Ho Ah Kow v. Nunan - Revision history

Ccarlsson: added pc header and italics to intro

2010-09-25T22:03:39Z

added pc header and italics to intro

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:03, 25 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Primary Source</font></font> </font>'''

	<font size=5>Ho fought the law and he won! </font size>		<font size=5>Ho fought the law and he won! </font size>


	Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling up the city jail. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.		''Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling up the city jail. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.

	Ho Ah Kow protested this treatment, sued the Sheriff (Nunan) for damages. Circuit Court Judge Stephen J. Field ruled that the law violated the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing equal protection.		''Ho Ah Kow protested this treatment, sued the Sheriff (Nunan) for damages. Circuit Court Judge Stephen J. Field ruled that the law violated the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing equal protection.

	For his damages, Ho Ah Kow was awarded $10,000 (quite a lot at the time) and the law was overturned.		''For his damages, Ho Ah Kow was awarded $10,000 (quite a lot at the time) and the law was overturned.

	Ho Ah Kow was an early fighter for civil rights in San Francisco and the Queue Ordinance is a concrete example of the racist laws that were used against immigrants.		''Ho Ah Kow was an early fighter for civil rights in San Francisco and the Queue Ordinance is a concrete example of the racist laws that were used against immigrants.''

	James Chionsini		by James Chionsini

Flippypimpstein at 00:52, 25 September 2010

2010-09-25T00:52:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 24 September 2010
Line 8:		Line 8:
	For his damages, Ho Ah Kow was awarded $10,000 (quite a lot at the time) and the law was overturned.		For his damages, Ho Ah Kow was awarded $10,000 (quite a lot at the time) and the law was overturned.

	Ho Ah Kow was an early fighter for civil rights in San Francisco and the Queue Ordinance is a concrete example of the racist laws that were used ~~to target~~ immigrants.		Ho Ah Kow was an early fighter for civil rights in San Francisco and the Queue Ordinance is a concrete example of the racist laws that were used against immigrants.

	James Chionsini		James Chionsini

Flippypimpstein at 00:51, 25 September 2010

2010-09-25T00:51:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:51, 24 September 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:


	Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling the ~~local jails~~. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.		Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling up the city jail. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.

	Ho Ah Kow protested this treatment, sued the Sheriff (Nunan) for damages. Circuit Court Judge Stephen J. Field ruled that the law violated the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing equal protection.		Ho Ah Kow protested this treatment, sued the Sheriff (Nunan) for damages. Circuit Court Judge Stephen J. Field ruled that the law violated the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing equal protection.

Flippypimpstein at 00:41, 25 September 2010

2010-09-25T00:41:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:41, 24 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Ho ~~Fought~~ the ~~Law (~~and ~~City Hall) and Won~~!		<font size=5>Ho fought the law and he won! </font size>

Flippypimpstein at 00:34, 25 September 2010

2010-09-25T00:34:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:34, 24 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Primary Source</font></font> </font>'''~~		Ho Fought the Law (and City Hall) and Won!


	Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling the local jails. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.		Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling the local jails. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.

Flippypimpstein at 00:19, 25 September 2010

2010-09-25T00:19:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:19, 24 September 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Primary Source</font></font> </font>'''		'''<font face = Papyrus> <font color = maroon> <font size = 4>Primary Source</font></font> </font>'''

	~~''Introduction~~ to ~~come''~~		Ho Ah Kow was a Chinese laborer in San Francisco during the late 19th century. At the time there was a local ordinance called the “Cubic Air Law” that specified there must be at least 500 cubic feet of air for each adult residing in a residence. Justified as a way to prevent overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions, the law targeted Chinese people who often lived in very cramped quarters and were only able to reside in the crowded area of Chinatown. When arrested for violating the law, Chinese people often chose to resist the law by refusing to pay the fine, thereby filling the local jails. In 1876 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors responded with the “Queue Ordinance” (sometimes referred to as the “Pigtail Ordinance”) requiring that all prisoners in city jail should have their heads shaved down to one inch of hair. The obvious intent of the law was to target and demean Chinese men as they wore their hair in a long braid or “queue” at the time and cutting it was seen as an act of disgrace.

			Ho Ah Kow protested this treatment, sued the Sheriff (Nunan) for damages. Circuit Court Judge Stephen J. Field ruled that the law violated the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution guaranteeing equal protection.

			For his damages, Ho Ah Kow was awarded $10,000 (quite a lot at the time) and the law was overturned.

			Ho Ah Kow was an early fighter for civil rights in San Francisco and the Queue Ordinance is a concrete example of the racist laws that were used to target immigrants.

			James Chionsini

Ccarlsson: added categories and NYT pdf as jpg

2010-08-31T02:03:00Z

added categories and NYT pdf as jpg

Show changes

Flippy Pimpstein at 08:42, 9 August 2010

2010-08-09T08:42:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 9 August 2010
Line 81:		Line 81:

	The plaintiff must have judgment on the demurrer to the defendant's plea of justification; and it is so ordered.		The plaintiff must have judgment on the demurrer to the defendant's plea of justification; and it is so ordered.
	~~</nowiki>~~

Flippy Pimpstein at 08:41, 9 August 2010

2010-08-09T08:41:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:41, 9 August 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~<nowiki>~~Ho Ah Kow v. Nunan, 12 F. Cas. 252 (C.C.D. Cal. 1879) — San Francisco’s infamous "Queue Ordinance" was invalidated on equal protection grounds.		Ho Ah Kow v. Nunan, 12 F. Cas. 252 (C.C.D. Cal. 1879) — San Francisco’s infamous "Queue Ordinance" was invalidated on equal protection grounds.

	Here is a link to a pdf news article about his case		Here is a link to a pdf news article about his case
Line 29:		Line 29:

	It appears that in April, 1876, the legislature of California passed an act "concerning lodging-houses and sleeping apartments within the limits of incorporated cities," declaring, among other things, that any person found sleeping or lodging in a room or an apartment containing less than five hundred cubic feet of space in the clear for each person occupying it, should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof be punished by a fine of not less than ten or more than fifty dollars, or imprisonment in the county [2] jail, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Sess. Laws 1875-76, p. 759. Under this act the plaintiff, in April, 1878, was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of ten dollars, or in default of such payment to be imprisoned five days in the county jail. Failing to pay the fine, he was imprisoned. The defendant, as sheriff of the city and county, had charge of the jail, and during the imprisonment of the plaintiff cut off his queue, as alleged. The complaint avers that it is the custom of Chinamen to shave the hair from the front of the head and to wear the remainder of it braided into a queue; that the deprivation of the queue is regarded by them as a mark of disgrace, and is attended, according to their religious faith, with misfortune and suffering after death; that the defendant knew of this custom and religious faith of the Chinese, and knew also that the plaintiff venerated the custom and held the faith; yet, in disregard of his rights, inflicted the injury complained of; and that the plaintiff has, in consequence of it, suffered great mental anguish, been disgraced in the eyes of his friends and relatives, and ostracised from association with his countrymen; and that hence [3] he has been dmaged to the amount of ten thousand dollars.		It appears that in April, 1876, the legislature of California passed an act "concerning lodging-houses and sleeping apartments within the limits of incorporated cities," declaring, among other things, that any person found sleeping or lodging in a room or an apartment containing less than five hundred cubic feet of space in the clear for each person occupying it, should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof be punished by a fine of not less than ten or more than fifty dollars, or imprisonment in the county [2] jail, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Sess. Laws 1875-76, p. 759. Under this act the plaintiff, in April, 1878, was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of ten dollars, or in default of such payment to be imprisoned five days in the county jail. Failing to pay the fine, he was imprisoned. The defendant, as sheriff of the city and county, had charge of the jail, and during the imprisonment of the plaintiff cut off his queue, as alleged. The complaint avers that it is the custom of Chinamen to shave the hair from the front of the head and to wear the remainder of it braided into a queue; that the deprivation of the queue is regarded by them as a mark of disgrace, and is attended, according to their religious faith, with misfortune and suffering after death; that the defendant knew of this custom and religious faith of the Chinese, and knew also that the plaintiff venerated the custom and held the faith; yet, in disregard of his rights, inflicted the injury complained of; and that the plaintiff has, in consequence of it, suffered great mental anguish, been disgraced in the eyes of his friends and relatives, and ostracised from association with his countrymen; and that hence [3] he has been dmaged to the amount of ten thousand dollars.


	Two defenses to the action are set up by the defendant; the second one being a justification of his conduct under an ordinance of the city and county of San Francisco. It is upon the sufficiency of the latter defense that the case is before us. The ordinance referred to was passed on the fourteenth of June, 1876, and it declares that every male person imprisoned in the county jail, under the judgment of any court having jurisdiction in criminal cases in the city and county, shall immediately upon his arrival at the jail have the hair of his head "cut or clipped to an uniform length of one inch from the scalp thereof," and it is made the duty of the sheriff to have this provision enforced. Under this ordinance the defendant cut off the queue of the plaintiff.		Two defenses to the action are set up by the defendant; the second one being a justification of his conduct under an ordinance of the city and county of San Francisco. It is upon the sufficiency of the latter defense that the case is before us. The ordinance referred to was passed on the fourteenth of June, 1876, and it declares that every male person imprisoned in the county jail, under the judgment of any court having jurisdiction in criminal cases in the city and county, shall immediately upon his arrival at the jail have the hair of his head "cut or clipped to an uniform length of one inch from the scalp thereof," and it is made the duty of the sheriff to have this provision enforced. Under this ordinance the defendant cut off the queue of the plaintiff.

Flippy Pimpstein at 08:37, 9 August 2010

2010-08-09T08:37:02Z

Show changes