Densho Digital Archive - Jim Tsujimura Interview

Densho Digital Archive
Oregon Nikkei Endowment Collection
Title: Jim Tsujimura Interview
Narrator: Jim Tsujimura
Interviewer: Margaret Barton Ross
Location: Portland, Oregon
Date: July 24, 2003
Densho ID: denshovh-tjim_2-01

[Correct spelling of certain names, words and terms used in this interview have not been verified.]

<Begin Segment 1>

MR: This is an interview with James Tsujimura, a Nisei man, seventy-two years old, at his home in Portland, Oregon, on July 24, 2003. The interviewer is Margaret Barton Ross of the Oregon Nikkei Legacy Center's Oral History Project 2003. Good morning.

JT: Good morning.

MR: Thank you for having me in your home. Let's start out talking about the circumstances of your birth, when and where you were born.

JT: I was born in Westport, Oregon, between Portland and Astoria, located there, and on February 10, 1931.

MR: How many people were in your family?

JT: I had five sisters. One is still living in Japan, and I've seen her only on two occasions. She's married, has a family; and of course, she's living there permanently.

MR: And your parents, what did your father do?

JT: As far as I can remember, he started working on a farm in Auburn, Washington, moved to Westport, Oregon, where he worked in a sawmill, and that's where I was born and most of my sisters were born.

MR: Did your mother work?

JT: Yes, as a housewife at that time. When they moved to Portland, my memory goes back to a laundry on 17th and Northwest Burnside, and she also worked there, of course.

MR: I'm curious about what it was like in Westport. Was there a Japanese community there?

JT: Yes, very small one, but that's about all I can remember too.

MR: Just one other question then about Westport. What did you do for traditional food there, do you know?

JT: No. I was so young at that time that I don't, I can't remember.

MR: Okay. And why did you leave?

JT: Well, I just suspect that my dad wanted to do something else, so my mother too, so, and they wanted to move to a larger town, so they decided on Portland.

MR: Okay. When did you go to Portland?

JT: I have no idea. I was too young.

MR: Okay. After you got to Portland, did you start school?

JT: Yes. I went to Couch School up until the fifth grade. My sisters attended that, Couch School and one other, but I just can't remember them.

<Begin Segment 2>

MR: Then when you were eleven --

JT: Yes.

MR: Is that when Pearl Harbor was bombed?

JT: Right, on December 7th, and it was a shock to us. When it occurred, suddenly news about it and the after effects of it started coming out. Curfews began to come out. We had to be in by a certain time. I recall the Chinese Americans wearing a button which said, "I am Chinese." We didn't have such a thing; therefore, we were limited. In other words, our Constitutional Rights and our Bill of Rights were abridged or practically taken away. We were American citizens, yet second-class citizens. The time came when signs were posted that we had to be evacuated right now. Only what we can carry, they came, took us on truck to the Portland Assembly Center which was the, which is the livestock exposition hall and smelled like one at that time. In the summertime, and the stench was terrible, surrounded by barbed wire fence, the machine gun nest pointing toward us, where we stayed for several months.

MR: Did your parents have any explanation for you about why these things were going on?

JT: No, because they were surprised just as much as everyone else. In fact, my mother was so worried and so scared, she burned everything that was Japanese. All the Japanese dolls for Girl's Day, Boy's Day. I recall about a twenty, twenty-five foot silk koi, that's a carp for Boy's Day. She burned that and so many things. But she was very, very worried that anything that had to do with Japan was burned.

MR: What, what happened after that, after the assembly center?

JT: After our stay there for several months, we were placed on trains. Curtains were all pulled down. They didn't want us to look out. Took about three days to get to where we were going, and it turned out to be Minidoka, Idaho. The train, no air conditioning, no drafts of any kind to keep us cool. It was very hot and not the ideal living conditions. But it took three days.

MR: Just going right back to before you left, I'm wondering if anybody was helpful to you in any way from the Caucasian community or --

JT: Our friends were, but they were, most were hysterical because of what Japan had done. Most of the Americans could not separate us from those from Japan, the Japanese national or the Japanese government; therefore, we were called "Japs" and other derogatory terms. But we were Americans, Americans of Japanese ancestry, and this was, America was our home, and they just couldn't understand that. And so many were saying, "You people go back to your own country," where this was our country.

MR: And when you had to leave so quickly, what plans were made to take care of your things or to hold your property, your parents' property?

JT: Well, we didn't know whether we were coming back, so we sold everything at half or less of the usual or what it was worth or gave things away. And I recall one particular item which was a brand new 1941 Buick which my dad had purchased, and he sold for half a price, and it was only a few months old. But no one knew where we were going, how long we would be gone, whether we would come back or not, and they were just scared.

<Begin Segment 3>

MR: So going back to camp then. After you got to camp, what was the procedure for settling you in?

JT: After we got there on train, they had trucks that drove us to our camp site, and I recall it was so dusty that I couldn't see my hand in front of my face. They assigned us our rooms or barracks, and ours happened to be Block 32, Apartment 7, Barrack 7, Apartment E. And it turned out that half of our block was a school, a grade school. So at least I didn't have very far to go, to go to school. The condition was severe, out in nowhere, desert country. Public facilities, it was nothing to speak of. They had outhouses. Later on, they put in running water, but it was just plain desert, South Central Idaho.

MR: And who all in your family did go to camp?

JT: As I recall, four of my sisters, my parents, and I. The one in Japan, of course, was still there.

MR: What's foremost in your memory about being in camp?

JT: That I, when I first saw where we were and the room that were assigned to us had cracks between the boards, dust was blowing in, and it was a single room with nothing in it but one potbelly stove in the corner. And I was thinking to myself, "Gee, is this where we're going to live for the next so many years? What are they doing to us?" But I was still very young at that point, so it didn't, well, I didn't think of other things like the older people, but it was a terrible place.

MR: One of the problems that we hear about in camp was that children tended to go with their friends and, for example, at mealtime, they didn't eat with their parents, and the family had problems because of that. How did your parents deal with that issue?

JT: Well, where we lived was just half a block, it wasn't really an issue in our block, and it really wasn't an issue initially. It was later on, a few years after, that we began to eat with friends, so we didn't have any problems that way. My mother worked as a waitress at sixteen dollars a month. The top pay was nineteen dollars a month. My father became a fire chief, and he was paid that. As a child when I worked on the farm during the summer, full time, I was paid eight dollars a month compared to the prisoner of war. They were paid five dollars a day plus cigarette money. So you can see how little we were paid.

MR: How did you spend your money?

JT: Well, there wasn't much to spend. And initially, there were no stores. Later on, they had little canteens where you can buy some goodies, but no department stores and things like that. So whatever I made, I just gave to my parents.

MR: How did your family turn the barracks into a home?

JT: Well, we slowly patched up the cracks, then we put up ropes or strings across the room so we could hang blankets to partition the rooms or bedrooms. So we had a little bit of privacy, but initially, nothing. And at least we had a roof over our head; whereas, when we were in the assembly center, there was no roof. It was all open ceiling. There was just canvas at the door, one plain room, and you can hear everyone. In Idaho, we at least had a room that we can call our own.

<Begin Segment 4>

MR: And you mentioned you worked on a farm. What did you do on the farm?

JT: Oh, like anyone else would, a common laborer, weeding, hoeing, raking, that type of work at eight dollars a month.

MR: And what were the crops?

JT: We raised several things. After we, it was desert at first, nothing was growing, then we channeled water from the canal which was running nearby to that area. And I recall growing melons, all sorts of vegetables, later animals, I remember some pigs. And we was kind of independent in that way that the government didn't have to feed us everything. We grow, we grew a number of crops.

MR: When you were in school, what was a typical day like for you when you got up 'til when you went to sleep at night?

JT: It was very similar to the school I attended in Portland except the one thing I remember is that we all brought a bath towel that during the afternoon, we placed on the floor and take a nap or so-called nap for about a half an hour. Other than that, some of our teachers were Americans, and they were there voluntarily to teach us. So our education was up to date; and in fact, I recall having to memorize Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. So the education was less than adequate, but adequate.

MR: And what did you do for recreation?

JT: Oh, we played football. Between blocks, there would be an area that was a little wider. We'd play softball. And right next to our block was a softball field. So as far as recreation, more outdoor sports.

MR: You went there when you were eleven. And how many years did you spend there?

JT: About three and a half years.

MR: So what grades in school were you in?

JT: It happened that I was in the split class, so I spent the fifth, sixth, seventh years through junior high school in camp.

MR: What kind of activities were there through the school for you, for the students?

JT: It was very similar to any other junior high school, outdoor sports. And somehow, I became the social chairman for our class, so we had a number of dances, social dances without any drinks, of course.

MR: While you were studying in school and learning about history and American government, what did you think?

JT: I was young enough at that time not to get too deeply into what the government was actually doing to us. And so like any other teenager, young teenager, oh, I guess playing is more important than the political things.

MR: Is there anything else about camp that you'd like to share?

JT: Well, except that we were sent there supposedly to protect ourselves from the American people or from harm. I always wondered why the barbed wire fence at the top pointed inward. If it were for our protection, they should have been pointed outward. The machine gun and the towers that the soldiers were, the guns were pointing at us, not outside, away from us. So was that for our protection? I often wondered that.

MR: Besides working, your parents, besides working as a waitress and as a fireman, what was life like for them in camp?

JT: Well, they did make friends, and they would occasionally go visit or some would come visit us, but they also spent time trying to make their own garden in front of our barrack. But there really was not that much of a social life for them. It was hard work, and I didn't know what they were thinking of what was happening.

MR: When the questionnaire came out with the questions 27 and 28, do you remember the discussions that were going on?

JT: I really don't. In fact, it was until later that I really realized what they were trying to do. But we were in camp held as more or less hostages, and how could they possibly come out with question 27, 28, "Are you loyal to your emperor?" No. Some answered "yes" because on purpose they wanted to do that and say "yes" because they took our liberties away. They took our freedom away. The other question, "Would you be loyal to your country?" Well, we were all loyal to our country. So that question, to me, was not that important. I was a little too young.

MR: But your parents being Issei had problems signing because they would have no country. So what, were they discussing anything about that?

JT: I never did overhear them discuss or nor do I recall their discussing that. My dad was too old to go into the service, but they were all for America. America was their home. They were permanent residents of the United States. So I could about, just about feel how they felt.

MR: Did people begin to leave camp to go other places?

JT: Yes. Fortunately, they allowed people to go who had sponsors. They had to have sponsors first, but you could not move towards the West Coast. It was the Midwest or East. In fact, my sister left earlier to Chicago to attend school, and many of the older boys and girls also did the same.

<Begin Segment 5>

MR: Being young as you were, you stayed with your parents 'til the end. How long did your parents stay in camp?

JT: They were there for three and a half years also. We moved back to Portland in 1945.

MR: Did you return to your same home?

JT: No. We had no home here. In fact, my father came home first to see what he could do as far as settling down. What he, when he came back to Portland looking for a job, he worked for the Russian Relief as a common laborer. And then when he was, had raised some money, then he wrote to us and said to prepare to come back.

MR: What is Russian Relief?

JT: That was like a Goodwill. You donate clothing or other articles to the Russian Relief, and they would send it to Russia.

MR: And this was an independent organization?

JT: It was a charitable organization at that time.

MR: So when you came back to Portland, where did you settle?

JT: We initially stayed at the Epworth Methodist Church in Portland which was located Northwest Sixteenth. We stayed there for a few weeks before we moved to Vanport, Oregon. Now Vanport was an area that was flooded later. Fortunately, we had moved out before that.

MR: When you came, was there anyone who helped you settle in?

JT: Not that I can think of, no.

MR: So where did you move to then, in Vanport?

JT: We stayed in Vanport for, oh, a few months, then we moved to the city. Initially, we stayed in the attic of the laundry, Hand Laundry, then we moved to a house right across the street from the Epworth Methodist Church.

MR: Where was the laundry located?

JT: Laundry was on Seventeenth and Northwest Burnside. It was called Independent Hand Laundry.

MR: Your father worked there?

JT: Yes. He and my mother ran the whole business. We had some employees helping, but that was the main source of livelihood.

MR: So it was their business?

JT: Yes.

MR: Okay.

<Begin Segment 6>

MR: And then what did you do when you got back?

JT: In 1945, I started high school, freshman. As a high school, I went to Lincoln High School. But psychologically, I didn't want to be Japanese. I wanted to be an American. I wanted nothing to do with the Japanese people. Therefore, I decided to move over, transfer over to Benson High School, which I did. So I finished there. I graduated there. I received a little scholarship to Lewis and Clark when I graduated. I believe I was the first Japanese American to become an official driver for the Rose Festival Princesses. And the last year, I was the vice president of the student body. I also played some baseball for high school.

MR: You said you didn't want to associate with the Japanese Americans. Was Lincoln High School, did they have a heavy population of Japanese Americans?

JT: Yes. I believe most of the Japanese students attended Lincoln. And again, psychologically, I had such an inferiority complex at that time that I just didn't want to be associated with Japanese.

MR: So you said you got a scholarship to Benson?

JT: Not to Benson, but from Benson to Lewis and Clark.

MR: Oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood. In my memory, Benson High School was a technical high school. Did you have a technical focus?

JT: Yes. It so happened that at Benson, you can take two types of courses. One, to prepare you for work; the other, to prepare you for work and college which was a little rougher course, and that's the one that I took. I first wanted to become a specialist in gas engine. But after seeing the fingernails of all the students, I changed my major to electricity. When I went to Lewis and Clark, my mother actually wanted me to become a doctor. Well, I didn't give that much thought until later.

MR: Now you said you were a Rose Festival driver. Was that in high school or college?

JT: That was from Benson High School.

MR: At the time, was Benson all boys?

JT: Yes. Therefore, we were the princesses.

MR: So where did they get the princess from, the Benson, you were a driver for Benson?

JT: Right.

MR: So where did the princess come from?

JT: From every other school that was co-educational.

MR: I see. So Benson provided the drivers.

JT: That's right.

MR: Okay.

<Begin Segment 7>

MR: So you started Lewis and Clark in what year?

JT: 1949.

MR: Can you talk about your college experience?

JT: Well, it was a prolonged one because I played baseball at Lewis and Clark one year. But in 1950, '51, I came down with pulmonary tuberculosis, so I had to drop out completely, was in the University of Oregon Tuberculosis Hospital at that time, and that took several years. And the treatment for tuberculosis at the time was just rest. They had some medications but not like they do now. In fact, they closed down those hospitals. But it took me several years to graduate because when I did go back, I couldn't take a full load. So I received my degree of bachelor of arts in biology in 1956.

MR: Did you live at the hospital?

JT: No. This was after I was released. After I was released, I still had to stay at home, couldn't go out for quite some time, and this is why it took so long to receive my degree from Lewis and Clark before attending medical school.

MR: When you went to the hospital, how long did you stay?

JT: I think close to a couple years.

MR: What did your parents do while you were there? What was your family life like with you living in the hospital?

JT: Well, it wasn't difficult for them to visit me because they lived in Portland too. I believe it was at, during the time that they had the laundry. And when they could come, boy, they would come to visit.

MR: So as a young man, you were living in this hospital and probably wondering what your future was, what were you thinking?

JT: Well, I did meet several friends in the hospital as they were patients as well, and there were some younger patients like myself. But it was there that I was convinced that I wanted to become a doctor. It also so happened that while a patient there, they allowed my appendix to rupture, and that was bad. I thought I was going to die from that. But it was all that together that made, that convinced me that I wanted to be, become a doctor.

MR: Was there anybody in particular, a doctor, a medical person, that inspired you?

JT: No one in particular. The only doctors that we saw were resident physicians and, of course, the staff physicians, but that was enough to convince me.

MR: After you left the hospital, where did you go?

JT: To our home. We had purchased another home on Southeast 53rd Avenue at the time and was confined to that home for a period of time. During that time, there was nothing to do. I was like a tiger.

MR: How did you spend your time?

JT: Reading, playing solitare, watching television, that was about all.

MR: When you went back to Lewis and Clark, did you retain your financial aid? You've been out of school so long.

JT: Yes, I did, because when I came down with tuberculosis, they had a program that the State would allow me to attend college, and they would pay for that. Or an alternative was if I wanted to go to medical school, they would take care of that. I chose the medical school.

MR: When did you graduate from Lewis and Clark?

JT: I received my degree in 1956.

<Begin Segment 8>

MR: And where did you go to medical school?

JT: On top of the hill then called University of Oregon Medical School.

MR: Can you talk about your medical school experience?

JT: Well, there really isn't too much to talk about except it was study, study, study. During that time, someone at the veteran's hospital, name was Dr. Worshafter, the chief of medicine there, he befriended me. In fact, he was like a second father to me. I worked for him throughout the medical school as a research assistant. Besides that, there was not much one could do because you had so much studying to do.

MR: What was the specialty?

JT: Well, you specialize after medical school, four years, and then one year of internship, then you can go into your specialty which was three additional years, and it was in ophthalmology.

MR: And that school, the ophthalmology school, was that in Oregon too?

JT: That was at Good Samaritan Hospital. They had opened a brand new program which became affiliated with the medical school. So that was offered to me, so I took it.

MR: Throughout this medical school career, where did you live?

JT: I lived on Southeast 53rd. And then later, a few years before I graduated, I moved to an apartment near the medical school which made it much easier.

MR: So you were busy study, study, studying, did you have any time for social outlets?

JT: Yes, I did. In fact, I may have spent a little bit too much time socializing. But it was tough, difficult, but was certainly worth it.

MR: So you graduated from medical school, your specialty school at what year?

JT: I graduated from medical school in 1960, '61 was my internship, and my residency, I completed it in 1964.

MR: And as you're maturing and looking around at the world, how did your feelings develop regarding the Japanese community? Were you still hesitant to be involved, or what happened with your thoughts there?

JT: Well, initially during high school days, I didn't want anything to do with Japanese. Somehow, that turned around. I guess I must have asked myself, "Who am I? Can I be anyone else with my Asian face?" No. Therefore, I began to turn around, 180 degrees, and wanted to do more and more for the Japanese community. Well, it was strange why I felt the way I did initially, maybe not strange to some sociologists coming back from camp and all. But later on, I just turned completely around.

MR: Do you have any idea what made that happen?

JT: Well, it was because I asked myself, "Who am I, who can I be, can I change my face, can I appear like an American?" No.

MR: So it wasn't anything external. It was --

JT: It was my feeling that if I'm Japanese, then I'll do everything that I can.

MR: And what, then what did you decide to do to make that difference?

JT: After my residency, I was pretty well tied up with work, working sixteen, eighteen, twenty-four hours a day as an intern resident for, at that time, no more than twenty-five cents an hour. Now, they're getting a little bit better pay than that. So I didn't really have time for anything else. It was only right immediately before finishing that I began to have more time to spend for other activities, community activities. I was married in 1964, my last year, a few months before I was through. But I turned more of my time towards the Japanese community immediately after that which was in the '60s.

<Begin Segment 9>

MR: And what were the specific ways that you turned to the Japanese community?

JT: One of my friends initially asked me, why don't I join the Japanese American Citizens League or JACL. It's a human rights, civil rights organization, 501©3 charitable organization. But because it had to do with civil rights and human rights, it interested me; therefore, I joined.

MR: And how did you view the JACL and its influence at the time?

JT: Well, it was a human and civil rights organization. We were involved with certain cases or certain persons that would come up that were discriminated upon. It began in that manner. Later, it would be redress, of course.

MR: You joined in 1964, and you became active at the national level pretty rapidly. Can you talk about how you did that?

JT: Well actually, as an officer of the chapter, as president of a chapter, you automatically became a delegate to the district. The JACL is made up of chapters, districts, and then the national level. So I became a delegate to the district and to the national council. That was in 1970. And '69 when I was vice president of the chapter, I was asked to chair the district biennial convention which was held in Portland. Then in '70 as president, it involved national.

MR: Was there an Oregon point of view that you took with you?

JT: No, not a particular one. There were no particular issue at the time back in the '60s or something. The first time I heard of redress or reparations as it was called was in 1970 in Chicago. A proposal was made and that interested me very much. The same proposal came up in 1972 in Washington, D.C., which made me even more enthusiastic about working to achieve reparations or redress. In 1973 to '75, I became the governor of our district which encompassed about nine other chapters. As governor, I proposed for our district a similar time for reparations. Now, it just so happened that in 1974 while I was governor, Portland held the biennial national convention, so I introduced a similar proposition to the council, however, asking them to place it in a more prioritized or as a number one priority issue. As governor and... being the district governor also belongs to the national board. There were so many elected officers and so many district governors who composed the district, the national board. In fact, when I first went down to a meeting of the national board, I was informed that the executive committee met the first half a day. So I said to myself, "What are we doing here for half a day? Nothing. It was just a waste. So I suggested why don't we form our own governor's council, and that's how the governor's caucus was born, and it's still in place today.

MR: Just to get a picture of this, what is the geographic range of the district?

JT: District composed of the panhandle of Idaho, Washington, Oregon, but not all. The eastern portion of Oregon belonged to the next district, but it was primarily these three states.

MR: And how many districts are there?

JT: There were eight at that time. It was held in Portland. Our regional office was in Portland at that time. It moved to Seattle later. We had one in southern, Northern California, Central California, Southern California, Mountain Plains, Midwest, and Washington, D.C. So it was composed of eight districts and about a hundred and so many chapters across the nation.

MR: So these governors are starting to meet?

JT: I beg your pardon?

MR: So the governors then are starting to have these meetings?

JT: Yes.

MR: What sorts of issues did they deal with?

JT: Well, I had in mind primarily to discuss the problems we were having in our local areas or in our districts. And we gained quite a bit of that what one would, district was doing, what the other district picked up on that. Later, it was used as a political office. But the primary purpose was to discuss our local problems and to spend that time when we had nothing to lose.

MR: Portland and Seattle are in the same district, and they are both large cities for their areas with distinct personalities. How did Seattle chapter and Portland chapter interact?

JT: Well, all of the chapters in our district got along just fine. Of course, Seattle wanted the regional office up there, and which they finally did. But initially for a few years, it was in Portland. Fortunately, when we had our national convention in Portland, it was in Portland, so it was a great help.

MR: Was there tension between the cities?

JT: No, not at all.

MR: And what was Portland's relationship, the Portland chapters, to the national organization?

JT: In relation to the national, if you go through the ropes, if you want to introduce something, you go through the district first, or one could write directly to national. But I believe you had more of a chance if the district concurred with the chapter at the district council meeting before it went to the national council. But we had no, we got along just fine.

<Begin Segment 10>

MR: Several times now you've mentioned the word redress. Can you explain what that is?

JT: Right after the bombing of Pearl Harbor was all these posters placed on the telephone poles and all, confining us, taking our liberties away, and then evacuating and interning us in camps. Redress was like in the Constitution in the Bill of Rights where one could redress the government for a wrong, and we felt that it was wrong for them to do so, and especially when three-quarters of the population evacuated were American citizens. And this was what redress was all about, asking for reparation or redress from our government for doing what they did which we felt was wrong.

MR: You mentioned that in the early '70s you heard the idea a couple of times in this area. Were other areas discussing this issue too?

JT: Yes. In fact, after 1974 when Portland or the Pacific Northwest district made our proposal at the national convention asking them to make it a priority, yes, all of our chapters became involved. As governor, the first thing I did was to write a letter to Mike Masaoka who was Mr. JACL at that time, and he served many, many years for JACL, and he was blamed for many things that he was not, well, he was not to blame for. But he agreed with us that we should ask for redress, and he wrote an article in the Pacific Citizen which was the JACL's paper. The holiday issue which was the largest one made, published about redress, and that it was right to do so. And I felt that half our battle was won since he came out with that article because there were many, many members who were against redress of any kind. But with that letter, I felt that half the battle was won. Now, the remainder was to convince the American people and Congress.

MR: You mentioned there was, there was dissension over the idea of redress. What were some of the pros and the cons?

JT: Well, the main one was we shouldn't be asking for money. It would belittle us to do so, and it was not the American way of acting. In America, whenever anyone is injured or hurt like in a car accident, any redress or payment for that injury is composed of money, a great deal of money in some areas. So we felt that that had to be part of any kind of a bill that we would want to, try to pass through Congress. Now the amount, however, even though in 1978 at Salt Lake City, that was another time when we had our convention. We have it every two years, our committee which I was in charge of... perhaps I should go back a bit. After being governor from '73 to '75, I ran for national vice president, '76 to '78 and also '78 to '80, and I asked for redress to be placed under my responsibility. Well, in 1978 in Salt Lake City, we came up with a proposal of asking the government for twenty-five thousand dollars per evacuee and an apology. The national council agreed with us and placed it as a priority order. Well, we had many, many, many national redress committee meetings after that. And at one meeting in March of '79, which was held in San Francisco, the committee came up with a question: do we present that bill that we presented at Salt Lake City, twenty-five thousand and an apology directly to Congress, or should we accept the recommendation of Senator Inouye? He suggested that we ask the President of the United States to select a commission to study the surroundings of evacuation; how, why did it happen, and if they found the government was wrong, to come out with some kind of redress. Well at that meeting in '79 in San Francisco, that question came up. The committee was tied; the votes were tied. It was three to three or four to four, but it came to a standstill. The chairman could not break the tie, so he turned to me and asked me for my vote. Now being vice president, I didn't have a vote except possibly to break a tie. Well, I was caught off guard. I didn't know that I was supposed to break a tie here. But after thinking about it, I had to vote the way I did which was for the commission route. Number one, because we needed the education. We needed to educate the American public and Congress. The other way would have been strictly directly to the Congress, and I thought it would die for sure. And I was told on many occasions that we have one and only one chance to introduce such a bill, so I just had to vote the commission way.

MR: While you were thinking about... and what was the result, personally, to you, of that vote?

JT: With that vote, half of the committee who were from Seattle all stood up, resigned from the committee and walked out. They were all my friends, of course. I had worked with them for years, but they didn't care for the way I voted, so they stood up and walked out. So at that time, I wondered if I had voted the right way. In hindsight now, of course, that was the only way. President Carter and later President Reagan selected the commission members who were all very powerful people, well-known. That assured us that the commission would not be taken for granted. The difficulty they had, too, was the amount. Well, their final decision, after having, holding hearings across the country and in Alaska, since some of the Aleuts were also involved with this bill, they came up with the conclusion that it was because of the hysteria of the time and a lack of government leadership, and the remedy was twenty thousand dollars per evacuee or who had lost their rights, couldn't come back to visit the West Coast. So it involved others then who were evacuated. But now, we had something to grasp. It was a commission that came out with that study and reported the results to the President. We had the education that we needed so badly. We needed to educate the Congressmen; and therefore, the commission route was the only way to go. And the support came out, out of the walls, not only Japanese and Japanese Americans, but Americans because this actually was not an isolated Japanese American issue. It was an American issue. It dealt with liberty, freedom, the Constitution. So finally in August, I believe, of 1988, President Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act of that year which cleared the way for us to receive some compensation and an apology. But it went only to those who were still living. Many had passed on, and that was one of the difficult things to decide because I knew the commission route was going to take more time, and we would lose more people including my mother and father. They did not receive anything. Well, I had a few discussion, several discussions with my mother after my dad passed away. Her feeling about redress was yes, it was right, but she did not care that much for the compensation. She felt that we should have some kind of permanent historical monument or something to keep reminding us that this should never, never, never happen again, and we did complete the American, Japanese American monument down at Tom McCall Park. So at least I kept part of my promise to my mother. There were many Japanese and permanent Japanese aliens who were actually living at the poverty level. Well, everyone thought that the Japanese people were well-off. They were not, so it helped them tremendously, and I was very happy. We didn't have a notion or we never dreamt that it would ever pass, but it did. And to me, that's what America stood for, that if they made a mistake that they would come forth and admit it, and they would pay for that remedy. Well, if it wasn't in America, I don't think it would happen.

MR: I'd like to go back to when you were deciding, you know. We went through this pretty fast. So when you had the vote in '79 and the Seattle delegation, did it completely disagree with the Oregon delegation?

JT: With the national organization, there were two or three other organizations, and so they joined that group.

MR: And what did they want to happen?

JT: They wanted the bill to go directly to Congress.

MR: And what were, did they state their opinions? Why did they think that was the way to go?

JT: Well, several reasons. Number one, many of the elder, first generation Isseis especially, had already passed away. Going the commission route would take even longer, and we would lose even more. So they wanted to introduce something that would be now instead of much later. I think that was the primary reason.

MR: Did they take into consideration that the education piece wouldn't have been in there?

JT: Well, they were trying to come out with tapes and other educational material, but I don't believe it would have been nationally known as going through a commission. With the people on the commission, Supreme Court Justice and the Ambassador to the United Nation was Goldberg. It was people in that top notch bracket; past Senators Edward Bruck, Senator Congressman Hugh Mitchell of Seattle. Joan Bernstein was the chair. She was a past general counsel for the Department of Health and Human, Department of Social Services. It was people in that category that held these hearings. And that's how, I believe, the education was spread out through the entire nation.

<Begin Segment 11>

MR: How was the education, how did the commission educate the people? What were the avenues it used?

JT: Primarily by having hearings in several different cities. We started in Washington, D.C., went out to the California coast, Los Angeles, San Francisco. One was held in Seattle. And all were on television, televised nationally, and I believe that was the best way to get the education out.

MR: What sort of public interest was there in the hearings?

JT: We received more letters, more comments. After the commission had come around, the chapter, of course, every opportunity we had, we would talk to groups, sole groups, civic groups. But the commission, I believe, had more influence on the public, the American public and what had really, how it had gone wrong. There were powerful people like Hearst, Randolph Hearst of the newspaper. I think it was the State General Attorney Warren before he became to Supreme Court, he was for getting us out, Winchell, Walter Winchell. So they had powerful people wanting the Japanese out of the West Coast for good. They didn't want us to come back. President Roosevelt sent a special agent from the State Department, name of Munson, to study the issue. The Naval Intelligence had sent a representative, Lieutenant Commander Ringle or something like that. The FBI with J. Edgar Hoover said that no, all of them agreed that it was not necessary to move us out, and yet they did. Therefore, the commission came out with their findings of hysteria of the time, lack of government leadership.

MR: During the time Japanese were being interned, you mentioned that the press, Walter Winchell and William Randolph Hearst were pushing for internment. During the time of the commission, what was the attitude of the press and --

JT: They had changed. Long before the commission was involved or selected, Warren became, was one of the members of the Supreme Court and became the chief. He had changed his mind 180 degrees. In fact, he never did, I believe, did not write down. But he did state to one of our members that he had made two great mistakes in his lifetime, and one was the evacuation. So they had changed their mind by then. In the meantime, they knew that there was not one incident of espionage, sabotage by us who were living on the West Coast. Now, there were even many more Japanese and Japanese Americans living in Hawaii several thousand miles closer to Japan. They didn't evacuate them, only a few. And there were two separate sets of camps set up; one run by the Justice Department, one by the War Relocation Authority which we were under, and there were ten camps. The average population when full was to hold about ten thousand apiece. The Justice Department, as soon as Pearl Harbor was bombed, they went around to pick up the Japanese leaders including the Japanese Buddhist priests. So there were two different types of camps. They were in longer than we were.

MR: As you got older and listened to these reasons, wartime hysteria, lack of government leadership, did you look at the situation in Hawaii where the Japanese were a necessary part of the labor force versus the West Coast and wonder if there were other motivations?

JT: I can't think of any since they were closer to Japan. But it's also interesting that in the United States, Italian Americans, German Americans were not incarcerated or evacuated. Now there were some first-generation Germans and Italians that were but not the majority of the race. It was, ours, we thought, was strictly based on race.

MR: Thinking about the conflict between Seattle and the national chapter and considering that traditionally Japanese American culture likes unity and avoids discord, how did the conflict affect those involved?

JT: Well, it really was not a conflict. They were also going to, trying to introduce a bill to Congress, so we were working towards the same goal except in two different ways. After a while, they must have known that education was a large factor, I think, one of the largest factors, because we received so much support from the American people, but we did not have a conflict. We worked together as much as we could.

MR: And what happened to you personally at that meeting, after that meeting? Did you suffer any personal consequences?

JT: No, except from my friends that walked out. They didn't speak to me for a long time. Other than that, I just felt that that was the only way. And if we only had one chance, I just couldn't vote any other way. So it was a sudden change to the commission instead of the direct introduction of a bill.

<Begin Segment 12>

MR: Listening to the years, 1979 is when you voted to form a, try to form a commission, and 1988 was when President Reagan signed the redress bill. What was going on in those nine years?

JT: Well, from '80 to '82, I ran for national president and was elected, and I took redress and U.S./Japan relations with me as a select committee, so I could continue to work with the redress committee. We spent most of our time on education and coming up with the history of what had happened, personal histories of what happened to them, but all along working towards a successful redress bill.

MR: Was it a continual progress, or did you ever feel like it might not happen?

JT: Earlier, but after the commission was formed and they came out with their, what they thought was right and their conclusions, after that, no. I felt much more relieved, and that we had a much better chance to pass any kind of bill through Congress. I must say that the history, what the 100th Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, and later we were to be informed of what the MIS or the Military Intelligence Service were 6000 Japanese American service in the Pacific Theater. But with that history, I think that had a great deal to do with the success of our bill and educating our congressmen. There were so many that didn't know that it even occurred. So that and the Japanese Americans serving in Congress; Senator Inouye, Senator Matsunaga, then Congressmen Matsui and Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta. They all had a great deal to do with the passage. I recall seeing and hearing Senator Matsunaga as he was speaking to his colleagues on the floor, and he was crying. I'll never forget that speech. So it was everything put together, tied together.

MR: How did you feel when you saw that speech?

JT: Well, very sad, and it was coming from his heart. It made me cry. But it was where they were, what they said along with the commission, and what the most decorated unit, the 442nd, in their short time they were formed, and a number of presidential citation they received. The injuries as I heard was over 300 percent casualties out of that Regimental Combat Team, and of course more recently, Senator Inouye receiving the Medal of Honor. Now all that put together went towards the success of redress. Now since then, because one of the things that we didn't want to ever occur to any other race was that it almost happened, not only once, but twice. During the Iranian crisis, one of the senators was going to introduce a bill to run up all Iranian Americans just like they did to us. We told them, no. It should never happen again. It almost happened with Iraq, the Iraqi Americans. We told them, no. So I believe it was Senator Inouye who said, "Don't ever forget your past; otherwise, you're going to make the same mistakes again," how true.

MR: Yes. Now you were chairman, national president the whole time this was, well --

JT: Well from '80 to '82, then I was on the legislative education committee which was the redress arm of JACL. I was on that organization until 1988 when President [Reagan] signed the bill, and I resigned. I took myself off the committee because I felt it was a little too large, and we will be spending too much and meeting and all that, so I resigned.

MR: Did you do anything behind the scenes to help with the passage of the bill?

JT: Well, it was already passed in '88.

MR: Before, before the bill passed?

JT: Before the bill passed, yes. JACL was working on redress all along, and we spent so much money. I don't think the Japanese American committee knows how much we really spent. In fact I, myself, had spent so much that when I receive my twenty thousand dollar bill, that only paid for a little of what came out of my own pocket. But I felt that it was a worthwhile cause.

MR: Can you tell me how much the JACL did spend?

JT: Oh, millions.

MR: Where was the funding coming from?

JT: From our membership. And non-members, they would be contributing to us. But that is one of the reasons why national JACL is having financially difficulty now. But it was a worthwhile cause.

MR: Did you ever testify before Congress or --

JT: Yes. In Washington, D.C. and in front of the commission when they were, they came to Seattle, so twice.

MR: What was it like to testify before Congress?

JT: Nervous. When you're in front of people that you only hear, this was the United States Congress, and you are in their building and their hearing room, and that's an awesome feeling. But all that time was worthwhile spending.

MR: When you were sitting in that hearing room, did part of you think about that eleven year old boy?

JT: I really didn't, but I thought about my parents, that they had passed on and so many others who really deserved what was coming, and I only hope that my parents are smiling down at me.

<Begin Segment 13>

MR: And when you, when the bill signed, where were you?

JT: We were having our national convention in Seattle, Washington, right in the middle of it. They called us that President Reagan was going to sign. So they had made a list of all those who could attend that could fly to Washington, D.C. Now, I also knew that it was limited to only so many, and I knew that there were many, many others who had given their time, their efforts; therefore, I decided not to go. I went up to the committee and told them to please take me off. There was one other that did the same. Later, I heard many attendees at the convention, well, they were disappointed, some more than disappointed that they weren't listed, but I felt that possibly if they saw me and the other colleague, that they wouldn't take it as bad. But that's the reason why I asked to be taken off.

MR: And what were you thinking when they finally signed that, or when the President signed that bill?

JT: Oh, it was such a joy, a relief, something that you never dream would occur did come about. But I still feel it would be only in the United States that it could have happened.

MR: So you had worked on redress for how many years?

JT: Since, actually 1970 to '88 when it passed.

MR: Doing the math, that's eighteen years.

JT: And all that time, I was in practice.

MR: So here you had been pretty involved for all those years in passing this. What did it feel like when the work was done?

JT: Well, it was like taking a heavy, heavy load off your shoulders, more than that, something one couldn't really describe. But my one regret is that those who really deserved it were already gone.

MR: What did some of the people, what were some of the uses that the money was put to?

JT: Some donated some of the fund to JACL. I don't really know what the others did, but they must have had some reason to spend it where they did. Some really needed the money, so it was up to them. It was their money.

MR: And since then, how did you keep busy? What activities, have you stayed active in the JACL and have some of those activities led, has your, let me start this again. Sorry. Since the redress was signed, have you stayed active in JACL?

JT: Yes. Not only at the chapter and district level, but at the national level. I was a member of the nominations committee in the year 2000 and chair of the committee 2003. And according to our bylaws, national bylaws, any national president, past national president would automatically be an honorary member of the national board which would attend and also a member of the past national president's committee, so, which means that goes on forever.

MR: So it's your choice?

JT: Yes.

MR: How have you chosen to stay active?

JT: Practically all the presidents, whenever they would use us, and I don't think they use us enough, we still have a number of past national presidents who are still living, who are still very, very active. On the chapter level, I served on almost every position. As a consultant, and I wrote up the most recent constitutional bylaws, that was in the year 2000. So I still try to help any way I can.

MR: During redress, JACL was active in seeking that. During evacuation, they encouraged a more, should I say passive approach, and what do you think about that? How do you feel about that?

JT: Well, even at eleven years old, when you have a gun, a rifle pointing at your back, you don't have a great deal to say or you can't say much, and that's exactly what was happening. Now understand that they already had picked up our leaders, so the only ones left were the younger folks or teenagers who were leading JACL, and they didn't have any choice, not with the soldiers and guns at our back. So that's how I felt and feel what occurred.

<Begin Segment 14>

MR: You have continued to do other useful works. I'm thinking about Hiroshima Medical Team?

JT: Yes. The national JACL introduced a bill to help the atomic bomb survivors, many who were American citizens, for one reason or another were caught in Japan. On several, several years, we tried to pass something, but it died in committee or sub-committee. I think they felt that if they pass such a law or bill, that would open a whole can of worms. I don't know what they're thinking, but the Hiroshima Medical Team volunteered to come over every two years since the '70s to examine the survivors. Now, some of the survivors were timid about that because they didn't want the life insurance company know; otherwise, they wouldn't renew their insurance, but they slowly came out. When I went to Seattle, the first year was 1981; the last was about '93. Every two years, I went up there on my own, paid my own expenses to assist the medical team. We saw about fifty to sixty over the Fourth of July weekend which took about three, four days. And I still remember some of that medical team that came over to assist us, to help the survivors. They passed away from radiation sickness. The reason I thought I would give it up in the '90s was because most of the damage that would occur to the eyes are found earlier or immediately after exposure to the radiation; therefore, I stopped going in '93.

MR: You said that the medical teams helping you had passed away?

JT: Some of the medical assistants or doctors who came over to examine the people or statisticians that came over with them. It was some of those people that passed away.

MR: I'm a little confused. Were they from America and they --

JT: They were from Japan --

MR: They were from Japan.

JT: Exposed to radiation.

MR: Okay. So they were already there?

JT: Right.

MR: Okay.

JT: And many of the survivors passed away, too.

MR: What kind of an experience was it to go over and see the damage every other year?

JT: Well, every other year, the team came to America. The only chance that I had, went to see the actual site and the monument in Hiroshima when I was invited to visit Japan in 1981. It was a beautiful park, but a horrible incident that occurred. Over two hundred thousand people that passed away, and I always would think to myself why did it have to be two cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Why couldn't it have just been one? Well, that was up to the government to decide.

MR: I'm a little unclear about the logistics of this. I was under the impression that you went to Japan every two years?

JT: No, no, no. The medical team came here every two years to examine the survivors.

MR: And the survivors were here?

JT: Yes. They were caught in Japan but had moved back. But many were American citizens that were caught over there.

MR: Thank you for making that clear. I was mistaken.

<Begin Segment 15>

MR: And then there was a building donation that you were involved in too which is quite interesting. Could you explain that?

JT: I don't know which one --

MR: Oh, the house, the Meiji Era.

JT: Oh, Meiji Mura. When I was asked to visit Japan in '81, the first person that approached me was a director from Meiji Mura. Meiji being a certain period, 1868 to 1912. They had an open air museum, beautiful, with so many, oh, it was a huge place. But he approached me and asked me if I could, after I came back, search for a building, a house, anything that had to do with Japanese or Japanese influence. However, it had to be donated to the museum and, of course, had some influence, Japanese influence. Well, after a year of seeking such a building, we did find one in Seattle. Ken Nakano, very active in JACL also, he and I were co-chair of the district U.S./Japan relations as well as the atomic bomb survivors, and he was a survivor himself. Well we found a place. A house, which was a family house, turned over as a Japanese Evangelical church. And because of attrition it had died out, vacant, and so the owner agreed to donate the building. Well, the director and an engineer came from Japan to look at the house, studied it. They approved it. So they took it apart piece by piece, shipped it to Japan, and rebuilt the house and Meiji Mura on prime land. President Reagan, I believe it was in 1982 or so, dedicated the building, which then of course, we had a definite tie with Japan not on any political basis because this was not a political museum, but through other relations. That house stands on prime land with an American flag flying over the house.

MR: And the dismantling and rebuilding couldn't have been a small feat. Can you describe that house?

JT: That's right. They took it apart piece by piece by piece, numbered everything, and I don't know how long that took. And they finally shipped it to Japan, and then they rebuilt the entire home back to how it was.

<Begin Segment 16>

MR: When did you retire?

JT: I retired from private practice in October of 1997. Now, I still have my license and my DEA or the narcotics numbers still active because I was asked to be a consultant to an attorney at one time. And I was director of a teaching institution at Portland Community College which I retired from too. And I have been teaching residents or doctors in training ever since I started practice as a volunteer basis, and I still have the title of clinical assistant professor in ophthalmology at the medical school.

MR: And how do you spend your time now that you are retired?

JT: Resting from all of my activities. I really felt burned out, and especially from the practice and all the paperwork. And that was one of the reasons I retired. The paperwork in medicine was horrible.

MR: Looking back on everything you've been involved with, it's probably hard to pick a thing, but what thing gratifies you the most?

JT: The passage of redress, when President Reagan signed the bill in 1988. Now, going back to '81 when I was visiting Japan, the Japan Foundation invited me for twenty days. It was beautiful back there, I didn't want to come home. But the Japan chapter gave me a doll's head. It's called a daruma. It's painted red, looks fierce looking with blank eyes. And what you're supposed to do is to paint in one eye, and when your wish comes true, you paint in the other eye. While in Japan, I made a wish and painted in one. When the first person received her twenty thousand dollars from the redress bill, I painted in the other. And I didn't realize it, but I looked at it, and it turned out one was painted with black ink, the other was painted with blue ink. But I thought to myself, well, that was only proper because it was the American public to support us, and that's why I kept it that way.

MR: What an appropriate thing for an ophthalmologist.

JT: Yeah. They asked me, "How come you drew it in so well?"

MR: What do you do now though, now that you've rested?

JT: I'm still resting. I may go back and become active again in Japanese community affairs which I was at one time and their programs, local programs if I'm needed or if they need me. Other than that, we do take trips. Right now, it's so hot that you really don't want to go anywhere. But we just returned from Las Vegas, and so I'm trying to have some fun.

MR: Good. As we approach the end of this interview, is there anything I haven't asked you that you would like to talk about?

JT: No. Well, possibly one thing. When we were working for redress, we were actually working for the entire Japanese community, all those who were involved with incarceration, evacuation. I would hope that somehow if they're able to, that more would contribute to the national JACL. We didn't do it for that cause. It was a cause for Japanese Americans, primarily, but Americans, all Americans. But those who did receive the twenty thousand, it would be nice if they might consider some kind of donation to JACL.

MR: You mentioned that you did it for all Americans. Do you think Americans understand that?

JT: I think so because we did try to impress upon them that this was not an isolated Japanese American issue. It was an American issue because our, it affected our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and it almost happened two more times.

MR: Is there anything you'd like to go back to and say more about?

JT: Well, one thing would be that I spent so much time for JACL and JACL issues that I really didn't have time to spend much on medical issues. And so in '88 when I did retire from the LEC, I felt that I should give the medical community some of my time, and that's why I became involved with the local Ophthalmological Society and at one time became their president etcetera.

MR: Just for clarification, what is LEC stand for?

JT: Legislative Education Committee which was the redress arm of JACL.

MR: Thank you. And thank you also very much for having us here, and I've learned a lot. I really appreciate that.

JT: You're welcome and thank you.