898-1900
• Register of Chinese laborers departing from the United States, 1882-1888. Arranged chronologically.
• Records of A.L. Blake pertaining to customs activities in Port Townsend, Washington, 1881-1884 (5 volumes, 3 linear inches.) This series includes a journal with entries dating from August 13, 1881, to December 20, 1884, and a letterpress book containing a 14-page letter dated 1887. The journal, compiled by Blake when he served as deputy collector of customs in Port Townsend, contains brief entries focusing on weather observations, dates and names of ships arriving and departing, reports of opium smuggling, and rumors of illegal entry by Chinese. Blake's 1887 letter alleges corrupt practices by four employees of the Customs Service at Port Townsend.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Record Group 85

Administrative History The Office of Superintendent of Immigration was established in the Department of the Treasury by an act of March 3, 1891, and was designated a bureau in 1895 with responsibility for administering the alien contract-labor laws. In 1903 it became part of the Department of Commerce and Labor. Functions relating to naturalization were added in 1906 and it was renamed the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization. In 1913 it was transferred to the Department of Labor as two separate Bureaus of Immigration and of Naturalization, which were reunited by Executive Order on June 10, 1933, to form the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The INS, which became part of the Department of Justice in 1940, administers laws relating to admission, exclusion, deportation, and naturalization of foreign nationals; patrols United States borders; and supervises naturalization in designated Federal courts.

Many of NARA's Regional Archives hold INS records created primarily during enforcement of the Chinese exclusion laws, 1882-1943. Although the acts were repealed in 1943, some case files may contain correspondence and other documents dated as late as the 1960's. Most case files relate to Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans departing and reentering the United States, but there are also files for other immigrants who came under the jurisdiction of the Chinese exclusion laws (such as Japanese, Koreans, and Filipinos). Laws and provisions passed after 1943, such as the "Confession Program," which allowed Chinese who had committed fraud to enter the country before September 1957 to confess to the immigration authorities and adjust or correct their status, generated records that may also be contained in these files.

Knowledge of the various exclusion laws fosters an understanding of the types of records generated. Different laws required different forms and documents. Various acts suspended immigration of Chinese laborers, permitted reentry of certain Chinese laborers who left the United States temporarily, created the Section 6 exempt status, and permitted entry of wives and children of "legally domiciled aliens."

The San Francisco earthquake and fire had a major impact on the course of the Chinese exclusion bureaucracy. The events of April 18, 1906, destroyed the Hall of Records, including vital records of births, marriages, and deaths. Because these records were destroyed, a legal Chinese resident who requested permission from the INS to return to China to bring back his family might claim to have more children than he actually did. He would receive the paperwork allowing their immigration, use what he needed for his own family, and use or sell the extra "slots" to bring in nonimmediate family members, other village residents, or strangers. These individuals became known as "paper sons."

As INS officials became aware of the existence of "paper sons," they developed the interrogation process to block their entry into the United States, making it more difficult for legal immigrants to enter the country. The transcripts of these interrogations, found in many Chinese immigration files, add to the documentation for each immigrant and give a broad view of their family and the community left behind in China.

Merchants were exempt from exclusion. A man who could prove his merchant status could obtain a merchant's certificate, allowing him to travel between China and the United States and the Territory of Hawaii. This status also allowed him to bring in his wife and family if he could provide proof of relationship. The records generated by the merchant certificate application process include the merchant's testimony and passport, testimony of Caucasian business colleagues or customers, partnership lists, and photographs.

A 1900 law required all Chinese in Hawaii to register and obtain a certificate of residence. To obtain this certificate the applicant had to submit to an investigation at the INS office. Proof of naturalization by the kingdom of Hawaii or a certificate of Hawaiian birth before the islands came under United States territorial status in 1900, or a special birth certificate for Chinese born in Hawaii after 1900, were used to acquire this certificate of residency and citizenship.

A typical Chinese immigration case file contains information such as the subject's name, place and date of birth, physical appearance, occupation, names and relationships of other family members, and family history. Specific INS proceedings are also documented. Because of the nature of INS investigations, case files provide links to file numbers for related cases, including those for other family members.

The files may contain certificates of identity and residency; correspondence; coaching materials used by "paper sons;" INS findings, recommendations, and decisions; maps of immigrant family residences and villages in China; original marriage certificates; individual and family photographs; transcripts of INS interrogations and special boards of inquiry; and witnesses' statements and affidavits. Prior to 1944 each INS district office developed its own filing systems. Keys exist for only a few of the offices.

To locate a case file a researcher must know the name the immigrant or traveler used on the papers. This may differ from the actual or commonly used name. Having the name in Chinese helps to verify the name on the file. INS officials often did not understand the arrangement of Chinese names and sometimes reversed family and personal names. Forms of address, marital status, or respect such as Ah or Shee were taken to be actual names and listed on the index as such. In some cases officials misheard, misunderstood, or misspelled the actual name. In other cases Chinese names were converted to Hawaiian names for phonetic reasons, such as Chung to Akuna. Case files are unlikely to exist for Chinese who arrived in the United States before 1882 and never left and for Chinese Americans born in the United States who never left.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Northeast Region (Boston) in Waltham, Massachusetts

• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1911-1955 (183 cubic feet.) The files are arranged numerically by case number. A name index is available.
• Certificate of citizenship files, 1944-1954 (11/2 cubic feet.) Arranged numerically by file number.
• Subport Chinese deportation files, 1947-1955 (41/2 cubic feet.) These files consist of records from suboffices in Gloucester and Springfield, Massachusetts; Providence, Rhode Island; and Hartford, Connecticut. They relate mainly to investigations and procedures for deporting Chinese seamen, students, and teachers who had been admitted on temporary visas and had not returned to China when their visas expired, or to people attempting to extend their visas. The files are arranged by subport and thereunder by case number.
• Chinese case files, 1900-1952 (13 cubic feet.) The files relate mainly to U.S. citizens of Chinese descent who planned to travel abroad and who applied for preinvestigation of their claimed status as United States citizens so that they could return without problems. Other files relate to Chinese who applied for temporary visas to attend school or teach and businessmen and merchants intending to conduct business. The files are arranged by case number. A name index is available.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Northeast Region (New York) in New York, New York

• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1880-1960 (252 cubic feet.) Finding aids include a database listing name, aliases, hometown, occupation, port of entry, and other details. Names are in English and Chinese, the latter using the four corner coding system that translates Chinese characters into four-digit numbers. The files are arranged by case number.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Mid Atlantic Region in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

• Case files of Chinese immigrants, 1900-1923 (57 cubic feet.) Files on resident Chinese laborers and merchants of Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey, West Virginia, and Delaware. Among the files are lists of Chinese seaman on vessels arriving at Philadelphia, a special census of Chinese taken in 1905, and administrative records. The records are arranged numerically by case number, 1 through 3415, with gaps. This series is also available as Case Files of Chinese Immigrants, 1895-1920, From District No. 4 (Philadelphia) of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, M1144 (51 rolls).
• Letters sent from "Chinese" inspectors, 1895-1903 (6 volumes.) Letterpress copies of letters from "Chinese" inspectors to the Office of the Collector of Customs for Philadelphia. They relate to the administration of the Chinese exclusion laws, particularly the enforcement of the provision of the convention of December 8, 1894, for the reentry of certain classes of Chinese laborers. The records are arranged chronologically.
• Letters sent concerning Chinese, 1904-1911 (12 volumes.) Letterpress copies of outgoing letters, chiefly to the office of the commissioner general of the Immigration Service, the collector of customs for Philadelphia, "Chinese" inspectors, and individuals of Chinese ancestry. They concern the administration of Chinese exclusion laws and regulations, including matters relating to entry, detention, arrest, and deportation; requests of Chinese for certificates of residence; and instructions to inspectors concerning the handling of Chinese appeal cases. Also included are copies of testimony taken in appeal cases concerning unlawful entry into the United States. The records are arranged chronologically.
• Register of Chinese cases, 1897-1903 (6 volumes.) The register lists name, occupation, date, case number, and decision rendered by the Immigration Office concerning deportations. The cases are arranged alphabetically by name.
• Official diary relating to Chinese cases, 1903-1904 (1 volume.) The diary includes entries for letters sent and received relating to Chinese cases; ships boarded that employed Chinese crewmen; visitors, both Chinese and others, such as attorneys and business associates, to the district office; and action taken on Chinese cases. It is arranged chronologically.
• Reports of boarding officers of vessels with Chinese crews, 1912-1915 . The reports show name of vessel; nationality; name of master; where and when the vessel was boarded; port of origin; number of passengers; number of Chinese crewmen; and name of boarding officer. The reports are arranged chronologically.
• Requests for investigations of Chinese desiring to leave the United States, 1895-1903 . Letters from the Office of the Collector of Customs asking that the Chinese inspector investigate Chinese who had applied for permission to leave the United States for a visit abroad. The letters include the names, occupations, and addresses of persons requesting permission to leave, and are arranged chronologically.
• Daily reports of Chinese cases investigated, 1909-1911 . Investigations of evidence submitted by Chinese applicants for admission and of laborers' return certificates, as well as interim determination of status, were reported daily to the Bureau's central office. The reports provide the name of the office and the name, class of exemption, and port of entry of each individual being investigated. They are arranged chronologically.
• Miscellaneous records relating to Chinese cases, 1900-1911 . Regulations governing passage of individuals through the United States; the expense account of the "Chinese" inspector; personal letters confiscated by the Bureau; Chinese seamen's identification cards; drafts of the special census of Chinese (1904) for West Virginia; and uncaptioned photographs.
• Identification papers of Chinese appearing at the Philadelphia Exposition of 1899, 1899 . Identification papers were given to individuals sent by the Chinese Government to participate in its exhibit at the Philadelphia Exposition. The individual's name, age, height, physical description, occupation, and place of residence are listed, and a photograph is attached.
• Case files of Chinese immigrants, 1904-1940 (5 cubic feet.) The files typically include correspondence with the central and district offices of the INS, the Customs Service, and private citizens relating to the admission, exclusion, and departure of Chinese laborers, merchants, students, and seamen. They are arranged by file number.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Great Lakes Region in Chicago, Illinois

• Correspondence of the Chinese Division, 1893-1924 (8 cubic feet.) Letters received and letters sent by inspectors engaged in the enforcement of Chinese immigration laws. They are arranged numerically, 1/1 through 27/19, in a subject-numeric system.
• Chinese case files, 1898-1940 (66 cubic feet.) Arranged numerically by file number.
• Chinese case files, 1906-1942 (10 cubic feet). Arranged consecutively by fiscal year and thereunder numerically.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Southwest Region in Fort Worth, Texas

• Testimony of Chinese arrested for illegally entering the United States, May-July 1907 (1 inch.) Letterpress copies of transcripts of testimony. Arranged chronologically by date testimony was taken by an immigration inspector. Formerly entry 238, volume 12, field records, INS.
• Descriptive list of Chinese deported from Arizona, 1907-1908 (2 inches.) Forms entitled Description of Chinese Person Deported that were completed by the Tucson office. Each form gives the name, height, color of eyes, complexion, identification marks, date of deportation order, date actually deported, signature of inspector, and a photograph of the deported person. Arranged numerically by number assigned to form. Indexed alphabetically by name of deportee. Formerly entry 242, field records, INS.
• Investigative case files on Chinese persons, 1909-1953 (2 cubic feet.) The files contain correspondence, applications of American-born Chinese persons to leave the United Sates temporarily (Form 430), and forms describing Chinese persons who were deported (Form 535). They relate to the residential status of Chinese, requests for duplicate residency certificates, and investigations for citizenship, deportation, and smuggling. Arranged numerically. An appendix contains the names of the persons investigated.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (Riverside) in Riverside, California

• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1893-1943 (159 linear feet.) Arranged by various filing codes. An index is available.
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1899-1955 (less than 2 linear feet)
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1920-1968 (78 linear feet)
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1932-1950 (28 linear feet)
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1922-1944 (less than 1 linear foot)
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1911-1976 (4 linear feet)
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1894-1965 (78 linear feet.) All local office case files listed above are arranged by case file number. Indexes are available.

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) in San Bruno, California

• Arrival investigation case files, 1884-1944 (1,060 cubic feet.) Most early files document the investigation of people arriving from China to determine their eligibility for admission under the Chinese exclusion laws. By the early 20th century the scope of individuals investigated expanded to include people arriving from India, Japan (especially picture brides), Korea, and other Asian countries, and Russia.
• Chinese partnership case files, 1894-1944 (40 cubic feet.) Maps of some Chinatowns in California, descriptions of business activities, photographs, and lists of business partners. Arranged by file numbers representing cities (mostly California) or, in the case of San Francisco, street names. Indexed on microfilm.
• Case files of investigations not resulting in warrant proceedings in the San Francisco District and investigations within the San Francisco District at the request of other service offices, 1912-1950 (16 cubic feet.) Case files of individuals investigated for possible immigration fraud.
• Case files of immigration fraud investigations, 1914-1924 (2 cubic feet.) Materials from the Vauer and Densmore Investigations. Included are village maps, extensive family genealogies, photographic logs of recent deportees, passenger lists, interrogations of immigrants and suspect INS employees, and coaching papers.
• Passport and travel control files, 1918-1924 (1 cubic foot)
• Return certificate application case files of Chinese departing, 1912-1944 (275 cubic feet)
• Return certificate application case files of natives departing, 1903-1912 (7 cubic feet)
• Return certificate application case files of lawfully domiciled laborers departing, 1903-1912 (2 cubic feet)
• Return certificate application case files of lawfully domiciled merchants, teachers, and students departing, 1903-1912 (3 cubic feet)
• Return certificate application case files of Chinese departing, 1894-1912 (18 cubic feet)
• Case files of investigations resulting in warrant proceedings, 1912-1950 (6 cubic feet.) Case files of individuals arrested and held for deportation.
• General immigration case files, 1944-1955 (254 cubic feet) All San Francisco District Office case files listed above are arranged by case file number. A database to the case files is being compiled.
• Administrative records (3 cubic feet.) General correspondence, 1915-1941; historical files relating to Angel Island, 1894-1941; boat files, 1911-1941, containing information about vessels used to ferry staff members and immigrants from Angel Island to San Francisco; telephone cable files, 1910-1940; and construction and maintenance files, 1912-1913.
• Certificate of identity books, 1909-1936 (1/2 cubic foot)

Microfilmed Records

• General index to immigration case files, c. 1910-1979 (unnumbered microfilm.) Index to the arrival investigation case files, 1884-1944.
• San Francisco Chinese mortuary records, 1870-1933 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Certificates of identity for Chinese residents, 1909-c. 1946 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Records of war brides with children, 1946-1948 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Register of Chinese departure case files, 1912-1943 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Records of miscellaneous [Chinese] immigration cases from other ports, 1911-1912 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Registers of Chinese departing from and returning to the United States, 1882-1908 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Passenger lists of Chinese, 1897-1905 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Registers of alien students admitted under the Immigration Act of 1924, 1924-1946 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Index of court certificates related to Chinese, c. 1885-1905 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Records of natives [United States-born Chinese Americans] departing,1909-1913 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Alphabetical index of Chinese partnerships in and outside of San Francisco, California, no date (unnumbered microfilm)
• Daily records of applications [by Chinese laborers] for return certificates, 1903-1912 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Daily records of applications [by Chinese merchants, students, and teachers] for return certificates, 1903-1912 (unnumbered microfilm)
• Register of "Chinese" partnerships in California, 1894-c.1940 (unnumbered microfilm.) Microfilm of the card file register provides case file numbers of the Chinese partnership case files, 1894-1944. It is arranged by city (mostly in California) and thereunder alphabetically by business name. Entries for San Francisco are arranged by street name and thereunder numerically by business address.
• Minutes of Boards of Special Inquiry at the San Francisco Immigration Offices, 1899-1909 (M1387)
• Passenger Lists of Vessels Arriving in San Francisco, California, 1893-1953 (M1410.) These passenger arrival lists are a key to the case files. The case file numbers are composed of the arrival number given to a ship entering the port of San Francisco followed by the ticket number or, after 1910, manifest page number and line number.
• Passenger and Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving in San Francisco, California, 1954-1957 (M1411)
• Customs Passenger Lists of Vessels Arriving in San Francisco, California, 1903-1918 (M1412)
• Registers of Chinese Laborers Returning to the United States through the Port of San Francisco, 1882-1888 (M1413)
• Lists of Chinese Passengers Arriving in San Francisco, California, 1882-1914 (M1414)
• Admitted Alien Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving in San Francisco, California, 1896-1921 (M1436)
• Passenger Lists of Vessels Arriving at San Francisco, California, from Insular Possessions, 1907-1911 (M1438)
• Lists of U.S. Citizens Arriving at San Francisco, California, 1930-1949 (M1439)
• Lists of Chinese Applying for Admission to the United States through the Port of San Francisco, 1903-1947 (M1476)
• Passenger Lists of Vessels Arriving at San Francisco, California, from Honolulu, Hawaii, 1902-1907 (M1494)
• General immigration case files, 1944-1955 (for Honolulu, 1944-1949)
• Letters sent by the chief immigration officer, 1903-1904 (1 cubic foot)
• Chinese immigration case files, 1903-1915 (37 cubic feet)
• Certificates of citizenship, 1926-1955 (28 cubic feet.) Arranged chronologically in two groups, 1926-1928 and 1929-1955, and thereunder arranged by certificate number.
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as U.S. citizens, 1916-1942 (84 cubic feet)
• Applications for return certificates of lawfully domiciled Chinese laborers, 1916-1938 (54 cubic feet)
• Case files of U.S. citizens of Chinese ancestry applying for certificates of citizenship Hawaiian Islands, departing to the continental U.S. or foreign destinations, 1924-1942 (59 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for merchants' return permits, 1912-1934 (8 cubic feet)
• Landing statements, 1903-1924, 1946-1959 (35 cubic feet.) Transcripts of interrogations during which immigrants were asked about themselves and their relatives. Arranged chronologically by date of entry.
• General immigration case files, 1944-1948 (26 cubic feet)
• General immigration case files, 1949-1954 (31 cubic feet)
• Register of Chinese confession cases, 1957-1968 (1 volume.) The register lists individual names and case file numbers chronologically by date of case.
• Index to applicants for reissuance of certificates of identity, c. 1903-1910 (1 cubic foot)
• Case files of arrest warrants and deportation orders, 1913-1942 (2 cubic feet)
• Applications for certificate of citizenship Hawaiian Islands, 1924-1941 (2 cubic feet)
• Case files of nonimmigrants admitted as students, teachers, and ministers, 1917-1938 (2 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as wives of merchants, teachers, and ministers, 1916-1939 (4 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as wives of native-born U.S. citizens of Chinese ancestry, 1916-1940 (2 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as children of Chinese merchants, teachers, and ministers, 1913-1938 (3 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as children of native-born U.S. citizens of Chinese ancestry, 1916-1926 (2 cubic feet)
• Case files of Chinese applicants for admission as wives and/or children of Chinese naturalized under the Hawaiian Kingdom and pre-examination of status of Chinese claiming such naturalization, 1919-1925 (2 cubic feet)
• Visa case files of Chinese applicants for admission as Section 6 students, teachers, and travelers, 1916-1942 (7 cubic feet)
• Visa case files of Section 6 Chinese applicants to proceed to the continental U.S., 1917-1942 (1 cubic foot)
• Case files of applicants for duplicate certificates of [Hawaiian] residence, 1921-1938 (1/2 cubic foot)
• Case files of applicants for duplicate certificates of identity, 1920-1942 (1/2 cubic foot)
• Case files of Filipino applicants for certificates of citizenship Hawaiian Islands, 1934-1944 (6 cubic feet)
• Records of the Chung Shin Tong, Lung Doo Section, c. 1943-1951 (unnumbered microfilm.) Arranged by type of record (membership lists, membership receipts, or minute books), thereunder chronologically by year.
• Alien crew lists of vessels arriving at Honolulu, 1902-1908 (unnumbered microfilm)

Immigration and Naturalization Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (Seattle) in Seattle, Washington

• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1895-1943 (650 cubic feet.) Arranged by office or suboffice (including Helena, Montana; Port Townsend, Seattle [two subseries], and Sumas, Washington; and Vancouver, British Columbia, where the United States consul maintained some records) and thereunder by case number. The numbering systems are unique to each office or suboffice. A database index is being compiled listing name, aliases, hometown, occupation, port of entry, date and place of birth, and other details. Dates of case files vary with the office.
• List of Chinese certificates of identity issued, 1911-1938 . The list contains the person's name, certificate number, city of residence, and section of the law under which admitted. It is arranged by certificate of identity number, which corresponds roughly to date of issue.
• Record of arrivals and dispositions of Chinese persons, 1903-1942 (27 cubic feet.) Arranged by office or suboffice (Seattle and Sumas, Washington; Vancouver, British Columbia) and thereunder chronologically. Dates vary with each office. Registers list the name and date of arrival, name of the ship, disposition of the case, legal status of immigrant (for example, merchant, student, minor child of citizen), and place of residence in the U.S. These volumes can be used to identify case numbers.
• Chinese exclusion acts case files, 1891-1943 (84 cubic feet.) Arranged in two groups, 1891-1914 and 1915-1943. The first group is arranged by type of file (returning, landed, refused, miscellaneous) and thereunder by file number; the second group is arranged by file number. There is a box contents list for the first group of records.
• Immigration and Naturalization Service Case Files of Chinese Immigrants, Portland, Oregon, 1890-1914, M1638, may be a useful finding aid.
• Testimony of witnesses, 1893-1894 . These volumes contain brief synopses of testimony for "returning merchant Chinese." The testimony usually relates to business associations and confirmation of identity. Marginal comments usually indicate the disposition of the case (admitted or rejected). The records are arranged chronologically with indexes in the front of the volumes.
• Partnership books, 1890-1901 . The volumes vary in content but most contain information about businesses in Oregon and some have information on businesses throughout the Pacific Northwest. Some volumes indicate partners' arrival dates, whether refused or admitted, and their business relationships. The volumes are arranged alphabetically by the name of the company.
• Arrest book listing Chinese, 1903-1941 . This volume was maintained by the "Chinese" inspector and lists those Chinese arrested for various offenses but primarily for alleged violations of the Chinese exclusion acts. The case number for the person arrested is usually provided. The volume is arranged by date of arrest with an index at the front of the volume.
• Registers of departing merchants and laborers, 1882-1899 . These volumes include the certificate of identity number, name, place of last residence, occupation, and vessel and date on which the person departed. Some entries indicate whether the person returned and list the date and vessel. The volumes are arranged chronologically by date of departure. These volumes appear to have been created by the Customs Service in Portland but were then transferred to the INS. Similar volumes exist for Seattle among the records of the U.S. Customs Service (RG 36).
• List of Chinese landed and refused in Astoria [Oregon] and Portland, 1893-1903 . These volumes list arriving Chinese and sometimes include the name of the business with which they were affiliated; the name of the ship on which they arrived; the last place of residence in the United States, if returning from abroad; and certificate of identity number. The records are arranged by date of arrival.

Public Health Service, 1912-1968 Record Group 90

Administrative History The Public Health Service, originally called the Marine Hospital Service, had its origins in an act of July 16, 1798, which authorized hospitals for the care of sick and disabled American merchant seamen. The scope of its activities was greatly expanded by subsequent legislation. It was part of the Department of the Treasury from 1798 to 1939, the Federal Security Agency from 1939 to 1953, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1953, and the Department of Health and Human Services in 1979. The Public Health Service operates marine hospitals, hospitals for specific diseases, medical facilities for Federal penal institutions, quarantine and health stations, and research institutions and laboratories. It disseminates health information and conducts research in the cause, prevention, and control of disease.

Public Health Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) in San Bruno, California

• Correspondence, 1890-1926 (70 volumes, 12 cubic feet.) Several series of letters sent or received, some in letterpress copy books. Arranged chronologically. Folder lists are available, and a few of the letterpress books are indexed by the names of correspondents.
• General administrative files, 1918-1948 (15 cubic feet.) The records concern Chinese and other ethnic groups and routine operations and administrative matters at the quarantine station and. Included are lists submitted by steamship lines for medical certification of passengers. The files are arranged alphabetically by subject. A folder title list is available.

United States Attorneys Record Group 118

Administrative History The Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, made provision for U.S. attorneys appointed by the president. U.S. attorneys have functioned under the general supervision of the Department of Justice since its creation in 1870. They investigate violations of Federal criminal laws, present evidence to grand juries, prosecute Federal criminal cases, and serve as the Federal Government's attorney in civil litigation in which the United States is a party or has an interest.

U.S. Attorneys Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) in San Bruno, California

• Civil, criminal, and appeals cases concerning immigration, 1905-1942 (4 cubic feet)

U.S. Courts of Appeals Record Group 276

Administrative History The courts of appeals are intermediate courts created by an act of March 3, 1891, to relieve the Supreme Court from considering all appeals in cases originally decided by Federal trial courts. They review final and certain interlocutory decisions of district courts (see RG 21) except where the law provides for direct review by the Supreme Court. They also review orders of Federal administrative bodies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the National Labor Relations Board. The records include case files of appeals by defendants charged with violation of the Chinese exclusion laws. Case files may contain copies of complaints, decrees, indictments, judgments, opinions, subpoenas, transcripts of interrogations, and other supporting documents. The files are arranged consecutively by case number, with cases involving Chinese interfiled with other types of cases. There is no separate series of appeals for cases involving Chinese.

Courts of Appeals Records at NARA's Mid Atlantic Region in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

• Criminal appeals, 1882-1942 . Docket books, with plaintiff and defendant indexes available in each volume.

Courts of Appeals Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno)in San Bruno, California

• Appellate case files, 1891-1969

United States Marshals Service Record Group 527

Administrative History The Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, made provision for U.S. marshals appointed by the president. They have functioned under the general supervision of the Department of Justice since its creation in 1870. U.S. marshals execute and serve writs, processes, and orders issued by U.S. courts, U.S. commissioners or magistrates, and commissions. They also notify the Department of Justice of defiance of Federal authority.

U.S. Marshals Service Records at NARA's Great Lakes Region in Chicago, Illinois

• Correspondence regarding Chinese immigration cases, 1905-1915 (1 volume, less than 1 cubic foot.) Reports summarizing actions taken in Chinese immigration cases, both before and after the issuance of orders for deportation, and correspondence with the Commissioner General of Immigration concerning Chinese immigration matters. The records are arranged in rough chronological order.

U.S. Marshals Service Records at NARA's Pacific Region (San Bruno) San Bruno, California

• Correspondence, 1874-1919 (54 cubic feet.) Various series of letters sent and received, some in letterpress books, arranged by type of document and thereunder roughly chronologically. The records relate to all aspects of U.S. marshal activities, including Chinese immigration and exclusion cases and alleged criminal matters. For example, there are letters regarding care of Chinese deported on ships owned by the Occidental and Oriental Steamship Company, Chinese detained as witnesses on Alcatraz Island, Chinese being discharged from prison, and advertisements for sale of opium. These letters are interfiled with all other letters. Indexes by name of correspondent, and a partial list of letters concerning Chinese cases, are available for some records.

Selected Finding Aids for Archival Holdings at NARA's Regional Records Services Facilities NARA's Regional Records Services Facilities

Accept Cookie Policy

Special announcement..

Free admission on Canada Day, July 1st, from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The Chinese head tax and the Chinese Exclusion Act The Chinese head tax and the Chinese Exclusion Act

By Matthew McRae Published: May 31, 2017

• Collective rights

Photo: Courtesy of Dr. Henry Yu

• Facebook facebook

When he was a little boy growing up in Vancouver, Dr. Henry Yu didn’t understand why his grandfather frequently took him on long walks to visit Chinatown.

It was only when Dr. Yu was much older that he realized that his grandfather’s walks were connected to two discriminatory policies from Canada’s past: the Chinese head tax and the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Dr. Henry Yu.

To understand these two policies and the terrible effect they had on generations of individuals, you need to know a little about the history of Chinese immigration to Canada. In the late 1800s, there was an influx of Chinese immigration to Canada’s West. Many came to help build the Canadian Pacific Railway – the first Canadian Railway to cross the Rocky Mountains and reach the Pacific Coast – but Chinese people emigrated for many other reasons, too: working on farms, opening stores and participating in logging operations in British Columbia and elsewhere.

Loggers in British Columbia, 1900.

Chinese people in Canada often worked in dangerous or low‐status jobs that others did not want.

Unfortunately, many white Canadians were hostile to Chinese immigration. In 1885, immediately after construction on the Canadian Pacific Railway was complete, the federal government passed the  Chinese Immigration Act , which stipulated that, with almost no exceptions, every person of Chinese origin immigrating to Canada had to pay a fee of $50, called a head tax. No other group in Canadian history has ever been forced to pay a tax based solely on their country of origin. “It was an attempt to basically discriminate against the Chinese,” Dr. Yu explained. “…it was a way to alter the flow of migrants to the new Canada to be weighted towards European and in particular British migrants.”

In 1900, the head tax was raised to $100. Then, three years later, it went up to $500 per person. Between 1885 and 1923, approximately 81,000 Chinese immigrants paid the head tax, contributing millions of dollars to government coffers. One of those who paid the tax was Dr. Yu’s maternal grandfather, Yeung Sing Yew, who immigrated to Canada in 1923. Yeung was also one of the last Chinese immigrants to pay the head tax; in the same year as he arrived in the country, the Canadian government passed a new  Chinese Immigration Act , which came to be known as the Chinese Exclusion Act.

Under the new act, Chinese immigration to Canada was completely banned. This legislation was kept in place until 1947, and its effect on Canada’s Chinese community was devastating.

Because of the costly head tax, by 1923, Canada’s Chinese communities were largely “bachelor societies,” where men outnumbered women by a ratio of almost twenty‐eight to one. Many Chinese men had come to Canada alone, hoping to save enough money to bring over their wives and families. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1923 destroyed those dreams. Yeung spent many years living alone in Canada.

Even after 1947, immigration to Canada was still challenging. Until Canada’s immigration system was overhauled in 1967, few Chinese were let into the country, and usually only for family reunification purposes. In fact, Yeung first met his daughter – Dr. Yu’s mother – when she immigrated to Canada in 1965. Both of Dr. Yu’s parents worked full time, so when he was young, he spent a lot of time with his grandparents –this brings us back to the long walks to Chinatown. 

It was only when Dr. Yu was older, and knew his grandfather’s whole story that he finally understood what the long walks were about: they demonstrated his grandfather’s joy at being reunited with his family. “It explains his showing me off to all those other elderly men gathered at these cafes in Chinatown,” Dr. Yu told me. He recounted how excited the old men would be, and how they would enthusiastically congratulate his grandfather: "It explains why my grandfather having me here was like an explosion of joy because the Exclusion Act basically made it impossible for many of them… to marry someone and have kids turn into grandkids. Many of them would die alone literally, growing old alone except for these other men in these cafes."

This experience helped teach Dr. Yu that the effects of racial discrimination take a psychological toll on many generations. He remembers how, until the late 1940s, the Chinese in British Columbia were not allowed to swim in pools with whites, and were segregated in movie theatres. He told me how many Chinese immigrants lived in fear of being deported because authorities would often look for reasons to remove people from the country. Dr. Yu’s grandfather used a fake identity, called a “paper name,” to get into Canada because he did not have a legal birth certificate – something that was very common at the time – and so he worried for many years about the authorities coming for him.

A page of the head tax register where “Low Jang Yit” – the “paper name” of Dr. Yu’s grandfather, was registered. His name is fifth from the bottom.

"So my grandfather, you could say he lived a life that unfortunately distorted who he could be, who he was – and by the time I knew him as an elder in the community, he wasn’t the same man he was when he was young. When I learned about things like the head tax…. It explained things about my grandfather that I already felt and knew. It’s kind of interesting that you can feel something’s wrong and not know why until later. You kind of don’t know the words, and then you finally find a name for your pain. You say "Oh now I get it. Now I understand.""

Chinese Canadians did call for acknowledgment of the human rights violations they experienced due to the head tax and Chinese Exclusion Act. In 1983, Dak Leon Mark and Shack Yee requested that the Canadian government refund the $500 head tax they had each paid. In the years that followed, some 4,000 Chinese Canadians came forward seeking redress. Some Chinese Canadians also pursued justice through the court of law. Redress finally came in June 2006, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper  apologized  in the House of Commons. That same year, $20,000 in redress was offered by the Government of Canada to all surviving individuals who had paid the head tax. The government also allocated $24 million for a community historical recognition program and $10 million for a national historical recognition Program meant to educate Canadians on the impacts of the head tax and the racism experienced by many different groups in Canada.

Thomas Soon, 97 (left) and Charlie Quon, 99, holding the first head tax redress payments from the Government of Canada.

Dr. Henry Yu is now a  professor of History  at the University of British Columbia. He has played a key role in the  Chinese Head Tax Digitization Project , which created a searchable database of Chinese Canadian immigrants who paid the head tax. The database allows individuals to search for family members, and it allows researchers access to important demographic information. For Dr. Yu, it also serves as a connection to his grandfather and to all those who have passed away, ensuring they and their stories are never forgotten:

"You could say that in this research, this database, I can find ways to hear from him and all those other men who are otherwise silent. And so that’s where, in a way, we were able to find a voice and let it say things that perhaps they couldn’t at the time."

The story of the Chinese Head Tax and Exclusion Act and the struggle for redress can be found in the Museum’s Canadian Journeys gallery. This blog was written in part using research conducted by Mallory Richard, who worked at the Museum as both a researcher and a project coordinator.

Matthew McRae worked at the Museum as Researcher and as Digital Content Specialist.

Suggested citation

Suggested citation : Matthew McRae. “The Chinese head tax and the Chinese Exclusion Act.” Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Published May 31, 2017. https://humanrights.ca/story/chinese-head-tax-and-chinese-exclusion-act

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

After Escaping China by Sea, a Dissident Faces His Next Act

Kwon Pyong recounted for the first time the series of gambles that got him out of China by jet ski, and almost a year later, out of South Korea.

By John Yoon

Reporting from Incheon, South Korea

The dissident’s lone regret after his 200-mile escape across the Yellow Sea was not taking night vision goggles.

Nearing the end of his jet ski journey out of China last summer, Kwon Pyong peered through the darkness off the South Korean coast. As he approached the shore, sea gulls appeared to bob as if floating. He steered forward, then ran aground: The birds were sitting on mud.

“I had everything — sunscreen, backup batteries, a knife to cut buoy lines,” he recalled in an interview. He was prepared to signal his location with a laser pen if he became stranded and to burn his notes with a lighter if he were captured. He also had a visa to enter South Korea, and had intended to arrive at a port of entry, he said, not strand himself on a mud flat.

It wasn’t enough.

Mr. Kwon, 36 and an ethnic Korean, had mocked China’s powerful leader and criticized how the ruling Communist Party was persecuting hundreds of pro-democracy activists at home and abroad. In response, he said, he faced an exit ban and years of detention, prison and surveillance.

But fleeing to South Korea did not offer the relief he expected. He was still hounded by the Chinese state, he said, and spent time in detention. Even after he was released, he was in legal limbo: neither wanted nor allowed to leave.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

FACT SHEET: President   Biden Announces New Actions to Keep Families   Together

Since his first day in office, President Biden has called on Congress to secure our border and address our broken immigration system. As Congressional Republicans have continued to put partisan politics ahead of national security – twice voting against the toughest and fairest set of reforms in decades – the President and his Administration have taken actions to secure the border, including:

• Implementing executive actions to bar migrants who cross our Southern border unlawfully from receiving asylum when encounters are high;
• Deploying record numbers of law enforcement personnel, infrastructure, and technology to the Southern border;
• Seizing record amounts of fentanyl at our ports of entry;
• Revoking the visas of CEOs and government officials outside the U.S. who profit from migrants coming to the U.S. unlawfully; and
• Expanding efforts to dismantle human smuggling networks and prosecuting individuals who violate immigration laws.

President Biden believes that securing the border is essential. He also believes in expanding lawful pathways and keeping families together, and that immigrants who have been in the United States for decades, paying taxes and contributing to their communities, are part of the social fabric of our country. The Day One immigration reform plan that the President sent to Congress reflects both the need for a secure border and protections for the long-term undocumented. While Congress has failed to act on these reforms, the Biden-Harris Administration has worked to strengthen our lawful immigration system. In addition to vigorously defending the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood arrivals) policy, the Administration has extended Affordable Care Act coverage to DACA recipients and streamlined, expanded, and instituted new reunification programs so that families can stay together while they complete the immigration process.  Still, there is more that we can do to bring peace of mind and stability to Americans living in mixed-status families as well as young people educated in this country, including Dreamers. That is why today, President Biden announced new actions for people who have been here many years to keep American families together and allow more young people to contribute to our economy.   Keeping American Families Together

• Today, President Biden is announcing that the Department of Homeland Security will take action to ensure that U.S. citizens with noncitizen spouses and children can keep their families together.
• This new process will help certain noncitizen spouses and children apply for lawful permanent residence – status that they are already eligible for – without leaving the country.
• These actions will promote family unity and strengthen our economy, providing a significant benefit to the country and helping U.S. citizens and their noncitizen family members stay together.
• In order to be eligible, noncitizens must – as of June 17, 2024 – have resided in the United States for 10 or more years and be legally married to a U.S. citizen, while satisfying all applicable legal requirements. On average, those who are eligible for this process have resided in the U.S. for 23 years.
• Those who are approved after DHS’s case-by-case assessment of their application will be afforded a three-year period to apply for permanent residency. They will be allowed to remain with their families in the United States and be eligible for work authorization for up to three years. This will apply to all married couples who are eligible.  
• This action will protect approximately half a million spouses of U.S. citizens, and approximately 50,000 noncitizen children under the age of 21 whose parent is married to a U.S. citizen.

Easing the Visa Process for U.S. College Graduates, Including Dreamers

• President Obama and then-Vice President Biden established the DACA policy to allow young people who were brought here as children to come out of the shadows and contribute to our country in significant ways. Twelve years later, DACA recipients who started as high school and college students are now building successful careers and establishing families of their own.
• Today’s announcement will allow individuals, including DACA recipients and other Dreamers, who have earned a degree at an accredited U.S. institution of higher education in the United States, and who have received an offer of employment from a U.S. employer in a field related to their degree, to more quickly receive work visas.
• Recognizing that it is in our national interest to ensure that individuals who are educated in the U.S. are able to use their skills and education to benefit our country, the Administration is taking action to facilitate the employment visa process for those who have graduated from college and have a high-skilled job offer, including DACA recipients and other Dreamers. 

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

Election latest: Another Tory under investigation over election bets - as Labour to return £100,000 in donations

A former Tory candidate who was dropped for betting on the date of the election has vowed to clear his name, as the Labour Party and more police officers also become embroiled in the escalating scandal.

Tuesday 25 June 2024 21:11, UK

• General Election 2024

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Election betting scandal

• Labour candidate suspended | Party to return donations
• Welsh Conservative under investigation
• Dropped Tory candidate vows to 'clear name'
• More police officers accused of betting on election date
• Jon Craig: This has exposed quite a sleazy side of politics
• Live reporting by Faith Ridler and (earlier)  Tim Baker
• Car crash outside PM's country house
• Four arrested in grounds of Sunak's constituency home
• Reform drops in new poll after Farage's Putin comments
• Starmer says children 'worried' about possible move into No 10

Election essentials

• Manifesto pledges: Alliance | Conservatives | DUP | Greens | Labour | Lib Dems | Plaid | Reform | SNP | Sinn Fein | Workers
• Trackers:  Who's leading polls? | Is PM keeping promises?
• Campaign Heritage: Memorable moments from elections gone by
• Follow Sky's politics podcasts: Electoral Dysfunction | Politics At Jack And Sam's
• Read more:  Who is standing down? | Key seats to watch | What counts as voter ID? | Check if your constituency is changing | Guide to election lingo | How to watch election on Sky News

Scotland Secretary Alister Jack has tonight denied breaking any Gambling Commission rules "on any occasion".

It comes after the BBC reported he had told the broadcaster he placed wagers on June and July polling dates.

However, in a statement he said: "I am very clear that I have never, on any occasion, broken any Gambling Commission rules.

"Specifically, I did not place any bets on the date of the general election during May (the period under investigation by the Gambling Commission).

"Furthermore, I am not aware of any family or friends placing bets."

"And for the avoidance of doubt that based on my comment above the Gambling Commission have obviously not contacted me."

Our live poll tracker collates the results of opinion surveys carried out by all the main polling organisations - and allows you to see how the political parties are performing in the run-up to the general election.

It shows a drop in support in recent days for Labour and the Tories - with a jump for Reform and the Liberal Democrats.

Read more about the tracker here .

There are seemingly three things on the minds of British people at the moment - the Euros, the election, and Taylor Swift.

But while the Royal Family have been quick to send their backing to England's footballers and catch the pop star's Eras shows at Wembley, they'll be keeping their distance from the politics.

That's despite the fact that, apart from the monarch, the royals are technically allowed to vote in UK general elections.

Sky News explains why they don't.

Rhun ap Iorwerth, the leader of Plaid Cymru, was also asked about a manifesto commitment to make it a criminal offence for elected politicians to knowingly mislead the public.

Former prime minister Boris Johnson was suspended from parliament for misleading the Commons - does Mr Iorwerth think he should go to prison?

He says legislation to "make it clear there are consequences if you are found to be purposefully deceptive" could be "part of the world of building trust in politicians and politics".

It's noted how difficult it would be to prove someone had purposefully deceived parliament.

Building that trust is a key focus for his party, he says.

"We believe this is important because one of the questions that I've been asked a lot during the course of this election campaign and MPs over the past year, is how do we build trust in politicians?"

That brings our coverage of tonight's Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge to an end, but the show returns tomorrow at 7pm. Stick with us for more news and analysis throughout the evening.

Sophy Ridge  asks about a report into Plaid Cymru, published before Rhun ap Iorwerth became leader, which found "a culture of harassment, bullying, and misogyny".

Has he cleaned up the party's act?

"It was a difficult time for us," Mr Iorwerth admits. "We commissioned this report on ourselves. 

"And, you know, there's a suggestion that other political parties may well benefit from doing the same themselves.

"But this was our moment."

Mr Iorwerth adds that Plaid Cymru has been "through a wake-up" and have "ticked off" all 82 recommendations the report made.

Russell George, a Conservative member of the Senedd, has stepped back from the Welsh shadow cabinet as he faces an investigation by the gambling watchdog over alleged bets on the timing of the general election.

Mr George represents Montgomeryshire in the Welsh parliament - the same area that Craig Williams, the Tory candidate who has had party support withdrawn as he faces similar allegations, represented at Westminster.

Welsh Conservative leader Andrew RT Davies said: "Russell George has informed me that he has received a letter from the Gambling Commission regarding bets on the timing of the general election.

"Russell George has stepped back from the Welsh Conservative shadow cabinet while these investigations are ongoing.

"All other members of the Welsh Conservative Group have confirmed that they have not placed any bets.

"I will not issue further comment on this ongoing process, recognising the Gambling Commission's instruction for confidentiality to protect the integrity of the process."

Joining  Sophy Ridge  tonight for the latest in her Leaders Interviews series is Rhun ap Iorwerth of Plaid Cymru.

She begins with her usual first question: Why should people vote for Plaid Cymru?

Mr Iorwerth says the reason to vote for his pro-independence party is "clearer than usual".

He adds: "We really need to make sure that the MPs we have really do speak up for Wales, which are guaranteed in Plaid Cymru. 

"But also we kind of know where this is going to end don't we? In terms of Downing Street. 

"Sir Keir Starmer will be the prime minister two weeks from now. We need to be holding him and his government to account for the people of Wales."

But Sophy points out that much of Plaid Cymru's manifesto is similar to that of Scottish Labour.

Mr Iorwerth disagrees, pointing to his party's desire to scrap the two-child benefit cap and reassess the country's relationship with the EU.

"We want to make sure that there's investment in Wales through the £4bn owed to us from the HS2 rail project in England, which Labour is flatly ignoring," he adds.

By Tom Cheshire , online campaign correspondent

There are two ways to reach voters online: pay for your adverts to end up in front of them - or produce content yourself that gets attention.

Throughout the election, we've been tracking the first of those. Labour have been the big digital spenders, with the Conservatives second, and then everyone else a very distant third.

But throwing money at it doesn't necessarily fix the attention problem. 

And some of those spending the least are getting the most interactions, with the Reform UK party doing by far the best.

Reform is also seeing the most page growth, with 32,000 new followers.

The Conservative Party by comparison has seen much slower growth, just 0.08%. 

That's only 596 more people clicking follow over the course of the election, speaking to a spluttering campaign.

Returning to the gambling scandal, former Tory MP Tim Loughton tells  Sophy Ridge  anyone involved "should have the book thrown at them, frankly just for them being pretty dumb".

"It just looks really, really stupid," he says. 

He explains that suspending anyone is effectively a death sentence for potentially innocent candidates standing in elections, and that Rishi Sunak waiting for an investigation before doing so wasn't a bad idea.

"It was right to look at it properly," he adds - but reiterates that it doesn't look good for anyone involved.

Tory peer Baroness Nicky Morgan is asked by  Sophy Ridge  if the campaigning is all but pointless - with the only Conservative aim to avoid Labour winning a so-called "supermajority". 

"In my book, you never give up until 10pm on polling night," she says, noting occasions where final votes on election night have made the difference.

"I don't think the British public would want a government to have a huge majority," she adds.

"I don't think it's good for democracy, for holding a government to account."

She concedes that after 14 years it "was always going to be a battle" to convince the public for a further five. 

On the recent gambling scandal, she says: "The more you're talking about things like betting, the less you're talking about the issues that people really want to hear about."

Be the first to get Breaking News

Install the Sky News app for free