The Voices of 820
« Yick Wo v. Hopkins »

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Dec 26, 2009, 4:06pm

[Home] [Help] [Search] [Login] [Register]



The Voices of 820 :: Chinese Resistance (Don't forget to add links to more information) :: Yick Wo v. Hopkins :: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
   [Search This Thread][Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]
AuthorTopic: Yick Wo v. Hopkins (Read 93 times)
AshleyZ
New Member
*
member is offline





Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 19
Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Thread Started on Nov 4, 2003, 9:58am »		[Quote]
:-/ This was about a Chinese man named Yick Wo who was arrested because his laundry was being operated in a wooden building. He was arrested my Sherrif Hopkins because he said that Yick Wo has broken the law. How Yick Wo broke the law was that the law said that no laundry can be operated in wooden buidings only brick buildings. Sheriff Hopkins arrested almost all the Chinese owners in wooden buildings and the Chinese launderers got mad. This made Yick Wo want to fight for his rights. So the Chinese launderers got togethr and sued Sheriff Hopkins.
:'( This relates to our big question because it involves intolerance and discrimination. Most of the Chinese fhow were launderers were being discriminated because they were being arrested by Sherrif Hopkins. Also Sherrif Hopkins arrested mostly the Chinese immigrants who had their laundries being operated in wooden buildings and not brick buildings. ::) :-[ ??? :-/
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
canDyl
New Member
*
member is offline





Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 18
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #1 on Nov 4, 2003, 11:57am »		[Quote]
Yick Wo is a laundry owner that convicted of a crime because he own a wooden laundry. Yick Wo v. Hopkins is related to the big question because no one was to own a laundry with a wooden building. 2/3 of the Chinese own a laundry that was made of wood. The Board of Supervisors granted permission to operated laundries in wooden building all except one non-Chinese owener. None of the 200 Chinese applicants were allowed to own a wooden building. When Yick Wo wasn't allow to own a wooden laundry he did anyway. He was arrested and convicted. Chinese were dicriminated amd oppress because Chinese couldn't own wooden laundry only whites could.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
kevinY
New Member
*
member is offline

[avatar]

[aim]

Joined: Oct 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 30
Location: New York
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #2 on Nov 4, 2003, 5:40pm »		[Quote]
This was a trial named Yick Wo v. Hopkins since it concerned Yick Wo and Sheriff Hopkins. Yick Wo was a Chinese man who operated a laundry but in a wooden building. According to the laws, the laundry had to be in a brick building. So, it led to controversy between Yick Wo and Sheriff Hopkins. Hopkins arrested most oft eh Chinese laundry owners with the wooden buildings but almost no white people. The Supreme Court because of the way it was presented, in a discriminatory fashion canceled Yick Wo’s trial.
This is related to the big question because it shows the discrimination shown by the Sheriff by arresting only Chinese people and leaving the white people alone. It shows that there was a lot of discrimination, even in the job places in America. Even if there were no problems, white people would still discriminate against the Chinese.


Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Susim
Guest
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #3 on Nov 4, 2003, 6:07pm »		[Quote]
Yick Wo was a laundromat owned by Lee Yick. He was a Chinese man who was arrested for opening the laundromat because it was a wooden building. He knows that he wasn't the only one doing that. There were white people opening laundromats in wooden buildings. But they only arrested Lee Yick and other Chinese people. They only arrested one white person and that was a woman. That's sexist and racist. He was angry and decided to gang up with a group of friends and have an argument with the sheriff hopkins. He and his friends had won the argument.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
susiem
New Member
*
member is offline



[aim]

Joined: Oct 2003
Gender: Female
Posts: 16
Location: Brooklyn
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #4 on Nov 4, 2003, 6:09pm »		[Quote]
Yick Wo was a laundromat owned by Lee Yick. He was a Chinese man who was arrested for opening the laundromat because it was a wooden building. He knows that he wasn't the only one doing that. There were white people opening laundromats in wooden buildings. But they only arrested Lee Yick and other Chinese people. They only arrested one white person and that was a woman. That's sexist and racist. He was angry and decided to gang up with a group of friends and have an argument with the sheriff hopkins. He and his friends had won the argument.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
julieK
New Member
*
member is offline





Joined: Oct 2003
Gender: Female
Posts: 20
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #5 on Nov 4, 2003, 6:47pm »		[Quote]
In this group, it talks about how a man named Yick Wo who didn’t want to have his business in a brick building was arrested. He was arrested because they said that the laundry business needed to be in a brick building and his was in a wooden building. Since they needed fire to warm up the water and if it is in a wooden building, the fire might burn through the wood because fire and wood doesn’t really mix with each other. This is related to our big question because why do they have to arrest a Chinese man. What happens if a white man was having their laundry business in a wooden building, would they go and arrest the white man? I think that they are discriminating against the Chinese man and they are racist. They shouldn’t be only arresting the Chinese man, but they should also arrest any white man who also has their laundry business in a wooden building.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
Kevinl
New Member
*
member is offline





Joined: Oct 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 22
Location: NEW YORK
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #6 on Nov 4, 2003, 6:55pm »		[Quote]
Yick Wo was a Chinese man who worked in a Laundromat in San Francisco. He and many other Chinese worked in Laundromats in San Francisco and he was the only one who was arrested. All buildings had to be built out of bricks and ninety five percent were in wood. Wood was flammable and could cause major damage. The Board of Supervisors granted permission to operate laundries in wooden buildings except Yick Wo. He refused a permit and was arrested. The supreme court reversed the arrest because he was the only one arrested while there are many others.
This is related to the Big Question because it shows racism and discrimination. He was the only one arrested because he didn’t have a permit. The law about restricting Laundromats being built with wood wasn’t just about safety. People wanted to persecute the Chinese because most of them owned Laundromats.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
PeterM
New Member
*
member is offline



[yim] [msn] [aim]

Joined: Oct 2003
Gender: Male
Posts: 16
Re: Yick Wo v. Hopkins
« Reply #7 on Nov 4, 2003, 11:35pm »		[Quote]
Yick Wo was arrested by Sherrif Hopkins just because his laundry was built by wood. He said that Yick Wo broke the law by not having laundry that's built by brick. So he almost arrest all the Chinese laundrymen because most of the laundry back then were by the wood. This made all the Chinese laundrymen mad and so they gathered together and try to fight back. And Yick Wo wanted to fight for his right.
This related to our big question because Chinese Immigrants were discriminated on what they did so they fight back that's how they struggle.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
   [Search This Thread][Reply] [Send Topic To Friend] [Print]

Click Here To Make This Board Ad-Free


This Board Hosted For FREE By ProBoards
Get Your Own Free Message Boards & Free Forums!