William wrote to Agnes and to their son from that moment of their departure in 1932 until 1950.[43] After Agnes and the baby left Shekki, however, they never saw William again. It was at this point that national imperatives impacted on the transnational relationship of Agnes and William.
Agnes and the baby were permitted to return to Australia as had been arranged with customs officials in Townsville before they left. Things were different, however, for William. He had been allowed to remain in Australia after his schooling as a substitute for his father as manager of the family store. Soon after Agnes and William’s departure, an officer in the Department of Home Affairs was already questioning whether William should be allowed to return at all, specifically citing his marriage to an Australian woman as the reason:
Lum Wie [William Lum Mow] was here as substitute for his father Lum Mow. We gave authority for him to return to Australia to continue to act in that capacity. During Lum Wie’s absence a younger brother is acting as substitute for the father.
In the case of an assistant of H Louey Pang’s we refused to allow him to return for some time because of his marriage to an Australian born girl.[44]
In the circumstances it is submitted as to whether Lum Wie shall be allowed to come back as his father’s substitute.[45]
While the direction was given in the first instance that William was to be allowed to be readmitted,[46] the same officer was firm on this point after Agnes’s return: William should not be allowed back into Australia because there was nothing that recommended his readmission.[47]
Agnes viewed the situation otherwise. The disagreement within William’s family meant that he would not be admitted to work in his father’s business, but Agnes wrote to the Minister for Home Affairs in December 1932 and again in March 1933 asking if there was some other way that William could be allowed to return. She proposed that he should establish a business with capital brought from China. The sum he could bring was perhaps not large enough to meet the requirements, but she argued that he would soon have it built into a substantial enterprise, saying, ‘He was very successful in improving his father’s business in Townsville during the time of his management, and was in high esteem of all local and overseas wholesale dealers.’[48] He was, she said, very anxious to return to Australia to support his child and wife.
The department’s decision, however, was final. Before he could be admitted as a merchant, William would have to demonstrate that he was representing a reputable importing or exporting house in China and that he would be undertaking a genuine wholesale import–export business. The value of capital and goods he was required to bring was no less than £500—more than double what William could muster. Having been disinherited, William no longer had the support and connections offered by his wealthy father. William and Agnes were stuck.
Australian authorities were unwilling to make allowances for their situation, despite Agnes’s polite and thoughtful requests for assistance and despite the power the authorities had to make lenient decisions in cases they felt were deserving. In November 1932, after Agnes Lum Mow’s case made the headlines, the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, A. R. Peters, requested that if customs officials were approached by white wives of Chinese for passports or documents for travel to China, his department should be informed and a report provided ‘as to the husband’s status (i.e. whether domiciled here or merely under exemption), his occupation, the object of the intended visit and proposed length of stay in China’.[49] Officials did not want a repeat of the events; nor were they particularly sympathetic to Agnes’s plight. In the margins of one memo from the Customs and Excise Office in Townsville are scribbled the words ‘The woman is not worth this trouble’.[50]
[43] Draft petition for dissolution of marriage between Agnes Hubertine Lum Mow and William Lum Mow, 1963, Agnes Breuer Papers.
[44] The mention of an assistant of Louey Pang’s refers to David Louey Shue, who arrived to work for his uncle Louey Pang in Melbourne in 1922. After he had been in Australia on exemption for seven years, Louey Shue married a Chinese–Australian woman. Officials in the Department of Home Affairs felt that he had done this as a deliberate attempt to remain permanently in Australia. After the couple and their child went to China for a holiday in 1930, the department had, as a form of chastisement, allowed Louey Shue to return to Australia only if his wife remained overseas. She was subsequently allowed to return in 1932. Louey Shue continued to live in Australia on exemption until the 1950s; NAA, A433, 1948/2/2879.
[45] Handwritten note, dated 13 April, at the bottom of memorandum from Collector of Customs, Brisbane, to Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, 4 April 1932, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297.
[46] Handwritten note, undated, at the bottom of memorandum from Collector of Customs, Brisbane, to Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, 4 April 1932, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297.
[47] Handwritten note, dated 21 October, at the bottom of Sub-Collector of Customs, Townsville, to Collector of Customs, Brisbane, 10 October 1932, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297.
[48] Agnes Lum Mow to Secretary, Department of the Interior, 6 March 1933, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297.
[49] Department of the Interior circular memorandum no. 31/2306, 21 November 1932, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297. See also NAA, B13, 1932/17435.
[50] Memorandum, Customs and Excise Office, Townsville, 2 November 1932, NAA, A433, 1942/2/3297.