HOM WONG SHEE & WHY IT MATTERS: A SUMMARY OF THE PETITION TO CONGRESS FOR AN APOLOGY AND A QUESTION FOR THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ABOUT SENATE RESOLUTION 201 AND
THE CHINESE EXCLUSION ACT OF 1882

Two years ago I launched a petition to the United States Congress for a public apology to the Hom family and all others concerned about the privately acknowledged inhumane treatment of Hom Wong Shee (Wong Toy Heung) while she was held in custody at the United States Immigration Service San Francisco Station from October 23 to November 19, 1941(1).

In the months between then and now, I have sent out in directions academic, religious, secular, and legislative the case for an apology to Wong Shee.

The Congress now has received from the United States Senate SR201, a bill which speaks to the matter of an apology for the enforcement abuses suffered by persons subject to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.  The official objective of the Exclusion Act was an attempt to control unskilled labor entering the United States from China.  The application of the Exclusion Act on the ground soon expanded beyond its stated limits to subject any Chinese person entering the United States from 1882 to 1943 to lengthy detentions by the Immigration Service until they were declared exempt or not exempt from the definition of “unskilled labor” and either excluded and deported or allowed to land in America. 

Hom Wong Shee was one of Exclusions many victims. 

The wife of a US Army WWI veteran who himself was the son of a native born citizen, Hom Wong Shee was granted an exemption to the Act and given permission to join her husband in Pittsburgh, PA.  Wong Shee lived in America for ten years in Pittsburgh (1922-1932) raising seven children (2).  At the time of Wong Shee’s custody in San Francisco in 1941, her eldest son Hom You Yee was active US Army and stationed at Fort Benning, Georgia (3).

Wong Shee left the United States for China in 1932.  Wong Shee intended to remain in China and did not file a “Laborer’s Return” document with the US at the time of her departure.

Because Wong Shee did not file this single piece of paper, and in spite of the fact that her husband and seven of her nine children resided in the United States, Wong Shee was held at San Francisco and separated from her two 8 & 9-year-old accompanying sons(4).  During her custody alone and separated from her children, Wong Shee grew increasingly depressed and showed clear indications of a need for mental healthcare.  Wong Shee’s treatment was limited to a dismissal of her emotional state by the Station nurse who described her behavior as typical of Chinese attempting to get around the system(5).

Wong Shee’s disturbed state must only have been exacerbated when she was misinformed by Station staff that her case had been denied.  To Wong Shee this would mean deportation to an uncertain and dangerous future in war-torn China.

Soon after receiving this incorrect news, and after her request to visit her detained sons remained ignored, Hom Wong Shee took her life at the San Francisco District Station (6).

So why should this matter to Congress in 2011?

If you are a Member of Congress who does not support a companion bill to SR201, is it not possible in a separate bill to at least apologize to someone who was mistreated by the misapplication of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882?

If you are a Member of Congress who supports a companion bill to SR201, does it not make sense to acknowledge in the text of that companion bill or on the floor of the House one of Exclusion’s most heartfelt victims?  Indeed it can be argued that Hom Wong Shee’s suicide set in motion the end of Exclusionist pretensions in America, leading to President Franklin Roosevelt’s description of the Exclusion Act as a “historic mistake” at the time of the rescinding of the Act by the President in 1943.

If you are a Member of Congress with no position on the companion bill to SR201, does the case of Hom Wong Shee not beg for its own representation in Congress, separate from and having no relation to SR201?

 

Thanking you for your attention,

Sincerely,

   

William Warrior,

Mountain View, CA

graihwing@gmail.com

http://www.roxanagraphs.us/wongshee1941.html

October 11, 2011

1. “A Request to Congress…” http://www.roxanagraphs.us/wongshee1941.html 

2. United States National Archives Pacific Alaska Region office, Seattle, WA, case file

 39430/1-7 & 8-3

3. National Archives Pacific Region office, San Bruno, CA, case file number 41369/11-29

4. IBID NARA file number 41369/11-29

5. IBID NARA file 41369/11-29

6. IBID NARA file 41369/11-29, and http://www.roxanagraphs.us/wongshee1941.html