Historiography of Chinese American History

Chinese-American History

The Exclusion Act; Redefining Citizenship

Historians have studied the Chinese Exclusion Act extensively and have recorded many aspects of the politics behind the events. However, they often focus their attentions on the motives of the excluders. They pay little attention to those that were excluded and the impact that it had on their lives. One important question has escaped the scrutiny of historians. Why, if they knew of the hardships and discrimination that they would face in America, did all of those Chinese immigrants continue to flock to America in droves?

What motivated them to leave their home and families to arrive at Angel Island and have to buy a new identity, all at great personal risk, to stay in America? What was the big attraction? Sure, there were jobs here and they could send money home to support their distant families, but the life in America was hard and treacherous. The following will explore the historiography of Chinese-Americans and the impact that the exclusion act had on shaping the course of Chinese-American culture. It will also examine man gaps that have been left by historians. The answers to these gaps will help shed light on the many questions that surround this era.

History and Impact of the Exclusion Act

Erik Lee explored the impact and motive behind the actions of Chinese immigrants in his book At America's Gates. Lee relates the experiences of Chinese-Americans to the immigration story of his Grandfather. In this case, he has first had knowledge of the events and their impact on Chinese-Americans. This personal experience apparently sparked his interest in the topic of how the Exclusion act impacted other Chinese-American Immigrants and their families. Lee uses primary sources to draw his conclusions and support his thesis. He relied exclusively on the documents of immigrants and those that were deported as his data source. This gives his work and incredible heir of reliability.

However, even Lee admits that he used his own interpretation to "read between the lines" of the immigration documents. This is inherently dangerous in any research setting. It is particularly disturbing when we consider that Lee felt passionately about the issues, especially as theory related to his own family history. There is a danger that Lee inadvertently introduced his own expectations on the research, which may have skewed the results. For these reasons, one must take this into consideration when they read his theories on the impact of the Exclusion Act.

Regardless of the validity issues with Lee's research, he still contains an excellent section of the background of the Exclusion Act. He raises many questions and makes observations that appear to have been missed by other historians. In the 1850s thousands of Chinese flocked to California in search of Gum Saan, or Gold Mountain. This was what the Chinese called the United States. Many immigrants planned to come to the United States, make a fast buck and then go back to their villages in China. However, when many got here, their plans changed and they stayed a lifetime. The money was good and Chinese workers found that they could provide much more for their family if they stayed.

Life in the U.S. was hard and often workers had family in China. They often did not get to see them for many years on end. This was difficult for the wives and children back home and for the immigrant, yet they stayed. Many escaped destitute situations in China, so they stayed. In some cases women and children migrated at a later date.

According to Lee, the first Chinese immigrants had an easy time immigrating. There were few rules and America welcomed all who came to work and contribute to the new economy. Many simply walked onto American soil and began their new life. By the turn of the century things had changed dramatically. In 1882 the Chinese Exclusion Act barred Chinese immigrants from becoming fully naturalized citizens.

According to Eric Lee, the first two decades of the exclusion were vaguely defined. The specifics of the law and the methods of enforcement were unclear. If was not even certain who would enforce the laws, or how this would be accomplished. Therefore, the laws were easy to circumvent in the early days. This allowed the entrance of many laborers that helped to build the factories and transportation systems that allowed for the advent of the Industrial era. However, as time went on the laws became more specific and it became almost impossible to gain entrance. Only certain classes of workers were allowed to enter. General laborers were not allowed to enter. However, teachers, merchants, students, diplomats and travelers were still allowed to enter under the Exclusion Act. By the 1920s even Chinese that were natural born or naturalized were in danger of exclusion if they left the country and tried to return.

The Exclusion Act marks the first time in U.S. history that a group of people were barred from entry based on race. This also represented the largest deportation of any immigrant group. Court cases launched by Chinese-Americans secured the rights of families of merchants and native-born citizens to apply for admission into the country. The Exclusion act was in effect until 1943 when it was repealed. At the turn of the century Chinese immigrants were interrogated and humiliated before entering the country. The immigrant had to prove that they were exempt from exclusion laws. They were subjected to an intense examination of their belongings. There was a general belief that fake papers and falsehoods were prevalent among those who wished to enter the United States.

In order to gain entry, an excluded worker would often pay a legitimate excluded entity to "adopt" him as a son, brother, etc. The two then had to prepare so that they got their family history straight. They had to give up their identity and assume a different legal name. They had to pretend to be someone else and be ready to fool the authorities. It is often difficult to trace the immigrant's roots because of this phenomenon. One can often trace them to Angel Island, but can go no further. Immigrants were questioned extensively. The typically stay at Angel Island (the West Coast Immigration point) was around two weeks. It was a harrowing ordeal to say the least.

Like Lees' Grandparents, many that lived through the ordeal were unwilling to talk about it. They wanted to forget the horrors of the past and move on to the life that they had dreamed of. In order to examine exclusion laws and the effects of them on the lives of Chinese-Americans one has to look at historical record. The exclusion laws forced families to separate, often for long periods, and sometimes never to see each other again. A form of racism drove immigrant officials that portrayed the Chinese as degraded and dangerous menaces to society. Once they were in the country they were subjected to scrutiny and always under watchful eyes by officials who would deport them in a heartbeat.

Through all of these hard times the Chinese developed ways of dealing with the system. Despite restrictions on their freedom of movement, civil liberties and human rights the Chinese managed to mount a resistance to their situation. They protested as individuals and as a group. Much of this resistance was passive in nature. They found ways to avoid exclusion laws, and adapted their strategies to get around the system. They sent petitions to government officials and sued in court. They used the press to their advantage. They knew that to protest openly and violently would mean their deportation, or worse, possibly their extermination. They had to use peaceful means of protest out of necessity. They had to walk the straight road well within the confines of the law.

America had always prided itself as begin a refuge for peoples of every place on earth. America was a place where everyone was welcome and could find safe haven. It was a place where new ideas flourished and peace equality was the order of the day. At least this was the rhetoric that one would hear from the government and other entities. America was billed as the land of opportunity. However, it is difficult to argue that this image held for all peoples. One certainly could not say that for black Americans, especially those living in the Old South. One could not say that for Native Americans, many of which were simply exterminated and those that did live were fenced like cattle. One could not say that for Latinos either. However, the Chinese were the ones specifically excluded from entering the country. It seemed as if the open-door policy of the United States only applied to certain groups of people. It seemed as if it were a land of opportunity, but only if your skin was colored white. Any other color of skin set you apart as an outsider and one to be treated with suspicion.

American society was based on a hierarchy and that hierarchy was based on race. Chinese exclusion forced society to redefine what it meant by citizenship. Power distribution in the United States was unequal. The power between the immigrants and the immigration official could not even be called on the same level. Ti was almost as if America was working on a caste system based on the color of the skin. Those that were anything but Caucasian were automatically reduced to a lower caste.

Identity Crisis

Research into the Chinese Exclusion Act is can be divided into a number of disciplines. The most prominent area of Historiography on the subject is examining how the act came about. There is little legal evidence on the development of the Act. Legal historian have had to fill in the missing gaps. The Chinese Exclusion Act had a dramatic impact on modern immigration law and discrimination law as well.

Social historians took a different perspective. They have focused their attention on explaining the social development of the Act. Their work has concentrated on social structures, organizations and institutions, labor patterns and markets, and the social identity of the Chinese in American society. The research focus has been on the American side of the Atlantic. However, this only gives us one side of the picture. In order to understand the forces that drove the migration, even through adversity, one must examine the social forces on both sides of the Pacific. The Exclusion Act led to the development of a complex social and economic system on both sides of the Pacific.

There are two stories to tell, in reality. There are the social forces in China that led to the migration, and what happened on the American side. Historians tend to forget that migrations not only have an impact on the new country, but they also have an impact on the country of origin. As many people left China, there were gaps to be filled in the country of origin. However, few historians have tackled the social and economic impact in mainland China. The migration left women and children with an absent husband. They had to cope with the migration, much as if it were a loss. The migration essentially left millions of women and children alone. If they did see their husband, it may only be a few times in a lifetime, or in some cases, never again.

Another approach taken by historiographers is that they treat the period from 1882 to 1943 as if it were homogeneous. However, there were many changes in American society, particularly during the industrial era that had an impact on the ways in which the Act was executed. There has been little study on the status of Chinese-Americans during World War I and World War II. Most historians focus on one small area of history, the influence of the Chinese on American westward expansion. There is so much focus on the contributions of the Chinese to the building of the transcontinental railroad that almost all other areas of history disappear. This narrow approach to Chinese-American history provides a skewed picture of the contributions and social tribulations of Chinese-Americans.

At some point, one begins to realize that the Exclusion Act was a part of social change in which Americans had developed their national identity. In the beginning, almost everyone was an immigrant. However, the Exclusion Act demonstrates that Americans had begun to change how they defined race, national identity and many other characteristics of society. They had began to develop a sense of "self," which logically meant they developed a sense of "other" as well. The Exclusion Act is evidence of this important step in national identity.

Omi and Winant called this process "race formation" (Omi and Winant, 57-69). This resulted in new categories of race and resulted in a series of new laws that would eventually evolve into modern immigration law. Omi Winant emphasize the development of new racial definitions as a crucial step the formation of a national identity and the restrictions that are now a part of immigration law. Control of Chinese immigrants would eventually lead to restrictions on all immigration to the United States.

The period from 1910 to 1924 saw the biggest changes in immigration law. It was during this time that decisions regarding immigration moved out of the jurisdiction of the Federal courts into the hands of the immigration service. The immigration system became systematic and bureaucratic. According to Omi and Winant these changes were the result of changes in the economy and problems associated with hoards of unskilled, unqualified workers flooding the job market. The 1924 Immigration Act was the culmination of these sentiments. It marked the formal triumph of national identity and how Americans think about race.

One of the most interesting facts that Lee discovered in his examination of immigration records is that the Chinese Exclusion Act did not end immigration of Chinese to the United States. Instead, it seems to have increased Chinese immigration, when compared to the 30 years before the Exclusion Act. (Lee, 29). Lee states that from 1882 to 1943 300,955 Chinese successfully migrated to the United States. In the pre-exclusion era from 1849-1882 only 258,210 migrated to the United States. This represents a major flaw in Lee's work.

Lee defined the pre-exclusion era as the period from 1949 to 1882 and the exclusion era as 1882-1943. There are unequally weighted time periods. It is difficult to say that immigration increased during the Exclusion period. This period was defined as a span of 61 years, yet the pre-exclusion era comprised a span of only 33 years. Yet Lee attributes the Exclusion years to an increase in immigration. If one extrapolates the data, they it would appear that immigration actually decreased during the exclusion. One cannot compare a period of 33 years to one of 61 years and determine that this represents a correlation. Both time periods must be alike in order for the type of comparison attempted by Lee to be considered valid. When one takes this into consideration, one would have to disagree with Lee's conclusion that immigration increased during the Exclusion. When one considers the rates of immigration, rather than the aggregate effect, it would appear the Exclusion Act did reduce the number of immigrants coming to America. This conflicts with Lee's conclusion, but is a more realistic comparison.

Eileen Scully is another historian that concentrated on the Exclusion period. She examined the effects of the Exclusion Act on trade relations and the effects on Americans traveling abroad to China. In her work Scully found that the Chinese government found the Exclusion Act to be barbaric. They considered it to indicate arrogance. Scully points out the disconnect in ideology. Americans saw the act as a diplomatic tool designed to demonstrate "proper" behavior to the Chinese. However, the Chinese saw it as a means to exert social control and imperialism. Scully concludes that the Exclusion Act harmed diplomatic relations with China and created a division in philosophy.

The development of national identity construed the requirement of the government to protect their citizens when traveling abroad. It was believed the "natural rights" and legal rights were two different concepts. The citizens felt that the government had a "natural obligation" to protect them from harm while traveling abroad. The western philosophy was that an imperialistic approach would ensure safety and freedom from punishment for crimes while abroad.

Westerners measured the "Civilization" of a county by how well they protected these rights. They expected diplomatic immunity when traveling in another country. The Chinese saw this as one-sided diplomacy and did not buy into it. They expected the same for their own citizens and when they did not receive it they refused to enforce it as well. This difference in expectation led to trade problems and was a major cause for the break down of diplomatic relations between the United States and China. Scully's work relies on documents from the eras and it is difficult to disagree with her conclusions based on them.

Chew and Associates explored the many means and methods employed by the Chinese to circumvent immigration laws. They used primary sources, including published law enforcement documents from 1896-1902 to examine the prevalence and techniques that came to be known as "substitution schemes" (Chew et al., 1). They used steam ship records from 1904-1907 to estimate the impact of substitution schemes to the flow of Chinese migration to Chinese-American Communities. They also used these records to examine the impact of immigration on the age composition of these communities as well (Chew et al., 1-6). They found that substitution schemes were critical to the revolving door system that achieved both external compliance with the immigration act and the ability of Chinese communities to replenish their labor force with younger workers. This is an area of impact that is often missed by many historians.

The purpose of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was to reduce labor force competition for white working men. Over 90% of the Chinese in the U.S. were male (Chew et al., 1). Interracial marriage was illegal. The population was over 100,000 at the time of the act. However, due to the high ratio of men to women, it was likely that the population would adjust itself over the next 40 years of its own accord. There would be few births, as compared to the aging population. Therefore the population would be likely to dwindle (Chew et. al, 1). However, the threat to white labor force was imminent. Even if they had realized the population dynamics at play, they could not wait forty or more years for a natural population decline to occur.

As far as the original motive of the Exclusion Act was concerned, it was considered a success. The few Chinese who managed to gain entry regardless of the Act still accounted for less competition to native workers. The U.S. Census from 1880 to 1920 shows a decline in Chinese-Americans from 105,000 to 60,000 (Chew et al., 2). However, Chew and associates felt that the decline is much steeper than the census indicates because there were approximately 50,000 entries from the 1880 Census until the enactment of the Exclusion Act (Chiu, Liu, and Patel, p. 1).

Social isolation and the inability to increase numbers due to immigration is cited as a primary cause for the decline in the Chinese-American population. This view is the accepted explanation from a historiographical standpoint and is the basis of theories concerning the success or failure of the plan in achieving its goals. From this perspective the Exclusion Act could be considered a success because it did reduce the number of immigrants coming into America, which theoretically provided more job opportunities for unskilled white workers.

One of the key misconceptions of the history of the Chinese population in America is that it represented a set of aging single men. However, Chew and Liu demonstrated through Census records that this long held belief was incorrect. They found that the Chinese population was young throughout the entire 60 years of exclusion. They based their conclusion by comparing Chinese-American age-sex data with that of the white and other populations (Chew and Liu, 58). For instance, the 1880 Census showed that the population was largely comprised of males between 20-44 years of age.

Chew and his many research partners used evidence to dispel many myths about the effects of the Exclusion Act on the Chinese-American population. These results go against what one would expect in the average population that did not have the ability to replace aging workers. However, the most significant finding by Chew and Liu was that the 1900 Census still showed that the Chinese-American population was comprised of males in prime working age. This does not seem logical and brings up many questions.

Chew and Liu postulate that this youthful population could only be maintained if there were a systematic replacement of the older workers. They propose that the total net population must have been zero or negative, as indicated by the massive decline in the overall Chinese-American population. However, this does not mean that there was no immigration during this time. Net gains of youthful workers balanced older workers that went home to China in old age. This is the phenomenon that is explored by Chew and Liu in their work. They attempt to explain how the Chinese retained strong, youthful workforce while still under the restrictions placed on them by the Exclusion Act.

Lau (2000) and Hsu (2000) also explored the problems and solutions to the immigration problem. Both of these historians agree that there were many obstacles associated with traveling to America and immigrating. The journey by steamship was a long and difficult experience. In addition, law enforcement agencies were created specifically to regulate the travel aspects of the journey. They limited the steamship locations to Southern China. This means that a majority of the Chinese that came to American were from coastal waters in the South.

The Chinese managed to continue to immigrate to America by utilizing some of the loopholes that were created as the Exclusion Act continued to change. There were four primary means to circumvent the Exclusion Act. The first and most well know ploy was the "paper son" scenario. This ploy took advantage of a loophole that allowed immediate family members of merchants into the country. This is the most cited method for gaining entry into the country (Lee, 2003). However, Chew and Liu found not quantitative findings to even support the existence of the practice. Analysis of this method is based on qualitative evidence, such as personal testimony. Even though this is the most cited of the ploys, it is the least provable by documentation. Use of this method may not have been as extensive as some historians believe.

The second ploy took advantage of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake that destroyed municipal records. The "Earthquake Exemption" allowed non-native Chinese-Americans to claim that proof of their U.S. birth had been lost in the fire following the earthquake. However, like the other methods of entry, Chew and Liu, found little quantitative evidence existed on the use of this exemption. Like the paper son ploy, the use of this ploy is difficult to document. It is not known how many took advantage of this loophole.

The third ploy used to enter the country involved an over land route after arriving in a Mexican port. Canada had implemented a Chinese Exclusion Act of its own (Chew and Liu). Historians assume that this method accounted for a large volume of border crossings. However, statistical evidence is virtually non-existent. These assumptions by historians are based on the modern practice of using the Mexican border to cross into the United States. However, like today there are few statistics to back up these assumptions.

The fourth ploy used to enter the country is a "substitution" scheme that took advantage of a policy that allowed Chinese immigrants to land at American sea ports on their way to Mexico and other destinations (Romero, 3). These travelers intended to stay in the United States. They were "replaced" by someone else that was trying to leave. Chew and his many associates feel that this was the most likely method for replacing young workers. This method would have accounted for the net zero gain/loss that they found in the Census records. This method is a type "smuggling" of people.

The difficulty found in assessing the frequency and methods for smuggling people into the United States is that there are no records. The best that one can do is to formulate theories and make guesses based on qualitative assessments. Evidence by Chew and Associates determined that evidence from steamship manifests was sufficiently large enough to account for the apparent exchange of the aged for the youthful in the Chinese population.

A new Generation of Historiographers

Early historiographers paid little attention to the Asian population in the United States, but rather continued to propagate the myths and racism that surrounded them (Daniels, B7). Scholars in the early part of the 20th century did not treat them as an immigrant, but rather treated them as if they were temporary guests. Early historiographers tended to treat the Chinese much in the same manner that they treated other minority groups. They tended to echo popular opinion instead of looking at the subject in an objective manner. These early supposedly "historical" works were more of an opinion than an actual assessment of the Chinese in America.

This change in attitude was the result of Chinese-Americans entering the field of history. This new generation of historiographers is relatively new. Many of them have the advantage of knowing both English and Chinese. This gives them the extra added advantage of being able to access sources in either language. This gave them access to more primary sources from which to draw conclusions. Because the Chinese-American scholar had relatives in China or may have lived there themselves for a short time, they know more about the two cultures and customs that may have influenced earlier historical accounts. They would be better equipped to handle problems associated with cultural bias and misunderstandings. The Chinese-American historiographer would be able to asses the impact of immigration from both sides of the ocean. They would be much less limited than historiographers that took a decidedly ethnocentric view of the situation.

Through these new scholars, as new perspective on the history of Chinese-Americans is beginning to emerge. One of the more notable contributions is Renqui Yu's To Save China, To Save Ourselves: The Chinese Hand Laundry Alliance of New York. This work recounted the tales and contributions of left-wing laundry workers in New York. Until this work was published, their contribution to the fabric of the history of Chinese America was largely forgotten. Yu used writings by and about them published in Chinese-language newspapers during the 1930s and 1940s. The story of this group of workers was the result of bilingual historians and their ability to understand both cultures.

The story of Chinese America is a story of overcoming the challenges of discrimination. Chinese-Americans had many tangles with the American legal system. These historical accounts add to the body of work that is the Chinese-American experience by adding one more piece of their lives to the tapestry. Most of these works are only regarded for their contribution to understanding the development of immigration law as it is today. However, they can tell us much more than to give a limited pragmatic view of the legal development of law.

If one reads between the lines of these works the struggle for rights, equality, and fairness begins to take shape. Two examples of these types of work are Charles J. McClain's In Search of Equality: The Chinese Struggle Against Discrimination in Nineteenth-Century America and Lucy E. Salyer's Laws Harsh as Tigers: Chinese Immigrants and the Shaping of Modern Immigration Law. The most important point that these books make about the Chinese-American experience is that instead of taking the part of a helpless victim, this group of immigrants took a legal stand against laws that they felt were unjust.

They demonstrated their ability and willingness to adjust to a new society that was different than anything they had experienced in China. They made progress and were able to have an impact on the direction that new laws developed. These historical accounts demonstrate that they were unable to overcome major Constitutional issues. However, they were able to change or defeat discriminatory actions by the state and localities. These actions were accomplished largely through suits and petitions in federal courts.

This is a perspective that many, including some of the most prominent historians tend to ignore. Chinese-Americans are typically played as passive resistors to an unfair system over which they had no control. However, this does not mean that they did not participate at all. The played a major role in helping to shape immigration laws, discrimination policies and other similar types of injustices that permeated the American legal system. This perspective destroys the traditional dynamic that is found in many historical accounts of the Exclusion Act period.