• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
EARTHQUAKE : THE CHINATOWN STORY 
EXHIBITION APRIL 3–SEPTEMBER 16,2006
Relocation
[ANNA NARUTA;CHUNG SAI YAT PO TRANSLATIONS BY DANNY LOONG]
T
HROUGHOUT
San Francisco’s history, therewere white European Americans who desiredto dislocate Chinese Americans fromChinatown and redevelop the area’s prime realestate.In 1904, a publicly-traded company incorpo-rated to achieve just that goal. The United StatesImprovement and Investment Company pub-lished their plan in the February 1905 issue ofthe Merchants’ Association Review. “It is thepurpose of this company,” Vice President andSpokesman John Partridge wrote, “to acquiretitle to at least two-thirds of Chinatown, [and]move the entire Chinese population to a suit-able and improved location on the Bay shore,”where people were to live in a remote, self-con-tained planned development that could be visit-ed by curious tourists. Towards this end, in1904 the company had already acquired “theproperty bounded by Bush, Broadway,Stockton, and Kearny streets,” according to theincorporation announcement in the November18, 1904 San Francisco Call.After the earthquake and fire, some whiteSan Franciscans chose the moment to try toeliminate Chinatown from the city. The SanFrancisco Chronicle on April 25, 1906 reportedthat as the real estate board discussed rebuildingaccording to the 1905 Burnham plan for SanFrancisco,Agent Speck suggested Hunter’s Point.Thomas Magee said that Hunter’s Pointwas Mayor Schmitz’s choice. The fact
Noting the value of Chinatown’s real estate could be increased from an estimated six million dollars to twenty-five or thirty million, the United States Improvement and Investment Company in February 1905 published thisplan to redevelop San Francisco Chinatown’s property by first relocating Chinese San Franciscans to a self-contained planned development.
Courtesy San Francisco Public Library San Francisco History Center 
 
that a corporation headed by JohnPartridge and other capitalists startedsome time ago to transfer Chinatown tothe vicinity of the Six-Mile House wasmentioned. Chairman Howell is toappoint a committee which will make arecommendation to the Real EstateBoard concerning Chinatown.”Printing from temporary Oakland headquar-ters, Chung Sai Yat Po worked to keep theChinese community informed of happeningsthroughout the refugee and reconstructionperiod. Working without their printer’s type,the issues were hand-lettered. On April 29,1906 Chung Sai Yat Po featured this editorial,“On how the Chinese should rebuildChinatown as soon as possible”:Ever since the city has been devastated by fire, all Chinese yearn to rebuildtheir community and their homes.However, though everyone wants torebuild, everyone insists in differentways. Why? Westerners have suggestedmoving the Chinese people out ofChinatown. This suggestion has beenraised for quite a while and for quite anumber of times. Now that the GreatFire has happened, it provides anopportunity to raise the issue again.Can we not move? There is widespreadpublic opinion that now Chinese mustnecessarily move out of Chinatown.But if we try our best to fight to stay,who knows who will win in the end? Ifwe are united, if we help ourselves andhelp each other, we can make the diffi-cult possible. I humbly offer the follow-ing suggestions for the Chinese to tack-le the present situation.1. Hire famous attorneys to represent usas soon as possible.2. If the Chinese living in Chinatownare also themselves landlords, theyshould restore their buildings as soon aspossible. And there is no need to informlocal officials. According to U.S. laws, ifthe land belongs to the building owner,the landlord has the right to build onhis land. Local officials have no right tostop him. The present city officials are[with the anti-Chinese union faction].If we apply through them, they will tryto stop us. So it’s better not to gothrough them.3. If the Chinese rented from the west-ern landlords, the Chinese rentersshould speak with their landlords assoon as possible and ask them to rebuildand rent them the building. Westernlandlords like to rent their houses toChinese because the rent in Chinatownis higher than elsewhere. Secondly,Chinese are content with the status quoand they demand very little, if at all,from their landlords. Western landlordsfind renting to the Chinese good deals.The above three strategies should beimplemented by we Chinese quickly, orwe will soon regret it.AMay 2, 1906 Chung Sai Yat Po articlewarned of further discussion about relocationschemes, translating the following article fromthe San Francisco Examiner:On the eighth day of this moon, SanFrancisco Examiner reported thus:Those who managed the properties ofChinatown said that the lands inChinatown would eventually be sold torich westerners to build opulent resi-dents because the hill behind was aneffective wind barricade. And in frontwas the arresting beauty of the port andthe river. Furthermore, Chinatown wasright next to the commercial areas thatoffered great convenience. Chinatownin the old days was an expensive loca-tion. Now that Chinatown is burntdown to the ground, perhaps the same
 
While the proposed relocation site was initially referred to as being at Hunter’s Point, it was actu-ally south of the county line, near Visitacion Valley. That Partridge had inherited the hundred-acresite determined its selection. The Partridge estate is shown here along with other speculativeplots in the yet-undeveloped area.
Courtesy San Mateo County History Museum Archives
Today the proposed relo-cation site is largelymarshy land with a powerrelay station, betweenBayshore Boulevard andthe Cow Palace. Alongthe western boundary ofthe property, SchwerinStreet intersects with theonly lasting impressionthe relocation scheme lefton the landscape, a roadnamed Partridge Avenue.
 Anna Naruta, 2006
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...