Was Won Alexander Cumyow framed? Researching a 140 yr old mystery, the conclusion

In last week’s post, I looked at the months leading up to Cumyow’s arrests and conviction, and the suddenness of his fall from grace. In this post, I’ll summarize what I found, share my thoughts and questions, and come to a conclusion.

Timeline of events – Jul-Dec 1885

In July, 1885, Won Alexander Cumyow was petitioning the citizens and business leaders of Victoria, BC, to support his application to be appointed Chinese Interpreter for the ports at Victoria. By December, he was convicted of embezzlement and sent to prison. Here are the key dates July to December, 1885.

• Jul 11 – petition to appoint Alexander Cumyow as Chinese Interpreter

  Jul 20 – Canada brings in The Chinese Immigration Act, 1885

  Aug 6-9 – heated debate published between supporters and detractors of Cumyow’s petition to be the Chinese interpreter under the new “Restriction Act”

  Sep 23 – Cumyow arrested for forgery

  Sep 24-25 – Cumyow appeared in police court

  Sep 26 – Case adjourned (held over)

  Sep 30 – Cumyow taken back into custody

  Oct 17 – Forgery case resumed

  Nov 23 – Cumyow appeared at the Autumn Assizes, a periodic meeting of the Supreme Court, to answer charges including forgery, embezzlement, and criminal intent to defraud

  Nov 26 – The Grand Jury dismissed the charges of forgery but found evidence supporting a trial for embezzlement and criminal intent to defraud

  Dec 17 – Cumyow faced trial in the Queen/Regina vs. Cumyow, before Supreme Court Chief Justice Begbie, and was found guilty of both charges; sentenced to serve three years

  Dec 18 – Cumyow was imprisoned at the BC Penitentiary, New Westminster

Was Cumyow framed – questions and comments

This is a deep rabbit hole of a mystery. Before I share my conclusions, first let me outline some of my questions and comments:

• Why didn’t Cumyow go to his family, friends, or associates for the promissory note (I.O.U.) when it came due? He was the son of businessman Won Ling Sing, who surely would have helped his son. It was $100 [$3400 in 2025], hardly enough to warrant jail time.
• Why didn’t Cumyow, who had just finished petitioning the community on his suitability to be appointed Chinese interpreter,¹ ask them for help in the King Tye matter?
• How could Cumyow, a man praised for his “splendid set of books”² and entrusted to sign at least forty promissory notes for King Tye,³ make such a basic error?
• Cumyow said he had accepted partnership in King Tye as part of his compensation in May 1884, yet no one at the firm corroborated his statement. Did he speak with them before going to court?
• Was it normal in 1885 to be charged one day, and appear in court the next?
• Why didn’t Cumyow better prepare himself for court? He had thirty-eight days between Oct 17 and Nov 23 to prepare for the criminal charges of embezzlement and intent to defraud.⁴ Why, for example, didn’t he repeat his testimony that he was an unrecognized partner at King Tye?
• Who was E.M. Johnson? Why did he take over the note from a Chinese third party (Wah Chung)? Research shows he was a conveyancer – a legal professional with a speciality in real estate – who was astute enough to represent himself in court.⁵ In Cumyow’s two lower court trials, Johnson was both plaintiff and prosecutor. Some have theorized he was Cumyow’s business partner, but a careful read of the articles shows he had once been employed to draft a lease among Tai Soong Co. and King Tye Co., with Dong Tai and Cumyow as reps, respectively. There is nil evidence to suggest Cumyow was pursuing a business partnership with Johnson, in addition to his employment with King Tye.
• Did Wah Chung, a Chinese man, really engage a white lawyer and pay his fees, to collect $100 from a Chinese man?
• Why did E.M. Johnson pursue Cumyow for such a small amount? Why was he so relentless? As a conveyancer, did he have a stake in the struggle for BC land ownership and keeping Chinese out of places of power?
• It is clear that Johnson used the evidence from the first court appearance to strengthen his case. Why didn’t Cumyow do the same, or retain legal counsel?
• Why did both E.M. Johnson and William Teague⁶ both come forward at the same time – the fall of 1885 – to accuse Cumyow of improper business management?
• What happened to the controversially high salary for the position of Chinese interpreter? Initially proposed by the Sec. of State at $3000/yr [$101K in 2025], it was halved before Vrooman/Gardner took office.⁷
• In mid-1885, the Canadian Pacific Railway was not yet completed and yet various anti-Chinese associations, labour unions, newspapers, and politicians (Baker, Shakespeare) gained enormous power by objecting to any Chinese labourers. These groups were not shy in their opposition to Cumyow as interpreter. They didn’t mention wages but $3000/yr was a gentleman’s wage and probably incendiary. Would they have considered removing him by any means necessary?
• Chinese are not monolithic, and Cumyow may have garnered powerful detractors from within the Chinese community. How would this have affected the outcome?

Many features of this story are suspicious. I will discuss three. The first one is timing. One month Cumyow is a strong candidate and petitioning to be Chinese interpreter, the next month he’s under arrest for mishandling a promissory note. The total period from that first arrest to his eventual conviction – Sep 23 to Dec 18 – is less than three months. In his Supreme Court trial, Cumyow said he hadn’t time to prepare his defence. As if that weren’t enough, he was also accused of mishandling a second promissory note (from the previous year) on the same day he was defending himself in court. Finally, Vrooman was appointed as interpreter in Mar 1886, when Cumyow was safely incarcerated and unable to organize a protest. Everything happened at once.

The second aspect is absurdity. Cumyow went to jail⁸ because he failed to make good on a minor I.O.U. originally made to Wah Chung and taken over by E.M. Johnson. The judiciary expended considerable resources to punish him, led by the tenacious E.M. Johnson. Magistrate Johnson ruled to send Cumyow’s minor case to the grand jury. The grand jury moved to indict. Supreme Court Justice Begbie tried Cumyow in a case lasting twenty minutes, and sentenced Cumyow to three years. In my view, Cumyow underestimated the seriousness until he was sentenced, which suggested he did not understand the forces working against him, the penalty for criminal intent to defraud and embezzle, and/or was bewildered by the speed of events. Cumyow acted like an innocent man who was confident the truth would save him.

The third aspect was that Cumyow had major forces working against him: the omnipresent anti-Chinese zeitgeist, as represented by elected Members of Parliament and the Legislature, labour unions, newspaper editors, and more, all agitating to impose restrictions on Chinese persons. They were clear – they did not support Cumyow, regardless of his place of birth, his education and suitability – because he was not white. In addition, Cumyow may have incurred the wrath of members of the Chinese community who didn’t want to see him succeed. In the face of this hostility, did Cumyow overstep his perceived place by aspiring to a well-paid job government job and showing he might have the charisma, talent, and skills to get it?

But was Cumyow framed? – conclusion

Before I share my conclusion, I need to first explain some terminology. Professional genealogists avoid using absolute terms: it was/ was not. We do this because we are researchers who – while acknowledging we are working with incomplete and imperfect information – are still trying to draw a conclusion. Therefore, we make decisions based on a spectrum of likelihood. In Evidence Explained, Elizabeth Shown Mills provided Levels of Confidence (greater to lesser): certainly, probably, likely, possibly, apparently, and perhaps:⁹

• “Certainly: The author has no reasonable doubt about the assertion, based upon sound research and good evidence.
• “Probably: The author feels the assertion is more likely than not, based upon sound research and good evidence.
• “Likely: The author feels some evidence supports the assertion, but the assertion is far from proved.
• “Possibly: The author feels the odds weigh at least slightly in favor of the assertion.
• “Apparently: The author has formed an impression or presumption, typically based upon common experience, but has not tested the matter.(A presumption is not a blank check, however. In law, for example, Federal Rule 301* holds that the author of a presumption is still expected to produce evidence to meet or rebut the presumption.)
• “Perhaps: The author suggests that an idea is plausible, although it remains to be tested.”

In this series, I looked at Cumyow’s life as reported in three separate newspapers. I was thorough in my newspaper research, but all newspapers are secondary sources. They are secondary because none were created by Cumyow himself. A story that is reported through a third person, such as a reporter, then innumerable third parties (the editors), is subject to bias. In fact, I learned that one article misrepresented the story, which led me to conclude Cumyow endured two forgery trials and not one.¹⁰ Therefore, since I was thorough in my research but used only one type of source, and that source was secondary, I must take that into account.

I believe it is likely Cumyow was framed. I think there is possibly a connection between his bid to be Chinese Interpreter and his eventual incarceration. There are too many outstanding questions in all of his court appearances, against a backdrop of overt anti-Chinese sentiment, in a year when Canada brought in the first iteration of what would later be called the Exclusion Act. Of course, there is a big difference between saying a thing is likely (some evidence supports the assertion) and a thing is certain (no reasonable doubt based on sound research and good evidence). I need good evidence, wherever it happens to be hiding. Perhaps I’ll get lucky and uncover some bright sparks bragging about what they did. I’ve already booked my dates to visit the BC Archives for those Supreme Court records. I’m excited to see what else there is to find in this 140 year old mystery.

Postscript

Won Alexander Cumyow served his sentence and returned to the community to pick up where he left off. He married Eva Yé Chan (1872-1939) the next year, and the couple had ten children. His son, Gordon Won Cumyow, became the first Chinese notary public in B.C., Mar 1951, after winning his case against the B.C. Law Society.

Until writing this series and creating this photo illustration, I had underestimated how young Cumyow was when the events of 1885 happened. He was only twenty-four. He had enough political savvy to engage the community to petition for a federal appointment, but not yet enough life experience to recognize when he was in serious danger. He may have been a nascent civil rights activist, but I believe his true activism coalesced later. Cumyow would become a fixture in the courts as Chinese interpreter.

There’s one last observation which niggles at me. For a prominent Chinese family, the Cumyows had their fair share of legal issues. Each of Edward (1903, 1905), Fred (1915), David (1925), and Richard (1925) were arrested. Edward and Richard served time.

Afterword

Alexander Won Cumyow’s life and the world he knew both continue to fascinate me. I have combed repositories online and off, gathering records. For this story alone, I have forty-nine articles, emails, and notes. For the Won (溫) family, I have 585, dating back as early as 2017. The hardest part about doing this research is how few original records have survived. For a man whose work touched thousands, his own notes, journals, and records are just 16 cm / 6 inches in a file at UBC. What I wouldn’t give for a diary. In the absence of words from Cumyow himself, I’m forced to glean his life from the viewpoint of others, and if this two part series showed me anything, it was that his world was hostile.

I honour the work of leaders fighting for civil rights, so that I might enjoy them to the fullest.

Thank yous

Thank you to Jim Wolf, whose fascination and knowledge of the history of Chinese families in New Westminster is such a resource. And thank you to Mairi MacDonald, expert in Canadian legal history, for her thoughts on the case. And to Andrew Sandfort-Marchese, for his thoughts on the Chinese clan fights of 19th century Victoria, BC. Also to Jim Waechtler, for his thoughtful conversation on Cumyow’s police court trial. And to reader JL for identifying the typo on Gordon Cumyow’s legal case.

1. “The Chinese interpreter,’” Victoria Daily Times, 11 Jul 1885, Victoria, BC, p4, Newspapers.com (Newspapers.com : accessed 17 Feb 2025). ↩︎
2. “Pro Bono Publico,” “Cumyow vs. foreigner,” Daily Colonist, 6 Aug 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 2, Col. 1, University of Victoria Libraries, The British Colonist Online Edition 1858-1980 (britishcolonist.ca : accessed 17 Feb 2025). ↩︎
3. “Police Court – alleged forgery,” Victoria Daily Times, 24 Sep 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 4, Cols. 2-3, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 18 Feb 2025); “The Cumyow forgery case,” Victoria Daily Times, 26 Sep 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 2, Col. 2, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 29 Nov 2020). ↩︎
4. “Police court,” Victoria Daily Times, 17 Oct 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 4 col. 2, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 18 Feb 2025); “The Cumyow case – preliminary hearing on the second charge of forgery,” Victoria Daily Standard, 17 Oct 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 3 cols. 4-5, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 18 Feb 2025); “The Cumyow case – preliminary hearing on the second charge of forgery,” Victoria Daily Standard, 17 Oct 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 3 cols. 4-5, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 18 Feb 2025); “The autumn assizes,” Victoria Daily Times, 23 Nov 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 4 col. 2, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 18 Feb 2025); ↩︎
5. Canada, British Columbia City Directories, 1860-1955, British Columbia Directory, 1884-1885, Victoria, British Columbia, pg. 48, listing for E.M. Johnson, conveyancer, Bastion, Vancouver Public Library (bccd.vpl.ca : accessed 19 Feb 2025). ↩︎
6. “Notice [ad for William Teague],” Victoria Daily Times, 17 Oct 1885 to 7 Nov 1885, Victoria, BC, Newspapers.com (newspapers.com accessed 19 Feb 2025). ↩︎
7. “Another $3000 throw away,’” [Victoria] Times Colonist, 10 Jun 1885, Victoria, BC, p4, Newspapers.com (Newspapers.com : accessed 17 Feb 2025); new position of Chinese interpreter to be paid $3K/yr; “Chinese interpreter,” Victoria Daily Times, 26 Mar 1886; “salary is something like $1,500 per annum.” ↩︎ ↩︎
8. For a photo, see “Item A-03353 – New Westminster Provincial Gaol,” ca. 1885, digital image, ref. no. A-03353, Royal BC Museum and Archives (https://search-bcarchives.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/new-westminster-provincial-gaol-4 : accessed 26 Feb 2025). ↩︎
9. Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace., 3rd ed. (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2017), p 19-20; also see discussion among ESM and John Reid in John’s blog: “Perceptions of Probability in Genealogy,” 2 Jan 2018, (https://anglo-celtic-connections.blogspot.com/ : accessed 1 Mar 2025). ↩︎
10. “Cumyow re-arrested,” Daily Colonist, 30 Sep 1885, Victoria, BC, p. 3, Col. 3, University of Victoria Libraries, The British Colonist Online Edition 1858-1980 (https://britishcolonist.ca : accessed 5 Jan 2021). ↩︎