FEATURE' In Lon Po Po, a Caldecott winner, Ed Young gave one ofthe three sisters big and slightly exaggerated slanting eyes,as if to respond to criticism targeting The Five CiiineseBrothers with gentle humor-a certain proportion of theChinese population were born with eyes looking slanted ifnot as thin as a thread.^ Throughout the discussion, she used the nickname "liTtLeRicE" to identify herself. She introduced herself as beinga Chinese raised in Taiwan though now married to a Jewishman.^ Chinese American authors of Tripmaster Monkey: His FakeBook (1989), Monkey King (1997), and American Born Chi-nese (2006) respectively."According to Peffer's (1999) study, the Page Law, a fed-eral statute enacted in 1875, made it difficult for Chinesewomen to enter the United States, to the satisfaction ofAmerican capitalists who could continue keeping Chinesemales as the cheapest laborers by saving the payment forfamily support. The gender imbalance in Chinatown wasmaintained until the middle of the 20th century.^ My preliminary search for juvenile nonfiction works hasfound fewer titles than fiction for youth: a dozen informa-tion books, two autobiographies, and several biographiesabout Claire Chennault have World War II in China as thecentral topic or main backdrop.<• The geographical scope I am interested in is mainlandChina; thus stories portraying wartime Hong Kong and Tai-wan are not included here. Those two places had distincthistories during World War II and require separate studies.Hong Kong, a British colony since the Qing Empire of Chinalost the First Opium War in 1842, remained a haven forrefugees flooding in from the mainland until the PacificWar broke out. Taiwan became Imperial Japan's colony in1895, when China lost the first Sino-Japanese War, and wasnot returned to the Chinese government until the end ofWorld War II.

### ''- 'Minjie Chen is a PhD candidate in theGraduate Sc/wo/ of Ubrary andInformation Sdence at t/je Universityoj I//inois at Urbana-Champaign.

The article was first published inMulticultural Education, Volume 16, Number 3, Spring2009.

Editor's Note: The rest of the article (Part II) will bepublished in the 2011 April issue.

n this constitutional case, the U.S. SupremeCourt, composed entirely of Bok Guey (whites),judged Hon Yen (Chinese) to be in the samesocial classification as Lo Mok (blacks). TheSupreme Court's decision permitted the state ofMississippi to define Martha Lum as a memberof the "colored races" so that "white schools"could remain segregated. The origins

of "Lotuses among theMagnolias" involvedsouthern planter'sfears that emancipa-tion had spoiled theirnewly freed slaves.The question posed byplanters was whether

the freed people would work without the sting ofthe lash. Planters answered by recruiting Chineselabor and by 1900 the majority of coolie laborcame from the "Sze Yap" or Four Counties districtsouthwest of Canton in South China.

By the 1920s a thriving Chinese community haddeveloped in Mississippi which now included schoolage children. In 1924, Rosedale Consolidated HighSchool forced Martha Gong Lum, daughter of aprosperous Chinese grocer, to leave school becauseof her ethnicity. The Gong Lums sued but theMississippi Supreme Court ruled, "Chinese are notwhite and must fall under the heading, coloredraces." On appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, theGong Lums listened as the high court justicesagreed with the Mississippi court and stated,"Similar laws (of segregation) have been enactedby Congress under its general power...over theDistrict of Columbia as well as by...many of theStates...throughout the Union, both in the Northand South."

Sources: Malik Simba, "Gong Lum v. Rice: The Convergence of Law,Race, and Ethnicity," in American Mosaic: Selected Readings onAmerica's Multicultural Heritage, eds. Young I. Song and Eugene C.Kim; James Loewen, Lotus among the Magnolias: The Mississippi Chi-nese, Jackson, Ml; Mississippi University Press, 1960.Contributor(s): Simba, Malik; Califomia State University Fresno.

20 C H I N E S E A M E R I C A N F O R UM - Volume XXVI, No. 3 - January 2011

GONG LUMV. RICE

1927

MISSISSIPPISCHOOL SECRECATION

AND THEDEETA CHÍNESE

BY JOHN JUNG

Separate schools shall he maintainedfor children of the white and colored races.

Mississippi State Constitudon, 1890, Section 207.

he Mississippi Constitution of 1890had no specific provision for schoolingChinese children since it defined any-one not of the white or Caucasian race

as belonging to the colored race. At the time ofthis ruling, Chinese were largely unaffected.There were few, if any, Chinese children in thestate then, largely because the 1882 ChineseExclusion Act severely reduced the creation ofChinese families

However, over time, more Chinese already inthe U. S., especially those in western states,sought to escape the violence they suffered bymoving to the midsections of the country. WhenChinese in Mississippi began to have families,they sent their children to white public schoolsdespite school segregation because they werebetter funded than colored schools. White op-position was minimal as Chinese, being success-ful merchants, achieved higher social standingrelative to blacks in their communities.'

In 1924, however, on the first day of schoolauthorities in Rosedale informed four Chinese

children including sisters, Berda and MarthaLum, they could not attend the local whiteschool on the grounds that Chinese were notmembers of the white or Caucasian race."

Fig. 1 Berda and Martha Lum about 4 yearsbefore they were excluded from the white school.

Courtesy, Carol Hong Chan.

Gong Lum, their fadier, was a weü-respected gro-cery store owner in the communit}'. A local law firmacted on a prv bono basis to file a writ of mandamus onbehalf of Martha Lum to the Circuit Court in BolivarCount}' to demand that the school board allow her toattend the white school.

Fig. 2 Gong Lum, father of the girls, circa 1920.Courtesy Carol Hong Chan.

They argued that as the district did not pro-

• See NAME INDEX for Names in Chinese on Inside Back Cover 21

vide schools specifically forChinese, the white school wasthe only one in the district avaü-able for her. To require her toattend the colored school,which was inferior to the whiteschool, would deny her rightsunder the Equal ProtectionClause of the FourteenthAmendment.

An unstated reason forwhite opposition to Chineseattending white schools was theconcern among whites thatsome Chinese children were ofmixed Chinese and black par-entage. It was widely believedthat due to the earlier lack ofChinese women in the Delta,some Chinese men had fatheredchildren with colored women.If children of mixed Chineseand black blood attended whiteschools, they would have, in ef-fect, "desegregated" the publicschools. The emphatic declara-tion in the petition that MarthaLum was not colored, and notof 'mixed blood,' but 'pure Chi-nese,' was directed at whiteconcerns on this issue.'

The lower court granted thepetition in 1924, requiring thatthe white school admit MarthaLum. However, in 1925 theSupreme Court of Mississippireversed this decision becauseshe was not white or of theCaucasian race.''

Gong Lum then appealed theMississippi Supreme Court'sruling to the Supreme Court ofthe United States, but withoutsuccess. In 1927, Chief Justice

Gong l^um then appealed

the Mississippi

Sttpreme Court's rttling

to the Sttpreme Court

oj the United States,

hut without sttccess.

In 1927, Chief Justice

William Howard Taft wrote

the opinion that affirmed the

Mississippi Supreme Court's

ruling. It maintained that

Martha I^um was

entitled to have, in its words,

"the benefit of the colored

public schools

in her district"

and stated "she may go

to a private school

Wilham Howard Taft wrote theopinion that affirmed the Mississippi SupremeCourt's ruling. It maintained that Martha Lumwas entitled to have, in its words, "the benefit

but not at state expense. "gued that Chinese were not of the colored

of the colored public schools inher district" and stated that "shemay go to a private school butnot at state expense."

The LL S. Supreme Courtmaintained that it was within thediscretion of Mississippi to regu-late its pubhc schools, and thatexcluding Chinese from whiteschools did not conflict with theEqual Protection of the Law-Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-ment.

This court case was by nomeans the first one involving thedenial of Chinese access to whitepublic schools. Around half acentury earlier, San Franciscoprovided no public schools forChinese and mission schoolsopened by the 1870s by Christianchurches were the primary sourceof schooling for Chinese. ''

In 1884, Mary Tape tried toenroll her 8 year-old daughter,Mamie, in a white public schoolin San Francisco without success.Reflecting the extreme hostilityin the west toward Chinese dur-ing that time, which culminatedin the passage of the ChineseExclusion Act in 1882, Chinesewere deemed to have filthy andvicious habits as well as infec-tious or contagious diseases. Itfollowed then that their childrenwould pose dangers to white chil-dren if they were admitted towhite public schools.

Joseph Tape, her father, fileda lawsuit on grounds that exclu-sion violated her equal protec-tion rights under the FourteenthAmendment. In contrast to theMississippi case where it was ar-

races, part of the argument for Mamie Tape'sadmission was that her middle-class family was

22 CHINESE AMERICAN FORUM - Volume XXVI, No. 3 - January 2011

less 'Chinese' than weremembers of theunassimilated workingclass Chinese.'

The California Su-preme Court 1885 rulingre: Tape i>. Hurley was infavor of the Tapes but thevictory was hollow.^ TheSan Francisco Board ofEducation countered bycreating a separate pub-lic school for Chinese todefend the continued ex-clusion of Chinese fromwhite schools, a practicethat did not end officiallyuntil 1947.'

Gong Lum, deter-mined to obtain betterschooling for his chil-dren, moved his family toArkansas, which ac-cepted Chinese in whiteschools. Other Chineserejected colored schoolsand sent their chudren toother states, hired tutors,or enrolled them in pri-vate schools.'"

The adverse Gong h,ump. Rice ruling was morehonored in the breachthan in its observance asmany local communitieshad favorable attitudestoward the Chinese andreadily accepted theirchildren into white pub-lic schools.

Impact on Chinese-Colored Interactions

The school rulingagainst the Chinese hadeffects other than wheretheir children were edu-cated. It also had long-

Edilor's Kote: The status of U.S.-born children of illegalimmigrants re-kindles the issue of 14th Amendment. Thefollowing excerpt ¡sfivm OPINION of Wall Street Jour-nal, 01—05-2011.

Birthright Citizenshipand the 14th AmendmentOpponents of illegal immigrationcannot claim to champion the rule oflaw and then propose policies thatviolate our Constitution.By JAMES C. HO

A coalition of state legislators, motivated byconcerns about illegal immigration, is ex-pected to endorse state-level legislation todayat the National Press Club in Washington, D.C,to deny the privileges of U.S citizenship to theU.S.-born children of undocumented persons.This effort to rewrite U.S. citizenship lawfrom state to state is unconstitutional-andcurious. Opponents of illegal immigrationcannot claim to champion the rule of law andthen, in the same breath, propose policies thatviolate our Constitution....Opponents of birthright citizenship say thatthey want nothing more than a chance torelitigate the meaning of the 14th Amendment.But if that is so, state legislation is a poorstrategy.Determining U.S. citizenship is the uniqueprovince of the federal government. It does nottake a constitutional expert to appreciate thatwe cannot have 50 different state laws govern-ing who is a U.S. citizen. As a result, courtsmay very well strike down these state lawswithout even invoking the 14th Amendment.The entire enterprise appears doomed tofailure.Many Americans have sincere concerns about

the rule of law. But there are many toolsavailable to combat illegal immigration. Surelywe can do so without wasting taxpayer fundson a losing court battle, reopening the scars ofthe Civil V/ar, and offending our Constitutionand the rule of law.

# # #Mr. Ho is the former solicitor general of Texasand a partner with the law firm ofGibson, Dunn ¿~ Crutcher.

term consequences onChinese-black social in-teractions. Chinese real-ized that negative viewsof whites toward themstemmed in part from thecordial relations thatmany Chinese had withblacks, the customers inmany of their grocerystores

Consequently, Chinesebelieved that better ac-ceptance by whites wouldhave to come at the costof clearer separation fromblacks. They tnade strin-gent efforts to distancethemselves socially fromblacks, ostracizing anyChinese who did not com-ply. Those with mixedChinese and black par-entage were shunned byChinese as well as byblacks."

Chinese Begin toEmbrace Christianity

A second important ef-fect of school segregationwas to increase Chineseinvolvement and accep-tance of the Christianfaith. Prior to immigrat-ing, most Chinese werenot deeply involved in re-ligious practices, espe-cially Christianity. In thewake of school segregadonagainst Chinese, some Bap-dst churches saw that thesituadon gave them an op-portunity to attract Chi-nese. Stardng in Rosedale in1928, they reached out byfirst offering English les-sons and then Bible classes

• S e e NAME INDEX for Names in Chinese on Inside Back Cover 23

to the Chinese. During die 1930s Baptist churchesopened mission schools in larger cities such asClev eland and Greenville to provide education toChinese chüdren so they would not have to attendcolored schools.

By 1940, white attitudes toward Chinese had im-proved considerably. Church schools for Chineseclosed as white public schools in many towns gradu-ally began to accept Chinese.'"

For over a decade. Baptist churches filled thegap with mission schools to giveChinese cliüdren the educationthat was denied to them by seg-regated public schools. In return.Baptist churches reaped the ben-efits of gaining many convertsand devout adherents to Chris-tianit)- including Chinese fromthe older immigrant generationas well as from their American-born children and subsequentgenerations.

ConclusionIt would not be for anodier

decade before school segrega-tion against blacks was outlawednationwide by the 1954 landmark ruling of Brown vhoard of Education by the U. S. Supreme Court that"separate but equal schools" were inherently un-equal."

Gong lami v. Rice did not directly question the le-gitimacy of school segregation. It ignored that is-sue, one that was too firmly entrenched in that erato be successfully challenged by anyone, let aloneby a group with so little political power as the Chi-nese. Their chaUenge dealt only with the validity' ofthe classification of Chinese as colored. Even dioughthey lost their case in 1927, and like the Chinese inSan Francisco, were excluded from white publicschools for decades, the legal challenges by GongLum and Joseph Tape were pioneering efforts thatprovided the groundwork that led to the eventualoverturning of school segregation in America a gen-eration later.

# # #John Jung is a Professor of Psychology Emeritus, Cali-fornia State University, Long Beach, who is the author

Lum V. Rice was effectivelyoverruled by the Court's decisionin Brown v. Board of Education

in 1954, outlawing

oj seven psychology textbooks on memory, motivation,research ethics, research methodology, and the psychologyof alcohol and other drugs.

ReferencesJorae, W. R. The Children of Chinatown: Crowins Up Chi-nese American in San Francisco 1850-1920. Chapel Hill: Uni-versity of North Carolina Press, 2009.Lim de Sanchez, S. "Crafting A Delta Chinese Community:Education and Acculturation in Twentieth-Century South-ern Baptist Mission Schools," History of Education Quar-terly, 43, (2003): 74-90.

Loewen, J. W. The Mississippi Chi-nese: Between Black and White, Cam-bridge AAA.: Harvard University Press,1971.McCunn, R. L "Arlee Hen and BlackChinese." In Chinese American Por-traits, San Francisco: ChronicleBooks, 1988, 78-87.Ngai, M. The Lucky Ones: One Familyand the Extraordinary Invention ofChinese America. New York:Houghton Miff lin Harcourt, 2010.O'Brien, R. W. "Status of Chinese inthe Mississippi Delta." Social Forces,19 (1943): 386-390.Rhee, J. "In Black and White: Chi-nese in the Mississippi Delta," Jour-nal of Supreme Court History, (1994): 117-132.

Footnotes' O'Brien, 1943 "Status of Chinese,"p.388-389.^ Rhee, 1994, "In Black and White," p. 122, suggested thatthe impending accreditation for the Rosedale school mayhave prompted officials to enforce school segregation.^ Decision in Gong Lum v. Trustees Rosedale ConsolidatedSchool District. Mississippi Department of Archives and His-tory." Rice V. Gong Lum, 139 Miss. 760, 104 So. 105.= Gong Lum v. Rice, 275 U.S. 78 (1927).' Jorae, "The Children of Chinatown,"123-125.' Ngai, "The Lucky Ones," p. 52.« Tape V. Hurley, 66 Cal. 473 (1885).' Jorae, "The Children of Chinatown,"115-116.'° Loewen, "The Mississippi Chinese," p. 68; Rhee, "In Blackand White," p. 126." McCunn, "Chinese American Portaits." p. 87. noted thatArlee Hen, a daughter of a Chinese grocer and blackmother, could not be buried in the Chinese cemetery.' Lim de Sanchez, "Crafting A Delta Chinese Community,"p. 81-87." Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, 74S.Ct. 686, 98 L.Ed. 873(1954).

24 CHINESE AMERICAN FORUM - Volume XXVI, No. 3 - January 2011