A Tale of Two Wongs of Historical Importance for Different Reasons

What factors determine who becomes a significant historical figure? Most historically important people are associated with some very positive, or negative, actions or events.  In addition, persons connected with some important incident or event despite having little or no active participation with a historically important outcome or event nonetheless are historical figures.  

Wong Kim Ark (1873-?) is an example of the last type. He became an important person in Chinese American history more by circumstance rather than by any active role or action he initiated.  Born in the United States to Chinese immigrant parents Wong was a cook who made a trip to China to visit his parents who had left the U.S. in 1890. He successfully reentered the U.S.  However, he made a second trip in 1894 to China and when he tried to reenter in 1895, he was denied entry by the Collector of Customs because he was a laborer. 

The Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association used Wong as a test case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1898, (U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 849 1898)arguing that because Wong was born in the United States, he was a citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution and could not be barred from entry to the country. This concept became known as "birthright citizenship." 

This basis for citizenship has been repeatedly challenged but upheld since Wong Kim Ark. The issue is particularly relevant today because President Trump currently wants to eliminate this right provided by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. 

Wong Kim Ark won the case that was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court but not because of any actions he initiated. Wong just happened to be the person denied reentry that advocates of Chinese birthright citizenship used to establish his status as a U.S. citizen because he was born in the U.S. even though his parents were not. 

He tried to bring his four sons from China, but the oldest was denied entry in 1910 on grounds that he did not convince immigration officials that he was his real son. However, in the 1920s his three younger sons were admitted because Wong Kim Ark was recognized as a U.S. citizen. Interestingly, there is little else known about Wong Kim Ark after the court decision. Even his youngest son, Wong Yook Jim, the only one who made the U.S. his permanent home did not know about his father's legal victory and historical significance until it was cited in a Chinese language newspaper on the 100th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision.2

A Washington Post article by Fred Barbash reprinted in 2018 noted that:

For all its importance, it never became a famous landmark. There is Dred Scott, and there is Plessy, there is Brown and there is Bakke and Loving. But Wong Kim Ark draws a blank with most Americans.

His case is so little known that even his own great-granddaughter was only dimly aware of its importance. Then, one day in 1998, having decided to research her family’s history, the 20-year-old college student Alice Wong phoned the San Bruno regional office of the National Archives and Records Administration to say she was coming down to find out about her grandfather. When she arrived, she told the SFWeekly at the time, an archive employee who specialized in the history of the Chinese Exclusion Act asked for her autograph and then introduced her to the entire staff. “This,” he said, “is Wong Kim Ark’s great-granddaughter.”Wong, the "father" of birthright citizenship, ironically, eventually returned to China in 1931 when he was 62 and never came back to the U.S. even though Form 430 below indicated an intention to return.

Only Wong’s youngest son, Wong Yook Jim, however, made a permanent home in the United States. Shortly after WWII, he received word from village elders in China that Wong Kim Ark had died.1

Wong Chin Foo

In contrast, Wong Chin Foo (1847–1898) was an articulate Chinese who spoke and wrote English well.  During the latter part of the 19th century, Wong was an outspoken activist in defense of Chinese immigrants who faced discrimination and racial prejudice. He campaigned tirelessly across the country on behalf of the rights and better treatment or Chinese, fighting racist leaders of anti-Chinese actions such as Dennis Kearney, flamboyantly challenging him to a duel. offering him the choice of weapon: chopsticks, Irish potatoes, or Krupp guns. He boldly rejected negative stereotypes of Chinese as when in a lecture in 1877, he pointed out, “I never knew rats and dogs were good to eat until I learned it from Americans.”

Wong Chin Foo actively made significant contributions in fighting for Chinese political and civil rights. establishing the Chinese Equal Right League which united the Chinese Americans to fight against the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. Wong established the first Chinese-language newspaper east of the Rockies, the Chinese American.

Whereas Wong Kim Ark was more of a pawn than an agent in comparison to the years of significant activism for civil rights by Wong Chin Foo, today the more important figure is Wong Kim Ark because of the continuing debate over "birthright citizenship." 

In marked contrast, the path-breaking work of Wong Chin Foo is not very influential on contemporary issues. After his death, Wong Chin Foo's writings were mostly forgotten, and he was rarely mentioned in the American press again. Despite his considerable efforts to gain the right to naturalization for Chinese, the ban continued for nearly half a century after his death. 

The fickle hand of history now honors Wong Kim Ark as the 'father of birthright citizenship' even though he was a passive participant and has all but forgotten the charismatic Wong Chin Foo, considered the first to promote the term "Chinese American" at a time when the public called them "John Chinaman" or Chinaman as well as "chink."

1. Berger, Bethany. (2016) Birthright Citizenship on Trial: Elk v. Wilkins and United States v. Wong Kim Ark,  Cardozo Law Review, 37, 1185-2052.

2. Wong, William. Yellow Journalist.  Philadelphia, PA.: Temple University Press, 2001.