From: "Non-Departmental Letters Received by the Collector, 1867-1912." Records of the Collector of Customs, Collection District of San Francisco, U.S. Custom Service. Record Group 36. Imperial Chinese Consulate General
San Francisco Nov 13th, 1885
Mr. J. M. Morton, Surveyor of the Port of San Francisco
Sir
My attention has been called to a press telegram published this day wherein it is set forth that a number of Chinese in transit from Cuba to China via New York and this port has failed to report their exit here. In this connection I beg to call your attention to what took place at the Pacific Mail dock which may account for the missing Chinese. About the time they should have departed from this port the Collector of Customs have changed their officer who had charge of those departing by each steamer in transit. At the departure of the steamer the names and dates I commit (illegible). I asked Mr. Harris (who was in charge of the wharf), "How many waybilled Chinamen he had from to Cuba?" His answer was, "What do you mean by waybill?". I then explained how Chinamen in transit were furnished with passports in Cuba and a list forwarded to the port of San Francisco. He then said taking out a package of papers from under a bundle of certificates, "This must be the list you are talking about." I asked him if he checked any off as departing. He said he had not seen any. I then with the Consulate Interpreter not on board and called out for those having Cuban passports to come on shore and be organized – four responded – and I brought them to Mr. Harris and exhibited the passport and each was checked off. After that I found three more on a (illegible) through (illegible) and had them checked off also. How man more not counted I am unable to say departed by that steamer. Special Agent Evans was present on the dock and I called his attention to the matter and he witnessed my bringing up these men to be checked off. I have no hesitation in saying that the (illegible) himself mentioned in the press dispatches (illegible) in that steamer. It was in my mind that it was the "San Pablo" but I am not sure. Will you do me the favor to enquire of Special Treasury Agent Evans if he remembers what took place at the time mentioned in this communication? I don't intend any censure of Mr. Harris but he was wholly inexpressive(?) as to his duties at that time concerning trhu transits. Trusting you will investigate this matter.
I have the honor to be your obedient Servant, F. A. Bee, Chinese Counsel
Referred to Inspector F T Haines for a report of facts
H. W. Brown, Deputy Inspector
Replied by letter dated Nov 17th, 1885 addressed J. M. Morton, Surveyor of the Port
F. T. Haines, Inspector

Customs House, San Francisco, Cal.
Surveyor's Office Nov 17th, 1885
Hon. J. M. Morton, Surveyor of the Port
Sir,
In reply to Consul Bee's letter of the 13th inst in regard to Transit men from Cuba en route to China through the United States. I will respectfully state as follows:
The first steamer that departed from this port that I was put in charge of was the steamer "Arabic" which departed for China Aug 1st, 1885 about two months after the arrival of those transit men in June last at the port of New York- so ex-Inspector Ciprio is the proper man to see in regard to those men.
I have of course been giving certificates out to Chinamen since June 2nd, but I merely give out the certificates and was not in charge of the Chinese work until the latter part of July and the Arabic was the first departing steamer under my management.
The steamer that Consul Bee thinks they left on the "San Pablo". I will state they left this port on July 9th, 1885.
If I remember correctly, Consul Bee and Special Agent Evans was present when we were giving out certificates to Chinamen in the steamer, Arabic. Col Bee asked me, "Are there any Chinamen waybilled from Cuba?" I pulled out some waybills under the certificates and said this must be the list. Col. Bee went through the record of Chinamen, and, shortly afterward Interpreter Rickards called my attention to a man who had a passport, and I checked it off the list and he went aboard and several others also. Col. Bee asked Col. Evans to assist him which he did.
If as Colonel Bee says, he was aboard and found several men who were taken ashore and checked off, they were evidently registered by the interpreter as departing without papers of any kind and did not know enough to present their passports. I am quite sure there were men who went aboard on the steamer "Arabic" on my steamer thereafter without being asked.
I inquired of Colonel Bee some time ago about some transit men. It seems that the next steamer after the Arabic, "City of Rio de Janeiro", that Interpreter Richards did not send the transmit men to me as before but put their names and etc., on a piece of paper and intended giving it to me, but by some means or other was missing or lost.
Very respectfully, F. T. Haines, Inspector
Respectfully referred to the Collector under date of October 26th who names of passengers from Havana were reported to the collectors as not having left the country. The within letters refer to this matter. The report was made for the reason that no official evidence could be obtained of the dapartures of some men. I should think it probable those men left as is stated by Colonel Bee although I am unable to obtain official knowledge of this fact.
J. Morton, Surveyor

From Daily Alta California, Volume 39, Number 13007, 24 October 1885
The Steamer Rio de Janeiro arrived yesterday with 121 passengers, of those 112 had Custom House return certificates, 5 Chinese consular certificates, including 3 merchants and 2 servants, 4 with guaranteed letters; forty-six in transit for Honolulu, 15 for Victoria and 17 for Panama.

From Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 54, Number 63, 3 November 1885, "The Steamer, City of Rio, that sailed for China on Saturday, carried 805 Chinese passengers with certificates, 56 without certificates and 44 in transit, making altogetehr 905."
Note: Saturday was October 31, 1885.

From: "Non-Departmental Letters Received by the Collector, 1867-1912." Records of the Collector of Customs, Collection District of San Francisco, U.S. Custom Service. Record Group 36.
Imperial Chinese Consulate General
San Francisco
Nov 19th, 1885 John S. Hager, Collector of the Port of San Francisco
Sir
I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th in which you author certain suggestions in reference to the registration of departing Chinese subjects – I beg to inform you that my colleague the Consul General at once caused notices to be posted throughout the Chinese quarter acknowledging your suggestions with the request that due attention be paid to the matter of those intending to return to China. Thanking you for the interest you have taken. I have the honor to be with much respect Your Obedient Servant, F. A. Bee, Consul