The Marriage of Convenience
A federal judge bypasses exclusion laws by upholding a traditional Chinese proxy marriage for an immigrant woman.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
In the case of a Chinese woman who desired to land to join her husband, whom she had never seen, Judge Bellinger today decided that a betrothal at two years of age and a marriage six months since by swearing together two cards upon which the particulars of the engagement had been written is a valid marriage according to the laws of China, and by American law, a marriage which is valid in the place where contracted is valid here. The husband, acting under legal advice, sent a certificate to her identifying him and setting forth that she was his wife. He also sent money for the journey. There was no evidence to show that the facts were other than as claimed by the parties, and it would be a cruel injustice to send the woman back, therefore she was allowed to land. The court was aware of the danger of imposition in such cases, but danger exists in all cases where Chinese are concerned and must continue until exclusion is made absolute.
“There was no evidence to show that the facts were other than as claimed by the parties, and it would be a cruel injustice to send the woman back.”
This decision captures a rare moment where a federal judge prioritized humanitarian logic over the rigid, discriminatory framework of the Chinese Exclusion Act. It highlights the lengths to which families had to go to reunite in the face of state-sanctioned separation, a struggle that echoes in contemporary debates over immigration enforcement and family reunification.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.