The anti-Chinese campaigns in Sonora, Mexico, 1900-1931
Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors Jacques, Leo Michael Dambourges
Publisher The University of Arizona.
Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Download date 05/10/2021 10:11:02
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/565314 0 1975
LEO MICHAEL DAMBOURGES JACQUES
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE ANTI-CHINESE CAMPAIGNS IN SONORA,
MEXICO, 1900-1931
by
Leo Michael Dambourges Jacques
A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
In the Graduate College
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
19 7 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA.
GRADUATE COLLEGE
I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by ______Leo Michael Dambourqes Jacques______entitled THE ANTI-CHINESE CAMPAIGNS IN SONORA,______
MEXICO, 1900-1931______be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement of the degree of ______DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY______
^ __ ^ j-dhsT- c3 J y Dissertation Director Date
After inspection of the final copy of the dissertation, the following members of the Final Examination Committee concur in its approval and recommend its acceptance:*
O d 2V IIV-I
This approval and acceptance is contingent on the candidate's adequate performance and defense of this dissertation at the final oral examination. The inclusion of this sheet bound into the library copy of the dissertation is evidence of satisfactory performance at the final examination. STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library,
Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder.
SIGN 7 TO CAROL
iv PREFACE
The Mexican Revolution of 1910 set into violent motion several powerful forces that were latent during the long rule of President Porfirio Diaz. One of these was nativism or the quest for a distinct Mexican personality.
Concomitant with this searching for a Mexican ethos, arose a passionate xenophobia that affected Mexico’s small, but influential foreign population. Although the Mexican nativist movement was sporadic, halting and malleable in its search for concrete characteristics, xenophobia in the movement was peculiarly direct. After a half century of foreign encroachment that witnessed the creation of fabulous fortunes by aliens, while Mexicans lagged behind, the latter were primed for the release of pent-up hostilities and frustrations. Thousands of foreigners of all nationalities had come to Mexico. Spanish, British, German, North
American, and other foreigners found Diaz' Mexico a hospitable haven for foreign investment.
Second in numbers only to the Spanish, the Chinese were a significant minority in Mexico. Although they lived throughout Mexico, they concentrated in the outlying, sparsely-populated frontier states, In the states of Baja
California, Sinaloa, and Sonora they were the largest foreign minority. Because Mexico depended on them for its
v vi economic growth, aliens amassed considerable fortunes and economic influence, especially in the states on the north west coast.
As the power and influence of foreigners grew,
Mexicans watched with mounting jealousy and anger. The
Revolution, with its unchecked violence and unleashed nativism, intensified these forces and physical attacks on foreigners became commonplace. Before the Revolution, the
Chinese were the objects of sporadic outbursts of pent-up hostilities. Attacks of this nature were most prevalent in
Sonora. But after 1910 attacks on the Chinese became widespread. The violence and persecutions were most intense in those states with the largest Chinese colonies.
Chinese suffered throughout all of Mexico, but in Sonora they faced the most organized, prolonged and intense anti-
Chinese campaigns.
The purpose of this study is to ascertain how and why the Chinese became the object of a crusade to oust them from Sonora, The Chinese were a large and important foreign minority in Mexico and their treatment in a climate of rising nativism is a significant aspect of both the quest for a national ethos and the xenophobia inherent in the
Mexican Revolution.
The author wishes to thank The University of
Arizona for a University Pre-Doctoral Fellowship, which provided the funds for research in several libraries of vii the United States and archives in Mexico City and Sonora.
Sr. Enrique Macias B. and Sr. Sergio Flores, Director and
Assistant Director of the Archive General del Gobierno del
Estado de Sonora were particularly generous with their time in locating materials in Sonora. I am indebted to
Miss Anne Pace and Dr. Delmar Leon Beene for leads to information in Mexican archives.
I also wish to thank the late Dr. Russell C.
Ewing, who directed the early stages of research. Special thanks is reserved for Drs. Michael C. Meyer and Boyd C.
Shafer for valuable suggestions and insights into the
Mexican Revolution and nationalism. Of great importance was the guidance and suggestions of Dr. George A. Brubaker, who had the unenviable task of nursing the project to its conclusion. To him is due gratitude, not only for directing the dissertation, but also for providing invaluable new insights into Latin America. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF T A B L E S ...... ix
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... X
ABSTRACT...... xi
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION . 1
2. IMMIGRATION OF CHINESE TO MEXICO ...... 8
3. CHINESE IN SONORA BEFORE 1 9 1 0 ...... 42
4. CHINESE IN SONORA, 1911-1916 ...... 72
5. JOSE MARIA ARANA'S CAMPAIGN— 1916-1921...... 110
6. TONG WAR AND RENEWED OPPOSITION, 1922-1926 . . . 163
7. CHINESE ECONOMIC PRESENCE IN SONORA ...... 201
8. EXPULSION ...... 222
9. CONCLUSION ...... 257
APPENDIX A. IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION S T A T I S T I C S ...... 264
APPENDIX B. POPULATION STATISTICS ...... 275
APPENDIX C. ECONOMIC STATISTICS 288
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 304
viii LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Number of Chinese in Northwest Mexico, 1921, 1928, 1930, 1940, and Ratio to Chinese in All Mexican States ...... 203
2. Chinese Population of Sonora by Sex, Age, Civil Status, 1924 ...... 206
3. Chinese Population of Sonora by Occupation, 1924 ...... 206
4. Chinese Merchants of Sonora in Ratio to Total Chinese, 1924 ...... , 208
5. Merchants and Mixed Grocery Merchants of Sonora by Nationality, 1924 ...... 211
6. National Composition of Merchants and Grocery Merchants of Sonora, 1924 211
7. Mexican and Chinese Capital Investment in Industry and Other Property in Sonora, 1925 ...... 213
8. Capital Investment of Over 10,000 Pesos by Chinese and Mexicans in Mercantile Businesses in Sonora, 1925 ...... 214
9. Ratio of Foreign Investment to Mexican Investment in Guaymas, MazatlSn, Acoponeta, 1926 ...... 217
10. Merchandise Received by Juan Lung Tain at Guaymas, January to August, 1924 ...... 218
ix LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure , Page
1. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1895 . . . 22
2. - Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1900 . . . 26
3. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1910 . . . 39
4. Sonora: Chinese Population by District, 1903 . . 49
5. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1921 . . . 161
6. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1930 . , . 204
7. Sonora: Towns with Over 90 Chinese, 1924 .... 209
8. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1940 . . . 255
x ABSTRACT
Porfirian economic policies stressed the necessity of foreign immigration to provide labor for Mexico's development projects. Chinese comprised the second largest number of foreigners who resided in Mexico. Although they gravitated to almost all states, the majority lived in
Sonora. As the center of the largest Chinese colony, Sonora became the focal point of anti-Chinese campaigns.
Within Sonora the Chinese dominated the retail
grocery trade through credit ties with Chinese in the United
States and an intricate network of associations within
Sonora. Protected by a succession of state governors, they
faced constant opposition from the press and domestic labor.
Sporadic and unorganized before the Revolution, opposition
increased drastically as revolutionary armies operated in
Sonora. The Chinese suffered constant attacks, which ranged
from looting to murder. The accession of Plutarco Ellas
Calles and Adolfo de la Huerta to power ushered in a new
phase of both the Revolution and opposition to the Chinese.
As the Revolution developed Mexicans attempted to define
their own distinct national ethos. An important part of
the definition was the elimination of the vestiges of the
Porfiriato. Because the presence and power of foreigners
were prominent vestiges of Diaz' regime, Mexican nationalism
xi xii was definitely xenophobic. In the articulation of cultural and economic nationalism the Chinese in Sonora were aliens who profited at the expense of Mexicans, Armed with a new constitution, Sonorans organized anti-Chinese campaigns that stressed legal restrictions instead of unchecked violent attacks.
Three separate organized and legalistic campaigns between 1916 and 1931 attempted to curtail Chinese immigra
tion, to weaken the position of the resident Chinese, and eventually, to oust them from the state. From 1916 to 1921
Jos§ Maria Arana coordinated a campaign against the Chinese,
but their economic strength, contributions in tax revenue
and official peculation blunted his efforts. A second
organized campaign, a direct result of tong wars in 1922
and 1924, suffered a similar eclipse. By 1928 the Chinese
remained in control of over eighty per cent of Sonora's
retail grocery trade despite two concerted campaigns to
destroy their power by encumbering them with legal restric
tions.
The Great Depression created an environment in
Sonora that immediately led to a third and final anti-
Chinese campaign. Unemployment, economic chaos and the
return of thousands of Mexicans from the United States
strained the precariously balanced Sonoran economy. Three
interrelated problems, economic crisis, unemployment and
the presence and influence of the Chinese, faced incumbent xiii
Governor Francisco Elias. He and his successor, Rodolfo
Calles, emphasized one measure they believed would solve the three-fold problem— expulsion of the Chinese. In the fall of 1931 this third campaign successfully ousted the
Chinese from Sonora. CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In 1876 Po'rfirio Diaz assumed office as president of
Mexico. Except for the four years from 1880 to 1884, he held this position until 1911, During the Porfiriato,
Mexico attempted to develop its economic potential which had been disrupted by constant civil strife and foreign inter vention. Although mining had been a significant industry and source of revenue in the colonial period, it suffered from antiquated technology and from destruction during frequent civil wars before Diaz assumed office. The agricultural productivity of the nation also suffered from
inadequate transportation, capital, and irrigation facili
ties. Thus the exploitation of large-scale mining and
agricultural projects necessitated at least three elements:
capital, an efficient transportation system, and a popula
tion sufficiently large to sustain these projects and to populate the unoccupied areas of the country.
With some domestic capital and investments from the
United States and Europe, Mexico began to remedy her
economic problems. Of utmost importance was the development of a railroad network to ensure that minerals and
1 2 agricultural produce reached domestic and foreign markets.
Without a railroad network little interdependence existed among the various states. Agriculture suffered from a lack of markets in good harvest years, and from a lack of outside sustenance in bad harvest years. Mining also deteriorated as only those areas which promised an enormous profit could be exploited. Poor transportation facilities also retarded industrial growth because raw materials and finished products could not be shipped inexpensively, thus the Diaz regime created a network of railroads throughout the nation.
The railroad provided the backbone of Porfirian development schemes. Upon it hinged more efficient trans portation, greater agricultural productivity, stimulus to mining in remote areas, and, ultimately, progress for
Mexico. But construction of railroads was only a part of
Diaz' development projects. The multi-faceted reconstruc tion of the country necessitated immense funding and expertise, which the country lacked. Thus the government brought in foreign capital and specialists in mining, construction, agriculture, and railroads. It also granted concessions to foreign firms and individuals to exploit her
natural resources and to build railroads and to improve port facilities. New steamship lines, that plied both the
Atlantic and the Pacific, provided inexpensive steerage rates to Mexico. Publicity agents and brochures in foreign 3 capitals extolled the benefits of investment in the country and provided another attractive force for foreigners who desired to emigrate. An added inducement was the status assigned to foreigners by the law of 28 May 1866 which gave them equal civil rights with Mexicans.
Thus began a long and profitable association between foreigners and the Diaz regime. With government concessions and blessings, foreigners invested their capital, until
British, French, German, Spanish, and North American in vestors dominated the modernized Mexican economy which they helped create. But as urbanization and modernization occurred a class of Mexican middle class entrepreneurs appeared. They were both the initiators and the bene
ficiaries of the economic revival. A segment of these indi-
i viduals formed a clique within the government, privy to the
long-range goals of Diaz. This group, known as the
cientificos, became the arbiters of Porfirian economic,
policies and helped produce the favorable climate in which
foreign businessmen operated. With a new body of techno
crats to plan its development, foreign investment, and
tecnology, Mexico began to modernize.
Although Mexico could obtain the capital and tech
nology necessary to build railroads, contemporary observers
believed it lacked consumers and laborers for economic
1. For a list of the rights of foreigners, see The Mexican Year Book, 1908 (London: MeCorquodal, 1908), p. 120. 4 advancement. Thus immigration was "the first and most urgent 2 necessity." Immigrants of two types were desired. First, contractors needed labor to build railroads and public projects, and to work in plantation agriculture. The second type of immigrants the Diaz regime desired to attract were permanent colonists. Diaz hoped to use foreign immigrants to colonize large areas of sparsely populated or uninhabited territory, especially in the north. Thus he granted con cessions to foreign colonization companies. The creation of these companies and concessions, combined with the need and desire for labor and increased population, lured foreigners.
In 1877 Minister of Development Vicente Riva Palacio allowed private surveyors to retain one-third of all land that they surveyed. From this beginning Diaz hoped to induce sur veying and colonization of Mexico's unoccupied territories.
Despite all these inducements few foreigners migrated to the country.
The attempt to stimulate foreign immigration was not only a part of economic development plans, but also a re flection of the racial attitude of the cientificos. Before
Diaz assumed power, the Indians in Mexican society were largely neglected. Many considered them child-like. Thus
2. J. de Jesds Cuevas, La inmigracidn: opdsculo (Mexico: n.p., 1866), n.p.
3. For information on colonization during the Porfiriato, see Moists GonzSlez Navarro, La colonizacidn en Mexico, 1877-1910 (Mexico: n.p., 1960). 5 two strong bastions of conservatism, hacendados and the
Church, kept them in a state of tutelage. On the other hand, liberal factions considered them an obstacle to progress because of their tendencies to be crude, uneducated, and violent. Neither attempted to draw the Indian into the mainstream of national life.^ With the ascendancy of the cientificos the Indian question assumed a role in Mexico's development. The cientificos, never a monolithic group with a single philosophy, also differed in their approach to the
Indian. Those who saw hope for the Indian as a contributory force in the nation's growth stressed education and closer contact between Indians and other Mexicans. Among the important proposals of.this group was primary education for
Indians. But during the Porfiriato this concern was neg lected . Other cientificos saw the Indian as an obstacle to progress, thus others were needed to develop the country.
Although Diaz did not reject the uplifting of the Indian into a modern economy, he believed that this was a long evolutionary process. Because he desired rapid economic expansion he chose a second course. Immigration of
4. For a discussion of the Indian in Mexico before Diaz, see T. G. Powell, "Los liberales, el campesinado indigena y los problemas agrarios durante la Reforma," Historia Mexicana, XXI (April-June, 1972), pp. 653-675. 6 foreigners was stressed as official government policy to 5 stimulate growth.
While not rejecting the indigenous population, Diaz again turned to foreigners out of economic necessity. With long-standing cultural ties and envy of progressive and modern western Europe, Mexicans stressed the need for free, white, European immigrants. They supposedly possessed the intellectual, moral, Christian, technological, and industri ous qualities necessary for rapid economic development.
Some of them also had capital. But few Europeans came to .
Mexico, and many who did immediately left and entered the
United States.
Railroad builders and planters with large haciendas in the southern states of YucatSn, Chiapas, and Tabasco found the native Indian and the European immigrants too weak for sustained labor in the hot and humid environment.
Cotton planters in the Mexicali Valley of Baja California concurred with this assessment. In addition, European labor demanded wages these businessmen thought too high for a sizeable profit. To alleviate these problems Mexican and foreign entrepreneurs negotiated contracts with Chinese labor to fill in the gaps in the labor force.
5. For a revisionist study of Porfirian attitudes toward race, see T. G. Powell, "Mexican Intellectuals and the Indian Question, 1876-1911," The Hispanic American Historical Review, XLVIII (February, 1968), pp. 19-36. 7
A dedication to material progress provided two por tentous orientations. First, the government emphasized the necessity of foreign capital and investments. This in turn produced a larger foreign debt, dependence on foreign bankers, and foreign control of the country’s natural re sources and industrial potential. The second orientation, an emphasis on foreign immigrants, introduced a new alien force into the already heterogeneous population. In the states of the northwest coast foreign capital came almost exclusively from the United States, although Spanish,
French, German, and British nationals also invested capital.
The cotton industry of Baja and the mining areas of Sinaloa and Sonora were controlled by United States businessmen. In addition to this presence and dominance of foreign capital ists in large-scale industries, Chinese immigrants gravi tated to these states and gradually dominated small-scale mercantile activities, especially in Sonora. The arrival of the Chinese aggravated domestic problems created by the heterogeneity of races in Mexico. CHAPTER 2
IMMIGRATION OF CHINESE TO MEXICO
Attractive forces lured Chinese to Mexico, and the government promised lucrative rewards for migration to its territory. Labor contractors negotiated to obtain un employed Chinese as labor for Mexico's development projects.
And most significant among the inducements was the absence of any restrictions on immigration to Mexico. But propul sive forces also affected the Chinese desire to leave their homeland. The migration of Chinese to Mexico was only a small part of their migratory movements in the nineteenth century. Although migrations were caused by constant civil war and unrest, such as the Opium War (1839-1842) and T'ai
P'ing rebellion (1850-1864), few Chinese entered Mexico before 1880. But later civil wars, famine, poverty, rural unemployment, scarcity of arable land, overpopulation, and other internal pressures caused emigration to Mexico between
1880 and 1920.1
1. For information on the causes of Chinese migra tions, see "A Survey of Chinese Emigration," International Labour Review, LX (September, 1949), p. 290; Pyau Ling, "Causes of Chinese Emigration," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, XXXIX (January, 1912), pp. 74, 80; Eugenio Chang-Rodriguez, "Chinese Labor Migration into Latin America in the Nineteenth Century," Revista de Historia de America, XLVI (December, 1958), p. 393; Sen-dou Chang, "The Distribution and Occupations of
8 9
The two provinces of Fukien and Kwangtung provided over ninety per cent of all Chinese emigration in the nineteenth century. The Chinese in Mexico came almost ex clusively from the latter province, with the majority from a seven thousand square mile area around the Canton Delta.
The nine hsiens (districts) of Chung-shan, T'ai-shan, Shun- te, Nan-hai, Hsin-hui, Kai-p'ing, Hao-shan, Kao-yao, and
En-p'ing provided all the Mexican Chinese. Several circum stances induced the Chinese from the Canton Delta to migrate to Mexico. After the closing of the ports of Amoy and
Swatow in the 1850's and Macao in 1874, which were open during the heyday of the coolie trade to Cuba and Peru
(1847-1874), Hong Kong was the main port of embarkation.
The proximity of Canton to Hong Kong facilitated emigration from.these nine districts. The area had a long tradition of business and international trade, and the Chinese of
Kwangtung province were accustomed to traveling abroad for long periods of time on business ventures. Finally, since the clan financed many of the voyages, many left to join clansmen who were already in Mexico. Thus the Chinese were
Overseas Chinese," The Geographical Review, .LVIII (January, 1968), p. 104; Ching-chieh Chang, "The Chinese in Latin America: A Preliminary Geographical Survey with Special Reference to Cuba and Jamaica" (unpublished Ph.D. disserta tion, University of Maryland, 1956), pp. 10-11; La Voz de Mexico (Mexico), 30 September, 1883; Ta Chen, Chinese Migra- tions, with Special Reference to Labor Conditions (rpt. 1923, Taipei: Ch'eng-Wen Publishing Co., 1967), pp. 5-6, .11. 10 an available and inexpensive force to solve some of Mexico's 2 labor problems.
Although the Chinese government never actively promoted emigration, Chinese labor migrated to Mexico, especially for the plantations and railroads of the south.^
The earliest immigration of Chinese to Mexico in the nine teenth century occurred in the 1860's. They came from the
United States and worked on construction projects and in the mines of Mexico's northern states.^ The first official
Chinese colonization company received its concession on 10
December, 1865, when the Emperor Maximilian created the
Asian Colonization Company. Under the decree Maximilian granted Manuel B. de Cunha Reis an exclusive privilege to
2. Ching-chieh Chang, "The Chinese in Latin America," pp. 33, 41.
3. TomSs Carrasquilla H., Inmigracidn y coloniza- ci6n (BogotS: Imprenta Nacional, 1906), p. 63; Ching-chieh Chang, "The Chinese in Latin America," p. 33.
4. For references to the arrival of the Chinese in 1864, see S. W. Hung, Chinese in American Life: Some Aspects of Their History, Status, Problems, and Contributions (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962), p. 22; Kwong Min Chen, Mei-chou Hua ch'iao t'ung chien ("A General History of the Chinese Overseas in the Americas") (New York: Overseas Chinese Culture Publishing Company, 1950), p. 496; Yuan-tse Yu, Mo-hsirke.Hua-ch*iao Shih-hua ("Historical Sketch of Overseas Chinese in Mexico") (Taipei: Overseas Chinese Library Publication Service, 1954), pp. 10-11; Ching- chieh Chang, "The Chinese in Latin America," p. 27; Sen-dou Chang, "The Distribution and Occupations of Overseas Chinese," p. 94; for references to the arrival of the Chinese in 1881, see Florence C. Lister and Robert H. Lister, Chihuahua: Storehouse of Storms (Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico Press, 1966), p. 175. 11 import Asian labor into Mexico for ten years. The contract called for workers from Asia as well as for 1,500 Arabs from
Egypt for work on haciendas in Vera Cruz.^ In a second venture, the Lower California Company formulated a plan to import Chinese colonists to Baja California. After twelve 6 years of surveys the project collapsed in 1878.
Although these two ventures failed to induce Chinese to migrate, Mexicans encouraged contract labor and colonists to come from Hong Kong to work on construction and agri cultural projects. An example of the inducements to lure colonists and immigrants appeared in the following circular posted in Hong Kong in the 1880's.
China colony for Mexico. All get rich there, have land. Make first year $500, next year $1,000. Have quick more money than mandarins. Plenty good rice and vegetables cheap. Nice ship, no sickness, plenty of room. Chang Wo.
These early efforts were to little avail before 1884 as few
Chinese entered Mexico.
5. Mexico, Compahia de Colonizacidn AsiStica, Estatutos (Mexico: n.p., 1866).
6. Lower California; Its Geography and Character istics with a Sketch of the Grant and Purposes of the Lower California Company (New York: M. B. Brown and Company, 1868), pp. 14-44; Ruth Elizabeth Kearney, "American Colonization Ventures in Lower California, 1862-1917" (unpublished M.A. thesis. University of California, Berkeley, 1944) , p. 59.
7. Quoted in Ching-ch'ao Wu, "Chinese Immigration in the Pacific Area," The Chinese Social and Political Science Review, XII (October, 1928), p. 553; see also La Voz de Mexico (Mexico), 22 June, 1881. 12
To increase trade and immigration, the Mexican government negotiated a contract with the Pacific Mail 8 Steamship Company of San Francisco in 1874. This contract provided for two separate steamer lines. First was a
"throughline," with two round-trip voyages a month from San
Francisco to Panama with a stop at Acapulco. The second, or "coast line," called for two round trip voyages from San
Francisco to Panama with nine stops on Mexico's Pacific
Coast. These steamers stopped at Cabo San Lucas, MazatlSn,
San Bias, Manzanillo, Acapulco, Puerto Angel, Salina Cruz, 9 TonalS or La Puerta, and San Benito de Soconusco. On 10
8. For other contracts of the Mexican government and various steamship lines, see "Contract with Holladay and Flint, San Francisco (23 August 1861)"; "Contract between Maximilliano and Benjamin Holladay (31 January 1865)". Mexico, Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn, Seccidn I, Informe que el Secretario de Gobernacidn rinde a la Ccimara de Diputados del Congreso de la Unidn en cumplimi- ento del acuerdo aprobado en la sesidn del 5 del actual, sobre lineas de vapores subvencionadas (Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1880), pp. 19, 21; Mexico: Presidente, Manifesto que en el Ultimo dia de su periodo constitutional de a sus compatriotas el Presidente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos Manuel Gonzcllez informando acerca de los actos de su adminis- tracidn (Mexico: Tipografia Literarla de Filomeno Mata, 1884), pp. 32-33; "Contract with the Compahia de la Mala del Pacifico (8 November 1880)";. all in the papers of Edward Lee Plumb, box 7, folder 76, Special Collections, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. For other contracts, see El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 16 November 1880; Mexico, Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn, Contrato con C. Ireneo Paz en representacidn de la Compahia de Vapores de California (13 November 1883); Mdxico, Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn, Contrato con C. Sebastidn Camacho, como apoderado de la Compania del Ferro- carril de Sonora (12 January 1885).
9. Edward Bartlett, United States Consul, Acapulco, to Edwin F. Uhl, Assistant Secretary of State, 10 October, 13
March 1884, the Mexican government signed a contract with the Pacific Navigation Company to establish service from her
Pacific ports to the Orient. There were to be at least twelve round trip voyages per year, for which the govern ment paid the company a subsidy of $17,000 per voyage.
Part of the contract stipulated that the company develop immigration to Mexico. In return the government paid the company $68 for every European immigrant and $31.50 for every Asian laborer.
Spenser St. John, British Envoy in Mexico, wrote
Foreign Minister George Granville that he thought the pur pose of the steamer lines was to bring in a flood of Chinese coolies. He believed that the development of Mexican agri culture needed them, but hoped that they would fare better than the Chinese coolies in Peru.1* The 1884 contract 11
1895, in United States, Department of State, Despatches from United States Consuls in Acapulco, Mexico, 1823-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 143 (Washingtong: National Archives and Record Service, 1949), reel 7; "Articles of Contract between the Pacific Mail Steamship Company and the Republic of Mexico (1874)."
10. Spenser St. John, British Envoy to Mexico, to Foreign Minister Lord Granville, 19 March 1884, in Great Britain, Public Record Office, Foreign Office, Consular Despatches from Mexico, 1822-1902, series 50/volume 445/ folio 33; reel 178 (hereafter cited as FO with appropriate classification numbers).
11. For the treatment of the coolies in Peru and a sample coolie contract, see Watt Stewart, Chinese Bondage in Peru; A History of the Chinese Coolie in Peru, 1849-1874 (Durham, North Carolina; Duke University Press,.1951),.pp, 42-44, 138-159; for conditions of the Chinese in Peru, see Hosea Ballou Morse, The International Relations of the 14 provided for the transport of coolies from Hong Kong to work on Mexican railroad and agricultural projects. But the
British colonial governor of Hong Kong refused to allow the emigration of contract coolie labor from that port because he believed Mexico was not able to guarantee their protec- 12 tion. This decision opened a long controversy, initiated 13 by the Pacific Navigation Company.
Immediately the company appealed to the British government to allow the Chinese to leave Hong Kong. The steamer Mount Lebanon was in that port ready to leave with
600 Chinese when the governor prohibited emigration. Since no treaty existed between China and Mexico, the Chinese -
Chinese Empire (3 vols., n.p.: n.p., n.d.), II, 172-180; Alice Jo Kwong, "The Chinese in Peru," in Morton H. Fried, editor, Colloquium on Overseas Chinese (New York: Inter national Secretariat, Institute of.Pacific Relations, 1958), p. 42? S. R. Lainger, "K voprosu o Kitaisko'i emigratsii v strany Latinskoi Ameriki," in Strany Dal'nego vostoka i lUqo-vostochnoi Azii (Mokova: n.p. 1969), p. 61.
12. For examples of contracts that established rules and protection.for coolies in Cuba, see Cuba, Reglamento para la introducidn de los trabajadores chinos en la isla de Cuba (Habana: Imprenta del Gobierno y Capitania General por S.M., 1860); Cuba, Reglamento para la introducidn y regimen de colonos asidticos en la isla de Cuba (Habana: Imprenta del Gobierno y Capitania General, 1861); Cuba, Decreto del gobierno superior politico sobre colonizacidn asidtica publicado en 14 de septiembre de 1872 e instrucciones dictadas por dicho superior gobierno para las subcomisiones y delegaciones creadas en 22 de mayo de 1872 (Cienfuegos: Imprenta del Pabell6n Nacional, 1872).
13. St. John to Granville, 19 March 1884, FO/50/445/ 33, reel 178; Victor C. Dahl, "Alien Labor on the Gulf Coast of Mexico,.1800-1900," The Americas, XVII (July, I960), p. 30; Edward Wingfield, Colonial Undersecretary, to Julian Pauncefote, Foreign Undersecretary, 8 August 1884, FO/50/ 447/199, reel 179. 15
Foreign Office (Yamen) intimated to Great Britain that it trusted British agents to protect Chinese immigrants if they 14 went to Mexico.
St. John again advanced the idea that the Chinese were the only people capable of developing Mexico's Pacific coast. He reported that several representatives of San.
Francisco-based Chinese firms were now in Mexico. These
firms wanted to establish branches in MazatlSn to assist
immigrants.^ When Mexico's Foreign Minister, Ignacio
Mariscal, stated that Mexico would allow British good
offices to include protection of all Chinese interests in
Mexico, the Chinese government agreed to the emigration from
Hong Kong.Thus they set the precedent for Chinese
immigration.
14. Theodore Schneider, Agent, Pacific Navigation Company, London, to the Earl of Derby, London, 6 October 1884, FO/50/451/3, reel 181; Foreign Office to Sir Harry Parkes, British Agent, Peking, 4 November 1884, FO/50/451/43, reel 181? Parkes to Granville, n.d., FO/50/451/54, reel 181; for the exchanges of notes in this controversy, see Mexico, Secretaria .de. Relaciones.Exteriores, Correspondencia diplo- m&tica cambiada entre el gobierno de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos y los de varias potencias extrangeras desde el 30 de junio de 1881 a 30 de junion de 1886 (4 vols., Mexico; Tipografla "La Luz," 1887), IV, 603-633 (hereafter cited as Correspondencia, 1881-1886).
15. St. John to Granville, 10 December 1884, FO/50/451/92, reel 181.
16. Lionel Carden, British Envoy, Mexico, to Ignacio Mariscal, Minister of Foreign Relations, Mexico, 19, 31 March, 1 May 1885, Correspondencia, 1881-1886, IV, 623, 625, 629; Mariscal to Carden, ibid., p. 626. 16
This was not the last British action that involved
Chinese immigration to Mexico. On 30 August 1883 George
Hopkins of the Anglo-Mexican Mining Company, and George
Gibbs of the Mexican Railway Company, bought mines near
Culiaccin, Sinaloa, from United States owners. They paid
$850,000 in cash and $510,000 in shares of the new company.
To provide labor for the enterprise, Hopkins contracted with a Hong Kong firm, which promised to ship Chinese coolies to 17 the mining camps via MazatlSn and Guaymas. Problems plagued this project from the start. An early group of 300
Chinese arrived in MazatlSn in the summer of 1886. They lived in two rooms in a building in the center of the town while they awaited the arrival of the mining company's agents. Local authorities accused the contractors of mal treating the coolies. Living in poverty and hunger, eating discarded watermelon rinds, they were finally provided rotten fish and a paltry supply of rice by the townspeople.
Finally the company removed the coolies to the mines. Of the 300, about one half obtained employment. If they were healthy and capable after their ordeal in the city, they
17. Alfred Tischendorf, Great Britain and Mexico in the Era of Porfirio Diaz (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1961), p. 80. 17 obtained jobs in the mines at wages up to a peso and a half a day.'1'8
A second group of Chinese arrived in MazatlSn from
San Francisco in October, 1886. No company agent met. them, therefore, some left for other areas of Sinaloa and Sonora in violation of their contracts. At their own expense city authorities fed and housed the remainder. The 150 Chinese barely survived on clams and crayfish that they caught.
Finally, when some Chinese died, the populace, moved by their misery, donated twelve centavos a day for their relief. They expected the Chinese consul in San Francisco to reimburse them. Representatives of the company soon arrived and took the Chinese to the camp at Yedras.^8 Al though Chinese fishermen lived in AltatS as early as 1883, no appreciable immigration of Chinese to Sinaloa took place before 1886. Those Chinese who came for the mining 1819
18. El Tiempo (Mexico), 29 June, 1, 16 July 1886; E. G. Kelton, United States Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 1 December 1886, in United States, Department of State, Despatches from United States Consuls in MazatlSn, Mexico, 1826-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 159 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1949), reel 5 (hereafter cited as CDM).
19. El Socialista (Mexico), 31 December 1886? El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 26 March 1887? Tischendorf, Great Britain and Mexico, pp. 80-81. 18 operations added considerably to the small foreign popula te tion of the state.
Before 1890 only Tehuantepec and Baja California had 21 received significant numbers of Chinese immigrant laborers.
In September, 1889, the On Mick Company of San Francisco planned to bring Chinese laborers to the area around
Ensenada, Baja California. The company planned to provide
labor in Real del Cartillo to exploit the mining concessions of a San Diego firm. On Mick also negotiated contracts with
Mexican businessmen in Ensenada to provide capital and labor
to exploit pearl and abalone beds on the west coast of
Baja.20 2122
20. La Voz de Mexico (Mexico), 30 September 1883; for information on the emigration of Chinese to AltatS from Guaymas, see Archive Histdrico del Estado de Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, gaveta 21-1, carpeton 544 (hereafter cited as AHES).
21. For the 31 March 1891 Tehuantepec contract of the Mexican government and the combine of Salvador Halo and the Hi Loy Company, see G. D. Barker, British Consul, Hong Kong, to St. John, in Great Britain, Public Record Office, Foreign Office, Embassy and Consular Archives, Mexico, Letterbooks, 1826-1899, FO/204/217/12; Carden to St. John, 27 August 1891, in Great Britain, Public Record Office, Foreign Office, Embassy and Consular Archives, Mexico, Correspondence, Series I, 1823-1902, FO/203/102/51, reel 51 (hereafter cited as FO with appropriate classification numbers).
22. Alexander Willard, United States Consul, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 18 September 1889, in United States, Despatches from United States Consuls in Guaymas, Mexico, 1832-1896, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy T-210 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1958-1963), reel 8 (hereafter cited as CDG); Anthony Godbe, United States Vice Consul, Ensenada, to the Secretary of State, 13 September 1889, in United States, 19 Interest in Chinese labor was not confined only to
Baja and Tehuantepec. Sonorans were also interested in
Chinese labor. The building of the railroad in Sonora in
1880 initiated talk of the need for Chinese in that state.
Chinese moved to Sonora before 1880, but in very small numbers and almost all of them lived in the port city of 23 Guaymas. The first opportunity for large numbers of
Chinese to enter Sonora came in 1880. The Sonoran Railroad
Company of Boston received a contract to build the line between Guaymas and Nogales. As early as July, 1880, the company reluctantly spoke of importing Chinese labor if the
Yaquis did not prove adequate for the rigorous construction work. The company found it difficult to maintain steady employment among the Yaquis, who, unaccustomed to this type of work, often deserted. Although the company considered using Chinese, the labor crisis did not materialize and 23
Despatches from United States Consuls in Ensenada, Mexico, 1888-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Micro copy 291 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1963) (hereafter cited as CDE).
23. For reference to the arrival of fifty Chinese in Guaymas in 1873, see Pro-Patria (Magdalena, Sonora), 25 July 1917; for an 1875 date instead of 1873, see Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 5, 12 September 1917; for early contact of the Chinese with Sonora, see Farrelly Alden, United States Vice Consul, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 1 January 1861, CDG, reel 1; for early movement of Chinese in and out of Sonora, see Boletln Oficial (Ures), 14 July 1876 and La Era Nueva (Hermosillo), 3 February 1878; for records of contri butions by the Chinese to the treasury, see El Municipio (Guaymas), 15 February, 1 March 1878 and La Constitution (Hermosillo), 26 June 1879. 20 construction proceeded without them. A scarcity of labor developed again in November, 1880, but other foreigners in
Sonora filled the gaps. With the completion of the line in
October, 1882, the need for Chinese labor ceased,^
Although very few Chinese entered Sonora before
1883, government authorities thought Chinese immigration was a problem. On 27 February 1883, the Sonora Secretary of the
Treasury addressed a complaint to the Secretary of Develop ment in Mexico on the subject of immigration to Sonora. He complained that European and Asian immigrants took the jobs of native Mexicans, who thus unemployed, migrated to Cali- 25 fornia and Arizona. Despite this complaint, Chinese immigration continued to increase slowly after 1883. Small parties of Chinese arrived in Guaymas in 1883 and 1884, but again their numbers were insignificant in the total foreign population of the state.^ But it was not until well into
24. Willard to the Secretary of State, 8 July, 12, 29 August, 30 November 1880, 14 October 1882, CDG, reel 5; John H. McNeely, "The Railways, of Mexico: A Study in Nation alization," Southwestern Studies, II (Spring, 1964), p. 13.
25. Secretary of Treasury, Hermosillo to Secretary of Development, Mexico, n.d., AHES, gaveta 20-2, carpeton 513; for the immigration of Chinese from Tucson, Arizona, to Caborca, Sonora, via the port of entry of Sasabe, see La Constitucidn (Hermosillo), 25 August 1881.
26. For immigration in 1883, see La ConstituciGn (Hermosillo), 22 June, 24 August 1883; for the figures for 1884, see the port records of Guaymas, AHES, gaveta 21-1, carpeton 544; for figures for 1885 to 1890, see Henry R. Jackson, United States Minister, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 8 October 1885, in United States, Department of State, Despatches from United States Ministers to Mexico, 21 the decade of the 1890's that immigration of Chinese in creased rapidly in Mexico, with large numbers going to 27 Sonora. Figure 1 shows the centers of Chinese population in Mexico in 1895.
With the increasing immigration and problems with the United States over.illegal entrants, Mexico moved to an accommodation with the Chinese Empire to regulate this 28 immigration. These negotiations resulted in a Treaty of
Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation between China and
Mexico. The treaty, signed in Washington, inaugurated diplomatic relations between the two signatories and
1823-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Micro copy M-97 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1955-1961), reel 81 (hereafter cited as DMM); Willard to the Secretary of State, 26 September, 31 December 1886, 31 December 1887, 18 September 1889, 18 April 1890, CDG, reels- 6, 8.
27. Paak-shing Wu, "China's Diplomatic Relations with Mexico," The China Quarterly, IV (Summer, 1939), p. 3; for reports from Guaymas that concernced Chinese immigration see Willard to the Secretary of State, 18 April, 8, 18 May 1890, CDG, reel 8; for reports on an increase in immigration in 1894 to 1895, see Frank Roberts, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 23 January 1896, in United States, Department of State, Despatches from United States Consuls in Nogales, Mexico, 1889-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy T-323 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1959), reel 2 (here after cited as CDN).
28. For Chinese arrivals at Mexican ports before 1899, see Appendix A, Tables A.1 and A.2. STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS 1- FEDERAL DISTRICT. 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4- TLAXCALA 5 HIDALGO 6 - MEXICO 7 - OUE RETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
LEGEND
253-348
INTANA ROO
to Figure 1. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1895 N) 23 29 introduced a new era in Chinese immigration to Mexico.
Yang Yue, China's Minister to the United States, Spain,
and Peru, began negotiations for a treaty with Mexico in
August, 1894.^ Finally, in 1898, Wu Ting-fang, Chinese
Minister to the United States, and Manuel de Azpiroz,
Mexican Ambassador in Washington, began negotiations, which
resulted in a Treaty of Amity and Commerce signed in
Washington on 12 December 1899. Three articles were impor
tant not only for future relations between Mexico and China
but also for the Chinese residents of Mexico. The treaty
gave the nationals of each country the freedom to enter and
travel in the other country where they could also remain
and engage in commerce. Mexico guaranteed protection to the
persons, families, and properties of its Chinese residents.
China extended similar guarantees to Mexicans resident in
China. Each country permitted the free immigration of 31 laborers and their families without restrictions. Other
29. Paak-shing Wu, "China's Diplomatic Relations," p. 3; St. John to Fernlndez, 22 December 1884, Corresponden- cia, 1881-1886, IV, 617; Clinton Harvey Gardiner, "Early Diplomatic Relations Between Mexico and the Far East," The Americas, VII (April, 1950), p. 410; Carden to St. John, 27 August 1891, FO/203/102/51, reel 51; El Imparcial (Hermosillo), 25 July, 4, 11 August 1894.
30. El Imparcial (Hermosillo), 11 August 1894; Paak-shing Wu, "China's Diplomatic Relations," p. 4.
31. Ch'ang-fu Li, Hua ch'iao ("Chinese Overseas"), (Shanghai: Chung Hua Book Company, 1929), p. 144; for the text of the treaty, see.Mexico, Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, X (August, 1900), pp. 193-211; Harley Farnsworth MacNair, The Chinese Abroad: Their 24 parts of the treaty dealt with commerce and most favored nation clauses, but these were less significant because 32 Mexico's trade with China was small.
This treaty inaugurated diplimatic relations be tween the Diaz regime in Mexico and the Ching Dynasty of
China.^ It also opened Mexico to more Chinese immigrants? ^
Position and Protection: A Study in International Law and Relations (rptT 1933, Taipei: Ch'eng Wen Publishing Company, 1971), p. 93; and a copy in Archive General del Gobierno del Estado de Sonora, 1900-1931, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, tomo 3611, Part 1 (hereafter cited AGG).
32. For the presentation of an award from the Republic of China to Manuel de Azpiroz for his part in the promulgation of the 1899 treaty, see Letter of Manuel Calero to the Secretaries of the Mexican Senate, 5 December 1911, in The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley; for trade between Mexico and China from 1905 to 1907, see The Mexican Year Book, 1908, pp. 311, 312, 318.
33. Mexico, Secretarla de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, XIX (December, 1904), p. 66; Mexico, Presidente, Informe leido por el C. Presidente de la Repdblica al abrirse el cuarto periodo de sesiones del XXI Congreso de la Uni6n el lo de abril de 1904 (Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1904), p. 5; United States, Depart ment of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, with the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress, December 6, 1904 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1905), p. 487; Mexico, Presi dente, Informe del Ciudadano General Porfirio Diaz Presi dente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos a sus compatriotas acerca de los actos de su administracidn en el periodo constitutional comprendido entre el lo de diciembre de 1900 a 30 de noviembre de 1904 (Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1904), pp. 8-9; Wu Ting-fang to Diaz, 30 October 1909, in Mexico, Secretarla de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, XXIX (November, 1909), pp. 7-9; for the notes on the death of the Chinese Emperor, see ibid., XXVII (December, 1908), pp. 53-55.
34. For immigration figures for 1900 to 1907, see Appendix A, Table A.3. 25
With the establishment in 1903 of the China Commercial
Steamship Company by a group of wealthy Chinese in San
Francisco, the number of Chinese immigrant.laborers in- .. creased. In addition to freight service, the company pro- 3 5 vided steerage for coolie labor. The company also began a price war with the Pacific Mail Steamship Company for control of the coolie trade. With four boats, the Atho11,
Clavering, Ching Wo, and Lothian, the China Commercial
Steamship Company forced its rival to cut rates-. The
latter's efforts to retain control of this trade resulted
in a reduction of steerage rates from fifty to fifteen
dollars to keep pace with the new line. With cheaper rates
and greater demand for coolie labor, Chinese immigration
doubled from 1,900 in 1903 to 3,800 in 1 9 0 4 . Figure 2
shows the centers of Chinese population in Mexico in 1900.
As Chinese continued to enter the ports of Manzanillo and -
Salina Cruz, Vice President Ram6n Corral feared the Lothian
and Ching Wo would bring in over ten million Chinese under
35. Kwong Min Chen, Mei-chou Hua ch'iao, p. 497) Yuan-tse Yu, Mo-shi-ke, p. 11; for a sample coolie contract used in the twentieth century, see Eugene S. Watson, "Chinese Labor and the Panama Canal," The Independent, LXI (22 November, 1906), p. 1204; The Mexican Year Book, 1908, pp. 407-409.
36. San Francisco Chronicle, 22 May 1903; The San Francisco Examiner, 22 May, 25 July 1903. STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS 1 - FEDERAL DISTRICT. 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4- TLAXCALA 5 HIDALGO 6 - MEXICO 7 - QUERETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
INTANA ROO
to Figure 2. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1900 CTi 27 37 their new contract. The company landed 4,157 Chinese at
Salina Cruz between 1903 and 1904. This passenger service
surpassed its cargo service; at times the passengers ate all 3 8 the cargo before the ships could unload it in Mexico.
North of Salina Cruz and Manzanillo, MazatlSn and
Ensenada handled Chinese immigrants. MazatlSn was the
terminus for most Chinese on ships from San Francisco. From
Mazatldn many transhipped to Guaymas or Ensenada. The
steamer Curacao carried most of these coastal migrations to 3 9 Mexican ports. In December, 1902, the bubonic plague
struck Mazatlcin. Shipment of Chinese there ceased and
Manzanillo emerged as the terminus for Chinese immigration
in 1903. Mexican authorities took measures to alleviate the
distress by burning houses and bodies in addition to
quarantines and the closing of the port. In January, 1903,
Doctor I. Rivera, representative of the Superior Board of
Health, presented his findings on the plague in that city.
He claimed that rats from San Francisco brought the disease.
37. Vice President Ramdn Corral, Mexico, to Governor Rafael Izabal, Hermosillo, 26 July 1903, in Letters of Ram6n Corral in the Private Papers of Jorge Corral, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico.
38. Mexico, Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletln Oficial, XX (July, 1903), p. 128; Clinton Harvey Gardiner, "Trade Between Mexico and the Transpacific World, 1870-1900,11 Inter-American Economic Affairs, III (Winter, 1949), p. 38.
39. For an account of a disastrous trek by fifty Chinese from MazatlSn to Baja in 1902, see John Edwin Hogg, "El Desierto de los Chinos," Touring Topics, XXII (October, 1930), p. 37. 28
He alluded to the Chinese as the main dealers in vegetables and produce in MazatlSn and found them culpable for the rapid spread of the disease.Eventually the plague abated and the port of MazatlSn returned to business, but it was never to regain the position it once held of handling the largest number of Chinese immigrants on the west coast. A new law, passed on 29 September 1903, permitted only ten
Chinese from foreign countries to land at a port at one time. Every Pacific Mail ship brought ten Chinese, who waited until the Curacao took them to Sonora.
The presence of increasing numbers of Chinese in
Sonora caused fear of surreptitious entry into the United
States. As the Chinese arrived in MazatlSn and then traveled to Sonora, warnings preceded them. Louis Kaiser,
United States Consul in MazatlSn, warned that over 6,000
Chinese were moving toward Sonora to cross the line. Every arrival resulted in reports that Chinese used Sonora as a.
stepping stone to the United States. The press reported that the Chinese accepted no jobs, because they only wanted 6*
40. Louis Kaiser, United States Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 23 December 1902, 24, 27 January, 6 February 1903, in COM, reel 6.
41. Powell Clayton, United States Envoy, Mexico, to John Hay, Secretary of State, 12 November 1903, in DMM, reel 159; for reports on regular departures from Guaymas and MazatlSn to Ensenada, see Louis Kaiser to the Secretary of State, 24 June, 22 August, 7 July 1904, 24 May 1905, in COM, reel 7; Gustavus A. Kaiser, United States Vice Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 29 November 1904, ibid. 29 to cross the border. Chinese continually went from MazatlSn to towns in Sonora near the border, where smugglers operated on both sides to bring them across.^ In 1899, the
United States government removed Harry K. Chenoweth from his position as Customs Collector at Nogales. He was an associate of Lee Sing of Sonora, a known smuggler of
Chinese. In August, 1901, Chenoweth1s successor in Nogales,
William M. Hoey, followed the same path to disgrace for his part in smuggling Chinese across the border. Reports also circulated in Nogales that Yung Ham, a reputed smuggler, smuggled 6,000 Chinese into the United States. Of these, 43 the authorities caught and deported only 3,000.
These arrests merely curtailed smuggling operations for a time. The smugglers reverted to new techniques with *28
42. Louis Kaiser to the Secretary of State, 10 July 1900, COM, reel 6; Gustavus Kaiser to the Secretary of State, 28 July, 7 August 1900, COM, ibid.; El Correo de la Tarde (MazatlSn), 29 August 1900; Albert R. Morawetz, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 10 June 1903, CDN, feel.4. .
43. George E. Paulsen, "The Yellow Peril at Nogales: The Ordeal of Collector William M. Hoey," Arizona and the West, XIII (Summer, 1971), pp. 113-115; Roscoe G. Willson, "Secret Service Men Foil Border Smuggling Racket," Arizona Days and Ways (13 January 1957), pp. 24-25; Roscoe G. Willson, "Line Riders Trick Chinese Smugglers," Arizona Days and Ways (20 January 1957), pp. 16-17; Border Vidette (Nogales, Arizona), 31 August 1901; for the arrests of several Chinese who crossed the line illegally at Nogales, see John H. Behan entries in logbook of 15, 16, 19 January 1896, in Papers of the Behan Family, in Special Collections, The University of Arizona Library, Tucson, Arizona; Morris Hunter Jones, Chinese Inspector, to George Webb, several dates from 1906 to 1908, in Papers of Morris Hunter Jones, in the Arizona Historical Society, Tucson, Arizona. 30 the forging of Chinese certificates that allowed the Chinese to pose as United States citizens. Use of these certifi cates coupled with the new sanitary regulations of 29
September 1903, that curtailed Chinese immigration to
Mexico, led to an investigation of Chinese certificates there and in the United States. Vice President Ram6n Corral complained of these false certificates to Sonoran Governor
Rafael IzSbal in 1904.^
William Wright, Deputy Collector of Customs at Naco in the Arizona Territory, discovered this operation when he found a forged certificate on a Chinese in Sonora. And on
9 June 1904, D. W. Clark, Deputy Sheriff in Naco, along with several other United States officials, raided the Palace
Saloon in Cananea, Sonora, and confiscated over 300 forged blank Chinese certificates. The smuggling operation began with the arrival of the Chinese at MazatlSn. Later they went with smugglers to Cananea where they received training on what to do to enter the United States. With training completed, the agents brought them to Guaymas where they boarded boats to sail up the Gulf of California and the
Colorado River to the United States. The forger received
44. Clayton to Hay, 6 February 1904, DMM, reel 161; Mariscal to Clayton, 16 February 1904, in Clayton to Hay, 5 March 1904, DMM, ibid.; Fenton R. McCreery, United States Charge ad Interim, Mexico, 19 May 1904, DMM, reel 163; Vice President Ramdn Corral, Mexico, to Governor Rafael IzSbal, Hermosillo, 22 June 1904, AGG, tomo 1900, paquete 35. 31
$100 for each fraudulent certificate and hundreds of Chinese crossed the border in this fashion. The customs officials failed to catch the forger, who fled to British Columbia.
Consul Alexander Dye of Nogales, Sonora, reported that
forged certificates continued in use as late as 1910.^
Set in a narrow valley on the border, the city of
Nogales, Sonora, provided an ideal area for smuggling. What
appeared to be small shops on the street opened into large
dwellings and caves dug into the hills, A substantial
number of Chinese lived in the area, awaiting an opportunity
to cross. Bands of smugglers provided the opportunity to
cross for $200 a person.^ United States Consul George B.
Schmuker at Ensenada testified to the effectiveness of this
trade and the "largely unavailing.efforts of controlling the
long standing problem of Chinese smuggling.11 ^ V.*
45. San Francisco Chronicle, 10 June 1904; Alexander Dye, United States Consul, Nogales, to Doctor Griffith, Nogales, Arizona, 24 January 1910, in Papers of Alexander V. Dye, in Special Collections, University of Oregon Library, Eugene, Oregon (hereafter cited as Dye Papers).
46". Undated manuscript autobiography of Alexander V. Dye, Dye Papers.
47. Quoted in Lowell L. Blaisdell, The Desert Revo lution; Baja California, 1911 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1962), p. 112; for more information on smuggling activities in Baja, see the Secretary of State to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, 21 March 1911, In Archives of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States, Department of Justice, Washington, 53620/318 thereafter cited as Justice with appropriate classification numbers). 32
During the first decade of the twentieth century, the immigration of Chinese continued and increased enormously over pre-treaty figures. This increase in numbers, constant problems with the United States, and domestic opposition forced Mexico to take action. The national government undertook measures to study the Chinese immigration problem and attempted regulations to control its direction and extent. Criticisms of the lack of sanitary regulations resulted in the promulgation of sanitary restric tions on the Chinese on 10 October 1903. Under the new regulations each immigrant had to present a doctor's affi davit that he was free from all diseases while each vessel was required to have disinfecting apparatus to disinfect all the passengers, their baggage, and clothing. The Superior
Council of Health ordered the China Commercial Steamship
Company to construct observation barracks and a quarantine zone for contagious diseases in Manzanillo, the only port of 48 arrival for Chinese.
In October, 1903, the Secretary of Interior, in the name of the president, created a commission to study the problem of oriental immigration, especially its health aspects. The commission received orders to study the legal, economic, and social aspects of Asian immigration and its effects on the physical, moral, and intellectual progress of
48. For the 1903 sanitary regulation, see L. Kaiser to the Secretary of State, 17 March 1904, COM, reel 7. 33
Mexico. The Secretary of Interior posed four questions which he hoped the commission would answer after they re searched the immigration problem. First, was it beneficial to allow the free immigration of Chinese and Japanese?
Second, were rules to be established for both on an equal basis, or were they to have different regulations? Third, if the government impeded free entry of Asians, was it to be merely by restrictions or by abolition? Finally, a legal question arose. Was immigration to be impeded or prevented 4 9 by law or by decree?
The president's Immigration Commission began de liberations on 17 October 1903 with five distinguished members. Licenciado Genera Raigosa, Doctor Eduardo Lic^aga,
Licenciado Rafael Rebollar, Senador Jos§ M. Romero, and 50 Ingeniero Jos# Covarrubias comprised the board.
Armed with the sanitary regulation, the initial attempt to mitigate the effects of Chinese immigration, the
49. Andr#s Landa y Pina, El servicio de migracidn en Mexico (Mexico: Secretaria de Gobernacidn, 1930), p. 3.
50. Mexico, Comisidn de Inmigracidn, Dictamen del vocal ingeniero Jos# Maria Romero encargado de estudiar la influencia social y econ6mica de la inmiqraciOn asiatica en M#xico (M#xico: Imprenta de A. Carranza e Hijos, 1911), p. vii; Landa y Pina, El servicio de migracidn, p. 5; Jos# Covarrubias, "La inmigracidn china considerada desde los puntos de vista intelectual y moral," in Varies informes, sobre tierras y colonizacidn (M#xico: Imprenta y Fototipia de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1912), pp. 120, 122; for earlier statements of Raigosa that the Chinese were regres sive and opposed to progress, see Powell, "Mexican Intel lectuals," pp. 29, 31. 34 commission moved on to the first phase of its study. The 10
November 1903 session produced two questionnaires to be circulated in each state. The commission stated that one of its objectives was to propose a general law to the govern ment to regulate Chinese immigration. To do this they needed information on the orientals who were resident in Mexico.^
One of the questionnaires referred to the Japanese; the other considered the Chinese. Ten questions appeared on the form:."
1. Are there Chinese in your municipality? 2. What is their approximate number? 3. What are their general occupations? 4. What is their general conduct? 5. What crimes do they most frequently commit? 6. Are there any vagrants or beggars? 7. Are there many in public establishments (asylums)?
If there are no Chinese: .
1. Do agriculturists and industrialists desire to employ Chinese laborers? 2. What wages would they pay? 3. How many can they employ?^
The results of the survey led.the commission to
study the problem of Chinese immigration more closely. Two
of the members of the board published their findings and
the committee's conclusions. Jos# Maria Romero published
his ideas on the Chinese issue in 1911. As he studied 18*
51. Genero Raigosa, Immigration Commission, to •Governor of Sonora, 10 November 1903, AGG, tomo 1900, paquete 34. 52. Immigration Commission to Governor of Sonora, 18 November 1903, AGG, tomo 1900, paquete 34; for the results of the survey in Sonora, see Chapter 3. 35
Chinese immigration Romero concluded that the Chinese did not bring to Mexico the type of people that it needed. For progress Mexico needed intelligence, capital, and hard work.
The Chinese only added to another unassimilated people, the
Indians. Thus Chinese immigration was socially and eco nomically unsuitable. In Romero's view the low morals, non permanent characteristics, and different racial, linguistic, and religious customs rendered the Chinese undesirable 53 immigrants.
Jos§ Covarrubias published his conclusions on 3
September 1904. He believed that the Chinese who came to
Mexico were the dregs of Chinese society. They were agri culturists who broke away from their land and families in
China. Since the family was the nucleus of social unity in
China, Covarrubias saw this as a bad omen for Mexico. With no natural family the Chinese in Mexico would never be permanent residents or become integrated into Mexican society. He saw the Chinese as very materialistic, con cerned only with money and profit. They garnered all they could and remitted their savings to China, thus Mexico lost valuable capital from circulation. Despite these defects the Chinese were considered invaluable laborers in hot and humid lands. Covarrubias mentioned one other important
53. Mexico, Comisidn de Inmigracidn, Dictamen del vocal ingeniero Jos6 Maria Romero, pp. iii, iv, 81, 85, 95, 104. 36 consideration. Mexico needed labor, and he thought the
Chinese were beneficial as laborers, but not as permanent colonists.
On 29 September 1904 the Immigration Commission reached a conclusion.. The commission felt there was no. danger that Mexican society would be contaminated or changed by conta'ct with the Chinese. They also discarded the hope that they could assimilate the Chinese. Mexico had capital, but had insufficient labor; therefore, Chinese labor was an economic necessity. The commission then recommended to the president that the free immigration of Chinese colonists be regulated, while no restrictions be placed on the entry of
Chinese labor. Then the board proposed that the government constantly supervise Chinese labor and direct it to where it was needed. They hoped to eliminate Chinese colonies or enclaves in certain areas where they competed with Mexicans 55 and impeded local economic development.
From 1903 to 1909 the Sanitary Service handled prob lems resulting from immigration. But it proved unable to
54. Jos6 Covarrubias, "La inmigracidn china," pp. 124, 126, 206-209; Moists GonzSlez Navarro, El porfiriato: la vida social, vol. VI of Historia moderna de Mexico, Daniel Cosio Villegas, editor (9 vols., Mexico: Editorial Hermes, 1955-1972), VI, 166-167; Jos§ Covarrubias, "La inmigracidn y la colonizacidn en America," in Varios informes sobre tierras y colonizacidn (Mexico: Imprenta y Fototipia de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1912), p. 345.
55. Covarrubias, "La inmigracidn china," pp. 209- 210; Mexico, Comisidn de Inmigracidn, Dictamen del vocal ingeniero Jos£ Maria Romero, pp. 121, vii. 37 handle its own responsibilities as well as problems created by immigration. Therefore, on 22 December 1908, Diaz promulgated the Mexican Immigration Law which was to take effect on 1 March 1909. The law not only regulated immigra tion, but also created the Mexican Immigration Service. The law enumerated prohibited classes in Chapter I , These included those with bubonic plague, cholera, yellow fever, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, leprosy, beri-beri, and tracoma. It also prohibited the entrance of epileptics, paralytics, the blind, fugitives from justice, anarchists, prostitutes, and beggars. Chapter II detailed all regula tions for arrivals at Mexican ports. Each captain bore the responsibility to present a detailed statistical analysis of every passenger. Each person had to submit to a medical
examination and detention in a sanitary station. Other
articles of the new law repeated the sanitary regulations of
1903. Finally, Chapter III created the Mexican Immigration
Service.Andres Landa y Pina in his analysis of other
articles stated that the identification of all the aliens
with cards and photographs was a very significant advance,
56. Ley de Inmigfaci6n, Mexico, 22 December 1908, AGG, tomo 2337, paquete 18; Mexico, Secretaria de Gobernacidn, "Ley de inmigracidn de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos," in Coleccidn de leyes, decretos, reglamentos, y acuerdos, serie I, leyes y decretos de la federaci6n (Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno Federal, 1909); Mexico, Comisidn de Inmigraci6n, Dictamen del vocal ingeniero Jose Maria Romero, p. vii; Landa y Pina, El gervicio de migracidn, p. 7. 38
"given the same physiognomy that exists among all indi viduals of the Asian race." Although the law dealt with all immigrants, the impetus for its promulgation came from the 57 pressures of Asian immigration.
No accurate.figures exist for the total number of
Chinese immigrants to Mexico before 1911. According to
Mexican immigration figures, over 35,000 Chinese entered
Mexico before 1911, but thousands also left for the United
States, returned to China, or transshipped to other areas.
Those who remained were counted in three censuses before the outbreak of the Madero revolution. The numbers varied with the estimates of local observers, who reported larger numbers. Nonetheless, these statistics indicated the in crease in the number of Chinese in the country. Although the total number of Chinese in Mexico rose from only 915 in
1895 to 2,836 in 1900, increased immigration after the promulgation of the 1899 treaty affected the 1910 census.
Officials recorded 13,203 Chinese in 1910.^ Figure 3 shows the centers of Chinese population in Mexico in 1910.
The Chinese in Mexico gravitated to the outlying, sparsely populated and undeveloped areas. Except for a .... large Chinese colony in Mexico City, few Chinese lived in
57. Landa y Pina, El servicio de migraci6n, p. 7.
58. For statistics on the Chinese population of the Mexican states in 1895, 1900, and 1910, see Appendix B, Table B.l. STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS 1 - FEDERAL DISTRICT. 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4- TLAXCALA 5- HIDALGO 6 - MEXICO CALIFORNIA' 7 - OUERETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
LEGEND
2306-4608 X ^ lA L is c c y • y
1153-2304 X e # • -f COLIMA'^«ICHOACANi • INTANA 577-1152 W ROO 2 8 9 - 576 # X P UERRER(# 145-288 e 1 - 1 4 4 #
w Figure 3. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1910 40
Central Mexico. Coincidental with Porfirian development schemes there arose a need for labor for railroad construc tion, mining, and plantation agriculture. In many outlying areas Chinese provided this work force. Before 1910 large
Chinese colonies lived in Oaxaca, Veracruz, Chiapas and
Yucatetn as a result of railroad construction and the growth of large plantations. But the largest colonies lived in
the north. By 1910 Sinaloa, Baja California, Coahuila, and
Chihuahua all supported sizeable Chinese populations
occasioned by the need for labor for the development of
railroads, mining concessions, and increased agricultural
production.
With the failure of European immigration schemes
and the need for labor, Chinese migrated to Mexico. Induced
by promises of lucrative rewards, they arrived, only to be
directed to remote undeveloped areas, both in the south and
the north. Mexicans expected a docile and servile laboring
class which they could manipulate in the country where
needed. They also hoped these immigrants would return to
China at the completion of their contracts. Although the
Chinese solved some of the country’s labor needs, they pro
duced problems. Many reneged on their contracts and others
tried to enter the United States by land routes through
Mexico's northern states. And.finally, their drastic in
crease in numbers after 1899 prompted a government investi
gation of oriental immigration. The 1903 survey and 41
Immigration Commission renewed the debate on both the immigration and racial policies of the Porfiriato. The commission concluded that immigration was still a necessity for the country's economic progress. Although the commission noted that the Chinese would fail as colonists because of their unassimilable nature, they thought these immigrants were a valuable addition to the labor force. With the con tinued commitment to immigration, the Diaz regime also con tinued its emphasis of the superiority of foreigners to
Mexico's Indians as elements in Mexico's rapid progress.
Aided by a favorable attitude toward foreigners, an ambivalent racial attitude, and "an evil but necessary" attitude toward them in particular, Chinese entered northern
Mexico. CHAPTER 3
CHINESE IN SONORA BEFORE 1910
As the most important northern port of entry,
MazatlSn received thousands of Chinese who were on their way to other Mexican states, especially Sonora. Many
Chinese chose to remain in MazatlSn and other towns in
Sinaloa. In his 1881 address to the state congress. Governor
Mariano Martinez de Castro stated that there were only
twenty-two Chinese in Sinaloa, all of whom lived in
MazatlSn. Governor Francisco Cahedo' s address of 1886
listed forty-five Chinese in the state. The majority were
laborers in shoe factories owned by other Chinese. Even
after the influx of Chinese in 1886 to labor in the mines, 2 reports indicated less than 100 in Sinaloa. Alfonso Luis
Velasco, author of several statistical surveys in Mexico,
listed seventy Chinese in Sinaloa in 1899. Forty worked in *VI,
1. Sinaloa, Gobernador, Memoria general de la administracidn a la H. legislature por el gobernador constitutional, C. Ingeniero Mariano Martinez de Castro, en 15 de septiembre de 1881 en cumplimiento de la fracci6n VI, art. 47 de la constitucidn politics, de Sinaloa (CuliacSn: Tip. de Retes. y Diaz, 1881), pp. 30, 109.
2. Sinaloa, Gobernador, Memoria general de la ad- ministracidn pdblica del estado, presentada a la H. legis- latura del mismo por el gobernador constitucional C. General Francsisco Cahedo, en cumplimiento de la fraccidn VI, articulo 47 de la const!tuci6n politica de Sinaloa (Culiacdn: Imprenta Estereotipia de TomSs Ramirez, 1886), pp. 97-102, 104. 42 43 shoe factories in CuliacSn. Others worked in the oyster beds to obtain pearls. But the total number of Chinese acknowledged to live in the state remained low.^ As immi gration increased in the 18901s Sinaloa showed a consider able increase in Chinese residents. The census of 1895 reported 195, a number which was second only to that of
Sonora. By 1900 234 Chinese lived in Sinaloa, third only 4 to Sonora and Chihuahua.
Using Mazatl&n as a base, the Chinese moved into
Sonora, which not only contained the largest number of
Chinese, but was also the center of the most strident oppo sition to them. Before 1890 almost all the Chinese in
Sonora worked in the state's large shoe and clothing manu facturing businesses. They either made shoes or clothes, or worked as ironers or launderers. United States Consul3 4
3. Alfonso Luis Velasco, Geografla y estadistica de la Repdblica Mexicana: Sinaloa (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1889), pp. 70, 94, 106; Richard Lambert, United States Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 13 September 1891, COM, reel 5.
4. Mexico, Direccidn General de Estadistica, Censo general de la Repdblica Mexicana, 20 de octubre de 1895 (Mexico: Secretaria de Fomento, 1899), p. 32; Mexico, Direc- ci6n General de Estadistica, Censo general de la Repdblica Mexicana verificado el 28 de octubre de 1900: Sinaloa (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1905), p. 31; Sinaloa, Gobernador, Memoria general de la administra- ci6n ptiblica de estado de Sinaloa presentada a la XXa legislatura por el gobernador constitucional C. Gral Fran cisco Cahedo comprende los ahos de 1896 a 1902 (2 vols. in 1, MazatlSn: Imprenta y Casa Editorial de M. Retes y Cia., 1905), II, 99; for a district breakdown of the Chinese pop ulation in Sinaloa in 1895, 1900, and 1910, see Appendix B, Table B.2. 44
Alexander Willard in Guaymas felt that the businesses were so profitable most would not want to go to the United 5 States. The Chinese turned to gardening activities as well, an occupation that would prove lucrative in the future. In the fall of 1889 the shoe factories at Guaymas and Hermo- sillo increased business with improved machinery. The two largest Guaymas factories employed 102 Chinese, while in
Hermosillo another employed twenty-four.^
By 1890 the Chinese population of the state was 170.
Willard reported no Chinese domestic servants because the wages were too low for them to think of competing with native labor. The remainder, not in the shoe industry, served as cooks and gardeners. Except for one mining engineer for the Imuris Mines, Ltd., there were no Chinese miners or farm hands in Sonora before 1890, despite the shortage of labor in these areas. Most people felt the
Chinese were not good underground workers, but could do the aboveground labor on the mines. Their failure in the mines at Yedras, Sinaloa, and their move to Sonora seemed to prove 7 this point. 567
5. Willard to the Secretary of State, 26 September 1885, CDG, reel 6.
6. Willard to the Secretary of State, 18 September 1889, CDG, reel 8.
7. Willard to the Secretary of State, 8 May 1890, CDG, reel 8. 45
With some capital when they arrived and extensive credit with firms in San Francisco, some Chinese soon prospered in Sonora. The first indication of success in the shoe industry appeared in Willard's annual report for 1890.
He stated the Chinese controlled the shoe and rough clothing 8 business and did well in laundries and gardening. The two largest shoe factories, both in Guaymas, belonged to Siu Fo
Chon and Company and Tung, Chung, Lung. The latter began business in 1873. Both manufactured shoes and clothes and sold both wholesale and retail. By 1900 Tung, Chung, Lung had all modern equipment imported from the United States.
The Siu Fo Chon firm also acted as Mexican agent for a
Canton export firm. These two factories were the beginning of an extensive business these men developed over the next thirty years. Several other Chinese established shoe and clothing manufacturing plants in Guaymas and Hermosillo. And
Fon Qui, who would become one of the richest Chinese in 9 Sonora, established a shoe factory in Magdalena in 1885.9 8
8. Willard to the Secretary of State, 31 December 1890, CDG, reel 8; for advertisements for the shoes made byi several Chinese firms in Sonora, see El Imparcial (Guaymas), 1892, 1893; El Tr&fico (Guaymas), 1895; El Trdfico (Nogales), 1897; El Comercio (Guaymas), 1898; El Imparcial (Hermosillo), 1895; J. R. Southworth, El estado de sonora, Mexico; sus industrias, comerciales, mineras y manufactureras (Nogales, Arizona: The Oasis Printing and Publishing House, 1897, p. 47.
9. Information culled from the advertisements in the newspapers noted in footnote 8; Fon Qui, Magdalena, to Governor Adolfo de la Huerta, 20 December 1919, AGG, tomo 3288; Fong Hong, representing Tung, Chung, Lung, Guaymas, 46
Periodic business censuses indicated that they gradually moved into other fields as well.'*'®
Periodic censuses of the Chinese population gave an idea not only of their numbers, but also of their occupa tions. Willard reported 157 in the Guaymas consular district (which excluded Nogales and Cananea) in 1889.
Governor Ramdn Corral's report to the state congress in 1891 stated that the Chinese population of the state was 229 at the end of 1890.^ Seventy per cent (161) worked in the industries related to the manufacture of shoes and clothes. 12 Only twenty said they were merchants. *11 to Governor, 21 August 1902, AGG, tomo 1720, paquete 2, expediente 3.
10. Governor, Hermosillo, to Eduardo Banfi, Mexican Consul, Milan, Italy, 28 March 1898, AHES, gaveta 27-1, carpeton 745; Southworth, El estado de Sonora, p. 47; JosS Maria Arana, Reseha de estadistica general de la ciudad de Hermosillo (Hermosillo: Imprenta de "El Heraldo," 1899), pp. 22-23h for Chinese business activities in Agua Prieta, see Manuel Sandomingo, Historia de Aqua Prieta: resumen historico del su primer cincuentenario (Agua Prieta, Sonora: Imprenta Sandomingo, 1951), pp. 217-218.
11. Willard to the Secretary of State, 18 September 1889, CDG, reel 8; Sonora, Gobernador, Memoria de la administracion pdblica del estado de Sonora, presentada a la legislatura del mismo por el Gobernador Ram6n Corral (2 vols., Guaymas: Imprenta de E. Gaxiola y Cia., 1891), I, 586; Alfonso Luis Velasco, Geografia y estadistica de la Repdblica Mexicana: Sonora (Mexico: Secretaria de Fomento, 1893), p. 200.
12. For a comparison of Willard's and Corral's figures for the population of Chinese in 1889 and 1890, see Appendix B, Table B.3. 47
Within two years a change took place in Chinese business activities in Sonora. With the increase in immi gration and the gradual movement of some from ambulatory pursuits to fixed business, more Chinese classified them selves as merchants. The 1895 census also indicated an in crease in the number of Chinese living in the mining areas.
Minas Prietas reported seventy-five men and a surprising 13 nine Chinese women. Chinese did not limit themselves to the larger cities in Sonora. Estacidn Carb6 had eleven
Chinese in a population of 479. One of them, Ignacio Bon, was well known in Sonora. His restaurant was the one critir cized by travelers for its rotten tomatoes, half-cooked meat, and moldy potatoes. Travelers advised others to save their seventy-five cents and bring a box lunch on the train trip.But the future for the Chinese was to be in mer cantile activities. Established in Sonora for more than a decade, with credit ties with merchants in San Francisco,
they began to move into the wholesale grocery and drygoods
businesses. Two Chinese business houses with considerable 1413
13. For preliminary census work sheets for 1889, see AHES, gaveta 23. 1, carpeton 616; for 1892, see AHES, gaveta 24-2, carpeton 647; for 1895, see AHES, gaveta 26-2, carpeton 715.
14. Preliminary census work sheets, AHES, gaveta 26-2, carpeton 715; El Trgfico (Guaymas), 1 September 1895; El Treifico (Nogales), 3 January 1897; David M. Pletcher, "The Development of Railroads in Sonora," Inter^American Economic Affairs, I (March, 1948), pp. 23-24. 48 economic interests in Sonora were the firms of Fon Qui and
Juan Lung Tain.^ The latter had branches in Magdalena,
Guaymas, and Hermosillo. By 1898 his company had an in vested capital of $40,000 to $50,000.^ These two merchants were to become the largest and richest Chinese businessmen in Sonora, with assets estimated at over one million dollars each.
The growth of the Chinese population prompted the national government to study immigration in 1903. An extensive census of Chinese was taken at the request of the
Immigration Commission. In this census authorities in
Sonora prepared a municipality-by-municipality breakdown of all the Chinese in the state according to the questions on the commission's questionnaire. Figure 4 indicates the
Chinese population of Sonora by district in 1903. Each of the districts of Sahuaripa, Altar, Ures, Moctezuma, and 1615
15. J. F. Darnall, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 18 May, 30 June 1898, CDN, reel 3; F. Aguilar, Secretary of Treasury, Hermosillo, to the Secretary of State, Hermosillo, 8 July 1896, AHES, gaveta 26-2, carpeton 721.
16. Josiah E. Stone, United States Vice Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 11 February 1892, CDN, reel 1; affidavit of Alejandro J. Clark, Municipal President, Magdalena, 6 February 1892, ibid.; affidavit of Ignacio Bonillas, Prefect, Magdalena, 6 February 1892, ibid.; Darnall to the Secretary of State, 31 October 1892, CDN, reel 1. 49
ARIZONA
ALTAR
MAGDALENA AR,2PE
BAJA
GUAYMAS
CALI FORNIA
LEGEND SINALOA
451 -9 0 0
30 1 -4 5 0
76 -3 0 0
I - 75 ■ Figure 4. Sonora: Chinese Population by District, 1903 50 17 Alamos reported less than sixty-five Chinese residents.
The other four districts in Sonora all had colonies of over
350 Chinese residents. The smallest of these was Magdalena, which claimed 356 Chinese. Of the 409 Chinese in the district of Hermosillo, ninety-six lived in the mining area of Minas Prietas and over 300 resided in the capital,
Hermosillo. Guaymas district reported 427, with 350 Chinese residents in the port of Guaymas. Of the 900 Chinese in
Arizpe, 800 lived in Cananea. The reports prepared for the commission indicated a Chinese population of 3,165 in TO Sonora.
The Chinese continued to engage in lines of business they entered in the 1880's and 1890's, but they solidified their hold on the retail and wholesale grocery business and shoe factories. Pedro Ulloa in his study of the economic
situation of Sonora in 1910 stated that the Chinese owned the majority of the thirty-seven shoe factories in Sonora.
A 1907 report of the United States Department of Commerce and Labor confirmed this assessment and affirmed that the17 18
17. For preliminary census work sheets, see AGG, tomo 1900, paquete 34.
18. Preliminary census work sheets, AGG, tomo 1900, paquete 34; T. Philip Terry, Terry's Mexico: Handbook for Travellers (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909), p. 71; the total of these figures was over 2,000, whereas the total noted in another section of the report was 3,165; the discrepancies were in the Arizpe district— Agua Prieta was not included in the report, and the figures for Cananea differed in the two sections of the report. 51
Chinese owned at least ten shoe factories that produced over
$100,000 in shoes each year. In addition, the Chinese owned all but one of the factories that manufactured shirts and overalls, sales of which amounted to over 450,000 pesos a year. This report also confirmed allegations that the
Chinese dominated the wholesale and retail trade of the 19 state.
In a study of the economic progress and potential of
Sonora, Federico Garcia y Alva complimented the Chinese on
some of their contributions to the state. In the general directory of the state Garcia y Alva listed Chinese busi
nesses in twenty-one Sonoran towns. Almost all were grocery merchants.^
The 1910 census included 667 Chinese in Sinaloa and 21 a total of 4,486 in Sonora. Other observers who lived or
traveled in the state reported different figures. One21 2019
19. Pedro N. Ulloa, El estado de Sonora y su situacidn econdmica al aproximarse el primer centenario de la independencia nacional (Hermosillo: n.p., 1910), p. 185; United States, Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures, Monthly Consular and Trade Reports, 318 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1907), p. 160; for an 1899 survey of the Chinese in the grocery trade, see Jos6 Maria Arana, Resena de estadisticas, pp. 22-23.
20. Federico Garcia y Alva, "Mexico y sus pro- qresos:" album-directorio del estado de Sonora (Hermosillo: Imprenta Oficial Dirigada pro Antonio B. Monteverde, 1905- 1907); for a similar study of Chinese economic interests in MazatlSn, see Directorio mercantil, industrial, agricola y minero del estado de Sinaloa (Mazatlcin: Tip. y Casa Editorial de M. Retes y Cia., 1904), pp. 29, 30, 32-37, 44, 46, 47. 21. For the Chinese population of Sonora by district in 1900 and 1910, see Appendix B, Table B.4. 52 traveler reported 2,500 Chinese in Guaymas alone, with 2,000 of these owning stores. Consul Dye reported 1,000 Chinese 22 in Nogales. While these latter figures are probably exaggerations, they do indicate that a large number of
Chinese resided in Sonora and were an important part of the business community before the Mexican Revolution. But their increase in numbers and influence in the economy of the state intensified public opposition that had been growing
steadily since 1879.
In 1879 La Libertad, a Mexico City daily, initiated a campaign against Chinese immigration even though only a
few Chinese lived there. The litany of Chinese defects presented by this paper formed the corpus of arguments of
anti-Chinese crusaders for the next fifty years. The editor
charged that the Chinese presented a danger to Mexican in
dependence and to the beauty of the Indian race. They were
a degenerate race, not the strong race of immigrants Mexico
needed. More important were the economic arguments. The
Chinese were not consumers since they spent only one quarter 22
22. T. Philip Terry, Terry's Mexico, p. 78; Dye to Doctor Griffith, 24 January 1910, Dye Papers? undated manu script autobiography of Dye, ibid.; for figures for the 1890's and 1900, see Mexico, Direccidn General de Esta- distica, Censo y divisdn territorial del estado de Sonora, verificado en 1900 (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Foment©, 1901), pp. 39, 133, 227? Mexico, Direccidn General de Estadlstica, Resumen general del censo de la Repdblica Mexicana verificado el 28 de octubre de 1900 (Mexico: Imprenta y Fototipla de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1905), p. 38; Mexico, Censo ... 1895, p. 32; Sonora, Gobernador, Memoria ... Corral, p. 586. 53 of what they earned. The rest of their earnings they took back to China with them. Equally bad was the nature of
Chinese penetration. La Libertad alleged that they competed with Mexicans and drove them out of jobs. Chinese were 23 never permanent colonists because they had no families.
Another commentator, Alberto H. Mertes of Sonora, who observed the Chinese in California and in various
Mexican states, reported similar conclusions in 1884. He
found the Chinese to be egotistical, ungrateful, lazy, and
cruel. But again, the economic arguments were paramount.
He criticized them because they sold higher than they bought,
not a very astute criticism. They,were, parasites, who
arrived with no families, only tea and shoes. After they
filled their pockets, they left with their debts unpaid.
Mertes asserted that this was not the type of colonist Mexico
needed. The debate over the desirability and type of immi
grants among the cientificos was now repeated and expanded 24 in the press. Those who favored colonization stressed the 2324
23. La Libertad (Mexico), 3 October 1879; for the development of anti-Chinese attitudes in another country with an Hispanic heritage, see Margaret Wyant Horsley, "SANGLEY: The Formation of Anti-Chinese Feeling in the Philippines— A Cultural Study of the Stereotypes of Prejudice" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1950).
24. El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 26 March 1884, 3 April 1886, 26 March 1887, 25 April 1889; for protests against the program of using the Chinese to convert Mexico's "deserts into gardens," see Francisco R. Calderdn, El porfiriato: la republics restaurada: la vida econdmica, vol. IV of Historia moderns de Mexico, Daniel Cosio Villegas, ed. (9 vols., Mexico: Editorial Hermes, 1955-1972), IV, 66. 54
need for good, white colonists, not Chinese who lived in
conditions worse than the Indians. El Monitor Republicano
thought that a population of six persons per square kilo meter was insufficient for prosperity and growth. Mexico
had to have workers, but from a civilized country. Mexico
had enough uneducated.citizens in her Indian population and
Chinese could only add to this uneducated mass. The draw- 25 backs of immigration far outweighed Chinese productivity.
This paper's comments on the immigration of gypsies.to.
MazatlSn best epitomized the feeling of the opponents of
Chinese immigration. In a caustic commentary the paper
reported that the people of MazatlSn "now lacked only Mormons
and Negroes to consider themselves happy, since they already
had Chinese and Gypsies." Increasingly, arguments against
Chinese immigration stressed two main threats. Most evident
at first, and which colored all further opposition, were
racial and cultural antagonisms. Opponents argued that the
Chinese spread diseases, such as tracoma and beri-beri,
because dozens of the "celestials" lived in the same small
room, built for only four to five people. Worse than these
debilities, they charged that immigrants brought other 2625
25. El Colono (Mexico), 10 November 1895; La Convencidn Radical Obrera (Mexico), 13 September 1896; El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 22, 23 September 1896.
26. El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 5 September 1890. 55 vices, such as gambling, drinking, and smoking opium. 27
Others claimed that Chinese were also characterized by
generic indolence, egotism, and cruelty. The press alleged
that the strange "sons of Confucius" committed all types of
crimes and were a very "pernicious element." But, the
newspapers concluded, what could one expect from people who
wrote from right to left, began books at the end, read from
bottom to top and right to left, and ate their dessert first 28 and their soup last? But racial slurs comprised only a
part of the cultural antagonism evident in Sonora. Sonorans
decried the marriage of Chinese and Mexicans. Critics
reported hundreds of these marriages and numerous non-marital
unions which they alleged, produced a weak, half-breed 29 caste.
Rafael Agraz y Rojas of Hermosillo summed up his
opinion on the Chinese presence in 1905. He believed that
the framers of the 1857 Constitution realized the need for
immigration, but in their zeal to attract it they made a
grievous error. They allowed any breathing human to enter. 282927
27. Moists GonzSlez Navarro, El porfiriato: la vida social, pp. 168-169; El Universal (Mexico), 5 August 1896; El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 6 August 1896.
28. El Imparcial (Guaymas), 13, 20, 23 January, 1, 8,February, 29 March, 18 April 1893; J. Baranda, Secretary of Justice, to Governor, 21 August 1897, AHES, gaveta 26-5, carpeton 740; La ConvenciGn Radical Obrera (Mexico), 20 December 1896.
29. La Convenci6n Radical Obrera (Mexico), 20 December 1896; El Universal (Mexico), 5 August 1896; Ching- ch'ao Wu, "Chinese Immigration," p. 557. 56 without regard for physical and mental disabilities and social misfits. This needed to be corrected as the influx of germ-ridden Chinese showed. Even the healthy ones were unacceptable because they were a weaker race and would not mix well with the Mexicans. They remained aloof and brought no women. Thus Agraz y Rojas proposed the restriction.of
Chinese immigration. He suggested that all colonists ad mitted must bring their wives, He thought of a married colonist as a more permanent resident. Thus he noted the need to reform the constitution to permit Asian immigration by families only. He reinforced his contention with a story about the Chinese New Years Dance in Hermosillo. A fright ening spectre was the presence at the dance of all the young
"flowers” of Hermosillo society. He thought it sad that young Mexican girls went to the dance without Mexican boys.
He deplored the threat this completely masculine Chinese society p o s e d . ,
Only rarely did young Chinese women arrive in
Sonora. One such episode in 1907 aroused much interest, because the small group of Chinese girls who arrived in
Guaymas were reputed to be models of Chinese beauty. But with few Chinese women in the north, Chinese continued to marry Mexican women, especially in Sinaloa and Sonora. The 30
30. La EvoluciOn (Hermosillo), 17 February 1905; for the celebration of the Chinese New Year in Mexico, see El Centinela (Hermosillo), 27 January 1906. 57 press in Mexico City bemoaned the advances made by Chinese
in relationship to Mexican women. The 11 opium-smoking"
Chinese laundrymen were the culprits.31 343233 El Diablito Rojo
of Mexico City feared the inroads of the Chinese, who with
"nice pumpkin colored faces, and seductive diagonal glance
and a skullike nose captivated the hearts of many ignorant, 3 2 foolish Mexican girls." The Mexicans received clean white
laundry and the Chinese got the Mexican women workers in the
laundries. The product of these unions moved the editor to
thoughts of genocide to remove the threat they posed to 33 the Mexican race.
For most Sonorans it was the economic threat and
pressure of the Chinese that caused the greatest concern.
The Chinese took over all types of businesses and forced
natives out of work. Of importance was their alleged pro
pensity to employ no Mexicans at all in their businesses
from laundries to shoe factories.3^ Among the charges was
the contention that the Chinese forced native women out of
their way of life by washing clothes, ironing, and cooking
31. El Pais (Mexico), 10 February 1907; Diario del Pacifico (MazatlSn), 2 October 1910.
32. El Diablito Rojo (Mexico), 21 September 1908.
33. Ibid., 22 March 1909.
34. El,Centinela (Hermosillo), 9 June 1906; for Tung, Chung, Lung's record of employing Mexicans, see Fong Hong to Governor, 21 August 1902, AGG, tomo 1720, paquete 2, expediente 3. 58 at low wages. Men complained that Chinese preferred woman's work to hard work on the land. Women charged that all that was left for them was the occupation as wetnurses, since the
Chinese dominated all else. As the Chinese moved into the shoe and grocery businesses, complaints increased. From
Alamos came complaints that their shoe business destroyed all competition and reduced local workers to poverty, unable 35 to support their families.
After the 1899 treaty anti-Chinese campaigns pro liferated. The center of the campaign was Sonora, which by
1903 had over 3,000 Chinese residents. A virulent press campaign attacked the Chinese using the same charges as the campaign of the previous twenty years.One of the solu tions proposed to end the Chinese problem was the repatria tion of Mexicans in the United States. Another solution was the formation of anti-Chinese leagues. In June, 1910, the directors of El Correo de Sonora and El Tr&fico, both
Guaymas newspapers, formed a league to combat Chinese immi gration. Entitled the United Press of Guaymas, the organ ization had a two-point program. First, it decided to use 3536
35. La Convencidn Radical Obrera (Mexico), 20 December 1896; El Universal (Mexico), 5 August 1896; Ching- ca'ao Wu, "Chinese Immigration," p. 557.
36. Yo Chinolla, merchant, Naco, to Governor, 9 May 1905, AGG, tomo 1974, paquete 4, expediente 8; A. Cubillas, Secretary of Government, to Yo Chinolla, 17 May 1905, ibid.; Diario del Pacifico (MazatlSn), 24 June, 18 August 1910; El Imparcial (Mexico), 9 August 1900, 6 August 1907; El Pals (Mexico), 8 August 1900. 59 all legal means to combat Chinese immigration. Second, the league sent a note to the national congress protesting " 37 ' against the treaty with China.
Sonorans also urged the federal government to create
Chinese inspectors in all large cities to watch Chinese businesses and homes. They wanted to insure cleanliness and prevent disease. They also decried the process by which
Chinese became Mexican citizens. Sonorans saw these people as pseudo-Mexicans and parasites who replaced them in business, especially when armed with their new rights as 3 8 Mexicans. When legal restrictions failed, other methods . were employed to. reduce the economic threat.
The area in which the Chinese dealt daily with the
Mexican local and state authorities was.in the matter of business taxes. Sonoran law required that accurate books be kept by all businesses so assessors could accurately deter mine annual sales for tax purposes. The state obtained substantial revenue from the graduated taxes on annual sales.
Violations of the laws by the failure to record sales, falsification of books, and failure to possess account books 3738
37. La Convencidn Radical Obrera (Mexico), 9 June 1901; El Pais (Mexico), 2 March 1907.
38. La Convencidn Radical Obrera (Mexico), 16 June, 4 August 1901; El Centinela (Hermosillo), 15 July 2 September 1905, 17 February 1906; El Imparcial (Mexico), 21 December 1905; El Pals (Mexico), 3 November 1907; for statistics on naturalization of Chinese in Mexico before the 1910 revolu tion, see Mexico, Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, I-XXXI (1896-1910), passim. 60 resulted in fines. The state also levied fines for not
retaining invoices for sales made in Chinese shops. In many
cases the Chinese defended their failure to comply with the
law by saying the problem arose because of their lack of
knowledge of the customs and language of the country. They
felt the diversity of the business laws hurt them more than 3 9 all other foreigners.
Again and again treasury agents fined the Chinese
for failure to keep bills of sale for merchandise. A second
long series of fines stemmed from deliberately hiding the
sales from treasury agents to avoid payment of taxes. Al
most all the merchants fined were dealers in groceries or 40 drygoods. It was not unusual for firms to be fined
several times for violations of the laws on sales. The
repetition of the same charges indicated that the Chinese,
like their Mexican counterparts, did not always comply
with the laws, and in some cases deliberately tried to avoid 3940
39. For protestations by the Chinese that they were ignorant of the laws and the language, therefore their fines should be reduced, see Tom Yong Sui, merchant, Arizpe, to Treasurer, Hermosillo, 11 September 1902, AGG, tomo 1720, paquete 8, secci6n 4, expediente 7; Wong Assim, merchant, Hermosillo, to Governor, 15 April 1902, ibid., expediente 29; Chon Qui, merchant, Hermosillo, to Governor, 12 October 1911, AGG, tomo 2685, paquete 3, seccidn 5, expediente 6; 31 July 1906, AGG, tomo 2106, paquete 1, expediente 20; although many of the Chinese knew no Spanish, almost all were literate as indicated in the periodic state censuses.
40. For the exchange of correspondence concerning these fines, see AGG, tomo 2216, paquete 2, expediente 6; AGG, tomo 2685, paquete 3, seccidn 6, expediente 1. 61 taxes, especially in large sales. But the Chinese disagreed with this contention. They complained to local and state officials that treasury agents harassed them.^ But Sonoran authorities disputed contentions of harassment. They pointed out several instances when fines were returned because they 4 2 were levied illegally. The state government also aided
Chinese in improving their businesses. In 1902, Fong Hong of Tung, Chung, Lung, the shoe company of Guaymas, requested an exemption from his treasury fees for a few years. He wanted to invest his funds in new electric machinery to improve his shoe factory. He asked for the ordinary exemp tions the state gave to new industries. The state granted the concession.^
The success of Chinese businessmen, their large sales and inventories, and their alleged accumulation of wealth irritated Sonorans. But Mexicans also lamented the42 4341
41. Luis Quon Yui Sen, merchant, Magdalena, to Secretary of Government, 12 June 1908, AGG, tomo 2336, paquete 1, expediente 5; Felipe Lee, merchant, Camoa, to Cubillas, 3 September 1908, AGG, tomo 2336, paquete 2, expediente 1.
42. Treasurer to Governor, September 1909, AGG, tomo 2440, paquete 1, expediente 22; Fung Chong, agri culturist, Magdalena, to Governor, 10 September 1909, ibid.; Governor to Fung Chong, 16 October 1909, ibid.; for other instances when fines were returned, see AGG, tomo 2216, paquete 2.
43. Fong Hong to Governor, 21 August 1902, AGG, tomo 1720, paquete 2, expediente 3; Governor to Fong Hong, 23 August 1902, ibid. 62 constant tendency of the Chinese to undersell the native
store owner. Criticisms by local officials and businessmen comprised the most vocal opposition in addition to press 44 attacks. But not everyone criticized them. Some thought
they were not such bad fellows after all. One inmate in the
Arizpe jail complained that he did not "object to the
Chinaman but I do object to being locked up with a crazy
Mexican.
When all other opposition failed, Sonorans resorted 46 to violence. Occasionally prosperous Chinese shopkeepers
were subject to attack as highwaymen and Yaquis preyed on
them throughout the state.^ Despite attacks, they faced
opposition without any physical resistance. But they did
constantly ask for protection and criticized local officials 47454644
44. Jestis V. Cruz, Prefect, Altar, to Cubillas, 29 February 1908, AGG, tomo 2336, paquete 9, expediente 2.
45. Fred Beckwith, inmate, town jail, Arizpe, to Frank W. Roberts, United States Consul, Nogales, n.d., in Roberts to the Secretary of State, 16 May 1895, CDN, reel 2; Roberts to the Secretary of State, 25 March 1895, ibid.
46. For earlier attacks, see La Estrella de Occidente (Hermosillo), 20 June, 10 October 1884; El Impar- cial (Guaymas), 6 February 1893, 10 October 1894; for records of deaths of other Chinese by violent means, see AHES, gaveta 35-2, carpeton 1032, carpeton 1034.
47. For Chinese protests of harassment, see Sam King, merchant, Fronteras, to Governor, 29 June 1905, AGG, tomo 2072, paquete 5, expediente 8; Francisco L. Yuen, merchant, Cananea, to Governor, AGG, tomo 2320, paquete 2, expediente 67; Yuen also petitioned for a permit to carry a Winchester for a trip to Chihuahua to protect himself from bandits. 63 for alleged unwarranted interference with their businesses 4 8 and failure to apprehend criminals. Press criticism and violence caused them grave concern, as it did for other foreigners when aimed in their direction. But only,the
Chinese lived in constant fear of attacks. In November,
1903, fire struck the commercial house of Yuen Chong in
Guaymas. The owners so feared the constant threat of
Mexicans robbing their stores that they locked the store and let it burn to the ground. They feared the firemen would 4 9 rob the store instead of fighting the fire.
The most important outbread of violence in Sonora prior to the Revolution, was the Cananea strike of June,
1906. Foreign capital, especially from the United States
entrepreneurs, dominated the Sonoran economy during the
Porfiriato. Investments were made in railroad construction,
cattle-raising, irrigation projects, and mining. With the
completion of the Guaymas to Nogales section of the rail
road, investment was facilitated, especially with feeder 4849
48. Francisco Chon Lay and Fong Hay, merchants, Cananea, to Governor, 24 December 1904, AGG, tomo 1974, paquete 8, expediente 20; I. Macmarrus, Municipal President, Cananea, to Secretary of State, Hermosillo, 16 January 1905, ibid.
49. A. E. Garcia, Prefect, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, Hermosillo, 20 November 1903, AGG, tomo 1869, paquete 1, expediente 2; for violence against Chinese, see Chinese of Santa Cruz to Governor, 31 October 1903, AGG, tomo 1869, paquete 1, seccidn 3, expediente 6; Arturo Fong Chong, merchant, Cananea, to Governor, 8 October 1904, AGG, tomo 2139, paquete 1, expediente 4. 64 lines to more isolated mining districts. In 1905 United
States investment in Sonora was estimated at over seventy- five million dollars divided among over 250 firms.With an increase in the world demand for copper in the 1890's,
Sonoran copper mines became profitable, especially with the government's relinquishment of the Hispanic tradition of national ownership of subsoil rights. The 1884 mining code eliminated these old traditions.
Foremost among the mining magnates in Sonora was
Colonel William Greene, whose Consolidated Copper Company dominated Cananea. Three-quarters of his 5,000 workers were
Mexicans, whose wages were less than a third of their United
States counterparts. These wages were high by Mexican
standards, thus their plight was not as severe as for
laborers throughout the country.But constant agitation
against the disparity between native and foreign wages was
common in Cananea. Constant anti-Diaz agitation by the
Mexican Liberal Party (PLM), their newspaper, Regneracidn,
and leading spokesman, Ricardo Flores Mag6n, also affected
conditions in Cananea. Workers subscribed to the labor 5150
50. Louis Hostetter, United States Consul, Hermosillo, to the Secretary of State, 1 November, 18 December 1905, in United States, Department of State, Despatches from United States Consuls in Hermosillo, Mexico, 1905-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Micro copy 293 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1963.
51. Wages for United States employees averaged five dollars a day; Mexicans received $1.50 to $1.75 a day. 65 orientation of the PLM just as an organized labor movement emerged in this mining district. The Uni6n Liberal Humani- dad struck on 1 June 1906 after a pay increase was granted to United States workers, but not to Mexicans. The Union demanded $2.50 a day, an eight-hour day, and the removal of some hated foremen. But beyond these immediate demands lay other allegations. Strikers demanded more privileges for
Mexicans in the face of what they alleged was government favoritism of foreigners at their expense. They charged that .they were treated like the lowest dregs of Mexican 52 society, Negroes and Chinese.
Violence occurred during the course of the strike.
Among the foreigners whose property was destroyed were two
Chinese who claimed they were unable to stay in business 53 because of the depredations. The strike was an important watershed in the Porfiriato. It was an attack on the Diaz
regime, an early manifestation of xenophobia, and the
fledgling beginnings of nativist sentiment in Sonora. The 5253
52. Albert Brickwood, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 23 June 1906, CDN, reel 4.
53. For exchanges of correspondence on the 1906 Cananea strike, see AGG, tomo 2139, paquete 1; for the cor respondence on a similiar strike in 1908 in Cananea, see AGG, tomo 2412, paquete 1; for the Chinese claims and the governor's response see Quong Sang Lung and Fong Fo Qui, merchants, Cananea, to Governor, 26 June 1906, AGG, tomo 2139, paquete 1, expediente 3; Governor to Quong Sang Lung and Fong Fo Qui, July 1906, ibid.; for the claims of Monnin Brothers, Swiss merchants, Cananea, see AGG, tomo 2139, paquete 1, expediente 1; for the claims of Juan Pons, French merchant, Cananea, see AGG, tomo 2139, paquete 1, expediente 2. 66 mineworkers were now even more receptive to PLM ideas. On
1 July 1906, the PLM published its Program. In addition to political, social, and economic reforms, the manifesto con
tained references to foreigners. The PLM deplored the preference given to foreigners over Mexicans and suggested
that foreigners who obtained real estate thus lost their
foreign citizenship and became Mexicans. In regard to the
Chinese, the PLM demanded the prohibition of their immigra
tion in order to protect the native worker. The justifica
tion was that these aliens worked at the lowest wage level
and were thus an obstacle to the prosperity of native
laborers.54
Mineworkers were not the only Sonorans receptive to
anti-Diaz propaganda before 1910. An emerging group of
middle class businessmen also found comfort in attacks on
the regime. Commercial interests in Nogales, Hermosillo,
Guaymas, and other growing cities found themselves the
beneficiaries of Porfirian economic development. But they
were excluded from the entrenched political leadership of
Diaz' supporters in the state. Ramdn Corral, Luis Torres,
and Rafael IzSbal alternated as governor and dominated the
54. For the Manifesto and Program of the PLM, see Manuel GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos y otros documentos (Mexico: Fondo de Culture Econdmica,- 1954) , pp. 3-29. 67 state from the late 1870's to 1910.^ Frustrated by political isolation and foreign competition, these business men were receptive to proposals for change, A bitter epi gram circulated in Sonora before the Madero Revolution which manifested the position of foreigners and the bitterness of the Mexicans toward them because of their success and busi ness acumen: "The Americans do all the big business, the
Chinese do all the little business and we Mexicans hold office and shout VIVA!"
In the midst of rising opposition to his regime from miners and businessmen in Sonora, Diaz announced in 1908 57 that he would not seek reelection. This stimulated polit
ical activity, but when Diaz reneged on his promise, opposi
tion immediately surfaced. In Sonora opposition coalesced
around native son Ram6n Corral's campaign for reelection as
Vice President. Gradually the dissidents supported the
presidential candidacy of Francisco I. Madero, wealthy5755 56
55. For a study of the creation of this regime, see Delmar Leon Beene, "Sonora in the Age of Ram6n Corral, 1875- 1900" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 1972), pp. 32-59.
56. Undated manuscript autobiography of Dye, Dye Papers.
57. James Creelman, "Interview with Porfirio Diaz," Pearson's Magazine, XIX (March, 1908), pp. 241-277). 68 hacendado of Coahuila. Under the slogan "Effective Suffrage
— No Reelection," Madero gained support.
He was aided in his campaign by a deterioration in the nation's economic growth after a Wall Street crash in
1907, subsequent economic crises in Mexico, and a poor harvest year in 1909. But the switch to support for Madero had deeper roots than economic changes. He preached strict adherence to the constitution, legalism, and a non-violent approach. These appealed to the middle class businessman.
Despite his tour of the country and the backing of the dissidents, Madero, in jail on the day of the voting, "lost"
the election. Hounded by Diaz, imprisoned, and then in
self-imposed exile in the United States, he reluctantly decided to revolt. He proclaimed the Plan of San Luis
Potosi, dated 5 October 1910, which declared open rebellion
against Diaz to begin on 20 November.58 59 On that date the
Mexican Revolution began.
Although both the national and Sonoran governments
espoused economic development through foreign investment,
individuals in the private sector resented some of the
ramifications of this policy. Mexico and Sonora did undergo
58. For Madero* s ideas, see Francisco I. Madero, La sucesi6n presidencial en 1910 (San Pedro, Coahuila: n.p., 1908).
59. For the Plan of San Luis Potosi, see GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos, pp. 33-46. 69 rapid economic development in which these individuals shared. But progress brought with it some disadvantages.
Foreigners dominated in the economy with concessions from
Diaz and the Corral-Torres-IzSbal clique. Foreign investors
received approximately sixty-five per cent of the nation's
export earnings in 1910. Money flowed through the latter's
hands back to foreign lands in the form of profit remit
tances, service on the foreign debt, charges and fees, and
import payments. Despite her growth, Mexico was caught in
a cycle in which foreigners and Mexicans prospered, but
deprived Mexico of control over her own economy. With pay
ments to foreigners, Mexicans had little to reinvest in
their own economy. Thus, after 1900 cientlficos attempted
to regulate foreign control.Under Finance Minister Jos§
Ives Limantour, the government purchased railroads, attempted
to return to the Hispanic idea of government control of sub
soil rights, and played European nations against the United , States in their bids for concessions. All these measures
presaged revolutionary programs after 1910.
Thus, by 1910 opposition to Diaz had emerged in
Sonora. Middle class businessmen were tired of foreign
privileges and frustrated in their political aspirations.
Lower class mine workers desired better conditions and 60
60. For an analysis of Mexico's financial problems in 1910, see G. Butler Sherwell, Mexico's Capacity to Pay: A General Analysis of the Present Economic Situation (Washington: n.p., 1929), pp. 7-24. 70 resented the position of foreigners. As the opposition to
Diaz and the Sonoran elite increased, hostility to United
States and Chinese interests played an important part.
On the eve of the Mexican Revolution anti-Chinese activity increased. A 1910 memorial from Sonoran citizens to Vice President Ramdn Corral noted an alarming increase in the number of Chinese in Sonora. The memorial asked for the restriction of their immigration into the state.^ Agita tion and violent attacks against them increased to the point where they complained to the Chinese Charge d 1Affairs.
Eventually the Secretary of Foreign Relations instructed the governor of Sonora to insure protection for the large S 2 Chinese colony in the state.
Press opposition, United States vigilance, new sanitary and immigration regulations, personal attacks and abuse, enforcement of business taxes, and general public opposition all failed to stem the tide of Chinese immigra tion. And despite all these forces, they prospered, and advanced from laborers to businessmen in the favorable climate of the Porfiriato. Chinese entered as an economic necessity in a country in dire need of laborers for economic development. The transformation of these immigrant-laborers 6162
61. Memorial, citizens of Sonora, n.p., to Ramdn Corral, 16 March 1910, AGG, tomo 2556, paquete 18.
62. Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to Governor, Hermosillo, 1 July 1910, AGG, tomo 2605, paquete 10, expediente 7. 71 to entrepreneurs who competed with domestic labor and businessmen was a totally unexpected and undesirable meta morphosis. Thus they became an economic liability in the eyes of domestic labor and middle class businessmen. But
Chinese immigration continued, although the government attempted to regulate its direction and extent. With the outbreak of the Revolution, Mexicans more frequently manifested their bitterness over the presence and success of go the Chinese. Outbreaks of violence became more frequent and more ghastly. Financial exactions increased, especially in Sonora. Discriminatory legislation also appeared.
Finally, a campaign that contemplated the cessation of
Chinese immigration and the eventual expulsion of the
Chinese from the country became a mainstay of Sonoran polit ical life. But before Sonora again took center stage in the campaigns against the Chinese, the Revolution began and disaster befell the large Chinese colonly in Torredn,
Coahuila. 63
63. For a study of anti-foreign feeling against United States, Chinese, Spanish, and Guatemalan minorities in Mexico in the Revolution, see Moists Gonzdlez Navarro, "Xenofobia y xenofilia en la Revolucidn Mexicana," Historia Mexicana, XVIII (April-June, 1969), pp. 569-614. CHAPTER 4
CHINESE IN SONORA, 1911-1916
In November, 1910, the Mexican Revolution began with the uprising of Francisco Madero. This attack on the regime of Porfirio Diaz would drive him from power within a year and initiate an internal power struggle in Mexico in which northerners, especially Sonorans, would play an important i role. Military campaigns in the north affected the busi
nesses and lives of the Chinese as revolutionary armies
fought the federal forces and among themselves. Although
initial rebel campaigns were failures, Madero's revolution
spurred rebels to action in several states. In Chihuahua
Abraham Gonzalez, Pascual Orozco, and Francisco Villa
gradually wrested control of large portions of that state
from the federals. The capture of Ciudad Jtiarez on 10 May
secured Chihuahua for Madero. And in the south, Emiliano
Zapata took Cuernavaca and Cuautla in Morelos. By May,
1911, rebels were also successful in Durango as the Diaz
regime neared collapse.1
1. For an analysis of characteristics of northerners, see Barry Carr, "Las peculiaridades del norte mexicano, 1880-1927: ensayo de interpretacidn," Historia Mexicana XXII (January-March, 1973), pp. 320-346).
72 73
As the rebels pressed southward toward Mexico City, one obstacle impeded their control of the transportation network in the north. Torredn remained in federal hands.
The rebels attacked the city, which resulted in disastrous consequences for the Chinese. One of the most brutal and
savage acts perpetrated against the Chinese during the
Revolution occurred at Torredn in May, 1911. Fresh from victories over the federal forces in Durango, the Maderistas under Emilio Madero attacked Torredn, a strategic railroad
junction in southern Coahuila. After three days of fighting,
the Maderistas entered the city on 15 May. When the federal
troops had abandoned the city, the rebels proceeded to
slaughter its Chinese colony. After ten hours of savagery 2 and barbarity, 303 Chinese and five Japanese were killed.
The firm of Loebbus Wilfley and Arthur Bassett stated that
the incident was "an unprovoked massacre . . . conceived in
2. For accounts of the massacre by eyewitnesses, see Tulitas Jamieson, Tulitas of Torredn; Reminiscences of Life in Mexico (El Paso: Texas Western Press, 1969), pp. 118-122; C. A. Heberlein, United States mining engineer, Torredn, to Philip Hanna, United States Consul General, Monterrey, 23 May 1911, in Hanna to the Secretary of State, 25 May 1911, Decimal File 812.00/2026, in United States, Department of State, Records of the Department of State Relating to Internal Affairs of Mexico, 1910-1929, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 274 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1959), reel 13 (here after cited as RDS with appropriate classification numbers); George C. Carothers, United States Consul, Torredn, to Charles M. Freeman, United States Consul, Durango, 7 June 1911, in Freeman to the Secretary of State, 10 June 1911, Decimal File 312.93/7, in National Archives, Records of the Department of State, 1910-1939, Washington (hereafter cited as NA with appropriate classification numbers). 74 malice and race hatred,” and thus violated Chinese guaran- 3 tees under the 1899 treaty. A second team of investigators, who represented both Mexico and China, researched the question of responsibility and an allegation that the
Chinese fired on the Maderistas. Arthur Bassett and Owang
King, who represented China, and Antonio Ramos Pedrueza, who represented Mexico, investigated the scene of the massacre and interviewed witnesses. They concerned themselves only with these latter charges as the basis for ascertaining responsibility. The three men concluded
that the contention that the Chinese offered resistance is a pure fabrication, invented by the officers of the revolutionary army for the sole purpose of escaping the punishment which the commission of such a heinous crime would naturally entail upon them.^
With these findings in mind, Wilfley and Bassett submitted a third report that substantiated Chinese claims for an indemnity for the 303 Chinese killed in the massacre at Torredn. China submitted claims for.these dead in 34
3. Wilfley and Bassett, firm, Memorandum on the Law and the Facts in the Matter of the Claim of China against Mexico for Losses of Life and Property Suffered by Chinese Subjects at Torredn on May 13, 14, and 15, 1911 (Mexico:. American Book and Printing Co., 1911), pp. 7-8.
4. Owang King and Arthur Bassett, Report of Messrs, Owang King and Arthur Bassett, Representatives of His Excellency, Minister Chang Yin Tang in an investigation Made in Conjunction with Licenciado Antonio Ramos Pedrueza, Representative of His Excellency, Francisco L. de la Barra, President of Mexico, of the Facts Relating to the Massacre of Chinese Subjects at Torredn on the 15th of May, 1911 (Mexico: American Book and Printing Co., 1911), pp. 13-14 75 addition to 271 other claims that totaled $1,137,227.04.'*
After six months of haggling over the indemnity, Mexico agreed to pay China 3,100,000 pesos in addition to an apology for the massacre. China accepted the apology and the promise of an indemnity. ** But collecting the indemnity . was an entirely different matter as Mexico never paid China 7 for the massacre at Torredn.
The motivation behind the massacre aroused fear and indignation among the Chinese of Mexico, especially in
Sonora. The reports of the investigating teams stressed racial prejudice, but the economic position of the Chinese in Torredn was also an important cause of the movement
5. Wilfley and Bassett, firm,' Memorandum Showing Extent of Destruction of Life and Property of Chinese Sub jects During the Recent Revolution in Mexico and Mexico's Responsibility Therefore, Together with Citations of Auth orities (Mexico: American Book and Printing Co., 1911), p. 3.
6. For the texts of the protocols on the indemnity, see "Convention between the Governments of Mexico and China for the Payment of an Indemnity," Supplement to the American Journal of International Law, VIII (January, 1914), pp. 147- 150; Memoria: hechos relatives a la matanza de chinos en Torredn y el protocol de 16 diciembre de 1911, prometiendo indemnizacidn por la matanza (n.p.: n.p., n.d.), pp. 6-7.
7. Ch'ang-fu Li reported in 1929 that Mexico had not yet paid the indemnity, Ch'ang-fu Li, Hua ch'iao, p. 144; for Mexico's attempts to float silver bonds to pay the indemnity, see Montgomery Schuyler, United States Charg§, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 12 January 1912, NA 312.93/25; Nelson O'Shaughnessy, United States Charge, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 3 December 1913, RDS 812.51/98, reel 168; Paul Kosidowski, Dutch Ambassador-, Mexico, to Foreign Office, 22 December 1912, 19 January 1913, in The Netherlands, Algemeen Rijsarchief, Archief Gerent- schep, Washington, 1910-1940 (hereafter cited as AR with appropriate classifications); Kosidowski to Dr. J. Loudon, 4 June 1913, ibid. 76 Q against them. The Mexicans resented the existence of a fairly large and very prosperous Chinese colony in their
q midst. Anti-Chinese speeches incited the crowd before the attack on Torredn and observers noted an intense feeling against all foreigners, especially Chinese. But only they suffered wide scale death and destruction. They were easily visible targets because of their color and facial features.
They also provided a safe target since they did not resist and their government was too weak to aid them. In addition to the virtual destruction of Chinese business in Torredn, the massacre terrorized them throughout Mexico and forced many to emigrate. Chinese immigration declined immediately after the massacre, but resumed again within two months.
8. For Chinese economic activities and wealth in Torredn, see Jung-pang Lo, editor and translator, K*ang Yu-wei: A Biography and a Symposium, The Association for Asian Studies: Monographs and Papers, XXIII (Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1967) , pp. 195, 202-208, 269; Hsien-tzti Wu, Chung kuo min chu hsien-cheng tang tang shih ("A History of the Chinese Democratic Constitution Party") (San Francisco: n.p., 1952), pp. 79-86; Wen-chiang Ting, Liang jdn-kung hsien-sheng nien-p'u ch'ang-pien ch'u-kao ("First Draft of an Unabridged Chronological Biography of Liang Ch'i-ch'ao") (3 vols in 1, Taipei: n.p., 1958), I, 251, II, 266-267, 327-328.
9. Carothers to Freeman, 7 June 1911, NA 312.93/7; Frederick C. Turner, The Dynamic of Mexican Nationalism (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1968), p. 204; Henry Baerlein, Mexico, the Land of Unrest, Being Chiefly an Account of What Produced the Outbreak in 1910, Together with- the Story of the Revolutions Down to This Day (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, n.d.), p. 261.
10. Loebbus Wilfley, legal counsel for China, Mexico, to President William H. Taft, 11 July 1911, NA 312,93/9; El Heraldo de Occidente (MazatlSn), 18 March 1912; El Imparcial 77 The capture of TorreSn by the Maderistas opened the railroad route to the south. Combined with the victories in
Morelos and Chihuahua, these successes in Durango and southern Coahuila forced Diaz to resign. He left office on
25 May 1911 and Francisco Le6n de la Barra succeeded him as provisional president until November, 1911. In November
Madero became president, a position he would hold until his death in February, 1913.
On the northwest coast of Mexico the situation for the Chinese was one of turmoil, especially after the Torredn massacre. When the revolution began, over 5,000 Chinese lived in Sinaloa and Sonora. Although Sinaloa had only
fifteen per cent of them, most of the Chinese residents of
Sonora arrived through the port of MazatlSn, thus Sinaloa was well aware of their impact.
In September, 1911, the Union of Retail Merchants of
Mazatlcln attacked the Chinese colony for unfair business
practices. No outbreak of violence occurred until September
1 when a mob inspired by the Union stoned some Chinese in
the streets. The mob resisted the attempts of the local
prefect to arrest them, and in turn threw the prefect in
(Mexico), 28 May, 15 December 1912; for immigration and emigration statistics of Chinese in 1911 and 1912, see Appendix A, Table A.4; for a list of the remnants of Chinese businesses in Torredn in 1913, see International Chinese Business Directory of the World for the Year 1913 (San Francisco: International Chinese Business Directory Co., Inc., 1913), pp. 1572-1573. 78 jail. United States Consul William E. Alger feared anarchy and the massacre of Chinese citizens. The State Department authorized him to insure protection of the lives and prop erty of the imperiled Chinese by granting them temporary _ 11 refuge.
In October, 1911, the Union staged another demon stration against the Chinese in MazatlSn, which was so massive the authorities did not interfere. The local prefect fled to CuliacSn. E.. Stait-Gardner, British Vice
Consul in Mazatldn hoped for troops from the state capital to restore order. On 6 November he reported the circulation of a flyer that threatened an attack on the Chinese, but troops arrived and restored order, and MazatlSn returned to 12 normalcy. Under constant pressure from the Chinese, Alger petitioned the State Department to grant the Chinese tempo- rary refuge in San Francisco or San Diego if they were
compelled to leave Mexico. The Department granted the
request and sent the USS Buford to take the Chinese out of
Mazatldn as an act of humanity. As the threat subsided, the 1211
11. El Imparcial (Mexico), 13 September 1911; William E. Alger, United States Consul, Mazatldn, to the Secretary of State, 21 October 1911, RDS 812.00/2481, reel 15; Wilbur J. Carr, Department of State, to Alger, 14 November 1911, ibid.
12. E. Stait-Gardner, British Consul, Mazatldn, to Foreign Office, 2, 6 November 1911, Great Britain, Public Record Office, Foreign Office, FO/204/392 (hereafter cited as FO with appropriate classification numbers). 79
Chinese extended their thanks for the aid, but would not 13 avail themselves of the Buford except as a last resort.
Madero may have won the presidency, but pockets of resistance to his policies occupied his attention as presi dent. Zapata continued his struggle for agrarian reform in
Morelos. Orozco rebelled in the north. Other isolated movements also took place. But a rift between Madero and his General Victoriano Huerta drove the latter into an alliance with another rebel, Diaz’ nephew,.F61ix Diaz.
This conspiracy, with the tacit approval of the United
States Ambassador, Henry Lane Wilson, precipitated the fall
of Madero in February, 1913.
The overthrow and death of.Madero installed Huerta
in the presidency and introduced more turmoil in Mexico. In
March both the Sonora and Coahuila state legislatures re
fused recognition of Huerta.^ On 26 March Governor
Venustiano Carranza of Coahuila proclaimed the Plan of 1413
13. Heraldo de Occidente (MazatlSn), 27 January 1912; Alger to the Secretary of State, 17 March 1912, RDS 812.00/3259, reel 16; 17 March 1912, NA .312.93/19; Alger to the Secretary of State, 14 April 1912, RDS 812.00/3754, reel 17; Dye to the Secretary of State, 2 May 1912, NA 151.07/7; Huntington Wilson, Secretary of State, to Dye, 4 May 1912, NA 151.07/7; Alger to the Secretary of State, 5 May 1912, NA 312.93/22.
14. For the declarations of these legislatures, see GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos, pp. 134-136; for the coup in Sonora, see Sonora, Gobernador, Informe del qobernador de Sonora sobre el golpe de estado de febrero de 1913 y hechos posteriores (Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno de Sonora, 1914). 80
Guadalupe, which initiated a revolt against the Huerta regime.^ For the Chinese in MazatlSn conditions remained the same until the United States took punitive action against Huerta by occupying Veracruz. With this occupation came the closing of its consulates in April, 1914. The
Chinese then requested the protection of H. Claisse, the
French Consular Agent in MazatlSn. In June, 1914, the
French Ambassador in Washington relayed the French Foreign
Minister's approval of this request in those areas where ho
Chinese official resided.
With the reopening of the United States consulate in
MazatlSn, the Chinese again looked to Alger for aid. In
March, 1915, the Chinese colony numbered over 700, with the accretion of emigres from other parts of northern Mexico.
They were in a perilous situation. Anti-Chinese crusaders began an attempt to segregate the Chinese in barrios on the periphery of the city. Simultaneously a virulent press
campaign incited the populace to the point where all 1615
15. For the Plan of Guadalupe, see GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos, pp. 137-144.
16. Alger to the Secretary of State, 29 March 1915, NA 312.93/106; Ayquesparsse to Minister of Foreign Affairs, 1 June 1914, in France, Archives du Ministers des Affaires fitrangeres, "Colonie franqaise et Strangers au Mexique” (1908-1918); Gasgory to French Ambassador, Washington, 6 June 1914, ibid; J. Jusserand, French Ambassador, Washington, to Foreign Minister, Paris, 7 June 1914, ibid.; P. de Fucergerie to French Legation, Mexico, 10 June 1914, ibid. 81 17 expected a riot. Through May and June, 1915, the Chinese situation worsened in MazatlSn. Finally, protests against the segregation of the Chinese on grounds of discrimination resulted in a temporary halt to the move on 6 June 1915.
Acting Governor Manuel Rodriguez Gutierrez stopped the 18 segregation because it was a discriminatory measure.
Simultaneous with these events, anti-Chinese activities again occurred in Sonora. For the next twenty years Sonora was the center of anti-Chinese activities in
Mexico. With no consular representative in Sonora, the
Chinese there felt themselves in great danger, as their country, fresh from a 1910 revolution against the Manchu
Dynasty, was unable to protect their interests. In this instance the Chinese Charge in Mexico asked Henry Lane Wilson for protection for the Chinese in Guaymas. Wilson peti tioned the Department of State, who authorized him to use17 18
17. Alger to the Secretary of State, 30 March 1915, NA 312.93/105; H. Claisse, French Consular Agent, MazatlSn, to Chinese Ambassador, Washington, 14 April 1915, NA 312.93/103.
18. Alger to the Secretary of State, 14 May 1915, NA 312.93/116? 6 June 1915, NA 312.93/118? Alger to Manuel Rodriguez Gutierrez, Acting Governor, CuliacSn, 7 June 1915, ibid.? for a similar barrio crusade in 1917 in Guasave,' ‘ Sinaloa, see Sinaloa, Gobernador, Informe correspondiente al periodo transcurrido del 15 de septiembre de 1917 al 15- de marzo del aho en curso rendido a la XXVII legislatura de Sinaloa por el C. General Ram6n F. Iturbe, sobre su gestidn administrative como gobernador constitucional del estado (Culiacctn: Talleres Gr&ficos de la Compahia Comercial de Sinaloa, 1918), p. 16. 82 19 his informal good offices to aid them if Mexico assented.
This crisis was averted, but outbreaks against the Chinese continued.
After Madero's call to arms in 1910, rebel bands appeared in Sonora. Their initial attempts failed, but gradually, supplied with arms from the United States, they gained strength. The fall of Agua Prieta on 13 April 1911, assured control of a border town and a more secure supply of munitions. Cananea fell on 13 May and by late May Diaz and his regime in Sonora had fallen. Waiting.in the wings were the disaffected classes who survived the Corral-Torres-
IzSbal regime. Carlos Randall guided the state as pro visional governor until the July elections. Although fighting had taken place in the state, dislocation of the economy was minimal, except in one area, finances. The state government had used large sums to fight the rebels, then when the struggle was lost, they absconded with state funds. In this climate Jos6 Marla Maytorena assumed the governorship on 30 July 1911. 2019
19. Henry Lane Wilson, United States Ambassador, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 20 March 1911, NA 704.9312; Huntington Wilson, Secretary of State, to Henry Lane Wilson, 24 March 1911, ibid.
20. For Randall's account of his tenure, see Sonora, Gobernador, Informe del C. gobernador interino del estado de Sonora Carlos E. Randall presentado el lo de septiembre de 1911 ante el H. Congreso del mismo al hacer entrega del ejecutivo al gobernador constitucional Sr. Jos# Maria Maytorena (Hermosillo: Imprenta de Gobierna de Sonora, 1911). 83
The Revolution brought military.engagements, chronic unrest, and Yaqui uprisings in Sonora. All of these affected foreigners, especially the Chinese. W. W. Clark/ a British ranch owner in Cananea, informed British officials in Mexico City of’ disturbed conditions in the Arizpe district of Sonora. Cananea witnessed labor disturbances in
1906 and 1908 and was a center of anti-foreign sentiment in
Sonora. Clark reported several raids on his ranch in April,
1911, in which rebels carried off his mules, horses, and movable property. In addition, several of his Chinese employees lost their belongings when rebels beat and robbed them on 7 April. Having employed several Chinese for many years on his ranch, he had become familiar with their position in Sonoran society. Although violence against the
Chinese was only sporadic, Clark stated that the feeling of the Sonorans against the Chinese was very strong and he 21 feared for them in the future.
As the Revolution entered Sonora and Yaqui incur sions increased as a result of the disruption, the Chinese felt more imperiled. Consul Dye saw the Chinese issue as a major political question in Sonora. Complaints by the rebels levied against the incumbent government, and espe cially against native son, Ram6n Corral, involved the 21
21. W. W. Clark, British rancher, Cananea, to British Consular Service, Mexico, 25 April,1911, FO/204/391. 84
Chinese question. Opponents of the Diaz regime held the government responsible for fostering Chinese immigration.
Secondly, they protested alleged administration favoritism to Chinese merchants at the expense of Mexicans. The lower classes were markedly hostile to the Chinese as they looted and destroyed Chinese stores when towns fell.to the rebels.
Even the Federals manifested strong dislike for the Chinese. 22 For these reasons the Chinese sought consular protection.
Chinese fears were not imaginary, but real. In May,
1911, rebels attacked Imuris. They sacked Chinese gardens and stores, killed eight and wounded three other Chinese.
In August, 1911, another crisis developed for the 300-man
Chinese colony who had worked for a United States mining firm in Pilares de Nacozari. They complained earlier in the month that mobs threatened them because they felt the
Chinese robbed them of their work. The mob ordered the
Chinese to leave within three days or be shot, Chang Yin
Tang, Chinese Minister in Washington, requested and received a promise of United States consular good offices.Chang 222324
22. El Imparcial (Mexico), 18, 25 May 1911; Dye to the Secretary of State, 15 May 1911, RDS 812.00/1789, reel 13; 19 May 1911, NA 704.9312/7.
23. El Imparcial (Mexico), 23 May 1911; The New York Times, 23 May 1911.
24. Fred Morris Dearing, United States Minister, Mexico, to Chang Yin Tang, Chinese Minister, Washington, 14 August 1911, NA 312.93/n.n.; Dearing to the Secretary of State, 14 August 1911, NA 312.93/13. 85
Yin Tang had a low opinion of the Mexican lower classes and feared what they might do. He stated that these people disliked work, peace, law, and order. And he thought this 95 boded ill for the Chinese during a period of revolution.
During the next twenty years the activities of the Sonorans against the Chinese fulfilled his worst fears. Chang was not alone among, the Chinese who criticized the Mexicans.
Another Chinese observer pointed out the control of all
Mexican industry by foreigners because "the Mexican people are lazy and cannot well manage their own living." This observer stated that because they were unable to attack the
Japanese, British, French, and United States citizens, who were supported by powerful governments, the Mexicans took their revenge on the Chinese.^
By August, 1911, El Imparcial estimated the number of Chinese ead in Sonora, Sinaloa, and Tepic at sixteen, with twenty-five million pesos in property damage. Two hundred and sixteen Chinese merchants in these states complained of forced loans by the military. China's legal representatives in Mexico, Wilfley and Bassett, agreed with the number killed, but revised the property damages down ward. In addition to the 303 Chinese killed by soldiers in
Torredn, Wilfley and Bassett reported fourteen other Chinese also killed by soldiers in Baja, Sinaloa, Sonora, and
26. Ch'ang-fu Li, Hua ch'iao, p. 144. 86
Chihuahua. Eleven of these were in Sonora. Of the seven
Chinese killed by unknown parties in Durango, Oaxaca,
Sinaloa, and Sonora, four occurred in Sonora. Of the total of 608 Chinese claims, 271 were from Coahuila and 235 from
Sonora. Baja and Chihuahua followed with thirty-three and thirty-eight, respectively. The total of all claims outside. of Torredn was $287,298.35, or about one-third of the
Torredn total. The first year of the Revolution closed with 97 324 Chinese dead and over a million dollars in claims.
Chinese throughout.Mexico suffered hardships, but 28 the anti-Chinese campaign was most intense in Sonora.
Despite protests and investigations, the attacks continued.
Chinese and other foreign claims for damages mounted each year as the Revolution progressed. Throughout 1913 and 1914 rebels assaulted and robbed over twenty Chinese in separate incidents, and killed half of them. After Yaquis killed two in Torin in September, 1913, fifteen others fled the Yaqui
Valley. They sailed from Guaymas to San Diego on the USS
27. El Imparcial (Mexico), 23 August 1911; Wilfley and Bassett, Memorandum Showing Extent of Destruction, p. 3.
28. For inventories of Chinese property, see Dye to the Secretary of State, 9 March 1912, RDS 812.00/3240, reel 16; undated manuscript autobiography of Dye, Dye Papers. 87 29 Buffalo. In the violent revolutionary times they were easily recognized as outsiders. This, combined with their position in the economic sphere, singled them out for attacks. Most of the attacks were merely senseless acts of frustration and the result of pent-up hostility, not the result of long planning. The Chinese was there, he fared better than Mexicans in business, and he was obviously a foreigner. It was easy to assault them, because they hardly 30 ever resisted and most crimes went unpunished. Conditions worsened for the Chinese as the revolution wore on. In
October, 1914, a Maytorena soldier challenged a group of
Chinese in Nogales with the traditional Vwho goes?" Wong
Ben, who knew no Spanish, answered in Chinese. The soldier
shot and killed him. With the constant changes in governing authorities the neutral and pacific Chinese became more wary. Fearful that any action would result in personal
29. Tong Qui, merchant, Hermosillo, to Governor, 29 August 1913, AGG, tomo 2946, paquete 2, seccidn 5, ex- pediente 3; W. J. Philips, United States Acting Consular Agent, Guaymas, aboard USS Buffalo, San Diego, to Secretary of State, RDS 812.48/558, reel 153.
30. Frederick Simpich, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 23 June 1913; NA 312.93/32; 24 June 1913, NA 312.93/34; Simpich to Governor Ignacio L. Pesqueira, 28 June 1913, AGG, tomo 2913, p quete 9; Simpich to the Secretary of State, 27 February 1914, NA 312.93/63; 6 April 1915, RDS 812.00/14863, reel 44; A. L. Gustetter, surgeon. United States Public Health, Nogales, to Simpich, 25 June 1913 [sic], in Simpich to the Secretary of State, 24 June 1913, NA 312.93/34. 88 harm, they began to reply to shouts of "who goes?" with "you say first.
But it was in Cananea that anti-foreign sentiment crystalized and led to violence.. On 24 February 1914 leaders of the Women's Union of that town harrangued the populace with denunciations of foreigners, especially
Chinese. A crowd of 500 heard speakers that demanded the forcible expulsion of the Chinese. Led by wives of mine laborers, the crowd began a rampage of destruction of
Chinese stores in the immediate vicinity. While police watched, the mob robbed, stoned, and beat Chinese laun- 32 derers. Deluged by protests, the mayor and Governor
Maytorena sent thirty mounted troops who dispersed the mob and arrested eight men. Charged with inciting the women to violence, the men spent one night in jail. With anti- foreign feeling still running high, Maytorena ordered the local authorities to protect the lives of foreigners.
Gradually, order returned. Native hatred of foreign inter ests, especially Chinese and the large Cananea Consolidated 33 Copper Company, continued. 333132
31. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 29 October 1914, NA 312.93/79; undated manuscript autobiography of Dye, Dye Papers.
32. The New York Times, 25 February 1914.
33. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 27 February 1914, NA 312.93/63. 89 Chinese protested the increasingly bitter feeling toward them and the constant infringements of their rights.
The local authorities seized their property, taxed them excessively, arrested and beat them, and failed to intervene when the mob attacked. Secretary of State William J. Bryan ordered Frederick Simpich, Consul in Nogales, to prevent hostile action against any foreigners.. He suggested a plea to Venustiano Carranza to intervene.and offered the Chinese entry into Naco, Arizona. The Chinese wanted to close all their shops, but feared to do so because they would be 34 looted. The threat to the foreigners prompted James S.
Douglas and George Kingdom, United States mine owners, to consider closing the mine. They discarded this idea as it was certain to produce riots, and probably a recurrence of the Torredn massacre. The riots ceased, but the forces that moved the mob to action remained. The depreciation of the peso, rapid increases in food prices, and the presence and dominance of foreigners continued to alienate the populace.
Many blamed the United States capitalists and Chinese 3 5 merchants for the poor economic conditions. 3534
34. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 24 February 1914, NA 312.93/61; William J. Bryan, Secretary of State, to Simpich, 14 February 1914, ibid.; Simpich to the Secretary of State, 26 February 1914, NA 312.93/62.
35. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 27 February 1914, NA 312.93/63? 24 February 1914, NA 312.93/61. 90
Sonorans also instituted a more subtle campaign to weaken the position of the Chinese. With the coming of the
Madero Revolution Sonorans formed the Sonoran Democratic
Club, with Eduardo C. GonzSlez as president and Plutarco
Elias Calles as secretary. In its nine-point national pro
gram the club approved Madero's revolt against Diaz, called
for the sovereignty of the states, and urged municipal
independence. • They also asked the government for laws to
impede Chinese immigration. In a six-point municipal pro
gram, the Club stressed the necessity for local vigilance
of Chinese colonies to ensure they complied with all health
regulations. Another part of their program called for the
closing of Chinese casinos and gambling dens and the pro- 3 6 hibition of opium. In order to protect the health of the
town and protect the Chinese, the municipal council of
Cananea decreed that no Chinese could sleep in his place of
business. Seventeen Chinese protested this decree since
they had no homes but their stores. Governor Jos6 Maria
Maytorena modified the decree. The new regulation allowed
only one Chinese to live in each store that also served as a
residence. Imuris followed this new line of attack with a
decree in July, 1912, which prohibited cantinas to be36
36. El Imparcial (Mexico), 28 June 1911. 91 37 joined to other businesses. In October the Nogales municipal council adopted a new municipal market law, which provided for inspections of all vendors of cheese and eggs.
Article IV specified that these products could be sold only
in the central market. The council stressed the many
complaints against the Chinese who sold these items in bad
condition. Guillermo Barrett, Municipal President of
Nogales, informed the governor of the council's reasons for .
the decree. He reminded the governor of a similar Nogales
decree of 1909 which prohibited the Chinese from selling
bread outside the central market. The 1912 law prohibiting
the sale of cheese and eggs outside the market remained in
effect. The Chinese suffered because most of their shops 3 8 were outside the principal market.
Various regimes requested contributions in cash and
merchandise from Sonorans and from the Chinese. The latter
complied to avoid repercussions. Chinese merchants who left
Mexico to conduct business found they could not reenter
Mexico on their return to the border. In Nogales 3738
37. Various Chinese, Cananea, to Governor, n.d., AGG, tomo 2777, expediente 15; JosS Maria Maytorena, Governor, Hermosillo, to Prefect, Cananea, 25 June 1912, ibid.; Wing On Chong, merchant, Imuris, to Governor, 25 July 1912, AGG, tomo 2777, expediente 18.
38. Twenty Chinese merchants, Nogales, to Governor, 8 November 1912, AGG, tomo 2777, expediente 19; sixteen Mexican merchants and thirteen Chinese merchants, Nogales, to Guillermo Barrett, Municipal President, Nogales, 12 October 1912, ibid.; Barrett to Governor, 16 November 1912, ibid. 92 authorities arbitrarily levied contributions and fines on 3 9 Chinese. The introduction of new currency by each new regime complicated the Chinese position, as it did for other 40 Sonoran residents. And in Guaymas Chinese suffered from commercial discrimination. Consul W. J. Philips acted as the Chinese representative in the protests to the municipal authorities, while the USS Pittsburg granted protection to
600 Chinese in a camp on Almagre Island in Guaymas harbor.
In April, 1914, 700 of the Chinese colony in Guaymas arranged a charter on the German steamer Marla to take them out of the city if there were riots.^
While Maytorena attempted to revivify Sonora's economy and institute reforms in the state, Carranza con tinued his war against Huerta. After failures in Chihuahua41 3940
39. Louis Hostetter, United States Consul, Hermosillo, to the Secretary of State, 10 May 1913, NA 312.93/27? Captain Arnulfo R. G6mez, Military Garrison, Nogales, to Interim Governor Ignacio Pesqueira, 27 May 1913, AGG, tomo 2903, paquete 11; J. L. Pope, Municipal President, Nogales, to Maytorena, 12 December 1913, ibid.; Simpleh to the Secretary of State, 12 February 1914, RDS 812.5157/47, reel 187; 24 June 1913, RDS n.n., ibid.; Secretary of State to Simpich, 3 July 1913, NA 151.07/11.
40. For an analysis of problems involved with an exchange rate of five constitutionalist pesos to one silver peso, see Juan Santiago, merchant, Cananea, to Governor, 14 September 1916, AGG, tomo 3075, Part 1, expediente 4.
41. Philips to the Secretary of State, n.d., NA 312.93/51? Captain, USS Pittsburg, to Secretary of Navy, 9 July 1913, in F. D. Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of Navy, to the Secretary of State, 10 July 1913, RDS 812.00/8021, reel 27; Philips to the Secretary of State, 23 April 1914, NA 312.93/69. 93 and Coahuila, Carranza retreated into Sonora. But this proved to be a less convenient starting point for a drive to Mexico City because of the gap in the railroad from
Tepic, Nayarit, to Guadalajara, Jalisco. Victories by
Francisco Villa in Chihuahua and his capture.of Torredn on
2 April 1914 opened a rift in Carranza's Constitutionalist forces. Fearing that Villa would reach the capital first,
Carranza denied him munitions and coal for his trains. Thus
Carranza's forces under Sonoran General Alvaro Obregdn reached the capital first, in August, 1914. Villa's and
Obregdn's victories, combined with the occupation of
Veracruz, weakened Huerta's position. He resigned on 15
July and left the city to the Constitutionalists.
The struggle against Huerta and the split in the forces fighting Huerta also had repercussions in Sonora. A rift developed between Maytorena and the military under
Obregdn. The latter thought Maytorena moved too slowly in his reforms. Thus Obregdn and his Sonoran subordinate
Plutarco Ellas Calles attempted to weaken Maytorena's posi tion. With Obregdn's departure to beat Villa to the capital, the split widened between Calles and Maytorena.
Calles controlled the northeast around Nogales, Naco,
Cananea, and Agua Prieta..
The most important split in the Constitutionalist forces came late in 1914 when Villa declared against both
Carranza and Obregdn. The latter abandoned the capital for 94
a new base in Veracruz while both forces fought to control
Mexico and the Revolution. In April, 1915, Obregdn
decimated Villa's forces at Celaya, Guanajuato, and forced
him back into Chihuahua. Relentless pursuit and victories
at Agua Prieta and Hermosillo reduced Villa to a threat only
in Chihuahua. Turning on Zapata, Obregdn reduced him to his
original base in Morelos. Thus Carranza regained prominence
and United States recognition. With the widening rift
between Carranza and Villa, Maytorena also broke with the
Constitutionalists, thus initiating a more intense struggle
with Calles. Through the spring and summer of 1915 he
successfully confined Calles to Agua Prieta.
The economic situation in Sonora reached its lowest
point in the spring of 1915. As military forces operated in
the state Sonora became a battleground. The result was the
disruption of agricultural and industrial productivity. The
Maytorena government was in dire financial straits with no
money and its fiat peso valued at five cents. Trade stag
nated with the disruption of communications. Importers
feared heavy losses when dealing in the rapidly changing
currencies, therefore they imported little. Taxes remained
uncollected while Maytorena increased duties and taxes and
levied loans on merchants. The Consolidated Copper Company
closed, thus adding over 4,000 to the unemployed, and in
creasing unrest in the mining areas. The population of the
Cananea area fell from 15,000 to 12,000 with over 2,500 95 destitute. Observers reported that Yaquis looted Chinese stores, beat, robbed, and stripped their owners, and left 42 them naked and tied to trees.
In the agricultural areas the land lay fallow as the farmers abandoned their farms from fear of Yaqui depreda tions. If this were not bad enough, floods wiped out most of the crops of wheat, corn, and garbanzos. Faced with economic hardships, the Yaquis and townspeople resorted to popular methods of relief. They raided Chinese businesses.
In April, 1915, the Yaquis raided Chinese in Querobabi,
Torres, and other towns. Townspeople in Fronteras, Cumpas,
Nacozari, Santa Ana, and Magdalena followed the Yaqui lead
In Guaymas crowds looted Chinese stores, but strangely took only dry and dressgoods, not food. What incensed the
Chinese in Sonora more than all else was the impunity with which anyone attacked them. It seemed that despite protesta tions to the contrary and half-hearted attempts to prevent abuses, the state authorities did not consider the beating and killing of Chinese as a crime. None of the men 4342
42. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 6 April 1915, RDS 812.00/14863, reel 44; Charles L. Montague, United States Consular Agent, Cananea, to Simpich, 28 February 1915, in Simpich to the Secretary of State, 6 April 1915, ibid.; Montague to Simpich, 4 May 1915, NA 312,93/110; for figures on the decline in copper production, see The Mexican Year Book, 1914 (London: McCorquodal, 1914), p. 62.
43. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 6 April 1915, RDS 812.00/14863, reel 44. 96 responsible for these crimes went to trial or_jail. The
authorities investigated the cases and the complaints, but
only to satisfy observers and to insure the guise of 44 responsible government.
In May rioters broke into Chinese stores in
Hermosillo. The prefect, unable to prevent this attack,
wired Maytorena for troops. Simultaneously a plea went out
to Villa to restore order. A mob of Yaqui soldiers, towns
men, and women raided the stores. With the low value of
fiat money and the high price of provisions the soldiers and
the civilians had a difficult time in surviving. Thus they
resorted to the popular balm for their woes.^ Officers and
men joined the 300 to 400 looters while the prefect fled.
After only seven stores were looted some semblance of order
was restored, but observers felt this was only a temporary
reprieve as over 100 Yaquis and their women deserted the
army and promised to return to loot the next day. Maytorena
ended the looting by proclaiming martial law in the capital.
Consul Louis Hostetter in Hermosillo felt Maytorena was
responsible for the looting because of his financial
policies. For a long time Maytorena had ordered merchants
to sell provisions at less than cost and he also obtained44 45
44. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 21 April 1915, NA 312.93/108.
45. Hostetter to the Secretary of State, 21 May 1915, NA 312.93/112; Bryan to Carothers, 21 May 1915, ibid. 97 provisions by forced contributions. Payment made by paper receipts left merchants with no money and no supplies. Thus merchants imported no new supplies. When the scarcity
reached the people, they rioted and looted whatever they
could find. In most instances they found the Chinese stores
first.
In the summer of 1915 Maytorena found himself on the
defensive^as the forces of Plutarco Elias Calles advanced in
Sonora. On 19 July, as they abandoned Cananea for Nogales,
Maytorenistas joined local citizens in looting over forty
Chinese businesses. The soldiers freed all the prisoners in
the jails to join in the sacking of the stores. The mob
took everything movable and destroyed anything they could .
not take with them. Later, Chinese found every safe empty. 47 They estimated their losses to be $544,726.05. The
enormity of this figure seemed exaggerated considering the
previous sacks, the lack of business, and the decline in
imports to Sonora. Despite exaggerations, the damages were
extensive. The number and amount of claims also manifested
the importance of the Chinese in the economic life of 4 8 Cananea. On 20 July Calles arrived and restored order. 474846
46. Hostetter to the Secretary of State, 21 May 1915, NA 312.93/112; 23 May 1915, NA. 312.93/115.
47. Shah to Adee, 24 July 1915, NA 312.93/124.
48. Shah to Alvey A. Adee, Acting Secretary of State, 24 July 1915, NA 312.93/124; Montague to Simpleh, 30 August 1915, in Simpich to the Secretary of State, 2 98
He allowed the Chinese to reopen their businesses but he was unable to punish any of the rioters because most of the town had participated. As a result of the destruction, the
Chinese requested a diplomatic representative from China to speak for them in Sonora. But no consular personnel came 49 at this time.
Faced with the open hostility not only of the local officials, but also from the governor, the Chinese suffered at the hands of Sonorans in 1915 and 1916. Juan Lung Tain claimed damages from five separate depredations in 1914 and
1915. He reported losses of over 6,000 pesos in March,.
1914, and almost 17,000 pesos in December, 1914, and the summer of 1915. A fifth raid cost him almost 70,000 pesos in August, 1915. And finally, he reported losses of almost
500,000 pesos as a result of raids and depredations in the first two weeks of November, 1915. 5049
September 1915, NA 312.93/129; C. C. Chase, United States Acting Consular Agent, Cananea, to Simpich, 22 July 1915, in Simpich to the Secretary of State, 31 July 1915, NA 312.93/127.
49. H. Merle Cochran, United States Vice Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, RDS 812.00/15513, reel 46; Simpich to the Secretary of State, 21 December 1915, NA 312.93/136.
50. Juan Lung Tain, Guaymas, to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 1 October 1922, in Claims Commission, Mexico, to Governor, Hermosillo, 15 February 1927, AGG, tomo 72 (1927); for a breakdown of the losses of Juan Lung Tain in this 1914-1915 period, see Appendix C, Table C.l. 99 Anti-Chinese sentiment in Cananea continued with murders and robberies while in other parts of Sonora Yaqui depredations increased. In Nogales, Yaqui women raided five
Chinese stores in September. The local garrison restored order after the women looted as they pleased. And near
Guaymas, Yaquis killed twenty-three Chinese. China's minister in Washington requested aid by the United States consul and the naval squadron under Admiral T..B. Howard.
The Navy Department stated that the Pacific Fleet would land men in Guaymas only if foreigners were to leave Mexico.
They had no information that the Chinese desired to leave.
By October, 1915, the dire financial and economic conditions weakened Maytorena's base of support. With the de facto recognition of Carranza's government by the United
States on 19 October, Calles was reinforced and rearmed through Douglas, Arizona. This eventually led to Maytorena's defeat and Calles' accession as military governor of Sonora.
If the Chinese thought they fared badly under the
Maytorenista regime, conditions worsened under Calles in
1916. As in previous years, harassment of individual
Chinese continued unabated. Francisco L. Yuen, President of the Chinese Fraternal Union of Nogales, complained to
51. Montague to the Secretary of State, n.d., NA 312.11/6738; Simpich to the Secretary of State, 24 September 1915, NA 312.93/130; Shah to Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, 31 July 1915, NA 312.93/126;. W. Brusan, Acting Secretary of Navy, to the Secretary of State, 4 August 1915, NA 312.93/128. 100
Governor Calles about the frequent attacks, murders, and 52 sacks of Chinese merchants throughout the state. Yuen feared for the 2,000 Chinese at Cananea, who expected a
Villista raid in November, 1916. United States consuls continued to protect the Chinese, as did the German Vice
Consul in Guaymas. In July, 1916, the latter received instructions from the German Minister in Mexico to offer aid to the Chinese in Sonora and northern Baja. He protested to
Governor Adolfo de la Huerta, Calles1 successor, in the summer of 1916 against the harassment of the Chinese. He deplored the failure of the Mexicans to bring anyone to 53 justice for these crimes. But these outrages were few in number and less important than the beginnings of a new campaign against.the Chinese position in Sonora. A more subtle crusade tried to ruin them and force them to leave 54 the state in 1916.
52. F. L. Yuen, President Chinese Fraternal Union, Nogales, 17 September 1916, AGG, tomo 3076, expediente 35; Municipal President, Opodepe, to Governor, 5 October 1916, ibid.; Municipal President, Magdalena, to Governor, 31 October 1916, AGG, tomo 3071, Part 2.
53. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 28 November 1916, NA 312.93/160; Rademacher, German Vice Consul, Guaymas, to Governor Adolfo de la Huerta, 25 July 1916, AGG, tomo 3061, Part 2; 12 August 1916, AGG, tomo 3076, expediente 33.
54. Luis Chen, merchant, Hermosillo, to the Secretary of Government, Hermosillo, 5 January 1916, AGG, tomo 3083; Governor to Chen, 8 January 1916, ibid.; Simpich to the Secretary of State, 10 April 1916, NA 312.93/145. 101
In Agua Prieta the authorities instituted a policy of harassment of the Chinese on several fronts. They raised their business taxes.from five to thirty pesos a month. All other regulations were irritants aimed at forcing the
Chinese to leave in frustration. The Chinese faced regula- tions that compelled them to take public baths in the presence of the municipal officials and forbade them to visit from one house to another in the city without author ization from the police. Local regulations also limited the number of times Chinese could leave town to visit friends in other towns. And finally a 200-peso fine was
levied for each Chinese over four who lived.in the same
store that served as a residence. In Cananea, Mexicans who
leased lands to Chinese received warnings that their land
could be confiscated. Finally, the municipal council
ordered Chinese to sell.nothing but groceries in their
grocery stores.a. 55
The Chinese colony of Cananea vigorously protested
the prohibition on selling dry and dressgoods in their
grocery stores. In addition to their cries that this pro
hibition hurt them because they needed great variety in
goods to pay their taxes, the Chinese complained that this
55. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 10 April 1916, NA 312.93/145; 7 April 1916,.NA 312.93/144; Edward Eugene Briscoe, "Pershing's Chinese Refugees: An Odyssey of the Southwest" (unpublished M.A. thesis, St. Mary's University, San Antonio, Texas, 1947), p. 6. 102 hurt their customers, who liked to.buy in one store, not several. E. R. de Hoyos, Municipal President of Cananea, countered these accusations when he defended the law as necessary for public hygiene. The council believed selling other goods with vegetables was unsanitary. In addition he defended its actions as similar to those of other areas of
Sonora. The Secretary of Interior overlooked Chinese com plaints and upheld the local ordinances as in accordance with the incumbent governor's ideas. He also thought it was in the general interest of Cananea society.^ The governor agreed with these measures. In Hermosillo, Calles decreed that no Chinese could travel outside his home city or town, nor could any Chinese obtain a passport. Vigorous protests resulted in the abolition of these ordinances, but the
Chinese feared the constant annoyances would lead to a 57 general campaign of harassment against them.
In June, 1916, Chinese in Nogales received orders to pack and ship all their merchandise to Magdalena and
Hermosillo. They complained that Calles issued the order to wipe out their businesses in Nogales. The orders further
56. Nineteen Chinese merchants, Cananea, to Governor, 3 May 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1,'seccidn 3, expediente 2; E. E. de Hoyos, Municipal President, Cananea; to the Secretary of Government, 18 May 1916, ibid.; Secretary of the Interior, Hermosillo, to J. F. Chuck, merchant, Cananea, 23 May 1916, ibid. '
57. Hostetter to the Secretary of State, n.d., NA 312.93/152. 103 stated that noncompliance would remove any government 58 responsibility to protect the Chinese in Sonora. As they continued to profit from their sales, local authorities complained to the governor that they charged higher prices.
The municipal presidents of Magdalena and Santa Ana charged that Chinese merchants bought their goods with gold and sold
them at a very high price for paper money. Juan Lung Tain and Fon Qui, with branches in Magdalena, Santa Ana, Imuris,
Estacidn Llano, and several other towns, were the main
targets of these complaints. These charges of July, 1916,
remained unanswered when several Mexican merchants joined
the Chinese in attacking the price scales set by the 59 municipal presidents.
As the economic crisis deepened in Sonora in the
summer of 1916, projects aimed at conserving food supplies
became uppermost in the minds of many government officials.
The municipal president of Magdalena proposed a system of
regulations and inspections to ensure that necessary goods
were available. In order to retain needed supplies he *1
58. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 20 June 1916, RDS 812.00/18512, reel 54.
59. Ram6n Corral Soto, Municipal President, Santa Ana, to de la Huerta, 26 July 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, expediente 2; E. Campbell, Municipal President, Magdalena, to the Secretary of Government, 28 June 1916, ibid.; twenty-one merchants, Magdalena, to Campbell, 14 October 1916, ibid.; for a list of the branch stores and the business of Fon Qui, see Fon Qui to Governor, n.d., AGG, tomo 2445, expediente 110. 104 proposed a ban on exports. Second, he.requested merchants, especially Chinese, to remain open to the populace for longer hours. And finally he desired a register of every merchant with information on the times they closed and if they aided the government. He hoped by this to reduce
Chinese power and hopefully force them into other businesses or out of the state. The governor agreed with his ideas and instituted a policy of inspecting all mercantile activi ties. ^
Throughout Sonora the newly organized campaign
against the Chinese increased in 1916 under the auspices of
Governor Calles, who was openly hostile to foreigners. On
all sides Mexicans deliberately harassed the Chinese with
discriminatory legislation that gradually replaced the
personal attacks, sacks, and murders of previous years. The
regulations violated Chinese rights under both the treaty
between China and Mexico and the Constitution of 1857.
Noetheless, local officials, with the tacit support of
Calles, continued to press for the diminution of Chinese
economic power. Simpich felt it was useless to protest to
Calles, because he inevitably refused to listen or even to
answer notes protesting the treatment of the Chinese.* 15
60. Campbell to the Secretary of Government, 3 August 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, seccidn 2, ex- pediente 6; Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, to Campbell, 15 August 1916, ibid.; Chuck to Governor, 31 August 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, seccidn 3, expediente 3. 105
Simpich recommended a vigorous protest to Carranza, but feared Calles would evade any checks on his power or campaign against foreigners.
Not every local official harassed the Chinese. In
Bacerac, Luis Fong petitioned for the reopening of his business which had been closed several times by local officials. Since he had the only general store in the area, the populace petitioned that it be reopened because they neede the staples he sold. The municipal council allowed him to reopen and the Secretary of Interior agreed. In this case, with a scarcity of food and no other stores in the town, Fong was an economic asset. Because he sold what the people needed to survive, necessity altered the policy that had closed his store several times in the past. But in most
Sonoran towns the ideas of Magdalena's municipal president gained new adherents. He wanted to reduce Chinese business G 2 and drive this "plague" from the state.
Calles tried to limit Chinese immigration to the state in an effort to reduce their numbers, and hopefully their power. On 23 December 1915, Calles informed.all. immigration authorities in Sonora that Chinese immigration 6162
61. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 7 April 1916, NA 312.93/144.
62. Ignacio M. Ochoa, Municipal President, Bacerac, to Governor, 9 October 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, ex- pediente 3; Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, to Ochoa, ibid.; Campbell to the Secretary of Government, 3 August • 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, seccidn 2, expediente 6. 106 to that state was temporarily suspended. This included not only Chinese from China and the United States, but also from other Mexican states. He stated that the regulation was a necessity because of health reasons. The Chinese chargS protested because it violated Article VI of the 1899 treaty.^
In addition to the losses in property suffered by the Chinese, Mexicans killed over fifty other Chinese between 1911 and 1916 in Sonora alone. Only one killer went to trial. Chinese also suffered from increasingly harsh discriminatory legislation. Other foreigners feared that this precedent would be injurious to all foreigners in the
state. Since they had no consular representative in Sonora, many Chinese left the state to escape the persecution spon
sored by the incumbent regime. Periodic petitions from prominent Chinese, such as Juan Lung Tain, stressed the need
for a consular representative. Finally, China decided to
send Tsai Shih Jung to the state. He was to represent China 63
63. El Pueblo (Mexico), 31 January 1916; Secretary of Interior Circular #55, Hermosillo, 23 December 1915, AGG, tomo 3045, paquete 20; Enrique Moreno, Secretary of State, Hermosillo, to R. Cruz, Municipal President, Guaymas, 31 December 1915, ibid.; Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to Governor Plutarco Elias Calles, February 1916, AGG, tomo 3072, paquete 8. 107 in the northern Mexican states and to mitigate some of the 64 repression against them.
Although opposition to the Chinese existed before the outbreak of the 1910 Revolution, it was sporadic and unorganized. Criticism came from Diaz' opponents and became merely one element of the condemnation of his regime. In
Sonora opposition to the entrenched regime of Luis Torres,
Rafael IzSbal, and Ram6n Corral merged with the condemnation of Diaz. Because this triumvirate was responsible for the unchecked immigration of Chinese into Sonora before 1910, anti-Chinese demonstrations became a part of the opposition to their regime. But these forces remained unorganized and concentrated on isolated acts of violence and financial exactions on the local level.
With the advent of the Revolution, the triumvirate and Diaz machines collapsed and Jos£ Maria Maytorena'became the dominant political figure in the state from 1911 to
1915. Torn in the throes of revolution and economic crisis,
Sonora was a maze of conflicting factions in this period.
The Chinese remained neutral, which marked them for exploita tion by all parties. Again, isolated though now more fre quent, outbreaks of violence against the Chinese continued.* 24
64. Simpich to the Secretary of State, 10 April 1916, NA 312.93/145; 7 April 1916, NA 312.93/144; Cochran to the Secretary of State, 2 July 1916, NA 312.93/119; Wellington Koo, Chinese Minister, Washington, to Lansing, 24 April 1916, NA 312.93/146. 108
Murders, beatings, robberies, and sacks increased. In a time of unrest and scarcities the Chinese remained aloof and seemingly well-supplied. Thus increased financial exac tions, taxes, forced loans.and contributions, and outright thefts predominated.
The victory of the Revolution brought to power the disaffected elements of the Porfiriato. Middle class businessmen, resentful of Diaz' favoritism toward foreigners, assumed power on the state and local levels. Their lower class compatriots, imbued with the ideas of the PLM and anti-foreign resentment, supported the new legal restric tions on the Chinese. In the chaotic situation created by
the fighting in Sonora they also released their pent-up
hostilities in physical acts of violence against foreigners,
especially Chinese. Latent in the Porfiriato, anti-Chinese
sentiment exploded during the Revolution.
Both as beneficiaries of the old regime and neutrals
in the Revolution, the Chinese suffered with the fall of
Diaz. The Maytorena transition period was a harsh one for
them. With the advent of the Calles-de la Huerta regime
conditions changed, but only in tone, not intent. For the
twenty years after 1911 all Sonoran political regimes sought
to limit Chinese economic power in the state. Only the
means differed. With Calles and de la Huerta came not only
a new regime, but also a new dynasty to replace the old
triumvirate. The new clique would rule Sonora into the 109 1930's and Mexico from 1920 to 1934. Simultaneous with the rise of Calles came a new and organized campaign to crush the economic power of the Chinese. With the tacit support and encouragement of Calles and de la Huerta, JosS Maria
Arana emerged to coalesce all the divergent local and hap hazard campaigns into a grandiose scheme to rid Sonora of her Chinese. CHAPTER 5
JOSfi MARIA ARANA'S CAMPAIGN— 1916-1921
In February, 1916, the Mexican businessmen of
Magdalena took the first steps toward the organization of a
campaign to oust the Chinese from the state. On 5 February
they established the Commercial and Businessman's Junta with
Francisco C. L6pez as president. Among the objects of the
Junta were efforts to uplift the Mexican merchant with the
hope that other cities would follow their lead. But the
most important goal was to use all legal means to eliminate
the Asian merchant.The Act of Installation of the new
Junta stressed the necessity for a militant mercantile
organization in this time of crisis. The committee deplored
the situation that faced Mexican youth, who emerged from
school prepared for a career, only to find their entrance
into business barred by the Chinese who dominated the field.
Thus many young Mexicans emigrated to the United States.
This was doubly harmful, not only because Sonora needed
these young, aggressive future businessmen, but also because 1
1. Act of Installation of the Commercial and Businessman's Junta, Magdalena, 5 February 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, expediente 2; Juan Lung Tain, Magdalena, to Governor, 24 November 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paquete 4; re printed in Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 8 August 1917.
110 Ill their departure further solidified the Chinese hold on the 2 economic life of Sonora.
As the Chinese entrenched themselves in business, the Junta condemned them because the Mexicans were unable to compete on an equal level. The Chinese sold at the lowest prices in addition to cheating on taxes, weights, and quality. Among other alleged abuses, the Junta singled out frauds, both of the consumer and the treasury. Because they had no families they lived frugally, either in their stores or in large numbers in small rooms. The Mexican, on the other hand, had to pay rent for a house and a store, pay business taxes and support large families "in decent condi- 3 tions imposed by society." In addition the Chinese were a threat to public health with their diseases, crowded living conditions, and despicable habits of sleeping in their stores. For these reasons the committee felt it necessary to "make an effort to the end of extirpating this class of individuals from its bosom.
The committee rapidly gained adherents throughout the state. On 16 March it met in Magdalena to present a formal proposal to Governor Plutarco Ellas Calles, who 342
2. Act of Installation, 5 February 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, expediente 2.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid. 112 subsequently supported the campaign against the Chinese.^
All the assembled delegates agreed that the economy of
Sonora was in dire straits. The long revolution was costly in financial outlay, in the destruction.of communications, and in the disruption of business and agriculture. Pro longed rains and disastrous floods of 1914 also reduced agricultural production considerably. But it was the presence and activities of Chinese merchants that hurt
Mexican commerce and industry more than any other force. I In addition to their dominance of business, they closed
their doors in crises and accepted only United States gold
in payment. This contributed to the scarcity of goods and
the high prices.56
For these reasons the Assembly asked the immediate
expulsion of the Chinese. If this solution proved
impossible, the Assembly then proposed several measures
aimed at resolving the main Chinese issues...To combat the
problem of marriages and prostitution, the Assembly proposed
abolition of naturalization and marriages of Chinese, as
5. JosS Angel Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora (Mexico: n.p., 1932), p. 31.
6. Memorial Presented to the Governor of the State by the Great Commercial and Businessman’s Assembly, Magdalena, 16 March 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, ex- pediente 2; reprinted in Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 15, 22, August 1917; for a list of United States and foreign in vestment in Sonora in 1914, which listed no Chinese, see "American and Foreign Capital Invested in Mexico," pp. 15- 19, RDS 812.503/19, reel 161. 113 well as the elimination of business contact between Mexican girls and Chinese. The Chinese ability to defraud the treasury constituted a second problem. Thus, the legis lature appointed inspectors to check their books more frequently. Because one of the complaints alleged that the
Chinese refused to employ Mexicans, the Assembly found an
1875 law that stipulated that fifty per cent of all workers in any enterprise must be Mexicans. Further measures to weaken the favorable position of the Chinese encompassed suggestions that all business be conducted in Spanish and 7 only a fixed number of Chinese could live in the same house.
Each proposal attempted to reduce the influence of the Chinese, who had benefitted from free immigration and the absence of restrictions on foreigners during the
Porfiriato. The Assembly also charged that the Chinese bribed Governors Ram6n Corral, Luis Torres, and Rafael
IzSbal whenever they needed a concession. Official mal
feasance, which aided the Chinese, constituted one of the
first abuses the Assembly desired to end. They hoped the
new administration would make it impossible for Chinese to
bribe officials.®
In subsequent months the members of the Junta
traveled throughout Sonora and reiterated their program.
7. Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 15, 22 August 1917.
8. Ibid. 114
Destined to become the leading proponent of the anti-Chinese campaign, Jos§ Maria Arana initiated his crusade in 1916. A
school teacher and businessman from Magdalena, Arana became
the leading antagonist to the Chinese in the next five 9 years. It was no accident that he made his first address
on the Chinese issue in Cananea. Long a center of foreign
population and a hotbed of xenophobia, Cananea was an ideal
location to rouse the rabble against the Chinese.
' On 29 April 1916 Arana announced the program of the
Junta to the workers of Cananea. In addition to the list of
sins propounded in the March Memorial, Arana added refine
ments of his own to stress the danger the. Chinese posed for
Mexico, and for Sonora in particular. He condemned the
immunity from compliance with commercial laws which the
Chinese enjoyed under Corral, Torres, and IzSbal. As the
solution to the deplorable situation in which the Chinese
dominated Sonora's women and economy, Arana proposed that
no woman enter their stores and no one do business with the
Chinese. Arana recoiled in horror when confronted with the
example of Sinaloa where, he claimed, the Chinese ran the
economy and married the fairest women, all with the approval
of the people, the society, and the government. This he
9. Gordon V. Krutz, "Chinese Labor, Economic Development and Social Reaction," Ethnohistory, XVIII (Fall, 1971), p. 328; Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, p. 32. 115 refused to allow for Sonora, and he saw Calles as the man to destroy the power of the Chinese.
By June, Arana became president of the Junta. The campaign continued as he deluged the governor with the
Junta's memorials, complaints, and solutions to the danger
ous increase in the number of Chinese in Sonora. Arana
the businessman and crusader never divested himself of the
rhetoric of the academician as the following excerpt from
one of his speeches showed:
Like a dismal legacy of the abominable dictator ship, they have outlived in Sonora, rooted deeply in the arteries of the social organism, an in- stiable hydra, who by tolerance and unconditional protection benefitted during the disappeared tyranny, have remained converted into a fabulous monster, endowed with the eyes of Argos, the tentacles of an octopus, the immunity of Mithridates, the talons of a bird of prey and the venom of a serpent; and which in actuality represent the case of the dogs who consumed the entrails which had given them life: I refer to the tremendous calamity of the Chinese iaundice, the pestilential and nauseous Chinese.1%
But while Arana and the Junta talked, their propa
ganda began to have an effect. In January, 1917, the small
merchants of Nacozari de Garcia complained about the in
crease in Chinese there and in Pilares de Nacozari. Because
the Chinese were a health hazard, the merchants requested11 *
10. Discourse of JosG Maria Arana, Cananea, 29 April 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, expedients 2.
11. Arana to Governor, Magdalena, 2 June 1916, AGG, tomo 3083, paquete 1, expediente 2.
12. Discourse of Arana, Cananea, 29 April 1916, ibid. 116 that the governor stop immigration and place the Chinese in special barrios. The merchants filed the usual charges against the Chinese.^ As the pressure and stridency of anti-Chinese propaganda increased, the governor took action to restrict immigration. When nine Chinese returning from
China tried to enter at Nogales in 1917, the officials denied them entry. Later some of the Chinese who fled Chihuahua with General John J. Pershing petitioned Governor Adolfo de la Huerta for permits to enter Sonora.^ He asked President
Venustiano Carranza for instructions. Faced with de la
Huerta's exhortations that Sonorans were unalterably opposed to further immigration, Carranza suggested to the governor that he restrict further immigration for a time. . De la
Huerta immediately ordered all immigration and municipal officials in Nogales to temporarily suspend Chinese immigra- 15 tion, because of urgent necessity. 151314
13. Two hundred and twenty-five small merchants to Governor, Nacozari de Garcia, 1 January 1917, AGG, tomo 3124, paquete 1.
14. For the story of Villa1s oppression of the Chinese in Chihuahua and their flight to the United States with General John J. Pershing, see Edward Eugene Briscoe, "Pershing's Chinese Refugees in Texas," The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, LXII (April, 1959), pp. 467-488; Amy Elizabeth Nims, "Chinese. Life in San Antonio" (unpublished M.A. thesis, Southwest Texas State Teachers College, San Marcos, 1941), p. 5.
15. Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to de la Huerta, 8 February 1917, AGG, tomo 3313, paquete 8, expediente 1? Governor Adolfo de la Huerta, Hermosillo, to President Venustiano Carranza, 8 February 1917, ibid.; Carranza, Mexico, to de la Huerta, 11 February 1917, ibid.; 117
De la Huerta's orders and the intensification of the campaign against the Chinese elicited a query on the situation from the Secretary of the Interior in Mexico City.
The Secretary wanted suggestions on how best to limit their immigration to Sonora. De la Huerta stressed the necessity of limiting immigration without endangering relations with
China. He believed the argument to the government in China must stress three points. First, Mexico was in the turmoil of several years of abnormal conditions in which the mines and industry were in a chaotic state. In addition, the problems created by unemployment continued unabated. Thus, in this period of reconstruction, Sonora was unable to accept new immigrants from any country.
A complaint Mexicans levied against the resident
Chinese was the familiar one that they arrived without capital, saved all they.could and sent it back to China.
With their control over business, they also drove off other more desirable foreigners who came to Sonora to establish 16 de la Huerta to Cirilio Rochin, Immigration Official, Nogales, 13 February 1917, ibid.; Oficial Mayor, Hermosillo, to Municipal President, Nogales, 28 February 1917, ibid.; Sonora, Gobernador, Informe que rinde al H. Congrese del estado, el gobernador constitucional provisional de Sonora C. Adolfo de la Huerta, por el periodo de su gobierno, comprendido entre el 19 de mayo de 1916 al 18 de junio de 1917 (Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno del Estado, 1917), p. 69.
16. Manuel Aguirre Berlanga, Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to de la Huerta, 8 March 1917, AGG, tomo 3313, paquete 8, expediente 1; de la Huerta to Aguirre Berlanga, 17 March 1917, ibid. 118 businesses. The foreigners left because they encountered the insufferable Chinese. For the Mexicans there remained
nothing to do in Sonora. The Chinese controlled all types
of small businesses, agriculture, industry, mining as well
as shoe and clothing factories, tailor shops, and hotels. 17 They even ran bakeries and pastry shops.
A survey of Sonoran industries by the Secretary of
Industry, Commerce, and Labor in 1921 reinforced the con
tentions of these Cananea merchants. Chinese engaged in
several types of large businesses in the state in addition
to their control of the grocery business. They maintained
control of the clothing industry and owned and operated two
of the three clothing factories in Cananea and all five of 18 these businesses in Nogales.
Mariano Urrea, Cananea1s new Municipal President,
reinforced the view of the aggrieved Mexican merchants. He
reported to the governor in March, 1917, that while previous
anti-Chinese legislation was to protect native business, it
nonetheless resulted in a diminution of local revenue. The 1718
. • ' 17. Twelve Mexican merchants, Cananea, to the Governor, 12 February 1917, AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 3; for anti-Chinese speeches and attacks in 1917, see Jos§ Chong Bing, President, Chinese Fraternal Union, Hermosillo, to Governor, 5 March 1917, AGG, tomo 3141, expediente 5; Arana speech, 29 March 1917, in Papers of Jos§ Maria Arana, Special Collections, The University of Arizona Library, Tucson, Arizona (hereafter cited as Arana Papers).
18. Mexico, Secretari de Industria. Comercio y Trabajo, Departmento de Industries, Directorio industrial de algunos estados de la Reptiblica (Mexico: Talleres Grdficos de la Naci6n, 1921), pp. 75-80. 119
Chinese also circumvented prohibition on Chinese-owned stores by hiring Mexicans to sell meat and vegetables in the market. They were merely fronts for businesses owned by
Chinese. Another regulation sought to encourage Mexican ambulatory business by prohibiting Chinese from these activities. With the demise of the Chinese in this business, problems arose. The local treasury lost at least twenty-
five pesos daily in revenue and no Mexicans replaced the
Chinese in this trade. This hurt both the treasury and the
consumer. Nonetheless the council sustained the ordinance.
By early March the council proposed that no one rent to the
Chinese. This ruling had little effect.1^
After.thirteen months as Provisional Governor of
Sonora, de la Huerta left office in June, 1917. He reported
to the state legislature that he had prohibited Chinese
immigration to solve the problems of economic crisis and
rising unemployment. With the unemployment and business
chaos, Chinese replaced Mexican women in the laundry,
washing, and ironing trades. To end this danger and to
"defend the Mexican woman," de la Huerta established a
government steam laundry, with Mexican employees only.
Finally, he created a government cooperative farm with a
large number of workers and provided railroad cars to bring 19
19. Mari no Urrea, Municipal President, Cananea, to Governor, 6 March 1917, AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 3? for anti-Chinese legislation in Nogales in April, see AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 6. 120 20 Mexicans back from the United States. Despite these measures de la Huerta never solved the financial crisis in the state. According to E. W. Lawton, United States Consul in Nogales, de la Huerta failed in all his efforts to over come the financial troubles. Lawton thought the crisis con tinued because the governor depleted the treasury with lavish expenditures. Calles replaced de la Huerta as gover nor and attempted to cut unnecessary expenditures. Mean while the campaign against the Chinese continued as local councils throughout Sonora passed laws which decreed that at least seventy-five per cent of all employees in all busi nesses must be Mexicans. A second type of class legislation levied against the Chinese was the prohibition on their obtaining more property or of selling it except to a
Mexican. Calles vetoed these measures because they violated individual guarantees contained in the new federal constitu tion of 1917.20 21
After the victory.of the Carrancistas over the forces of Villa and Zapata, the Constitutionalists turned their attention to the pressing problems in need of reform.
They deliberated over education, Church-State relations, the political structure, land tenure, labor, and subsoil
20. Sonora, Gobernador, Informe ... de la Huerta ... 1917, pp. 11, 12.
21. E. W. Lawton, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 16 July 1917, RDS 812.00/21141, reel 161. 1 2 1 rights. The last two were of particular importance to the foreign population of Mexico.
In January, 1915, Carranza instituted a change in the 1857 Constitution. The new amendment gave the national government the right to legislate on mining, commercial, and labor issues. Gradually labor assumed an organized and independent role in the country after a pact between
Carranza and the Casa del Obrero Mundial. The latter promised to support the president in return for laws to protect workers. From this.base labor brought its plight to the nation and established its need for privileges and guarantees in the constitution. Labor, one of the most powerful enemies of foreign control, assumed a prominent role in the new order.
A second area of concern for the Constitutionalists was the question of ownership of subsoil rights. Since the
time of the Diaz mining code of 1884 the traditional Hispanic principle of national ownership of subsoil rights had been
replaced by that of the private individual. With over
eighty per cent of Mexico's mineral deposits and over fifty
per cent of its oil reserves owned by United States
capitalists, the new regime began to give Porfirian policy
a closer scrutiny. Three elements of the system needed
revision: alteration of the old concessions to gain benefits
for domestic labor and the government, obtain greater
revenues for the treasury from these industries, and restore 122 the policy of national ownership of subsoil deposits. In
April, 1916, the Constitutionalists took the first steps toward these changes when Carranza's technical advisors declared it equitable."to return to the nation that which is 22 its own, the wealth of the subsoil, coal, and petroleum."
Carranza established a temporary capital in
QuerStaro in April, 1916, and began the procedure of electing a constituent assembly. On 1 December he appeared before the newly elected convention and presented a draft constitution for the country. Essentially it was a revision of the 1857 document, but the Revolution had proceeded too far to approve this draft. Many articles were accepted, but
substantive revision was made in regard to education, Church-
State relations, labor, and subsoil rights. The resultant
Constitution of 1917 embodied not only rejection of the most
nefarious Porfirian practices, but also new departures,
gained by the revolutionary experience. Article 123 pro
vided for a complete renovation of the status of Mexican
labor. In addition to material benefits in wages, hours,
and working conditions, this article also granted arbitra- 03 tion and strike privileges. 2322
22. Lorenzo Meyer, Mexico y Estados Unidos en el conflicto petrolero, 1917-1942 (Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico, 1968), p. 68.
23. Mexico, Nueva constitucidn politica de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos (Mexico: Empresa Editora "Argos, 11 1917), pp. 38-41. 123
The most significant article in the new constitution was Article 27. It was to be.the.basis for social and economic changes, as well as a challenge to the system of property holdings and foreign concessions. The statement that all property rights were subordinated to the needs of society later led to expropriation of haciendas, national dominion over subsoil deposits, and elimination of ownership 24 of property by foreigners. This article was the crux of opposition to Diaz and the fundamental ideas of the Revolu tion. In it lay a dedication to agrarian reform, an active role for the government in the economy, restrictions on foreigners, and the codification of nationalist aspirations.
Two other articles severely circumscribed the freedom.of action of. foreigners, in the country. Article 23 promised preference to Mexicans over foreigners in regard to all government concessions and positions. And Article 33 prohibited foreigners from taking part in the political life of the country. It also provided for expulsion of aliens 95 who disobeyed the laws or were undesirables. The entire document proclaimed a "new Mexico."
Among the important ideological bases for the new
Mexico were the writings of Andres Molina Enriquez. In 1909
he wrote Los Grandes Problemas Nacionales, a treatise that
24. Ibid., pp. 9-13.
25. Ibid., pp. 14-15 124 introduced a coherent conception of a Mexican ethos. He attacked the coalition of the upper classes and foreigners who dominated the country to the exclusion and detriment of the lower classes. In his tirade.against them he called for a more equitable distribution of wealth to establish some semblance of social equilibrium. Of greater importance was his stress on the mestizo as the. unifying force in Mexican society. For the creation of Mexican nationality he rejected the upper classes outright. They were too closely allied with foreigners. The Indians would not be the unifying force because they were too oriented toward their own locality. But they would be the allies of the mestizos, the only Mexicans with common origins and aspirations. Thus he preached against Diaz and the foreigners.26 m the new order created by the Revolution, Molina Enriquez1 ideas
enjoyed a resurgence. The. Revolution and the Constitution redefined national goals. Uppermost was the idea of political stability.to ensure a favorable environment for
economic and social justice. Within this redefinition
indigenous elements were stressed as the national ethos.
Diaz' xenophilia gave way to xenophobia and the exclusion
of alien influences. Within this framework, Mexican agrarian
reform, labor legislation, treatment of foreigners, art,
26. Andres Molina Enriquez, Los grandes orolemac nacxonales (Mexico: Imprenta de A. Carranza e Hiios— Tongi pp. 312-313, 338-340, 345-346, 357-360. 3 ' '' 125 music, and literature resounded with allusions to the new
Mexico, land of the "Cosmic Race." Although debate would center around the concrete characteristics of the Mexican, the rejection of any alien element was singularly prominent.
Despite these anti-foreign articles in the Consti tution, all residents in Mexico received certain rights, which were guaranteed by Article 1. Article 4 prohibited unwarranted interference in anyone's business or profession.
Within the limits of immigration and health laws. Article
11 guaranteed freedom of movement within Mexico. Among other individual guarantees. Article 16 limited interference with one's person, family, and personal possessions, except when confronted with official, written authorization. These and other individual rights, when upheld, would blunt any
anti-Chinese measures in Sonora..
Under the new constitution Carranza was elected
President and took office on 1 May 1917. And in Sonora,
Calles and de la Huerta alternated in office from November,
1915, to May, 1920, when the latter became President. Under
Calles' protection and with the general imprimatur of the
Constitution of 1917, Arana began a new anti-Chinese
campaign. The organ of the crusade was his Magdalena-based
paper, Pro-Patria, whose masthead proclaimed it was a weekly
••• "dedicated to defend the interests of the Mexican people. 126 27 Mexico for the Mexicans and China for the Chinese.11 From the beginning Arana stressed the need for a program to work constantly for the advancement and well-being of the
Mexicans. Supporters had to carry out this scheme within 28 the law, reason, and morality. The dangerous increment of
Chinese stood in the way. He believed that Mexican hospi tality, indolence, and indifference allowed.them to enter and prosper to the point that they menaced the economic and
social strength of Mexico. The campaign demanded from the
local, state, and federal authorities the regulations and 29 laws necessary to protect national business.
Under the cry "either them or us," Arana carried his
campaign throughout the state in Pro-Patria. Anti-Chinese
jokes and derogatory remarks were prime fare in the paper.
These appealed to the mentality of his lower class audience.
Arana printed a sample question from a school physiology
examination. To the question what are the most obstinate of
animals, the students replied, "flies, chickens, cochis
[small fish with vicious teeth], and Chinese.
Pro-Patria waged a constant.campaign to reveal
Chinese abuses, to eliminate the Chinese from positions of
27. Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 25 July to 19 September 1917.
28. Ibid., 25 July 1917.
29. Ibid., 25 July, 1 August 1917.
30. Ibid., 25 July 1917. 127 power in the economy, and finally to uplift Mexican business, agriculture, and industry. 'The members of the Junta spread their propaganda throughout the state through the paper and by means of speeches in towns with a Chinese colony. In
Cananea in September, 1917, Arana's lieutenant, Serapio
Ddvila, reiterated all the Arana arguments and stressed the need to abrogate the treaty with China. He stated that the
Chinese problem, with its accompanying prostitution, opium, monopolies, disease, and corruption was the most significant crisis in Sonora. It now reached the point where it was
"either them or us.Arana concurred and added "together we cannot be, because there exists an absolute incom- 32 patibility in race, social customs, and economy." Sup ported by a succession of governors, Arana carried his campaign to all parts of Sonora and adjacent states, Adolfo de la Huerta, Cesareo Soriano, Plutarco Ellas Calles, and
Francisco Ellas all supported the campaign at various times during their tenures as governor between 1916 and 1921.
Despite the emphasis on legality, the over-zealous followers of Arana, affected by anti-Chinese propaganda and independence day celebrations, resorted to popular festive events. On the night of 15 September 1917 unknown indi viduals bombed two Chinese stores in La Esperanza and31 32
31. Ibid., 5 September 1917.
32. Ibid., 1 August 1917 128 wounded three Chinese. The owners estimated losses at 2,000 pesos. On the same evening bombs wracked three Chinese stores in Pilares de Nacozari. These caused only minor damage. And the next day, in the midst of the independence celebrations, rioters tore down and destroyed the Chinese 33 flag on the Fraternal Union Building in Nacozari.
Conditions worsened for the Chinese in the fall of
1917 as the anti-Chinese campaign increased in intensity.
Under the tacit approval of Plutarco Ellas Calles, who dis liked the Chinese, Arana's campaign gradually bore fruit as several towns passed new regulations against them. In the agricultural towns around the capital, Chinese farmers and merchants faced special taxes levied only on them. In violation of Article 11 of the Constitution, Calles denied reentry permits to Chinese who left Mexico and desired to return through Nogales. In the cases of eight of these, a
contribution of 500 pesos to local charities was sufficient
to supercede the immigration decree.Huatabampo proposed
a law to prohibit the opening of new Chinese stores.34 33
33. Enrique S. Gin, President, Chinese Fraternal Union, Nacozari, to Governor, 17 September 1917, AGG, tomo 3141, expediente 12; E. Andrade, Municipal President, Nacozari, to Cesareo R. Soriano, Interim Governor, 18 September 1917, ibid.; R. E. Contreras, Police Commissioner, Pilares, to Soriano, 18 September 1917, ibid.; Lawton to the Secretary of State, 21 September 1917, NA 312.93/165; P. Galvez, Pilares, to Arana, 10 October 1917, Arana Papers.
34. Lawton to the Secretary of State, 21 September 1917, NA 312.93/165. 129
Interim Governor Cesareo Soriano suggested that "the
Mexicans compete with the Chinese and have the townspeople 35 refuse to buy anything from them. And in Guaymas Juan
Lung Tain and Fon Qui, the two largest Chinese firms in the
state, protested the increase in their taxes while others
continued to pay the old rate. The municipal president
retorted to the governor that the taxes were not discrimina
tory but were levied on all importers. Beyond this, they
were not harsh taxes because the Chinese were not only rich,
they also monopolized trade and almost all imports. Again,
higher taxes aimed almost exclusively at Chinese remained in
effect despite protests, because few other nationalities
operated in the business to substantiate the Chinese claim
of discrimination.
< Both public and official opposition to the Chinese
spread in 1917, and although Calles and Soriano favored the
campaign, Soriano attempted to oppose its more blatant and 37 illegal attacks. As the attacks and pressures on the 363735
35. R. Ruiz, Municipal President, Huatabampo, to Governor, 18 September 1917, AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 1; Soriano to Ruiz, 19 September 1917, ibid.
36. Martin Wong, merchant, Guaymas, to Governor, 30 September, 27 October 1917, AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 4; C. R. Felix, Municipal President, Guaymas, to Governor, 3 November 1917, ibid......
37. For the activities of General, later President Alvaro Obregdn in saving the Chinese of Huatabampo from harm, see Francisco L. Yuen, President, Chinese Fraternal Union, Nogales, to Governor, 30 September 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paguete 4; Soriano to Yuen, 5 October 1917, ibid.; Chinese increased so did their complaints. Finally, Soriano issued a circular to all municipal presidents on 25 October
1917. He ordered them to give the Chinese the protection guaranteed by the Constitution to all foreigners. He also cautioned them to prevent violence and anti-Chinese dis turbances. Consistent with his policy of favoring a diminution of Chinese influence, but maintaining legality,
Soriano conceded that anti-Chinese activity could continue, but municipal authorities must control it and maintain , 3 8 order.
On 24 November Juan Lung Tain protested vigorously to the governor that Arana's campaign continued unimpeded.
In addition to the charges of false statements and deliberate lies, he accused Arana of inciting the violence against the
Chinese in Sonora and using his campaign as a means of furthering his candidacy for municipal president in the forthcoming elections. The Chinese condemned Arana because he played on public sentiment and ignorance to.promise.their expulsion if he were elected. They noted that even if he were elected, he could not oust them, relegate them to a38 for the business interests of Alvaro Obregdn in Sonora, see AGG, tomo 3147, expediente 6; for Obregdn's comments to Consul Lawton in Nogales on his fears that the people of the state would get out of hand and kill the Chinese, see Lawton to the Secretary of State, 21 September 1917, NA 312.93/165.
38. Soriano Circular to all Municipal Presidents, 25 October 1917, AGG, tomo 3183, paquete 8, expediente 2; tomo 3138, paquete 4. 131 separate barrio, or close their stores. The federal and state constitutions, the penal code, and the 1899 treaty guaranteed their rights. No local officials had the right 3 9 to supercede these provisions.
Tain then proceeded to refute the main lines of
Arana's arguments against the Chinese. To the charge that they monopolized commerce and tried to prevent the growth of the Mexican merchant, he argued that the Mexicans pre ferred to shop at Chinese stores because the prices were lower. He also noted that the families of the leaders of the anti-Chinese crusade bought from the Chinese to save money. To Arana's promise that prices would change when the
Chinese left, he asked why the Mexicans did not sell lower now. He charged that Arana did not really care about the price and the local economy, but merely wanted to destroy the Chinese. Tain stressed that the Chinese were honest, hardworking, and also paid their taxes punctually. He also refuted the charge that they bribed local officials. As to
Arana's obsession with the idea that Chinese prostituted
Mexican women, Juan Lung Tain responded with bitter contempt
for a man who, to destroy the Chinese, dishonored the
Mexican woman. After a long discourse on the anti-Chinese
campaign, the Chinese defense:against.these abuses, and the
legal rights that Arana violated, Tain concluded that if 39
39. Juan Lung Tain, Guaymas, to Governor, 9 November 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paguete 4. 132
Chinese immigration was prejudicial and their business detrimental to Mexico, then the legislature could decree they must leave. But until then, the laws protected them 40 from Arana.
Arana replied that his crusade was morally just.
His sixteen national juntas with more than 5,000 members had an obligation to broadcast the vices of the Chinese to stop a further increase in either their numbers or economic power.
Among his followers Arana numbered several newspapers and 41 the majority of the people of Sonora and other states.
He continued that the Chinese were a dangerous group because of their economic monopolies and corruption of society. For these reasons they must go and Mexico must take steps to 42 amend the 1899 treaty.
In a letter to Arana in December, Soriano summarized his ideas on the Pro-Patbia campaign and the Chinese problem in Sonora. He agreed with Arana's theories about Chinese domination of.Sonora and the need to uplift the Mexican as a distinct ethnic element in the New World, but he dis approved of the disgraceful effect of the propaganda of 424041
40. Ibid.
41. Some of the papers that followed Arana and his campaign were Orientacidn (Hermosillo), La Palabra (Nogales), El Malkriado (Nacozari de Garcia), and Nuevos Horizontes (Pilares de Nacozari).
42. Arana to Soriano, 24 November 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paquete 4; 19 November 1917, ibid., paquete 5. 133
Pro-Patria. He thought that the program "left much to be desired, not only in matters of gentlemanly and noble con duct, but also in the most trivial rules of the education of men." Soriano charged that Arana forgot the cardinal rule that brought pride to the press. The press had to instill in the hearts of the masses doctrines of significance for universal fraternity, harmony, and brotherhood. Pro-Patria was remiss in this, and produced a vulgar response by dia tribe, insults, and parochialism. "Far from being for the public welfare, it exploited the little intelligence of our popular masses" to further Arana's political aspirations.
Soriano warned Arana that if he wanted to carry out patriotic work he must alter his approach, because many honorable 43 people read his words. Finally, on 4 December, Soriano issued another circular to all municipal presidents con cerning the recent disorders against the Chinese. He stressed the constitutional guarantees of free speech, association, and assembly, but cautioned against abuses of these rights by reviling the Chinese. Everyone must respect all guarantees inasmuch as the constitution prohibited per
secution of anyone because of his race or for any other reason. He also instructed all officials to see that no 43
43. Soriano to Arana, 4 December 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paquete 4, paquete 5. 134 demonstration occurred, but if one did, they were to punish 44 all culprits.
Despite the increase in the number of murders,
Sonorans refined their attacks on the Chinese in 1919 as more and more legal impediments appeared.Arana cam paigned for the position of Municipal President of Magdalena with an anti-Chinese program. After his victory, he
immediately increased the monthly taxes of Juan Lung Tain
from 250 to 400 pesos. He thought the precarious economic
situation and the dire straits of the poor dictated drastic measures.Therefore he decided to increase the taxes of
the Chinese who had capital, monopolized business, and had 47 no families. 47464445
44. Soriano Circular to all Municipal Presidents, 4 December 1917, AGG, tomo 3138, paquete 5.
45. Oficial Primero, Hermosillo, to Attorney General, 15 January 1919, AGG, tomo 3313; E. Garzca PSrez, Subsecretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to Governor, 7, 20 February 1920, AGG, tomo 3315; Jos6 Maria Pena, Municipal President, Imuris, to Governor, 7 March 1919, ibid.; for permits to several Chinese to carry arms to protect them selves from the attacks, see AGG, tomo 3312.
46. For information on the economic crisis and regulations on the distribution and prices of staples, see Sonora, Gobernador, Informe que rinde el C. General Plutarco Elias Calles, gobernador constitucional del estado de Sonora, ante la XXIV legislatura del mismo, acerca de sus gestiones durante el perlodo comprendido entre el lo de abril al 16 de septiembre de 1918 (Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno del Estado, 1918), p. 15.
47. Arana to Governor, 18 March 1919, AGG, tomo 3288; Governor to Juan Lung Tain, 13 January 1919, ibid.; Fon Qui, Magdalena, to de la Huerta, 20 December 1919, ibid.; Treasurer to Governor, 27 December 1919, ibid. 135 In the spring of 1919 the Chinese faced several serious threats to their position.. In March the Noriega
Theatre in Hermosillo advertised the coming attraction. The
Yellow Peril. The Chinese Mutual Cooperative Society immediately attacked the theatre for creating.an environment conducive to attacks on the Chinese. The Society also referred to ordinances that prohibited foreign films that denigrated Mexico. As a compromise measure, the Chinese colony petitioned the municipal council to name a committee to view the film to ascertain whether it denigrated Mexico or the Chinese. But before the commission met, Calles ordered the film to be shown since it was neither immoral 4 8 nor attacked any nation.
With the reemergence of Arana and another vicious campaign in March, 1919, the Chinese colony in the capital complained about the continuous slanderous attacks that the
authorities never punished. The Chinese charged that the
attacks were only for personal gain, not a patriotic
crusade. On 6 March Arana attacked the editor of El Tiempo
in a public letter after the latter charged that Arana's
campaign was unconstitutional. Arana countered that all 48
48. JosS Chong Bing to Governor, 26 March 1919, AGG, tomo 3300, Part 1; Chinese Colony, Hermosillo, to Municipal President, March 1919, ibid.; Calles to Municipal Presidents, Cananea and Nogales, 22 April 1919, ibid.; the film, made in the United States, did denigrate Chinese. 136 his activities were legal under the state and federal con- 49 stitutions.
Arana's propaganda campaign was partially effective in March, 1919/ with the passage of the state's Organic Law of Internal Administration. Article 60 stated that munici pal councils, for reasons of hygiene and health, would relegate all Chinese houses and stores to special barrios.
Article 61 allowed each council to establish its own pro cedures to carry out the law. Immediately the Chinese
ChargS protested that this violated the treaty and was a deliberate conspiracy against the Chinese because of their prosperity. The Secretary of Interior communicated this complaint to Calles and requested information on the new
law.49 5051
In a lengthy defense of the state legislature's
action, Calles told the Secretary of Interior that the
deputies, after long debate, passed the law for the good of
49. Chinese Colony, Hermosillo, to Municipal Presi dent, March 1919, AGG, tomo 3300, Part 1; Arana's Open Letter to the Director of El Tiempo, 6 March 1919, ibid.; for a similar article that defended the Chinese, see El Norte (Nogales, Sonora), 22 August 1917; for Arana's response to this article, see Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 29 August 1917; for Arana's recital of his accomplishments in Magdalena, see Arana's Open Letter, 6 March 1919, AGG, tomo 3300, Part 1.
50. Orientacidn (Hermosillo), 6 March 1919.
51. Chinese Charg§, Mexico, to Secretary of Foreign Relations, March 1919, in Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to Calles, 2 April 1919, AGG, tomo 3315; for viru lent anti-Chinese statements by State Deputy Rosendo L. Galaz, see Orientacidn (Hermosillo), 1 March 1919. 137 the state. Among the major considerations were the expe rience of the deputies in their own districts, and what they thought was an accurate reflection of public sentiment. In addition to these concerns, they realized the danger the
Chinese presented to public health, business, society, and the Mexican race. Calles added that Sonora suffered more than any other state from the errors of the Porfiriato,. especially in the disastrous flood of oriental immigrants.
Chinese dominated commerce and ran the largest businesses.
Even more alarming was the increase in their numbers from
859 in 1900, to 4,486 in 1910, to an alleged ten to fifteen thousand in 1919.^
Unable to defeat the law that created barrios, the
Chinese soon faced another and more serious threat to their businesses. On 13 April 1919, Calles announced the new
labor law which arose from Article 123 of the federal con
stitution. This federal regulation allowed state legis
latures to pass labor laws necessary in their own state if 53 they did not violate Article 123. For the Chinese,
Article 106 of the 1919 Labor Law was to impinge on their
economic power in the next twelve years. The article
stated that in "every business, workshop or industrial or *12
52. Calles to the Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 12 April 1919, AGG, tomo 3315.
53. Mexico, Nueva constituci6n, p. 38. 138 mercantile establishment, the owners were obliged to employ eighty per cent Mexicans.”
On 15 July, R. GonzSlez, Municipal President of
Cananea, emphasized in a circular that he would enforce the
Labor Law, especially Article 106. He granted all business men two weeks to conform. A Commission was to investigate all houses and businesses on that date to ensure compliance 55 with the law. In order to circumvent the law, the Chinese created societies in which all members were partners. Thus there were no employees and Article 106 would not apply.
Calles intervened and declared that mutual societies were not exempt from the law.^
Outside of Cananea, the largest number of complaints
arose from conditions in Magdalena. Alejandro Ungson,
President of the local Fraternal Union, complained that
jailers held Chinese incommunicado, beat them brutally, and
allowed the populace to stone them in the streets. Com
plaints surfaced against Arana because he was the municipal
president and sponsored the legislation against the Chinese.
54. Labor Law, 13 April 1919, AGG, tomo 3291, Part 1.
55. R. R. GonzSlez, Municipal President, Cananea, Circular, 15 July 1919, AGG, tomo 3349, Part 1; El Tiempo (Cananea), 1 July 1919.
56. GonzSlez to Governor, 28 July 1919, AGG, tomo . 3449, Part 1; Calles to GonzSlez, 29 July 1919, ibid,; Jim Son, representative of Chinese colony, Cananea, to Governor, 1 August 1919, ibid. ... 139
One of the regulations pushed by Arana was the notice that
"Chinese merchants . . . are strictly forbidden to joke in any way with their clients or customers, especially with little girls or women, as to do so is improper and detri- 57 mental to morality."
Although there were no attempts to enforce Article
106 in Guaymas in July, the Chinese, who owned seventy-five per cent of the grocery trade, feared oppressive legisla
tion. They also feared race riots similar to the ones in
1915 that cost Chinese considerable losses in merchandise.
In addition to their protests, the Nogales, Arizona,
Chamber of Commerce attacked the Labor Law because it hurt
Arizona trade and business.by disrupting the Chinese in 58 Sonora with whom they had extensive business ties.
Benjamin Ungson, President of the Chinese Fraternal
Union in Nogales, summarized his objections to anti-Chinese
legislation in a discourse on Article 106. He attacked the
law from three points of view, juridical, moral, and
practical. In addition to violations of individual guaran
tees in Article 1 and employer's rights in Article 4, the
57. Francis Dyer, United States Consul, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 14 July 1919, RDS 812.504/169, reel 162; George F. Summerlin, United States ChargS, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 11 August 1919, RDS 812.504/196, ibid.; Arana notice of May, 1919, ibid.
58. Bartley F. Yost, United States Consul, Nogales, to the Secretary of State, 26 July 1919, RDS 812.504/192, reel 162; Gil Rankin, Chamber of Commerce, Nogales, Arizona, to the Secretary of State, 22 August 1919, RDS 812.504/196, ibid. 140 law violated Article 123 of the federal constitution.
Ungson also quoted a 1914 United States Supreme Court decision that declared unconstitutional a similar Arizona law. These were Ungson's juridical criticisms of the eighty per cent law. From a moral viewpoint, Ungson protested national discrimination. He asked why should any Mexican, whether he was able or honest or not, have an advantage over a Chinese. In addition, freedom of labor was a necessity for a sound political economy. And finally, from a prac-.. tical viewpoint, the employer lost trained and honest employees if he had to replace them with new ones. Besides, he added, imagine the chaos if he had to "amputate part of 59 his employees" if he had less than five.
In a letter to.the.Oputo Municipal President on 24
September, the governor stressed the need to prevent demon
strations against the Chinese. He stated that this violence
discredited Mexico in the eyes of the world, especially
since the United States press condemned Mexico for her
failure to prevent this violence. The governor felt that
the disturbances gave the foreigners an excuse to accuse
Mexican authorities of complicity in the outbursts. Mexico
must prevent this to be welcomed into the "concert of
59. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 5 August 1919, FDS 812.504/194, reel 162; Benjamin Ungson, President, Chinese Fraternal Union, Nogales, to Governor, 24 January 1920, AGG, tomo 3367, Part 1. 141 nations.11 De la Huerta urged that all violence end, but he felt that this would have fatal consequences, especially in Cananea, where anti-Chinese sentiment ran high. And again, Cananea led the way with the first violation of the governor's request to forestall violence. The municipal council decreed the expulsion of the Chinese to take effect by 31 December 1919. On 25 November the council notified the Chinese that they could not import any more merchandise and must sell their entire stocks by the end of the year.
Beginning 1 January 1920 the council stipulated that all remaining Chinese property revert to the council. For the convenience of the Chinese the council provided a train to take the Chinese to the border on New Year's Day.
Immediate Chinese protested. Ungson condemned the action as an.intrigue of Mexican storeowners. Appalled at the callous injustices the Chinese faced, the Chinese Lega tion in Mexico blamed Arana's personal greed to acquire more business as the motivation behind the decree of expulsion.
If the Mexicans desired to reduce Chinese competition, the
Charge proposed a limit on Chinese immigration to Mexico. 6061
60. Circular #177, Hermosillo, 22 October 1919, AGG, tomo 3328; Dyer to the Secretary of State, 11 November 1919, RDS 812.5593/3, reel 204; Governor to Municipal President, Oputo, 24 September 1919, AGG, tomo 3312.
61. De la Huerta to Berlanga, 29 November 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1; Municipal Council Decree, Cananea, 25 November 1919, ibid.; note, Department of State, Washington, 12 January 1920, RDS 812.5593/21, reel 204. 142
Later this suggestion assumed importance when negotiations began to renew the 1899 treaty. At this time protests had no effect on local or state officials, only on the federal authorities. President Carranza instructed de la Huerta to prevent local officials from expelling the Chinese and to order their protection. On 22 December General Juan Torres,
Chief of Military Operations in Sonora, told de la Huerta to prevent any violence.^
From another direction, the Cananea Municipal
President and Governor de la Huerta faced protests from Hum
Fook and Jos§ Chang, prominent merchants in Cananea. The former represented 125 Cananea.Chinese merchants and the latter another 38 in a protest against the expulsion decree.
Hum Fook complained that expulsion meant their economic ruin. The Chinese then asked the Nogales district judge for a writ of amparo. After they explained the action of the municipal council and the inaction of the governor, they reinforced their contention that the decree was illegal.
Not only did the decree violate constitutional guarantees of liberty and freedom to engage in business, but it also 62
62. Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to de la Huerta, n.d., 15 November 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1? General Juan Torres, Chief of Military Operations, La Misa, to de la Huerta, 22 December 1919, ibid.; The New York Times, 13 December 1919; Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, to Dyer, 30 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/12a, reel 204. 143 violated the treaty of 1899 and Article 1 of the Labor Law which prohibited interference in anyone's business.
As the date" neared for the expulsion of the Chinese,
Augustin Centeno BSrcena presented the Chinese case to the court. Attacking the council's statement of unfair Chinese competition as a subterfuge, Centeno BSrcena accused the council of being a front for a few speculators who, unable to compete with the Chinese, desired their expulsion. Re calling de la Huerta's, inaugural address of 14 September
1919 in which he promised to end violence against the
Chinese, because it gave Sonora a bad name, The Chinese's lawyer suggested it was time for de la Huerta to fulfill his 64 promise.
On 27 December the district judge presented the amparo petitions to the governor. Upon receiving the charges, de la Huerta presented his defense. In spite of
President Carranza's instructions, he charged the Chinese violated Article 106 of the Labor Law, therefore he and the 6364
63. Hum Fook, merchant, Cananea, to de la Huerta, 11 December 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1; Chinese Colony, Cananea, to District Judge, 25 December 1919, ibid.; Labor Law, 13 April 1919, Article 1; for an analysis of the juicio de amparo, whose aim was to protect private persons against the violation, by public officials, of the guarantees of the first twenty-nine articles of the Constitution, see Richard D. Baker, Judicial Review in Mexico: A Study of the Amparo Suit, Institute of Latin American Studies, Latin American Monographs, 22 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1971).
64. Augustin Centeno BSrcena, Hermosillo, to de la Huerta, 15 December 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1. 144
Cananea council were correct in closing stores and allowing no new ones to open. In addition he stressed his strict adherence to the law while he catered to public interest and the national conscience. He foresaw serious conse quences if the judge suspended the Cananea ordinance.^
In two separate decisions on the cases of Hum Fook and Josd Chang, the court suspended the Cananea act of 25
November 1919. Governor de la Huerta advised Julian S.
GonzSlez, Municipal President of Cananea, to appeal the two decisions.^ Despite Carranza's directive and the court's orders, many observers believed that de la Huerta would not comply with the decision. Francisco Chiyoc of the Chinese
Fraternal Union in Cananea told J. M. Gibbs, United States
Acting Consular Agent in Cananea, that GonzSlez and de la
Huerta did not consider Carranza's promises of protection to the Chinese as binding on them. The amparo suspended the
Cananea decree and the Chinese remained, though not un molested. Chiyoc also stated that the municipal president of Cananea accepted money from the Chinese during his entire term. But now he felt that GonzSlez had milked them of all 6566
65. L. Castaneda, for the District Judge, Nogales, to Governor, 27 December 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1; de la Huerta to Castaneda, 28 December 1919, ibid.
66. Castaneda to Governor, 29 December 1919 (two separate letters with same date), AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1; Governor to Castaneda, 31 December 1919, ibid.; de la Huerta to GonzSlez, 19 January 1920, ibid. 145 that he could, thus he agitated for their expulsion to strengthen his political position.
Sonora in 1919 was definitely hostile to the Chinese who owned and operated most of the mercantile business. De la Huerta ran for office on a program that included a demand for the expulsion of the Chinese. In Cananea labor agita tors incited the populace and officials against the
Chinese.In Nogales agitation against the Chinese was
less intense and demonstrations were rare. Very few Chinese
closed shops in Nogales and even less left the city.
Guaymas was also free of violence against the Chinese since
the outbreaks of 1915. This was strange considering the
openly hostile attitude of the press and local officials to
the Chinese monopoly of business. But here again graft
played a significant role in keeping hositility a vocal
exercise. In exchange for immunity, the officials extorted
money from the Chinese.7069 6867
67. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 30 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/15, reel 204; J. M. Gibbs, United States Acting Consular Agent, Cananea, to Dyer, 22 December 1919, in Dyer to the Secretary of State, n.d., RDS 812.5593/17, reel 204.
68. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 10 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/12; 28 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/17, reel 204.
69. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 28 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/17, reel 204.
70. Yost to the Secretary of State, 25 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/19, reel 204. 146
. At the beginning of 1920 the Chinese remained in
Sonora and anti-Chinese legislation was ^in a state of limbo, either because of writs of amparo, presidential restric tions, or the lucrative practice of accepting graft or donations from the Chinese.^ Although fifty Chinese left
Sonora in December and an average of thirty more left each month, an influx of new arrivals from Sinaloa maintained the
Chinese at an estimated 5,000. De la Huerta suggested the.
Chinese foresake business and go into agriculture as a
compromise to forestall drastic measures. The Chinese
rejected this because they would have no protection in the
outlying areas. A second suggestion, that a number of
Chinese leave Sonora monthly until all or most left, was
equally distasteful. Moreover, with a constant increment of 72 Chinese from Sinaloa, this plan would not work.
Upon his accession to the governorship Adolfo de la
Huerta pursued an anti-Chinese campaign. He consistently
supported the efforts of Arana and others against the 7271
71. For payments and donations from the Chinese to local officials in 1920, see AGG, tomo 3375, Part 1, tomo 3362, Part 1.
72. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 27 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/13, reel 204; 28 December 1919, RDS 821.5593/17, ibid.; for manifestations of support for de la Huerta against the Chinese, see Pablo Aguilar, Mexico, to de la Huerta, 23 December 1919, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 1; Governor Ramdn F. Iturbe, CuliacSn, to de la Huerta, 23 December 1919, ibid.; Ramdn Murieta, Municipal President, Cocorit, to Governor, 27 December 1919, ibid.; E. L. Rivas, et al., workers representatives, Hermosillo, to de la Huerta, 27 December 1919, ibid. 147
Chinese from his election campaign to the end of his term.
In addition to blocking the return of Chinese to Sonora, de la Huerta supported the Cananea expulsion decree, resisted efforts from Mexico City to protect the Chinese, and en forced his choice of an anti-Chinese municipal council on
Guaymas. He also advocated amendments to the 1899 treaty to limit Chinese immigration and rights in Mexico.
References to the treaty and its renewal opened a 73 new stage in the anti-Chinese campaign. . Magdalena citi
zens circulated a petition to abrogate.the treaty and rein
force the governor's plans. De.la Huerta advocated the
abrogation of the treaty in addition to the expulsion of the
Chinese. He intimated to Consul Dyer that abrogation was
his next goal because the situation in Sonora had stabilized,
after the failure of the Cananea expulsion decree. In
December, 1919, his petition to annul the treaty reached the
national senate, which in turn handed it over to the Foreign
Relations Committee. De la Huerta told Dyer that the Senate
began work on his idea to abrogate the treaty and by this
method he thought "that very soon the Chinese problem . . .
will be solved.74 73
73. For a report that alleged that over 800 armed Yaquis, in the pay of the Chinese in Sonora, were going to join the Chinese in a rebellion on 25 December 1919, see El Demdcrata (Mexico), 26 December 1919.
74. P. Ortega, Municipal President, Magdalena, to governor, 12 January 1920, AGG, tomo 3378; Dyer to the Secretary of State, 27 December 1919, RDS 812.5593/13, reel 148
Although Chinese suffered attacks throughout the state, the Arizpe district was the scene of continuous abuses. In 1921 Fronteras and Agua Prieta rivaled Cananea for outbreaks against the Chinese. In November, Felipe
GonzSlez Cortes, who had attempted to stir up the Guaymas populace against the Chinese in January, appeared in Agua
Prieta. In a large demonstration he stressed the need to 75 stop Chinese immigration. The Chinese of the Arizpe district charged Mexicans with harboring malice toward them and deliberately molesting them. Benjamin Ungson indicated to the governor that two political parties in an election in
Fronteras prejudiced the Chinese there. One party supported
Francisco Blanco and circulated flyers, which indicated
Chinese supported his rival, Felipe Luna. The flyer, in
pidgin Spanish, imitated the way the Chinese spoke and
stressed the benefits the Chinese would get if Luna won:
"We like Mesicans cuz they vely dumb, if Filipi plesident
we leceive many potatoes, chili, glocelies; we agglandize 75
204; 7 January 1920, RDS 812.5593/20, ibid.; Secretary of State to Charles Tanney, United States ChargS ad Interim, Peking, 19 January 1920, RDS 812.5593/21, ibid.; de la Huerta to Dyer, 3 January 1920, in Dyer to the Secretary of State, 29 January 1920, RDS 812.5593/23, ibid.
75. Hiang hieng Li, to Governor Francisco Elias, 7 November 1921, AGG, tomo 3471; Y. Trevino, Municipal President, Agua Prieta, to Governor, 15 November 1921, ibid. oulselves, but he lefuse Mesicans tax us.” Ungson requested the governor order the campaigners to campaign without insulting foreigners. The Secretary of Interior 77 ordered the flyers removed. The use of flyers to denigrate the Chinese was another common feature of the anti-Chinese crusade. In February, 1921, Li complained to Governor Pina about flyers in Nogales that ruined the good name of Chinese and prejudiced their business. Li asked the arrest and punishment of the author of this offending poem:
Since the Chinese entered here our country is in ruin, because the gold they hoard then send to China.
What sorrow it gives me to see what is happening on seeing a pretty Mexican with whom Chinese are marrying.
Do not buy from the Chinese think with your head, because to consume from the Chinese is to make them richer.
I wish that the Government would have the compassion and 7776
76. Quoted in political flyer, in Ungson to Governor, 30 July 1921, AGG, tomo 3471; for the arrival in 1921 of a new Chinese Consul, Hiang hieng Li, see AGG, tomo 3360.
77. Manuel Wong, Agua Prieta, to Governor, 27 July 1921, AGG, tomo 3471; Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, to Ungson, 8 August 1921, ibid. 150
colonize the Chinese -g and restrict immigration.
Another constant threat to the Chinese in Sonora 79 were the degradations of the Yaquis. As a result of
Yaqui raids, the state government and several towns decreed that all Chinese merchants must leave the area in June, 8 0 1921. Bdcum's municipal president stressed the need for haste in removing the Chinese. Reiterating the problems they faced from the Yaqui raids, he stressed the need to remove Chinese interference with the "moralizing work of the 81 government" among the Indians.
Another crisis that exacerbated tensions in the summer of 1921 concerned a drastic increase in taxes on the
Chinese in Guaymas. Carlos Tang and Martin Fong, who8179 8078
78. Quoted in poem, in Li to Pina, 10 February 1921, AGG, tomo 3471.
79. For the protests of Rademacher, German Vice Consul, Guaymas, against the expulsion of the Chinese from the Yaqui Valley after Yaqui raids in 1917, see Rademacher to Interim Governor Gilberto Valenzuela, AGG, tomo 3141, expediente 2; F. L. Yuen to Valenzuela, 17 January 1917, ibid.; Valenzuela to Rademacher, 11 January 1917, ibid.; General Francisco Serrano, Military Commandant, Guaymas, to Valenzuela, 13 January 1917, ibid.
80. Memo, Division of Far Eastern Affairs, Depart ment of State, 25 June 1921, RDS 812.5593/44, reel 204; Malcolm Cutter Little, attorney, Richardson Construction Company, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 8 June 1921, NA 312.93/199; Yost to the Secretary of State, 11 June 1921, NA 312.93/200.
81. Municipal President, BScum, to Police Chief, Yaqui Valley, n.d., in Yost to the Secretary of State, 19 June 1921, NA 312.93/201. 151 represented sixteen other Chinese, informed Li that their 8 2 taxes increased between forty and 300 per cent in May.
The increase was a surprise to them since they expected a decrease in taxation because population was down drastically since 1917. With the lack of work in the city, many
Mexicans went elsewhere, thus their surprise when taxes went up. They feared closings because they were unable to pay the higher taxes. They also feared for their creditors
if they closed and failed to pay their debts. Li attacked
the regulations as unjust and contributory to the ruin of
Chinese business in a period of dire economic crisis. He
asked de la Huerta to fix the irregularities because it was unfair to treat Chinese differently than other 83 foreigners. The governor said he could not interfere,
because the taxes affected all citizens, not only the
Chinese. The taxes remained, as the governor replied that
he thought it "useless to continue . J . this unnecessary 84 and polemical discussion." 838482
82. For the new taxes for the Chinese merchants in Guaymas, see Appendix C, Table C.2.
83. Carlos Tang and Martin Fong, merchants, Guaymas, to Li, 15 June 1921, in Li to de la Huerta, 16 June 1921, AGG, tomo 3471; Oficial Primero to Li, 17 June 1921, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 2; Governor to Li, 21, 22, 28 June 1921, ibid.
84. Oficial Primero to Li, 29 June 1921, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 2; Li to Governor, 2 July1921, ibid.; Oficial Primero to Li, 5 July 1921, ibid. 152
By late 1921 Arana's campaign, begun in 1916, reached its peak with constant harassment of the Chinese by violence and legal devices. Although Arana himself had died early in 1921 and Pro-Patria folded, the press con
tinued his campaigns.^5 El Sol of Hermosillo ran anti-
Chinese articles, and a new paper, La Pulga, of Nogales,
replaced Pro-Patria as the leading crusader against the
Chinese. Li protested these attacks on his conationals
because, as he saw it, the paper tried to incite disorder
and inflame public opinion against the Chinese. He appealed 8 6 to Governor Elias to stop the campaign.
Beginning from three premises. La Pulga advanced its
anti-Chinese campaign. First and foremost, government
officials contributed to the Chinese position. Second,
Mexicans, victims of poverty, allowed the Chinese to
prosper. And finally, in the not so distant future the
editor foresaw the possibility of a Chinese governor of
Sonora if the Sonorans failed to take punitive action. He
claimed that gold, the Chinese "religion," placed in the
correct hands, brought Mexican women to Chinese beds. Thus86 85
85. For an opinion of Arana's son Enrique that his father was poisoned by the Chinese, see notes appended to the Arana Papers by Bernard Fontana, University of Arizona Field Historian, who received the papers from Enrique Arana.
86. Li to Ellas, 12 December, 28 October 1921, AGG, tomo 3425. 153
these "bestial quasimodos" gradually ruined the Mexican 87 race.
In his second article the editor of La Pulga turned
from the question of the prostitution of Mexican women to
the drain of unemployed Mexicans from Sonora. He charged
that Chinese enriched themselves in Sonora and returned to
China while Mexicans starved at home and faced discrimina
tion in the United States. Unable to meet Chinese competi
tion, Mexicans witnessed the appearance of Chinese stores on
every corner. Even worse, they employed no Mexicans despite go the existence of Article 106.
In the third issue of his anti-Chinese crusade, the
editor of La Pulga looked with horror on Chinese merchants
who dominated the central market, while there were but a few
Mexican merchants. He charged they invaded every business 8 9 until the Mexican was a mere tributary to them. La
Pulga* s editor called for a grandiose meeting of protest
against the Chinese to support the idea of a special
Chinese barrio. He also suggested a special plea to the
state legislature to prohibit the immigration of Chinese
into Sonora unless they brought 1,000 pesos with them. The
editor also proposed a plan to create an anti-Chinese police
O C La Pulga (Nogales, Sonora), 21 October 1921.
CO CO Ibid., 22 October 1921.
89. Ibid., 23 October 1921. 154 force to be supported by a head tax levied on every Chinese. resident. Surveilance of Chinese and the prevention of concubinage between them and Mexicans comprised the important tasks of the police. Another proposal indicated the need to prevent disease by naming a sanitary inspector to visit all Chinese residences. Finally, the paper exhorted the Mexicans to break up large enclaves of Chinese 90 in the state.
While Sonorans took steps to organize state govern ment under the new constitution and also to weaken the
Chinese position by legal means, Carranza had begun his tenure as constitutional president and decreed a return to constitutional rule in all states. Of the nineteen governors elected, fourteen were Carranza's allies, while only three were definitely hostile. Among the latter was 91 Calles in Sonora. During the last three years of his tenure, Carranza faced considerable obstacles. He did little to fulfill the aspirations of labor and agrarian reformers. And he was unable to enforce subsoil legislation because of foreign resistance and rebel control of the oil areas. But he faced more serious domestic crises. Poor climatic conditions and uncertain markets forced
90. Ibid.
91. For a list of the newly elected governors, see Charles C. Cumberland, Mexican Revolution: The Constitu tionalist Years (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1972), pp. 370-371.
! 155 agricultural production to new lows, as unemployment reached
new highs. Beset by these dire economic conditions
Carranza faced renewed opposition within his ranks.
On 1 June 1919 Alvaro 0breg6n announced his can
didacy for the presidency. As the economic crisis deepened
he rapidly gained support, as Carranza's hold on the
government deteriorated. Relations between Carranza and
Sonora, Obregdn1s stronghold, gradually broke down after
Carranza's constant interference in the state's Chinese
policy. Carranza then supported Sonoran Ignacio Bonillas
for the presidency. He also interfered directly in the
state. With de la Huerta's accession as constitutional
governor in September, 1919, the rift widened. First,
Carranza claimed that the Sonora River was federal property
not Sonoran. He then named Chihuahuan Manuel M. DiSguez
as head of the military in Sonora. Although the Yaquis
were now subdued, Carranza informed de la Huerta that he •
would send federal troops to deal with them. In April,
1920, faced with this threat, the state legislature
declared that the despatch of federal troops would be an
attack on the state's sovereignty. On 9 April Sonora broke 92 with Carranza, who ordered troops to the state. Soon
rebels appeared in Sinaloa, Zacatecas, Nuevo Le6n,
Michoacan, and elsewhere. On 23 April the revolt gained *
92. Dyer to the Secretary of State, 10 April 1920, RDS 812.00/23557, reel 70. 156 official sanction with the proclamation of the Plan of Agua
Prieta by the new Sonoran triumvirate, Calles, de la
Huerta, and Obregdn. The plan denounced Carranza for violations of individual guarantees, states rights and the
Constitutional Revolution. The plan also named de la Huerta 93 as supreme chief. Carranza's forces lost battles or deserted, thus on 7 May he left the capital for Veracruz in a disorganized flight. When he camped for the night on 20
May he was killed by rebels in Tlaxcalantongo, De la Huerta assumed the office of provisional president until the election of ObregSn, who succeeded him.
Obregdn's ascendancy to the presidency occurred at a time when Chinese immigration increased considerably, 94 especially to Baja California. Chinese immigration, which
93. For the Plan of Agua Prieta, see GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos, pp. 251-255.
94. For information on the life and treatment of the Chinese in Baja's cotton fields, see Eugene Keith Chamberlin, "Mexican Colonization Versus American Interests in Lower California," Pacific Historical Review, XX (February, 1951), pp. 43-55; United States, Department- of Commerce, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Special Agents Series, 220, Mexican West Coast and Lower.California: A Commercial and Industrial Survey (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1923), pp. 293-295, 305-306, 311-312; Lew Ling, The Chinese in North America: A Guide to Their Life and Progress (Los Angeles: East-West Culture Publishing Association, 1949), p. 164; Harry Carr, "The Kingdom of Cantu: Why Lower California is an Oasis of Perfect Peace in Bloody Mexico," Sunset, XXXVIII (April, 1917), p. 65; for an estimate of over 2,000 in the cotton fields in 1919, see Frederick Simpich, "A Mexican Land of Canaan: Marvelous Riches on the Wonderful West Coast of Our. Neighbor Republic," The National Geographic Magazine, XXXV (September, 1919), p. 329; for a later report of an increase to 3,000 by 1921, 157 declined to 3,300 from 1914 to 1918, underwent a resurgence to 6,100 between 1919 and 1921, according to Mexican 95 immigration statistics. The influx of Chinese caused great concern, thus the press and several federal Senators proposed restrictions.^ Faced with this opposition and increasing demands for abrogation of the treaty with China,
Obregdn's government moved toward an accommodation with
China, particularly in reference to the immigration of 97 Chinese laborers. After long diplomatic negotiations and
see "The Chinese Population Abroad," International Labour Review, VI (November, 1922), p. 778; for de la Huerta's views on this immigration, see Mexico, Diario de los debates de la Camara de Diputados del Congreso de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, XXIX Legislatura (1 September 1920), p. 11.
95. For immigration statistics for these years, see Appendix A, Table A.5.
96. For this opposition, see Excelsior (Mexico), 19 May 1919; Mexico, Diario de los debates de la Camara de Senadores del Congreso de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, XXVIII Legislatura (13 June 1919), pp. 4-5 (hereafter cited as DPS); El Heraldo de Mexico (Mexico), 23 May, 2 June 1920.
97. For initial attempts to alter the treaty, see Mexico, Presidente, Informe rendido por el C. Adolfo de la Huerta presidente constitucional substitute de la Reptiblica, ante el H. Congreso de la Unidn, el dia lo de septiembre de 1920 y contestaciSn del C. presidente de la Camara de Diputados (Mexico: Imprenta del "Diario Oficial," 1920), p. 16; El Universal (Mexico), 3, 8 March 1920; Robert T.. Pollard, China's Foreign Relations, 1917-1931 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933), p. 99; Mexico, Presidente, Informes rendidos por el C. Gral. Alvaro Obreg6n presidente constitucional de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos ante el H. Congreso de la Uni6n durante el perlodo de 1921 a 1924, y contestaciones de los CC. presidentes del citado Congreso en el mismo perlodo (4 vols., Mexico: Talleres Linotipogrdficos del "Diario Oficial," 1924), I (1921), p. 20; Summerlin to the Secretary of State, 5 April 1921, Decimal File 712.932, 158 strident debate in the legislature, A. J. Pani and Ouang Ki
Tseng signed an amendment to the treaty on 25 November 98 1921. Article II of the "modus vivendi" prohibited the immigration of foreign labor to Mexico. With the exception 99 of this article, the 1899 treaty remained in force.
Chinese immigration declined after 1921, not only in total numbers, but also in relationship to other nationalities.
Chinese, who comprised 12.49 per cent of all immigrants from 1911 to 1915, and 6.69 from 1916 to 1920, fell to only 2.61 per cent of all entrants from 1921 to 1924.^^^
Despite official harassment, depredations by irresponsible elements, immigration restrictions, and an organized anti-Chinese campaign in Sonora, the Chinese survived into 1922 and continued to dominate the retail trade in most goods and the wholesale and retail grocery businesses. Passive resistance, complaints to the in United States, Department of State, Records of the Department of State Relating to Political Relations Between Mexico and Other States, 1910-1929, National Archives Micro-, film Publications, Microcopy M-315 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1961), reel 2 (hereafter cited as DS with appropriate classification numbers).
98. For legislative debate on this issue, see DDS, XXIX (9 November 1921), p. 25; XXIX (15 November 1921), p. 15.
99. Diario Oficial (Mexico), 25 November 1921; for a copy of the treaty and the "modus vivendi," see AGG, tomo 3611, Part 1.
100. Imre Ferenczi, editor. International Migra tions, Demographic Monographs, 7 (2 vols., rpt. 1929, New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1969), II, pp. 271-273, 286-287. 159 authorities in Sonora, Mexico and Washington, and the willingness of officials to accept bribes and to look the other way, all combined to mitigate the pressures of Arana and his cohorts. A tight-knit organization into cooperative
societies also aided the Chinese to resist expulsion and
financial ruin.^^^ But Arana had established the organiza
tion of juntas, groups of merchants and virulent press
campaigns that subsequent crusaders were to use with more
effect against the hated Chinese. Arana also established
the procedures of legal impediments and official harassment
which later anti-Chinese leaders refined and extended. But
ultimately Arana’s campaign was a failure as the Chinese
remained with as much, if not more, financial weight than
before 1916.
Faced with constant opposition, both in the public
and private sectors, Chinese encountered considerable
obstacles in the Sonora of Calles and de la Huerta. Except
for the legal qualms of Soriano, Chinese found the governors
hostile, or at the least uncooperative. Although the
Chinese population of Sonora fell from 4,486 to 3,639 during
the ten years since the revolution began, they still
101. For lists of officers in Sonoran Chinese societies, see AGG, tomo 3378 for 1920, and AGG, tomo 3471, paquete 4 for 1921; for an analysis of organization and aims of these societies, see John W. Dye, United States Consul, Ciudad JuSrez, to the Secretary of State, 3 June 1921, RDS 812.43C44, reel 151. 160 102 comprised the largest Chinese colony in Mexico. Figure 5 indicates centers of Chinese population in Mexico in 1921.
Despite the coordinated campaign of state-wide proportions, the Chinese survived and prospered. But with the beginning of the "Sonoran Dynasty" and the movement of Sonorans to the presidency and other high offices in Mexico City, in combination with a rapid increase in Chinese colonies in
Tamaulipas, Baja, and other states, the campaign spread
throughout Mexico. With a national voice, Sonorans carried
their campaign beyond the confines of the northwest.
Temporary roadblocks, such as Chinese bribes and the need
to curtail violent outbreaks in order to enhance Mexico's
international prestige, impeded the success of the anti-
Chinese campaigners. But they continued to employ Arana's
organization and procedures and to use the national congress
as a forum to restrict Chinese immigration and to advocate
abrogation of the 1899 Sino-Mexican treaty.
The end of the violent phase of the Revolution in
Sonora, the subjugation of the Yaquis and the appearance of
a new constitution transformed anti-Chinese campaigns in
the state. The violent attacks diminished in number and
intensity. Simultaneously legal restrictions proliferated.
Calles and de la Huerta rose from the middle class barred
from political power during the Porfiriato to dominance of
102. For population figures by states for 1921, see Appendix B, Table B.5. STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS 1 - FEDERAL DISTRICT 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4- TLAXCALA 5 HIDALGO 6 - MEXICO 7 - OUERETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
LEGEND
2305-4608
1 1 5 3-23 0*
INTANA 577-1152 R00
289- 576
145-288 1-144 161
Figure 5. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1921 162 the state during the Carranza years. Both were imbued with a dislike of foreign interests, especially United States and
Chinese. Supported by local and state administrators from similar backgrounds they hounded Chinese with legal restric tions. Armed with the new constitution and an emergent nationalism they fully supported Arana's campaign of "Mexico for the Mexicans; China for the Chinese." Despite Arana's death the anti-Chinese forces continued to advocate expul sion of the Chinese’. In 1922 this campaign increased.
Aided by the "modus vivendi, immigration restriction, a ■>f •* national forum and the experiences of the Arana campaign,
Sonorans, led by Governors Francisco Ellas and Adolfo de la
Huerta, took advantage of a tong war to oust Chinese from the state.
r CHAPTER 6
TONG WAR AND RENEWED OPPOSITION, 1922-1926
In April and May, 1922, a series of brutal slayings of Chinese occurred in Sinaloa and Sonora. Authorities found over twenty bullet-riddled bodies of Chinese in the streets.. In these instances police were successful in apprehending the criminals, because the murderers remained at the scene of the crime and surrendered meekly. An important difference between these crimes and previous attacks was the nationality of the assassins. They were all Chinese. In the spring of 1922 a tong war between rival
Chinese factions provided the backdrop for a new attempt to oust them from the state,1
In Sonora and Sinaloa two rival societies, the
Nationalist League and the Chee Rung Tong, fought each other to claim the support of the Chinese residents there. The weaker, the Nationalists, began a campaign against the Che
Rung Tong (CRT) to strip it of its adherents.^ Without the 12
1. Democrat (Nogales, Arizona), 15 June 1922; Tucson Citizen (Tucson), 14 June 1922; for information on tong wars in Baja, see Baja California, Gobernador, Memoria administrativa del gobierno del Distrito Norte de la Baja California, 1924-1927, Abelardo L. Rodriguez (Mexicali: n.p., 1928), pp. 6, 16, 229.
2. Chinese Minister, Mexico, to Municipal President, MazatlSn, 25 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4.
163 164 support of the Chinese consul, who supported the
Nationalists, or of the Mexican government, who recognized his government, the CKT bore the brunt of responsibility for the assassinations and saw its bretheren deported."*
These societies had a legal existence in Sonora as social and business associations to aid the resident Chinese. The
CKT, often called a Masonic Society by Mexicans, had an involved secret ritual that aroused the suspicions of
Sonorans. Arana noted the threat of such a secret society in 1917 in Pro-Patria.34 5
After the victory of the Nationalists of Sun Yat Sen over the Manchu or Ching Dynasty in the Chinese Revolution of 1910, overseas Chinese supported the newly-formed
Nationalist government. Supporters of the regime joined the Nationalist League in Mexico. When the Nationalists denied participation in the new cabinet to others who participated in the revolution, a crisis ensued which was
to throw China into turmoil for over a decade. The Triad
Society, long a bitter enemy of the Manchus, resisted their
exclusion from the cabinet. Formed in the early eighteenth
century, the Triad Society dedicated itself to the overthrow
of the Manchus,^ In the Americas the overseas Chinese in
3. El Sol (Cananea), 4 May 1922,
4. Pro-Patria (Magdalena), 1, 15 August 1917.
5. Chinese Nationalist Party Broadside, Sonora, October 1922, AGG, tomo 3588. 165 this society called their organization the Chee Kung Tong and in Mexico it appealed to the large number of Cantonese.^
Against the backdrop of internecine strife in China, these two rival factions carried out a series of assassina tions in Sonora in May, 1922. Beginning in Cananea, the series of murders spread to Hermosillo, Guaymas, Nogales, 7 Cocorit, and Los Mochis, Sinaloa. Authorities appre- 8 hended most of the assassins. Although only Chinese were victims and the culprits went to jail, Sonorans took advantage of the unrest to vilivy them. A state-wide dragnet to apprehend all members of the CRT became a state objective. Opponents of the Chinese demanded the applica tion of Article 33 of the federal constitution, which6 78
6. Robert Wells Ritchie, "The Wars of the Tongs: Justice in New York's Yellow Triangle,11 Harper's Weekly, LIV C27 August 1910), p. 8; Lois Mitchison, The Overseas Chinese: A Background Book (Chester Springs, Pennsylvania: Dufour Editions, 1961), p. 34; Stewart Culin, The I King or "Patriotic Rising" (rpt. 1887, San Francisco: R and E Research Associates, 1970), p. 2; C. N. Reynolds, "The Chinese Tongs," The American Journal of Sociology, XL (March, 1935), p. 618; Stanford M. Lyman, The Asian in the West, Social Science and Humanities Publication, IV (Reno and Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press, 1970), p. 39.
7. Yost to the Secretary of State, 20 May 1922, NA 312.93/211; William E. Chapman, United States Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 18 June 1922, NA 312.93/217.
8. Alfonso Almada, President, Supreme Tribunal, Hermosillo, to Governor, 6 October 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Dyer to the Secretary of State, 5 May 1922, NA 312.93/209. 166 provided the president with the power to oust unsuitable g foreigners,
Immediately after the first murders, opposition to the Chinese increased because Mexicans feared accidental deaths of innocent Sonorans.Federal troops guarded closed Chinese stores in Guaymas and Hermosillo, where
Sonorans threatened to bomb the stores if they failed to reopen. With Chinese establishments closed, goods became scarce and the prices rose. As the unrest caused by the assassinations gradually intensified the public became more hostile in the face of widespread scarcities. Finally the
Chinese reopened to save their businesses.^
As the first step in the elimination of the violence between the rival tongs, the governor ordered, on 1 June 12 1922, the collection of all arms held by the Chinese.
Throughout the state municipal presidents and police
officials collected Chinese weapons. Despite protests by
the Chinese that they needed the weapons for protection,
local officials carried out the order. After the constant 9101112
9. Mexico, Nueva constitucidn, p. 15.
10, Excelsior (Mexico), 24 June 1922; for reports on a Chinese gun duel that almost killed a Mexican girl, see L, G. Montano, citizen, Guaymas, to Elias, 8 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523,
11. Yost to the Secretary of State, 10 June 1922, NA 312.93/213.
12, Circular to all Municipal Presidents, Hermosillo, 1 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523. 167 harassments of the past thirty years, the Chinese were well armed. In Huatabampo thirty-three Chinese surrendered thirty-one pistols and two rifles. And in Pilares de
Nacozari police collected twenty-three pistols and ten rifles from only seventeen Chinese. These were typical of the reports received by the Secretary of Justice. Although the Chinese surrendered hundreds of arms, many people were 13 convinced that many more arms remained hidden.
As a result of the first series of arrests in the dragnet, 193 Chinese received jail terms in the state penitentiary in Hermosillo. Less than ten per cent of these belonged to the Nationalist group, while over sixty per cent were members of the "masonic party." Of the total, seventy per cent were merchants. Members of the CKT protested against the arrests as the unconstitutional action of a 14 "miserable governor." The arrest of these Chinese
engendered a host of other problems for the Sonoran
authorities. Immediately, many Chinese protested the
arrest of several Chinese who were innocent of participation 1314
13. Municipal President, Huatabampo, to Secretary of Justice, Hermosillo, 11 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Municipal President, Nacozari, list of weapons, 5 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Miguel Palafox, Municipal President, Caborca, to Governor, 7 June 1922, ibid.
14, Undated list of Chinese prisoners in the State Penitentiary, Hermosillo, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Lin Mo Poing, member CKT, CuliacSn, to Alfonso Ley, member CKT, Hermosillo, 10 August 1922, in Narciso C. Yillen, Secretary, Nationalist League, CuliacSn, to Governor, Hermosillo, 15 August 1922, ibid. 168 in the murders. Secretary of Interior, Plutarco Elias
Calles, communicated Chinese protests to Governor Elias and cautioned him to ensure protection to those Chinese not involved in the murders.
Faced with these problems the governor proclaimed \ one dictim as a reason to free the Chinese. Article 33 referred only to foreigners; therefore, any Chinese who was a naturalized Mexican and was not directly responsible for any of the murders could be freed.^ Despite this order, some Chinese took matters into their own hands and tried to free their compatriots by other means. Huatabampo's municipal president informed his superiors in the capital that Chinese in his area frequently used coded messages to telegraph other Chinese in Sonora. Immediately after these suspicious activities, Chinese in Cumpas and Cocorit tried 17 to free imprisoned Chinese, but were captured. 171516
15. Tranquilina V. de Ley, Navojoa, to Governor, 17 18 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Jos§ L. SuSrez, Chinese attorney, Nogales, to Chinese Legation, Mexico, 23 June 1923, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; P. E. Calles, Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to Elias, 10 August 1922, ibid.
16. Secretary of Government, Hermosillo, to Jesds C. Robles, Sonoran Labor Syndicate, Hermosillo, 8 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Elias to Francisco Barreras, Municipal President, Guaymas, 17 August 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3, for pleas by Mexicans to free certain Chinese, see Seventeen Mexican merchants, Guaymas, to Governor, 29 July 1922, ibid.
17. Municipal President, Huatabampo, to Secretary of Government, 17 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Raul H. Ldon, citizen, Navojoa, to Elias, 17 June 1922, ibid; S. F. 169 While the two hundred Chinese languished in prison, anti-Chinese elements in Sonora and Sinaloa again took up the crusade against the Chinese. Most applauded the imprisonments while milder elements suggested restrictions 18 on their freedom of movement. Throughout Sonora placards appeared with the slogan, "China for the Chinese and Sonora 19 for the Mexicans; drive out the Orientals."
Juan Lung Tain tried to mediate among the warring
factions, Sonoran authorities, the imprisoned Chinese and
labor leaders, but to no avail. The governor also rejected
the offer of the Sonoran Cooperative Party, who promised 20 aid in ousting the Chinese. President 0breg6n took steps
to solve the crisis as tempers flared in Sonora. On 20 June
1922 0breg6n authorized the application of Article 33 to 21 Chinese responsible for the disorders in Sonora. Another 18192021
Navarro, Municipal President, Cocorit, to Governor, 20 June . 1922, ibid.; Ellas to President Obregdn, 19 June 1922, ibid.
18. Palafox to Governor, 7 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Fifty citizens, Imuris, to Municipal President, Imuris, 22 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Labor Leaders, Nogales, to Governor, 23 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523.
19. Yost to the Secretary of State, 25 June 1922, NA 312,93/218.
20. Ouang Ki-Tseng, Chinese Envoy, Mexico to Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, 26 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; R. Espinoza, Sonoran Cooperative Party, Nogales, to Governor, 27 June 1922, ibid.; Secretary of Government to Espinoza, 21 July 1922, ibid.
21. Mexico, Presidente, Informes ... 0breg6n ... 1921 a 1924, II (1922), p. 7; El Universal (M§xicol, 21 June 1922; Excelsior (Mexico), 20 June 1922; Mexico, 170 long and laborious process followed as Sonorans attempted to comply with the order and oust the guilty Chinese via 22 MazatlSn. With over 200 Chinese in jail in Hermosillo,
Ellas had an ample supply of "pernicious foreigners" to
expel. On 26 June the Secretary of Foreign Relations
compiled a list of 181 Sonoran Chinese who were to be
expelled. The 181 left Hermosillo for Mazatl&n on 8 August.
Their journey by train was to conclude with a boat trip to
China via San Francisco. Ellas demanded payment of all 23 costs by Chinese merchants in Sonora.
Despite the arrival of these Chinese in MazatlZm
for deportation, Ellas continued to petition for the 24 application of Article 33 to other Chinese, To reinforce
his position he commissioned two men to intercede on
Sonora’s behalf with 0breg6n. For this purpose he chose
Alberto Gayou and Ignacio F. Loaiza, Sonora's deputies 242223
Secretarla de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletln Oficial, XXXIX (June-July, 1922), pp. 147-148.
22. Excelsior (Mexico), 21 June 1922.
23. Ellas to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 28 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 26 June 1922, in Undersecretary of Interior, Mexico, to Governor, Hermosillo, 3 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Ellas to Ignacio F. Loaiza and Alberto Gayou, Federal Deputies, 8 August 1922, ibid.; Ellas to Undersecretary of Interior, Mexico, 10 August 1922, ibid.
24. The New York Times, 9 August 1922; Ellas to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 27 September 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4. 171 to the federal congress. On 2 July, Elias authorized Gayou and Loaiza to press Sonora's case before the nation. He hoped they would transform a state campaign against the
Chinese into a national crusade. The two-man commission arrived in the capital on 6 July and discussed the issue 25 with Calles on 8 July.
The Chinese also petitioned the federal government to investigate the situation in Sonora and the Secretary of Interior commissioned Antonio Pozzi and Martin F.
BSrcenas to travel to Sonora for this purpose. During the investigation state officials received orders to ensure 2 6 the constitutional guarantees of the Chinese. Pozzi and
B&rcenas returned to the capital on 4 November. Initial reports indicated the weaker Nationalist League created the disturbances to undermine the stronger CKT; therefore, the government expelled over thirty Nationalists. Another 250
remained in prison in CuliacSn and MazatlSn, awaiting
deportation. The commission declared that the imprisonment
of 300 Chinese for over three months was unjustified, since many were innocent. All, but a few to be expelled, received26 25
25. Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, to Gayou and Loaiza, 2 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; 2 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4; Gayou and Loaiza, Mexico, to Elias, 7, 8, 9 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3523.
26. Guadalupe Hung, Chinese citizens' representa tive, Mexico, to Obregdn, 13 July 1922, in Calles to Elias, 14 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Undersecretary of Interior, Mexico, to Elias, 24, 25 August 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4, 172 27 complete liberty. On 8 November Obreg6n acted on the commission's report. He decreed full pardon to all but forty-three Chinese held in CuliacSn and MazatlSn. These forty-three were the "principal intellectual directors of the bloody conflicts among the Chinese colonies of Sonora and Sinaloa" in 1922. In December President 0breg6n reiterated his order to free all the other Chinese o g imprisoned in the two states.
Obregdn was in a delicate position during his
tenure (1920-1924). Of immediate concern was pacification
of the contending forces that had disrupted Mexico for ten
years, fiscal stabilization and an accommodation with
foreign governments to forestall intervention. Although
he failed to institute all the reforms contemplated in the
constitution, he did succeed in pacifying the country.
While his gradualist and pragmatic approach did not satisfy
agrarian reformers, a law of 1922 did provide for expropria
tion of unproductive and uneconomically operated latifundia,
not all large estates. His support of the Regional Con
federation of Mexican Workers (CROM) and its head Luis
Morones, brought staunch labor support for his regime. 2827
27. El Demdcrata (Mexico), 4, 6 November 1922.
28. Obregdn Decree, 8 November 1922, in Under secretary of State, Mexico, to Governor, 23 November 1922, AGG, tomo 2523; 5 December 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4; Mexico, Secretarla de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, XXXIX (June-July, 1922), pp. 147-148. 173
Obregdn also supported education reforms of Jos§ Vasconcelos in rural areas. The stress on the Indian origins of Mexico and the role of the native in the Revolution became impor tant concepts in the development of Mexican nationalism.
But fiscal problems and foreign pressures occupied most of
Obregdn1s time.
Finance Minister Adolfo de la Huerta negotiated a reduction of the foreign debt and higher payments to
Mexico on the oil export tax, but he was unsuccessful in obtaining foreign loans and recognition of the Obregdn government by the United States, But these deliberations paved the way for a future accommodation. Protection of foreign investment, especially oil, was important for the
United States in the face of Article 27’s subsoil provi
sions. Mexico desired autonomy, a financial return from exploitation of its natural resources and elimination of
foreign tutelage. In the Bucareli Agreements of 1923 a
compromise was reached. The United States extended
recognition to Obregdn in return for vague promises that
paragraph. IV, Article 27 would not be retroactive to before
the promulgation of the constitution for those who had
performed "positive acts" which indicated the owner intended 99 "to make use of or obtain oil under the surface." 29
29. Robert Freeman Smith, The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 1916-1932 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1972), pp, 221-222, 174 While ObregSn struggled against foreign pressure and gained recognition, Sonorans witnessed the beginnings of another anti-Chinese campaign. Since "one Chinese looked like another," the state congress passed a law on 30 June
1922 that required the registration and identification of all Chinese in the state to avoid confusion. The lawmakers also stressed the need to protect the Chinese during any future tong disturbances. Ostensibly congress passed the law as a result of the arrest of many innocent Chinese during the summer crisis.In July, the Sonora congress passed a new regulation to isolate Chinese in special barrios. In order to improve the condition of the laborer,
"without distinction as to color or creed," it was necessary
to exclude the Chinese, and only the Chinese, They violated
the eighty per cent provisions of the 1919 Labor Law, and
were opposed to the solidarity of the Mexican worker.
Therefore, Sonorans felt that Chinese intransigence left
them no choice, thus they banished them to separate colonies 31 outside municipal limits. But again Chinese remained in 3031
30, For local restrictions, see Excelsior (Mexico), 10 July 1922; Ley #51, 30 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Boletin Oficial (Hermosillo), 12 July 1922; Municipal President, Navojoa, to Secretary of Government, 24 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3510; Municipal President, Navojoa, to Secretary of Government, 18 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Circular #54 to all Municipal Presidents, 6 December 1922, AGG tomo 3523; Chinese Consul, Nogales, to Ellas, 25 January 1923, ibid.
31. Circular #46 to all Municipal Presidents, 12 July 1922, AGG, tomo 3496. residence within each town as they successfully bought off
local officials. The Cruz GSlvez Industrial School also
received over 3,000 pesos in donations from Chinese after
the passage of this regulation. This fund was frequently
used to accept donations from petitioners who desired
exemptions from various regulations that impinged on their 32 business activities.
While some Mexicans believed that this was the
moment for the rise of Mexican businesses, others disagreed.
Magdalena's Municipal President, Eduarto Arias, believed
that the campaign to oust the Chinese would be detrimental, ..
not only for the Chinese, but also for Mexicans. Faced with
expulsion, Chinese closed their shops and abandoned their
farms. This left the town without vegetables. But the
greatest blow Arias foresaw was a disaster for the local 33 treasury with the loss of Chinese tax revenue.
As in previous anti-Chinese campaigns, the Chinese
survived the crisis and continued to dominate business. On
the local level Mexicans needed their products and revenue.
And on the national level Mexico was not yet willing to risk
international complications, even with the weak Chinese
Republic. Although the Chinese survived the tong war, they 3233
32, Summerlin to the Secretary of State, 25 October 1922, NA 312.93/229; for contributions of Chinese to the Cruz GSlvez Industrial School in 1922, see AGG, tomo 3499.
33. Eduardo Arias, Municipal President, Magdalena, to Governor, 21 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523, adopted new methods to escape persecution and expulsion.
Strangely no radical increase occurred in the illegal entry of Chinese into the United States to escape the conse quences of the tong war. But many Chinese contributed to 34 an increase in legal emigration to the United States. In the four years before 1922 the United States admitted only
119 Chinese from Mexico. In 1922 the figure rose to 418 as immigration officials allowed Chinese to escape the state wide dragnet. In each of the next two years over one
hundred additional Chinese entered in this manner from
Mexico.
After the presidential decree to free all •
naturalized Mexicans, a second tactic the Chinese employed
was to become Mexican citizens. From the summer of 1922
to the end of the year over one hundred Chinese became
Mexican citizens. Chinese comprised over sixty per cent of
all foreigners naturalized in 1922. Many Chinese had become
citizens before, but most retained their Chinese citizen
ship because"they saw themselves as temporary visitors. 363435
34. United States, Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1923 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1923), pp. 18-19.
35. For statistics on the emigration of Mexican Chinese to the United States in this period, see Appendix A, Table A,6,
36. Lew Ling, The Chinese in the Americas: A Guide to Their Life and Progress (Los Angeles: East-West Culture Publishing Association, 1929), n.p. 177 But during the crises of 1922 to 1926 Chinese comprised over 37 twenty-five per cent of all foreigners naturalized.
Sonora's Chinese weathered the storm caused by the tong war, but not unscathed. Prohibitions on the immigra tion of Chinese laborers and the expulsion of over 200
Chinese cut into their numbers. With immigration cut off, they competed more fiercely with Mexicans for local women in Sonora. This competition provided the backdrop for a new anti-Chinese crusade in 1923.
In 1923 Alejo Bay was elected to succeed Adolfo de la Huerta. Although the latter was Mexico's Finance
Minister, he was still officially governor of Sonora for the four-year term 1919 to 1923. A succession of interim governors served for him while he was in the capital. After
he resigned as Minister of Finance, de la Huerta returned to
Sonora to fill out his term and oversee the election of Bay.
The new governor returned to the stress on legalism in the
fight against the Chinese. He did not play an active role
as had de la Huerta, Calles, and Ellas, but supported a
series of anti-Chinese measures proposed by the legislature.
For most areas of the state special Chinese barrios 3 8 were the answer to the Chinese question. Despite the38 37
37. For statistics on the naturalization of Chinese in this period, see Appendix B, Table B.6.
38. For an exception in Guaymas, see El Brochazo (Guaymas), 19 July 1923. 178 passage of several local ordinances, they were not applicable until passed by the state legislature. In the
Sonoran congress, Alejandro C. Villasenor proposed a law to create a Chinese barrio in each town of the state. He hoped to localize the Chinese to remove the threat to the health of Sonorans. Villasenor also proposed that the owners of the land chosen for the barrio must sell to the
Chinese or face expropriation. After these decisions, each municipal council had four months to remove all Chinese to 39 these barrios.
Despite strident opposition, led by Deputy Angel J.
Cortes, the state legislature passed a law on 8 December 40 1923 that created Chinese barrios. Constant legislative action also attempted to reduce the intense Chinese competi tion for female companionship.^ In June, 1922, Hermosillo police arrested four Chinese found "consorting with prostitutes" in the house of Martina Garcia. Chinese competition for prostitutes was rampant throughout the state, and they had the funds to compete successfully with the Mexicans. In May, 1923, the Hermosillo municipal 413940
39. Sonora, Boletin de la C&mara de Diputados del. Estado de Sonora, XXVII Legislatura (.28 November 1923)., p. 5 (hereafter cited as BCDS).
40, BCDS, XXVII (6 December 1923) , p. 5,* Boletin Oficial (Hermosillo), 19 December 1923; for Cort&s* opposi tion, see BCDS, XXVII (6 December 1923), p. 5.
41. Ling Lew, The Chinese in North America, p. 165 council attempted to reduce this competition with an amendment to the law on prostitution, which prohibited the exploitation of prostitution and vice in any establishment 42 owned by foreigners. But the law failed to solve the
problem.
From Cumpas, Municipal President Florencio Frisby
complained about the large number of Mexican girls who 43 lived with Chinese. This so offended Frisby that he
ordered the concubines of Juan Hong and Luis Sujo to leave
their homes and move to the barrio set aside for prosti
tutes, Pacifica Morales and Adela Barrios protested this
action, because their relationship with the Chinese was
"honest and clean," although not sanctioned by civil laws.
They requested and received a writ of amparo to suspend 44 Frisby's decision. Judge Arsenic Ezpinoza of Nogales
ordered Frisby to suspend his order to relegate Morales and 45 Barrios to the barrio for prostitutes. Nonetheless, 44454243
42. Manuel Lau, merchant, Hermosillo, to Interim Governor, 19 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523? Amendment to the Law on Prostitution, Hermosillo, 1 June 1922, ibid.
43. For later activities of Frisby as President of the Pro-Racial Committee of Cumpas, see Florencio Frisby, Municipal President, Cumpas, to Governor, 7 August 1924, AGG, tomo 3686.
44. Frisby to Governor, 27 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Pacifica Morales and Adela Barrios, citizens, Cumpas, to Judge of First Instance, Nogales, 1 June 1922, ibid,
45. Arsenic Ezpinoza, Judge of First Instance, Nogales to Frisby, 16 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523. Frisby deplored the alarming increase in concubinage among 46 the Chinese and Mexicans in Cumpas. To substantiate
Frisby's claim of a drastic increase in concubinage in
Cumpas, the municipal council prepared a list of all Chinese
in the town. This included references to those who lived
with Mexican girls. Of the fifty-four Chinese in Cumpas,
twenty-four per cent had Mexican concubines.^
These conditions in addition to legal marriages of
Mexicans and Chinese prompted many municipal councils to
propose a state-wide prohibition on Sino-Mexican marriages.
On 13 December 1923 the state congress passed a law which
attempted to solve this problem. Article I prohibited
marriages of Mexicans and Chinese, including Chinese who
were naturalized Mexicans. Article II assessed a fine of
from one hundred to 1,000 pesos for any illicit or marital 4 8 union between Mexicans and Chinese.
Angel J, CortSs condemned this new law as well as
other anti-Chinese measures as unconstitutional. In March,
1924, he proposed the elimination of the barrio and marriage
laws. He also condemned the congress' approval of a 484647
46. For examples, see Frisby to Governor, 27, 29 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523; Patricio Chu, merchant, Esqueda, to Francisca Miranda, Cumpas, 9 June 1922, ibid.
47. List of Chinese, Cumpas, 27 June 1922, AGG, tomo 3523.
48. BCDS, XXVII (14 December 1923), p. 3; Boletin Oficial (Hermosillo), 31 December 1923; Ley #31, 13 December 1923. 181 Nacozari de Garcia ordinance that prohibited Chinese from selling meat unless they had a Mexican employee who handled 49 all the meat. Cortes stated all three laws were un constitutional; therefore, no one need obey them. He claimed he was no friend of the Chinese and disliked them, but he would not attack them with illegal methods or destroy
the legal structure of the state, merely to weaken their position.Some Sonorans shared Cortds' views, and even
applauded the Chinese as hard-working and honest, but the majority shared the views of Walterio Pesqueira, Municipal
President of Nogales. He condemned them as men of doubtful
character who were a definite menace to the race, especially
through the prostitution of Mexican girls.^
Both de la Huerta and Ellas stressed a legal
process to eliminate the foreign threat to Sonora. As
Minister of Finance de la Huerta dedicated himself to
obtaining United States recognition without any concession. 505149
49. For the debate on the Nacozari meat bill, see BCDS, XXVII (5 December 1923), p. 3; (6 December 1923), p. 5.
50. BCDS, XXVII (26 March 1924), pp. 3-5.
51. Walterio Pesqueira, Municipal President, Nogales, to Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, 8 December 1923, AGG, tomo 3577; for support for the Chinese, see Arturo M. Martinez, Municipal President, Oputo, to Governor, 10 May 1923, AGG, tomo 3577; for an opinion that China should fight over the marriage and barrio laws, see Ch'ang-fu Li, Hua ch'iao, p. 144; for the contributions of individual Chinese for the relief of the victims of the earthquake in HuSsabas and Granados in December, 1923, see AGG, tomo 3578, 182
The Bucareli Agreements incited widespread opposition to
Obregdn throughout Mexico as a relinquishment of Mexico's national prerogatives. De la Huerta, embittered over his failure to secure recognition, soon became the leader of the various opposition groups. In the summer of 1923
0breg6n began the process of choosing a successor. When
Calles was designated, de la Huerta resigned in September,
With Veracruz as its headquarters, de la Huerta's Libertarian
Movement gained support. On 7 December 1923 he proclaimed
a revolt against Obregdn in a manifesto which charged that
the latter had violated the sovereignty of the people and
of the states. With arms provided by the United States,
Obregdn was victorious against de la Huerta, who fled to
the United States. Obregdn was again successful, but left
Mexico in a severe financial crisis.
In Sonora the legal campaign received an impetus
from the outbreak of a second tong war, In September, 1924,
Hsiang Hu left Nogales and Timothy T. M. Wang replaced him 52 as Chinese Consul in Sonora, He arrived in time for a
renewal of friction between the CRT and the Nationalists.
The latter now called themselves the Kuo Min Tang (KMT), or
Chinese Nationalist Party. Wang told the governor that the52
52. Timothy T. M, Wang, Chinese Consul, Nogales, to Governor, 14 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3682, expediente 3901, 183 CKT had killed twelve KMT members between 7 January and 8
November 1924.
From 28 September to the end of the year a contro
versy that involved the CKT, KMT and anti-Chinese crusaders
revolved around the murder of Francisco U. Yuen, a prominent
KMT merchant of Agua Prieta. On 28 September two Chinese
shot and killed Yuen as he descended from the train in Naco.
Local police apprehended CKT-members Ram6n Ley and Luis 54 Hoy, This incident was to renew the suspended tong war
crisis of 1922, and to result in a state campaign to crush
the CKT. It ultimately led to another wave of expulsions.
On 3 October Walterio Pesqueira, former Municipal
President of Nogales and now Secretary of Government, posted
a circular in the name of the governor. It decreed the
confiscation of all weapons held by the Chinese. This was
necessary because of the new "war to the death" between the
rival Chinese parties in the state. On 31 October another 5453
53, Secretary of Foreign Relations, Mexico, to Governor, 8 September 1924, AGG, tomo 3640, expediente 1659; Yillen to Governor, 18 September 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2031; 23 July 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2083; Wang to Governor, 23 December 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2043.
54, Yillen to Governor, 29 September 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2037; Governor Alejo Bay, Hermosillo, to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 11 October 1924, ibid.; El Intruso (Cananea), 30 September, 1 October 1924. 184 circular established procedures and regulations to record 55 information on all weapons surrendered by the Chinese.
President 0breg6n, who was familiar with the CKT attempts to destroy the KMT, decided to apply Article 33's
expulsion clause to the directors of the CKT on 12 October
1924. Consul Wang cautioned against hurting innocent merchants and agriculturists in the state-wide dragnet. The
Secretary of Interior in Mexico noted this plea and directed
Governor Alejo Bay to free all but the leaders of the CKT.^
By late October, Sonoran jails held 240 Chinese with another 57 106 of the original list of fugitives still at large,
After he received Obregdn's order, Bay informed the municipal
president and police officials in his capital to free all
Chinese who were naturalized Mexicans. On 5 November
0breg6n ordered expulsions to be limited until a further
investigation ascertained the responsible parties. He
ordered liberty to those who were not directors of the CKT.
In addition, Obreg6n promised Interim Governor Manuel 575556
55. Citizens, Naco, to Governor, 29 September 1924, in Flyer of Pro-Racial Committee, Naco, 20 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2033; Circular #204 to all Municipal Presidents, 3 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2035; Circular #238 to all Municipal Presidents, 31 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2036.
56. For a breakdown of the CKT members by town, see Appendix C, Table C.14.
57. Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to Governor, 12 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3645; 6 November 1924, ibid.; Wang to Bay, 18 October 1924, ibid.; The New York Times, 20 October 1924, 185 Montoya recompense for Sonora's costs in executing the 5 8 expulsion decree.
Although liberty for the prisoners eased financial
problems, drains on the state treasury continued. In
addition to the time and personnel needed to round up the
Chinese, other financial considerations concerned the 5 9 state. From the beginning of the expulsion proceedings
the Chinese declared their inability to pay either the
costs of imprisonment or the voyage to whatever destination
they chose. Montoya indicated to Obregdn that the difficult
economic situation, combined with the costs engendered by
the expulsion procedure, placed the state treasury in a
precarious position. Obregdn promised to cover the state's
costs.^ The governor forwarded a bill to the Secretary of
Interior to cover the costs of extra police, photographs and
food for the Chinese prisoners. On 28 January 1926 the
federal government authorized the payment to Sonora of 605859
58, Bay to Municipal President and Police Officials, Hermosillo, 31 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, expediente 2030; Obregdn to Interim Governor Manuel Montoya, 6 November 1924, AGG, tomo 3648.
59, For payments in 1922 to photographers A. W, Kossio and others, see Treasurer, Hermosillo, to Governor, 9 August 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 3; Secretary of Government, Hermosillo, to Treasurer, Guaymas, 18 August 1922, ibid.; for payments of at least 1,100 pesos to Gayou and Loaiza in 1922, see Secretary of Government, Hermosillo, to Treasurer, 14 July 1922, ibid.; Treasurer to Governor, 24 September 1922, AGG, tomo 3524, paquete 4,
60, Bay to Obregdn, 31 October 1924, AGG, tomo 3648; Montoya to Obregdn, 5, 6 November 1924, ibid. 186 4,537.64 pesos to cover the costs incurred from the 1924 expulsion proceedings.*^
With the expulsion of CKT leaders in 1924, Sonora saw the end of tong disturbances, although both parties remained antagonistic throughout the next few years.
Expulsion of a few Chinese failed to halt either Chinese economic power or the anti-Chinese campaign. Taking advantage of the widespread fear in Sonora of further
Chinese unrest, agitators turned their attention to immigration restrictions. The Dutch Ambassador in Mexico reported strong movements against Chinese immigration,
especially in Sonora where the number and power of the
Chinese were greatest. After the "modus vivendi" of 1921,
Mexico continued to search for means to restrict 626361
61. Governor to Secretary of Interior, Mexico, 21 April 1925, AGG, tomo 3648; Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to Governor, 15 February 1926, ibid.; for breakdown of the costs by town, see Appendix C.
62. For information on the continued antagonism between the rival tongs, see Way Yen Man, member, CKT, Agua Prieta, to Governor, I4 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Municipal President, Cocorit, to Secretary of Government, n.d., ibid.; JosS Jui, member, CKT, Nogales, to Governor, 11 November 1925, ibid.; W. Pesqueira to Jui, 11 November 1925, ibid.; Anselmo Juan, member, KMT, Nogales, to TomSs M. Valderrama, Secretary of Government, 14 June 1926, AGG, tomo 86 (1926); Benjamin Ungson and Luis C. Fong, members, KMT, Nogales, to Governor, 4 January 1929, AGG, tomo 15 (1929); A. R. Cinco, member, CKT, Nogales, to Governor, 29 January 1929, ibid.; for 1928 tong disturbances in Baja, see Frank Bohr, United States Consul, Mexicali, to the Secretary of State, 18 March 1928, RDS 812.00/29137, reel 88.
63. Dutch Ambassador, Mexico, to Foreign Office, 21 April 1924, AR, Kabinet-gezantschepsrapporten, Latyins- Ameriker, 1924, 187 immigration, although they exchanged few communications with the Republic of China.^ Because new regulations failed to solve the Chinese question, the 1899 treaty came under repeated attack.Critics denounced the special privileges which had allowed the Chinese unfair competition in business. On 25 October 1925, the Mexican government gave the one-year notice required to abrogate the treaty.
Mexico was not too candid in its diplomacy in this instance, because China said it received no such note. They received an undated note on 30 September that repudiated the treaty.
Finally, foreign relations admitted that the note they 666465
64. Summerlin to the Secretary of State, 3 April 1922, NA 712.53/1; for a rare note from Mexico to China, see Mexico’s protest to the Chinese government over the kid napping of a Mexican and his wife by bandits in Shantung, in The New York Times, 11 May 1923.
65. For earlier restrictions, see Mexico, Presidente, Informes rendidos pro el C. Gral. Plutarco Ellas Calles, presidente constitucional de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos ante el H. Congreso de la Uni6n los dlas lo de septiembre de 1925 y lo de septiembre de 1926 y contestacidnes de los CC, presidentes del citado Congreso (Mdxico: Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn "'Diario Oficial," 1925-1926), p. 15; The New York Times, 1 June 1926; El Demdcrata Sinaloense (MazatlSn), 20 June 1926; for congres sional opposition to the treaty, see El Demdcrata (Mexico), 8 September 1924; DPS, XXXI (29 September 1924), p. 6; (6 October 1924), pp. 12-13; (27 November 1924), pp. 10-11; Cl5 December 1924), p. 14; for migration figures for the 1920s, see Appendix A, Table A.5.
66. El Universal (Mdxico), 7 September 1926; H. F. Arthur Schoenfeld, United States Chargd ad Interim, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 17 September 1926, RDS 812.5593/ 51, reel 204; 1 October 1926, RDS 812.5593/52, ibid.; 2 October 1926, RDS 812.5593/53, ibid. 188 submitted in 192 as the second official note to terminate 6 7 the treaty, was in reality the first such note'.
Obregdn left office without having solved either the oil or the financial questions. His successor, former governor of Sonora and Secretary of Interior, Plutarco
Ellas Calles, inherited the problem. Freed from the internal opposition and quest for foreign recognition that circumscribed Obregdn, Calles turned to reforms. Labor reached its peak with Morones as Minister of Industry,
Commerce and Labor. Calles also reduced the army to a servant of the state. In addition to progress in irriga tion, elimination of disease and the continuation of the
Vasconcelos education reform, he reorganized the fiscal system. He reorganized taxation, created a national bank and reduced the foreign and internal debts. In enforcing the anti-clerical provisions of the constitution Calles67
67, For the exchange of notes that resulted in the expiration of the 1899 treaty, see Pollard, China1s Foreign Relations, p . 375; Chung-hua-nien-chien (The China Year Book), 1931 (Shanghai: The North-China Daily News and Herald, Ltd., 1931), pp. 487-488; for a new Treaty of Amity between Mexico and China in 1944, see China Handbook, 1937- 1945 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1947), pp, 185-186; for the relinquishment of extraterritoriality in 1929, see "Exchange of Notes between China and Mexico for the Relinquishment of Extraterritoriality," The Chinese Social and Political Science Review, Public Documents Supplement, XIV (April, 1930), pp. 19-22; China, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Treaties between the Republic of China and Foreign States (1927-1957) (Taipei: n.p., 1958), pp. 313-315, r
189
provoked the Cristero Rebellion, but eventually he broke
the power of the Church.
But again foreigners stood in the way of economic
development and the creation of national unity. Calles
took steps to impinge on foreign control late in 1925. A
new Alien Land Law prohibited foreigners from owning land
within fifty kilometers of the coast, or 100 kilometers of
the frontier. It also provided for the elimination of
foreign majority interests in land development companies.
A new Petroleum Law required applications for concessions by
foreign countries. These laws strained relations with the
United States on the official level, while financial and
debt negotiations on the private level were harmonious. But
in Sonora relations with the Chinese worsened.
In 1925 Chinese faced several threats in all parts
of Sonora. Although legal restrictions made great efforts
not to single out individual nationalities, most regulations
struck directly at the Chinese. The Arizpe district again
became the center of agitation against the Chinese.*’®
Fronteras passed an ordinance that required a permit to
export goods from that town to any other location. The
Chinese merchants immediately protested in January, 1925.
Before the month ended, vigorous protests forced the local 68
68. Wang to Bay, 12, 31 January 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1234; Casimiro Cota, Municipal President, Agua Prieta, to Governor, 31 January 1925, ibid.; Affadavit of Doctor Manuel Calderdn Vargas, 29 January 1925, ibid. 190 Municipal President, M. Dur6n, to revoke the legislation.
Under the leadership of Durdn, Fronteras pursued a definite anti-Chinese crusade with meetings, demonstrations, and * propaganda.^ The effect of this propaganda became evident in March, 1925. Within a fortnight five Chinese in
Fronteras and vicinity died as a result of gunshot wounds.
Agua Prieta police captured the four killers, one of whom,
Julio Martinez, was Durdn’s nephew. Consul Wang placed the entire blame on Dur6n, who campaigned for election under a program to eliminate Chinese merchants from Fronteras and to enforce anti-Chinese laws. Because of his campaign and success in the election, the authorities in Fronteras never
intervened in anti-Chinese activities. On the contrary,
they encouraged them.^
These harassments and regulations were insignificant
compared with, a new and more powerful anti-Chinese crusade 6970
69. Wang to Bay, 20 January 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1229; Sam Lee, merchant, Fronteras, to Governor, 23 January 1925, ibid.; Secretary of Government to Sam Lee, 28 January 1925, ibid.y for agitation against marriages of Chinese and Mexican women in Fronteras, see Francisco Sujo, merchant, Fronteras, to Governor, 8 February 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1230; M. Dur6n, Municipal President, Fronteras, to Secretary of Government, 17 February 1925, ibid.; for similar attempts of the Cananea police to prevent Chinese from living with Mexican women, see Antonio Ley, merchant, Cananea, to Governor, 8 August 1925, AGG, tomo 3750.
70. Wang to Interim Governor, 22 December 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Le6n J, Garcia, Municipal President, Agua Prieta, to Governor, 16 April 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1237; Wang to Bay, n.d., ibid. 191 that struck Sonora in the summer of 1925.^ Anti-Chinese and Pro-Racial committees throughout the state began a full- scale offensive to destroy the Chinese threat. Under the guidance of state senator Jose Angel Espinoza and Doctor
Juan Calder6n, the Chinese faced the greatest threat to their existence since Arana. Aided by only half-hearted attempts to stop their campaign, the committee attacked and 72 robbed Chinese merchants in the capital. Alert Chinese recorded the license number of the fleeing thieves and reported it to Wang. The car belonged to Trugui Brothers
Candy Shop, As one of the Trugui brothers was municipal president, Wang was upset over the collusion of the authorities in attacks on Chinese. Police captured the criminals, all of whom were members of the Anti-Chinese 73 Committee of Hermosillo, 737271
71. For the exchange of letters that concerned the continuous harassment of the Chinese, see Wang to Bay, 21 March 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1246; 5 October 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; 30 March, 1 May 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1249; 10 March 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1250; 27 May 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1239; 18 May 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1240; for new legal restrictions on the Chinese in the same period, see Pitiquito Law, 25 April 1925, AGG, tomo 3784; Pilares de^ Nacozari Law, 30 April 1925, ibid.; Ley #180, 21 April 1925, AGG, tomo 3768.
72. Wang to Bay, 3, 16 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1241; 11 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1244,
73. Wang to Bay, 8, 9, 11 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1244. 192 From informants Wang heard of a three-pronged strategy planned by the committee. They planned to print derogatory slogans on walls throughout the state, burn
Chinese stores, and kill individual Chinese. In July the committee carried out their threats with attempts to burn
Chinese stores, After several attempts to burn them out,
T. T. Lee, Chinese Vice Consul in Sonora, criticized Bay for his inaction. Lee charged that Bay could have avoided these attacks and fires if he had checked the anti-Chinese 74 elements after the initial threats. On 17 July Bay ordered the municipal president of the capital to avoid further disorders and to guarantee the lives and properties of the Chinese. He also ordered all permits for anti-
Chinese demonstrations in the city bear his approval before 75 they could be held. Despite this proclamation the fervor generated by the new campaign continued. Within eight
days in July three Chinese died at the hands of gunmen.
Within another nine-day period unknown men burned four
Chinese stores, Chinese feared that the propaganda
campaign infused in the lower classes a desire to destroy74 75
74, Wang to Bay, 9 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1244; T. T. Lee, Chinese Vice Consul, Nogales, to Bay, 10 July 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; for lists of the assassinations and fires in 1925, see Wang to Bay, 22 November 1925 (two separate letters), ibid.
75. Lee to Bay, 15 July 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Circular #212 to Municipal President, Hermosillo, 17 July 1925, AGG, tomo 3738, paquete 5, 193 them. After a state-wide convention of anti-Chinese committees in Hermosillo on 5 August, another series of arsons on Chinese stores occurred.
Although Hermosillo was the center of much of the anti-Chinese activity in 1925, Navojoa and Moctezuma were also centers of vicious campaigns against the Chinese. As in Hermosillo, the campaign began with another isolated incident. Antonio Villegas prohibited Chinese from entering his Cosmopolitan Barber Shop in Navojoa. He claimed that the majority of his clientel voted to do so.
Despite pleas from Chinese to remove this ban, the governor refrained from acting. By July the local anti-Chinese committee exhorted the populace to boycott Chinese stores, printed broadsides that defamed them and threatened to burn 77 out their businesses.
The most intense anti-Chinese campaign was that
inaugurated by Doctor Juan Calderdn in the Moctezuma
district in the summer of 1925. In a public declaration in
Hermosillo on 23 July 1925, he called for the enforcement77 76
76, Jos# Won and Queon Lee, CKT, Hermosillo, to Governor, 22 July 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 29 July 1925; "Lee to Governor, 8 August 1925, AGG, tomo 3750,
77, Municipal President, Navojoa, to Pesqueira, 3 June 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Pesqueira to Municipal President, Navojoa, 17 August 1925, ibid.; Lee to Bay, 13 July 1925, ibid.; Lee to Bay, 25 August 1925, ibid.; Municipal President, Navojoa, to Pesqueira, 25 September 1925, ibid. 194 of the barrio and marriage laws of December, 1923. He gave the government one week to enforce the laws. At the end of that period, the "people" would exercise their constitu tional rights for the good of the nation. When he received no reassurance that the laws would be enforced he held a meeting in which he called the Chinese "animals" and 78 threatened them with expulsion. In Nacozzri de Garcia,
Calderdn called on the populace of Mexico to exercise their
constitutional rights against the Chinese. Since neither
the president nor the governor answered his requests to
carry out existent laws, he proclaimed the efficacy of
Article 39 of the federal constitution of 1917. The article
stated that "national sovereignty resided essentially and
originally in the people." Since the state and federal
governments failed to carry out the popular will, it was
up to the people to enforce colonization of the Chinese,^
And this is exactly what CalderSn attempted to do in several
towns in Moctezuma.
Late on the night of 27 August 1925 a group of
armed men invaded Pilares de Nacozari, sacked Chinese stores
and carried off several Chinese. Municipal President Pedro 7978
78, Declaration of Doctor Juan Calderdn, Moctezuma, 23 July 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Juan CalderSn, Moctezuma, to Governor, 29 July 1925, ibid.; Lee to Governor, 29 August 1925, AGG, tomo 3750, expediente 1249,
79. Calderdn Manifesto to the People, Nacozari, 25 August 1925, AGG, tomo 3570; Mexico, Nueva Constitucidn, p. 16, 195 Fglix of Pilares reported that Doctor Juan Calder6n led the raid and now moved on Nacozari. A. P. Martinez, Municipal
President of Nacozari, informed the governor that he expected an attack and feared his police forces were
insufficient to prevent it. Interim Governor Manuel Montoya
then ordered General Francisco R. Manzo, Chief of Military
Operations in La Misa, to send troops to Pilares and 8 0 Nacozari. Martinez requested troops, and with the
despatch of seventy troopers of the 64th Cavalry under
General Flavio Bdrquez, the situation returned to normal, 81 and the Chinese returned to their homes. By early 82 September almost all the raiders had been imprisoned.8280 81
80. A, P. Martinez, Municipal President, Nacozari, to Governor, 27 August 1925 (10:10 p.m.), AGG, tomo 3750; Montoya to Martinez, 28 August 1925, ibid.; Pedro FSlix, Municipal President, Pilares de Nacozzri, to Governor, 28 August 1925 (9:00 a.m,), ibid.; Martinez to Governor, 28 August 1925 (9:25 a.m.), ibid.; Montoya to General Francisco Manzo, Chief of Military Operations, La Misa, 28 August 1925, ibid.
81, Martinez to Governor, 28 August 1925 (11:55 a.m. and 2:20 p.m,), AGG, tomo 3750; Manzo to Montoya, 29 August 1925 (5:20 p.m.), ibid.; Montoya to Saldate, 28 August 1925, ibid.; Montoya to A. Saenz, Secretary of Foreign Relations, 30 August 1925, ibid.; Damm to the Secretary of State, 8 September 1925, RDS 812.4016/14, reel 143.
82. For the final dispositions of the cases against Calderdn's gang, see Bay to Municipal President, Nacozari, 3 September 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Bay to Municipal President, Pilares, 4 September 1925, ibid.; J. Solorzano and Francisco V, Coronado, imprisoned gang members, Nacozari, to Governor, 25 September 1925, ibid.; Francisco Cardenas, jailer, Nacozari, to Governor, 26 September 1925, ibid,; President, Supreme Tribunal, Hermosillo, to Governor, 196
The termination of this crisis was not the end of problems for the Chinese. The Chinese Legation communicated rumors of more demonstrations in Hermosillo and elsewhere.
On 11 October 1925 the Second Convention of all anti-
Chinese Committees of the Republic took place in Hermosillo.
Leaders of the meeting, were Carlos GonzSlez Tijerina and
JosS Angel Espinoza, For his services as director of the meeting, Espinoza, a State Deputy, received from the state legislature a grant of 200 pesos for costs incurred in arranging the meeting. He also received from the same source a subsidy of 250 pesos to aid his work as editor and owner of El Nacionalista, an anti-Chinese newspaper in 83 Cananea. Espinoza's involvement and that of the legisla ture through its subsidies to leaders of the anti-Chinese campaign, placed the Chinese in a precarious position in late 1925,
Although the CalderSn-Espinoza campaign generated widespread anti-Chinese sentiment in Sonora, the physical violence placed the national government in a delicate position. President Calles manifested his displeasure with 83
3 February 1926, ibid.y for an estimate of $1,600,000 in losses by Chinese in 1925, see Ch'ang-fu Li, Hua ch'iao, p. 144.
83. Secretary of Interior, Mexico, to Governor, 8 September 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Carlos GonzSlez Tijerina, President, Board of Governors, National Anti-Chinese Movement, Nogales, to Governor, 1 September 1925, ibid.; State Congress to Governor, 17, 27 October 1925, ibid. 197 Governor Bay because of the numerous complaints he received from Chinese over the last three years. What grieved him most was the charge that local officials encouraged the attacks by participation in anti-Chinese meetings and failure to capture the culprits. The active participation of the authorities in the violent campaigns also alarmed
Calles. Finally, he complained about the anti-Chinese committees which worked outside the law and denied the 84 Chinese their legal guarantees.
Calles emphasized that these activities placed
Mexico in an embarrassing position. By provoking violent conflicts, these groups endangered internal peace and menaced Mexico with another possible Chinese massacre.
Beyond these threats, the persecutions sullied Mexico's image on the international scene. He reiterated the federal executive’s measures to partially alleviate the situation by impeding Chinese arrivals at Mexican ports. But the 1899 treaty remained in effect and the constitution guaranteed protection to Chinese residents. Therefore, he suggested that Bay take all necessary steps to grant the Chinese their legal guarantees, in order "to maintain order and to 8 5 sustain the prestige and good name of Mexico." Bay passed 8584
84. President Plutarco Elias Calles, Mexico, to Governor, 23 September 1925, AGG, tomo 3750.
85, Ibid, 198 the directive .on to all municipal presidents in a circular on 22 October 1925.86
Despite Calles' warning to local authorities, more officials in Sonora actively participated in anti-Chinese 87 activities as 1925 drew to a close. In Hermosillo,
Felipe GonzSlez Cortes, local Sanitary Inspector, declared that "both the municipal and state authorities . . . were in
accord with the principles" of the leaders of the anti- 8 8 Chinese crusade.
Backed by the press, the governor, and local
officials, pro-Mexican and anti-Chinese groups throughout
Sonora worked to force the Chinese to obey the laws or to
leave. With the passive acquiescence or active participa
tion of state and local authorities the committees harassed 89 the Chinese both legally and illegally. The crusaders *31
86. Circular #300 to all Municipal Presidents, 22 October 1925, AGG, tomo 3738, paquete 5.
87. For the spread of the campaign to other states, see The New York Times, 21 August 1925; Annual Report for 1925, of the Dutch Consul, MazatlSn, in AR, Archief Consuleer, MazatlSn, 1925-1929; El Universal (Hermosillo), 5 September 1925; Bartley F. Yost, United States Consul, Torredn, to the Secretary of State, 8 July 1925, RDS 812.4016/12, reel 143.
88. Address of Felipe GonzSlez Cortes, Sanitary Inspector, Hermosillo, 20 December 1925, in Wang to Governor, 25 December 1925, AGG, tomo 3750; Wang to Bay, 31 August 1925, ibid.
89. Francisco Amparon, Substitute Municipal President, Navojoa, to Secretary of Government, 26 January 1926, AGG, tomo 20, expediente 169 (1926); El Diario (Navojoa), 13 January 1926; The New York Times, 25 October 19.25, “ 199 pointed to the constant necessity to propose new laws against the Chinese, which were exactly the same as laws 90 already on the books. When they searched for the answer
to this recurring problem, Sonorans found the economic
power of the Chinese to be the most potent and obstructive
force in the enforcement of the laws. They alleged that the
Chinese were sufficiently rich either to buy off officials
with bribes, or to threaten the survival of several towns
by closing their shops.
Eight years after the constitution codified regula
tions for the position of foreigners in the country and
presented the embryonic tenets of Mexican nationalism
foreigners still held prominent positions in Mexico. The
United States dominated the oil fields, which remained a
national problem. And in Sonora the Chinese continued to
dominate the wholesale and retail grocery trade. But the
state's quest to determine what exactly comprised Mexican
nationality was a prominent force. The prevalence of
"national" and "pro-fatherland" committees manifested an
active campaign to define the characteristics of a Mexican.
Although no precise definition was arrived at, these
90, El Diario (Navojoa), 7 January 1925; Wang to Bay, 8 January 1926, AGG, tomo 20, expediente 168 (1926); Secretary of Government to Wang, 12 January 1926, ibid.; El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 26 April 1926; for exchanges of correspondence on robberies of Chinese, see AGG, tomo 20, expedientes 186, 190, 192 (1926); for exchanges of correspondence on the murders of Chinese in this period, see AGG, tomo 20, expedientes 166, 172, 175, 178 (1926). 200. committees had a definite conception of what it did not include— the Chinese. The legal campaign concentrated on the nefarious effects of contamination of the race by contact with the Chinese. The new conception of the
Mexican race stressed the mestizo heritage, but in the case of the Chinese, further mixture would prove detrimental to the race. Thus sanitary regulations, barrio proposals and prohibition on marriages became the most important weapons against the Chinese. Constrained by the constitu tion and international agreements, Sonorans created a framework of laws, regulations, and annoyances to harass the Chinese to force them to leave. As in the past they failed. Thus Sonorans reassessed the position of the
Chinese in order to find new methods of eliminating this menace. CHAPTER 7
CHINESE ECONOMIC PRESENCE IN SONORA
From the moment the Chinese arrived in Mexico they encountered hostility and opposition. Criticisms included racial slurs, allusions to poor health, evil habits, and charges of frauds and business practices that gave them control.of business in the state. For over forty years
Sonorans complained that the Chinese were a threat to domestic business. Despite the constant complaints,
Sonorans also lamented the expected loss of tax revenue if the Chinese left. Faced witti these alternatives, state and national authorities attempted to ascertain the exact
numbers, location, and economic interests of the Chinese.
Although national censuses in 1921 and 1930 showed
an increase in Chinese in Mexico from 14,472 to 18,953, many Mexicans believed that these figures were far from
accurate.Most estimates were between thirty and forty
thousand for the Chinese in the country. In an independent
attempt to determine the entire foreign population of the
nation, the Department of Migration compiled a statistical
index of Mexico's foreigners by state in 1928. They noted 1
1. For statistics by state of the Chinese popula tion in 1921 and 1930, see Appendix B, Table B.5.
201 202 24,218 Chinese, or sixteen per cent of all foreign resi dents . Two aspects of the survey were revealing to the anti-Chinese crusaders. The Chinese comprised the second largest foreign colony in Mexico, second only to that of the Spanish. Whereas the ratio of men to women for all other foreigners varied from one to one, to three to one, 2 Chinese men outnumbered Chinese women by thirteen to one.
Thus the opponents of the Chinese presence were reinforced in their contention that the Chinese population was extremely large and a threat to native women as they brought a few Chinese women with them. Only in Baja California,
Sinaloa, and Sonora did the Chinese comprise more than thirty per cent of all foreigners in the state. In each of these states the Chinese population was over fifty per cent 3 of the entire foreign population. The large concentration
of Chinese on the northwest coast almost equalled that of
the Chinese in all the other states of Mexico in the 1920s.
Table 1 shows the Chinese population of these three states
in 1921, 1928, 1930, and 1940, and the ratio of these
figures to all the Chinese in Mexico. Figure 6 indicates
centers of Chinese population in Mexico in 1920. 23
2, Department of Migration list, 14 March 1928, AGG, tomo 53 (1929); for statistics by sex of the foreign population in 1928, see Appendix B, Table B.7.
3. Ibid; for statistics on the foreign population by state, see Appendix B, Table B.8. 203 Table 1. Number of Chinese in Northwest Mexico, 1921, 1928, 1930, 1940, and Ratio to Chinese in All Mexican States^
State 1921 1928 1930 1940
Baja California • 2,971 5,889 3,188 788
Sinaloa 1,040 2,019 2,127 283
Sonora 3,639 3,758 3,571 155
Total 7,640 11,666 8,886 1,226
Per cent of total Chinese in Mexico 53.0 . 48.0 47.0 18.0
^Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 53 (1929) . STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS 1 - FEDERAL DISTRICT. 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4 - TLAXCALA 5 HIDALGO 6 - MEXICO 7 - QUE RETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
LEGEND
2305-4608
1153-2304
INTAN A 577-1132 ROO 289 576 145- 288 1- 144 204
Figure 6. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1930 205 According to these official national statistics the
Chinese population of Sonora fluctuated between 3,500 and
3,800 in the 1920s. But Sonorans were not completely satisfied with data that originated from the capital, therefore they compiled their own statistical surveys. In
1924 Governor Alejo Bay ordered a census of all Chinese in the state to ascertain the characteristics of the state's 4 largest foreign minority. At first Chinese refused to answer the questionnaires because they feared this was the initial step in another campaign against them. But when threatened with heavy fines, they complied,^ The census officials, in a door-to-door survey, listed 3,339 Chinese in Sonora in 1924. As Table 2 shows, only five per cent were women and ninety per cent were of working age. Again, the statistics reinforced the arguments of the nationalist leagues who advocated the reduction of the Chinese threat to domestic labor, A second part of the survey indicated the occupation of each Chinese. Table 3 details the type of employments pursued by the Chinese and the ratio of the number in each area to the total number of Chinese employed. The labor force of 3,033 was almost equally 54
4. Walterio Pesqueira to all Municipal Presidents, 17 December 1924, AGG, tomo 3659.
5. J. E, Montano, Municipal President, Cumpas, to Governor, 30 December 1924, AGG, tomo 3659; Bay to Montano, 5 January 1925, ibid. 206 Table 2. Chinese Population of Sonora by Sex, Age, Civil Status, 1924a
Sex Age Status
Men 3,165 to 15 221 single 1,751 Women 174 15-30 724 married to Mexican 166 31-45 1,706 married to Chinese 1,341 46-60 627 widowed 76 60+ 61 divorced 5
Total 3,339 3,339 3,339
^Compiled from census work sheets of all Sonoran towns, 1924, AGG, tomo 3659; over 1,300 Chinese had wives who still lived in China.
Table 3. Chinese Population of Sonora by Occupation, 1924a
Number in Per cent of Occupation occupation total employed
Merchant 1,410 46.5 Laborer 652 21.5 Agriculture 470 15.5 Shoes/tailoring 137 4.5 Cook 94 3.1 Baker 76 2.5 Laundryman 61 2.0 Hotel/restaurant 45 1.5 Others 88 2.9
Total 3,033 100.0
^Compiled from census work sheets of all Sonoran towns, 1924, AGG, tomo 3659. 207 divided between merchants and those in all other occupa tions. Whatever field they pursued, the Chinese faced criticisms from the Mexicans. If they were laborers,
Mexicans charged that they worked at a lower salary, thus forcing the Sonoran laborer out of jobs. Chinese merchants faced charges that they undersold the local businessmen and ruined their business by unfair competition. Under these conditions the Sonorans claimed they found it difficult to survive because they faced Chinese competition wherever they turned, especially in the cities. Although the Chinese lived in ninety-three Sonoran towns, eighty per cent lived in the twenty largest cities and mining areas.^ As Table 4 indicates, these towns contained over eighty-five per cent of Sonora's Chinese merchants. They were also the towns where anti-Chinese activities were most intense. Figure 7 shows centers of Chinese population in Sonora in 1924.
For Sonorans the 1924 census was no surprise. They had been complaining for forty years about the number and
economic position of the Chinese. The new statistics merely
enunciated the need for corrective measures. Thus addi- 7 tional surveys followed this initial census in 1924. In6 7
6. For statistics on Chinese merchants in towns with over 100 Chinese, see Appendix C, Table C.3; for statistics on Chinese merchants in towns with 50 to 80 Chinese, see Appendix C, Table C.4^
7. For a town by town survey of merchants by nationality, see Appendix C, Table C.5. 208
Table 4. Chinese Merchants of : Sonora ini Ratio to Total Chinese, 1924a
Per cent Per cent Number of of all Number of of all Size of town Chinese Chinese merchants merchants
Over 100 Chinese 1,922 57.6 952 67.5
50 to 80 Chinese 739 22.2 255 18.1
73 other towns 678 20.2 203 14.4
Total 3,339 100.0 1,410 100.0
^Compiled from census work sheets of all Sonoran towns, 1924, AGG, tomo 3659. 209
ARIZONA
NOGALES ■ A QUA PRIETA BAJA CANANEA frontera: MAGDALENA
n a c o z a r i
HERMOSILLO
GUAY MAS
CALIFORNIA
NAVOJOA
LEGEND SINALOA 311 - 365
256-310
201-255
146-200
91-145
Figure 7. Sonora: Towns with Over 90 Chinese, 1924 210 1924, the state Secretary of Interior requested information on all merchants in Sonora, especially with reference to 8 their nationality. Because the new survey counted only owners of businesses, many Chinese, who were counted as
i merchants in the 1924 census, failed to appear in the new statistics. According to the figures in Table 5 only one- third of the Mexican merchants were owners of mixed groceries. Eighty-five per cent of the Chinese merchants sold a diverse stock of goods in mixed grocery establish ments. Although only forty per cent of the merchants of the state were Chinese, they controlled sixty-five per cent of the mixed grocery establishments. They engaged in fewer types of businesses, but offered a greater variety of goods in their stores. Table 6 shows their dominance of the retail grocery trade and near parity with the Mexican merchants of Sonora in absolute numbers.
By early 1925 many of the charges levied against the
Chinese seemed to have been proven. Sonorans knew the size of the Chinese colony, their number in the business com munity, and virtual control over the grocery trade. But
official investigators had not yet finished with them. In
April, 1925, the governor requested still another survey
when he asked for a list of all new businesses established
in Sonora in the past year. He stressed the need for 8
8, Circular #45 to all Municipal Presidents, [1924], AGG, tomo 3660. 211 Table 5. Merchants and Mixed Grocery Merchants of Sonora by Nationality, 1924a
Type Mexican Chinese Other
Merchant 763 685 131
Mixed grocery 257 588 48 Per cent of grocery merchants of all merchants 33.7 85.8 36.6
^Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3660.
Table 6. National Composition of Merchants and Grocery Merchants of Sonora, 1924a
Per cent of Per cent of Nationality merchants grocers
Chinese 43.4 65.8
Mexican 48.3 28.8
Other 8.3 5.4
100.0 100.0
^Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3660. 212 information on the nationality of each owner. Among the new businesses were twenty-eight Mexican and thirty-four 9 Chinese concerns. This revelation prompted a new survey of capital investment of Chinese and Mexicans in all phases of the state's economic life. Although Chinese investments in industry were meager, they had sizeable holdings in land, in addition to their mercantile establishments.^^ Table 7 indicates Chinese holdings in industry and land in 1925.
The survey of capital investment in mercantile businesses showed that, although almost twice as many
Chinese were surveyed, their average investment was almost
one thousand pesos less."^ When the merchants are divided
into separate categories, as in Table 8, a different picture
emerges. For investors of less than 5,000 pesos and 5,000
to 10,000 pesos, only a 400 peso difference existed between
the average investment by Mexicans and Chinese. Among the
large investors, who invested over 10,000 pesos, Chinese
businessmen averaged over 2,000 pesos more each in invested
12 ' capital. In a separate survey of several smaller towns, 9101112
9. Circular #146 to all Municipal Presidents, 30 April 1925, AGG, tomo 3758; figures compiled from several letters to the Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, from Municipal Presidents, ibid.
10. Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3758.
11. For a breakdown by town, see Appendix C, Table C.6.
12. Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3758. Table 7. Mexican and Chinese Capital Investment in Industry and Other Property in Sonora, 1925a
Industry Other property
Nationality Number Investment Average Number Investment Average
Mexican 112 1,535,513b 11,921b c c c
Chinese 21 53,050 2,526 91 355,082 3,900
^Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3758.
In pesos.
cNot available. 213 Table 8. Capital Investment of Over 10,000 Pesos by Chinese and Mexicans in Mercantile Businesses in Sonora, 1925a
Mexican Chinese
Type (in pesos) Number Capital Average Number Capital Average
5-10,000 19 113,400 5,968 25 158,500 6,340
10,000+ 17 523,000 30,059 13 408,300 31,984
Others 204 307,140 1,505 420 809,570 1,928
Total 240 943,540 3,932 458 1,376,370 3,005
aFor statistics of capital investment of 5,000 to 10,000 pesos by town, see Appendix C, Table C,7; for figures of investments over 10,000 pesos, see Appendix C, Table C,8, 214 215 investigators checked local treasuries to ascertain annual sales of all establishments. In the fragmentary returns the average Chinese sales of 6,064 pesos almost doubled the
Mexican total of 3,280 pesos in merchandise sold each year. Although investments in their respective businesses were almost equal, Chinese outsold their
Mexican competition with lower prices and a wider variety
of goods, A later investigation of Mexican and Chinese
businesses in Naco reinforced this assessment of the
Chinese position. In businesses exclusive of cantinas,
the Chinese merchants outsold their Mexican competitors
four to one. They also owned all the grocery stores in 14 the town.
There was no doubt, despite exaggerations, that
the Chinese did a thriving business in Sonora. They
comprised a high percentage of the merchants of the state,
although they were only a fraction of the population. The
Chicago Daily Tribune reported in 1928 that Chinese
interests in Mexico’s Pacific coast states were in the
millions of dollars.^ Fragmentary returns of local land 151314
13. For statistics on these annual sales in 1925, see Appendix C, Table C.9.
14. A. H. Hernandez, Treasury Agent, Naco, to Governor, 22 March 1928, AGG, tomo 91 (1928); for the statistics by type of business, see Appendix C, Table C.10.
15. The Chicago Daily Tribune, 13 March 1928. 216 assessments in Sonora for 1927 showed Chinese were assessed
for almost one million pesos. But this was only one-tenth of the total for Mexicans in the same towns.^ A federal
survey of only three cities in Nayarit, Sinaloa, and Sonora
in 1927 reinforced the Tribune1s allegations. The
statisticians chose Acaponeta in Nayarit, MazatlSn in
Sinaloa, and Guaymas in Sonora for their analysis of capital
investment of over 5,000 pesos in mercantile establish
ments. The survey divided the investments by nationality.
Although Chinese and Japanese were combined in the totals,
the figures are indicative of the position Mexican
businesses occupied in the face of foreign competition. In
both Acaponeta and Guaymas the Chinese and Japanese were
second only to the Mexicans in investments of over 5,000
pesos in mercantile establishments. In Mazatl&n their 17 investment was almost three million pesos, Using the
Mexican investment as a base of 100, Table 9 indicates the
relative position of Asian businessmen. In all three cities
these foreigners were first in investments among the foreign
colony. And in Mazatlcin they had investments two and a half 1617
16. For 1927 assessments of Chinese, see Appendix C, Table C.11? for a sample declaration of a valuation official, see Declaration of J. C. Araiza, Evaluation Official, Navojoa, 13 December 1927, AGG, tomo 3 (19271.
17. For the statistics by nationality, see Appendix C, Table C.12. 217
Table 9. Ratio of Foreign Investment to Mexican Investment in Guaymas, MazatlSn, Acoponeta, 1926a
Nationality Guaymas MazatlSn Acoponeta
Mexican 100.00 100.00 100.00 Chinese/Japanese 66.37 244.96 40.34 German 1.75 229.83 6.90 United States 26.20 165.55 0.00 Spanish 34.93 58.82 0.00 Syrian/Lebanese 3.49 18.91 20.69 French 8.73 • 0.00 0.00 English 4.37 0.00 0.00 Others 0.00 2.94 0.00
aMSxico, Department© de la Estadistica Nacional, Sonora, Sinaloa y Nayarit, Ano de 1927 (Mexico: Imprenta Mundial, 1928), pp. 376-377.
times as large as their Mexican competition. Despite their small numbers they posed a powerful threat to domestic merchants on the northwest coast. Among the powerful
Chinese competitors was Juan Lung Tain, who remained one of the richest Chinese in Sonora. His average annual sales were over 100,000 pesos as he was one of the biggest receivers of goods at the port of Guaymas. Table 10 reveals
the magnitude of this trade for the period January to
August, 1924. Local officials in Guaymas watched the ship
and railroad manifests carefully and reported the merchandise 218
Table 10. Merchandise Received by Juan Lung Tain at Guaymas, January to August, 1924s
Number of Product railroad cars Sacks
Coffee 2 8,885 Sugar 4 1,000 Rice 4 360 Corn 4 85 Bran 5 0 Butter 2 2,580 Beans 1 537 Wheat 7 775 Anchovies 2 300 Cement 0 1,340 Others 13 5,000+
^Compilation of records in enclosures in J. Manzo, Contador, Guaymas, to Interim Secretary of Interior, Hermosillo, 27 August 1924, AGG, tomo 3668, expediente 2913,
he received and its distribution to his branch stores 18 throughout the state.
With such tremendous stocks of goods available the
Chinese were formidable competitors for the Mexicans. They also had large cash reserves saved over the last four decades of their residence in Sonora. With ready cash, credit reserves and extremely well organized commercial cooperative organizations, the Chinese successfully outsold 18
18, Walterio Pesqueira to Alejandro C, Villasenor, Assessor, Hermosillo, 30 August 1924, AGG, tomo 3668, expediente 2913? for the distribution of these goods to his stores in Magdalena, Santa Ana, and Estacidn Llano, see Appendix C, Table C.13. 219 their Mexican competition. In addition the Chinese spent little on food, rent, and families, thus leaving a larger reserve of profits for reinvestment or remittance to China for political purposes or retirement in old age, W. M.
Cousins,.who observed the Chinese in the Caribbean in 1926, noted that the only ostensible sign of wealth among the 19 Chinese in the islands was a new car. In Sonora in 1924 fiscal agents reported 1,352 automobiles registered in the state. Forty of these belonged to Chinese, among them the 20 largest Chinese businessmen in the state. In his analysis of the businesses of Nacozari de Garcia in 1924, the municipal president complained that "all the Mexican 21 businesses are small; all the Chinese large."
This was the economic power that the anti-Chinese campaign of 1922 to 1926 attempted to eliminate. The campaign was only partially successful in Sonora, but it had gained new adherents in other parts of Mexico. 22202119 22
19, W. M. Cousins, "Chinese in the Caribbean," The Living Age, CCCXXXII (1 January 1927), p. 18; W. M. Cousins, "The Chinese in the Caribbean," The Contemporary Review, CXXX (November, 1926), p. 635.
20. Undersecretary of Industry, Commerce and Labor, Mexico, to Governor, 14 May 1924, AGG, tomo 3659; report of J. F. Astiazar&n, Fiscal Agent, Hermosillo, 1 October 1924, ibid.
21. Municipal President, Nacozari, to Secretary of Government, 19 June 1924, AGG, tomo 3758.
22. H. C. Mendez, President, Anti-Chinese Committee, Torre6n, to Governor, Hermosillo, 28 June 1926, AGG, tomo 20 (1926); for the growth of the anti-Chinese 220 Within the state violence remained a popular method of harassing the Chinese. The CalderSn episode indicated the intensity of anti-Chinese feeling in some areas. But Alejo
Bay's tenure as governor (1923-1927) was characterized by increased legal impediments on the lawbooks and tremendous economic growth of the Chinese. New health regulations, immigration restrictions, barrio laws and prohibitions on mixed marriages all became law during Bay's tenure. At the same time Chinese investments, sales, and wealth increased until they dominated mercantile activities and virtually controlled the retail grocery trade of the state. Despite laws, virulent defamatory attacks, violent measures, and official assistance, the committees and agitators failed to oust the Chinese from Sonora. As in previous years the power of Chinese tax money and contributions proved an 23 effective weapon. Control over the grocery trade, combined with the lack of Mexican capital to replace it, also aided in defeating the campaign.^ Conscious of their23 24
campaign in Torredn, see Yost to the Secretary of State, NA 704.9312/23; RDS 812.4016/9, 10, 11, reel 143; RDS 812.404/255, reel 144.
23. Author's correspondence of October, 1973, with Mrs. Herbert Sidney Bursley, widow of Herbert Sidney Bursley, former United States Consul, Guaymas.
24, For an opinion that French merchants provided money for the campaign, see William D, Maxwell, United States Vice Consul, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 28 July 1925, RDS 812.4016/13, reel 143; for an opinion that Russians from Esnsenada incited anti-Chinese riots in 221 international position and prestige, the national government was not yet ready to prohibit immigration or to allow any violent campaign to cause a repeat of the Torredn massacre.
Aided by their own organization, cooperation and financial power in combination with the venality and divisions among
the opposition, the Chinese survived the 1925-1926
Calderdn-Espinoza campaign as they had the Arana campaign.
They outlived both the legal and violent crusades of the
first half of the 1920s. Thus they were able to forestall
violent campaigns and expulsion for another five years.
Hermosillo, see John Q, Wood, United States Consul, Veracruz, to the Secretary of State, 12 September 1925, RDS 812,4016/15, reel 143. CHAPTER 8
EXPULSION
In 1925 another electoral campaign began in Sonora.
The two major candidates were former governor Francisco S.
Ellas and General Fausto Topete. Calles supported the former while 0breg6n supported Topete. When the election approached, 0breg6n sent 15,000 troops under General
Francisco Manzo to the state for the ostensible purpose of
subduing the Yaquis. The presence of these troops, who voted in the election, ensured Topete’s victory. He con
tinued the campaign against the Chinese, but with less vigor
than his predecessors. Early campaigns centered around
threats of racial contamination.^ 1
1. State Congress to Governor, 30 April 1928, AGG, tomo 17 (1928); Boletin Oficial (Hermosillo), 30 May 1928; Herbert S. Bursley, United States Consul, Guaymas, to the Secretary of State, 16 June 1928, DS 712,932/0, reel 2; for an opinion that this racial mixture was the most important problem on a "totally yellow" Pacific coast, see Gustavo Durdn Gonzalez, Problemas migratorios de Mexico (Mexico; Talleres de la Camara de Diputados, 1925), pi 129; for an analysis of a similar problem with the Chinese "fifth column" of racial inferiorities and disabilities, see Emilio Uribe Romo, "La poblaciSn de Sinaloa en el tiempo y en el espacio," in Antonio Pompa y Pompa, editor, Memories y revista del congreso mexicano de historia; estudios histbricos de Sinaloa, 2 vols,, Congreso Mexicana de Historia, IT (Mexico: n.p., 1960), I, pp. 264-265.
222 223 The National Pro-Racial League of Sonora led the opposition. The League upheld the need for foreigners in
Mexico, but only those with capital, not exploiters like
the Chinese. To defend native labor they demanded the end of Chinese immigration. In a flyer the committee called 2 for unity and cooperation of all to oust the Chinese.
L. M. Shen Ming, Chinese Consul in Nogales, immediately
protested the flyer and the meeting. Speakers insulted
Chinese and encouraged the listeners to extort money from
them. Shen Ming praised "as a noble end," efforts of the
committee to unite the workers for the betterment of the
race. But he objected to the anti-Chinese slurs. He
reminded the governor of past campaigns and of the
deleterious effects Arana's speeches had on the Chinese.
Shen Ming also stressed Calles1 exhortations to Bay in
1925 to prevent violence.^ The consul failed to comprehend
why the league existed, since its two programs were
unnecessary. Immigration restrictions on Chinese labor
and laws that prohibited marriages of Chinese and Mexicans
existed in the state. Then why was the league adamant in
its opposition to the Chinese? As the consul probed more2 3
2. El Siglo (Agua Prieta), 8 December 1928; Flyer, National Pro-Racial League, Navojoa, 30 December 1928, AGG, tomo 15 (1929).
3. L. M, Shen Ming, Chinese Provisional Consul General, Nogales, to Governor, 7 January 1929, AGG, tomo 15 (1929) . 224 deeply into the matter he equated Arana's campaign with the new one in Navojoa. He said Arana carried out his crusade for one purpose, to extort money from the Chinese. It
seemed to him as if the new campaign were aimed at the same
end. Shen Ming then requested the governor order,all to 4 obey the law. On 14 January the governor ordered Navojoa
groups to stay within the law and prevent violence.^
Topete's order reflected President Calles* position
in 1928. As negotiations on the oil issue proceeded, Calles
advocated a more moderate policy. Moderation on the part of
the United States reached its apogee with the appointment of
Dwight Morrow as Ambassador to Mexico. This coincided with
a modification of Calles' stand. Economic dislocation
caused by the Cristero Rebellion and the loss of large oil
revenues precipitated this change. The conciliation of the
Mexican and United States bankers in 1925 left the oilmen
with no allies, thus they acquiesed to the new Petroleum
Law of December, 1925. The law renewed concessions which
had been improved on before 1 May 1917. All others were
subject to national control, but owners could receive
thirty-year leases. Although Calles allowed the foreign
oilmen to retain their holdings, he still stressed national 45
4. Ibid.
5. LizSrraga to Shen Ming, 14 January 1929, AGG, tomo 15 (1929); for the continuation of the campaign against intermarriages, see El Intruso (Cananea), 8, 10 March 1929, 225 regulation of the economy and national control of natural resources,
In 1926 Calles prepared for the election of his successor. Two amendments to the constitution, non- consecutive reelection of a president and a six-year term, were passed by the congress. Thus the way was paved for
Obregdn*s election in July, 1928. But on 17 July a Catholic fanatic assassinated the recently elected Obregdn. This immediately was the signal for opposition to Calles, who many accused of ordering Obregdn1s assassination. Calles then designated the Governor of Tamaulipas, Emilio Fortes
Gil, as provisional president. Opposition rose immediately in Sonora and Veracruz. Nominally a repudiation of Fortes
Gil, the opposition was in reality an attack on the position of Calles and his control of Mexico, On 3 March 1929, in the Plan of Hermosillo, General Francisco Manzo, Governor
Fausto Topete, Senator Alejo Bay, General Jose Escobar and a host of others, repudiated the presidency of Fortes Gil.
These men condemned Plutarco Ellas Calles for the assassina tion of Alvaro ObregSn and the creation of a puppet regime under Fortes Gil, Under the cry "Down with the Predominance of Plutarco Ellas Calles," the group went into open rebellion.^ 6
6. Plan de Hermosillo, 3 March 1929, AGG, tomo 7 (1929); El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 4 March 1929? La Reata (Hermosillo), 4 March 1929; La Gaceta (Guaymas), 4 March 19.29; GonzSlez Ramirez, Planes politicos, pp, 295-300, 226 The uprising in Sonora and Sinaloa cut off railroad communications, which hurt Chinese business, This worried them less than did the possibility of bodily harm. Among the first threats to the Chinese were forced loans and the loss of merchandise. General Manzo demanded considerable sums from the three largest Chinese businesses in Guaymas.
Juan Lung Tain, Fupau Brothers, and On Ching paid over
4,750 pesos in forced loans and lost over 7,200 pesos in merchandise in Guaymas alone. Since the total loan assessed for the town was 20,000 pesos, these three bore a con- 7 siderable share of the burden. In Ciudad Obregon, Manzo levied a loan of 50,000 pesos on the town. Au Sap, Ching
Chong, and Cinco Brothers bore 10,000 of the total. They feared for their lives since they had no such cash available.
When they appealed for aid, E. W. Eaton, United States Vice
Consul, extended unofficial good offices, and, if necessary, the use of a refugee camp on the beach covered by the guns of the USS Robert Smith. The revolt then settled down to a
series of destructive raids by Manzo * s forces until his 8 eventual defeat. United States companies lost property and 78
7, A. S . Hooe, merchant, MazatlSn, to Carr Brothers, factory representatives, n.d., in Hooe to William P. Blocker, United States Consul, Mazatlan, 29 March 1929, NA 312.93/243; Bursley to the Secretary of State, 5 April 1929, NA 312.93/242.
8. E, W. Eaton, United States Vice Consul, Ciudad Obregdn, to the Secretary of State, 7 April 1929, NA 312,93/246; for daily accounts of Francisco Manzo’s revolt, see El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 4 March, to 1 May 1929, 227 valuables in the revolt, but Chinese suffered heavily through demands for cash and merchandise, in addition to outright thefts. Juan Lung Tain and Fupau Brothers suffered the greatest losses, again because they were the largest q firms. Under General LSzaro CSrdenas the federals defeated the Manzo-Escobar revolt by 1 May 1929. Manzo, Topete,
Escobar, and Bay all fled.
After the revolt, Francisco S. Ellas again assumed office as governor to replace the now-defunct Topete regime.
Having lost the 1927 election to Topete, Ellas now succeeded him on 10 May 1929 as provisional governor. This boded ill for the Chinese. Ellas campaigned on anti-Chinese programs in 1927. When he lost, his followers, who called themselves the 11 Guarache," continued the anti-Chinese tenets of his program. They became the staunch supporters of Ellas and his successor, Rodolfo Ellas Calles, when these two men tried to destroy the position of the Chinese in Sonora.
On the eve of this new campaign in Sonora, two
United States consuls in Mexico assessed the status of the
Chinese. In their studies, John Jones, United States Vice 10119
9, Eaton to the Secretary of State, 4 May 1929, NA 312.93/253; Bursley to the Secretary of State, 7 May 1929, NA 312.93/254.
10, The New York Times, 27 April 1929; El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 1 May 1929.
11, Jos6 AbrSham Mendlvil, Cuarenta ahos de polltica en Sonora (Hermosillo: n.p,, 1965), pp, 17, 23, 45-46; Las Noticias (Guadalajara), 23 July 1929. 228
Consul in Mexico, alluded to characteristics of the Chinese in Mexico. They monopolized trade and competed with the
Mexicans. But they were absolutely neutral in politics.
Therefore, both consuls concluded that there was no real threat to the Chinese since their presence was "looked upon 12 by the native element as a natural condition." This proved to be an unrealistic assessment because Mexicans on the northwest coast felt differently. Sonorans saw a dangerous precedent set by Chinese who laughed at Mexico's laws, thus they renewed demands for immigration restric tion.^^ Efforts to achieve restrictions faltered as Mexico entered the Great Depression. With the depression came closing of the mines, unemployment, and economic crisis, and an economic standstill in the United States forced thousands 14 of Mexicans to return home.
12. John E. Jones, United States Vice Consul, Agua Prieta, to United States Consul General, Mexico, 30 April 1928, RDS 812.5593/59, reel 204; Reed Paige Clark, United States Consul, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 5 June 1928, RDS 812.5593/61.
13. Mexico, Secretaria de Gobernacidn, Memoria que comprende el periodo del lo de agosto de 1929 al 31 de julio de 1930, presentada al H, Congreso de la Uni6n por el secretario del ramo C. Carlos Riva Palacio (Mexico: Talleres *14 Gr&ficos de la Nacidn, 1930), p. 27.
14. Abraham Hoffman, "Mexican Repatriation Statistics: Some Suggested Alternatives to Carey McWilliams," The Western Historical Quarterly, III (October, 1972), p. 399; Abraham Hoffman, Unwanted Mexican Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pressures, 1929-1939 (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1974), pp. 174-175; Brewery Gulch Gazette (Bisbee, Arizona), 3 April 1931; for statistics 229 As the economic depression deepened in Sonora, officials faced three interrelated problems with the peso, unemployment, and the Chinese. The value of the peso plummeted.With the return of thousands of Mexicans from the United States, unemployment rose drastically. And in the midst of the crisis the Chinese continued to prosper and dominate commerce. The most logical solution to the problems of revenue for state coffers, employment for
Mexicans, and a final resolution of the Chinese menace was to force the latter to comply with the laws.
This situation confronted Francisco Ellas as he assumed office, and he created public works projects to employ many repatriated Mexicans. Among other possible solutions to the problem, Elias stressed the need to enforce existing legislation that regulated the position of the Chinese, Already on the books were Article 106 of the
1919 Labor Law which required that eighty per cent of all
employees be Mexicans, and the 1923 laws that created
Chinese barrios and prohibited marriages between Chinese
and Mexicans. During the last six months of 1930, Ellas and
his Secretary of Government, Abelardo B. Sobarzo, reiterated 1516
on the repatriation of Mexicans from the United States, see Appendix A, Table A.8 and Table A.9; for the emigration of Chinese during this period, see Appendix A, Table A.7.
15. Christian Science Monitor (Boston), 19 May 1931.
16. Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, p, 49. 230 previous regulations to weaken the Chinese and to aid native
labor and business.
Sanitary regulations passed in January, 1929, were
ineffective, therefore Ellas created a new sanitary service 17 to enforce all health regulations. Under the leadership
of the new Director General of Public Health, Antonio
Quiroga, sanitary inspectors enforced these laws. By
forcing the Chinese to live outside their shops, the state
hoped to generate more income for the populace from rents.
And with the prohibitions on sales of a variety of goods in
a single store, they hoped to create more stores, preferably
run by Mexicans. And finally, the enforcement of the 1919 18 Labor Law was essential to reduce Mexican unemployment.
Although they pressed the Chinese on all fronts,
Ellas and Sobarzo concentrated heavily on the 1923 law that
prohibited Chinese-Mexican marriages. On 7 October 1930,
Ellas reiterated the law in a circular to all municipal
presidents. The law also included naturalized Mexicans and
illicit unions. Fines for offenses ranged from one hundred
to 1,000 pesos. Ellas told his minions to initiate an 1817
17. Circular #153 to all Municipal Presidents, 27 May 1930, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1930; for a summary of previous health regulations that Ellas hoped to enforce, see Charles C. Cumberland, "The Sonora Chinese and the Mexican Revolution," The Hispanic American Historical Review, XL (May, I960), p. 201.
18. Antonio Quiroga, Director General of Public Health, Circulars, 29 October, 11 November 1930, Hermosillo, in Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, pp. 65, 67-68. 231 active campaign to apprehend and fine all Chinese who lived 19 with or were married to Mexican girls. To assist in preventing infractions of the law, Ellas ordered all keepers of vital records to inform their municipal president of any woman who appeared to register a child born of a Chinese
father. 20 Local municipal presidents, aided by informants,
pursued this campaign until a bombardment of protests forced
Ellas to reconsider the full ramifications of enforcement of
this law. Overzealous supporters of Ellas carried out his
orders to the letter. Thus the campaign caused considerable
disruption, especially among the Chinese with families.
Ellas saw that full application of the law to Chinese family
units was inimicable to the development of the children.
The Chinese-Mexican child would lose paternal guidance and
the family would suffer great hardships, if the state 21 deprived the family of the Chinese father. Faced with
these considerations, Ellas decided to reconsider the law
in November, 1930. Cognizant of the hardships the law
produced, Ellas planned new legislation to treat this
problem. Meanwhile he would exercise the "most elemental
human sentiments" and permit the continuation of these 211920
19. Circular #277 to all Municipal Presidents, 7 October 1930, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1930.
20. Circular #278 to all Keepers of Vital Records, 7 October 1930, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1930,
21. Circular #308 to all Municipal Presidents, 13 November 1930, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1930. 232 family units. Despite this reprieve, he ordered the full application of the law for the "complete and absolute dissolution" of all legal and illicit Chinese-Mexican 22 unions that had no children.
Despite grandiose schemes and rhetoric, Ellas’ campaign sputtered with occasional setbacks, until the 23 spring of 1931. As the world economic depression intensified and unemployment increased, he took action to increase employment for Mexicans. Ready at hand was the eighty per cent provision of the 1919 Labor Law, which he revived in a circular on 18 March.^ Under the cry "Out with the Chinese to employ Mexicans," Sonorans envisioned jobs as a result of the eighty per cent provision of
Article 106.2225 2324
Again the Chinese attempted to circumvent the law.
To exempt themselves from compliance with the law, they said they had no employees, They were either owners or associates; therefore, the law had no effect on them. The legislature immediately passed an amendment to reform
22, Ibid.
23, For attempts by Cananea merchants to invite capital investment from other states, see La Frontera: Organo de la C&mara Nacional del Comercio de Ciudad Jflarez (Ciudad JGarez), January 1931,
24. Circular #68 to all Municipal Presidents, 18 March 1931, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1931,
25. El Sol (Monterrey), 20 May 1931. 233 Article 106. To eliminate the loopholes, a law of 13 May
1931 added naturalized Mexicans and associates to those owners who were required to employ eighty per cent domestic n z* labor. In June, Ellas added one more check on the
Chinese inclinations to disobey the law. Chinese, faced with fines and closing for non-compliance with Article 106, began employing female labor because they received a smaller wage, Ellas banned employment of women in any business owned by Chinese. The circular also gave the Chinese an 27 extension to comply with the law.
In August, 1931, the campaign to force Chinese compliance with the laws intensified. As the Chinese hurried to liquidate their businesses, several chambers of commerce in the state became alarmed. To solve the threats to creditors, these chambers requested intervention rights in liquidation procedures. One of their suggestions was to inform all chambers of commerce of the liquidations so 28 they could collect any debts owed them by Chinese.28 2726
26. Ley #89, 13 May 1931, AGG, Bound Laws, 1931; for continued advertisements by the Chinese firms of Juan Lung Tain, Manuel Chuy, and Sin Lee, despite the crises, see El Mayo (Navojoa), 23 April 1931.
27. Circular #141 to all Municipal Presidents, 22 June 1931, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1931.
28. The New York Times, 10 August 1931; Boletin Comercial (Chihuahua), 15 August 1931; for a $15,000 debt of Chinese in Sonora to a Douglas, Arizona wholesale firm, see Douglas Daily Dispatch. (Douglas, Arizona), 1 September 1931; tor reports that Chinese owed Mexicans four million pesos in debts, see Brewery Gulch Gazette (Bisbee, Arizona), 31 July 1931. 234 Chinese resisted attempts to force them out of
Sonora. In addition to bribing officials, they also resorted to economic sanctions. The first method, bribes, failed because the pressures of unemployment and anti-
Chinese agitation were too great to overcome. Voluntary closings to prevent compliance with Article 106 and to avoid forced liquidation comprised the economic sanctions.
Closings cut local revenue drastically and removed produce for the survival of the local populations. Conscious of their economic power, the Chinese hoped to end the campaign.
Instead, Elias lamented their closings which produced scarcities. Thus, he ordered the Chinese to liquidate their 29 entire stocks and leave the state by 5 September 1931.
Samuel Young, Chinese Minister in Mexico, protested against these actions to Foreign Relations and to Porter Gil's sucessor, President Pascual Ortiz Rubio. Although Ortiz
Rubio promised protection for the Chinese, J, Reuben Clark,
United States Ambassador to Mexico, believed this was only a token response. Clark believed the federal government 29
29. Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, p. 118; Circular #194 to all Municipal Presidents, 25 August 1931, AGO, Bound Circulars, 1931; R. Roosmale Keprene, Dutch Ambassador, Mexico, to Foreign Minister, 30 September 1931, AR, Archief van het Kabinet, gezantschepsrapporten, Latin- America, 1930-1931. 235 was powerless to prevent or control the anti-Chinese activities in Sonora,
During the last five days of August, Chinese began to abandon their properties. In the Agua Prieta area the
Chinese, who raised almost all the produce there, relin quished their land to the Mexican cattlemen from whom they had leased it. With this transfer and the closing of stores in the towns, food again became scarce. Local observers hoped that the thousands of repatriated Mexicans would move 31 into abandoned Chinese stores.
The expulsion decree prompted many Chinese to close
their shops and to sell all their goods. But here problems
arose. The decree denied them all but a few personal
possessions. If they sold out and took the money, Mexico
would gain little. Therefore many towns denied Chinese the
right to wholesale their goods. Also many refused to buy
from the Chinese as they considered him an illegitimate
owner. By the end of August the campaign forced many
Chinese to close and Sonora moved toward removal of its 32 Chinese population.32 3130
30. Paak-shing Wu, "China's Diplomatic Relations," p. 18; J. Reuben Clark, United States Ambassador, Mexico, to the Secretary of State, 26 August 1931, NA 312.93/259; The New York Times, 30 August 1931.
31. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 27, 29 August 1931; The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 29 August 1931. 32. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 29 August 1931; Excelsior (Mexico), 31 August 1931. 236
Minister Young, admitting defeat, petitioned the
United States to allow Chinese to cross the border without passports. Although the exclusion act prohibited this practice, the Labor Department allowed the Chinese to enter the United States in transit and under bond. Applications for this privilege, made at the border, carried a nine-day limit to travel by train to San Francisco. The railroad bore the responsibility to deliver all Chinese to that port.
The Chinese Minister suggested this transit privilege as "a precautionary measure to save the Mexican Government embarrassment if it fails to afford protection promised to 33 the Chinese." In addition to attempts to secure the safety of the refugees, China also continued its protests to
Ortiz Rubio. To help solve the controversy, China decided to seek the mediation of a third power. As the date neared for the expulsion of the Chinese, Chinese diplomatic personnel reported relations near the breaking point.
Therefore, China sought United States mediation.In the midst of the crisis, the federal government ordered the new 3334
33. The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 1 September 1931? The New York Times, 1 September 1931.
34, Excelsior (Mexico), 3 September 1931; El Sol (Monterrey), 3 September 1931. 237 governor, Rodolfo Ellas Calles, to order a temporary halt to 35 the expulsion. Calles did so on 3 September.
Despite the order, the exodus of Chinese continued.
Chinese diplomatic protests also proceeded. The United
States promised its unofficial good offices if China
petitioned for this aid. Temporary transit of Chinese to
San Francisco was one part of these good offices. To
extricate itself from further involvement, the United States
claimed it would mediate only if both parties accepted her
good offices,Mexico criticized China's petition for 37 Washington's aid as "unwarranted because of its impudence."
China was in an unenviable diplomatic position in September,
1931, Although the United States granted entrance and
transit privileges, it refused to intervene or mediate
unless both parties agreed. Mexico adamantly refused.
Moreover, Mexico traded very little with China. This
deprived China of aiding its nationals in Mexico with trade
reprisals. Because there were only a handful of Mexicans
in China, it had no lever to threaten Mexico. Finally,36 3735
35. The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 4 September 1931? The New York Times, 4 September 1931; "Mexico," Time, XVIII (14 September 1931), p. 23.
36. El Porvenir (Monterrey), 4, 11 September 1931; The New York Times, 11 September 1931; La Prensa (Mexico), 12 September 1931.
37. The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 5 September 1931; San Francisco Chronicle, 5 September 1931. 238 Mexico was not a member of the League of Nations, which 3 8 deprived China of an international forum for its protests.
Beset by these problems, China continued her pro tests to Mexico via diplomatic channels. But she also sanctioned other petitions to Ortiz Rubio from private
Chinese citizens' groups. The Chinese Students' Club and the American Friends of China commissioned Paul Linebarger, president of the latter, to plea the Chinese case before
Ortiz Rubio. Soon Linebarger officially represented the
Chinese government and attempted to prevent more expul- 39 sions. Meanwhile, China denounced the expulsion as an
act of barbarism. On both sides of the Pacific the press
anticipated a break between the two powers. Mexicans hoped
this would be a partial solution to the Chinese problem.
Chinese papers were more strident in their denunciations of
Mexico. Sin Wan Pao claimed expulsion was the economic
device Mexico employed to aid her workers, who were too lazy
to compete with the Chinese. Both the Central Daily News
(Nanking) and the Republican Daily News (Shanghai) casti
gated Mexico for barbaric acts. The latter demanded an
apology and restitution. The China Times of Shanghai39 38
38. For Mexico's admission to the League of Nations on 11 September 1931, see Excelsior (Mexico), 13 September 1931,
39, Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 6 September 1931; Excelsior (Mexico), 7 September 1931; La Prensa (Mexico), 8 September 1931? El Sol (Monterrey), 8 September 1931. 239 suggested a gunboat visit Mexico to reprimand ex-president 40 Calles, who supported the anti-Chinese forces. But China was in no position to enforce sanctions on Mexico. She had no trade to curtail, no Mexicans to harass, and a myriad of
internal problems. Disastrous floods in August, and
September, 1931, left thousands homeless and millions with
out food. She also faced a revolt in August and a new civil
war in September. Flood*relief and war comprised her main
concerns. This left little time and energy for Mexican
affairs. With the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in
September, 1931, China left the Chinese in Mexico to their
own fate,^
The Chinese in Sonora continued to close their
establishments and to leave Sonora in early September, 42 1931, The Douglas Daily Dispatch reported that Mexicans
moved into abandoned Chinese stores in Agua Prieta. The
paper believed these stores would fail if all the Chinese
left, because Mexicans lacked business ability. Although
the Agua Prieta lower class was jubilant, Douglas, Arizona,
merchants were upset because their meat and vegetable 424041
40. "Mexico Relaxes on Chinese Exclusion Order," The China Weekly Review, Shanghai (19 September 19311, p, 98? "Why Mexico Expels the Chinese," The Literary Digest, CX (26 September 1931) , p. 14.
41. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 3, 5, 10 September 1931.
42. Lewis Boyle, United States Consul, Agua Prieta, to the Secretary of State, 1 September 1931, NA 312.93/260, 240 business was with the Chinese. They were about to lose
steady suppliers and good credit risks. Despite the .
expulsion order, very few Chinese left Agua Prieta. As the
date for the expulsion approached, the town was tense. But
Calles1 modification of the order extended the time limit 43 and reduced the tension.
In the rest of the state the Chinese were near panic
as Mexicans forced them to the border or to MazatlSn. On
2 September forty-nine Chinese left Nogales for San
Francisco by train. This was only the first contingent of
Chinese headed for China. The next day sixty more 44 followed. They fled several towns in Sonora and Sinaloa 45 while Mexicans seized their property.
By 3 September El Porvenir of Monterrey reported
over 1,000 Chinese awaiting deportation in both Nogales and
Mazatl&n. The paper stressed the successful conclusion of
the campaign to control the retail grocery trade in Sinaloa
and Sonora with the expulsion of the Chinese. Ousted from
their homes, forced to sell at a loss and unable to remove
their possessions, the Chinese were a miserable spectacle 454344
43. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 1, 3, 4 September 1931,
44. San Francisco Chronicle, 2 September 1931; The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 3 September 1931.
45. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 3 September 1931; The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 3 September 1931; Christian Science Monitor (Boston), 4 September 1931. 241 in Sonora in early September. Over 300 Chinese waited deportation procedures in Arizona jails, while special trains traveled throughout Sonora to carry others to
MazatlSn or Nogales. Residents loaded the Chinese in 46 cattle cars for the journey to the debarkation points.
Harassed at all stops, the Chinese suffered an added indignity at Naco where they now met demands for a fifty peso exit fee. Border officials also stole some of their 47 clothes and valuables. The order to halt the expulsion
found hundreds of Chinese in Nogales, MazatlSn, and Arizona
jails, and thousands more on the northwest coast in a state
of panic.
Between 25 August and 5 September, Sonorans
virtually destroyed Chinese economic power in the state.
Although Calles ordered a temporary halt to expulsions,
Chinese suffered damages estimated at over ten million
dollars, With liquidations, forced sales, emigration and
attacks, the Chinese remained with only a shadow of their
past wealth and power. Even with the losses, the suspension
of the campaign against them met stiff resistance. Sonoran
students in Mexico violently protested the alteration of the 4647
46. El Porvenir (Monterrey), 3 September 1931; The New York Times, 3 September 1931; El Sol (Monterrey), 4 September 1931; San Francisco Chronicle, 2 September 1931.
47. Excelsior (Mexico), 4 September 1931. 242 order to oust the Chinese. They demanded the "expurgation of the Asians" from the state,^
Cognizant of United States laws that provided deportation for illegal entrants, the Chinese fled to the border. Those who retained some of their funds and could afford to pay their passage to China crossed legally under
bond. Others, more destitute, crossed the line and
surrendered to immigration officials, sheriffs, or anyone
they saw. All these appeared before the United States 49 Commissioner, who bound them over for trial. After the
trials the Immigration Service shipped them to San Francisco
for deportation to China. On 5 September 1931, 180 Chinese
left San Francisco for Hong Kong on the Dollar Line Steamer,
President Monroe. The 180 included twelve children and
fifteen women, many of them Mexican. All were able to pay
their way to China. They reported that the majority of
Chinese in Mexico were unable to pay their fares. 504849
48. Douglas Daily Despatch (Douglas, Arizona), 8 September 1931; Excelsior (Mexico), 7 September 1931; all newspaper reports alleged that both Fon Qui and Juan Lung Tain lost one million dollars each in the expulsion.
49. Mary Kidder Rak, Border Patrol (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1938), pp. 119-142.
50. The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 5 September 1931; for records of the cost to the United States of deportation, see United States, Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1931 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1931), p. 53; Twentieth Annual Report of the Secretary of Labor for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1932 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 243 To alleviate this problem, and for a large profit,
J. W. Krederman, president of the Panama Mail Steamship
Company, offered to aid the National Pro-Racial Committee.
He offered two of his ships to leave MazatlSn on 11
September to take the Chinese to Hong Kong at a reduced fare of $131.^ Reports circulated that fifteen Chinese a day left Mexico the first week in September. This later rose to twenty, then to fifty a day in the next two weeks. Mexico recorded 1,278 Chinese emigrants in 1931. Of these, sixty 52 per cent or 709 left between 1 August and 31 December.
From Nogales, the Chinese went to Hong Kong via San
1932), p. 72; United States, Department of Labor, Bureau of Immigration, Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1932 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1932), p. 5; Twenty-First Annual Report of the Secretary of Labor for the Fiscal Year Ended 5152 June 30, 1933 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1934), p. 59; for the procedure involved from arrest by law officers, to detention in local jails, to appearances before the United States Commissioner, to trial by the Judge of the First District Court, to deportation from San Francisco after a train trip from Tucson, see Author's Correspondence of 24 October 1973, with D. C. Kinne, United States Immigra tion Service, retired, Douglas, Arizona.
51. Excelsior (Mexico), 6 September 1931; El Porvenir (Monterrey), 6 September 1931.
52. El Correo de Chihuahua (Chihuahua), 7 September 1931; Excelsior (Mexico), 9 September 1931; for emigration records for 1909 to 1935, see Appendix A, Table A.5; for monthly records of emigration of Chinese in 1931, see Appendix A, Table A.7; for a comparison of emigration of Chinese from Mexico in 1929 with 1930, see "Statistics: Migration to and from Mexico in 1929," International Labour Review, XXII (November, 1930), p. 678; "Statistics: Migra tion to and from Mexico in 1930," International Labour Review, XXIV (November, 1931), p. 612. 244 Francisco. From Mazatl&n many Chinese sailed to China, but 53 the majority went to South America. If Sonora solved its problem, it also gave one to other states. Excelsior reported considerable movement by the Chinese early in
August, 1931, long before the expulsion. The paper pre dicted an intensification of the anti-Chinese campaign as new states received more Sonoran Chinese. Chinese poured out of Sonora into most of the northern states and as far
south as Colima. In all these states anti-Chinese
committees began to attack this new menace to their
survival. Excelsior claimed the Chinese problem underwent 54 not a solution but merely a change of locale.
Francisco Ellas, in the first official statement on
the expulsion, defended the eighty per cent law and
vehemently denied that the government had expelled the
Chinese, He also rejected as ludicrous the charges that the
Chinese suffered great losses. Ellas insisted that the
Chinese left of their own free will to avoid compliance with 5354
53. Excelsior (Mexico), 31 August 1931; The New York Times, 31 August 1931,
54. For reports on the internal migration of Chinese, see Excelsior (Mexico), 13 August, 10, 14 September 1931; El Sol (Monterrey), 1, 10, 30 September, 21 October 1931; The New York Times, 7 August 1933; DOS, XXXIV (29 September 1931), p. 6; XXXVI (3 November 1936), p. 14; Frederick W, Hinke, United States Consul, MazatlSn, to the Secretary of State, 3 March 1933, NA 812.504/1375; for efforts of Sonoran Chinese to enter Baja, see El Informador (Guadalajara), 4 October 1931; Excelsior (Mexico), 4 October 1931; El Sol (Monterrey), 27 October 1931, 245 55 state laws. By 10 September the Nationalist Committee that coordinated the expulsion campaign felt confident of their success. Thus, in a meeting in Hermosillo it terminated the anti-Chinese crusade since there was no longer any problem with Chinese merchants.
Chinese remained in Sonora after the expulsion crisis, though in far reduced numbers. Governor Rodolfo
Calles told the press that he would enforce Article 106 of the 1919 Labor Law. In addition he allowed the remaining
Chinese time to comply or close. On 13 September Calles permitted a United Press reporter to interview him on conditions in Sonora. Like Ellas, he denied that the state expelled the Chinese, He reiterated the story that they left of their own free will to avoid compliance with the law. In regard to the law, he said that he would treat the Chinese with an energetic hand to force them to "comply strictly with the labor laws and to satisfy corresponding taxes," He also ordered troops to protect Chinese where 57 there was racial unrest.5756 55
55, Douglas Daily Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 6 September 1931? The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 6, 8 September 1931,
56, El Sol (Monterrey), 10 September 1931,
57, El Porvenir (Monterrey), 7 September 1931; La Prensa (Mexico), 14 September 1931? El Sol (Monterrey), 14 September 1931. 246
The termination of the expulsion crusade in Sinaloa and Sonora emboldened some Chinese to return. When a contingent of over seventy Chinese returned to Guamuchil,
Sinaloa, a riot ensued. Federal troops ended the dis turbance. Sinaloa, like Sonora, saw a great diminution of
Chinese control over the grocery trade. Of 480 Chinese businesses in early 1931, only 150 survived the expul sion.^ But those who remained awakened a new anti-Chinese campaign in both states. With the departure of the Chinese and the reluctance of the remainder to employ Mexican employees, Nogales' Chamber of Commerce sought businessmen and capital from other states. With the attractive offer of hundreds of abandoned stores, Nogales enticed businessmen and investments from Nuevo Le6n, Tamaulipas, and other 59 states.
Another problem, repatriation of Mexicans, increased to an alarming number of 37,000 for October and November,
1931,^ This drastic increase, combined with continued unemployment, especially in the mines of Pilares, Nacozari, and Moctezuma, pushed Sonora into a deeper economic crisis. 585960
58. El Sol (Monterrey), 19 September 1931; El Informador (Guadalajara), 4 October 1931.
59. El Sol (Monterrey), 17 September 1931; Carta Semanal de la CSmara Mercantil y Agricola (Matamoros, Tamaulipas)., 19 September 1931.
60. For Mexican repatriation statistics for 1929 to 1937, see Appendix A, Table A.8; for monthly statistics for 1931, see Appendix A, Table A,9, 247
Calles immediately moved against the Chinese who remained in the state. On 14 October, in a circular to all municipal presidents, he deplored the resurgence of Chinese business and ordered the closing of all their stores and shops and 61 the arrest of their owners.
Under the slogan "All the Chinese or None," Sonorans pursued their crusade with such vigor that Rodolfo Calles announted in January, 1932, that there was no longer a
Chinese problem in Sonora. The problem spread to other states, especially Baja, but refugees there never equaled the number who left Sonora, which lost an estimated
3,000.61 62
Expulsion might have solved the crisis created by
Chinese control of the grocery trade, but it failed to solve other pressing economic problems in.the state. The Chinese brought little capital to Mexico to invest. Nonetheless, they obtained great welath, Sonorans maintainted that they retained the profits and did not return pesos to circula tion, instead they saved their money and ultimately sent it
61, Excelsior (Mexico), 14 October 1931; El Heraldo de Cananea (Cananea), 17 October 1931; Circular #241 to all Municipal Presidents, 14 October 1931, AGG, Bound Circulars, 1931; Circular #255 to all Municipal Presidents, 21 October 1931, ibid.
62. El Sol (Monterrey), 3 September 1931; Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, p, 140; The New York Times, 10 October 1931; for Chinese admissions that they did control eighty to ninety per cent of Sonora’s grocery trade, see "Chinese Being Forced Out of Mexico by the Thousands," The China Weekly Review, Shanghai Cl2 September 1931), p. 64, 248 overseas to China. This practice was harmful to Mexico, not only because Chinese prospered at the expense of Mexicans, but also because it deprived Mexico of funds for reinvest- 6 3 ment in other projects. Because the Chinese built up
large savings in Mexico in the hope of eventually retiring on these earnings in China, they had substantial reserves
in banks in Sonora and Sinaloa. Many large banks in these
two states bought and sold exchange at Hong Kong for the
convenience of these customers. When the campaign began in
earnest in August, 1931, Chinese immediately withdrew 6 4 considerable sums from banks in both states. After the
exodus many banks closed because of the withdrawal of these
reserves.^ The plan to oust the Chinese to prevent a drain
on Mexican capital was not too successful with their bank
deposits, Sonora faced yet another failure in its attempts
to retain Chinese profits in circulation. Although they
had little time to sell their holdings and sold only at a
63. "Why Mexico Expels the Chinese," p. 14; La Prensa (Mexico), 7 September 1931.
64. Mexican West Coast, p. 254; Excelsior (Mexico), 31 August 1931; The New York Times, 31 August 1931; for advertisements of the Bank of Sonora which included refer ences to exchanges at Hong Kong, see Revista Comercial de Sonora y Sinaloa (Nogales, Arizona), December, 1924 to November, 1925.
65. Anita Bradley, Trans-Pacific Relations of Latin America (New York: International Secretariat, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1942), p. 62; "The Credit Situation in Guaymas, Mexico," Commerce Reports, XLV (9 November 1931), p. 313; Ching-chieh Chang, "The Chinese in Latin America," p. 104. 249 fraction of current market values, the Chinese converted large holdings into pesos. They then converted this into gold. Despite robberies and extortions by border officials, millions of pesos left Mexico with the Chinese. Professor
Joaquin Balcarcel reported in La Prensa that Chinese removed eight million pesos from Sonoran banks.Sonoran banks were not the only losers. A. L. Shafer, Manager of the Pacific Branch of the American Red Cross, reported that Chinese also withdrew their reserves from Nogales,
Arizona, banks as well as from Nogales, Sonora, banks.
Arizona banks, firms and creditors lost considerable invest ments with the expulsion.
Although Sonora failed to control these funds, it succeeded in the crusade to employ Mexicans and control
Chinese businesses, Jos§ Angel Espinoza, spiritual descendant of Arana, and long a leader of the anti-Chinese
campaign, branded the campaign a success in these two
phases. He claimed that Mexicans established 1,454 new
businesses in the eleven months between September, 1931,
and July, 1932. He asserted that these provided sustenance
66. The Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), 6 September 1931; The New York Times, 26 December 1931; La Prensa (Mexico)., 25 December 1931.
67. A. L. Shafer, Manager, Pacific Branch, American Red Cross, San Francisco, to James Fieser, National Vice- Chairman, American Red Cross, Washington, 16 February 1932, in the Records of the American National Red Cross, Washington; Douglas Daily Dispatch. (Douglas, Arizona), 1 September 1931. 250 for 5,816 families, or over 25,000 people, based on approximately five persons in a family.
Despite this glowing but exaggerated picture, the economic situation in Sonora was still chaotic. State
Treasurer Rodolfo Tapia informed Calles that these new businesses provided monthly taxes of 24,888.88 pesos. But this was only one-third what the Chinese had paid.^
Sonorans faced shortages, not only of tax revenue, but also in many areas of food and drygoods. In many towns the
Chinese were the only shopkeepers; therefore, their expulsion forced the populace to bartering. Chinese paid their debts in kind and left. Because they paid no cash, indeed took cash with them, they left some towns in dire 70 financial straits. The Chinese left a vacuum in other areas as well. Agricultural production fell when Mexicans drove the Chinese off their truck gardens.
The expulsion shook the already weakened structure of Sonora. Sonora found employment for thousands of
68. Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, pp. 333, 368; for a list of all these new businesses, see ibid., pp. 336 to 338; the population of Sonora in 1930 was 316,271.
69. Espinoza, El ejemplo de Sonora, p, 334; The New York Times, 13 March 1932.
70. The New York Times, 26 December 1931; "The Credit Situation in Guaymas, Mexico," p. 314; Bradley, Trans-Pacific Relations of Latin America, p. 62.
71. Douglas Daily Dispatch (Doublas, Arizona), 29 August 1931, 251 Mexicans and took over hundreds of Chinese stores. But again it was not without cost. These merchants had meagre stocks and even less credit. As 1932 began, the future of
Sonora's precariously balanced economy was doubtful.
Chinese observers saw a bleak future because they believed
Mexico lagged behind the world in socioeconomic living and
cultural standards because of continuous revolution and 72 unsound internal affairs.
Calles indicated to the state legislature in 1932
that he was proud of his efforts to enforce the Labor Law,
especially those provisions on hours, salaries, and the
eighty per cent rule. Despite these successes, he regretted
the loss of local revenue because of the depression. But 73 he had great hopes for the future. Early in 1932 Calles
opened another campaign against the Chinese to force them
to comply with an impending federal labor law that required
ninety per cent of all employees to be natives. The new 74 labor law went into effect on 1 March 1932, By the second
72. Ling Lew, The Chinese in North America, p. 164.
73. Sonora, Gobernador, Informe rendido por el gobernador constitucional del estado, C. Rodolfo Elias Calles a la H. XXXI legislature, de Sonora: Hermosillo, Sonora, 16 de septiembre de 1932 (Hermosillo: Imprenta "Cruz Galvez,” 1932)., pp. 4, 15,
74. For restrictions on immigrants in the early 1930s that affected the Chinese, see Robert Frazer, "Mexico Further Restricts Immigration," Commerce Reports, XXXVI (7 September 1931), pp. 624-625; La Prensa (Mexico), 3 September 1931; Harold Fields, "Closing Immigration Throughout the World," The American Journal of International 252 week in March many of the Chinese who remained after the 75 1931 purge, began to leave.
Brutal treatment of Chinese in Sinaloa led to a protest to President Abelardo L. Rodriquez in 1933. This group of citizens demanded the cessation of indignities to
Chinese. They supported expulsion, but protested "as civilized human beings . . . in order that it may not be said later that . . . [they] stood silently by and tolerated these inhuman acts. Observers in China also lamented the persecution of their conationals in Mexico.
They charged that the anti-Chinese leagues "composed of intellectuals and parliamentarians and led by Mr. [Plutarco
Ellas] Calles," conspired with Rodolfo Calles to destroy 77 the Chinese in Sonora. Opposition papers in China attacked the Nanking government and demanded funds and naval vessels to go to Mexico. They condemned China for not protecting her overseas populations. The Chinese Republic .
felt definitive action was necessary. The editor charged
Law, XXVI (October, 1932), pp. 671-699; Decreto que reforma varies artlculos del reglamento de la ley de migracidn y acuerdo por el cual se restringe la inmigracidn de trabajadores (Mexico: Talleres Gr&ficos de la Nacidn, 1934).
75. The New York Times, 21 February 1, 20 March 1932.
76. The New York Times, 1 March 1933.
77. Chung-hua-nien-chien (The China Year Book), 1932, Shanghai (The North-China Daily News and Herald, Ltd., 1932), p. 266. 253 that China would face Mexican dreadnoughts pounding on her 7 8 shores if China had persecuted her Mexican residents.
In September, 1934, Rodolfo Ellas Calles announced that the anti-Chinese campaign initiated by Francisco Ellas had reached its definitive conclusion in his term. But the resolution of the Chinese issue led to another problem.
When the Chinese liquidated their businesses they caused an economic crisis and the loss of over 800,000 pesos a year in state income. With a moratorium on some taxes to stimulate the growth of local business, Sonora gradually emerged from this situation, recuperated some of her losses, 79 and regained some economic stability in 1933. Rodolfo
Calles was the man of the hour in 1933. He not only resisted all Chinese bribes and opposition, but also carried Ellas’ campaign to its fullest extent and drove out the Chinese. Jos£ Healy of the National Chamber of Commerce in Hermosillo, in praise of Calles, said there were no
Chinese groceries in Sonora in 1933. He felt the
78. "The Week," The New Republic," LXVIII (14 October 1931), p. 219; "The Plight of the Chinese in Mexico," The Literary Digest (24 June 1933), p. 11.
79. Sonora, Gobernador, Memoria general e informe rendidos por el G. Rodolfo Ellas Calles, gobernador constitucional del estado, ante la H. XXXII legislatura local, el 16 de septiembre de 1934 (Hermosillo: n.p., n.d.), p. 10; for monthly income figures for the state of Sonora from 1929 to 1933, see Appendix C, Table C.15; for state income for 1919 to 1927, see Ricardo Diaz, Contador, Hermosillo, to Governor, 31 December 1926, AGG, tomo 18 (1926). 254 elimination of the Chinese had been a social necessity and was representative of the will of the people. In his discourse on the subject he reiterated alleged Chinese vices and debilities. Healy asserted that they bankrupted
Sonora's economy, while Mexicans, with large families to support, languished in misery. Given the absolute danger of the Chinese menace, it was of utmost necessity "to cut off the octopus' head whose repugnant tenacles sucked out g q our blood." Although by 1933 the Chinese menace in the northwest ceased, periodic outbreaks of anti-Chinese 81 violence occurred in these states as late as 1935. By
1937 the Chinese campaign ended, because few Chinese remained. Chinese gradually reentered Sonora, although in greatly reduced numbers and circumstances. The 1940 8 2 census reported only 155 Chinese in Sonora. Figure 8
80. Sonora, La labor de organizacidn econdmica y social en el estado de Sonora en 1933: discursos (Hermosillo: n.p., 1933), pp. 28-29; El Noroeste (Nogales, Sonora), 18 August 1934.
81. For anti-Chinese activities in Baja caused by sensational newspaper reports of harsh treatment of Mexican women by their Chinese husbands in China, see Dutch Ambassador, Mexico, to Foreign Minister, 23 February 1934, AR, Kabinet-gezantschepsrapporten, Latijns-Amerika (Mexico), 1932-1934; "The Plight of the Chinese in Mexico," p. 11.
82. Chun-po Chen, "Chinese Overseas," The Chinese Year Book, 1935-1936 (rpt. 1936, Nendelin/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968), p. 446; D. Graham Hutton, "Mexico and the Pacific," Pacific Affairs, XI (June, 1938), p. 152; Francisco Javier Clavigero, S.J., The History of [Lower] California, Sara E. Lake and A, A. Gray, translators and editors (rpt. 1789, Stanford; Stanford University Press, STATES INDICATED BY NUMBERS I - FEDERAL DISTRICT 2 - MORELOS 3 - PUEBLA 4 - TLAXCALA 5 - HIDALGO CALIFORNIA1 6- MEXICO 7- QUERETARO 8 - GUANAJUATO 9 - AGUASCALIENTES
LEGEND
481'- 960
2 41-480
161-240 UUINTANA ROO 8 1-160
I - 80 255
Figure 8. Mexico: Chinese Population by State, 1940 256 shows the centers of Chinese population in Mexico in
1940.
1937), p. 210; for the renewal of ads by Chinese businesses see Accidn (Nogales, Sonora), 14 October 1937; for a town by town survey of Chinese in Sonora in 1940, see Appendix B, Table B,9; for a state by state survey of Chinese in Mexico in 1940, see Appendix B, Table B.10, CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSION
During the Porfiriato Mexico induced foreign immigration to aid in its economic development. Foreign technology, capital, and labor were considered an economic necessity for rapid development of its mines, railroads, and agricultural projects. Although Chinese brought little capital or modern technological expertise, they did provide an abundant source of labor and mercantile skill. They helped build railroads and other public works, and aided in increasing the productivity of Mexico's mines and planta tions. They also gravitated to Mexico's frontier states, which the government hoped to populate. Spurred by oppor
tunities to prosper, the 1899 treaty and the absence of
immigration restrictions, Chinese entered Mexico in large
numbers. Despite local opposition the government con
sidered them an economic necessity as population on the
frontier and as laborers in new development schemes.
The Chinese manifested a slightly divergent attitude
toward their role in Mexico. Because they brought no
families with them, they did not form large agricultural
communities in isolated frontier districts. As laborers
they were effective, but gravitated toward large towns and
257 258 cities when they completed their contractual obligations.
Although Chinese in Sonora worked on the railroads and in the mines, the majority lived in cities and engaged in other businesses, such as laundries, restaurants, and hotels.
But the mainstay of their existence was shoe and clothing factories and grocery establishments. With little capital, but extensive credit ties, industry and frugality, they dominated the rough clothing, shoe, and grocery business of the state before the end of the Porfiriato. With this drastic change in the role Mexicans expected them to play in local society, opposition arose. Instead of confronting a docile, transient contract laborer, the Mexican faced intense competition from the Chinese in business. But opposition was isolated, sporadic and ineffectual before the Revolution,
Bereft of the stability and protective umbrella
of the Diaz regime, the Chinese faced more intense cultural
antagonism in the Revolution. As Mexicans attempted to
define their unique characteristics and arrive at a national
ethos, xenophobia assumed a prominent role. Although
foreigners in general were affected, Sonorans concentrated
on the Chinese, which was facilitated by the precedents and
corpus of anti-Chinese propaganda established in the •
Porfiriato, On one level the Chinese remained as
beneficiaries of the old regime. On another level they
swore allegiance to no regime, but dealt with all contending 259 parties in the revolt. Thus, as neutrals in the Revolution, they were marked for exploitation by all forces,
Anti-Chinese activity was only one segment of general anti-foreign feelings in Sonora, as anti-American sentiment also prevailed. Although United States and other foreign residents controlled much of the economy, only the Chinese faced constant and vicious attacks.
Because of obvious racial characteristics, they were more visible than other foreigners. They also outnumbered all other foreign residents combined and were an important force
in the economy as shown by several state and national
economic surveys. What distinguished the Chinese was their
control of the grocery trade. To survive in the difficult
times of the Revolution, Sonorans had to deal with them in
almost every town on a daily basis in order to obtain vital
staples at low prices. Thus an alien element controlled
the state's food supply.
Two vestiges of the Sonoran's Hispanic past worked
against him in attempting to compete with the Chinese. The
Hispanic abhorence of manual labor carried over into modern
Mexico and by default the Chinese occupied many positions
the Mexicans did not care to pursue. Mexicans allowed
foreigners to do tasks they disliked and, gradually, as in
the case of the Chinese in Sonora's grocery trade, they
controlled the business. When the Mexican did engage in
this type of business he faced an additional residue of his 260
Hispanic past. Mexican merchants were all independent, isolated economic units eking out their own individual survival. Hardly any cooperation existed among them. But the Chinese, who presented a small corner grocery store on the surface, were backed by a network of interrelated associations and cooperatives.
Under the aegis of the benevolent de la Huerta-
Calles regime, the first organized crusade began with Arana.
The campaign was at times violent, but the emphasis was on effective cooperation, competition and legal harassment until the Chinese left. Despite official protection and encouragement this campaign failed to oust them. Coopera tion among themselves and the effective use of bribes enabled the Chinese to blunt Arana's efforts. Of great importance in their survival was the common assertion that
the Chinese supported most towns in the state by their
taxes, Thus the campaign was ineffective when local politicians foresaw the projected damage to their coffers
if the Chinese left.
The outbreak of a tong war in Sonora precipitated
a second organized campaign to oust them. But again,
despite the expulsion of a few, the problem remained
unsolved. The failure of this campaign manifested the
strength of the Chinese, In the past they withstood
opposition by cooperation. But now, divided and warring
among themselves, they also successfully resisted a 261 state-wide campaign to destroy their power. A new legal crusade evolved out of the tong war and tested their position from 1922 to 1926. Restrictions on sales, residences, occupations, hours, prices, and a plethora of minor aggravations confronted them. But even the two most significant legislative acts, the barrio and marriage laws of 1923, failed to curb their influence. Chinese success in evading all laws and impediments, especially Article 106 of the 1919 Labor Law, increased the frustration and antagonism of their detractors.
While Chinese success in mercantile activities prompted opposition, it simultaneously blunted or overcame this opposition before 1931. With control of the vital
staples of the grocery trade and substantial contributions
in tax revenue, the Chinese possessed two powerful levers
against opposition. They were in a position to cut off
supplies or to bribe officials to refrain from enforcing
anti-Chinese legislation. This relationship with Sonoran
officials ensured their survival until 1931,
The Great Depression provided the backdrop for the
solution of Sonora’s Chinese dilemma. With the depression
came business chaos, closing of the mines, economic disloca
tion, an influx of repatriated Mexicans from the United
States, and substantial unemployment. Again the position
of the Chinese in the economy marked them for attacks, It
w^s a measure of their position that they were able to 262 resist this last onslaught for two more years. Elias and
Calles hoped to solve many of the economic problems created by the depression with one act— expulsion of the Chinese.
The Chinese had outlived their usefulness for the state and had become an economic liability. The depression, in combination with long-standing local hostility and the sympathy of national leaders, finally wrested control of the state's food supply from the alien Chinese.
The treatment of the Chinese in Sonora reflected two important developments in Mexico's search for a national ethos. Anti-Chinese attacks and racial slurs comprised a part of its cultural tenets. Although a part of Mexican
society, the Chinese were not a part of Mexican culture,
thus opponents alleged they were an unassimiable alien
presence grafted on Mexico by Diaz and his cohorts. It was
easy to transfer general feelings of xenophobia into anti-
Chinese harassment in Sonora. Other foreigners were strong
and backed by powerful governments, Chinese were visible,
rich, neutral and unprotected. Freedom from the Diaz
regime also meant destruction of the vestiges of the
Porfiriato, such as foreign exploitation, business and
influence, which permeated Porfirian development schemes.
Thus the Revolution attacked Mexico's foreign element. The
rejection of Diaz' stress on foreign influence in the
economy was the most important tenet of economic nationalism. 263 Thus, in their search for cultural and economic autonomy, the Mexicans attacked the Chinese,
Although the Mexican nativist movement was sporadic, halting and malleable in its search for concrete charac teristics, xenophobia in the movement was peculiarly direct.
Chinese were attacked because they were foreigners. The attacks were greater in extent and intensity because they were Chinese. Their power in the local economy, combined with their vulnerable position with no powerful patron, marked them for extinction among all foreigners. But this
economic position also provided the lever that extended
their stay for a half century despite constant opposition. APPENDIX A
IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION STATISTICS
264 Table A.1. Chinese Arrivals at Mexico's Maritime Ports, 1884-1891
Ports 1884 1885 1886a 1887 1888b 1889° 1890d 1891e
Gulf 3 6 2 3 2 13 66 216 311
Pacific 72 138 277 190 117 520 1,655 828 3,797
Total 75 144 279 193 119 533 1,721 1,044 4,108
aM£xico, Ministerio de Fomento, Boletin de la direcci6n general de estadistica de la Repdblica Mexicana, 1888-1891 (.8 vols., Mexico: n.p., 1888- 1892), I, 41-46,
bIbid,, II, 78-84.
CIbid., III, 88; 4, 89.
dIbid,, VI, 129.
elbidt, VIII, 130, 265 Table A.2. Chinese Arrivals at Mexico’s Maritime Ports, 1892-1899
Port 1892a 1893b 1894C 1895d 1896e 1897f 1898g 1899h Total
Gulf Progreso 0 12 35 45 335 60 15 124 626 Tampico 43 12 39 205 281 97 13 345. 1,035 Veracruz 252 668 82 21 51 37 20 271 1,158 Total 295 692 156 271 667 194 48 496 2,819
Pacific Acapulco . 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 5 Ensenada 26 11 4 8 24 5 17 10 105 Guaymas 4 3 4 7 1 2 0 2 23 MazatlSn 9 9 0 7 10 428 119 187 769 Puerto Angel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Salina Cruz 5 5 14 55 210 3 12 6 310 Total 45 28 23 77 247 438 148 207 1,213 Total all ports 340 720 179 348 914 632 196 703 4,032
aMSxico, Minister© de Foment©, Boletin semestral de la direcci6n general de estadistica de la Reptiblica Mexicana, Aho de 1892, NGmero X (Mexico: n.p., 1892), pp. 418-419.
Vn Mexico, Anuario estadistico de la RepGblica Mexicana, 15 vols, (1893- 1907), I, 302-303.
CIbid,, II, 354-356.
dIbid., III, 570.
eIbid., IV, 229. 266 fIbid., V, 199, Table A. 2.— Continued
9Ibid., VI, 347.
hIbid., VII, 109.
^For different figures for 1897 (43), 1898 (37), and 1899 (24), for Veracruz, see United States, Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Statistics, Emigration to the United States, Special Consular Reports, XXX (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904), p, 178.
to C\ Table A.3. Chinese Arrivals at Mexico’s Maritime Ports, 1900-1907
190 0a 1901b 1902° 1903d 1904e 1905f 19069 1907h Total
Gulf Progreso 64 0 276 168 132 25 103 96 864 Tampico 113 . 0 17 2 1 0 5 6 144 Veracruz 171 13 26 24 11 31 19 148 289 Total 194 13- 319 194 144 56 127 250 1,297 Pacific Acapulco 0 65 17 7 4 16 1 6 116 Ensenada 4 3 3 2 0 3 3 3 21 Guaymas 0 0 0 38 1 0 2 16 57 La Paz 0 . 0 0 • 6 0 0 0 0 6 Manzanillo 1 0 4 1,656 185 45 49 55 1,995 MazatlSn 205 829 232 25 224 0 274 233 2,022 Puerto Angel 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Salina Cruz 9 1 0 58 3,300 1,909 2,287 5,286 12,850 San Benito 19 11 1 0 0 0 0 13 44 San Bias 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 5 Santa Rosalia 0 0 0 0 0 0 507 0 507 Total 240 909 257 1,792 3,714 1,973 3,124 5,616 17,625
Total all ports 434 922 576 1,986 3,858 2,029 3,251 5,866 18,922
aMSxicof Anuario estadistico, VIII, 171-172,
bIbid., IX, 174, 176.
cIbid., X, 106, 108,
dIbid., XI, 207-208, 268
elbid,, XII, 160^162, Table A.3.— Continued
fIbid., XIII, 130.
gIbid., XIV, 132, 134.
hIbid., XV, 132, 134.
*For different figures for 1900 (24), 1901 (41), and 1902 (54), for Veracruz, see United States, Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Statistics, Emigration to the United States, p. 178. 269 270 Table A,4. Immigration and Emigration of Chinese ]by Sex, 1911-1912
Immigration Emigration
Date Male Female Male Female
1911 3,258 12 801 9 1912 4,953 20 535 15a
Jan 1911 107 1 19 0 Feb 1911 81 0 29 2 Mar 1911 26 1 17 1 Apr 1911 953 1 63 1 May 1911 557 0 24 1 Jun 1911 82 0 58 2 Jul 1911 535 2 95 1 Aug 1911 233 1 220 1 Sep 1911 46 0 46 0 Oct 1911 594 5 93 0 Nov 1911 100 1 53 0 Dec 1911 44 0 84 0 Jan 1912 760 3 46 0 Feb 1912 43 1 32 0 Mar 1912 27 1 45 0. Apr 1912 22 0 47 2b
Mexico, Departmento de la Estadlstica Nacional, Anuario de 1930, 2a Spoca, 16 (Tacubaya: Talleres GrSficos de la Secretarla de Agriculture y Fomento, 1932), p, 163.
^MSxico, Secretarla de Fomento, Colonizacidn S Industrie, Boletin de la direccidn general de estadistica, Nfimero I (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretarla de Fomento, 1912), p. 119. 271 Table A.5. Immigration and Emigration of Chinese by Sex, 1911-1936
Immigration Emigration
Year Male Female Male Female
1911 3,358 12 801 9 1912 4,953 20 535 15 1913 4,857 53 843 23 1914 1,488 3 457 3 1915 467 7 182 4 1916 220 8 366 7 1917 366 11 615 21 1918 762 12 508 11 1919 1,132 19 729 16 1920 3,647 22 1,045 21 1921 1,276 44 1,001 22 1922 696 25 922 38 1923 1,082 • 43 850 20 1924 845 35 945 27 1925 365 11 856 35 1926 862 20 693 21 1927 433 16 800 25 1928a 475 14 688 30 1929 389 17 565 16 1930 308 13 635 28 1931 99 15 1,202 76 1932 5 2 311 28 1933 1 1 49 4 1934 1 1 37 1 1935, 2 0 20 0 1936° 1 5 13 0
Total by sex 28,090 429 15,688 501
Total 28 ,519° 16, 189
^Figures for 1911 to 1928 from Mexico, Departmento de la Estadistica Nacional, Anuario de 1930, pp. 163-170.
^Figures for 1929 to 1936 from Mexico, Direcci6n General de Estadistica, Anuario estadistico, 1938 (Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn, 1939), pp. 87-88.
cFor immigration figures of 3,487 for 1909 and 4,681 for 1910, see Ferenczi, International Migrations, p. 503; these figures increase the official Mexican totals of Chinese immigrants from 1909 to 1936 to 36,687. 272
Table A.6. Chinese from Mexico Admitted to the United States, 1918-1926a
Year Number
1918 38 1919 16 1920 11 1921 54 1922 418 1923 142 1924 121 1925 65 1926 58
aR. D. McKenzie, Oriental Exclusion; The Effect of American Laws, Regulations, and Judicial Decisions Upon the Chinese and Japanese on the American Pacific Coast. (rpt. 1928, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1970), p. 188. 273 Table A.7. Migratory Movements of Chinese in Mexico, July, 1931 to June, 1932 by Month and Sex
Immigration Emigration
Date Male Female Male Female
Jul 1931 6 2 56 if Aug 1931 5 0 142 17b Sep 1931 7 0 167 21 Oct 1931 1 0 148 13 Nov 1931 3 0 91 12c Dec 1931 2 0 89 9
Feb 1932 0 0 40 0d Mar 1932 1 0 58 2® Apr 1932 0 0 35 4vi May 1932 0 0 50 7h Jun 1932 0 0 50 7h
aMSxico, Estadlstica Nacional, VIII (January, 19321, p, 48 .
bIbid., VIII (February, 1932), pp. 120, 125, 126.
cIbid., VIII (March, 1932), pg>. 170, 171.
dIbid., VIII (April, 1932), p. 293. •
eIbid., VIII (June, 1932) , pp. 340-341.
fIbid., VIII (July, 1932), p. 387.
gIbid,, VIII (August, 1932), p. 465.
hIbid., VIII (September, 1932)i , p. 529. 274 Table A.8. Repatriation of Mexicans to Mexico from the United States, 1929-1937a
Year Number
1929 74,419 1930 70,129 1931 138,519 1932 77,435 1933 33,574 1934 23,943 1935 15,386 1936 11,599 1937 8,037
aHoffman, "Mexican Repatriation Statistics," p. 399.
Table A.9. Repatriation of Mexicans to Mexico from the United States by Month, 1931a
Date Number
Jan 6,508 Feb 6,145 Mar 9,400 Apr 10,439 May 7,201 Jun 9,639 Jul 8,954 Aug 14,748 Sep 13,826 Oct 16,448 Nov 20,756 Dec 14,455
a Hoffman, Unwanted Mexican Americans, pp. 174-175. APPENDIX B
POPULATION STATISTICS
275 276 Table B.l. Chinese Population of Mexico by Sex, 1895,a 1900,b 1910c
1895d 1900d 1910e
State Male Female Male Female Male Female
Aguascalientes 8 0 10 2 21 0 Baja-Norte 71 0 138 0 851 0 Baja-Sur f f 50 0 f f Campeche 3 0 5 0 70 0 Chiapas 13 0 16 0 477 1 Chihuahua 62 1 328 2 1,316 9 Coahuila 54 4 197 5 745 14 Colima , 0 0 5 0 78 2 Durango 23 0 147 1 240 2 Federal District 40 3 116 1 1,477 5 Guanajuato 2 0 11 0 102 0 Guerrero 0 0 3 0 27 0 Hidalgo 0 0 0 0 38 0 Jalisco 0 0 20 0 69 0 Mdxico 3 0 15 0 57 1 Michoacan 1 0 4 0 26 0 Morelos 0 0 5 0 18 0 Nuevo Leon 34 0 90 0 221 0 Oaxaca 13 0 81 0 259 3 Puebla 1 0 11 0 29 2 Queretaro 0 0 1 0 5 0 Quintana Roo g g g g 3 0 San Luis Potosl 12 0 32 0 109 0 Sinaloa 182 0 233 i 663 4 Sonora 299 11 850 9 4,449 37 Tabasco 4 0 2 0 35 1 Tamaulipas 8 0 38 0 211 2 Tepic 1 0 29 0 173 0 Tlaxcala 0 0 0 0 0 0 Veracruz 11 0 116 0 433 1 Yucatan 47 0 153 0 875 0 Zacatecas 4 0 19 0 41 0
Total by sex 896 19 2,725 21 13,118 85
Total 915 2,746 13, 203
aM ^MSxico, Resumen general del censo ... 1900, p. 29, passim. 277 Table B.l.— Continued cMSxico, Secretaria de Fomento, Colonizaci6n S Industria, Boletln estadistica, Ntimero 3 (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretarla de Fomento, 1913), p. 87. ^Chinese nationality. eBorn in China, f Combined with Baja-Norte. ^Not included. Table B.2. Chinese Population of Sinaloa by District, 1895, 1900, 1910 District 1895a 1900b 1910c CuliacSn 43 46 116 Sinaloa 67 47 34 Mocorito 0 2 5 Co Sell cl 0 10 0 Badiraguato 15 16 1 El Fuerte 2 15 60 MazatlSn 42 83 431 Rosario 21 15 14 Concordia 0 0 4 San Ignacio 0 0 2 Total 190 234 667 aM£xico, Censo general ... 1895, p. 30. ^MSxico, Direccibn General de Estadistica, Censo y divisi6n territorial del estado de Sinaloa, verificado en 1900 (Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Romento, 1905), p. 31. ^Mexico, Direccidn General de Estadistica, Tercer censo general de poblaciSn de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos verificado el 27 de octubre de 1910 (2 vols., Mexico:Ofic. Impresora de la Secretaria de Hacienda, Departmento de Fomento, 1918-1920), I, 230. 279 Table B.3, Chinese Population in Sonora in 1889 and 1890 by Total Number and Number of Chinese Involved in Shoe Industry 1889a 1890b District Number Shoes Number Shoes Alamos 4 3 18 18 Altar 0 0 10 0 Arizpe 0 0 0 0 Guaymas 110 102 143 88 Hermosillo 30 24 26 19 Magdalena 6 4 30 13 Moctezuma 0 0 0 0 Sahuaripa 0 0 1 0 Ures 0 0 1 0 Cocorit 3 0 0 0 Mines 4 0 0 0 Total 157 133 229 138 aWillard to the Secretary of State, 18 September 1889, CDG, reel 8. ^Sonora, Gobernador, Memoria ... Corral, I, 586, 489-492, 494-498, 502-503, 505; Alfonso Luis Velasco, Geografla y estadlstica: Sonora, pp. 91, 102, 134, 145, 159, 173, 188, 200. 280 Table B,4. Chinese Population of Sonora by District and Sex, 1900, 1910b 1900 1910 District Male Female Male Female Alamos 54 9 147 6 Altar 16 0 92 0 Arizpe 16 0 1,370 7 Guaymas 281 8 857 14 Hermosillo 315 0 716 6 Magdalena 144 0 770 4 Moctezuma 12 0 490 0 Sahuaripa 0 0 11 0 Ures 12 0 56 0 Total 850 9 4,449 37 aM§xico, Direccidn General de Estadistica, Censo .., Sonora ... 1900, pp. 39, 133, 227. ^Mgxico, Tercer censo, I, 232. 281 a Table B.5. Chinese Population of Mexico by Sex, 1921, 1930b 1921 1930 State Male Female Male Female Aguascalientes 14 0 29 18 Baja-Norte 2,792 14 2,919 63 Baja-Sur 160 5 162 44 Campeche 60 1 75 38 Chiapas 615 30 857 238 Chihuahua 517 16 898 229 Coahuila 507 16 612 153 Colima 31 1 24 14 Durango 46 0 196 33 Federal District 589 18 745 141 Guanajuato 18 3 25 12 Guerrero 3 0 7 3 Hidalgo 49 1 52 18 Jalisco 52 1 103 48 Mexico 24 0 35 22 MichoacSn 5 0 11 1 Morelos 3 0 3 0 Nayarit 152 0 143 27 Nuevo Leon 68 0 154 13 Oaxaca 152 6 108 50 Puebla 16 1 32 12 Queretaro 1 0 2 0 Quintana Roo 3 0 6 4 San Luis Potosi 103 8 284 73 Sinaloa 1,036 4 1,685 438 Sonora 3,573 66 3,159 412 Tabasco 44 4 41 23 Tamaulipas 1,970 35 1,875 242 Tlaxcala 0 0 0 0 Veracruz 837 10 1,076 162 Yucatan 768 5 819 153 Zacatecas 19 0 117 25 Total by sex 14,227 245 16,254 2,699 Total 14, 472 18,953 aM(3xico, Departmento de la Estadistica Nacional, Censo general de habitantes, 30 de noviembre de 1921 282 . Table B.5.— Continued (33 vols., Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Naci6n, 1925- 1928), I-XXXIII, passim. kjyiSxico, Secretaria de Economia Nacional, Direccidn General de Estadistica, Quinto censo general de poblacion, 15 de mayo de 1930 (32 vols., Mexico: Talleres Graficos de la Nacidn, 1932-1936), I-XXXII, passim. 283 Table B .6. Naturalization of Chinese in Mexico, 1922-1932a Total foreigners Date naturalized Chinese Per cent 1922 197 122 62.0 1923 371 160 43.0 1924 205 98 48.0 1925 322 122 38.0 1926 95 23 24.0 1927 305 21 7.0 1928 323 13 4.0 1929 366 6 1.7 1930 540 11 2.0 1931 1/106 3 0.3 1932 1/278 6 0.5 aM§xico, Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletin Oficial, XXXIX-LIX (1922-1932), passim. 284 Table B.7. Foreigners Resident in Mexico by Sex and Nationality, 1928a Per cent Ratio of of total women to for Nationality Men Women men Total eigners Canadian 3,249 3,198 98.4 6,447 4.3 German 4,443 2,518 56.7 6,961 4.6 Syrio-Lebanese 7,400 5,245 70.9 12,645 8.3 United States 9,742 5,477 56.2 15,219 10.0 Chinese 22,446 1,772 7.9 24,218 16.0 Spanish 31,412 17,146 54.6 48,558 32.0 Others*3 c c c 37,619 24.8 Total c c c 151,667 100.0 ^Department of Migration list, 14 March 1928, AGG, tomo 53 (1929). ^Sixty-two nationalities, each with less than 4,700 residents. 4 cNo information available. 285 Table B.8. Foreign Residents of Mexico by State, 1928a Total Total Per cent State foreigners Chinese of Chinese Aguascalientes 397 31 7.8 Baja California 9,223 5,889 63.9 Campeche 581 108 18.6 Coahuila 4,500 707 10.6 Colima 175 43 25.0 Chiapas 6,755 1,261 18.7 Chihuahua 11,030 1,037 9.4 Federal District 46,456 1,062 2.3 Durango 2,168 197 9.0 Guanajuato 1,945 37 2.0 Guerrero 511 7 1.4 Hidalgo 2,523 98 3.9 Jalisco 2,131 192 9.0 Mexico 2,305 78 3.4 Michoacan 1,325 8 0.6 Morelos 272 9 3.3 Nayarit 626 164 26.2 Nuevo Le6n 2,553 216 8.5 Oaxaca 2,441 254 10.4 Puebla 5,114 22 0.4 Queretaro 381 1 0.3 Quintana Roo 369 2 0.6 San Luis Potosi 2,950 288 9.8 Sinaloa 4,027 2,019 50.0 Sonora 6,842 3,758 54.9 Tabasco 1,130 67 6.0 Tamaulipas 10,918 2,916 26.7 Tlaxcala 236 0 0.0 Veracruz 14,428 1,908 13.2 YucatSn 6,293 1,726 27.4 Zacatecas 1,035 113 10.9 Total 151,667 24,218 16.0 ^Department of Migration list, 14 March 1928, AGG, tomo 53 (1929); copy appended to Mexico, Departmento de Migracidn, Seccidn de Estadistica , Inmigracion y emigracidn registradas en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos durante los ahos de 1908 a 1927 (n.p.: n.p., n .d,). 286 Table B.9. Chinese Population of Sonora by Town and Sex, 1940a Chinese Naturalized Town Male Female Male Female Total Agua Prieta 0 0 2 0 2 Alamos 3 0 3 0 6 Arizpe 1 0 0 0 1 Bacerac 1 0 0 0 1 BScum 6 0 1 0 7 Batuc 1 0 1 0 2 Bavietcora 1 0 0 0 1 Caborca 1 0 0 0 1 Cajeme 14 1 5 0 20 Cananea 3 0 3 0 6 La Colorada 0 0 2 ' 1 3 Cucurpe 0 0 1 0 1 Etchojoa 5 0 2 0 7 Guaymas 10 3 4 1 18 Hermosillo 4 0 5 0 9 Huatabampo 3 0 6 1 10 Imuris 2 0 2 0 4 Magdalena 0 0 1 0 1 Naco 1 0 0 0 1 Nacozari de Garcia 0 0 1 0 1 Navojoa 13 0 4 0 17 Nogales 4 0 8 0 12 Opodepe 1 0 1 0 2 Oguitoa 1 0 2 0 3 Pitiquito 1 0 0 0 1 Quiriego 0 0 1 0 1 Sahuaripa 0 0 1 0 1 San Miguel 1 0 1 0 2 San Pedro 1 0 0 0 1 Tubutama 2 0 1 0 3 Ures 7 0 1 0 8 YScora 1 0 1 0 2 Total 88 4 60 3 155 ^Mexico, Secretaria de la Economia Nacional, Direcci6n General de Estadistica, Sexto censo de poblacidn. 1940: Sonora (Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de lai Naci6n, 1943), pp. 21, 53, 85 , 115, 287 Table B.10. Chinese Population of Mexico by State and Sex, 1940a Chinese Naturalized Town Male Female Male Female Total Aguascalientes 6 0 8 0 14 Baja-Norte 610 8 113 7 738 Baja-Sur 35 1 14 0 50 Campeche 24 1 11 0 36 Coahuila 255 1 90 1 347 Colima 19 0 8 2 29 Chiapas 305 6 104 3 318 Chihuahua 510 10 190 16 726 Federal District 603 20 220 10 853 Durango 83 0 21 0 104 Guanajuato 10 0 6 0 16 Guerrero 8 0 4 1 13 Hidalgo 44 1 14 0 59 Jalisco 60 0 42 5 107 Mexico 11 0 3 3 17 Michoacan 12 1 5 ' 0 18 Morelos 2 0 3 0 5 Nayarit 51 1 34 0 86 Nuevo Le6n 62 4 42 2 110 Oaxaca 38 0 16 0 54 Puebla 12 0 14 3 29 Queretaro 1 0 0 0 1 Quintana Roo 5 0 3 0 8 San Luis Potosl 91 1 43 1 136 Sinaloa 155 10 115 3 283 Sonora 88 4 60 3 155 Tabasco 9 1 6 1 17 Tamaulipas 700 23 220 8 951 Tlaxcala 0 0 0 0 0 Veracruz 528 9 167 3 707 YucatSn 349 6 129 1 485 Zacatecas 60 2 27 0 89 Total 4,746 110 1,732 73 6,661 Mexico, Secretaria de la Econoraia Nacional, DirecciSn General de Estadistica, Sexto censo de poblacidn, 1940; resumen general (Mexico: Talleres Grdficos de la Nacion, 1943), pp. 9-10, 47-48. APPENDIX C ECONOMIC STATISTICS Table C.l. Juan Lung Tain's Claims for Losses Suffered During the Revolution in 1914 and 1915a Date Amount of claim in pesos 1 March 1914 6,678.14 December 1914 16,784.36 Summer 1915 b 17 to 18 August 1915 merchandise 54,516.00 United States currency 3,330.00 Mexican bank notes 6,800.00 constitutionalist currency 5,200.00 69,846.00 69,846.00, 1 to 13 November 1915 merchandise 198,702.85 United States currency 149,500.00 Mexican banknotes 7,895,00 constitutionalist currency 43,770.00 403,117.85 403,117.85 Total 496,426.35 Juan Lung Tain to Secretary of Interior, Mexico City, 1 October 1922, in Claims Commission to Governor of Sonora, 15 February 1927, AGG, tomo 72 (1927). ^Included in December, 1914 figures. 288 289 Table C.2. Guaymas Business Taxes, 1917 to May 1921a May % Increase Name 1917 1920 1921 1921 in 1921 Juan Lung Tain, Co, 200b 450 350 500 42.86 On Chong, Co, 175 350 225 385 71.11 Yick Chong, Co, 200 275 225 300 33.33 Siu Fo Chong, Co. 100 165 125 180 44.00 Fing Sing, Co. 40 200 150 220 46.66 Sang Chong 40 115 75 130 73.33 Ramon Pon & Bros. 40 115 75 130 73.33 Julio Chan & Bros. 10 40 20 45 125.00 Chan Hie, Co, 0 55 30 60 100.00 Miguel H. Guin 0 30 20 30 50.00 Mauro Hien 0 30 20 35 75.00 Juan Hong & Bros, 0 35 25 35 40.00 Hop Lorn 0 30 20 35 75.00 Him Qui 0 30 20 35 75.00 Leon Qui 20 45 35 55 57.14 Quon Qui 15 40 25 45 80.00 Sam Qui 0 30 20 35 75.00 Carlos Tang, Co. 0 100 100 400 300.00 El Aguilar Petroleum Co. 125 Csspar Zaragoza 200 J, A. McPherson Co, 50 National Paper Type Co, 10 Pierce Oil Corp. 125 Rademacher Muller Co. 125 A. Save Co. 80 aLi to de la Huerta, 16 June 1921, AGG, tomo 3449, Part 2 In pesos, 290 Table C.3. Chinese Merchants of Sonora by Towns with Over 100 Chinese, 1924a Town Number of Chinese Chinese merchants Hermosillo 355 232 Cananea 336 172 Guaymas 270 165 Nogales 263 134 Fronteras 172 24 Navojoa 165 52 Nacozari de Garcia 148 47 Agua Prieta 107 75 Magdalena 106 51 Total 1,922 952 ^Compiled from census work sheets of all Sonora towns, 1924, AGG, tomo 3659. Table C,4. Chinese Merchants of Sonora by Towns with 50 to 80 Chinese, 1924a Town Number of Chinese Chinese merchants Villa de Tigre 80 14 Naco 74 32 Santa Ana 73 19 Cocorit 72 27 Villa de Seris 70 6 Imuris 68 13 BScum 65 48 Pilares de Nacozari 64 40 Etchojoa 62 19 Cumpas 58 18 Empalme 53 19 Total 739 255 ^Compiled from census work sheets of all Sonora towns, 1924, AGG, tomo 3659, 291 Table C.5. Merchants and Mixed Grocery Merchants of Sonora by Town and Nationality, 1924a Mexican Chinese Others Mer- Mer Mer Town chant Grocer chant Grocer chant Grocer Aconchi 1 1 1 1 0 0 Agua Prieta 23 4 30 19 11 2 Alamos 42 7 12 7 1 0 Altar 28 7 4 4 3 3 Atil 1 1 1 1 0 0 Arizpe 7 4 14 14 1 1 BacadShuachi 3 3 0 0 0 0 Bacerac 4 4 1 1 0 0 Bacoachi 38 1 2 2 1 1 Bdcum 3 3 17 17 4 4 BanSmichi 8 8 3 3 0 0 BaviScora 1 0 6 6 1 1 Bavispe 7 4 1 1 0 0 Caborca 15 6 2 2 1 1 Cananea 39 10 49 35 22 5 Cocorit 46 9 21 17 5 3 La Colorada 8 5 20 15 0 0 Cucurpe 2 2 1 1 0 0 Cumpas 3 2 17 17 1 1 Etchojoa 8 6 19 18 0 0 Fronteras 3 1 11 10 0 0 Granados 6 1 0 0 0 0 Guaymas 56 10 69 61 26 2 Hermosillo 116 27 84 76 11 7 Huachinera 2 1 1 1 0 0 HuSsabas 16 4 2 2 0 0 Huatabampo 4 1 40 36 2 1 HuSpac 2 1 6 6 1 1 Hunamichi 8 8 3 3 0 0 Imuris 11 3 9 8 0 0 Magdalena 29 6 18 14 0 0 Moctezuma 1 0 4 3 1 0 Movas 1 1 1 1 0 0 Naco 6 0 10 7 4 0 NScori Chico 5 3 1 1 0 0 Nacozari 20 10 14 11 8 3 Navojoa 29 12 38 33 9 4 Nogales 49 14 59 43 9 2 Nuri 3 3 0 0 0 0 Opodepe 3 3 6 6 0 0 Oquitoa 3 2 1 1 1 0 292 Table C.5.— Continued Mexican Chinese Others Mer- Mer- Mer- Town chant Grocer chant Grocer chant Grocer Oputo 20 7 18 16 4 2 Pilares 7 2 11 11 3 2 Pitiquito 12 5 3 3 0 0 Quirego 3 3 4 4 0 0 Rosario 1 1 1 1 0 0 San Felipe 3 2 0 0 1 1 San Javier 2 2 0 0 0 0 Santa Ana 2 1 20 19 0 0 Santa Cruz 7 2 2 2 1 1 Saric 5 5 4 4 0 0 Sahuaripa 4 3 4 4 0 0 Suaqui 11 7 0 0 0 0 Suaqui Grande 1 1 0 0 0 0 Tepache 3 3 8 8 0 0 Trincheras 7 1 1 1 0 0 Tubutama 0 0 3 3 0 0 Villa de Seris 1 1 7 7 0 0 YScora 14 13 1 1 0 0 Total 763 257 685 588 131 48 aCompiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3660, 293 Table C.6 Mexican and Chinese Capital Invested in Mercantile Establishments in Sonora by Town, 1925a Number of Capital Number of Capital Town Mexicans invested Chinese invested Alamos 3 22,200b 3 3,900* Aconchi 1 500 • 1 2,000 Agua Prieta 1 200 11 21,700 Altar 5 14,405 6 16,000 Arizpe 6 18,050 6 16,500 Arivechi 1 1,000 0 0 Atil 1 1,200 1 3,000 BacadShuachi 1 500 0 0 Bacerac 1 150 2 8,000 Bacoachi 1 4,000 0 0 BScum 0 0 1 1,500 BanSmichi 5 2,150 3 5,400 Batuc 2 5,900 1 6,000 BaviScora 1 600 4 10,010 Bavispe 3 3,300 1 2,200 Caborca 5 9,250 1 5,000 San Luis Rio Colorado 3 3,200 0 0 Cananea 12 31,800 11 33,900 Cocorit 2 1,200 36 95,300 Cucurpe 2 900 0 0 Cumpas 0 0 8 19,200 Etchojoa 0 0 20 44,450 Fronteras 0 0 8 19,800 Granados 1 1,100 7 2,500 Guaymas 23 268,750° 32 208,000 Hermosillo 29 214,800 72 182,135 Huachinera 0 0 1 3,500 HuSsabas 1 400 2 900 Huatabampo 0 0 25 64,850 HuSpac 1 500 4 6,700 Imuris 0 0 5 8,500 La Colorada 1 1,000 3 6,500 Magdalena 3 4,450 25 150,255 Moctezuma 3 7,340 4 12,540 Ncicori Chinco 1 525 0 0 Nacozari de Garcia 0 0 9 29,265 Navojoa 19 41,100 22 118,900 Nogales 57 183,920 61 112,960 Nuri 3 1,500 0 0 Oputo 2 2,900 3 8,340 Oquitoa 0 0 2 2,380 294 Table C.6.— Continued Number of Capital Number of Capital Town Mexicans invested Chinese invested Pilares de Nacozari 1 11,000 4 13,500 Pitiquito 3 1,050 0 0 Quirego 1 1,200 2 2,700 Raydn 2 2,500 4 8,800 Rosario . 1 500 0 0 Sahuaripa 11 17,450 3 8,300 San Javier 2 3,000 0 0 San Miguel 2 5,000 4 9,000 San Pedro 0 0 1 5,000 Santa Ana 1 1,200 15 25,255 Santa Cruz 1 3,000 1 5,000 Saric 2 2,000 2 4,500 Soyopa 2 4,500 0 0 Suaqui de Batuc 2 2,500 0 0 Tepache 0 0 2 2,020 El Tigre 7 14,400 9 24,000 Trincheras 1 1,050 0 0 Tubutama 0 0 2 3,200 Ures 8 9,810 12 28,310 Valle de Tacupeto 1 800 1 2,500 Villa de Seris 1 500 5 7,200 Villa Pesqueira 1 1,200 0 0 Total 240 943,540 458 1,376,370 ^Compiled from statistics in AGG, tomo 3758. bT In pesos. cThis included the invested capital of Caspar Zaragosa, who appeared in other statistical surveys as a Spaniard. 295 Table C.7. Chinese and Mexican Capital Investment of 5,000 to 10,000 Pesos in Mercantile Businesses in Sonora by Town, 1925a Town Nationality Businesses Investment Altar Mexican 2 11,000 Chinese 2 10,000 Arizpe Mexican 1 7,000 BanSmichi Mexican 1 5,000 Chinese 1 6,000 Bavicicora Chinese 1 5,000 Caborca Chinese 1 5,000 Cananea Chinese 1 9,000 Cocorit Chinese 3 21,500 Fronteras Chinese 2 10,000 Guaymas Mexican 3 21,000 Hermosillo Mexican 3 18,000 Chinese 5 39,500 Huatabampo Chinese 3 17,500 Magdalena Chinese 1 9,000 Navojoa Mexican 3 16,000 Chinese 1 5,000 Nogales Mexican 5 28,400 Chinese 1 5,000 Sahuaripa Chinese 1 6,000 Santa Cruz Chinese 1 5,000 El Tigre Mexican 1 6,000 Ures Chinese 1 5,000 aAGG, tomo 3758. 296 Table C.8. Chinese and Mexican Capital Investment of Over 10,000 Pesos in Mercantile Businesses in Sonora by Town, 1925a Town Nationality Businesses Investment Alamos Mexican 1 20,000*) Cananea Mexican 1 15,000 Chinese 1 10,000 Cocorit Chinese 1 10,000 Guaymas Mexican 6 230,000° Chinese 4 157,000 Hermosillo Mexican 3 157,500*) Chinese 2 35,000 Magdalena Chinese 2 110,000 Nacozari Chinese 1 12,300 Navojoa Chinese 2 75,000 Nogales Mexican 4 67,500 Pilares Mexican 1 11,000 Sahuaripa Mexican 1 10,000 aAGG, tomo 3758. ^These include owners listed as Spanish in other statistical records. 297 Table C.9. Annual Sales by Mexican and Chinese Merchants in Sonora by Selected Towns, 1925a Mexican Annual Chinese Annual Town merchants sales*3 merchants sales*3 Alamos 6 27,000 3 23,000 Altar 2 16,000 5 25,800 Atil 1 2,400 1 2,400 Bacerac 2 716 1 892 Bavispe 4 9,800 1 7,000 Caborca 7 14,571 1 5,000 Cumpas 4 9,600 11 95,000 Etchojoa 5 16,000 16 137,100 Fronteras 1 6,000 9 37,893 Guaymas (San Jos£) 9 12,821 2 2,967 Horcasitas 4 12,000 9 37,200 Huepac 2 4,400 5 22,400 Moctezuma 4 12,586 4 34,400 Opodepe 3 11,600 2 4,000 Pilares de Nacozari 4 36,900 10 61,600 Pitiquito 4 15,400 3 10,000 Rosario 1 3,600 1 3,600 Santa Cruz 0 0 1 10,500 Tepache 1 215 4 20,000 Trincheras 2 4,800 1 5,000 Total 66 216,409 90 545,752 Average annual sales per merchant 3,280 6,064 ^Figures from AGG, unnumbered tomo. Figures did not include cities with the largest concentration of Chinese: Cananea, Guaymas, Hermosillo, Nogales, b-rIn pesos. 298 Table C.10. Mexican and Chinese Businesses in Naco, Sonora by Type and Annual Sales, 1928a Mexican Chinese Business Number Sales Number Sales Cantina 4 108,000b 0 0 Butcher 0 0 1 12,000 Restaurant 2 8,000 4 29,000 Grocery 0 0 8 89,000 Others 3 23,000 0 0 Total 9 139,000 13 130,000 ^Treasury Agent HernSndez to Governor, 22 March 1928, AGG, tomo 91 (1928). bIn pesos. 299 Table C.11, Assessment of Chinese in Sonora by Selected Towns, 1927a Value of Total value Number Chinese Chinese Town of land assessed property Aconchi 172,481.42b 3 18,000 Arizpe 599,854.89 8 29,860 Cajeme 858,925.00 47 200,915 Cananea 1,266,070.00 17 91,300 Guaymas 972,780.00 22 54,500 Hermosillo 1,285,214.50 16 154,085 Los Angeles 188,504.79 7 38,150 Magdalena 634,676.63 14 26,600 Nacozari 1,470,529.11 16 103,365 Nogales 993,930.00 6 69,310 Pilares 110,090.00 4 41,520 Sahuaripa 213,763.58 3 12,000 Santa Rosa 20,353.00 1 1,000 La Trinidad 4,160.00 1 2,000 Ures 427,475.15 10 47,200 Total 9,218,808.07 168 989,805 aAGG, tomo 3 (1927). b-rIn pesos. Table C.12. Capital Investment of Over 5,000 Pesos in Mercantile Businesses in Guaymas, MazatlSn, and Acaponeta by Nationality, 1926a Guaymas Mazatlcin Acaponeta Nationality Capital Per cent Capital Per cent Capital Per cent Mexican 1,145,000 40.67 1,190,000 12.18 290,000 59.55 Chinese/Japanese 760,000 27,00 2,915,000 29.84 117,000 24.02 Spanish 400,000 14.21 700,000 7.17 0 0.00 United States 300,000 10.66 1,970,000 20.16 0 0.00 French 100,000 3.55 0 0.00 0 0.00 England 50,000 1.78 0 0,00 0 0.00 Syrian/Lebanese 40,000 1.42 225,000 2.30 60,000 12.32 German 20,000 0.71 2,735,000 27.99 20,000 4.11 Others 0 0.00 35,000 0.36 0 0.00 Total 2,815,000 100.00 9,770,000 100,00 487,000 100.00 aM£xico, Department© de la Estadistica Nacional, Sonora, Sinaloa y Nayarit, Ano de 1927, pp, 376-377? in 1928 Chinese and Japanese comprised 57.8% of all foreigners in Sinaloa, see Sinaloa, Secci6n de Fomento, Departmento de Gobierno, El estado de Sinaloa: monografia, geografia, estadistica e informative, Ano de 1928 (CuliacSn: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1928), p. 51; in 1930 Chinese and Japanese comprised 67.2% of all foreigners in Sinaloa, see Sinaloa, Departmento de Gobernacidn, Seccidn de Fomento, El estado de Sinaloa: monografia geografia, estadistica, informative e ilustrada, Ano de 1930 (2nd ed., CuliacSn: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1930), p. 19. 300 Table C.13, Distribution of Merchandise to Branch Stores of Juan Lung Tain, January to August, 1924a Product Magdalena Santa Ana Llano Coffee (sacks) 351 307 27 Coffee (kilos) 35,500 0 0 Sugar (sacks) 1,525 620 105 Butter (boxes) 355 651 0 Beans (sacks) 100 28 3 Soap (boxes) 595 500 55 Potatoes (sacks) 59 0 8 Corn (sacks) 0 240 35 Corn (kilos) 56,744 0 0 Gas (gallons) 0 203 40 Rice (sacks) 0 203 5 Rice (railroad car) 1 0 0 Anchovies (sacks) 0 290 0 Anchovies (railroad car) 1 0 0 Wheat (sacks) 240 190 180 aWalterio Pesqueira to Antonio Villasenor, 30 August 1924, AGG, tomo 3668, expediente 2913. 302 Table C.14. Suspects and Costs of 1924 Tong War in Sonora by Town Town Apprehended3 At large3 Costs to state*3 Agua Prieta 16 5 298.80° BScum 2 3 24.00 Cananea 22 9 632.10 Cocorit 31 6 352.00 La Colorada 3 8 27.85 Cumpas 10 8 92.50 Empalme 4 8 116.50 Fronteras 21 0 206.15 Guaymas 7 5 243.75 Hermosillo 21 15 50.00 Huatabampo 13 0 278.00 Magdalena 6 9 963.10 Naco 11 0 65.40 Nacozari de Garcia 15 5 316.75 Navajoa 9 3 82.74 Nogales 14 4 176.50 Pilares de Nacozari 6 0 230.00 Santa Ana 18 6 332.00 El Tigre 3 7 20.00 Ures 8 5 93.50 Total 240 106 4,601.64 aList of Chinese apprehended and at large, 1924, AGG, tomo 3645, ^Governor to Secretary of Interior, Mexico City, 21 May 1925, AGG, tomo 3648. (2 In pesos. \ 303 Table C .15. Income of Sonora’s State Treasury by Month, 1929-1933a Month 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 Jan 3.7b 3.9 2.0 2.0 3.0 Feb 2,0 2.9 2.4 2.0 1.8 Mar 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.0 1.4 Apr 2.0 3.8 3.0 3.2 3.3 May 2.2 2.7 2.0 1.8 1.7 Jun 2.5 2.3 2.2 1.1 2.6 Jul 3.3 3.0 3.8 3.3 3.2 Aug 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.0 Sep 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.2 —— Oct 3.2 2.4 2.0 3.0 —— Nov 2.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 — Dec 3.0 2.1 2.2 3.7 — Average/month 2.75 2.63 2.35 2.31 2.38 aSonora, Gobernador, Informe que el ciudadano Rodolfo Elias Calles gobernador constitucional del estado fibre y soberano de Sonora, rindiS ante la H. legislature, del mismo, con fecha 16 de septiembre de 1933 (Mexico: Talleres Linotipogr^ficos Mexicanos, 1933), n.p. ^1 is equivalent to 100,000 pesos, SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Materials Archives: Archives of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. United States. Department of Justice. Washington. Archive General del Gobierno del Estado de Sonora, 1900- 1931. Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico. Archive Histdrico del Estado de Sonora. Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico. France. Archives du Ministers des Affaires Etrangeres. "Colonie frangaise et Strangers au Mexique" (1908- 1918). Great Britain. Public Record Office. Foreign Office. National Archives. Records of the Department of State, 1910-1939. Washington. Decimal Files 151.07, 312,93, 704.9312. The Netherlands. Algemeen Rijksarchief, Records of the American National Red Cross. Washington. Personal Manuscripts: Letter of Manuel Calero to the Secretaries of the Mexican Senate, 5 December 1911. Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. Letters of Ram6n Corral. Private Papers of Jorge Corral. Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico. Papers of JosS Maria Arana. Special Collections, University of Arizona Library, Tucson, Papers of the Behan Family. Special Collections, University of Arizona Library, Tucson. 304 305 Papers of Alexander V. Dye. Special Collections, University of Oregon Library, Eugene. Papers of Morris Hunter Jones. Arizona Historical Society, Tucson. Papers of Edward Lee Plumb. Special Collections, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. Government Documents on Microfilm: Great Britain. Public Record Office. Foreign Office. Consular Despatches from Mexico, 1822-1902. ______. Public Record Office. Foreign Office. Embassy and Consular Archives, Mexico. Correspondence, Series I, 1823-1902. ______. Public Record Office. Foreign Office, Embassy and Consular Archives, Mexico. Letterbooks, 1826- 1899. United States. Department of State. Despatches from United States Consuls in Acapulco, Mexico, 1823-1906. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 143. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1949. ______. Department of State. Despatches from United States Consuls in Ensenada, Mexico, 1888-1906. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 291. Washington# National Archives and Record Service, 1963. ______. Department of State. Despatches from United States Consuls in Guaymas, Mexico, 1832-1896. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy T-210. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1958-1963. ______. Department of State, Despatches from United States Consuls in Hermosillo, Mexico, 1905-1906. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 293. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1963. 306 United States. Department of State. Despatches from United States Consuls in MazatlSn, Mexico, 1826-1906. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy 159. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1949. ______. Department of State. Despatches from United States Consuls in Nogales, Mexico, 1889-1906, National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy T-323. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1959. ______. Department of State. Despatches from United States Ministers to Mexico, 1823-1906. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy M-97. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1955-1961. ______. Department of State. Records of the Department of State Relating to Internal Affairs of Mexico, 1910-1929. National Archives Microfilm Publica tions, Microcopy 274. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1959. ______. Department of State. Records of the Department of State Relating to Political Relations Between Mexico and Other States, 1910-1929. National Archives Microfilm Publications, Microcopy M-315. Washington: National Archives and Record Service, 1961. Published Government Documents: China. China. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Treaties between the Republic of China and Foreign States 11927-1957). Taipei: n.p., 1958. Cuba. Cuba, Decreto del gobierno superior politico sobre colonizacibn asicttica public ado en 14 de septiembre de 1872 e ^instrucciones dictadas por dicho superior gobierno para las subcomisiones y delegaciones creadas en 22 de mayo de 1872. Cienfuegos: Imprenta del Pabellbn Nacional, 1872. 307 Cuba. Reglamento para la introduci6n de los trabajadores chinos en la isla de Cuba. Habana: Imprenta del Gobierno y Capitania General por S.M., 1860. ______. Reglamento para la introduci6n y regimen de colonos asiciticos en la isla de Cuba. Habana: Imprenta del Gobierno y Capitania General, 1861. Mexico. Baja California. Gobernador. Memoria administrativa del gobierno del Oistrito Norte de la Baja California, 1924-1927, Abelardo L. Rodriguez. Mexicali: n.p., 1928. Mexico. Anuario estadistico de la RepGblica Mexicana. 15 vols. (1893-1907). ______. Comisi6n de Inmigracidn. Dictamen del vocal ingeniero Jos# Maria Romero encargado de estudiar la influencia social y econdmica de la inmigraci6n asicitica en Mexico. Mexico: Imprenta de A. Carranza e Hijos, 1911. ______, Comp an la de Colonizaci6n Asicitica. Estatutos. Mexico: n.p., 1866. ______. Departmento de la Estadlstica Nacional, Anuario de 1930. 2a Spoca, 16. Tacubaya: Talleres Gr&ficos de la Secretaria de Agriculture y Fomento, 1932. __. Departmento de la Estadlstica Nacional. Censo general de habitantes, 30 de noviembre de 1921. 33 vols. Mexico: Talleres Gr&ficos de la Naci6n, 1925-1928. __ . Departmento de la Estadlstica Nacional. Sonora, Sinaloa y Nayarit. Aho de 1927. Mexico: Mundial, 1928. __ . Departmento de MigraciSn. Secci6n de Estadlstica. Inmigracion y emigraci6n registradas en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos durante los anos de 1908 a 1927. N.p.: n.p., n.d. __ . Diario de los debates de la Clmara de Diputados del Congreso de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, 1920. 3 08 Mexico. Diario de los debates de la Camara de Senadores del Congreso de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, 1919- 1936. __. DirecciSn General de Estadlstica. Anuario estadlstico, 1938. Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Naci6n, 1939. __. Direccidn General de Estadlstica. Censo general de la Repfiblica Mexicana, 20 de octubre de 1895. Mexico: Secretaria de Fomento, 1899. __. DirecciSn General de Estadlstica. Censo general de la Repdblica Mexicana verificado el 28 de octubre de 1900: Sinaloa. Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1905. __ . DirecciSn General de Estadlstica. Censo y divisiSn territorial del estado de Sinaloa, verificado en 1900. Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1905. __ . DirecciSn General de Estadlstica, Censo y divisiSn territorial del estado de Sonora, verificado en 1900. MSxico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1901. __ . DirecciSn General de Estadlstica, Resumen general del censo de la Repfiblica Mexicana verificado el 28 de octubre de 1900. Mexico: Imprenta y Fototipla de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1905. __ . DirecciSn General de Estadlstica. Tercer censo general de poblaciSn de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos verificado el 27 de octubre de 1910. 2 vols. MSxico: Ofic. Impresora de la Secretaria de Hacienda, Department© de Fomento, 1918-1920. __ , Estadlstica Nacional, VIII (1932). __ . Minesterio de Fomento, Boletln de la direcciSn general de estadlstica de la Republica Mexicana, 1888-1891. 8 vols. Mexico: n.p., 1888-1892. __ . Ministerio de Fomento. Boletln semestral de la direcciSn general de estadlstica de la Repfiblica Mexicana. Ano de 1892. Nfimero x. Mexico: n.p., 1892. 309 Mexico. Nueva constituci6n politico de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Mexico: Empresa Editora :Argos,: 1917. ______. Presidents. Informs del Ciudadano General Porfirio Diaz Presidents de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos a sus compatriotas acerca de los actos de su administracidn en el periodo constitucional comprendido entre el lo de diciembre de 1900 a 30 de noviembre de 19041 Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1904. ______. Presidents. Informe leido por el C. Presidents de la RepOblica al abrirse el cuarto periodo de sesiones del XXI Congreso de la UniOn el lo de abril de 19041 Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1904. ______. Presidents. Informe rendido por el C. Adolfo de la Huerta presidents constitucional substituto de la Reptiblica, ante el H. Congreso de la Uni6n, el dia lo de septiembre de 1920 y contestacidn del C . presidents de la Cctroara de Diputados. Mexico: Imprenta del "Diario Oficial," 1920. ______. Presidents. Informes rendidos por el C. Gral. Alvaro 0breg6n, presidents constitucional.de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos ante el H. Congreso de la Uni6n durante el periodo de 1921 a 1924, y contestaciones de los CC. presidentes del citado Congreso en el mismo periodo. 4 vols, Mexico! Talleres LinotipogrSficos del "Diario Oficial," 1924. __. Presidents, Informes rendidos por el C. Gral. Plutarco Elias Calles, presidents constitucional de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos ante el H. Congreso de la Uni6n los dlas lo de septiembre de 1925 y lo de septiembre de 1926 y contestacibnes de los CC. presidentes del citado Congreso" Mexico: Talleres Grdficos de la Naci6n "Diario Oficial," 1925-1926. __. Presidents. Manifiesto que en el dltimo dia de su periodo constitucional da a sus compatriotas el Presidents de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos Manuel Gonzalez informando acerca de los actos de su administracidnl Mexico: Tipografia Literaria de Filomeno Mata, 1884, 310 Mexico. Secretarla de la Economla Nacional. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica. Quinto censo, general de poblacidn, 15 de mayo de 1930. 32 vols. Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn, 1932-1936. ______Secretaria de la Economia Nacional. Direccidn General de Estadistica. Sexto censo de poblacidn, 1940: resumen general. Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn, 1943. ______. Secretaria de la Economia Nacional. Direccidn General de Estadlstica. Sexto censo de poblacidn, 1940: Sonora. Mexico: Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn, 1943. ______. Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn. Contrato con C. Ireneo Paz en representacidn de la Compania de Vapores de California (13 November 1883). ______. Secretaria de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn. Contrato con C. Sebastidn Camacho, como apoderado de la Compania del Ferrocarrii de Sonora (12 January 1885). ______. Secretarfa de Estado y del Despacho de Gobernacidn. Seccidn I. Informe que el Secretario de Gobernacidn rinde a la Cdmara de Diputados del Congreso de la Unidri en cumplimiento del acuerdo aprobado en la sesidn del 5 del actual, sobre lineas de vapores subvencionadasl Mdxico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1880. ______. Secretarfa de Fomento, Colonizacidn 6 Industrie. Boletin de la direccidn general de estadlstica. Ndmero I. Mdxico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretarfa de Fomento, 1912. ______. Secretarfa de Fomento, Colonizacidn d Industrie. Boletfn estadlstica. Ntimero 3. Mdxico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretarfa de Fomento, 1913. ______. Secretarfa de Gobernacidn. "Ley de inmigracidn de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos." in Coleccidn de leyes, decretos, regl'amentos, y acuerdos, serie I , leyes y decretos de la federacidn. Mdxico: Imprenta del Gobierno Federal, 1909. 311 Mexico. Secretaria de Gobernaci6n. Memoria que comprende el periodo del lo de agosto de 1929 al 31 de julio de 1930, presentada al H. Congreso de la Unidn por el secretario del ramo C. Carlos Riva Palacio. Mlxicol Talleres GrSficos de la Nacidn, 1930. ______. Secretarla de Industrie, Comercio y Trabajo. Departmento de Industries. Directorio industrial de algunos estados de la Repflblica. Mlxicol Talleres Greificos de la Nacidn, 1921. . Secretarla de Relaciones Exteriores. Boletin Oficial, I-LXII (1896-1933). ______. Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Correspondencia diplom&tica cambiada entre el gobierno de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos y los de varias potencies extrangeras desde el 30 de junio de 1881 a 30 de junio de 18861 4 vols. Mexico: Tipografla "La Luz," 1887. Sinaloa. Departmento de Gobernacidn. Seccidn de Fomento. El estado de Sinaloa: monografia geografia estadistica, informativa e ilustrada. Ano de 1930, 2nd ed. CuliacSn: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1930. ______. Gobernador. Informe correspondiente al periodo transcurrido del 15 de septiembre de 1917 al 15 de marzo del ano en curso rendido a la XXVII legislature de Sinaloa por el C. General Ramdn F. Iturbe, sobre su gestidn administrativa como gobernador constitucional del estado. Culiac&n: Talleres Gr&ficos de la Compania Comercial de Sinaloa, 1918. ______. Gobernador. Memoria general de la administracidn a la H. legislature, por el gobernador constitucional, C. Ingeniero Mariano Martinez de Castro, el 15 de septiembre de 1881 en cumplimiento de la fraccidn VI, art. 47 de la constitucidn politica de SinaloaI Culiac&n: Tip. de Retes y Diaz, 1881. ______, Gobernador. Memoria general de la administraci6n pflblica del estado de Sinaloa presentada a la XXa Legislature por el gobernador constitucional C. Gral. Francisco Canedo comprende los ahos de 1896 a 1902. 2 vols. in 1. MazatlSn: Imprenta y Casa Editorial de M. Retes y Cia,, 1905, 312 Sinaloa. Gobernador. Memoria general de la administracidn pfiblica del estado, presentada a la H. legislatura del mismo por el gobernador constitucional C . General Francisco Canedo, en cumplimiento de la £racci6n VI, articulo 47 de la constitucidn politica de Sinaloa. CuliacSn: Imprenta Estereotipia de TomSs Ramirez, 1886. ______. Seccidn de Fomento. Departmento de Gobierno. El estado de Sinaloa; monografla, geografla, estadistica e in£ormativa~ Afio de 1928, CuliacSn: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1928. Sonora. Boletin de la CSmara de Diputados del Estado de Sonora, 1923. ______. Gobernador. Informe del C. gobernador interino del estado de Sonora Carlos E. Randall presentado el lo de septiembre de 1911 ante el H . Congreso del mismo al hacer entrega del ejecutivo al gobernador constitucional Sr, Jos# Maria Maytorena. Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno de Sonora, 1911. ______. Gobernador. Informe del gobernador de Sonora sobre el golpe de estado de febrero de 1913 y hechos posteriores. Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno de Sonora, 1914. ______. Gobernador. Informe que el ciudadano Rodolfo Elias Calles gobernador constitucional del estado libre y soberano de Sonora, rindio ante la H . legislatura del mismo, con fecha 16 de septiembre de 1933% Mexico: Talleres LinotipogrSficos Mexicanos, 1933. ______. Gobernador. Informe que rinde al H. Congreso del estado, el gobernador constitucional provisional de Sonora C. Adolfo de la Huerta, por el perlodo de su gobierno, comprendido entre el~T9 de mayo de 1916 al 18 de junio de 1917. Hermosillo; Imprenta del Gobierno del Estado, 1917. ______. Gobernador. Informe que rinde el C. General Plutarco Elias Calles, gobernador constitucional del estado de Sonora, ante la XXIV legislatura del mismo, acerca de sus gestiones durante el perlodo comprendido entre el lo de abril al 16 de septiembre de 1918. Hermosillo: Imprenta del Gobierno del Estado, 1918. 313 Sonora. Gobernador. Informe rendido por el gobernador constitucional del estado, C. Rodolfo Ellas Calles a la H. XXXI legislature de Sonora: Hermosillo, Sonora, 16 de septiembre de 1932. Hermosillo: Imprenta "Cruz GSlvez," 1932. ______. Gobernador. Memoria de la administraci6n ptablica del estado de Sonora, presentada a la legislatura del mismo por el Gobernador Ramdn Corral. 2 vols. Guaymas: Imprenta de E. Gaxiola y Cla., 1891. ______. Gobernador. Memoria general e informe rendidos por el G, Rodolfo Elias Calles, gobernador constitucional del estado, ante la H, XXXII legislatura local, el 16 de septiembre de 1934. Hermosillo: n.p., n.d. ______. La labor de organizaci6n econ6mica y social en el estado de Sonora en 1933: discursos. Hermosillo: n.p., 1933. United States. United States. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. Special Agents Series, 220. Mexican West Coast and Lower California: A Commercial and Industrial Survey. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1923. ______. Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures. Monthly Consular and Trade Reports, 318. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1907, ______. Department of Commerce and Labor. Bureau of Statistics. Emigration to the United States. Special Consular Reports, XXX. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904. ______. Department of Labor. Bureau of Immigration. Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1923. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1923. 314 United States. Department of Labor. Bureau of Immigration. Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1931. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1931. ______. Department of Labor. Bureau of Immigration. Annual Report of the Commissioner General of Immigration to the Secretary of Labor, 1932. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1932. ______. Department of State. Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, with the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress, December 6, 1904. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1905. Memoires, Diaries, Contemporary Accounts: Arana, JosS Maria. Reseha de estadistica general de la ciudad de Hermosillo. Hermosillo: Imprenta de "El Heraldo," 1899. "Articles of Contract between the Pacific Mail Steamship Company and the Republic of Mexico (18741." Baerlein, Henry. Mexico, the Land of Unrest, Being Chiefly an Account of What Produced the Outbreak in 1910, Together with the Story of the Revolutions Down to This Day. Philadelphia: J , B. Lippincott Company, n.d. "Contract between Maximilliano and Benjamin Holladay (31 January 1865)." "Contract with the Compahia de la Mala del Pacifico (8 November 1880)." "Contract with Holladay and Flint, San Francisco (23 August 1861)." "Convention between the Governments of Mexico and China for the Payment of an Indemnity." Supplement to the American Journal of International Law, VIII (January, 1914), pp. 147-150. Cuevas, J. de JesGs. La inmigracidn: opGsculo., Mexico: n.p., 1866. 315 Decreto que reforma varies artlculos del reglamento de la ley de migraci6n y acuerdo por el cual se restringe la inmigraci6n de trabajadores. Mexico: Talleres Gr^ficos de la NaclSn, 1934. Directorio mercantil, industrialf agricola y minero del estado de Sinaloa. MazatlSn: Tip. y Casa Editorial de M. Retes y Cia., 1904. "Exchange of Notes between China and Mexico for the Relinquishment of Extraterritoriality." The Chinese Social and Political Science Review. Public Documents Supplement, XIV (April, 1930), pp. 19-22. Garcia y Alva, Federico. "Mexico y sus progresos;11 album- directorio del estado de Sonora. Hermosillo: Imprenta Oficial Dirigada por Antonio B. Monteverde, 1905-1907. International Chinese Business Directory of the World for the Year 1913. San Francisco: International Chinese Business Directory Co., Inc., 1913. Jamieson, Tulitas, Tulitas of Torre6n: Reminiscences of Life in Mexico. El Paso: Texas Western Press, 1969. King, Owang, and Arthur Bassett. Report of Messrs, Owang King and Arthur Bassett, Representatives of His Excellency, Minister Chang Yin Tang in an • Investigation Made in Conjunction with Licenciado Antonio Ramos Pedrueza, Representative of His Excellency, Francisco L. de la Barra, President of Mexico, of the Facts Relating to the Massacre of Chinese Subjects at Torre6n on the 15th of May, 1911. Mexico: American Book and Printing Co., 1911. Lower California: Its Geography and Characteristics with a Sketch of the Grant and Purposes of the Lower California Company. New York: M. B. Brown and Company, 1868. Madero, Francisco I. La sucesi6n presidencial en 1910., San Pedro, Coahuila: n.p., 1908. Memoria: hechos relatives a la matanza de chinos en Torre6n y el protocol de 16 diciembre de 1911, prometiendo indemnizaci6n por la matanza. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 316 The Mexican Year Book, 1908. London: McCorquodal, 1908. The Mexican Year Book, 1914. London: McCorquodal, 1914. Revista Comercial de Sonora y Sinaloa (Nogales, Arizona), December, 1924 to November, 1925, Southworth, J. R. El estado de Sonora, Mexico: sus industrias, comerciales, mineras y manufactureras. Nogales, Arizona: The Oasis Printing and Publishing House, 1897. Twentieth Annual Report of the Secretary of Labor for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1932. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1932. Twenty— First Annual Report of the Secretary of Labor for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1933. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1934. Ulloa, Pedro N. El estado de Sonora y su situaci6n econdmica al aproximarse el primer centenario de la independencia nacional. Hermosillo: n.p., 1910. Velasco, Alfonso Luis. Geografia y estadistica de la Repfiblica Mexicana: Sinaloa! Mexico: Oficina Tip. de la Secretaria de Foment©, 1889. ______. Geografia y estadistica de la Reptjblica Mexicana: Sonora. Mexico: Secretaria de Fomento, 1893. Wilfley and Bassett, firm. Memorandum on the Law and the Facts in the Matter of the Claim of China against Mexico for Losses of Life and Property Suffered by Chinese Subjects at Torredn on May 13, 14, and 15, 1911. Mexico: American Book and Printing Co., 1911. ______. Memorandum Showing Extent of Destruction of Life and Property of Chinese Subjects During the Recent Revolution in Mexico and Mexico's Responsibility Therefor, Together with Citations of Authorities. Mexico: American Book and Printing Co., 1911. 317 Author's Correspondence? Author's Correspondence of October, 1973, with Mrs. Herbert Sidney Bursley, widow of Herbert Sidney Bursley, former United States Consul, Guaymas. Author's Correspondence of 24 October 1973, with D. C. Kinne, United States Immigration Service, retired, Douglas, Arizona. Secondary Materials Books: Baker, Richard D. Judicial Review in Mexico; A Study of the Amparo Suit. Institute of Latin American Studies. Latin American Monographs, 22. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1971. Blaisdell, Lowell L. The Desert Revolution: Baja California, 1911. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1962. Bradley, Anita. Trans-Pacific Relations of Latin America. New York: International Secretariat, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1942. • Calderdn, Francisco R. El porfiriato: la repfiblica restaurada: la vida econdmica. Vol. IV o f Historia moderna de Mexico. Daniel Cosio Villegas, editor. 9 vols. Mexico: Editorial Hermes, 1955-1972, Carrasquilla H., TomSs. Inmigracidn y colonizacidn. BogotcL: Imprenta Nacional, 1906. Chen, Kwong Min. Mei-chou Hua ch'iao t'ung chien ("A General History of the Chinese Overseas in the Americas"). New York: Overseas Chinese Culture Publishing Company, 1950, Chen, Ta. Chinese Migrations, with Special Reference to Labor Conditions. Rpt. 1923, Taipei; Ch'eng-wen Publishing Co,, 1967, China Handbook, 1937-1945. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1947. 318 Chung-hua-nien-chien (The China Year Book), 1931. Shanghai: The North-China Daily News and Herald, Ltd., 1931. Chung-hua-nien-chien (The China Year Book), 1932. Shanghai: The North-China Daily News and Herald, Ltd., 1932. Clavigero, Francisco Javier, S.J. The History of [Lower] California. Sara E. Lake and A. A. Gray, trans lators and editors. Rpt. 1789. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1937. Culin, Stewart, The I Hing or "Patriotic Rising.” Rpt. 1887. San Francisco: R and E Research Associates, 1970. Cumberland, Charles C. Mexican Revolution: The Constitu tionalist Years. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1972. Dur6n GonzSlez, Gustavo. Problemas migratorios de Mexico. Mexico: Talleres de la CSmara de Diputados, 1925. Espinoza, Jos§ Angel. El ejemplo de Sonora. Mexico: n.p., 1932. Ferenczi, Imre, editor. International Migrations. Demographic Monographs, 7. 2 vols. Rpt. 1929. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1969. GonzSlez Navarro, MoisSs. La colonizacidn en Mexico, 1877- 1910. Mexico: n.p., 1960. GonzSlez Navarro, MoisSs. El porfiriato: la vida social. Vol, VI of Historia moderna de Mexico! Daniel Cosio Villegas, editor. 9 vols. Mexico: Editorial Hermes, 1955-1972. GonzSlez Ramirez, Manuel. Planes politicos y otros documentos. Mexico: Fondo de Culture EconSmica, 1954. Hoffman, Abraham. Unwanted Mexican Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pressures, 1929-1939. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1974. Rung, S . W, Chinese in American Life: Some Aspects of Their History, Status, Problems, and Contributions. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962. 319 Landa y Pina, Andres. El servicio de migracidn en Mexico. Mexico: Secretaria de GobernaciGn, 1930. Li, Ch'ang-fu. Hua ch'iao ("Chinese Overseas"). Shanghai: Chung Hua Book Company, 1929. Ling, Lew. The Chinese in North America: A Guide to Their Life and Progress. Los Angeles: East-West Culture Publishing Association, 1949. ______. The Chinese in the Americas: A Guide to Their Life and Progress. Los Angeles: East-West Culture Publishing Association, 1949. Lister, Florence C., and Robert H. Lister. Chihuahua: Storehouse of Storms. Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico Press, 1966. Lo, Jung-pang, editor and translator. K'ang Yu-Wei: A Biography and a Symposium. The Association for Asian Studies: Monographs and Papers, XXIII. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1967. Lyman, Stanford M. The Asian in the West. Social Science and Humanities Publication, IV. Reno and Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press, 1970. MacNair, Harley Farnsworth. The Chinese Abroad: Their Position and Protection: A Study in International Law and Relations. Rpt, 1933. Taipei: Ch'eng Wen Publishing Company, 1971. McKenzie, R. D. Oriental Exclusion: The Effect of American Laws, Regulations, and Judicial Decisions Upon the Chinese and Japanese on the American Pacific Coast. Rpt. 1928. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1970. Mendivil, Josg AbrSham. Cuarenta ahos de politica en Sonora. Hermosillo: n.p., 1965. Meyer, Lorenzo. Mexico y Estados Unidos en el conflicto petrolerol 1917-1942. Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico, 1968. Mitchison, Lois. The Overseas Chinese: A Background Book. Chester Springs, Pennsylvania: Dufour Editions, 1961. 320 Molina Enriquez, AndrSs. Los grandes problemas nacionales. Mexico: Imprenta de A. Carranza e Hijos, 1909. Morse, Hosea Ballou. The International Relations of the Chinese Empire. 3 vols. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Pollard, Robert T. China's Foreign Relations, 1917-1931, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933. Rak, Mary Kidder. Border Patrol. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1938. Sandomingo, Manuel. Historia de Agua Prieta: resumen hist6rico del su primer cincuentenario. Agua Prieta, Sonora: Imprenta Sandomingo, 1951, Sherwell, G. Butler. Mexico's Capacity to Pay: A General Analysis of the Present Economic Situation. Washington: n.p., 1929. Smith, Robert Freeman. The United States and Revolutionary Nationalism in Mexico, 1916-1932. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1972. Stewart, Watt. Chinese Bondage in Peru: A History of the Chinese Coolie in Peru, 1849-1874. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1951. Terry, T, Philip, Terry's Mexico: Handbook for Travellers. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909. Ting, Wen-chiang. Liang jen-kung hsien-sheng nien-p'u ch'ang-pien ch'u-kao ("First Draft of an Unabridged Chronological Biography of Liang Ch'i-ch'ao"). 3 vols in 1. Taipei: n.p., 1958, Tischendorf, Alfred. Great Britain and Mexico in the Era of Porfirio Diaz, Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1961. Turner, Frederick C. The Dynamic of Mexican Nationalism. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1968. Wu, Hsien-tzti, Chung kuo min chu hsien-cheng tang tang shih ("A History of the Chinese Democratic Constitution Party"). San Francisco: n.p,, 1952, 321 Yu, Yuan-tse. Mo-hsl-ke Hua-ch'iao Shih-hua ("Historical Sketch of Overseas Chinese in Mexico"). Taipei: Overseas Chinese Library Publication Service, 1954. Articles: Briscoe, Edward Eugene. "Pershing’s Chinese Refugees in Texas." The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, LXII (April, 1959), pp. 467-488. Carr, Barry. "Las peculiaridades del norte mexicano, 1880- 1927: ensayo de interpretacidn." Historia Mexicana, XXII (January-March, 1973), pp. 320-346. Carr, Harry. "The Kingdom of Cantu: Why Lower California is an Oasis of Perfect Peace in Bloody Mexico." Sunset, XXXVIII (April, 1917), pp. 33-34, 65-67. Chamberlin, Eugene Keith. "Mexican Colonization Versus American Interests in Lower California." Pacific Historical Review, XX (February, 1951), pp. 43-55. Chang, Sen-dou. "The Distribution and Occupations of Overseas Chinese." The Geographical Review, LVIII (January, 1968), pp. 89-107. Chang-Rodriguez, Eugenio. "Chinese Labor Migration into Latin America in the Nineteenth. Century,” Revista de Historia de America, XLVI (December, 1958), pp. 375-397. Chen, Chun-po. "Chinese Overseas." The Chinese Year Book, 1935-1936. Rpt. 1936. Nendelin/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968, pp. 428-455. "Chinese Being Forced Out of Mexico by the Thousands." The China Weekly Review, Shanghai (12 September 1931), p. 64. The Chinese Population Abroad." International Labour Review, VI (November, 1922), p. 778. Cousins, W. M, "Chinese in the Caribbean." The Living Age, CCCXXXII (1 January 1927), pp. 16-21. Cousins, W, M. "The Chinese in the Caribbean." The Contemporary Review, CXXX (November, 1926), pp. 632- 638. 322 Covarrubias, JosS. "La inmigracidn china considerada desde los puntos de vista intelectual y moral," in Varies informes sobre tierras y colonizaci6n. Mexico: Imprenta y Fototipia de la Secretaria de Fomento, 1912. pp. 121-210. ______. "La inmigracidn y la colonizaci6n en America," in Varies informes sobre tierras y colonizaci6n. Mexico: Imprenta y Fototipla de la Secretarla de Fomento, 1912. pp. 345-354. "The Credit Situation in Guaymas, Mexico." Commerce Reports, XLV (9 November 1931), pp. 313-314. Creelman, James. "Interview with Porfirio Diaz," Pearson's Magazine, XIX (March, 1908), pp. 241-277. Cumberland, Charles C. "The Sonora Chinese and the Mexican Revolution," The Hispanic American Historical Review, XL (May, 1960), pp. 191-211. Dahl, Victor C. "Alien Labor on the Gulf Coast of Mexico, 1800-1900." The Americas, XVII (July, 1960), pp. 21-35. Fields, Harold. "Closing Immigration Throughout the World." The American Journal of International Law, XXVI (October, 1932), pp. 671-699. Frazer, Robert. "Mexico Further Restricts Immigration." Commerce Reports, XXXVI (7 September 1931), pp. 624- 625. Gardiner, Clinton Harvey. "Early Diplomatic Relations Between Mexico and the Far East." The Americas, VII (April, 1950), pp. 401-414. ______. "Trade Between Mexico and the Transpacific World, 1870-1900," Inter-American Economic Affairs, III (Winter, 1949), pp. 29-40. GonzSlez Navarro, Moists. "Xenofobia y xenofilia en la Revoluci6n Mexicana." Historia Mexicana, XVIII (April-June, 1969), pp. 569-614. Hoffman, Abraham. "Mexican Repatriation Statistics: Some Suggested Alternatives to Carey McWilliams." The Western Historical Quarterly, III (October, 1972), pp. 391^404, Hogg, John Edwin. "El Desierto de los Chinos.11 Touring Topics, XXII (October, 1930), pp. 36-40, 55. Hutton, D . Graham. "Mexico and the Pacific." Pacific Affairs, XI (June, 1938), pp. 149-158. Krutz, Gordon V. "Chinese Labor, Economic Development and Social Reaction." Ethnohistory, XVIII (Fall, 1971), pp. 321-333. Kwong, Alice Jo. "The Chinese in Peru," in Morton H. Fried, editor. Colloquium on Overseas Chinese. New York: International Secretariat, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1958, pp. 41-48. Lainger, S. R. "K voprosu o Kitaiskoi emigratsii v strany Latinskoi Ameriki," in Strany Dal’nego vostoka i lUgo-vostochnoi Azii. Mokova: n.p., 1969, pp. 60- 67. Ling, Pyau. "Causes of Chinese Emigration." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social * Science, XXXIX (January, 1912), pp. 74-82. McNeely, John H. "The Railways of Mexico: A Study in Nationalization." Southwestern Studies, II (Spring, 1964), pp. 1-56, "Mexico." Time, XVIII (14 September 1931), p, 23. "Mexico Relaxes on Chinese Exclusion Order." The China Weekly Review. Shanghai (19 September 1931), p. 98. Paulsen, George E. "The Yellow Peril at Nogales: The Ordeal of Collector William M. Hoey." Arizona and the West, XIII (Summer, 1971), pp. 113-128, P1etcher, David M. "The Development of Railroads in Sonora." Inter-American Economic Affairs, I (March, 1948), pp. 3-45. "The Plight of the Chinese in Mexico." The Literary Digest (24 June 1933), p. 11. Powell, T, G. "Los liberales, el campesinado indigena y los problemas agrarios durante la Reforma." Historia Mexicana, XXI (April-June, 1972), pp. 653-675. 324 Powell, T. G. "Mexican Intellectuals and the Indian Question, 1876-1911." The Hispanic American Historical Review, XLVIII (February, 1968), pp. 19-36. Reynolds, C. N. "The Chinese Tongs." The American Journal of Sociology, XL (March, 1935), pp. 612-624. Ritchie, Robert Wells. "The Wars of the Tongs: Justice in New York's Yellow Triangle." Harper's Weekly, LIV (27 August 1910), pp. 8-10. Simpich, Frederick. "A Mexican Land of Canaan: Marvelous Riches on the Wonderful West Coast of Our Neighbor Republic." The National Geographic Magazine, XXXV (September, 1919), pp. 307-330. "Statistics: Migration to and from Mexico in 1929." International Labour Review, XXII (November, 1930), p. 678. "Statistics: Migration to and from Mexico in 1930." International Labour Review, XXIV (November, 1931), pp, 612—613. "A Survey of Chinese Emigration." International Labour Review, LX (September, 1949), pp. 289-301. Uribe Romo, Emilio. "La poblaci6n de Sinaloa en el tiempo y en el espacio," in Antonio Pompa y Pompa, editor. Memories y revista del congreso mexicano de historia: estudios histdricos de Sinaloa. 2 vols. Congreso Mexicana de Historia, 11. Mexico: n.p., 1960, I, pp. 255-283. Watson, Eugene S. "Chinese Labor and the Panama Canal." The Independent, LXI (22 November 1906), pp. 1201- 1205. "The Week." The New Republic, LXVIII (14 October 1931), p. 219. "Why Mexico Expels the Chinese." The Literary Digest, CX (26 September 1931), p. 14, Willson, Roscoe G. "Line Riders Trick Chinese Smugglers." Arizona Days and Ways (20 January 1957), pp, 16-17. 325 Willson, Roscoe G. "Secret Service Men Foil Border Smuggling Racket." Arizona Days and Ways (13 January 1947), pp. 24-25. Wu, Ching-ch'ao. "Chinese Immigration in the Pacific Area." The Chinese Social and Political Science Review, XII (October, 1928), pp. 543-560. Wu, Paak-shing. "China’s Diplomatic Relations with Mexico." The China Quarterly, IV (Summer, 1939), pp. 1-21. Unpublished Materials: Beene, Delmar Leon. "Sonora in the Age of Ram6n Corral, 1875-1900." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson, 1972. Briscoe, Edward Eugene. "Pershing's Chinese Refugees: An Odyssey of the Southwest." Unpublished M.A. thesis, St. Mary's University, San Antonio, Texas, 1947. Chang, Ching-chieh. "The Chinese in Latin America: A Preliminary Geographical Survey with Special Reference to Cuba and Jamaica." Unpublished Ph.D, dissertation, University of Maryland, 1956. Horsley, Margaret Wyant. "SANGLEY: The Formation of Anti- Chinese Feeling in the Philippines— A Cultural Study of the Stereotypes of Prejudice." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1950. Kearney, Ruth Elizabeth. "American Colonization Ventures in Lower California, 1862-1917." Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1944. Nims, Amy Elizabeth. "Chinese Life in San Antonio." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Southwest Texas State Teachers College, San Marcos, 1941. Newspapers: Mexico. Accidn (Nogales, Sonora), 14 October 1937. Boletin Comercial (Chihuahua), 15 August 1931. Boletin Oficial (Hermosillo), 1922, 1923, 1928. 326 Boletin Oficial (Ures), 14 July 1876. El Brochazo (Guaymas), 19 July 1923. Carta Semanal de la Camara Mercantil y Agricola (Matamoros, Tamaulipas), 19 September 1931. El Centinela (Hermosillo), 1905, 1906. El Colono (Mexico), 10 November 1895. El Comercio (Guaymas), 1898. La Constituci6n (Hermosillo), 1879 to 1884. La Convenci6n Radical Obrera (Mexico), 1896, 1901. El Correo de Chihuahua (Chihuahua), 7 September 1931. El Correo de la Tarde (MazatlSn), 29 August 1900. El DemScrata (Mexico), 1919, 1922, 1924. El DemGcrata Sinaloense (MazatlSn), 20 June 1926. El Diablito Rojo (Mexico), 1908, 1909. El Diario (Navojoa), 1926. Diario del Pacifico (MazatlSn), 1910. Diario Oficial (Mexico), 25 November 1921. La Era Nueva (Hermosillo), 3 February 1878, La Estrella de Occidente (Ures), 1873. La EvoluciGn (Hermosillo), 17 February 1905. Excelsior (Mexico), 1919, 1922, 1931. La Frontera: Organo de la C&mara Nacional del Comercio de Ciudad Jfiarez (Ciudad Jdarez), 1931. La Gaceta (Guaymas), 4 March 1929. El Heraldo de Cananea (Cananea), 17 October 1931. El Heraldo de Mexico (Mexico), 1920 Heraldo de Occidents (MazatlSn), 1912. El Imparcial (Guaymas), 1892 to 1894. El Imparcial (Hermosillo), 1894, 1895. El Imparcial (Mexico), 1900 to 1912, 1928. El Informador (Guadalajara), 4 October 1931. El Intruso (Cananea), 1924, 1929. La Libertad (Mexico), 3 October 1879. El Mayo (Navojoa), 23 April 1931. El Monitor Republicano (Mexico), 1880 to 1896, El Municipio (Guaymas), 1878. El Noroeste (Nogales, Sonora), 18 August 1934, El Norte (Nogales, Sonora), 22 August 1917. Las Noticias (Guadalajara), 23 July 1929, Orientacidn (Hermosillo), 1919. El Pais (Mexico), 1900 to 1907, El Porvenir (Monterrey), 1931. La Prensa (Mexico), 1931, Pro-Patria (Magdalena, Sonora), 1917. El Pueblo (Hermosillo), 1925, 1926, 1929. El Pueblo (Mexico), 31 January 1916. La Pulga (Nogales, Sonora), 1921. La Reata (Hermosillo), 4 March 1929. El Siglo (Agua Prieta)., 8 December 1928. El Socialista (Mexico), 31 December 1886, El Sol (Cananea), 4 May 1922. 328 El Sol rrey), 1931. 1 July 1919. A, JL W 7 f 1886. uaymas , 1895. ogales, Sonora), 1897. (Hermosillo), 5 September 1925. (Mexico), 1896, 1920, 1922, 1926. ico (Mexico), 1881, 1883. ally Star (Tucson), 1931, 1932. e (Nogales, Arizona), 31 August 1901. Gazette (Bisbee, Arizona), 1931. Tribune (Chicago), 13 March 1928. ence Monitor (Boston), 1931. ales, Arizona), 15 June 1922. Dispatch (Douglas, Arizona), 1931. Times (New York), 1911 to 1933. Chronicle (San Francisco), 1903, 1904, 1931. isco Examiner (San Francisco), 1903, 1931. n (Tucson), 14 June 1922, 4 03 80 b