1922-05-08

CROWSNEST PASS AGREEMENT


Hon. W. C. KENNEDY (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved:: That rude eleven be suspended, and that pursuant to the resolution adopted by the House on May 5, the following members do compose the select special committee to make inquiry Into the question of railway transportation costs

and the effect upon the Canadian National Railways and other lines, as well as upon agricultural development and Canadian industry generally of the expiration of the suspension of the Crowsnest pass agreement on July 6 next: Messrs. MacHean (Halifax), Euler, Malcolm, German, Duff, Macdonald (Pictou), McMurray, Hudson, MacLean (Prince), Michaud, Mitchell, Archambault, Vien, Stork, Crerar, Forke, Johnston (Last Mountain), Fansher, Halbert, McConica, Shaw, Dickie, Jones, Drayton, Stewart (Lanark), Manion, Boys; with power to send for persons, papers and records, including the minutes and evidence taken before the committee of this House in previous sessions, to examine witnesses under oath, and to report from time to time.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I must call the attention of the House to rule 11, suspension of which is asked by the present motion. The rule reads as follows:
No special committee may, without leave of the House, consist of more than fifteen members, and the mover may submit the names to form the committee, unless objected to by five members; if objected to, the House may name the committee 'in the following -manner:-each member to name one, and those who have most voices, with the mover, shall form the same; but it shall always be understood that no member who declares or decides against the principle or substance of a bill, resolution, or matter to be committed, can be nominated of such committee.
I notice in the list presented by the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals the names of some hon. members who have either spoken or voted against the motion. But the House is supreme, and if it be the unanimous wish of the House this rule can be suspended; the hon. minister has in his motion very wisely declared that rule 11 be suspended. If the motion passes unanimously as framed, there is no objection, but I desire to call the attention of the House to the rule itself.


Some hon: MEMBERS:: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Sir LOMER GOUIN (Minister of Justice) moved:: That Bill No. 16 intituled An Act to amend the Immigration Act, be referred to a Special Committee composed of Messrs: Archambault, Cardin, Forke, Fortier, Hudson, Lapointe, Mar-tell, McKenzie, McMurray, Murphy, Trahan, Sexsmith, Shaw, Stewart (Argenteulil), Stewart (Humboldt) that the said Committee have power to report from time to time and that Rules No. 11 and No. 40 be suspended in relation thereto.
I think we should have more members on this committee, and I have left a blank for the insertion of their names. If the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. MAY 5, 1922
Civil Service Bonus
Meighen) will furnish us with the names of four hon. members, they can be added to the list.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: I have no objection to the motion passing without the blank. Then if we desire to add further members as suggested, it can be done by subsequent motion to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Lomer Gouin: That Bill No. 17, intituled: "An Act to amend the Criminal Code be referred to the Special Committee on Bill No. 16, that the said Committee have power to report from time to time and that Rules No. 11 and No. 40 be suspended in relation thereto.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 72 (from the Senate), for the relief of Joseph Robert Lloyd Beamish.- Mr. Duff.
Bill No. 73 (from the Senate), for the relief of Clarence Robinson Miners.-Mr. White.
Bill No. 74 (from the Senate), for the relief of Mary Eleanor Menton.-Mr. Duff.
Bill No. 75 (from the Senate), for the relief of Harvey Easton Jenner.-Mr. Duff.
Bill No. 76 (from the Senate), for the relief of Marie Louise Dagenais.-Mr. Duff.
Bill No. 77 (from the Senate), for the relief of Alexander Lawrie.

Mr. Gordon.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. H. B. McGIVERIN (Ottawa) :: Before
the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the Prime Minister if he has any information to give to the House with regard to the cost of living bonus to civil servants.


Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) :: Mr. Speaker, when the supplementary estimates for the present year are brought down, the Government will make the following proposals respecting the distribution of the bonus to be allowed civil servants for the present year:
1.	On salaries of $1,200 and under-(a) for members of the Service having one or more dependents, the bonus as existing in the fiscal year 1921-22 to be continued; (b) for members of the Service without any dependents, one-half the bonus as existing in the fiscal year 1921-22 to be paid.
2.	On salaries over $1,200 and up to $1,800 (inclusive) - (a) for members of the Service having one or more dependents, two-thirds of the bonus as existing in the fiscal year 1921-22 to be paid; (b) for members of the Service without any dependents, the bonus to be discontinued.
3.	On salaries over $1,800 and up to $2,400 (inclusive) - (a) for members of the Service having one or more dependents, one-third of the bonus as existing in the fiscal year 1921-22 to be paid; (b) for members of the Service without any dependents, the bonus to be discontinued.
4.	On all salaries over $2,400-the bonus to be discontinued.
Provided: that in salaries of $1,200 or under, and in salaries of $1,800 or under, adjustments be made so that in no case shall a civil servant with a lower salary plus bonus receive more in compensation than a civil servant with a higher salary plus reduced bonus.
I may say that my hon. friend (Mr. Mc-Giverin) informed me that he intended to ask this question, and I therefore had the reply prepared in this form.



DATE OF THE BUDGET

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. Sir HENRY DRAYTON (West York) I think this is the week in which the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) was going to tell us all about the Budget, Mr. Speaker. I know he wants to relieve our anxiety and to let us know the date as long as possible in advance.
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) :: I would remind my hon. friend that this is only the beginning of the week. I have the whole week before me within which to fulfil my promise.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. GRIMMER:: 1.	When, and for what reason, were the services of the crew of the fishing patrol boat "Phalarope" dispensed with?
2.	Who have been appointed to fill these positions, on what date and on whose recommendation?
3.	Did any returned soldiers make application for such positions, and were any of them appointed?
4.	If not, what was the reason for their not being appointed?
Questions


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	The services of three of the crew- which consisted of four persons-were discontinued at the end of December last. The services of the fourth member of the crew were discontinued on February 28th. The boat was laid up at the end of December and not commissioned again until the opening of the present season, about April 1st. Consequently the services of a crew were not required.
2.	H. B. Kelly, captain; Manning Mitchell, engineer; Harry Galder, cook; Wilfrid Alexander, deckhand.
Authority for their employment when boat commissioned given on March 23, 1922. Minister of Marine and Fisheries.
3 and 4. One returned soldier was appointed. The remaining three were appointed before further applications from returned soldiers were received.
CAiRAQUET AND GULF SHORE RAILWAY


Mr. HANSON:: 1.	What was the price agreed to he paid by the Government for the Caraquet and Gulf Shore Railway?
2.	Has any portion of the purchase price been paid?
3.	If so, how much, and when was part payment made?
4.	What claims, if any, have been filed with the Railway Department or any other Department of the Government against the purchase price of said railway?
5.	Has any claim been filed by the Hon. P. J. Veniot, or any person on his behalf, with any Department of the Government against or to any portion of the said purchase price?
6.	If so, what is the amount of said claim, and what is the nature thereof?
7.	What are the causes of the delay in completing the purchase of said railway?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	$200,000 and cancellation of $87,705.39 due Canadian Government Railways.
2.	Yes.
3.	$150,000 on January 13, 1921.
4.	July 10, 1911, W. S. Loggie Co., no particulars given, no amount stated. Dec. 4, 1919, Estate P. H. Melvin, for services as superintendent, amount, $6,500. June 30, 1920, G. & H. Duguay, for parcel of land at Caraquet, no amount stated. August 8, 1921, W. G. Pugsley, for legal services, amount, $4,971.54.
5.	No claim filed by or for Hon. P. J. Yeniot with Department of Railways and Canals.
6.	Answered 'by No. 5.
7.	The railway company is unable to offer an acceptable title until the Lieutenant Governor in Council of New Brunswick passes a vesting order, which he agreed to pass but withholds.


CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY- GRANTS
Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	What different grants were made to the Canadian Northern Railway by the federal Government before 1911?
2.	On what dates were these amounts paid and for what amounts?
3.	What grants were made to the said company by the federal Government from 1911 to the time of the acquisition of the road by the Dominion Government?


Hon. Mr. KENNEDY:: 1.	Following cash subsidies were paid by the Dominion Government to Canadian Northern Railway Companies during the years in question. The statement shows payments made prior to 1911, and also between 1911 and the date of the acquisition of the railway by the government:


PERIOD TO 1911
[Stage Direction]
Canadian Northern Quebec Railway	Canadian Northern Ontario Railway	Canadian Northern Railway Company	Halifax and SouthWestern Railway	Total1883-1905	§ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts. 1,909,132 00	$ cts. 525,053 00 226,815 80 295,774 40 316,567 73	% cts. 2,434,185 00 878,079 80 716,382 40 908,862 13 612,313 60 415,154 69 261,498 111905	651,264 00 420,608 00 244,224 00 556,864 00 250,982 40 116,889 60	1906	1907 	256,870 40 55,449 60 164,172 29 144,608 51	91,200 00	1908 	1909	1910	
621,100 80	2,240,832 00	2,000,332 00	1,364,210 93	6,226,475 73

Questions

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Northern Quebec Railway	Canadian Northern Ontario Railway	Canadian Northern Alberta Railway	Canadian Northern Pacific Railway	Total1911	$ cts. 86,468 03	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts. 86,468 03 2,705,378 00 14,301,114 47 2,783,493 60 740,494 40 358,180 41 80,963 371912	2,705,378 00 2,520,281 00 178,077 80 244,889 57	1913	8,948,809 47 2,343,335 80 495,604 83 358,180 41 80,963 37	2,832,024 00 262,080 00	1914	1915	1916	1917...	
86,468 03	12,226,893 88	3,094,104 00	5,648,626 37	21,056,092 28
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.

Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Are there any peat bogs in Canada?
2.	If so, how many are there in each province?
3.	Where are they located?
4.	Are any being worked at present?
5.	What is the capitalization of each of the companies who are operating said peat bogs?
6.	Has the Government subsidized the above companies ?
7.	If so, to what extent, either in the form of grants or for experiments?
8.	What results have been obtained?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	No record of total number.
3.	The bogs investigated up to date are those considered of greatest potential value in view of their extent, and proximity to transportation facilities and probable markets.
4.	One at Alfred, Ontario, and one at Ste-Therese de Blainville, Quebec.
5.	The operations at Alfred are being conducted by the Peat Committee which was appointed by and financed jointly by the federal government and the government of the province of Ontario; and those at Ste-Therese by Le Combustible National Limitee, with an authorized capital of 8500,000.
6.	The federal government has provided funds to meet one half of the expenses of the Peat Committee since its creation in 1918.
7.	The share of expenses of the Peat Committee paid by the federal Government from the inception of the work to April SOth, 1922, amounted to $149,358.44.
8.	The Peat Committee was created in 1918 when the fuel situation was grave with a view to devising a process for the commercial utilization of a raw fuel possessed in abundance by Canada, and the results to date are considered far in advance of those secured elsewhere. The experiments are expected to be completed in 1922.


RICHMOND AND WOLFE POSTAL SERVICE
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many rural mail routes are now in operation in the constituency of Richmond and
Wolfe?
2.	What is the name of each route?
3.	What is the name of the rural mail carrier upon each route?
4.	How many miles are covered each day by each of the said rural mail carriers?
5.	What salary does each of the said rural mail carriers receive?


Hon. Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	34 routes in full, 4 routes in part.
Questions


OLEOMARGARINE
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	When was the law amended to allow the importation and manufacture of oleomargarine in Canada?
2.	What quantity of oleomargarine has been manufactured in Canada since that date?
3.	What quantity of oleomargarine has been imported into Canada since that date?
4.	When does the period fixed by law for the importation and manufacture of oleomargarine expire?
5.	Is it the intention of the Government to further extend the said period?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1. By Order in Council (P.C. 3044) dated 23rd October, 1917-in effect on and after 1st November, 1917-and later by Acts of Parliament dated 10th November, 1919, 18th September, 1920 and 4th June. 1921.

2.	No information.
3.	Imports of Oleomargarine entered for consumption in Canada-
Lbs.
Fiscal Year ended March 31, 1918 2,262,514 "	"	"	"	"	1919	4,217,916"	"	"	"	"	1920	6,497,031"	"	"	"	"	1921	4,630,747"	"	"	"	"	1922	1,345,784Total	
18,953,9924.	31st August, 1922.5.	On the Order Paper, under Notices of Motions, resolution No. 25 deals with this subject. In view of this fact there should be no pronouncement on the part of the Government with regard to the matter covered by this question.
Questions


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: Answer to Question No. 2: Up to 31st March, 1922, 27,061,132 pounds.


RICHMOND AND WOLFE POST OFFICES
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	What are the names of the different post offices in the constituency of Richmond and Wolfe?
2.	What amount is paid to or retained by the postmaster in charge of each of the said offices?


Hon. Mr. MURPHY:: Salary and
Names of Office	Allowances
County Richmond
*$ 250	00
Asbestos	
1,576	65Bromptonville	
1,543	69Danville	
3,643	30Duplin	
60	00Flodden	
72	00Gore	
85	00Greenlay	
..	239	08Hardwood Hills	
60	00Kingsbury	
606	59Lome	
200	96Melbourne	
771	60New Rockland	
120	00Richmond	
4,082	04St. Claude	
124	29St. Claude Nord	
93	00St. Cyr	
82	00
St. Francois Xavier de Brompton. 509 09
St. George de Windsor	
412	86Stoke Centre	
336	37Upper Melbourne	
60	00Windsor	2,461	88Windsor East	
971	29
County of Wolfe
Beaudoin Centre	
60	00Belmina	
60	00Bishop's Crossing	
799	06Cote Mills	
60	00D'lsraeli	
1,407	75
-j-210 00
Dudswell Junction	
82	00Fontainbleau	
246	67Garthby Station	
797	06Garthby West	
60	00Ham Nord	
332	99Ham Sud	245	79Lake Aylmer	
139	00Lime Ridge	
109	90Marbleton	646	79North Wolfestown	
60	00Notre Dame de Ham	
327	65St. Adolphe de Dudswell	
271	11St. Adrien	
406	02St. Camille	
629	87
Salary and
Names of Office	Allowances
St. Fortunat	
249	64St. Gerard	
520	84Sanborn	
80	00South Dudswell	
72	00Stenson	
178	00Stratford Centre	
264	84Weedon	
1,049	78AVolfestown	
313	12Wotton	
969	59
'Public Works Department pays $250 ; Post Office Department pays $100. Total, $350. lease of premises for Post Office.
fPublie Works Department pays $210 ; Post Office Department pays $150. Total $360, lease of premises for Post Office.


SHERBROOKE POST OFFICE INSPECTOR
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	Was any Order in Council passed by the late government, abolishing the position of post office inspector at Sherbrooke, Quebec?
2.	If so, when, and why?
3.	Was the said Order in Council later rescinded?
4.	If so, when and why?
5.	How many persons are now employed in the office of the post office inspector at Sherbrooke, Quebec?
6.	What are their names and what salary do they receive?
7.	Where did each of the said employees reside prior to their appointment?


Charles Murphy: 1, 2, 3, and 4. No Order in Council was passed specifically rejecting or abolishing position of post office inspector at Sherbrooke, but a general Order in Council was passed by which all inspectors were abolished and their duties merged with other duties to make up the work of the proposed District Superintendents of Postal Service. Under this Order in Council the Griffenhagens abolished the post office inspectorate of Sherbrooke ,and .established twelve district superintendents throughout the country leaving some inspectors under the name of Post Office Inspector as a branch of the District Superintendent's office at the more important points, and under this, Mr. Dastous, Post Office Inspector, was left in charge of the Sherbrooke division, and his staff removed to other points, and the staff was restored by order of Hon. Mr. Belley and the Sherbrooke office opened with its former status as an independent inspectorate.
5.	Eleven employees.
6.	Dastous, L. E., $3,840; Soles, C. E., $2,880; Lallier, Jos., $2,760; Downing, J. D., $1,800; Mullins, G. (Miss), $1,800; Aubin, R. (Miss), $1,680; Frechette, R.,
Questions

$1,440; Choquette, J. (Miss), $1,140; Le-febvre, J. P., $1,260; Bousquet, P., $1,260; Genest, G. (Miss), $960.
7.	Dastous, L. E. Sherbrooke; Soles, C. E. (Transferred from R.M.S.), Montreal; Lallier, J., Coaticook; Downing', J. ;D., Cookshire; Mullins, G. (Miss), Sherbrooke; Aubin, R. (Miss), Sherbrooke; Frechette, R., Wolfstown; Choquette, J., Sherbrooke; Bousquet, P., Sherbrooke; Lefebvre, J. P., Sherbrooke; Genest, G. (Miss), Sherbrooke.


CAMPAIGN FUNDS
Mr. BINETTE:: Is it the intention of the Government to amend the Dominion Elections Act, so as to make compulsory the publishing of the names of all subscribers to campaign funds, and the amount subscribed in each case?


Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Amendments to the Dominion Elections Act will be considered in due course.


ST. LAWRENCE RIVER CANALIZATION
Mr. BINETTE:: 1.	Has the Dominion Government had any communication with the Imperial Government concerning the canalization of the St. Lawrence river?
2.	Did the Dominion Government have any communication with the British Ambassador at Washington in this connection?
S.	Has the Dominion Government had any communication in this connection with the United States Congress?


Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Beyond transmitting copy of Minute of Council dated 24th December, 1919, expressing the readiness of the Canadian Government to join with the government of the United States in submitting reference to the question of the development and use of the St. Lawrence river between Montreal and lake Ontario to the International Joint Commission, no.
2.	Yes.
3.	No.


QUEBEC RIOTS COMPENSATION
Mr. PARENT:: Is it the intention of the Government to take such steps as will provide for due compensation to the innocent victims who, during the so-called riots in 1918, in the city of Quebec, have either been killed or wounded or have suffered damages at the hands of His Majesty's soldiers ?


James Horace King: This
matter is under consideration.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS

Mr. LANCTOT:: 1.	Is it a fact that appeals made by many civil servants who are dissatisfied with their classification never reach the Board of Hearing?
2.	Is it true that such appeals are from the decisions of heads or chiefs of branches who declined to recommend the classifications claimed to be in accord with the character of the work done by such civil servants?
3.	Is it true such appeals fail to reach the Board of Hearing because they are so prevented by the heads or chiefs against whose decisions such appeals are made?
4.	If so, does the Government intend taking any steps to see justice done suoh civil servants, by having their appeals reach the Board of Hearing notwithstanding the opposition of such heads or chiefs against whose decisions such appeals are made?
5.	If not, why not?


Mr. CHISHOLM:: 1.	Is the Government aware that there are instances of officials in the public service subordinate to deputy ministers who are in receipt of salaries more than those paid such deputy ministers ?
2.	If so, is it the policy of the Government to continue this custom?
3.	What deputy ministers or other officials in the public service are receiving more than six thousand dollars per annum from any Government source?


Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many postmasters were dismissed from office, in the constituency of Richmond and Wolfe, from the 21st day of September, 1911, to the 1st day of January, 1922,?
2.	How many postmasters resigned their offices, in the constituency of Richmond and Wolfe, during the same period?
3.	How many postmasters died, in the said constituency, during the same period?
4.	What were, in each case, the names of the postmasters and the names of the post offices?
5.	'What was the cause of dismissal in each case where the postmaster was dismissed, during the said period?


Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many postmasters have been appointed in the constituency of Richmond and Wolfe, from the 21st of September, 1911, to the 1st of January, 1922?
2.	What are the names of said postmasters, the location of post offices and the names of the persons who recommended the appointment in each case?


Mr. McDONALD (Timiskaming) :: 1.	How many multigraph machines are in use in the various departments of the Government?
2.	What was the volume of work done on these machines, by departments, during the fiscal year 1921-1922?
3.	Is this work under the control of the Editorial Committee?

Natural Resources



TRANSFER OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Arthur Meighen: For a copy of all correspondence passing between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, since 10th July, 1920, respecting the
transfer of natural resources.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There is no objection whatever
to adopting the motion, but I would like to point out to my right hon. friend that the officers of the Department of External Affairs and the officials in my office state that there are letters, either in the Prime Minister's office or in the Department of External Affairs, from the Prime Minister of Canada to the governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, other than those which have been addressed by myself, and replies thereto, which I am prepared to lay on the Table of the House now. The date referred to here is 10th July, 1920, which is, I think, the day my right hon. friend formed his administration. It may be that he is desirous of some correspondence being brought down to which he was a party. I would be glad to bring it down if he would tell me where it is, but I cannot locate it in the department.


Arthur Meighen: I am afraid my hon.
friend in taking office has taken on too many new assistants and secretaries, and kept too few of the old. These letters were dictated by me in the usual course, are purely official letters, and the copies must be there. I myself have sent for the copies subsequently to their being written and have seen them. There should be no difficulty at all in finding them.


James Horace King: So far from
doing what my hon. friend suggests, I rather went out of my way to provide for his old secretaries.


Arthur Meighen: Not in your own
department.


James Horace King: Yes, in my
own department. I am only too anxious to bring the correspondence down, but I am unable to locate it. I have had inquiries made, and shall make further inquiries, but up to the present I have not been able to find the correspondence on any file.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. W. G. McQUARRIE (New Westminster) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, the immigration of oriental aliens and their rapid multiplication is becoming a serious menace to living conditions, particularly on the Pacific coast, and to the future of the country in general, and the Government should take Immediate action with a view to securing the exclusion of future immigration of this type.
He said: Mr. Speaker, in rising to propose this resolution, I do so with considerable diffidence. I realize the importance and the comprehensive extent of the subject. I appreciate my own limitations and my incapacity to place this matter in a satisfactory manner before the House. My one comfort, however, is that I am to be followed by hon. gentlemen, particularly those from British Columbia, who will be able to make up for any of my deficiencies. There is a huge mass of material before me, and it will be necessary for me to make a comprehensive statement, but I intend to be as brief as possible.
The resolution calls for the exclusion of the immigration of oriental' aliens. It is hardly necessary for me to point out that this does not include British subjects such as, for instance, East Indians, who are popularly described as Hindus. The word " immigrant " is defined in the Immigration Act as follows:
" immigrant " means a person who enters Canada with the intention of acquiring Canadian domicile, and for the purposes of this Act every person entering Canada shall be presumed to be an immigrant unless belonging to one of the following classes of persons, hereinafter called " non-immigrant classes,"-
i.	Canadian citizens; and persons who have Canadian domicile;
ii.	diplomatic and consular officers, and all accredited representatives and officials of British and foreign governments, their suites, families and guests, coming to Canada to reside or to discharge any official duty or to pass through in transit;
iii.	officers and men, with their wives and families, belonging to or connected with His Majesty's regular naval and military forces;
iv.	tourists and travellers merely passing through Canada to another country;
v.	students entering Canada for the purpose of attendance, and while in actual attendance, at any university or college authorized by statute or charter to confer degrees; or at any high school or collegiate institute recognized as such for the purpose of this Act by the Minister;
vi.	members of dramatic, musical, artistic, athletic or spectacular organizations enterii g Canada temporarily for the purpose of givli g public performances or exhibitions of an entertaining or instructive nature; and actG i s,
Oriental Aliens

artists, lecturers, musicians, priests and rn i >-isters of religion, professors of colleges or other educational institutions, and commercial travellers, entering Canada for the temporary exercise of their respective callings;
vii.	holders of a permit to enter Canada, in force for the time being, in form A of schedule one to this Act, signed by the Minister or by some person duly authorized ;
This definition should be borne in mind in considering the subject now before the House.
The resolution provides for the exclusion in the future of all alien orientals who may seek to enter Canada in any capacity for permanent residence. It is, to adopt the reasoning of the Californians, to prevent increase by direct immigration of an element in our population which, for the reasons hereafter mentioned, is not only undesirable but dangerous to Canadian interests. The method of bringing exclusion into effect and the working out of the details will be for the Government.
It might be of interest for us to consider for a moment the condition of the Canadian laws dealing with immigration to this country. In respect to the Chinese we have an open field. There is no treaty or arrangement of any kind between Great Britain and China dealing with this matter. The different governments which have been in power in Canada in the past years have however adopted a policy of restriction so far as Chinese immigration is concerned. A great deal of time and a great deal of consideration have been given to this question, and the regulations have been made as restrictive as possible. In 1885 a head tax of. $50 was imposed. In 1901 that tax was doubled and made $100; and in 1904 it was increased to $500. It was thought at that time that the imposition of the higher tax would be prohibitive, and that we would not thereafter be troubled with immigration from the Chinese. However, the flow kept up. The Chinese, apparently, were quite willing to pay the $500, and they still came in in large numbers. In 1919 an Order in Council, known as P.C. 1202, was passed. This prohibited the entry into Canada at certain ports in British Columbia-all the ports of British Columbia I think-of skilled and unskilled labour, and that Order in Council applied to the Chinese as well as to other classes. Notwithstanding the passing of that Order in Council the Chinese still continued to come into the country. At first they came in as students. Apparently the Chinese who desired to come to Canada decided that it would be advisable for them to appear
[Mr. MeQuarrie.j
before the Canadians as students, and accordingly large numbers of so-called students entered the country. When that, to a certain extent, was stopped, and when the entry of students was confined to those who wished to attend universities conferring degrees, and could prove that they were going to do so, the wily Chinese adopted another plan. Those desirous of entering Canada became merchants, and last year 1,445 merchants came into the Dominion. It has been found that no matter how restrictive our regulations were, no matter how well they had been thought out and carefully planned, and no matter how stringently worded they were, the Chinese still kept coming into the country. In regard to the Japanese there is a treaty, known as the "Treaty of Commerce and Navigation", between the United Kingdom and Japan. This was signed at London, April 3, 1911, and the ratifications were exchanged at Tokio, May 5, 1911. That treaty provides, among other things, that:
The subjects of each of the High Contracting parties shall have full liberty to enter, travel, and reside in the territories of the other, and, conforming themselves to the laws of the country,-
Shall, in all that relates to travel and residence, be placed, In all respects on the same footing as native subjects.
They shall have the right, equally with native subjects, to carry on their commerce and manufacture, and to trade in all Winds of merchandise of lawful commerce, either in person or by agents, singly, or In partnerships with foreigners and or native subjects.
They shall in all that relates to the pursuit of their industries, callings, professions, and educational studies be placed in all respects on the same footing as the subjects or citizens of the most favoured nation.
That treaty was assented to by Canada in 1913, under the Japanese Treaty Act of that year. In ratifying the treaty so far as Canada is concerned we provided:
That nothing in the treaty, or in the Act, shall be deemed to repeal or affect any of the provisions of the Immigration Act.
That treaty came into operation on 17 July, 1911, and is to remain in force until 16 July, 1923, provided that:
In case neither of the High Contracting Parties shall have given notice to the other twelve months before the expiration of the said period, of its intention to terminate the Treaty, it shall continue operative until the expiration of one year from the date on which either of the High Contracting Parties shall have denounced it.
As regards the British dominions, colonies, possessions, and protectorates to which the present treaty may have been made applicable in virtue of article 26, however, either of the

Oriental Aliens
High Contracting Parties shall have the rigltt to terminate it separately at any time on giving twelve months' notice to that effect.
Now that treaty may, or may not, preclude us from adopting a policy of exclusion in regard to the Japanese-that is a matter as to which I do not care at this moment to express an opinion. But it has other effects. It prevents the legislatures of the various provinces from enacting what may be termed discriminatory legislation. In British Columbia, at various times in the past, enactments which might be placed in this class have been passed, and irrespective altogether of the political complexion of the majority of the legislature at that time. Last year the present Government passed an order in council which provided that all leases and grants of timber lands should contain the condition that Chinese and Japanese should not be employed thereon. That order in council was afterwards ratified by act of the provincial legislature. In February of this year a decision was handed down by the Supreme Court of Canada to the effect that that order in council and that act were ultra vires of the legislature of British Columbia, because the subject of naturalization and aliens, under the British North America Act, is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Dominion parliament, and because the act and the order in council cil conflicted with the treaty to which I have just referred. Now I submit that a request should be made to the British government to give notice to Japan to terminate that treaty in July of next year. That notice can be given by Great Britain on behalf of Canada without reference to the other parts of the Empire involved in the treaty. There is also in effect what is known as a "Gentleman's Agreement''. In 1907, and previous to that time, large numbers of Japanese came into British Columbia; I think in 1907 over 7,000 Japanese landed on our shores. There was a great deal of objection to that from the people of British Columbia, and in the city of Vancouver there were unfortunately race riots which resulted in considerable damage. Upon the matter being brought to the attention of the government, the present incumbent of the Speaker's Chair of this House was sent to Japan to see if some friendly arrangement could not be made to restrict immigration from Japan to this country. Some kind of an arrangement was entered into which is the "Gentleman's Agreement" referred to. The terms of that agreement have not been made public, we have not been able to ascertain
what they are; and it is questionable to my mind whether it is a proper thing to have an agreement of that kind in force, and to place in the hands of a foreign nation the right to say who shall come to our country. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that that agreement should be cancelled.
Immigration laws of this country as they exist to-day are apparently objectionable to the Chinese. A despatch from Montreal, dated March 23, appeared in the Vancouver World on that date and reads as follows:
Canadian immigration laws as regards the Chinese are a disgrace and should be remedied without delay, declared Hon. C. Teur, Chinea* consul-general to Canada, in the course of an address to members of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association here Wednesday.
"There is no reason why such discriminating laws should be in effect," he said. "Chinese labourers do not want to come to this country, but Chinese students do."
It is quite true that the Chinese have a right to complain, I think, that they are being badly treated, inasmuch as a head tax of $500 is imposed on any one of their subjects who desires to come to this country. I think, Mr. Speaker, it would be much better, indeed, in that regard if a change were made, and that, instead of having the $500 head tax, we should have exclusion altogether of Chinese immigration to this country.
The Japanese are very fond of protesting against discrimination by Canadians against their people. It might be very interesting to look at the situation so far as Canadians in Japan are concerned. In Hansard of May 5 of this year, on page 1514, I find answers to questions which were handed in that day by the Prime Minister in reply to the hon. member from Victoria (Mr. Tolmie). These answers show that, in common with other foreigners, Canadians cannot, as individuals, hold land in Japan, and may not become owners of ships flying the Japanese flag, and may not, as individuals engage in mining. The answers continue:
They may not become shareholders of the Bank of Japan, the Yokohama Specie Bank, the Bank of Korea, the South Manchuria Railway Company, the Oriental Development Company and certain other companies, or of shipping companies in receipt of a Government subsidy. They may not become members or brokers of the various exchanges in Japan. They may not as individuals become members of Japanese Chambers of Commerce. They may not engage in the emigration business or hold shares in any company so engaged.
Foreign unskilled labourers may not pursue their callings in Japan outside the limits of the former foreign settlements or the "mixed residence" areas without the express permission of the administrative authorities. Labour-
Oriental Aliens

ers for this purpose are defined as being persons engaged in labouring pursuits in connection with farming, fishing, mining, public works, building, manufacturing, transport, hauling (of vehicles), stevedoring and other forms of manual labour.
Hon. gentlemen will note that we have certain privileges over there and these restrictions do not apply to persons in domestic service or persons following the calling of cooks and waiters.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: Can a Canadian lease
land in Japan or engage in agriculture?


William Garland McQuarrie: As far as I know a Canadian may not lease land in Japan and may not engage in agriculture for profit.
I have had a great deal of difficulty in ascertaining the present oriental population of Canada. I have been struck with the dearth of information which is possessed by our immigration and other government officials in this respect, but I have been able to make an estimate from various sources. I find that, according to the 1911 census there were in Canada at that time 19,568, and in the whole of Canada 27,774 Chinese. I also find that immigration to Canada since 1911 has been 29,359 Chinese. I am told that the births of Chinese about equal the deaths. We may assume that we have a total of about 57,133 Chinese in Canada at the present time, and of this number there would be approximately 38,000 in British Columbia. It is to be noted that the Chinese population of Canada has doubled in the last ten years. I find also, according to the same census, that in 1911 there were 8,587 Japanese in British Columbia, and in the whole of Canada 9,021 Japanese, and that Japanese immigration to Canada since 1911 has amounted to 7,290. The birth rate of the Japanese is such that, I think it is safe to say, we have at least 16,311 Japanese in the country at the present time most of whom are in British Columbia. I have in my hand a pamphlet which was published by the Cana-dian-Japanese Association, which was sent to me through the mail some time ago. In that pamphlet it is stated that the Japanese population in Canada at the end of 1920 was only 15,453. Now of this number 7,153 were stated to be males of 20 years and upwards, and their occupations are given-fishermen, farmers, domestic servants, dock labourers, businessmen, etc. -As to the first, the number is placed at 1,467. We know that more than 1,467 Japanese were engaged in the fishing industry of British Columbia i.i 1920. The

official returns from the Marine and Fishery Department show that in that year there were issued to the Japanese 2,227 gill net licenses, and 519 trolling licenses, making a total of 2,746 licenses. If you take it on the basis of two men to a boat-and I think there are at least two men connected with each one of the licenses,-you will find there were in 1920 engaged in the fishing industry in British Columbia 5,492 Japanese as actual fishermen. There are other licenses as well, as the hon. gentleman from Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) points out. We have purse seine fishing for instance. If you take it on the same basis, the same proportion,- and take it for granted that the Japanese made the same mistake in giving the figures for the total population of Canada 

you would find there was in Canada in 1920 a Japanese population of approximately 50,000. There have been many charges of surreptitious entry, more particularly in regard to the Japanese. I am not in a position to say whether those charges are justified or not. I would point out that the Japanese birth rate in British Columbia indicates that, in that province, there are many more Japanese than we have had any idea of. The Japanese birth rate in British Columbia is very alarming. These figures, which I am about to quote, were compiled by the Asiatic Exclusion League of Canada:
	Total Biirths		Proportion
	in		of
British	Japanese	JapaneseTear	Columbia	Births	to Whites1910.. .	. . . 5,005	20	1 in 2521911.. .	. .. 5,841	30	1 in 1981912.. ..	. .. 8,008	43	1 in 1861913.. .	. .. 11,088	80	1 in 1381914.. .	. .. 10,418	172	1 iin 611915.. .	. .. 10,516	303	1 in 351916.. .	. .. 9,841	280	1 in 311917.. .	. .. 9,433	321	1 in 291918.. .	. . . 9,010	393	1 in 231919.. .	. .. 10,022	386	1 in 261920.. .	. .. 11,532	657	1 in 17
For the first six months of 1921 the number of Japanese births was 438, which would be equivalent, in a growing ratio, tc a total of not less than 900 for the year or about one in 13.
To verify the correctness of our figures let me give the figures for the birth rate in California. I quote from the San Francisco Examiner of September 14, 1921, a cartoon which is headed "Crowding of the Cradle." This gives California's birth rate statistics, birth record by races:

Oriental Aliens
Birth rate per 1,000
Japanese	 69.4
Chinese	 19.2
Whites	 18.1
Negroes	 16.7
Indians	 10.7
Other races	 4.9
The oriental population of Canada is largely confined to the province of British Columbia, and it is most noticeable in the cities. The condition in Vancouver gives a fair indication of what exists in all the principal cities of British Columbia. The orientals have made an alarming advance in the last few years. In 4 p.m. 1920, out of 486 grocery licenses issued in Vancouver, 171 were granted to orientals. There were 80 oriental laundries; 713 orientals were employed in restaurants, 50 per "cent of which were owned and operated by orientals. There are 62 oriental barber shops in Vancouver. Sixty per cent of the merchant tailors in Vancouver are orientals. Ninety per cent of the garden truck sold in Vancouver is produced by orientals. The truck gardening industry of British Columbia is controlled by the Chinese. They own or lease practically every acre of land in the Ashcroft district; they monopolize the Ashcroft potato industry, the truck industry at Lulu island, and the celery and truck industry in the Okanagan valley. In British Columbia, there are 1,080 Japanese and Chinese farmers employing large numbers of Asiatic farm help. Orientals own or lease or cultivate 26,919 acres of most fertile truck and orchard lands in the province. There are sixty logging camps in British Columbia owned and operated by Japanese. The Japanese have practically a monopoly of the British Columbia coast fisheries. I went into that subject so exhaustively a few days ago that I do not intend to give any statistics in that connection. They are engaged in exploiting nearly all our natural resources. They are in the hotel, grocery, drygoods and other businesses, almost every industry coming under their influence.
This year, in the schools of Vancouver there are 1,045 oriental children who are seated side by side with white children in the class rooms. What will be the prospect five years hence when the heavy cradle roll swells that school population? Last year 1,448 Chinese merchants entered Canada to compete with the small traders in the commercial field. All British Coluinbia cities have their oriental sections, and some towns, notably Steveston at the mouth of the Fraser river, are almost exclusively composed of oriental establishments. The orientals have (invaded the province of Alberta where they own or control many hotels, restaurants and laundries. They are also well established in the prairie provinces, and in eastern Canada. In Ontario, I understand, there are at the present time in the neighbourhood of 3,000 orientals.
The demand for exclusion is not a sectional one in any way; it is not limited to the province of British Columbia; but it is general and Dominion-wide. The legislature of British Columbia, following the policy of all previous governments, whether Liberal or Conservative, unanimously passed on November 1, 1921, these resolutions, and ordered copies to be sent to the Government, the leader of the Opposition, and the leader of the Progressive party.
1* That a respectful address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor praying him to convey to the Dominion Government through His Excellency the Governor General
?a^aa?;the fesPeotful request of this House that the Dominion Government take the necessary steps under Article 27 of the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between His Majesty the King and His Majesty the Emperor of Japan to request His Majesty the King to give His *Majesty the Emperor of Japan twelve months' notice of the intention of termination of this treaty as far as the British DominioTi of Canada is concerned.
2. That a respectful address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor praying him to convey to tne Dominion Government through His Excellency the Governor General of Canada the respectful request of this House that the Dominion Government amend the Immigration Act of Canada so as nearly as possible to totally restrict the immigration of Asiatics into this province, keeping in view the wishes of the people of British Columbia that this province be reserved for people of the European race, and that the Dominion Government consult with the Provincial Government on the proposed amendments.
At the Dominion convention of Retail Merchants' Association of Canada, held at Kingston last year, a resolution was passed calling for the exclusion of oriental immigration. In connection with the Retail Merchants' Association, this is a copy of a letter which has been sent to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King):
Retail merchants throughout BjC. are watching the McQuarrie resolution in the federal House, calling for oriental exclusion, with intense interest.
To us it is not merely a question of competitive merchandising, aggravated by lower standards of living. It is in fact a struggle of far deeper significance in which home, family

Oriental Aliens

and citizenship considerations outweigh mercenary motives. We are solidly behind Mr. McQuarrie in his efforts to get federal action on this issue.
In view of this we urge that if, for any reason, it should not be possible to pass the resolution as it stands, your Government give the matter the serious consideration it urgently calls for.
'* As Canadian citizens first and retail merchants afterwards, we ask that this issue be constructively dealt with at this session of the federal House.
The situation of to-day is acute. The situation of to-morrow will be embittered. Can we with equanimity bequeath to the Canada of the future a race problem worse than the negro heritage in the southern States?
Many telegrams have been received from various branches of the association throughout the Dominion, endorsing the resolution.
The Great War Veterans Association at its Dominion convention held at Port Arthur in October last passed a resolution of this subject to the following effect:
Whereas, for many years past there has been an increasing influx of Chinese and Japanese Into Canada, and especially British Columbia;
And whereas, the standard of living of such races makes it impossible to compete with them industrially, considering also that white men cannot buy land in Japan, and that the Chinese are the principal channels through which the drug habit is being spread iin Canada;
And whereas, there is a great deal of unemployment among white men, and particularly returned soldiers in British Columbia;
And whereas, it is of the utmost importance that the present almost unbearable condition, due to the influx of the alien Asiatics into British Columbia, be dealt with without delay and in the interests of the people of this country;
Therefore be it resolved, that this convention go on record as being in favour of the exclusion hereafter of alien Asiatics;
And further, that legislation be enacted to prevent the sale and lease of land to said aliens either directly or indirectly;
And further, that the incoming Dominion executive be instructed to lay this resolution before the proper authorities and vigorously prosecute the same.
I may add that I have received telegrams respecting public meetings held in British Columbia which were specially called to press for the exclusion of orientals, one of these meetings having been held at Nanaimo and another at New Westminster quite recently.
I have also a telegram from Charles F. Macaulay, secretary of the Asiatic Exclusion League of Canada. That league, I am told, has a large and representative membership. The telegram is dated April 4, 1922, and is as follows:

Forty thousand British Columbians, members of Asiatic Exclusion League stand solidly behind you in your fight for a white Canada.
The Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, with a membership of something like 225,000, at its last annual convention held in Winnipeg, on August 22, 1921, passed a resolution calling for the exclusion of oriental immigration, and I also have here a letter from the president, Mr. Tom Moore, dated April 7, 1922, in which he says:
Organized labour in Canada is to-day asking for the total exclusion of oriental immigration, and item 3 (b) of the legislative requests, presented to the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet, asks for " Exclusion of Asiatics." This request is based upon the decision reached at our last convention held at Winnipeg, in August, 1921, when 694 delegates were assembled from all parts of Canada.
In past years the Trades and Labour Congress have actively supported measures for the restriction-
I would ask hon. members to pay particular attention to this part of the letter:
-of Asiatic immigration, but our experience has been that no effective restrictions have as yet been devised, as is illustrated by the present over-running of the province of British Columbia with orientals and the considerable extent to which the Chinese have spread through other parts of Canada, especially in the restaurant and laundry business.
The Trades and Labour Congress of Canada look upon this subject as one of national importance, and realizing the vast difference in the economic development of Canada and oriental countries, have become convinced that the only way in which Canada, especially the Pacific province, can be retained and developed in the interests of the white race, is by the immediate application of a policy of exclusion of further Asiatic immigration.
The United Farmers of British Columbia, at their last annual convention, held in Vancouver, on January 25th of this year, passed the following resolution:
Resolved that we are opposed to orientals owning or leasing land in the province of British Columbia.
That all oriental produce be marked as such.
That we go on record as against all leasing and selling of property to orientals.
That in future all oriental immigration be excluded from British Columbia.
Resolved, that this convention of the United Farmers of British Columbia suggest to the Government that a graduated tax, according to the numbers of orientals employed, be placed on all employers of orientals in the province. This to apply to all oriental employers as well as to white employers, and that all proceeds be placed to the credit of the hospitals of the rural districts of the province, and cities wherein collected.
Then we have the Army and Navy Veterans, Disabled Soldiers' Association; we have Farmers' Institutes; we have various

Oriental Aliens
trades unions; we have teachers' associations; we have city councils; we have boards of trade; we have the Native Sons of British Columbia, and other organizations, all demanding the exclusion of oriental immigration.
The question has excited Dominion-wide interest, articles having appeared in the Winnipeg Free Press, the Toronto Telegram, Macleans Magazine and other publications, and it is now no longer a question of purely provincial significance.
I submit that drastic action is necessary. Modern history affords notable examples of the danger of bringing into a country races which cannot be assimilated. Our great neighbour to the south has a serious race problem in the negro population of the southern states. Who could have foretold that so many millions of negroes would have descended from the comparatively small number of slaves imported from Africa? That problem is entirely internal, and apparently nothing can be done to solve it.
The United States also has another grave problem in the Japanese menace. Hawaii is overrun by the yellow race. The United States census gives the population of the Hawaiian islands at 255,000, the Japanese portion of which numbers 114,000.
The Japanese practically control the island, not only in a business sense but in the political sense. When I visited Honolulu a few years ago I learned the reason why the Hawaiian Islands had gone to the United States. It appears that the Hawaiians were afraid they would be taken over by the Japanese. They sent their king and queen to London and offered their islands to the British Empire. The statesmen over there, unfortunately, did not see fit to accept the gift; they thought the islands were valueless and that they would only be a burden to the Empire. Later on uncle Sam got his chance and took over the islands. They became a great national asset. Not only was there a large production of sugar in these islands, but they furnished a strategic naval base in the mid-Pacific. At the entrance to Honolulu harbour the Americans established a fortress in the crater of an extinct volcano, which is one of the greatest fortresses in the world. Now, the Japanese kept on going into the Hawaiian Islands, and I am afraid that the islands have turned out to be a liability rather than an asset to the United States.
Having accomplished his desire in Hawaii the enterprising Jap turned his attention
to the mainland of the United States, invading the states of California, Oregon and Washington. To-day these states have their oriental problem, which is almost exclusively a Japanese problem. Last year a large meeting was held in Vancouver at which this subject was discussed. That meeting was addressed by Alderman Phillip Tindall, of Seattle, who referred to the conditions existing in the state of Washington as very alarming, and pointed out that nearly one-third of the grocery stores in Seattle were Japanese and nearly one-third of the hotels and lodging houses owned or leased by Japanese, though operated, possibly, by white managers. I quote from a report of that meeting:
"It is a fight for life between the white and the brown race" said Mr. Tindall. "We must insist upon this being a white man's land". He predicted that if steps were not taken now to put a stop to the menace, the time was not far distant when bloody war must result, because the white man would assuredly not allow himself to be crowded out when he became aroused to the danger.
In California there is a Japanese population of approximately 100,000, and with the alarming birth rate to which I have already referred, the situation is very serious. The Californians have been taking active measures to exclude the Japanese from that state. I hold in my hand a brief prepared for the State Department at Washington on behalf of the Japanese Exclusion League of California, in support of the declaration of principles on the part of the league as approved by the California Legislature. That declaration is in part as follows:
This is our country, and we are under no obligations to admit any foreigner; that we should tactfully but firmly let the world know that we claim the right to exclude any one we wish to exclude; that the life of this democracy depends upon the sort of immigrants admitted ; that there is nothing discreditable to the Japanese in our attitude on this question ; that we will not admit them because they do not and cannot assimilate and because in economic competition they drive our people to the wall; that we will not admit immigration freely under such conditions from any country no matter what the consideration offered or the consequences involved.
I submit that is a declaration which could be subscribed to by all Canadians, more particularly by British Columbians, who will I am convinced stand solidly behind our cousins in California in their demand for exclusion.
The question which naturally presents itself is, why should orientals be excluded? I have put down certain reasons in brief
Oriental Aliens


Mr. ALFRED STORK (Skeena) :: Mr. Speaker, this is a question which very vitally affects the province of British Columbia, and as a member from that province I am very pleased to have the opportunity of rising in support of this resolution. We have in this House thirteen

Oriental Aliens
members from the province of British Columbia, and it is very pleasing to know that all thirteen are unanimous, so far as I can gather, in their opinion towards this resolution.
The oriental first came to the Pacific coast in 1849 at the time of the California gold rush, and the people of California were tremendously pleased with the orientals because they were of the opinion that the fame of their mines had challenged the attention of the whole world, and that the fact of men coming from China bore tribute to the fact that California was a big mining country. In the first Fourth of July parade ever held in San Francisco, orientals took part, lending to it an air of novelty and oriental splendour which was very pleasing to the people of California. But the joy of the Californians was very soon turned to dismay when they discovered the effect that the orientals were having on the social and economic life of the state of California. From California the orientals spread north into the province of British Columbia. The British Columbians had at their disposal the experience of the people of California, and those earlier settlers of the Pacific coast province did not view with a great deal of approbation the influx of the oriental, because they believed that as the number of orientals increased, the opportunities for the white race decreased, and so we find that in the first session of the first legislature conveyed in the province of British Columbia in the year 1872, a resolution was passed calling for a head tax of $50 on every Chinaman coming into the country. In the same session a resolution was passed prohibiting the employment of orientals on public works. In 1874 a resolution was introduced calling for a head tax on orientals. In 1876 there was a resolution asking for a tax of $10 per head on all males wearing long hafr in the shape of a pig-tail or cue. In 1878 a resolution was passed that every Chinese person over twelve years of age should take out a license of $10, payable every three months in advance. In 1878 the oriental question was discussed for the first time in the federal parliament. In 1884 the member for Victoria in this House moved a resolution to exclude orientals altogether from the province of British Columbia-a resolution very similar to the one we are debating to-day. In 1885 a bill was passed imposing a tax of. $50 per head on Chinese. In 1891 seventy petitions were received from the province of British Columbia by
this Parliament praying for the total exclusion of orientals. In 1892 more petitions were received by this Parliament than had been received in 1891. In 1899 the head tax was increased to $100, and in 1902 it was again increased to $500. Last year the province of British Columbia enacted legislation to prohibit orientals from taking part in any work on government contracts. This legislation, we understand, has since been disallowed. I am not prepared to discuss the disallowance of that act of the British Columbia legislature, any more than to say this, that the very fact of the legislature of British Columbia deeming it wise and expedient to enact such legislation simply goes to prove the absolute and complete necessity of having something done to restrict the progress and the march of the oriental so far as British Columbia is concerned.
All of these proceedings that I have related were accompanied by much argument, by long speeches and lengthy talks in the various legislatures, and there were some very great prophecies as to what would happen if oriental immigration was not somewhat curtailed. We are to-day in the presence of prophecies matured, prophecies fulfilled. The seed has been sown, and the harvest is here. We find that these various acts and the different attempts that have been made to deal with this question have to a very large extent merely skirted around the question. There has never yet been a comprehensive dealing with the issue. We find legislation passed against men with long hair; we find that a head tax has been imposed from time to time, but these attempts have been altogether ineffectual to cope with the situation. We are now confronted with a fifty years' growth problem. There is an old saying, and a very true one, that possession is nine points of the law.
I believe that it is good policy to settle this oriental problem with the oriental while the white population is still in possession of the province of British Columbia, rather than to defer the settlement of the issue until the time when the oriental himself is in full and complete possession of that great province. One of the serious handicaps, Sir, that we suffer from, I think, is the handicap of indifference. There was a time when that great stretch of country now known as the states of Oregon and Washington was British territory-the Columbia river was supposed to be the international boundary.
Oriental Aliens

When the question of boundaries arose and demanded settlement, tradition has it that one of the officials dealing with that question stated that the country was of no use for the reason that the salmon in the Columbia river would not rise to the fly. I am not prepared to say whether that story is true or not; but I believe that indifference had a great deal to do with the moving of the international boundary up to the forty-ninth parallel. Later on we had the Alaskan boundary award. If you will look at the map you will find that there is a very small, narrow strip of northern coast line of what used to be British Columbia but is now part of Alaska. This piece of coast line is not of any particular benefit to Alaska because they possess no hinterland. But it is a very vital land to the province of British Columbia because the location of the boundary line deprives us of over half of the coast line of our province, and we find ourselves to-day without sufficient ground upon it to erect even a wireless station. Take the Premier mine, the richest in British Columbia-I might even say the richest on the North American continent. That mine is in Canada within half a mile of the international boundary. The product is brought down to tide water by means of a tram line, extending for a distance of thirteen miles, and this tram line travels almost entirely through American territory. In covering the northern part of my constituency I have to travel through Alaska by way of Skaguay, the White pass and Yukon railway. The people of Canada regard this, I suppose, as a matter-of-fact proposition. They say no doubt "Well, that coast line belongs to Alaska " and they are very largely indifferent to it. But to the people who live on the northwest Pacific coast this is a very vital matter. To-day we are having daily reminders of the disabilities under which we suffer, and I may say that in the settlement of that question indifference on our part played a very large part.
So we find ourselves to-day confronted with the silent and the steady absorption of the province of British Columbia by the orientals. A few years ago the Japanese were regarded as a simple, childlike and interesting people; but experience has shown us that they are the very incarnation of commercial aggressiveness. In the year 1920 in the matter of the number of post office money orders sent out of Canada, the United States had the largest number,
[Mr. Stork.J
Great Britain was second, and Japan was third. We find in the same year that the total number of money orders sent to Japan from Canada was 28,807; and the number of money orders arriving in Canada from Japan was 434. These oriental people came to British Columbia willing and anxious to serve; but, Sir, they have no intention of remaining as servants. The Jap who pulled the oar in the fishing boat on the Skeena river is now in full possession of a gasoline launch operating on the Fraser river. He has performed menial tasks in the cannery and incidentally he has mastered the fishing business; and so we find that he is now in the fishing game on his own hook, so to speak. The humble cook who has done the work in the lumber camp has, at the same time, made himself conversant with the lumber industry; and we find throughout the province of British Columbia that a great deal of the lumbering business is carried on there by Japs who first took their post-graduate course through the cookhouse door. The chore boy who has done the chores on the farm is now the man who owns or leases the farm on which he was formerly employed as a servant, and the oncoming hordes which are operating in Canada are glad to do the menial work in connection with that province. So as master and servant we find them working in perfect unison; they are proceeding to roll up the map of western Canada so that one day we shall find that the summit of the Rocky mountains will be the western boundary for the white population of this Dominion. There is no lure on the plains and the prairies of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba for the oriental. It requires brain and muscle, intelligence and patience to farm successfully in that vigorous climate, and the oriental prefers the warm sunshine, the mild climate and the fertile valleys of British Columbia,-British Columbia with its wealth of fisheries, of timber, of agriculture; the California of Canada which fronts on the Pacific whose waves wash the coast of Canada as well as the shores of the Orient.
An unequal contest, Mr. Speaker, is going on in the province of British Columbia. The white man is handicapped by the responsibilities of civilization; the oriental is prepared to struggle for his solitary existence. Organized society has erected a fabric and an institution to which the oriental contributes nothing. He is not concerned in municipal, provincial or federal problems; he is filling a field that would solve the unemployment problem in western Can-

Oriental Aliens
ada. He is the human teredo so far as organized labour is concerned, because he has created an industrial stratum into which the white man cannot descend. If the final occupation and possession of British Columbia is to be determined by such an unequal contest, we from British Columbia decline to enter such a contest. This is our country and we regard this House as the proper tribunal in which to state our case. We ask this House to pass an act for the total and absolute exclusion of all orientals on the ground of pressing economic necessity. If in the considering of this problem the principle of sacrifice is involved, I have no hesitation in saying that I am opposed to the sacrificing of Canadians for the benefit of orientals, or the inhabitants of any other country. If the powers who settled the terms of peace in the Old Country had decided that British Columbia was to be given over to the oriental you would find the people of this country on their feet to a man disputing that proposition; you would find them once more pledging the last man and the last dollar in defence of British territory. Let me say that thirty-three years of knowledge of the conditions in British Columbia justifies me in expressing the belief that unless we deal with this matter we are parting with the province of British Columbia just as effectually as if we gave British Columbia away by signing a treaty.


Mr. CARROLL:: I did not wish to interrupt the hon. member's argument while he was speaking but I would like now to ask him a question. Does he argue that we are incapable of contending in commercial life with the Japanese or Chinese? Is that my hon. friend's argument?


Alfred Stork: In reply to my hon. friend I would say that they have a standard of living so much lower than ours that they are gradually absorbing the province of British Columbia.


Mr. W. T. LUCAS (Victoria, Alta.):: As the seconder of this resolution I would like to say that while it was introduced by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie), and while perhaps the oriental question is more acute in the province of British Columbia at the present time than in any other province of the Dominion, yet I submit the question is one that vitally affects the Dominion as a whole. The hon. member for Prince Rupert (Mr. Stork) who has just taken his seat made the statement that this question did not affect the prairie provinces to the same extent as it did British Columbia. While that is true at present, yet the time is fast approaching when we on the prairies are going to be confronted with the keen competition of the oriental. Permit me to say at the outset that I do not wish to say anything detrimental to the members of the oriental races. But their standard of living is a lower standard than ours, and, therefore, we are not able to compete with them. I am speaking more from the point of view of the prairies and other parts of Canada, because I believe the hon. gentlemen from British Columbia will deal fully with the question as it affects their province. One of the reasons the orientals are not engaged jn agriculture on the prairies to-day is that they are too wise to engage in an industry that is being conducted at a loss. I will give the House a few facts regarding the question in Alberta, in the constituency which I have the honour to represent. An oriental living in the town near my farm two years ago purchased a quarter section which contained as fine land as it is possible to obtain in the province. He engaged in mixed farming, that branch of the business which we were told would be a panacea for all our ills. After putting in two years he allowed his farm to go, accepted a loss of $2,000, and, in his own words, stated "It did me no good, no money in farming." If agriculture comes back to the stage where it belongs, to a condition of prosperity, they might take it up. The oriental came into British Columbia in the early days and engaged in the laundry business. We always connected an oriental with the laundry. He worked in the laundry business until to-day, in that province, we find that he has control of that business and of the fishing business; he is fast getting into the lumber business, and fruit farming. As he succeeds in one business he pushes on to other fields, and I do not think the climate will prevent him from coming to the prairies and other parts of Canada, as soon as he sees that he can make a success of it. Coming to Ontario, we find that in Toronto last year $1,820,000 was paid by the public to Chinese laundries. We come to the capital of the Dominion and we find 65 Chinese laundries, 4 grocery stores and 21 restaurants. Out of 21 restaurants 12 are not being conducted in such a way that they would be recognized as Chinese restaurants; they are being conducted under other names. They are called the Metropolitan, Hamilton, Kingston,
Oriental Aliens

Chicago, British, Elgin, New York, Boston and other names. These are the restaurants. Of course the public do not know whom they are patronizing. Coming to Montreal, I find an item in the press of Friday last which reads:
Found dying in her room at 367 St. Dominique street at ten o'clock last night, a girl, who is known as Anita, passed away before medical attention could be given. It is suspected that the girl died as the result of drug poisoning, and the police are looking for a Chinaman, who is an alleged drug peddler, and who was with the girl some time before she died.
This is a very vital question, Mr. Speaker. We find the Chinese engaged in this drug traffic which is demoralizing the standards of our people. One of the greatest problems before our government to-day is the immigration policy. The Government are trying to decide whom they will admit to this country, and I think we have a perfect right to decide that question. We should give very close consideration to the oriental, with his lower standard of living, and we should consider also the fact that he cannot assimilate with our people. We do not want any class of people in this country who cannot be assimilated and who will not in time make good Canadians. I should like to hear expressions from both sides of the House, because this is not a party question or a sectional or provincial question. We should deal with it in a truly national way. I have much pleasure in seconding the motion.


Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon) :: I will not attempt to discuss the subject matter of this resolution in detail, but propose to address to the House a few general remarks, and present my own judgment and the conclusions that I have arrived at from experience and actual knowledge of the state of affairs. I do not need to be told by any one of the seriousness of this menace which faces us to-day. If members present are not fully informed on this question, they cannot do better than give an attentive hearing to the members who have come here prepared to discuss this subject from every angle, without partisanship and without a tinge of politics, but to discuss it as Canadians, in view of the effect that it is having and will continue to have on our national life, and to discuss it without any personal antagonism to the Asiatics, coming to Canada, because the more convinced one is of their undesirability in this country the more we must admire them for their good judgment in coming.
[ Mr. Lucas. ]
The House will not fail to become convinced of the sincerity of hon. members who address it on the subject, when it learns that actually the life blood of constituencies represented here is being sucked out by these orientals, and the commercial life of these constituencies is being undermined. Labour is being, not temporarily, but permanently, thrown out of employment. The standard of living in these constituencies is being reduced. Countless whites, young men and young women, are being mentally and physically ruined by the contact with these orientals.
For my part I need no convincing; I have personally encountered this menace and have seen it grow in volume. I have seen the white man retreat before the menace, as helpless to prevent it, or to hold it back, as he is to prevent the rising tide of the sea. The only thing for the white man to do is to retreat, back up, flee before that tide overwhelms him. Under present conditions it is impossible for him to do otherwise. If hon. members are not seized of this menacing condition of their own knowledge, they cannot fail to be convinced by other hon. gentlemen who to-day, with their fellow-citizens in the various constituencies, are engaged in a struggle for existence against the Asiatics. That fact shows the seriousness of the problem. Being convinced that defensive measures and action are noiv necessary, I am sure hon gentlemen will not be so remiss in their duty as to delay taking defensive action and taking it forthwith, by supporting the resolution before the House.
The remedy is simple; it is entirely in our hands, as a government, as a Parliament and as a people. Heretofore, the policy of governments in Canada in dealing with this question has been one of "hush, hush." It has been something to be spoken of in whispers, not in plain, understandable language. We were, in an unexplainable way, perhaps, given to understand that if governments did speak up and say what they felt, thought and wanted, some terrible calamity would happen to Canada. Just where this was going to come from was not quite clear; but, at any rate, we were told that we must speak the truth in whispers. In fact, an attempt was made to convince Canada that this was a cross that we must bear without murmuring. I think the time has come to stop this pussy-footing and to deal with this matter squarely, to make it understood by all Canadians, no matter what part of Canada they live in, and further than that.

Oriental Aliens
to make the position of Canada clear before the world. Let us take our stand and to maintain it.
It is said that, if orientals were excluded from Canada, a trade boycott would ensue. Well, better lose trade even to the extent of shutting out Chinese eggs than surrender the country. Hon. members may feel that the words "surrender the country" are extravagant. I do not think so. If you turn to British Columbia, you will find large portions of that province, which is a part of Canada, surrendered already to the oriental and completely and wholly under oriental control. Why does this happen in British Columbia? Simply because British Columbia is the outpost nearest to the invading army. If China and Japan were situated to the east of Canada and eastern Canada was nearer to Japan and China than the west and British Columbia, the eastern provinces would be the first to feel the force of the invading army which would spread from east to west instead of from west to east, as the movement is directed now. The invaders are consolidating their position in British Col-lumbia; they have made their way into Alberta and Saskatchewan, and the advance guard is right here in Ottawa making its presence felt. Do not make any mistake about that. Soon, the people of eastern Canada, as the people of British Columbia to-day are, will be battling with these people for an existence. That is what this invasion amounts to. It will soon be too late to rid ourselves of this scourge- and it is nothing less-by any such simple methods as are open to the country to-day.
In my constituency, the Yukon, we have only, I am happy to say, an insignificant number of Japanese and no Chinamen. The Yukon is so situated that people coming into that country by any feasible route are obliged to come through the territory of Alaska, through territory governed by the United States, and the presence of a level-headed immigration officer at practically the only point of ingress gives him an opportunity to use very good judgment as to who shall cross that boundary and who shall not. Consequently, we are not troubled by this class of undesirables. Once upon a time it was reported that a large influx of Chinamen might be expected into the gold fields of the Klondyke. The miners of that district, who are a law-abiding class of people, considered this an event of such importance that it should receive special consideration from them.
Consequently, a very large reception committee was appointed to meet those visitors, and it was definitely understood that the members of that committee would not leave behind them that innocent implement of their occupation, the very useful pick-handle. Somehow, the word went out to the Chinamen that they would be met with due ceremony, and for some reason the visitation was postponed and to this day we have not had a Chinaman in the Yukon.
Canada wants settlers; but she wants only settlers who will adopt Canadian and British ideals, people who will become Canadians. We want only races which will intermingle and which can intermarry with our people and become not only with us, hut of us. The Asiatics are not of those races. With them, naturalization is nothing more or less than a farce. A naturalized Japanese remains a Jap and a naturalized Chinaman remains a Chink, no matter what forms they may go through in Canada. The Japanese government does not recognize naturalization of its citizens in this country, and they are never released from their allegiance to Japan. Why should we go further?
Some sentimentalist has referred to these people as our "little brown brothers". As a matter of fact, in case some hon. gentleman may think of these people as little, innocent, harmless brown men, let me tell the House that many of them are not little at all, but great, big, hulking giants. I have seen them and know them. But it has been said, with a good deal more practical force-"what about these people for brothers-in-law?" It is all very well to refer to them as brothers; but would any hon. gentleman of this House consider an alliance between a sister or a daughter of his and a Chinaman or a Japanese? Is there an hon. member to whom such an alliance would appeal? That is what will happen if we allow these people to invade our land, to colonize it and to breed as they are doing on our soil. We must face that sooner or later.
Personally, I am strongly in favour of the total exclusion of Asi-
5 p.m. atics, and I would go further; I would advocate expropriating the property of those who are now here and deporting them to the land whence they come. There are enough here now to constitute a serious menace, because they are the advance guard of the forces who are yet to come. Can anything be said in favour of surrendering Canada to the Asiatics?-because

Oriental Aliens
that is what our present policy ultimately means. Supposing a million or, perhaps, ten million of these people took it into their heads to come here at once as fast as ships could carry them, would any hon. member hesitate a moment to do everything in his power to stop that movement, to head off that invasion, even by the exercise of the last atom of power and force at his disposal? If so, then why hesitate now to put an end to this peaceful penetration which ultimately means millions and, in the end, surrender? This is a sort of painless method, but it results in the same thing after all. Can Kipling's words: [DOT]'Daughter am I in my mother's house, but mistress in my own" be more applicable than in referring to Canada's ability to deal with this question herself?
I am convinced that there is no constitutional difficulty in the way, that there will be no rupture of diplomatic relations, and that the power to deal wisely, decisively and effectively with this question has been rightly reserved to Canada. This phase of the case will be made clearer to you by members who will follow me.
Now, admitting that we have the authority, let us be men, let us be Canadians, and let us not turn a deaf ear to that S.O.S. call for help from the people on the front line out there in British Columbia. For that is what it is. If their present plight does not move hon. gentlemen from eastern parts of Canada, let them remember that the condition of the people of the West to-day will be their condition to-morrow. That ought to appeal to them and dispel their apathy. Let them take action forthwith, commencing with the support of this resolution, towards making and keeping Canada a white man's country. It is our country. Should we have to show cause why we should keep it for ourselves and for those that we consider it wise to invite to join us in its development?
I submit that hon. members can do nothing more effective as patriotic Canadians, wishing to keep Canada a white man's country, than by supporting the resolution now before the House.


Mr. J. A. CLARK (Burrard) :: There is an old saying that it is better to see once than to hear a hundred times, I can readily understand the apathy with which this question is received not only by this House, but by the people of Canada, and by the white world, because the great majority of the white world at any rate have not seen, and although they may have heard

many times, I am afraid, the appeals fall on deaf or irresponsive ears.
I must admit, Mr. Speaker, that this is not a British Columbia question, it is not even a Canadian question, but it is a question which vitally affects the white world to-day. In my opinion the basic factor in the future of the white race is a racial type. That is the basic factor in the future of the Dominion, and if our race is to be mixed with that of an oriental country, we cannot have a racial type. We cannot assimilate the yellow races, nor, asi a( matter of fact, any colored races. You have only to go back to the earliest history of the white race in confirmation of that statement. We find the white race first in the west Central Asia, that is its cradle, and to-day west Central Asia is a colored country.
Take briefly the history of the white race for the past four hundred years. Going back to 1500 we find that the white race then occupied territorially about 2,000,000 square miles; to-day about 22,000,000-ten times as much; as compared with 31,00,000 occupied by the colored races. Take our own British Isles, in 1500 the population was 3,000,000; in 1900, 45,000,000. And take the growth of Europe, in 1500, 70,000,000; in 1800, 150,000,000; in 1900, 450,-000,000-an increase in the 100 years of 400 per cent.
But it is very significant that although the white race increased so tremendously in that hundred year period, it composed only four-tenths of the total population of the world; and more significant still, of a total of 550,000,000 white people throughout the world in 1914, four-fifths occupied one-fifth of the white territorial area. In other words, one-fifth of the total white population occupied four-fifths of the total white area.
Now, there are very significant features connected with that white development during those four hundred years, and the first and most outstanding, I think, is the tremendous expansion politically in that period of the world's history. In 1914 nine-tenths of the total world area was controlled politically by the white race, as compared with one-twenty-fifth in 1500. The world trade had increased from $2,000,000,000 in 1800, to $22,000,000,000 in 1900, and to $40,000,000,000 in 1910.
Those are outstanding features of our development. But the transitory character of that imposing political control is shown by the world war. How many countries

Oriental Aliens
were upset politically during four short years of war? Let us look back at the history of Greece and Rome, and how short was the period it took to upset their political control of the world. The same possibilities exist to-day, and we have only to review the last twenty years of our history to show the seriousness of the present situation in regard to the white race.
I think the first and most outstanding feature is the declining birthrate. And unfortunately the most useful part of our stock is not propagating; it is the least useful that is increasing in numbers. The result can mean only one thing-race deterioration.
The second outstanding feature is the effect of the result of the Russo-Japanese war of 1904 upon the oriental mind, and I venture to say that it will prove to be one of the turning-points of world history. The effect upon the oriental mind is something that we have not yet comprehended. It showed the oriental that the white man, even in war, is not deteriorating. And then we had what we all call the Great W.ar, but which might be called the white civil war, because as a result of it fifty million white persons laid down their lives. Think of the effect on future generations of having so many of our best men killed off and having thousands who lived so impaired in health as to be under a great disadvantage in life. Turning to the present day, you find the white races torn with domestic dissension. On the other hand, what do we find on the part of the oriental countries? There is no perceptible decline in the birth rate; on the contrary, we find that the population of Japan is increasing at the rate of 800,000 per annum. They must, therefore, have an outlet for their surplus population; and the same is true of China. Now, this is the question we must ask ourselves: What are the openings for immigration from those countries? There is the island to the north of Japan, Hokkaido; there is Formosa, Korea, Manchuria, Mongolia, Chinese Turkestan, North and South America, Australia, and the islands, peninsulas, and so on between China and Australia. For some generations at any rate, these countries will provide a field for Chinese immigrants, but not so with Japan, because all these countries, with the exception of the Americas and Australia, are subject to extremes of climate. Japan is a country which is temperate in climate, and so far the Japanese have not emigrated to countries or sections of countries with extreme
climates. Their eyes, therefore, are turned to-day upon the United States, Canada- largely the Pacific Coast-and portions of South America and Australia. I submit we must take our stand on this question and take it at once. We must be firm; we must be clear and definite in our policy. If we do that we shall be respected; if we do not, we shall ibe treated contemptuously. If bon. members are interested in the ambitions of the oriental countries to-day I would refer them to a book which has been published this year, entitled "The Rising Tide of Colour," by Lothrop Stoddard. It contains a complete analysis of the subject, and deals with the ambitions of those races in a dear, interesting and illuminating manner.
When I refer, Mr. Speaker, to this menace that we are facing I do not look at it from a military point of view. It is not the conquest of our country by a coloured army that is to be feared so much as that enduring conquest which is bound to result from unlimited immigration into a white country. It is a matter for the white race, particularly the Canadian white race, to consider and deal with now before the menace becomes such that our whole country is more seriously threatened than it is * to-day. I am in entire agreement with my fellow members from British Columbia, and I sincerely hope that this House will take the matter firmly in hand without delay.


Mr. C. H. DICKIE (Nanaimo) :: Mr. Speaker, earlier in the session I unburdened my soul to some extent with respect to the question of the exclusion of orientals as viewed by one who comes from the Pacific coast. During a residence of nearly forty years in that part of the country I have had numerous opportunities of observing the oriental and the effect which his immigration to the Pacific coast has had on our national life. Previous speakers have dealt fully with this matter and I associate myself with all that has been said, except, possibly, the suggestions which have been made as to the deportations of Japanese; it cannot be conceded that that is possible at the present time.
As to the Anglo-Japanese alliance, I never quite realized just what it meant until early in the war when the Pacific coast was in danger of invasion by the German warships Nuremberg and Scharn-horst. The people in Victoria, my home city, were alarmed for fear these warships would make a raid on the city. [DOT] We had at that time an obsolete warship called
Oriental Aliens

the Rainbow, and two submarines, but we were not sanguine as to the result of an engagement, should one occur, between them and one of the up-to-date German warships. South of us there were warships belonging to our American cousins, but they were swinging indolently on their anchors and we began to think that the words-" blood is thicker than water " were meaningless. However, on the morning of the 23rd of August there came steaming into the harbour of Victoria the battleship Idzuma, an up-to-date armoured cruiser, swarming with little brown men, and we gave a mighty cheer for Japan when we saw that ship; we knew then that we should receive ample protection. Five days later the Newcastle came in, followed by two more ships of the Japanese navy and then, Sir, we in British Columbia realized the importance of the Anglo-Japanese alliance. This question is a very important one indeed; it must be dealt with diplomatically and not by demagogues, otherwise the danger will be great. We are not allowed privileges in Japan which we concede to the Japanese people in this country. Although the difficulties are great, I have no doubt that an arrangement could be entered into with Japan that would ameliorate our condition with respect to this invasion.
It is impossible for us to compete with the Japanese in British Columbia. People say: Why, you are of the white race; you are a virile people; can you not compete with the Japanese? We cannot compete with them for this reason: their standard of living is away below ours, and they work, men, women and children, all hours, and longer hours than our labouring men will work, longer than we would want them to work. They have a community of interest and of activities to themselves. They work together with one aim in view, and work incessantly. We cannot compete with them industrially, we cannot compete with them agriculturally. They are entering into every line of our business, and we of British Columbia who have lived there so long want to retain that country for the white man. I remember distinctly having to leave the province of Ontario many years *ago. I left there because at that time the Manufacturing interests in Ontario could not compete with our southern neighbours and many of us, indeed, the majority of the young men of Ontario and the maritime provinces, wen': into American territory because better opportunities awaited us there than were to be had in Canada,

and six out of every ten of those people who went were of Scottish descent, and when a Scotchman has to leave a country there is something wrong with its economic conditions. I remember some longshoremen stood on the wharf at Victoria one day watching a ship go by. One of them said, "It is a Norwegian ship," another said "It looks like a German," but an Irishman said "It is a Scotch ship." They asked him why, and Pat said "It must be Scotch because there are no sea gulls following it."
I believe that an immigration policy can be enacted that will keep from obtaining a foothold in our country people with whose descendants our descendants cannot intermarry. We cannot conceive of a commingling of the blood of our Canadians with that of the Ethiopians; we cannot conceive of a commingling of our blood with that of Asiatics. The little Jap desires to keep his blood pure just as we Canadians do. I have spent some time in Japan and I know that the Eurasian, part European and part Japanese, is simply persona non grata among the educated classes; he is not even respected by the coolie classes. They wish to preserve their race pure and, as the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Black) told us, they will be Japanese for all generations. They come to our country, they have a right to come here, and I have a great admiration for these little people, but we cannot withstand their incursions. We or our descendants must either leave the country, or they must be prevented from coming in. Even though not another Japanese came to our country, we have still a stupendous problem on our hands in British Columbia. We have a tremendous birthrate among the Japanese that are there. It has been estimated that in nine years from now there will be as many Japanese children born in British Columbia as white children. You can realize what that means in a country such as we have, hemmed in with lofty mountains, with not too much arable land, and with the Japanese scattered along the coast. We can never have a dense population in British Columbia, and I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that if we allowed the Japanese to come in unchecked for two years, they would simply drive every white man out of British Columbia with the exception of those engaged in transportation and matters of that kind. I never could see where it was possible for a white man to succeed in Japan except in some financial institution or with some transportation system.

Oriental Aliens
I know the psychology of the Jap fairly well, I think, as well as most people know it. It is said by people who have sojourned in Japan that you go there for a week and write a book on the country; you remain a year, and you write a magazine article; and if you stay there indefinitely, you do not know what to write. Nobody understands the Japanese or the oriental mind except they themselves. They look at things differently from us. We can never look at things through their eyes, and they can never look at things through our eyes. There is one thing, however, that the Japanese do respect, and this is straightforward dealing. That is one reason why the Japanese are sincere admirers of Great Britain and her institutions, and I say that in dealing with these gentlemen we should play the game, lay our cards on the table face up, and tell them we cannot compete with them, that their entry is against the interests of our country. We cannot concede them privileges which they do not extend to us. We cannot let them come because they will inevitably displace our race. We can say to them "There are thousands of you engaged profitably in industry here to-day; we have thousands of idle white men walking up and down our streets looking for work, with their families at home in want. We cannot stand that. You would not stand these things." They will realize the sense of that position. No Chinaman who will work for less than a Jap would be allowed to work in Japan. The Japanese would not stand for twenty-four hours what we have stood from them. They are reasonable men, astute men, wise men of the East, who will understand this thing if it is put to them right. But do not let us put it to them through the mouth of a demagogue. Let some big man whom they respect-I know the type of men they do respect-go to them wide open and explain the case to them; tell them that because of their community of interest and of activities it is impossible for a cosmopolitan race such as we have in Canada to compete with them. Let him show them by figures that in ten years they would conquer British Columbia by peaceful invasion. There would be no trouble. Great Britain could not object, and I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I do not believe for one moment the Japanese would object. In that little country of Japan, fifty years ago, they had 33,000,000 people; to-day, they have 57,000,000. For Japan's population to remain stationary, hundreds of thousands of people must leave the country each year,
and they have been doing that. The island of Formosa has been densely populated by them during the last five years. The Hawaiian islands, which hoped a very few years ago to attain statehood with the United States, have given up all hope of that because the Japanese absolutely control their industrial and economic life, and it is said that in five years more the Japanese will own every sugar plantation in the Hawaiian islands. In the Philippine islands they also dominate the economic life. It is very doubtful indeed if the Philippine islands will ever be given their freedom, as was expected	they would
shortly after the United States took possession of that country. We have the Japanese in Chili, and in California to an alarming extent. We have them coming to our own country on the Pacific. They must spread, and they are spreading. They have taken Korea. They simply must spread, but we do not want to give them that most lovely part of the Canadian Dominion, Vancouver island and the southern portion of British Columbia. It is the choicest part of God's footstool to-day, a country of lovely valleys where, in Byron's words, "The mountains look on Marathon and Marathon looks on the sea"-that country laved by the waves of the Pacific redolent with memories of the tales of Robert Louis Stevenson and other great writers. There is a sub-tropic atmosphere around the southern portion of British Columbia that cannot be explained, and I can only described its effect in this way: I have never known a man or woman live there for ten years who would live anywhere else afterwards. I have known men from the Old Country and from India come to British Columbia and become dissatisfied with the economic conditions-they could not get cheap help in their houses to which they were accustomed-and return disgusted to India or England, but invariably they came back to southern British Columbia. That is a great tribute to our country.
We want to reserve that country for the poor as well as for the affluent of our race. We want to retain it for a white population. We want it as a breathing ground, a pleas-' ant land to which our people can retire from the less congenial climate of the prairies if they care to do so. If they do come we will gladly welcome them to British Columbia. But I can assure you, Sir, that this question is a very serious one-more serious, I think, than is realized by the people of this country as a whole. I say it with all respect to these
Oriental Aliens

industrious, virile little people, the Japanese. I admire the Japanese and nobody can help but respect the Chinese for their unceasing industry. They attend to their business, they mind their own affairs, and invariably succeed. As I say, if we stop them we shall still have our troubles with a certain proportion of our white people. I yield to none in respect for the character of the white workingmen of British Columbia, with the exception of a few that are easily influenced and led astray by the specious arguments of soap box orators, and others, who are trying to instill into them an insidious and pernicious doctrine calculated to tear down the institutions of our country. But, Sir, the white people who cause us trouble are in a minority in that province. Nevertheless, before we allow the orientals to pour into that province we certainly should consider the great future of British Columbia, and take the necessary steps to preserve that valuable heritage for our people.


Mr. L. W. HUMPHREY (West Kootenay) :: I have the honour to represent a
constituency in British Columbia which is close to the eastern border of that province, and would like to take time to explain the situation which has developed locally and the position in which the people of West Kootenay find themselves owing to the invasion of orientals into our province. Situated on the eastern border of the province we feel that we can speak with authority upon that invasion, more particularly as to the effect of the birth rate and the operations of the immigration law. First of all, we find that we in the eastern part of the province are now in the same position that our fellow-citizens on the coast were in a few years ago. We find that the orientals are crowding farther east and looking for more territory in which to expand. It was only a short time ago that we in eastern British Columbia felt that we were not very directly affected by the movement of orientals and not directly interested. The movement eastward of the orientals of recent years and their encroachment on territory within West Kootenay itself have been brought home to us with such force as to make us realize that it is not a local question, nor a provincial matter, but a national issue, with which the federal authorities must deal. I would like to speak particularly upon the question of the urgency of an exclusion policy. Is it not true that if Canada were in

danger of being invaded by orientals, or by white races seeking to gain control of this Dominion to the great detriment of our population of eight and a quarter millions, that we should take immediate steps to put in force a policy of prohibition or exclusion? That is the situation, I believe, which threatens us to-day. That is the igreat issue we are confronted with in the future unless steps are speedily taken to offset the threatened movement. As previous speakers have explained measures will .have to be taken to stop the immigration of oriental and the growth of that population within the country. Otherwise the time will not be long in coming when we shall cease to have a white Canada. I entirely agree with the terms of the resolution and endorse it most heartily. In my opinion the day has arrived when legislation along the lines indicated must be enacted if we wish to preserve this country for the white race. I believe the day is past when we can depend upon merely restrictive measures, or when we should have recourse to "Gentleman's Agreements" in handling this question. What we must decide upon is a policy of exclusion or prohibition.
Let me endeavour briefly to describe the local conditions in West Kootenay, and I believe that in the statements I have to make I shall be voicing the opinions of the white residents of that constituency. Speaking as a returned soldier, upon coming back to Canada after a service of four years service overseas, the inroads that the orientals had made during the great war at the expense of loyal Canadians heartily sympathetic to our cause were very noticeable to myself and my companions. When the great struggle in Europe began orientals were not present in excessive numbers in the eastern part of British Columbia. Returning when the war was over, we found they had appeared in great numbers and I as a returned man, voicing the sentiments of returned men, object to the condition in West Kootenay such as we find existing to-day. We find that orientals have secured greater control of our natural resources and have improved their position to such an extent that they are better off financially than the average citizen of British Columbia. They took advantage of the war period, when wages were high and labour scarce, to secure a footing in different industries to the extent that it is almost impossible to dislodge them to-day from places which

Oriental Aliens
should be occupied by returned men. From another angle we believe that it is a deplorable state in which to find our country, especially for those who sacrificed themselves during the war, looking that good might come, looking to protect our Dominion from invasion, from the democratic point of view, looking to make it a better Canada for Canadians. We believe it is not a healthy state that these conditions should exist in Canada to-day. We cannot believe that this is what our soldiers made sacrifices for,-that at the conclusion of the war the yellow races might benefit. These facts have been set out by the previous speakers to-day, and each fact can be substantiated. It is not a healthy condition or a healthy atmosphere from a national point of view. Unless legislation is enacted as soon as possible it will only be a short time when Canada will not be a white man's country, but the greater percentage of control will be, as in British Columbia at the present time, in the hands of the yellow race.
I desire to present for the benefit of hon. members the conditions in respect to the unemployment situation. I believe we can attribute the unemployment situation to a certain extent to the laxity of our laws in connection with the increase of population of Chinese and Japanese. The figures show that seventy per cent of the unemployed throughout the Dominion of Canada are returned soldiers. We find that in the province of British Columbia to-day that there are very few unemployed orientals, and the figures given by previous speakers show that the number of orientals in that province is very large. I hope the present Government will see their way clear to enact such legislation as will bring relief to us in British Columbia, for the benefit of the Dominion, because I believe it will be in the best interests of this country. If such legislation is enacted, it will overcome, not only one phase of the difficulty but a great many, and will remedy the economic conditions in regard to unemployment. It will create a greater market for our labourers, and will give us better control of farm and fruit lands, and will prevent the orientals getting control of our natural resources.
I wish to repeat that I agree with the resolution in its entirety and take great pleasure in supporting it.


Mr. E. J. McMURRAY (North Winnipeg) :: I am glad to -say that I can support this resolution and yet not be obliged to
resort to distasteful methods in condemnation of the oriental people. In common with the hon. member from Nanaimo (Mr. Dickie) I can bear tribute to the many fine qualities of the Japanese and Chinese. The patriotism of the Japanese is marked. The integrity of the Chinaman is pronounced. But we must look at this question from the point of view of its great national importance to us. Canada is a young nation, and compared with other nations is merely in its infancy. The nations that succeed are those that have been built up slowly of one homogeneous people. The nations that have stood the test of the late war in Europe have been those that were composed of one stock, French, British and German. Those nations have stood the test, but the conglomerate and polyglot nations of Europe, such as Austria, composed of all sorts of elements, dwindled and smashed before the force of the war. It will take us hundreds and hundreds of years to develop our national resources. It will take us a far longer time - to build up a distinctly Canadian type which must come in the process of time, and that type must be absolutely homogeneous. Without that it cannot survive. A rock washed by the waves, of the ocean, if it is not composed of one element, sooner or later will disintegrate. And so it is with the nations; if a nation is not built of one stock and woven together into a national fabricate, it will sooner or later crumble. As to the Japanese and Chinese, they have a great illustrious history. They have been great because they are of one stock; they are unconquerable as nations, because they are of that stock; but there is a vast chasm in every way between the oriental and the occidental. We have only to think of the western people, who, for instance, reside in India. We see the officials there longing for furlough home. We see the merchant there acquiring, at as rapid a rate as possible, his fortune, in order that he may leave the country and go home. We find the planter there overcoming the monotony of the time with his whiskey and his black cigar. We see the people there running frantically to all kinds of sport to wear away the dull edge of time, longing to get back to the western world. For three or four hundred years our people over there have never entered into the life of the nationality of the country. You will find that is the case in the occidental colonies in Yokohama, Hong Kong, Calcutta-everywhere throughout the eastern world. That
Oriental Aliens

vast chasm exists to-day in thought, in tongue, in physical form and colour. These people can never, or will never, intermingle and intermarry with our people. The descendants of Chinamen and Japanese coming to this country will be Chinamen ' and Japanese respectively in five hundred years from now; there will be no difference. The money that an oriental earns in this country goes back to his native land, and after his death his very bones are taken back to the sacred soil that gave him birth.
There has been no amalgamation of these people in any shape or form into our national fabric; there can never be any. At the present time, our complaint against them is probably on account of their industry, and that has been borne out here. But whatever attributes they may have that are essential, they are producing in this country at the present time, particularly on the west coast, a condition of affairs in which our people cannot compete at all. They are not, however, going to be limited to the west c.oast; they are already crossing over the mountains. If you go through any small town in western Canada, you will find those people more abundantly in evidence as the years go by.
Thus, there is the future to be considered. The China of to-day is not the China of twenty years ago. The China of to-day is looking out over the world. Twenty years ago, the Chinese soldier was armed with a quilted coat, a steel pot and a long pole. To-day, Chinese armies are battling around Peking, fully equipped armies, armed with machine guns and aeroplanes. There is no enmity between this country and Japan, or between this country and the oriental; but if these people come here, in years to come, there may be a difficult question to settle; and, just as good' friends sometimes, at election times, keep away from visiting each other for fear troubles may come, it would be well that the oriental races and the occidental race represented by Canada should recognize that there may be a difficulty here some day; that it must almost inevitably come on account of the people of the Orient settling in this country. We must settle this question, and I think, if we put it fairly in a diplomatic and reasonable way to the people of the Orient, they will appreciate that the settlement of this question at as early a date as possible may relieve a very dangerous situation in the future, not long distant or long distant, who knows? But

this question is a cause of irritation and a danger to us. Kipling has said:
East Is East and West is West,
And never they twain shall meet.
The difficulty is that they may meet some day in the future. Whether they will meet or will not meet, it is certain they will not mix, and I think that is the view that Australia and New Zealand have, that you cannot build up a strong national people unless you build them of homeogene-ous elements; that your immigrant coming into this country must have one absolute feature, that he can be welded into the national character and woven into the national fabric, politically, socially and in every other way.
At six o'clock, the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. L. J. LADNER (Vancouver South) :: Mr. Speaker, we have had various aspects of the Asiatic question dealt with in the course of this debate, and before it is concluded other speakers will deal with its economic and political aspects, as well as with certain of its social phases. My particular part in this debate relates to the sociological aspect of Asiatic immigration -the forces which influence and determine the organization and development of the social group.
I submit that perhaps no feature of this question is more important than that of assimilation. In the European countries you will find certain racial differences so far as origin is concerned. For instance, you will find in France that the northerner differs considerably from the southerner; in Switzerland you will find citizens of French, German and Italian origin, each group maintaining their mother tongue, but all capable of assimilation; you will find in Belgium the Walloons and the Flemings, each a distinct type, but all Belgian citizens with a common outlook on national affairs; even in Great Britain you have the English, the Scotch, the Welsh-and, I might still add, you have the Irish, although some people do not agree as to that.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: You have the French also.


Leon Johnson Ladner: In Great Britain?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.

Oriental Aliens


Leon Johnson Ladner: Well, we have the French very near. They are a welcome race, no matter where we find them. Now, I submit that in order to have national harmony, the people must hold in common such great fundamentals of nationhood as, national ideals and aims, the Christian religion, race tradition-the colour and habits of the race, and, perhaps, most important of all from the standpoint of immigration, the practice of intermarriage. These are powerful sociological forces which make possible and bring about national harmony.
We read in Wells' "Outline of History" that most of these races trace their origin back to twelve thousand centuries ago, and they have been gradually differentiating until to-day we have the various races which now people the world. During the five thousand years of their recorded history we know that Japan and China have maintained their national characteristics, and although they have lived side by side they have not intermarried, nor has it been possible for them to assimilate with each other. If that is so with those two nations, how much more so is it as between Asiatic peoples on the one hand and those of Anglo-Saxon stock on the other? We need only look at the past, and, taking our lessons from history, adopt a sound and sane policy for the future, although it may be intertwined with certain international difficulties at the outset.
The Eurasian, produced by the union between the white and brown races, has no social standing on either side of the Pacific. We all respect Japan as a nation and the splendid qualities of her people, likewise we must respect the good qualities of the Chinese; but it is the coming into this country of a particular section of those peoples, of the Mongolians and the lower educated classes, which has produced the educational and other problems that we are faced with to-day.
In order to indicate the difficulties with which the West is confronted, and with which the whole of Canada will sooner or later be confronted if this question is not dealt with promptly and satisfactorily, I have decided to refer for a few minutes to the ramifications of the drug traffic throughout Canada as disclosed by investigations conducted by committees in various parts of the country. The lowest dives, harbouring the lowest moral depravity, are found in the Chinese quarters of our cities. The drug traffic is organized like any large business. At the head of it are trained and capable men, and they have their
financiers, their importers, their wholesalers, their retailers, and even their street peddlers. Drugs in large quantities come to this country from China and Japan by our Pacific liners. In some cases the drug is secreted by members of the crew, who smuggle it on shore in small quantities. In other cases barrels of narcotics are dumped off the great liners as they pass south of Vancouver island. A speedy launch goes out, picks up the floating barrels, and takes them to some spot among the islands; in that way the drug is brought into the country. It is then given to men whose special and only business is to distribute it in large quantities. This business is mostly engaged in by Chinese and Japanese -not so much by the Japanese; I should not say that, but almost entirely by Chinese. The men engaged in the business, the men who sell the drugs, do not take it themselves, because they see the awful human wrecks which are the result of the use of narcotics. In a cold, calculating way, therefore, these men carry on this nefarious business, distributing the drugs throughout the community.
I would like to make it understood that these observations are not merely of a general character based on guesswork. The statements which I am about to make are founded upon official reports; upon information gathered by a citizens' committee appointed in the city of Vancouver, and upon information which I have collected from police authorities all the way from Vancouver to Halifax. Before giving some illustrations, let me explain, having touched upon the system of distribution, how the market is extended; how consumers are induced to take the drug; how they are inveigled into the practice until they become incapable of exercising their own will. What is known as " snow parties " are held. Chinamen of great wealth, engaged in this odious practice, and living in expensive, luxurious quarters, give parties at which white women, whom they employ, act as hostesses. Young girls are invited from about the city to take part in these so-called social functions-perhaps a dance, perhaps a card party; something of that kind. Interspersed among these young people are two or three addicts who are trained and whose business it is to inveigle other people into the use of narcotics. It is established beyond question that these parties take place periodically; that cocaine which is under strength is used to induce young people to acquire the habit. They are dared to take it, just as they would

Oriental Aliens

be dared to jump across a ditch, or some other such trifling thing. They are dared to smell this stuff-a small quantity of it on a knife or spoon, and in that way the first step is taken. Before my remarks are finished, I hope, with proper reluctance and due regard to the dignity of this House, to describe to you the depths to which addicts to the drug can go and to point out that one of the chief causes of this terrible traffic arises out of the intercourse between China and Canada and through the medium of the Chinese who are engaged in it.
I received a letter last week from the secretary of the Asiatic Exclusion League of Canada, the honorary president of which is Brigadier General A. D. McRae. In his concluding words referring to the illegal drug traffic, the secretary says:
Here we have a disease, one of many directly traceable to the Astatic. Do away with the Asiatic and you have more than saved the souls and bodies of thousands of young men and women who are yearly being sent to a living hell and to the grave though their presence in Canada.
We have received certain information through the police officials. In Okalla prison, the largest in British Columbia, during the spring of 1921 out of 320 inmates 110 were drug addicts As I mentioned a moment ago, the citizens' committee, at the head of which is one of the best known citizens of Vancouver, employed nurses and detectives in their investigations. One of the men who assisted them was a theatre owner, an actor by profession and a man philanthropically disposed, who took advantage of his talent and ability as an actor to disguise himself in the dress of a drug addict. He went about Vancouver and other cities as well, and in that way he gained the confidence of some of the men engaged in this traffic and discovered things that the police would not have found out in a thousand years. He found that within a block of his own theatre he could buy, in an illegal way, large quantities of narcotic drugs from Chinese who carried on the business in their laundries, tailor shops, jewelry shops and establishments of that kind.
The results of these findings are exceedingly interesting. It was found that much of the illegal drug importation comes from China and Japan and that the drug traffic was increasing all over Canada. The police reports that we have gathered corroborate that. The drugs are usually retailed in Chinese stores, laundry or tailor shops, and many other kinds of establish-

ments. Now, in order that the House may be apprised of the extent to which this work is undertaken and the terrible condition of affairs brought about by it-and it applies not only to Vancouver; these drug addicts move all over the North American continent; we found the trade was carried on in all cities right through to Halifax-I will give you some actual cases. I will not, of course, give the names, but I will state the facts in the best manner that I can, considering the nature of the cases.
One girl of sixteen became a user of morphine and cocaine and was associated with Chinese, Japanese and Hindus. She appeared before the committee of investigation and on that very morning she had yielded to Chinese, Japanese and Hindus m order to gain $5.50 with which to purchase drugs. I have here a list of several pages of individual cases which were investigated, and the facts were not only testified to by the addicts themselves but confirmed by corroborative evidence. A girl of twenty-three, through the use of morphine and cocaine, had a child by a Chinaman named Pete Kong, a notorious Chinese drug peddler. She injected morphine into the infant with a hypo needle until it died- her mind being so distorted. I am only giving some of the cases from this list which it is possible to divulge under the circumstances. It was found that the traffic was indulged in not only by persons who might be designated as among the lower classes, the uninformed or uneducated classes, but through the machinations of this organization people from the very best families became addicts. Here is the case of a woman who was a clergyman's daughter, accomplished in music, well educated. She is a subject of morphine and cocaine; she is associated with Chinamen, and at present is serving a jail sentence. There is a large list of names here, but I will conclude with one case, that of a man who is related to one of the best known public men in Canada. He served with the Princess Pats overseas, was badly wounded, and on his return to Vancouver got into the Chinese quarter and became a dope fiend; now his business is going around and carrying out a function known as "filling orders". A telephone message comes in giving a certain order, and he goes out and fills it-administers a hypodermic injection for which he charges a dollar, or something of that kind. I have a case here of another woman who actually spends from $10 to $30 a day for drugs, and a Chinaman named J. J. Wing secured

Oriental Aliens
from $2,500 to $3,000 worth of jewelry and furs from her. This came out in evidence in a lawsuit instituted by the woman for the recovery of the stolen articles.
In another list which I have before me there is an account of thirty-one cases which were investigated. They were taken in order as they came before the court, and twenty-one of the thirty-one cases were Chinese, so hon. members will see the extent to which these people are engaged in ' the traffic. From the moral and sociological standpoint alone, if from no other, these immigrants are of such a class that we would be a thousand times better off without them irrespective of their effect on our economic, commercial and industrial life.
In conclusion, I shall read a letter which was written to the secretary of the Asiatic Exclusion League of Canada, and forwarded to me. It is from a Japanese in Vancouver, and I read it in order to show the mental attitude of these people towards our country. Hon. members will note the irony and invective which runs through this letter.
Chas. L. Macauley,
306 Tower Bldg,
Vancouver, B.C.
Dear Sir,-I read with interest "Danger".
That is the small publication issued on behalf of the Asiatic Exclusion League. The letter goes on:
I paid 20 cent. One hundred Japanese read it, very cheap.
The first step very good. Getting his start very poor insult to our government and very insulting to the individual Japanese.
We Japanese are a nation Hike the English, the Scotch, or the Irish, but not like the latter altogether, we have abolished bigotry. If you like we are like the German, we are a nation, we love our country first and foremost. We love riches, and all that riches will bring, but we will not sell our country for money.
Hon. gentlemen will not find a case where a Japanese has been caught selling his country for money.
You never hear of a Japanese traitor. In Canada you have many traitors. In the United States there are many traiitors because you are only people and have not nationhood.
That is the point. He goes on:
In China they allow all deceitful and crooked men to govern, so in Canada.


Mr. GRAHAM:: The letter must be a very old one. What is the date?


Leon Johnson Ladner: The 6th of December. He goes on:
We Japanese did not force our way to Canada. Your money changers ask us to come, we were
cheap. O yes very cheap. In Japan our government is honourable. One member who does dishonour to his country must die by his own hand if possible, but he must die. In Canada your government is different, one member sells his people and he is soon great like our merchants trading in commerce, but our merchants do not sell Japan or the people, they sell merchandise. Japanese merchandise always, if possible. Your members sell their soul and their land, and the peo-ple, and when the election is over half the people cry witih joy for one week and then they cry for four years. Is this not so, Mr. Macauley? We do not hate Canadians, the clown and the jester is never hated.
We Japanese living in the province and making an honourable living will watch your political pantomime with interest. When you become a real nation we will do good business with you still and you will admire us more.
Very truly,
Sato.
I can conceive of no stronger argument for the necessity of fortifying ourselves in the building up of our nation than the attitude disclosed by this Japanese living in British Columbia. If we are to become a nation, and have an outlook and a permanent place in history, we can well profit by the lessons of other nations who have built before us. It is not necessary for us to jump in the dark, because we have the light of history to guide us, showing how nations have developed in the past. I submit that the Government and all' members of the House, irrespective of their political affiliations and looking only to the real interests of this country, can by adopting this resolution lay the foundation of a policy which will overcome the international obstacles and enable us to emerge twenty-five years hence a real Canadian nation, with a white country, instead of a mixture that we would not be very proud of.


Mr. T. G. McBRIDE (Cariboo) :: It is not my intention to take up very much time this evening, as many aspects of this) question have already been dealt with. When I spoke in the debate on the Speech from the Throne I made the statement that one of the most important questions that could come before the House this session was the oriental question. I repeat that statement here to-night. I stated then that it was hard for the people in he East to realize fully what the people in the West were up against in this oriental problem. The people who have to live and associate and compete with the Orient are the people who know what a menace the oriental is to our country. People in the East speak of Vancouver as the gateway to the Orient: the Orient speaks of Vancouver as their gateway to Canada.
Oriental Aliens

Ship captains who have sailed the seven seas speak of the port of Vancouver as the best harbour they have ever entered. Tourists speak of the sunny slopes of the Pacific as the land of sunshine, the California of Canada, a land loved by all who dwell there. Why should we, with a country like that on our Pacific coast turn it over to the Orient, and that is what will happen in the future if the laws of this country continue as they are at the present time. It seems to me that every person who has the vision of a greater Canada should try and keep British Columbia a land for the white race to dwell in, and not turn it over to the Orient. People who live in the West know from experience that if immigration of the Asiatic race is not checked and if the tide of immigration flows as it has in the past, the time will soon come when the white race will have to retreat across the Rocky mountains and British Columbia will be left in the hands of the Orient. The present state of affairs has only to continue for a short time for that day to come. I ask who will be responsible for that state of affairs? It will be the members sitting in this House to-night who will be responsible if they do not enact laws here that will stop oriental immigration to our shores. Why cannot that be done now, and done once for all?
The increasing tide of oriental immigration at the present time is striking at the very root of our civilization. It is tearing the foundations from beneath our home life, and home life reflects itself upon a nation; it always reflects itself upon the prosperity of a nation. We cannot have an A-l country and a C-3 class of people. It is against all laws of economy to expect such a thing. Home life either makes children good citizens or a public nuisance; and I say that so long as the working man in this country is forced to compete with the oriental they cannot have in Canada the home life he ought to have. Our workingmen cannot even have the semblance of home life if they have to compete with Asiatics. Why should not the interests of the Canadian people come first? Why should we have to cater to the Asiatic? Why should we allow these people to land on our shores? Let us look for a moment at the manner in which the Japanese treat white men when they go to Japan and let me say in this connection that I am not going to make statements that cannot be verified. There was a man named Mr. C. J. Kirkpatrick, formerly of the Royal 
Naval Service but who for five years was employed as a civil engineer at Yokohama by the Japanese government. Let us hear what he says about what the white people are up against in Japan. This gentleman declares "There is absolutely no law for the white man in Japan." He goes on to make several other statements. He tells of a practice on the part of the Japanese rickshaw men of demanding a fee of 25 yen for carrying a European or an American whereas they only ask 5 yen for carrying a Japanese. Imagine what an outcry there would be if we were to extort 25 cents from the Japanese or the Chinese on our street cars, and only charge our own people 5 cents. That would be discriminating against the Asiatic race, they would tell us. Well, that is the kind of discrimination which is carried on in Japan against the whites.
A few months ago a Mrs. J. Gray, wife of an accountant in the Lane-Crawford Company, a large wholesale establishment in Yokohama, refused to pay what she considered an exorbitant fee demanded by the rickshaw men. What happened? One of the men caught hold of the lady, twisted her arm and abused her in a most shameful way, and because her husband interfered he was summoned before the courts. Notwithstanding the evidence, which was wholly against the rickshaw men Mr. Gray was convicted of a criminal offence, and only escaped a sentence of six months in a filthy Japanese prison by the whole white population of Yokohama going to the authorities and offering an apology.
Mr. Kirkpatrick has made the statement that at the time of the riots in Vancouver some of the citizens of Japan boasted that if they did not get the same rights in Canada as the white people, the Japanese in Vancouver would cut the water mains and set fire to the city. They further declared that if the military were called out they were well prepared to take care of themselves. I have no doubt of the accuracy in the main of the latter statement, bearing in mind that all the Japanese who come to Canada are trained, either in the navy or in the army, before they are allowed to leave the Empire.
At the present time the Japanese companies are making a determined effort to secure control of the Pacific shipping and the Japanese government is giving-or at least it was a year ago-a subsidy to help these companies to control the shipping. Now what are the orientals doing in Can-

Oriental Aliens
ada? On the Pacific coast they are driving the white men and women from the most fertile valleys we have, and at present they control over 27,000 acres of the best land in British Columbia. Some years ago Chinamen started in peddling vegetables from door to door in Vancouver and Victoria, underselling the white man in every case. Finally they drove the white man to the wall and to-day the people of these cities are paying more for vegetables than is paid in any other city on the Pacific coast. The reason of that is that the oriental is in control of the market. Out of nineteen firms classified as retail and wholesale vegetable dealers in the telephone directory of Vancouver eighteen of them are under oriental names. The orientals are also getting well advanced in many other lines. Take, for instance, the wholesale and retail merchants of the city of Vancouver. Over 300 of them are orientals, and this number does not include Asiatics trading under the names of white men. A number of these firms combine together and purchase at wholesale prices. Then they retail the products bought in this way to the oriental restaurants at the wholesale rate. This is gradually driving the white men who are trying to run restaurants out of business. It is a very effective way of killing opposition.
What are they doing in the case of the logging camps all along the coast in which employment was given to hundreds and thousands of men? Over forty logging camps on the Pacific coast are controlled and operated by the Japanese. How can white men compete with orientals who can board themselves for twenty-five or thirty cents a day and live in shacks not fit for human beings to dwell in? Surely the people of Canada do not want to allow into this country a class of immigration that will lower the standard of living for the workingman. Why should the laws of this country not be such that they would raise rather than lower the standard of living of the workingman. The workingmen and women of this country are the backbone of Canada. No country can long continue in the forefront whose people are not workers.
The white people in the West are waiting to see what the members of this House are going to do about this question. The fishermen on the Pacific coast are eagerly waiting to see the stand this House will take on the oriental question; and the farmer and his family, who realize that they will finally be run out of house and home
by the oriental if the immigration laws of this country are not changed, are eagerly waiting to see whether this Government is or is not going to take some action. The lumbermen and the logger are eagerly waiting to see whether they will get a square deal at the hands of this Government. The laundrymen, who employ hundreds of our boys and girls, are eagerly looking for action on the part of this Government. The small merchant is also eagerly expectant of action. The young girl, who, through lack of employment, is forced to work in the restaurant with some of these orientals, is eagerly looking to see what the members of this House are going to do on this question. The mother of the little school girl-dear to her as life itself-is anxious to know if any relief is in sight, or if she will still have to continue sending her little one to school to sit in the same seat and associate with oriental boys twice her age. Yes, and the little girl herself who resents such company wants to see a change brought about. If this Government takes hold of this situation and passes legislation that will stop orientals entering this country they will have done more for Canada than any other government that was ever entrusted with the administration of public affairs in the Dominion.
Why should this Government not assume the responsibility and put an end to this at once? Why should it not assume the responsibility the people sent it here to assume? I will admit that you can educate the orientals, but it is simply like painting a pump to purify the water in the well. You can never change their disposition. The oriental is not a man who will develop the country. He will not go out and cultivate the country. He stays rather in the city, and takes the jobs from our women and young people. I read a statement in a paper the other day about this question, and I may say I do not believe in people coming into this House and spending hours reading the newspapers. When there are so many young women out of employment, the oriental problem becomes a serious affair. One young woman said "I have two bits left". I have lived for the last two weeks on two pints of milk and two doughnuts a day, and when I go to look for a job I mostly meet a Chinaman at the door and am told that I am not wanted." It is pretty hard for these young women that we have allowed into our country orientals to fill jobs that our own people
Oriental Aliens

should fill. Another young woman said "I am supposed to be good, I have got 75 cents left, I am two weeks behind in my rent. The landlady says I must pay the rent or she will take my clothes. I have to earn the money some way". And yet the Chinamen are taking the jobs that those women ought to have and want to fill. Is it not time to wake up to the situation, and stop sidetracking it, as has been done in the past? Is it not time that we realized our responsibility to the people of Canada, that this House took some action in the matter and stopped once and for all the immigration of orientals coming into our country?


Mr. J. A. MacKELVIE (Yale) :: There never has been a time, I think, during the somewhat extended period of 35 years during which I have been a resident of British Columbia, in which this subject of oriental immigration has not in some degree loomed up before the people of that province. I have seen it growing to very alarming proportions. I have seen it when it might be compared to a small cloud the size of a man's hand on the horizon, and have seen it develop into a menace that practically overshadowed the sky. I do not believe a question has ever been debated in this House to which more wholehearted support has been given by those who thoroughly understand it than this resolution. I believe that every member in this House who comes from British Columbia has time after time discussed this matter in his home constituency, and it is altogether probable that, either by way of pledges given in the canipaign in response to questions, or by promises given of his own volition, he has announced in some way his intention of pursuing this subject on every opportunity which presented itself in this House. I do not believe that any member from the westernmost province of this Dominion who casts a vote in favour of the resolution will ever vote with more sincerity or cheerfulness on any resolution or motion which comes before the Parliament of Canada. Something was said by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Dickie) this afternoon which indicates the measure of affection with which the people privileged to live in British Columbia regard that province, and he did not depict in one whit too glowing terms the natural beauties and great endowments which have been lavished upon that country by a munificent nature. And is it not, Sir, a heritage worthy 
of preservation for ourselves and for succeeding generations of Canadians that may come after us? Is it not our duty to preserve intact, as far as possible, that magnificent heritage to the people of this country, and yet it is slowly but surely slipping away from us?
Various aspects of the question have been, I think, very well dealt with by the speakers who have preceded me in this debate. I purpose to speak very briefly on the aspect which relates to the occupation of lands by orientals. Coming, as I do, from one of the farming sections of British Columbia, the Okanagan valley, known pretty well throughout Canada and otheT parts of the continent as one of the great fruit-producing sections of the West, I can give testimony to the fact that a very grave danger indeed confronts the residents of that section. I am not speaking so particularly in regard to the fruit culture as in relation to the general business of farming in that country. The member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Munro), who, I think, intends to speak in this debate, will, no doubt, be able to inform the House how, on the lower Fraser, vast areas of land producing small fruits, strawberries, raspberries, loganberries and other fruit of that description have passed absolutely under the control of the orientals during the last few years.
To a smaller degree this obtains in the Okanagan, where they were employed rather extensively in orcharding work, during the war period, and I believe that if statistics could be furnished it would be shown that perhaps no section of this entire Dominion possesses such a magnificent war record as that Okanagan country. I believe it could be shown that about 22 per cent of the entire population voluntarily took up arms in support of the Empire when war was declared or shortly afterwards. Naturally, under those circumstances, a very sparse population was left to cultivate the land, and the Chinamen immediately took advantage of the situation which thus presented itself, and during the war, and in the years which have since intervened, I think it would be a conservative estimate to say that 80 per cent of the vegetables produced in that country were produced by the Chinese residents.
Can you imagine, Sir, with what feelings the returned soldiers viewed this state of affairs when they came back to the land which they had left, sought to resume their occupation on the farm, and found that

Oriental Aliens
their places had been filled with orientals? Indeed, I have frequently thought, in spite of the very bitter complaints made at their meetings, that the Great War Veterans and kindred associations maintained a very great degree of restraint indeed, when they did not proceed to further measures than those which they have taken in this connection.
I wish to draw attention to a very specific instance which will give some idea of the feeling entertained by the people of that locality regarding the Japanese invasion of the land. Possibly some of you know that situated close to Vernon, where I live, lies a prosperous fruit-growing district known as the Coldstream municipality, and very close to it the Coldstream ranch, established as a fruit-growing property by a former Governor General of this country. It contains, in one block of 800 acres, the largest commercial orchard in Canada. You can imagine the consternation which obtained in that district when it became known, a few years ago, that negotiations were being pursued by the Old Country owners to dispose of that property to a Japanese syndicate. The municipality of Coldstream is settled by a very superior class of people, largely, if not entirely, by people coming from the Old Country, cultured people, men of means, many of them retired army and navy officers, who have spent a great deal of money in providing themselves with fine homes in surroundings that, perhaps, cannot be equalled in this country. You can surmise with what feelings they heard that the great Coldstream ranch, round which were clustered their holdings, was to be passed into the possession of a Japanese syndicate. It can also be easily conceived that the people of the town of Vernon, contiguous to that municipality, were not slow to realise that, if the deal were put through, very soon their town would be degraded into the position of a little, mean village, and all the advantages of which they are so proud now would speedily be taken away from them. Under the circumstances it was not surprising that a very strenuous effort was made to block that deal. Deputations were sent to the provincial legislature and to Ottawa, and, in both cases, without much success. They were informed that difficulties stood in the way of preventing any sale of land to any person in this country who desired to acquire it. Finally, to make a long story short, the deal was stopped, because a measure of
influence was brought to bear upon the owners of the property in the Old Country who withdrew the ranch from the market. This is a concrete instance of what might happen to any part of Canada under existing conditions. As I said a moment ago, those conditions already have been brought about to a very alarming degree on the lower Fraser where the small fruit lands of that section have passed under the domination of orientals.
As was outlined by the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Stork) this afternoon,_ legislation has been attempted on various occasions in our provincial legislature, and inevitably it has met with a check when it has come down to this House. Some years ago we passed and re-passed what was known in British Columbia as the Natal Act, called by that name because it pursued a course similar to that adopted by South Africa in the determination of the people of that country to keep out orientals. Briefly stated, that act provided that when an oriental or any immigrant of an undesirable class presented himself for entrance to this country, educational tests should be put to him; he should be asked by the immigration officer to read and write a certain number of sentences in any European language. Under those circumstances it was easy to shut out any oriental or other immigrant whose exclusion was desired. But that legislation was checked at Ottawa for reasons connected with the various treaties then existing between Great Britain and Japan. One of those treaties, known as the Anglo-Japa-nese Alliance has now been scrapped. Instead of it, we have the Four-Power Treaty which was recently consummated at Washington, and which, I have no hesitation in saying, should work out very much more satisfactorily than the previous agreement. Another treaty was mentioned this afternoon by the mover of this resolution, and I am free to confess that, in the four corners of that commercial treaty wllich he read, there appears to exist some difficulty which confronts such legislation as we are now seeking. It must be remembered that provision is also made in the treaty which apparently gives to the Parliament of Canada absolute jurisdiction regarding its own immigration law.
I do not think any speaker approaches this subject to-day without a clear conception of the responsibility which rests upon him in debating it. He must be seized with the idea that this is not a provincial affair
Oriental Aliens

entirely, nor a national affair entirely; that its scope is largely international; but I for one am convinced that no insuperable difficulties present themselves in that direction. I am fully convinced that if, as was argued by some of the speakers, the matter is put forward in a frank manner with all our cards on the table, and if we explain the situation fully to those people, we shall encounter no difficulty in implementing any legislation which this House may provide along the lines suggested in this resolution.
None of us who has watched history, can have failed to admire the wonderful progress made by Japan during the last fifty years. That little nation has rapidly forged ahead until it has taken a position well in the forefront amongst the great powers of the world, and1 along with that progress has naturally come a feeling of national pride. Accordingly, and quite rightly, they would maintain a position which would lead them to resent anything approaching an affront passed upon their national pride, and nobody in this House would, for a moment, suggest that a course should be followed that would give them the slightest cause to feel that they were being subjected to any slight or discrimination. But it has been pointed out with great force, I think, this after-
9 p.m. noon how their own legislation affects us if we seek entrance to their country, and it is only a matter of reasonable quid pro quo that we should demand the same privileges which they are prepared to give to others, and nothing further. Australia has found a way to settle this difficulty; she has been hampered by no fear of international complications. In spite of the fact that the Japanese alliance with Britain was in effect, Australia, during the last few years, passed legislation which has the effect of absolutely excluding orientals from that island continent. The matter was one of self-preservation with them, and there is an old adage that "self-preservation is the first law of nature." This should apply to nations as well as to individuals, and we are asking this Parliament to place no more power in the hands of the people of this country than that which has been taken, without any objection from any source, by the people of Australia and the people of South Africa.


Mr. CRERAR:: Might I ask a question purely for information, because I do not know? Can the hon. member inform the

House as to the character of the legislation which Australia has passed and which produces that result?


John Armstrong MacKelvie: It is exactly of the nature of that legislation of which I spoke a moment ago, which was passed by British Columbia some years ago, by way of educational tests. That subject and other constitutional points will be dealt with later on in the debate, I understand, by the hon. member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Ste-vehs), who has made a thorough and exhaustive study of all the constitutional aspects of this question. The speaker who opened the debate this evening (Mr. Ladner), dwelt, in a manner which must have engaged the earnest attention of this House, upon the moral degradation which has followed the introduction of the drug evil largely through oriental influence. I do not intend to dilate on that, nor to enlarge upon the tremendous evil which this has brought to our country. If any person desires to acquaint himself with how degraded human nature may, under certain circumstances become, all he has to do is to visit certain oriental quarters in British Columbia cities, where he will find a condition of filth and vice, vice which must be unmentionable before audiences such as this, which ought to convince him that the fewer of this class of people that any country has within its bounds, the better it will be for its people and for its civilization to progress upon really proper lines. Now, I have spoken very briefly upon the international aspect of this question. I realize that the administration naturally will have to give very serious consideration to it. But fully sensible of the gravity of my words and of the words of those who have preceded me, I venture to assure the Government that in my opinion, and in the opinion of every man in British Columbia who has given the question the attention which it demands, there is no remedy save that of absolute exclusion. We have tried restrictive measures for many years, and you can see where that policy has landed us. Now, we say: Cut right down to the root of this evil, cut right home to the very marrow of this disease, and apply the only effective remedy that will meet the situation-absolute and complete exclusion from this day forward of alien orientals entering this country.
We urge therefore that the commercial treaty between Great Britain and Japan, which expires in July, 1923, unless notice be given a year previously, be denounced with-

Oriental Aliens
out delay as far as Canada's part therein is concerned. We also think we are right in asking that what is known as the Lemieux agreement, a more or less secret arrangement regarding immigration from Japan to this country, be denounced as well. We believe that an open, above-board agreement excluding absolutely from our shores all the labouring classes from that country is the only remedy that can he satisfactorily applied. That is the spirit and the intention of this resolution.
No one who has given any attention to it can begin to speak about this subject at all without a thousand different aspects of it surging into his mind, and if he gave free rein to his thoughts he could discourse upon it to an almost unlimited extent. But recognizing that many speakers have preceded me and that many are still to follow,
I have no intention of speaking at any further length. I can only add that in my humble judgment it is not too much to say that the future of this country depends to a very large degree upon the fate of this resolution to-night.


Mr. E. A. MUNRO (Fraser Valley) :: Like other members who have spoken on this subject, I also consider it the most important that has engaged the attention of this House so far this session or that may engage it in the future.
The question involved means to the people of British Columbia in particular, and to the people of Canada in general, their right to develop the highest type of manhood and womanhood with a great national destiny after the best traditions of the British race in their own country. These rights, Mr. Speaker, no one will dare to challenge, nor will a Briton ever dare to forfeit.
It has often been said that Great Britain is generous to a fault. Modern history furnishes us with some examples in our own country where this generosity has worked a hardship on some of the members of this great confederacy. We have performed the filial duty of self-abnegation with more or less grace for the good of the Mother Country. When one considers the length, strength and alacrity of the British arm of justice in succouring even a single British subject from danger or distress, or demanding full restitution for foul play, we must confess after all that the seeming injustices done have been accompanied with the best intentions, and have grown out of her multiplicity of cares and her nonacquaintance with the peculiarities of the case rather than of maternal neglect.
The position in which we find ourselves in British Columbia with respect to orientals has grown out of lack of knowledge of the real conditions there on the part of the Mother Country, and also on the part of Canadians generally. No sane Canadian knowing, as we British Columbia men know, by actual observation and experience, could be cold or indifferent, as we see day by day, year by year, one industry after another, one farm after another, one locality after another, change ownership, character and colour from white to yellow.
A councillor in our country told me last fall how the Japanese acquire land and cultivate it. He said that if a Japanese is able to buy five acres of land, he can send to Japan and get a man to come over to this country under contract for two years at a wage of only fifteen or eighteen dollars per month-I have forgotten the exact amount. Each man is employed during those two years on a berry farm. A . great many Japanese run small fruit farms in the province, and during the summer months their men under contract work on these farms, and in the fall they go into the mills and take away the jobs of white men, drawing down good pay. Next summer those contract men are back on the berry ranch again, and at the end of two years they have learned the berry industry and are in very good shape to start themselves. If a Japanese owns ten acres he gets two men under similar terms.
It is not necessary for me to repeat the reasons why we will not and cannot meet oriental competition, or why we cannot assimilate the oriental, more than to say that it is largely a matter of rights and standards. Rights are measured by certain standards, and the higher the civilization the higher the standards. We in this country recognize a standard of decent living conditions; we recognize a standard working day of so many hours for so much pay; we recognize a standard of individual obligation to the community and the state; we recognize a standard of education; we recognize a standard of morality based on the Ten Commandments. How many of these standards do the orientals we get conform to? Not one. Where are the men and women in Canada who are prepared to live and raise their children under any other standards? These standards cannot be maintained and are not being maintained where orientals dwell in sufficient numbers.
This Parliament is on a hill almost three thousand miles away from British Col-
Oriental Aliens

umbia where the tragedy is being enacted. Perhaps not ten per cent of the members of this House have resided in British Columbia in recent years for a sufficiently long period to see and know by personal observation the insidious and deadly encroachments of orientals in almost every field of operation to which our province lends itself. Yet for almost a quarter of a century this Parliament has complacently disallowed and killed the oriental exclusion legislation that the legislature of British Columbia has passed for the protection of her own people.
It is always dangerous firing at long range where the visibility is poor. In every instance you have been wounding and maiming your own friends while the enemy went unharmed. Yes, this Parliament is on a hill, and although not very steep it would sometimes seem as though Knowledge and Truth, like some poor wayfaring men, had not always made the grade.
British Columbia, like the Psalmist of old, has been looking to this hill and saying: I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills whence cometh my help. But no help cometh, though our eyes be blinded with supplication, though our hearts be pierced with a cruel apathy and our sacrifice is replete with degradation and despair. Evidently the hills failed the Psalmist too, for he goes on: My help cometh from the Lord who made heaven and earth. Must we in our martyrdom exclaim,like Cardinal Wol-sey in those immortal words: If we had served our God as faithfully as we have served our King, he would not have given us over in our gray hairs.
"Hope springs eternal in the human breast." Once more we come to seek redress in this House.
Like dying embers on the hearth We light the beacon in the night To guide the mariner aright.
Our country raises monuments in honour of those men who discovered and explored new territories and planted the British flag thereon. We have such monuments in British Columbia and we are very proud of them. We have some other monuments,- joss houses and totem poles. We are proud of our totem poles, but we are doubtful if the spirits of the great navigators and explorers who gave to us that vast heritage would be proud of us if they could see the heritage they left us in the grasp of an alien, yellow race. The red men of this country are the wards of the white men; do the white men of this country want to

become the wards of the yellow men? Like brave men we talk; like cowards we retreat, sacrificing our country as a peace offering to a heathen people with their strange manners and their strange gods, whom we have not offended and of whom we wish no evil. We have always been ready, in peace or war, to rally round that flag "that for a thousand years has braved the battle and the breeze"; the flag that stands for protection and freedom. But we are not protected; we are invaded by the deadliest foe. We are not free, because we are not masters in our own house. What is the price of the peace we are asked to keep? A lost manhood, a lost province, the brightest gem in the Canadian confederacy,-the province of British Columbia. "There is a green hill far away" beyond a city wall, a land flowing with milk and honey, her mighty rivers filled with fish, her fertile valleys that produce thirty, sixty and one hundredfold, her harbours and her emerald lakes nestling in the bosom of the everlasting hills; her snow-capped mountains filled with precious minerals; skirted with giant cedars and Douglas pine; her varied climate from the forty-ninth parallel to the Arctic circle, her golden sunsets and her midnight suns

Breathes there a man, with soul so dead,
Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native land!
Whose heart hath ne'er within him burned
As home his footsteps he hath turned
From wandering on a foreign strand?
Mr. Speaker, I wish to read a proposed amendment. I do not intend to move it, because that would only block or spread-eagle this debate, and we do not want the discussion to take that form, but I want the House to listen to it in order that there may be an understanding of what is going to happen if something is not done to remedy the conditions which exist in British Columbia. This is the proposed amendment; that the following words be added to the resolution:
And; if for imperial or other reasons it is considered unwise to stop all future immigration of this kind to Canada, our immigration laws be so amended whereby all oriental aliens coming to Canada after such amendment, shall be taken in bond to the provtince of Ontario where they and their offspring shall permanently reside, under a registration system, so long as they remain in Canada or until such time as the oriental population of Ontario stands in the same ratio to the white population of Ontario as prevails in the province of British Columbia, after which another province may be substituted for that of Ontario.

Oriental Aliens
I do not want the province of Quebec to be jealous or any other province. The object, Mr. Chairman, of this proposed amendment is to find out if the people of Ontario and the other provinces are prepared to pay as high a price for imperial considerations as the people of British Columbia have paid. We offer you a draught from the bottle that for long years you have been pressing to our lips -formulated by your own physicians, mixed in your own laboratory. I doubt if an hon. member in this House would be willing to advocate that British Columbia should receive any more orientals. Assuming this to be correct, we have but two positions left: the one is in line with the resolution, total exclusion which we British Columbians demand so far at least, as our province is concerned and which we recommend generally. The second and last position is that we cannot stop all oriental alien immigration to this country for various reasons, therefore, these Asiatics must be settled outside of British Columbia. If it is all right for British Columbia to be loaded to the gunwale with orientals it is all right for the province of Ontario. If it is a good thing for the province of Ontario to be like British Columbia, vote for the amendment. But if it is a bad thing for the province of Ontario to be like British Columbia, why, vote for the resolution.
We will take it as an evidence of British fair play and of good faith towards the province of British Columbia if you shall rid British Columbia and Canada of this octopus by this resolution or take the pressure off British Columbia by the amendment.
It may be said that Canada never forced the orientals to settle in the province of British Columbia. Quite true, but Canada forced us to accept them by her disallowances, which brought the same result. Freely we have received; freely we have given unto you. There is an old saying that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. We have been the goose long enough. Now we are looking for the gander.
I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this resolution and proposed amendment are dead in line and ready for action if something is not soon done to arrest the blighting and withering effect of oriental occupation of the province of British Columbia.


Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni) :: Mr, Speaker, the phase of the question which I intended to deal with to-night was
net that with respect to the situation in British Columbia. I had left to other members from British Columbia the task of dealing with the conditions as particularly affecting that province. But in California you have the handwriting on the wall; you have an indication of where British Columbia will be in a very few years if something is not done. In California they are five or ten years ahead of us. Not very many years ago, in one of those old moss and ivy covered Scotch churchyards which date back to the thirteenth century, a place where really you almost like to die and rest-on one of the tombstones there I read an inscription supposed to be addressed from the man in the grave to the casual passer-by. I forget the first lines of it, but the latter part went something like this:
As you are now, so once was I;
As I am now, so will you toe,
Therefore prepare to follow me.
So with the situation in California today; from the grave of agricultural and industrial conditions, from the grave of Asiatic domination, they are saying to us in British Columbia: "As we are now, so will you be". It is for us to take warning from the writing on the wall. If I said such and such a thing would happen, you might or might not believe me, but when I point to you an actual condition of things row in existence, we may well take warning.
With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I would like to be allowed to place on Hansard a couple of documents; they are too lengthy to read, but they contain valuable information. One of them contains the evidence given before the House Immigration Committee at Washington quite recently on February 9 of this year, by a man named Mr. McClatchey who prepared the brief, that was alluded to this afternoon, of the state of California on the Asiatic question. The other is a letter by him to Viscount E. Shibusawa dated January 3, which gives a wonderfully clear and concise compendium of the situation. Instead of reading these documents I would like, with the permission of the House, to lay them on the Table for insertion in Hansard.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER:: Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. member shall have leave to hand in the two documents to which he has referred for insertion in Hansard?


Arthur Meighen: I was waiting for the leader of the Government to rise. I have no knowledge at all of the contents of the
Oriental Aliens

documents or of their nature, hut I do think that it is creating a very serious precedent to permit the indiscriminate reading into Hansard of documents. It is a practice we have not followed in this House save in the case of the Budget or of detailed statistics, or, in other special instances. It is not my business particularly to object, but I do think it would be in the best interests of the House not to indulge the precedent.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I might say that I agree with what my right hon. friend has said. I did not take any exception at the time because I happened to see in my hon. friend's hand the document he proposed to insert and it did not appear to he one of very considerable length, and this debate is on a question so all-important that I felt I would not be justified in raising the point at this time. I should like, however, to associate with what the leader of the Opposition has said and to ask the House not to consider it as establishing a precedent in any way if it permits this document to be inserted.


George Newcombe Gordon: Is it the pleasure of the House that, in this instance, the hon. gentleman shall have the right to insert the document unread in Hansard?


Hon. CHARLES MARCIL (Bonaven-ture) :: Will you allow me, Mr. Speaker, as an old member of the House to express my approval of what has been said by the leaders on both sides of the House, and to point out that in the old days a request of this sort was absolutely refused except in the case of government statistics and tables of figures in government speeches on the Budget, and so on. If this is allowed in this instance, the House, not having heard the document read, will not be in a position to vote intelligently to-night as we shall not be able to read the statement until we get to-morrow's Hansard. Therefore, I do not think it would he proper for the hon. gentleman to insert the document.


Alan Webster Neill: Might I suggest that it he referred to the Speaker, the leader of the Government, or the leader of the Opposition while I continue my remarks, for an opinion as to whether it might properly be inserted.


George Newcombe Gordon: It is purely a question for the unanimous decision of the House.


Hon. A. K. MACLEAN (Halifax) :: The document which the hon. gentleman asks
[Mr. Meighen.l
leave to insert in Hansard may be very informative and very interesting. I do not know, of course, but I assume the hon. gentleman would not ask leave of the House for its insertion unless it was relevant and important. Nevertheless, this is the first instance that I can recall in which any hon. gentleman has asked leave at this stage to insert a document in Hansard when it is of a character merely supplementary to his remarks. It is quite another thing for a member of the Government to ask leave to insert statistical tables or information of that kind, but I think it would be a great misfortune for the House if we were to institute the practice which is suggested this evening.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I
associate myself, I think entirely with what has fallen from the lips of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) my right hon. friend who leads the Opposition (Mr. Meighen), the hon. member for Bonaven-ture (Mr. Marcil) and the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean). If we adopt the practice in this House of permitting extracts to be inserted in Hansard, it will be very difficult to draw the line, and I can conjure up a vision of Hansard growing to two or three times its present size. I would suggest to my hon. friend that he either quote extracts from the article in question bearing on the matter, or that he read the document in its entirely. If the document has any bearing on the subject I think it should be placed before the House so that we can more intelligently vote on the question when we come to do so.


Alan Webster Neill: I would have no hesitation in reading the article in its entirety; I am a comparatively young man, but as other speakers are to follow me to-night, it would not be fair. We have agreed on a schedule of speakers, and it is not fair to take up the time of the House in reading this document, but if any hon. gentleman would care to see it, I shall have much pleasure in showing it to him privately.
Dealing with this California question, in April, 1921, just last year, the Senate and legislative assembly of the state of California passed by unanimous vote a joint resolution in connection with this subject, called the Declaration of Principles. It consisted of four paragraphs, some of which I should like to allude to. In order to save time, I shall allude to them as briefly as possible.
The first declaration demanded absolutely the exclusion of Asiatics from the

Oriental Aliens
United States. I may say that this Declarations of Principles was sent on as a state message from the state of California to be submitted to the federal government at Washington. They asked for rigid exclusion. It is curious how absolutely we are in agreement on a great many points. Our conditions are very similar. We also in British Columbia want rigid exclusion. We also want something else which hon. members who have spoken so far in the debate have not touched on, and that is that to make rigid exclusion worth anything we must have some system of registration because there are more orientals coming into British Columbia by the underground route than through the open door. It is no use shutting the lid on the top if you leave the underground passage open, and some system of registration such as we had in the war must be put into force, or we need not bother about putting restrictions on at the other end. I will show later the numbers that are coming in by the underground passage, and the only remedy for this is to have some system of registration.
Accompanying that Declaration of Principle the state of California submitted to Washington what they called a brief. It is a statement very carefully and very skilfully drawn up amplifying the Declaration of Principles and expressing the attitude of California. Yesterday I laid on the desk of hon. members copies, as many as I had, at any rate, of this small booklet. There is a certain amount of pathetic interest attaching to these little pamphlets. They were sent to me by a man in the Shaughnessy military hospital at Vancouver, which is practically a hospital for those who are going to die, for those who are so badly injured that the best thing for them is to allow them to die quietly and peaceably. The man who wrote me said that he had collected there the money to buy a hundred or a hundred and fifty of these pamphlets, and he sent them on to me in the hope that I would distribute them, so anxious were these men to try and get the true conditions in British Columbia before this House, and as the man who wrote the letter said, "Since I began this letter one more of our number has passed away-a man who only last week was fully and heartily engrossed in the presentation of this subject." It is pitiful to think of these young men taking such an interest in this question, and I hope hon. members will find the opportunity to
read this little pamphlet and the proofs contained in it. One might almost call it a message to hon. members from the grave.
As regards the preamble of this brief,
I shall quote only a very few words. They say that "the facts presented offer conclusive evidence of a grave and imminent danger, not only to California and the Pacific states, but to the nation itself." That is the considered judgment of the state of California.
The second clause deals with the desire of the state of California to govern that rigid exclusion themselves, and not by the state of Japan. Under the Gentleman's Agreement, Japan decides who shall come in and who shall stay out. The state of '.California wishes the Gentleman's Agreement denounced and says: "In future let us decide who shall come in and who shall not." I might say that that also applies to British Columbia.
The third clause refers to a sort of protest against any possible action on behalf of the federal government interfering with the Alien Land Act of California, which prevents aliens from owning or leasing agricultural lands, the same as in Japan. This protest urges the federal government not to give way to any representations on the part of the Japanese government to alter or over-ride that act, or to change the act which says that aliens in the States cannot be naturalized.
The fourth clause which I need not quote asks-it makes it one of the principles of their platform-that justice and freedom shall be given to the Japanese already in California. They put that squarely and unmistakably, and the only exception they make is that aliens must not be allowed to lease or own land, and they quote for their reason the treaty between Japan and the United States, in which that provision is absolutely laid down. In neither of the contracting countries are the subjects of the other allowed to own or lease land for agricultural purposes, and the state of California asks that that be adhered to.
I might explain the difference between the law in the States and our own law in that regard. In the States they have a law which forbids the naturalization of any aliens of brown or yellow race. I need not go into the details-that is a fact to-day- and they put the law in three words: This act shall apply only to free white people. There is also a provision for letting in the Filipinos and negroes but it excludes
Oriental Aliens

orientals absolutely. No oriental it he lived a thousand years in the States could be naturalized.
I wish to Heaven we had the same provision in British Columbia. In Canada, as you know, we do allow them to be naturalized to our everlasting regret; and on looking up some old books I found that as far back as 1898 there was a scandal on account of Japs being naturalized after they had only been four and a half months in British Columbia. It was discovered after investigation-you will find it all recorded in the sessional papers of British Columbia-that Japs over from Japan and only a day, in some case two days, in Vancouver, were posted up to the Skeena river and given naturalization papers, certifying that they were naturalized British subjects. They were naturalized in batches, and where there was a rush to get them to the canneries they did not even stop to naturalize them-they rushed them right up and got a notary public afterwards to make out naturalization papers and sent the tickets up to these men. That is all to be found in the evidence in the sessional papers referred to. That is how we in British Columbia naturalized Japanese who were supposed to have been in the country four or five years whereas, as I say, some of them had only been four and a half months. It is in the light of these experiences that we are asking to-day that you shall not naturalize oriental aliens.
In the States, however, there is also another different condition. If a man is born in the States, no matter what his parentage is, he is a United States citizen and has all the privileges connected therewith. He becomes a United States citizen, even though he is the child of an alien, since he has been born in the States. We, of course, have the opposite attitude here. We refuse the franchise to even the children of a naturalized alien born here; but we only do so by a provincial law and we never know the moment that law may be attacked and perhaps successfully attacked. There was a very clever pamphlet got up a few months ago appealing to every sentiment of the British ideal fair play. It spoke of "Taxation without Representation" and was a very cleverly gotten up thing, demanding and begging that the Japanese in Canada should be given a vote. We have refused them as yet under our provincial law but the subject will be more complex when the children born in British Columbia become twenty-one years of age. Therefore we too are asking that

oriental aliens, as in the States, should never be naturalized. I see that in the States also they are asking that they should not give to aliens born in that country any privileges as citizens. In other words we require what they have and what we lack, and they are asking to be given what we have and what they lack. It shows how close together our wants come in that regard.
As regards this rigid exclusion I want to ask the House this question: Is rigid exclusion unfair? Japan says it is but let us seek for the answer to that in the acts rather than in the words of Japan. This is what Japan does herself:
The policy of exclusion is that followed rigorously by Japan herself by section of the Imperial Ordinance No. 353 against Koreans and Chinese. The reason she gives is that to permit the entrance into Japan of such aliens whose standards of living are lower than the Japanese would submit their own people to disastrous competition.
Substitute the word "Canadians" for "Japanese" and you have exactly our sentiments in British Columbia to-day. Surely precedent is better than argument. That is what Japan does, not what she says, and that is what we are asking to have done- only to follow the example of the Japanese themselves.
Now the second clause asks that the control of this immigration shall be put into the hands of the United States instead of left in the hands of Japan. Roosevelt, who arranged this Gentleman's Agreement, added a clause to it that if it was not effective the States would immediately pass an exclusion law. Unfortunately he left office and Taft who succeeded him allowed that clause to be taken out so that the United States surrendered every atom of control over the situation. The Gentleman's Agreement of the States was more rigid than our agreement. It did not permit, as we do, the entrance of 400 labourers a year; it called for the exclusion of labourers entirely; but it said that when a man came along from Japan with a Japanese license or immigration certificate he would be admitted, that being proof he was not a labourer; and the labourers flowed in by the thousand. They had tickets from Japan which said "This man is not a labourer" and in he had to come even though the officials knew he was a labourer. So they kept coming in by the thousands. That is the result of handing over, or surrendering, the rights of any nation to deal with their own immigration. Roosevelt truly says that never in the history'of the

Oriental Aliens
world except under dire compulsion did a nation surrender her rights in that way. Accordingly in the States they are asking, and asking very strenuously, that that be done away with. We ourselves have suffered in the same way. We have an arrangement that not more than so many will come in. Notwithstanding that, they enter the country by dozens, they come in armed with Japanese passports.
Now what is to be done about it? In addition to that of course there is a secret immigration which helps very largely indeed. As this brief very truly says the agreement should be cancelled. What is the good of talking about a Gentleman's Agreement because even assuming-and I say it is a big assumption-that Japan has lived up to it in good faith, it has failed utterly to accomplish the purpose for which it was avowedly entered into. Then it gives examples-I have found hundreds of them here but I shall only cite one. In California they have a Chinese Exclusion Act which means what it says and says what it means. In California the Chinese Exclusion Act has decreased the Chinese population fifty per cent in a given period while the Gentleman's Agreement has enabled the Japs to increase fourfold since 1906. Making necessary allowance for births 47,000 Japanese came in during that period, nearly all labourers, not one supposed to come in under the so-called Gentleman's Agreement. There were 20,000 Japanese in Mexico when the Gentleman's Agreement was first made but there are only 2,500 there now. Where have the rest gone to? Do you think they have gone to Japan or to Heaven? Anyway you will find them in California to-day, and, Sir, it is far easier to evade laws in British Columbia to-day in that regard than it is in California. We not only have the long international boundary line but we have an enormous and very sparsely populated coast line.
The Japanese line of steamers, manned in every case by Japanese-they carry no white crew and no white passengers-pass, at regular intervals, within ten miles of the west coast of Vancouver island where there are numerous fishing settlements with hundreds of Japanese fishermen. What is there to prevent boats with one or two Japanese on board from going out at night and coming back next morning with two more Japanese added to the number? And this could go on uninterruptedly. Off the west coast of Queen Charlotte island the settlements are composed of Japanese to the
extent of ninety per cent. They send their schooners over from Japan to get lumber and shingles. What is to prevent them bringing with them hundreds of Japanese and landing them at night? Once ashore they are free. Who is to know how much of that underground system has been going on in spite of the existing agreement and the so-called Gentleman's Agreement. We are like the man in the Bible who said "All I know is, whereas before I was blind now I see." Wo. in British Columbia will say "Before, we saw one Jap and now we see ten." We cannot argue about documents and treaties, but we know the Japs used not to be there, and we know too surely that they are there now.
There is another way in which the Jap-anse ingenuity comes in. The Gentleman's Agreement says they must not exceed 400, but that means in one year. That means 400 coming direct from Japan. Japan professes to have no control over her nationals outside Japan, and, therefore, she takes care to send 400 direct from Japan, but that does not mean that any amount of Japanese may not come from Mexico, Honolulu, or any other place. All they need is to break their journey for a couple of days, and then come in. In that case they are not coming direct from Japan, and they are allowed to enter. An Order in Council of this Government provides that no labourers are allowed to come in, but that is a temporary thing for disastrous times, and by and by that will be taken off, and the treaty with Japan will continue to go or as before.
The Japanese are experts at evading th-law. As soon as a law looms up in California, they start to evade it. I never saw any nation more successful in evading the law than Japan, and if they cannot evade it, they get around it. They are a most intelligent race, and they can always devise a means of getting the Japs in. They saw there was likely to be trouble, and what did they do? They realized that a man born in the United States was an American citizen. They said, " Let us get together and get in a population and breed Japanese-American voters, and in pursuit of that policy theV began what is called the picture-bride proposition. Under the Gentleman's Agreement the wives of men then in California-mark that-were to be allowed in. There were hardly any wives then in California. But they started this mail-order proposition, by which you took
Oriental Aliens

a book of pictures and picked out your wife, and sent to Japan for her. That was called the picture-bride system and they boasted of the success with which they had evaded the act, the very spirit of the so-called Gentleman's Agreement. They brought them in by the thousands. The people soon began to get interested, and the Japanese saw the trend of it before it went too far, and they said to the officials of the United States, "We have started the picture-bride business, but we see you don't like it." The picture-bride business brought the birthrate of the Japanese so high that it amounted to 69 per thousand as against 19 per thousand for the white race.
What was the next thing? With their usual alertness, they found another loophole. In Seattle the authorities discovered that almost more Japanese children were being born than there were Japanese women, and they thought that, even for a Jap, that was something remarkable. They investigated the matter. They had reason to believe there was something wrong, that there was collusion between the Japanese doctors and the midwives, and false returns were being made. Then it was arranged to obtain birth certificates, and a Japanese boy was sent over from Japan on that certificate which had been obtained, and when he got to the States he was an American subject. The authorities in the States are now proposing to take the finger prints, the foot prints and the description of every child born.
When the agitation to stop the picture-bride business began the Japs said, "Sure, we are always ready to meet you." The hon. gentleman from Nanaimo (Mr. Dickie) said he was sure the Japanese would understand. Yes, they understand before we do. They then started a system called " kandokan" or excursion-bride. The relation between the excursion-bride and the picture-bride is much the same as the relation between Eaton's and Simpson's catalogues, in other words it is exactly the same, only it is more so. Under the excursion-bride or kandokan-bride system perhaps three and a half more women were brought in than under the picture-bride system. So that we are only hoping that there will not be an agitation to stop the excursion bride, or the last state will be worse than the first. I am reminded in that connection of Lloyd George. It is said he went on triumphantly from one defeat to another. These Japs go from

one defeat to another, and each time they are more successful than before.
I am trying to drive home one argument, and that is that there is only one remedy. That remedy is rigid exclusion and a system of registration. They are much too smart for us under any other arrangement. Wre hear talk from some people: "Oh, they are naturalized British subjects, what are you going to do about it"? There are 90,000 Japanese subjects in the United States to-day,-born and registered in the United States, and of these 90,000 only 73 have applied to be expatriated from Japan. If it were 73,000 out of 90,000 there might be some comparison, but it is only 73 out of 90,000, who have applied to Japan to be expatriated, which means to give up their rights as Japanese citizens, and of that 73 only 63 have been granted papers. So that out of 90,000 Japanese subjects in the United States, with their loyalty pledged to Japan, only 63 have been American citizens. And then we hear the prattle about treating them as naturalized citizens. There is no naturalization of a Jap any more than of a German, and they have their training just exactly as the Germans have it. There are to-day between ten and fifteen thousand native born Japs back in Japan getting educated in the traditions of their fatherland. They send them back at eight or ten and then send them back here again, at eighteen or nineteen years of age. Will they be American subjects after that, or will they be true to their country?
I will not deal with the land question, except to say that there was a treaty made in 1911 or in 1913 between Japan and the United States, which said that no subject should own land or lease it for agricultural purposes. They keep the treaty as regards Britain, but break it in California, and California passed a law making it more prohibitive. In two years they passed another law making it still more prohibitive. They passed another law in 1920 to try and make it still more prohibitive. The Jap gets around all that. How? He gets his kid of six days old and buys property or land in his name and manages it in his name. The native born Jap can own land and the alien cannot. And we talk about allowing immigration of people who are so adroit as that.
I wish to congratulate the hon. gentleman from Nanaimo (Mr. Dickie) on his excellent speech, and I agree with almost everything he said, excepting, when he said that he was sure the matter could be ar-

Oriental Aliens
ranged with the Japanese. You can arrange nothing with them unless it is to their advantage. I recollect the fact that 24 years ago the hon. member and I sat in the British Columbia legislature struggling with the same question. The width of the House separated us then. Time has brought us nearer together, and perhaps experience has brought us nearer together in thought and view. It is 24 years ago that we sat in the legislature and the subject is but little more advanced now. I suppose in 24 years from now he and I will be wandering up to the pearly gates, and I suppose from force of habit we will be asking Saint Peter " How are you on Asiatic exclusion here?" I do not like these cycles of 24 years. They do not happen often enough. We are told the Japanese will not like this proposition, that owing to their services in the late war we should not take this action, and that we must not remember that service. The member for part of my district, Alberni, Major Burde, and a man with a good war record, spoke in the local House on the same subject, and the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. King) will remember that he said "Yes, Japan makes a treaty with Great Britain and British Columbia pays the price".
Are we not, as the hon. member for the Fraser Valley (Mr. Munro) said, tired of paying the price, and is it fair that we alone should pay all the price? Our Canadian soldiers went to fight against Germany, in order to support the mother country; if Britain was defeated, Canada might have been turned over to Germany as a colony. Did our soldiers fight against Germany, in order that British Columbia now, and Canada as a whole afterwards, should be turned over to Japan to be a Japanese colony? Heaven preserve us from such a consummation. We did not fight the Germans in order to be handed over to the Japanese. Some weak-spirited people go so far as to say that we must be careful of offending Japan; that Japan might fight on that issue. What is the issue?-Japan will be fighting in these days when war is so unpopular and when you must have some national opinion behind you when you go to war, to compel us to give her rights that she denies to other nations. Is it likely that Japan would go to war for that reason? I hardly think there is much danger. Since when has it become a part of British policy or Canadian policy to say that we will give up our just and lawful rights for fear
somebody will fight? That is not the principle on which the British empire was founded. If we are to fight-let us carry the argument to its absurd-for it is absurd-conclusion, and say that we must fight. Is it better to fight now when Japan controls only one half of British Columbia or to leave the fighting until ten years hence when she will, by peaceful conquest, have absorbed the whole of British Columbia and have thousands of her trained1 troops scattered throughout British Columbia and the other provinces beyond the Rocky mountains. If the matter has to come to a fight, it will be better to have it settled once and for all, but this has only to be mentioned for one to realize the absurdity of it.
I should like to have gone into the question of imperial jurisdiction, but that will be dealt with by the hon. member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens). The question really resolves itself in final analysis into this. Have we in Canada jurisdiction over our immigration or have we not. I have here an Order in Council issued by this Government or by the late government before it ceased to hold office, which Order in Council states that immigration of labourers of any kind into certain parts of British Columbia is prohibited, owing, of course, to lack of employment. That applies as well to the Britisher as to the oriental or any other immigrant. It applies to the Britisher, but it does not apply in its entirety to the Japanese. It applies to the Japanese who would come from Honolulu or 'Frisco but not to the Japan-10 p.m. ese who comes to the country as one of the gallant four hundred whom we are compelled to bring over annually. I have this on the best authority. The Immigration Department states:
All Japanese entering Canada are subject to all the provisions of the Immigration Act-
And that means this Order in Council as well.
-with the exception of such provisions as would conflict with the I.cmieux agreement.
Therefore as regards the four hundred people we cannot exclude them while we are at the present moment restricting immigration of British subjects.


James Horace King: What is the date of that Order in Council?


Alan Webster Neill: One is dated the 9th June, 1919, and the other the 13th December 1920. I think those are the two. I thought this
was last year; it was the year before. The

Oriental Aliens

principle is this, that we absolutely prohibit British immigration and then we say that we cannot prohibit Japanese immigration. One hon. member who spoke this afternoon quoted Kipling's words about Canada being daughter in her mother's home and mistress in her own. Are we mistress in our home or are we not? Kipling said we were daughter in our mother's home; he did not say "illegitimate product" or "hired girl"; he said "daughter". Canada has all the privileges of a daughter. Will the fond mother-and Britain has ever shown herself to be a fond, lavish mother to her children-refuse to her well-beloved1 eldest born child, Canada, the privileges and rights that she has granted to her other children, Natal, New Zealand and Australia? Is it likely that she would, and at whose dictation would it be? An alien, yellow Germany. I can add another word; I can say a yellow, alien, heathen Germany.
I know it is unpopular in this day and generation, and considered old fashioned, to introduce any question of our relation to our God in a matter of public or even private affairs; but perhaps we might for one minute turn aside from the pursuits of the material and ask ourselves: Do we, can we, should we, expect Providence to bless this nation in its undertakings when we deliberately open our doors to an influx of an alien, heathen population in ever-increasing numbers? Japan is in the peculiar situation. Japan is not a nation living in ignorance or for lack of opportunity concerning the gospel message at all. Japan is heathen to-day by solemn and deliberate choice. Quite a number of years ago the Japanese appointed what I suppose in this country would be called a royal commission to settle two questions: Would it be for the benefit of Japan as a nation to change its religion, and if so what religion would they adopt? They were quite impartial; any religion that was good and practical would have received their sanction. After due deliberation they decided to remain heathen, and heathen they are likely to continue. A few missionaries will catch a few converts. A Japanese will turn Christian to-morrow if he thinks it will promote his interests in this country or in the United States, but at heart he remains a Japanese and a heathen. To-night when we are voting on this resolution we must remember that we are voting in accordance with tjhe interests of our constituents and our country, but we must also remember that we owe some responsibility to the God 
whom we at least profess to follow in our religious experiences.
I submit that this House and this Government must alone assume the respon sibility if this legislation is not enacted. We were told again that the Japanese are a proud race and that we must not hurt them; that they will fight. Yes! The pride of a race that makes a gentleman's agreement with the United States of America, that makes a gentleman's agreement with the Dominion of Canada and before the ink of the paper on which the agreement is inscribed is dry, that starts to break that agreement and evade its promises! If it is not in their official declarations- and I can show it in one instance at least -it is in their public press: you will see it openly boasted how they have broken their promises. The Gentleman's Agreement! the very fundamental basis of the existence of which is in the good faith of the contracting parties!
So much for the good faith of Japan; so much for its national pride. They are much more sensitive in their national pride than in their sense of honour. But if we must soothe and assuage that national pride, let me say we do not claim that they are to be excluded because they are an inferior race. They are far from that; I must admit; we must all admit that in many respects the Japanese can outbeat us in the field of industry. For instance, we must admire their thrift, their industry, their large families. Their unity as a nation is a remarkable feature. The family is behind the individual, the company behind the family and the nation behind them all. They are absolutely a unit in working out any industrial or economic pursuit. I for one am not ashamed to say that Canada will not survive in competition for economic advantage or racial supremacy under present conditions of Asiatic competition. That is an humiliating statement to make, but it is true, as every man in British Columbia knows. I said, under competing conditions. On equal grounds, we can meet them, but we cannot meet them under competing conditions. We might imitate their habits of thrift or industry or even as regards their large families, especially in these days when race suicide is coming to the fore; but we do not want to imitate them in their low standard of living or in the way they work, their lack of recreation, lack of comforts and lack of culture.
We do not want our women working long hours in the fields and factories, regardless

Oriental Aliens
of the fact whether they are mothers or expectant mothers. In a,word, we do not want to bring our white race down to the level of Asiatics, and for that reason, and that reason alone, we cannot compete with them. But the greater the disparity between the two systems of living, the greater the necessity to afford us in British Columbia that much-needed relief.
Now, Sir, we are come to the parting of the ways. Never before has the way appeared to be so clear, never again perhaps will the time be so opportune. We are told of difficulties. Of course, there are difficulties. Nothing is attained in this world without difficulty, struggle and sacrifice. But let us meet those difficulties with a bold spirit, and there is no doubt that we will succeed. The poet says:
Still the bold, brave man is fortunate.
He keeps his object ever full in sight,
And that assurance keeps him Arm and right. True, 'tis a narrow way that leads to bliss, But right before there is no precipice.
Fear makes men look aside and so their footing miss.
Paul says: Let us be strong and of good faith; let us take our courage in our hands. If we follow his advice I am confident that a way can be found and legislation can be enacted.
If this House accepts the resolution, and the Government enacts, not only the necessary legislation indicated in the resolution, but also the registration scheme I have already indicated, I believe we will to-night do a great thing for British Columbia, a great thing for Canada, and a still greater thing for posterity. For I have a vision, Sir, of a greater Canada, of a Canada, far greater than that which our narrow vision and our limited ambitions today can realize. I wiil not live to see it, but it will come, a Canada spreading from ocean to ocean, with a teeming, contented population, numbering millions where we now see thousands, and thousands where we now count hundreds. From the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean I see that great Canada peopled with one great white race, the worthy descendants of the two races that now occupy Canada; I see one race, speaking perhaps the two languages still, but one race in everything that counts, one race in their unity as a nation, one race in their allegiance to the flag they follow, one race in their adherence to the God they worship.
That is a dream that will come true some day, and for my part when the time arrives, as it must for us all sooner or later, whether very little sooner or very little later makes 981
little difference, when we must prepare to pass, or perchance pass without preparation, through that veil that hides the Great Beyond-for my part I can think of no higher eulogy of our political record, I ask for no loftier requiem to 'be sung over our ashes, than that it may be said that, in our humble way, we served faithfully our day and generation, and at this stage by wise and far-sighted legislation made it certain, or at least possible, that for all time to come this nation, this great Canada to be, shall be consecrated to the use of a white race and of a Christian ipeople.


James Horace King: Mr. Speaker, the
subject of this resolution is not new in this House, but I think we are warranted in bringing it before Parliament at this time in view of our further experience of these Asiatic people who have been located in western Canada of recent years, more particularly in British Columbia.
It has been my privilege to take part in debates on this question in our provincial legislature, and it cannot be said that the British Columbia House has been remiss in regard to this matter. For many years back resolutions have been passed suggesting and urging action by the central government in order that this menace-and I think that term is accepted by hon. members to-day, because if one* has followed the conditions that now exist in the West he will realize that this oriental immigration is indeed a menace-might be dealt with. Our legislature in that province has by means of an education test endeavoured to exclude these immigrants, but without success, such legislation having been disallowed by the Dominion government.
To-day we have arrived at the stage where we must appeal to the people's representatives in this House to give this question their very serious consideration. We have not only our own experience but we have that of the states on the Pacific coast, more particularly that of California, as to the great danger involved in the continuance of this immigration into our province.
Years ago the representations made as to the gravity of the condition came largely from our labour organizations, and so much was this the case that both parties at one time treated the question as a political football. That day has passed, and to-day all parties are united in their efforts to deal effectively with this menace to our national well-being. Indeed, throughout this debate
Oriental Aliens

there has not been the slightest effort to make this a political question.
It is true that on the public platform in British Columbia to-day you will not hear a debate carried on as in former years in reference to the entrance of the Japanese, because British Columbians realize that in the Japanese they had a loyal ally during the war. But that change of tone is not to be taken as indicating any weakening in the attitude of the people of British Columbia in regard to Asiatic immigra-' tion. On the contrary, the question has assumed a graver aspect, and it is generally recognized that unless this immigration be strictly controlled, it will probably become a question of increasing difficulty between the two countries. Therefore it is of vital importance that the question be taken up between the two nations and brought to a satisfactory conclusion without further delay. As a resident of British Columbia, there is no doubt in my own mind that not only is this Asiatic immigration a serious menace to the people of that province, but that the people of eastern Canada are also involved and must face the seriousness of the situation.
It is not my intention, Mr. Speaker, to prolong the debate. The ground has been well covered on other occasions, and it has been very well covered this afternoon, the various treaties having been discussed and their operation'fully dealt with; but I wish to assure the House that it is the desire of the people of British Columbia that action should be at once taken in regard to this matter in order that we in that province may have a better condition of affairs than at present obtains as a result of the continued immigration of Asiatics.
In conclusion, I may say that in order to counteract the effects of the presence in the province of persons of that class, in order that we may take care even of the present situation, it is essential that we bring in many good Britishers and thus regain predominance so far as the proportion of the different classes of the population is concerned.


Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Vancouver Centre) :: Mr. Speaker, I hesitate at this late hour to delay the House in the further discussion of this problem and would not do so were I not convinced that the matter is one of paramount importance, and that if we fail to give it complete consideration to-night there will be difficulty in our doing so at any later period in the session. If, therefore, I touch in some measure on

points that have already been dealt with I ask the indulgence of the House and assert that I do so with but one desire, that of driving these points home and convincing my fellow members of the House, just as we on the Pacific coast are convinced, of the seriousness of the problem.
This is not, Sir, a racial question; I desire to lay that down at the very outset of my remarks. In approaching the question, I treat it, as I think all do who understand it thoroughly, as a sociological, an ethical and essentially an economic problem. There is very much in the oriental philosophy, their history and their religious beliefs, etc., that is attractive and that forms a most pleasing study for the scholar. But, Sir, we must realize this, and Parliament and the Dominion of Canada must realize it, that the two races are distinct in type, in tradition, in ideas, in their whole outlook on life. They are distinct branches of civilization. It matters not how highly we value the attractive features of oriental civilization, the question before us to-night is this: which shall prevail, ours, or theirs? It is from that angle that I desire to approach the discussion of this subject.
The first reason which I offer in opposition to further immigration from the Orient is based on a very keen appreciation of the magnitude of the source. Let me say to the House that there are 800,000,000 orientals facing us on the Pacific slopes of this country-60,000,000 in Japan; 340,000,000 in India; 400,000,000 in China; many millions of others in smaller spheres. Just visualize, Sir, for a moment what it would mean if there was even a tremour of immigration, unrestricted, from such a prolific source of supply as a population of 800,000,000 to a country the total population of which is 8,000,000. We in Canada cannot absorb any considerable movement of immigration from such a source as that.
Then, Sir, in looking at this question from the economic point of view, I find myself in most excellent company. Many hon. members may hold the view that the position taken by British Columbians and western Canadians is a narrow and prejudiced one. But when I read to the House very briefly a statement by Lord Milner I think I offer a reference, if I may so term it, which warrants my taking a position similar to that which he took in years gone by. As representative of the British Crown in South Africa he gave this question intimate study under the most trying circumstances, and he has this to say:

Oriental Aliens
If we are to resist the influx of Asiatics into this country let us take the strong, unassailable grounds of social and economic reasons.
And it is upon these grounds, Sir, that we are appealing to the House at this time.
May I say to the House also this- and I submit it is important: there have been since the dawn of history movements of people from one country to another.
I shall not go into detail; I shall simply state the fact so that the House may get the proper perspective. There have been movements of people from place to place, and it is on record that frequently the peoples originally established in a state have been literally thrust out by the incoming or migrating races. The pages of history are replete with cases of that kind. But let the House remember this:	until very
recently large migrations have been difficult; the lack of available space and the lack of. transportation facilities offered a fair protection. But this protection to-day is gone. With our splendid transportation facilities-which in one case enabled us in the space of a few weeks to move literally millions of men across the Atlantic-with the consequent rapid movement of people from one part of the world to another, the presence of these 800,000,000 people as a source of immigration becomes a very serious problem.
Now, I shall deal briefly with one or two economic reasons which are irresistible to those of us who have witnessed their actual operation in this country. Where there is a large portion of the population consisting of orientals the effect of their economic pressure upon the community is startling-indeed terrifying. It inevitably means this-and it is proved by the experience of all the Pacific states and of British Columbia-that wherever the white man is brought into competiiton with the Asiatic, the standard of living must be reduced or there is no possibility of successful competition. It is a law that you cannot escape any more .than you can escape the great laws of nature. It is there; the effect is before our eyes, and we witness it-nay, we experience it day by day and year by year.
An hon. member asked this afternoon why we could not compete. We cannot compete, Sir, for two reasons. First, in regard to the Chinese, we have in Canada to-day and have had for the last thirty years, to my personal knowledge, a veritable slave system. Chinese syndicates bring into Canada large numbers of individuals, pay their $500 head tax, their passage, their
expenses. These Chinamen so brought into Canada remain the bondmen of that syndicate until they have paid off not only every dollar of that expense money, but usurious interest as well. Sometimes for fifteen or twenty years they remain the bondmen of .the heads of those syndicates. When you want to hire Chinamen in British Columbia you do not go to an individual Chinaman and ask him if he wants a job: you go to the head office of some syndicate and there you hire one or a dozen as the case may be. They send them to the job; they collect their wages; they give them their keep. So we are perpetuating in Canada, under cover, it is true, a system of veritable slavery. So we ask the House, those of us representing that province: is Canada to be a nation of bondmen, or is it to be a nation of free men? We stand for Canadianism as we understand it, with all its weaknesses, with all its faults, realizing that in many cases, perhaps, there are difficulties and there are delinquencies. But we say this: We prefer Canadianism, as we understand it, to the asiatic or oriental bondservant system.
Another economic effect which I shall briefly refer to before coming .to my main argument is this: for manufactured goods and the produce of the farm the home market is always recognized as the best market. Now in any community in which a large section consists of orientals it is noticeable that that community is a mighty poor market for the manufactured goods and for the white man's food from other sections of the country. All that you have to do is to realize this: that a Chinaman, and to a lesser degree the same is true of other orientals, will live upon a handful of rice day in and day out, mixed perhaps with a little fish. Where does the consumption of Canadian food come in? In regard to manufactured goods, he lives under conditions that no white man will live under, under conditions we positively refuse to ask our white people to live under, and so, I say, you destroy the home market for the supply of the goods of the country.
Let me say a word in regard to revenue. I have not the figures for Canada, but an exhaustive investigation was made in South Africa over a period of ten years, and it was found in Natal that the average annual per capita contribution to the revenue of the country was as follows- and I ask the House to get this in this day when we are looking for revenue and the distribution of taxes over a larger num-
Oriental Aliens

cling tenaciously, and upon which I believe, Sir, this question may be decided one way or the other. If you admit we clearly have this right to restrict-yes, Sir, to refuse admission to Canada-all persons we consider not to be desirable, if we once admit that right, if we once realize that that right has been asserted by the British government and by the Overseas Dominions, surely we place ourselves in a position where we no longer fear the argument. But we have it again in the Statutes of Canada, 111-IV George V, 1913, recferred to this afternoon by the mover of this resolution. Let me just put on record what is definitely stated in the statutes:
Nothing in the said treaty or in this act shall be deemed to repeal or affect any of the 'Provisions of the Immigration Act.
Now I have read the provisions of the Immigration Act as they are and as they have been on the statute books for many years. I have read this treaty with Japan. In other words the Japanese government in 1896, in 1905, and in 1913 admitted and embalmed in these treaties our right to restrict their immigration if we so chose. The Imperial government has urged us to so restrict it. Now, Sir, what remains to be done? Simply that we exercise this inalienable right in the interest of the Dominion of Canada as a whole.
Now let me turn to another point in this matter, let me refer to the Washington Conference. It has been said that owing to the peculiar manner in which the British Empire was closely, and intimately one could say, allied with Japan that nothing should be done by Canada that might in any way disturb the kindly relations between the two. With that I am wholly in accord but, Sir, only a few months ago in Washington this dual responsibility was ended, and the burden of the solving of the problems of the Pacific was placed upon the shoulders of four great nations-Great Britain, France, the United States and Japan. These four great nations entered into a treaty that, whenever questions arose of a perplexing or threatening character, a conference would be held and a solution would be found. I want to say to the House that that pact at Washington removed from Great Britain a very serious anxiety and perplexity indeed. Now, Sir, il wish to take a step further. Leaving that Imperial question, leaving the international question which I think I have shown-


Mr. McKENZIE:: Before my hon. friend leaves that point with which he has been

splendidly dealing, does he notice the distinction which the mover of the resolution makes between "restriction" and "exclusion." The two things are very different indeed. Which of the two does my hon. friend favour?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I take, without reservation, the position of exclusion. I am grateful to my hon. friend for raising the point. It was that there is a finely drawn distinction between what was an adequate restriction on the one hand and exclusion on the other, and that brought about these very conferences and the correspondence to which I have referred, and which resulted in the Natal Act being adopted by the other Dominions, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand. While, perhaps, the act does not state frankly that they are going to exclude, yet in effect it does exclude, and it was to obtain that result that this act was passed. This is not a restrictive act; it is an exclusion act. I said a moment ago that I was not here to say that this is the best method, but I do say that it is an effective method, and if we are to go by precedents, if it has been adopted, as it has, and been in operation for many years by the other Dominions, we are justified, at least, in taking a step to that extent.
"Canada a white man's country" is not merely an empty phrase. I want to say to the House that this is an essential doctrine. The time has come that we must determine in Canada whether we are going to preserve this country as peculiarly and essentially a white man's country, or whether we are going to share its resources, its national, social and economical life, with other races, whose type of civilization, however good, is distinct wholly from ours. The other Dominions have had this problem before them for many years in a very active and vital form, but you will notice that in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa there are large areas that are semitropical, in which, perhaps, there is some excuse for saying that those areas are not a White man's country, but no man on earth can say that Canada is not essentially, climatically and in every other way a white man's country. It is necessary for us to take cognizance of this point, that we must determine whether or not Canada is going to be preserved as a white man's country. We may make blunders in taxing or in penal laws, but we can rectify those blunders at the next session of Parliament, or in the next generation, but if we make a blunder in this regard and allow the entry

Oriental Aliens
into Canada of a very large nuiriber of persons who are wholly incongruous in conditions and life, who are incompatible to the race here, no action on our part can remedy it in the next generation. It will be gone forever, and Canada's purity of national type will be gone forever, and that is, sir, a situation which I look upon and look towards with a great deal of fear.
Indeed, Sir, the problem facing us is this: a conflict between theoretical inter-1 national justice and stubborn internal, economic and sociological facts. That is the problem this House is called upon now, and it has been called upon in the past, but never with the insistence that it is at this hour, to determine as between these two points, whether any fine-spun theory regarding the conventional rights of an individual to move untrammelled wherever he desires is to prevail as against stubborn economic and sociological facts. I know in addressing the Prime Minister, I am appealing to one who has given considerable thought to social and economic problems, and I think he will appreciate my arguments when I once again remind him that Canada cannot admit of a dual standard of living. We cannot admit of a standard of living under conditions that the white population will not tolerate, while there is an upper strata, supposedly ruling the country-and he knows this, and I appeal to him as one who does know and others who have studied it will agree with me-that sooner or later that under strata will draw the so-called upper strata down to its level and very rarely is there any record in the pages of history where a large numerical growth has been elevated from a lower to a higher standard, that is, where there is a distinction in type and in racial construction. I desire to emphasize the point that procrastination in this matter will do no good. Not only will it do no good, but it will just serve to intensify the perplexity and to increase the force and the number of the difficulties with which we are confronted. There never will be a time when we can solve this problem as easily, as expeditiously and as successfully as we can do it now. But the longer we let it stand the greater will be the difficulty and the more intense will be our trouble.
I am going to state briefly where I stand on this problem; I do so after 25 years of close observation in Canada and in the Orient, and I do it after the most intense study of the problem to the best of my ability and with full acquaintance with the
facts. I stand for the exclusion of the Asiatics as permanent residents of Canada. I pause here to say that perhaps that may shock some, but it need not. I am not saying that we shall not deal with, trade with, and admit bona fide traders or tourists or students to the country, but let them be bona fide and not come into this country ostensibly as traders and then become labourers in competition with our labourers. Let them come in here as bona fide students, and not under the colour of being students, and then turn out to be cooks or workers in our mills. That is the experience we have had in recent years.
We have had thousands of Chinese come in as bona fide students, and I think the immigration authorities did their best to examine and restrict them strictly to that class. We find thousands of them coming in as students, and then being distributed over the country as common labourers. In the fall of 1920, there came in as merchants, 1,400, whereas in months previous they had come in over many years at the rate of two or three a month. At that rate we could easily absorb them. There would be no great difficulty, but when suddenly the immigration rose to two, three, or four hundred per month, so that in four months 1,400 came in, it was time for us to take cognizance of it, and with the result that we found a regular scheme or system inaugurated in Canton by persons who had no other object but to gain money for themselves. They were entering Canada under these false colours. Now, Sir, there is plenty of room for regulations or, within regulations, for the promotion of trade and commerce and for communications of the character to which I have referred.
I wish to emphasize the fact that we in British Columbia, where we have been faced with this problem intimately for years, stand on the ground of total exclusion of oriental settlers. Let us take that question of persons who come into Canada to settle and remain. We stand in absolute opposition to any system of indenture or contract labour, and we also stand for a fair and just deal for all who are legally in the country. We want no oppression now, but straight British fair play for those who are in the country. I have a word to say in regard to indenture labour-the indenture labour referred to so frequently by individuals as a method of helping Canada to develop her natural resources and to settle her western lands. Another answer, which I should have given
Oriental Aliens

a moment ago, which I desire to lay before the House now, is this-and hon. members will at once see the force of it.
You cannot show me any instance where the oriental has pioneered in Canada. Can you? They do not pioneer. How have our prairies been settled? They have been settled by the hardiest white men in Canada. Who were the pioneers in Quebec, the maritime provinces, northern Ontario, the wilds of British Columbia, the mining districts? White men, the best of white men. But your oriental, where is he? He is in the heart of the cities. Where is he in the Okanagan? He comes in there after the white man, struggling, experimenting and suffering disappointment and perplexity, has developed the country. After the white man has done the pioneering work in developing the markets, along comes the oriental and picks the plum. Where is he in the cities? He is to be found in the very heart of our cities, living under conditions which are anything but satisfactory. I want to emphasize that point. The oriental does not pioneer; he contributes nothing towards the opening up and development of the new country; he does, however, come along behind' the pioneer and pick the plum.
In conclusion, let me ask this. Shall Canada remain white, or shall Canada become parti-coloured? Shall British institutions, traditions, ethics, and social standards prevail; or shall they, by blind neglect and purposeless procrastination, submit to a peaceful conquest by the forerunners of the hordes of Asia? Shall Can-adianism, which we are always proud to picture as the perfection of British democracy, prevail; or shall it recede before the races that, as I have already said, are incongruous and incompatible with our mode of life? This is the problem before the House; this is the danger that we call upon the Parliament of Canada to avert, and this is the menace which we who know the difficulties, who understand the problem, are absolutely determined to resist to the uttermost extremity.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, the mover of this resolution, the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie), has said, and others who have spoken in the debate have agreed with him, that this is not a local, nor a provincial, nor, for that matter, a national question; that it is larger than a national question, it is a question of great concern to all parts of the British Empire; it is a great international and world prob-

lem, and it is from that point of view that I think we must all consider the arguments that have been presented this afternoon and evening. The House is to be congratulated on the tone of the debate from the moment it commenced. There has been an effort on the part of hon. members to approach this subject from the point of view of national interest, and to keep away from anything in the nature of party controversy. I need scarcely say that, in this regard, I am most anxious to follow all who have spoken before me in the course of this debate. The question should not be considered as a party question; it is a great national question, a great imperial question, a great international question, and we should all deal with it from the point of view of the responsibility which a question of such ma'gnitude brings. If I refrain from going into the figures which have been quoted in the course of the debate this afternoon ; if I refrain from making any mention of the statistics of the number of Japanese or Chinese who have come to this country during the last few years, I do so simply to avoid introducing any element of party controversy into the dis-11 p.m. cussion, for hon. members will see at a glance that there is nothing that has happened since the 6th of December which could make this question so burning at the present moment. The argument that has been presented to-day all refers to immigration from the Orient during recent years, during the period of the administration which preceded the present one. For that reason and that alone, I shall refrain from saying anything about the statistics which have been quoted in the course of the debate.
Respecting the problem itself, may I say that I agree 'entirely with the view of the hon. member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens), as to this being fundamentally a great economic problem? In stating that it is an economic problem, he simply reiterated what has been said by most of the speakers who have addressed the House on the subject this afternoon. It is partly a racial question, partly a great political question; but it is primarily an economic question, a question of competing industrial and social standards. I have given a little thought to this problem during recent years, having had occasion several years ago to investigate the causes of immigration from the Orient, and ever since, having seen with increasing clearness, the vast significance of the problem to our country and other countries.

Oriental Aliens
May I illustrate the point I should like to make by citing an example which affords a striking parallel? In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, an officer of the 'Crown of that day discovered what he claimed to be a law governing the precious metals, where metals of different qualities or quantities of fineness were put into circulation as coinage in competition with each other. That law has come to be known as Gresham's law of the precious metals. What Gresham discovered was that, where two kinds of metals were in circulation as coinage, if one was of finer quality than the other, the baser metal tended to drive the finer metal out of circulation. The latter came to be either hoarded or melted down and sold as bullion, or used in the international exchange; and that, in the < curse of a very short time, the only metal that remained in circulation was the metal of less fine quality of the two. That was but an illustration of the law of competition applied particularly to the precious metals. I believe that economic science will yet come to assert that a similar law obtains as between competing industrial and social standards where such exist. And in this great problem of immigration, of peoples of different races, different habits and different modes of thought and life being brought into competition with each other, I think we view the matter aright when we assert that, sooner or later, the particular civilization that has a lower standard will, if it is permitted to compete with a civilization of a higher standard, bring the higher standard down to its level. It is for that reason that I regard this subject as of so great importance to our Dominion. In speaking of the oriental standard as different from our own, I do not wish to imply that orientals are in any way a less splendid people than peoples of European races. When oriental labour in this country comes into competition with white labour in this country, it does so under conditions vastly different as between the two. White labour, with the associations that are attached to family life as it exists amongst those of our own families, carries with it obligations of a character which do not adhere to the family life of those who come to us from the Orient and who enter into competition with our labour. I need only mention that all white labour in this country has obligations of a character which are related to the social life of our country, with regard to which the labour that comes from the Orient does not have a like relationship, for example, the observance of one day in seven, the obligations attaching to the education of children, the membership in labour organizations, the affiliations with clubs and churches and the like,-all these and very many other associations that I might mention go to make up the social standard of living of our people. The people from the Orient when they come to our shores do not have like standards to maintain. The result is that unless our labour is protected against this competition, sooner or later it is brought down to the economic level of the race that is competing against it. I think that has been demonstrated very clearly in a number of our industries. There is no doubt that in many parts of Canada where competition of the Orient with our own labour has been great, our own labour has been driven completely out of the field of effective effort. From this point of view we are justified in regarding this question in all seriousness, for what has been going on on a limited scale to-day may in course of time proceed on an international scale.
North America is peculiarly situated as respects this problem because on this continent European civilization is brought into competition with oriental civilization. It is here that these two civilizations are brought into competition with each other. This continent has already for the most part been peopled by the white races of Europe; they have established their standards here. Of recent years the peoples of the Orient have been coming in increasing numbers, and their civilization with its lower economic standards is being brought into competition with our own. 'Consequently the great problem to be decided is, which of these two civilizations is to prevail. If I am correct-and I believe I am-in the assertion that it is a great economic law that the lower civilization will, if permitted to compete with the higher, tend to drive the higher out of existence, or drag it down to the lower level, then we see the magnitude of the question viewed as a great national problem.
There is not only that aspect to be considered. There is another important national aspect that claims our attention- the desirability of a country having a homogeneous people. It must be admitted that every country should have the right to control the composition of its own population. That is a fundamental right which I think we are in duty bound to assert. As has been said over and over again in this debate, it is impossible ever to hope to assimilate a white population with the
Oriental Aliens

races of the Orient; the two will not assimilate. We wisely recognize that, we realize that if the question of oriental immigration ever became one of any considerable magnitude, we would be face to face at once with the loss of that homogeneity which ought to characterize the people of this country if we are to be a great nation. From that point of view we have to assume responsibility in this matter.
There is one other aspect which I think we cannot consider too seriously, and that is the obligation that exists at all times to avoid as far as possible the danger of social and industrial unrest, to say nothing of the vaster possibility of international strife. It is futile to contend that that danger is not pregnant where the oriental races are brought into competition to any great extent with the white races. Some fourteen or fifteen years ago I had the privilege of investigating the causes of Asiatic riots on our Pacific coast, and in the light of what I learned at that time, it would be impossible for me to do other than assert that that danger is existent wherever these two different competing industrial standards make- their effect felt the one upon the other.
So, Mr. Speaker, from the point of view of the maintenance of our social and industrial standards, from the point of view of the desirability of maintaining a homogeneous population, and from the point of view of avoiding social and industrial unrest and the possibility of international strife, I feel very strongly that this matter of the restriction of immigration from the Orient must be dealt with, and dealt with effectively. I believe strongly in the restriction of oriental immigration, and I think it is the duty of the Government to do all in its power to make that restriction as effective as it can be made, maintaining the good-will as far as it can be maintained of all the peoples that go to make up the vast human family.
Now, let me say a word in regard to two classes of oriental immigration which have been referred to this afternoon. I think the mover of the resolution has very wisely made no mention of the immigration from India, because there are special reasons which should incline us to take up that problem with the greatest possible care. But in the last analysis we must remember that the arguments which apply in the case of immigration from China and from Japan are applicable also, when it comes to matters of industrial competition, to the population from India; and for

that reason I think any position which we take on this question with respect to Japan and China should be regarded as being equally applicable to peoples from other parts of the Orient because we will have that question as well again to deal with sooner or later.
In regard to the Chinese, it has been mentioned this afternoon that the restriction sought in that connection was effected by the imposition of a head tax, at first fixed at $50, then at $100, and now and for some time past at $500. That that has been insufficient and ineffective is perfectly plain. The figures speak for themselves. The numbers of Chinese coming into this country despite the $500 head tax are very considerable. I think we might well say that -the imposition upon the peoples of another country of a head tax by a nation professing a christi-an civilization is somewhat of a contradiction in terms. Something has been said tonight about the heathen and the pagan. Certainly the heathen and the pagan mind must find itself somewhat confused when it seeks to appreciate the Christian ethics that lead a Christian people to make money for their country out of a tax imposed upon persons coming from another country to follow a livelihood in the country which is to profit by them. I would favour the elimination of this head tax altogether and the substitution of a method that would be not only less objection-able but also more effective.
Some years ago the Liberal government of the day sought to bring about just such a change in the method of restricting immigration from China. In 1908 I had the honour of representing this country at an international conference at Shanghai. Before going to the conference, Sir Wilfrid Laurier mentioned to me that it was his desire to do away with the head tax, if possible, and bring about an arrangement with China whereby immigration from that country to Canada thereafter would be restricted by the adoption of a system of passports over the numbers of which our government would have control. He asked me, while in China to take up this matter with the -Chinese government. I did so, and as a result of the negotiations an agreement was drafted between the Government of Canada and the Government of China, doing away with the head tax and substituting therefor a passport system, with the restriction of numbers in the hands of the Canadian Government. At the time that this matter was under con-

Oriental Aliens
sideration witli the then government the question of the reciprocity agreement with the United States came up, and it was decided to leave over the matter of oriental immigration until the reciprocity issue was determined. As hon. members well recall, the government of the day was defeated after the reciprocity campaign, and subsequently the government of China, which had been the other party to this preliminary negotiation, was also changed as a consequence of a revolution, so the negotiations fell through about as effectively as any negotiations could. But I would like to say to-night on behalf of the Government that we have already taken steps to resume negotiations looking to the restriction of Chinese immigration by a system of passports, the numbers of which this Government will control. That, we believe, can be made a system of effective restriction so far as that class of immigration is concerned.
One further word in regard to this question of Chinese immigration. Very little has been said this afternoon about the admission of Chinese students to this country except that in some cases Chinese have come in, supposedly as students, but in reality as labourers. I think we should make an effort to encourage Chinese students to come to our universities. In that view I believe we have the support not only of those who are interested in trade and commerce, but, I believe, of practically all classes in this country. When the deputation of the Trades and Labour Congress was before the Government I spoke to its members on this point, and the delegation expressed no objection to the admission of Chinese students to our universities, provided that the Government could make sure that this particular class came in with proper safeguards.
There are several reasons why Chinese students should be admitted to our universities. In the first place, if this country is to develop a trade with the Orient-and I take it that all people in the country would like to see trade develop between Canada and the Orient-it is wholly to our advantage that Chinese students should come to our country, that they should know something of Canadian conditions and after returning to their country help to make our conditions known in China. The American Government after the Boxer trouble in China, when a considerable indemnity was to be paid by China to the United States, believing that it was in the interests
of trade to encourage Chinese students to come to their universities, agreed to allow that indemnity to be applied towards the paying of the expenses of Chinese students in American universities. The result is that hundreds of students have come from China to American colleges and have gone back to their country, and with their knowledge of American conditions have done what they could to stimulate trade between China and the United States. Spending some time in travelling in China on the occasion to which I have referred, I was impressed with the extent to which the Americans had invaded the markets of the Orient. On practically all trains on which one travelled, the cutlery, a great part of the canned food, many of the articles in use on the dining tables, were from the United States. In the City of Peking there was a store every article in which was labelled as having been made in America. In different parts of China and Japan it was very noticeable that the contact which educated orientals had had with the United States had gone a long way toward furthering trade in that country.
But there is another argument which, I think, is also important from a national point of view. If this continent is ever to meet the competition of the Orient, which will be an increased competition as years go by, it must make a contribution to the Orient which alone can save the situation. The Orient must become acquainted with our higher standards, as we call them-our higher social and industrial standards-see the wisdom of them and gradually come to adopt them. We may send all the missionaries in the world to China to preach the gospel of a larger humanitarianism, but that will never begin to effect what a few men who have studied in our universities, who have become accustomed to our civilization, will be able to effect when they return to their country and, in their own effective way, impress the benefits of that higher civilization upon th/eir countrymen. I do not wish, Mr. Speaker, to take up too much time on this subject, so I will hasten on and refer to the question of the Japanese, the other class alluded to in this resolution.
Mention has been made of the existing trade treaty with Japan, and it has been suggested that the Government should give notice that twelve months hence the treaty will be abolished. It may be that such is a wise and desirable course, but I think, Mr. Speaker, before it is taken
Oriental Aliens

the Government should consider very carefully the advantages which might thereby be lost, and whether it is really necessary to sacrifice those advantages in order to attain the object which hon. gentlemen who have spoken have in view. We are asked to make appropriations for facilities of trade with the Orient for the ports of Vancouver, Victoria and Prince Rupert. We are asked to do a great deal for the cities on our western coasts. For what reason? Because they claim that the trade with the Orient is a growing trade, and they hope to see it expand even more and more. Is it advisable, if it can be avoided, that the Government should take any step which may prove a barrier to the development of trade between Canada and the Orient? I submit that Parliament should consider very carefully the effect upon the possible development or commercial relations between this country and the Orient, of every act that it may enact or propose.
In the present treaty I find the following clause, which has already been mentioned by the hon. member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens) :
Nothing in the said treaty or In this Act shall be deemed to repeal or affect any of the provisions of the Immigration Act.
Now, that may refer to the Immigration Act as amended up to date, or it may refer only to the Immigration Act as it existed at the time this agreement was adhered to on behalf of Canada in 1913. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that by negotiation with the Japanese government it will be possible to ascertain whether the Japanese government have any objection to that clause being construed as applicable to the immigration laws of this country as they may be amended at any time. I am inclined to think they will take that view, but if they should not do so, then I think it would be time to consider whether in the national interest that treaty should be abrogated.
But-the further step that is suggested is that we should abolish what is called the Gentleman's Agreement now existing between Japan and this country. I am somewhat surprised at the statements which have fallen from the lips of some of the speakers this afternoon to the effect that the Japanese government have not lived up to that agreement. In this matter we have to consider very carefully the source from which the Japanese immigration into British Columbia has come, and to what extent the prevention of further immigration is likely to be effectively

brought about through the abolition of an agreement to which at the present time the Japanese government is a party, and which I believe the Japanese government have adhered to loyally.
One hon. member mentioned that a few years ago there were a very large number of Japanese in Mexico and that today they had dwindled down to a very few. He asked where they had gone, and the assumption was that they had gone into the United States. If that be true, it cannot be suggested that these Japanese went into the United States in violation of any agreement existing between that country and Japan for which the Japanese government were responsible. They got in through evasions of the immigration laws, apart altogether from, the agreement between the United States and Japan. May it not be equally true in regard to British Columbia that the Japanese have been coming in there from the United States, apart altogether from any attempt on the part of the Japanese government to stimulate immigration to this country from Japan?
When I investigated the causes of immigration from the Orient some years ago, under royal commission, I found that practically all the immigration that had come to Canada from Japan had been at the instance of private companies, apart altogether from any action on the part of the Japanese government. I think we should be careful in a discussion of this kind and of this importance to discriminate between immigration that may owe its origin to evasions, which would not be affected at all by any change in an existing agreement, and to immigration that can be put down to some deliberate effort on the part of the Japanese government to ignore an agreement to which it is a party. I wish to say that I think the Japanese government has been wholly honourable in the manner in which it has carried out the terms of that agreement, and I do not think unless we are very, very sure of our ground, that we will help to solve this question by attributing any false step or imputing any wrong motive to the government of another country, particularly a country which has been our ally for years, and which, as was mentioned by one or two of the speakers this afternoon, rendered our country vast service at a very critical moment in the course of the last few years. We will gain more in the long run by recognizing the difficulties and endeavours of other gov-

Oriental Aliens
ernments to deal with these very problems, as well as the difficulties of our own government. This question is not an easy one to be dealt with by the Japanese government itself. They have their problems, as well as we have ours, and if it is to be effectively solved, I believe this will only be by the governments of the two countries working together with the one motive. I believe they can work together with the one motive, of bringing about an effective solution.
In regard to the attitude of the Japanese government, may I refer the House to a statement which appears in Hansard of April 29, 1919. In a debate on that day the Hon. Mr. Calder, who at that time was Minister of Immigration, had this to say in regard to the manner in which he thought the Japanese government had been living up to their agreement:
The House is aware of the fact that some years ago an arrangement was made whereby a limited number of Japanese would toe permitted to enter Canada. I have gone into the situation very carefully, and I can tell the House that the agreement has been lived up to by the Japanese government to the letter. As a matter of fact, taking the figures for the last four or five years, there are in the neighbourhood of 4 00 or 500 fewer Japanese in Canada to-day than three were dn 1914.
That was the statement made by the Minister of the Interior in the Government of Sir Robert Borden, and of my right hon. friend, with respect to the manner in which the Japanese government had lived up to the terms of their agreement up to that time 1919 and I know of no reason to believe that ,the Japanese government have not ever since been equally vigilant in living up to the terms of the agreement.
To hurry to a conclusion may I say just a word about the difference between the use of the word "exclusion" and the use of. the word "restriction", because that point has come up in the present debate. Just because this question is of the magnitude it is this House cannot be too careful in the impression which may be created abroad as a consequence of any phrase or word which may be used in debate or in resolution. The word "exclusion" in regard to these matters of immigration has come to have a meaning that to the peoples of the Orient is most offensive. If you read the debates that have taken place in the different Imperial Conferences, in the Peace Conference at Versailles, in the Conference at Washington, and in conferences which my right hon. friend attended of the premiers of the different countries, you will
discover that wherever the different nations have come together to deal with this question in any of its forms, they have been careful to avoid in any formal resolution the use of the word exclusion, and I say without fear of contradiction that there is not to-day as regards any part of the British Empire-South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, or any other part-any exclusion act so termed, nor do I know of any exclusion act on the part of any nation in the world. That is not a matter of chance happening. That has been the result of very careful thought and deliberation upon the consequences of using particular words where those words are known to have an offensive meaning in the minds of other people upon whom they may appear to reflect. My hon. friend has spoken of the Natal Act. He said that it was to all intents and purposes an exclusion act. Well, I agree with him that it is so to all intents and purposes, but it is not an exclusion act. Australia has enacted what is to all intents and purposes exclusion against Japan, but Australia has enacted no exclusion act.


Henry Herbert Stevens: My hon. friend is perhaps overlooking the fact that the United States have an exclusion act against the Chinese though not perhaps against Japanese.


James Horace King: I am speaking of the Japanese. I am glad my hon. friend has mentioned that. The reason why the enactment was in the nature of an exclusion against China and not against Japan was that China was regarded as a second-rate power, not a first class power.


Henry Herbert Stevens: My hon. friend will
again permit me. He used the phrase that there was no such thing as an exclusion act in the world. That is the reason I rose to correct him.


James Horace King: I must thank my hon. friend. I was talking of the relations between Japan and this country, and I was thinking of no exclusion act against Japan.
I might point out that in 1901 when Australia adopted what was termed the Natal Act, she applied an educational test, and the educational test as fixed in 1901 by Australia was that any immigrant coming to ,the country would have to be able to write down a sentence of some fifty words, at the dictation of an officer, in any European language. Four years later, in 1905, the words "in
Oriental Aliens

any European language" were changed to read "in any language", and the change was made in order that there might be no offence to the Japanese. At the same time the government of Australia agreed to admit by passport into that country tourists, merchants, students and other classes, the Minister of External Affairs of the Commonwealth undertaking to control the number of passports that were being issued. Now that was not exclusion; that was effective restriction. The same thing is true of New Zealand and South Africa; and I contend, Mr. Speaker, that this House would make a great mistake if it took a course which, after great care and thought, no other part of the Empire has thus far taken. Let me say that I am in entire sympathy with the motive and the purpose of the mover of this resolution. I think if the resolution is to serve the avowed purpose he has in mind it is all important that it should pass this House as an unanimous resolution. I do not think we will help the cause of effective restriction of oriental immigration if there is any division of opinion in this House as to the resolution which should govern in the matter. If my hon. friend is prepared to substitute the words "effective restriction" for the word "exclusion" in his resolution I will, on behalf of the Government, agree to accept his resolution; but if he is unwilling to do that, I should feel that the reasons I have mentioned are sufficiently grave as to constitute a justification for the Government not accepting the resolution in the form in which it has been moved.
Now I wish to address one word in the nature of an appeal to my right hon. friend who sits opposite. When he was in the place which I now have the privilege of occupying, he spoke to me about the advisability, in these matters of foreign policy and larger questions of international purport, of the House rising above any question of party, and considering such measures when before the House solely from the point of view of the national interest-in other words considering what would best serve the interest of Canada, the interest of the Empire and the international obligations of which we might be seeking to take account. I make that appeal to him to-night. I would like this House to rise above any consideration of party one way or the other. I would like its members to view this question in the light of the responsibility which we have, not only as citizens of our own country,

but to all parts of the British Empire, and also our obligations to the other countries of the world. Let us adopt a resolution which this House can agree upon unanimously, and avoid attempting to pass any motion which is certain to be misunderstood by the other party to the arrangement. There are two methods of dealing with these grave international questions. You can attempt to deal with them by law, by enacting legislation which in all probability will prove ineffective and serve only to antagonize and arouse bitterness and misunderstanding on the part of others; or they can be dealt with by negotiation between the governments of the different countries concerned in a spirit of good will, a spirit of friendly relationship with a great object in view. I contend that we are now dealing with one question which should only be dealt with from the latter point of view. We must seek to-day, above all times, to further good-will and to eliminate anything that is going to make for ill-will as between the nations of the world. There have been conferences for the purpose of establishing a League of Nations; there have been conferences for the purpose of doing away with the possibility of future war; conferences to bring about peaceful relations between the different countries Qf the world. We have a chance in this House of Commons to-night to help forward that new movement of good-will as between the different nations, or we can set it back and create an entirely new and very serious international problem. Today, as this matter stands, we are in the position of appearing to have a grievance as against the orientals because of their coming in, in too large numbers, into our country. Let us enact an exclusion law, let us pass a resolution which will be understood by the oriental as meaning exclusion, and the grievance immediately becomes one on the part of the Orient as against us. Now I contend, Mr. Speaker, that we shall not help to solve the situation that has arisen in that way, and I plead with hon. gentlemen opposite not to embarrass the Government in its efforts to deal with this great problem, but in a cordial and wholehearted way to lend their assistance t<3 the administration in its endeavour to elevate this question beyond the plane of party considerations to a realm which will help to further international good-will, friendly relations, and at the same time effectively deal with the problem to which my hon. friend's resolution refers.

Oriental Aliens


Arthur Meighen: Mr. Speaker, the wording of the resolution moved by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Mc-Quarrie) is as follows:
That, in the o,pinion of this House, the immigration of oriental aliens and their rapid multiplication is becoming a serious menace to living conditions, particularly on the Pacific coast, and to the future of the country in general, and the Government should take immediate action with a view to securing the exclusion of future immigration of this type.
I read the resolution in order to emphasize its limitations rather than its extent. The resolution contemplates the exclusion of immigrants of a certain class -the limitation of immigration. Immigration has a well-known meaning, it has a defined meaning in our statutes. Within the confines of that definition there would not be included many of those referred to by the Prime Minister, in the address that he has just finished, as of the class who should not, in the common interest, and in the common international interest particularly, be forbidden from our shores The resolution does throw into the arena of this House the question of restriction as against the question of exclusion, and the House must decide between the two. I am not here to argue for a moment that a question of this sort should be a matter of party controversy. The Government of which I was the head maintained a policy of restriction. That has been the policy of 'Canada up till now-that is to say it has been as respects the Japanese. At the same time we had, in the development of out nation, reached the stage when we must come to a conclusion as to whether we are going to have the exclusion as permanent residents of oriental aliens or not. We have to decide it. If we are going to pass a resolution in favour of effective restriction we really pass a resolution in favour of just what we are asked to do. We pass a resolution against taking further steps, 'by such means as the Government may devise, of going farther and stopping immigration, as such, from oriental alien lands.
Now I know it is a serious step to take; it would have been taken years ago had it not been a serious step. If this House decides that there has transpired in these years sufficient to convince us that we must in our own defence take this action then It is for the House of Commons to say so -not in terms of offence to any land but
in terms of firmness and terms of decision. I propose to inquire very briefly whether we have reached that stage or not, and I propose to state m views in language that will! be, I think, clear, in language that certainly will not be offensive, and I hope in language that will! be very brief. In discussing this question it is needless to affirm that we must use the utmost care that no language be adopted that is unjust, and that offends the susceptibilities of any nation or any people in the world.
The resolution has to do with the relations between the British Empire and two great nations, China and Japan. There is a special reason as to both of them why we must be careful that the good relations now existing may continue. As to China because we have been parties at the recent disarmament conferences, to action there looking to the rehabilitation of that country, and its elevation again to the front rank of nations. Canada has taken a leading part in that work. Our relations with China have always been friendly. We pray that they may always be so.
As to Japan, there is perhaps still greater reason, not at all because she is a stronger power, but because the intimacy between the Empire of which we are a part and the Empire of Japan has been greater than it has been between that Empire and China. We have been historically-that is looking back over two or three decades- allies of Japan. We were allies under the Anglo-Japanese treaty until the winter that we have just passed through, and under the aegis of that alliance we joined hands together in the greatest war in history. Under the terms of that alliance, Japan stood at a great price true to her obligation and assisted magnificently our own Empire and all the allies in the struggle. Japan particularly took part in that measure of defence that had to do most directly with our own safety as a dominion here. Japan lived true and stood square with all the burdens of the Anglo-Japanese alliance: that is to say, in so far as they particularly related to our country, at least.
Nor have I any complaint to make at all as to the manner in which Japan has conducted herself as bearing on what is known as the Gentleman's Agreement conducted by yourself or rather arranged by yourself, Mr. Speaker, back in the year 1907. I had not heard before that there was any cause of complaint over Japan's fidelity to that treaty. I believe with the Prime Minister that Japan stood true to



Oriental Aliens
the obligation she entered into with us there, consequently we must take care that whatever we say will be such that this country could take no umbrage if corresponding language were uttered in the Diet of Japan, and that we must take no action as such that, if the converse action were taken by the Diet of Japan, there would be objection taken in our Dominion.
Now what are the facts? We have had for some years, dating back, I think, to about 1886, some immigration from Japan and considerable immigration from China. J have the figures before me, extending back to 1905. Within that time I find that 42,085 have come to our shores as per the immigration figures from China, and that, in the same period, 20,883 by the same figures have come from Japan. It is claimed that we have at present, though perhaps the census may not disclose it, approximately 20,000 Japanese in our provinces of whom about 15,000 would be residents of the province of British Columbia. That number of itself is not relatively large having reference to our population. Across the border in the state of California there are said to be 100,000 Japanese, and in the other states of the Union about 50,000, a total of 150,000, as against a grand total of about 108,000,000 in the republic. The numbers there of Japanese would also appear not to be alarming, judging by the figures alone, relative to the whole population of the states.
But nevertheless we know-we cannot help but know, and we all know-that both in the United States and in Canada the numbers, by reason of the occupation and the modes of life, the habits of the people, are alarming, in view of the increase. No one can go to British Columbia, even for a visit, or to the further parts of Alberta, and not come back convinced of the sincere state of alarm in which virtually the whole population of the mountain province is found now because of the extent of Japanese aggression within that province, and of Chinese aggression too. The very same condition exactly obtains in the states to the south. The reasons have been disclosed in the arguments this afternoon. I do not intend to repeat them now. They are based on the fact that both the Chinese and Japanese people are accustomed through generations, through centuries, through ages to a standard of living far below, or, if it is better so to express it, far different from ours, so much so that there is no possibility of competition in industrial life between those of our race and theirs-based

on the fact as well that their temperaments, their habits and their very natures are such that assimilation with our people is an impossibility.
Assimilation is always an impossibility where marriage itself is forbidden by the very essence of the fact. Marriage is forbidden between the Japanese and the Chinese on their part and the whites on the other-not forbidden by any special law, but it is proved through the ages not to be a habit, will not become a habit, and when it cannot become a habit a state of nonassimilation exists and we have to face the facts. The rate of propagation is such that in our own province it appears probable, judging by figures also before me, that the years will not be many before the births from those of Japanese origin in British Columbia will equal the births of the whites. How many those years will be no one can figure exactly, but when I notice that the births stood at 252 to 1 only in 1910-252 whites born to one Japanese- and when I see now not 252 to one, but last year 17 to one, then one is, at least, within the mark in saying that we are approaching the time, and it is not very far distant, when the rate of birth of the one will equal the rate of the other.
All this is equally feared in the country to the south. The process going on here has been parallelled there, and the state of alarm existing in the western states is at as high a peak as that which exists in our own province; consequently though we who are living in the more western and central provinces of Canada are not disposed so readily to measure the menace in the strong-terms that it is measured in by our brothers in British Columbia, still we know that, however one may feel when he lives here, just have that man go out and live for a month, six months or a year in the Pacific coast provinces, and he comes back with his opinion just the same as the opinion of the rest of the population of that province. Now when that is a fact and has become a fact, this tremendous progression of all these races made there under the conditions that have obtained, under the laws that have obtained, under the traditions and in compliance with the treaties that have governed us through these years, surely it is not illogical to conclude that those laws, that province, those traditions and those understandings have not been sufficient to meet the situation.
Is there anything else we can do besides deciding upon exclusion of immigrants? By

Oriental Aliens
immigrants, of course, we mean those coming here for permanent residence, to make this country there home. Is there anything we can do without going to the extent of the exclusion of that class? I really do not see that there is. I do not know what we can do but go to that length. The point then is to inquire what are the perils about going to that length. What is there that is offensive, that is wrong, about such a course? I do not think there is any disposition on the part of any nation to take umbrage at a law that excludes their people from the borders of another country. The Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) may have read reports of conferences at which I was not present but I cannot recall the question of exclusion coming up, or yet its being emphasized, in any way at conferences at which I was present, that there was aversion to that term on the part of other countries. I do recall a resolution which will appear in a document which has been laid on the Table of this House, which was passed at a conference which I attended last summer, and in which it was distinctly affirmed that full and unrestricted control of immigration rested in each dominion of the Empire, even as against the inhabitants of another dominion or of India, and I do not think a stronger resolution on that subject or a stronger expression of opinion could be possible. It has been said that exclusion is a term not used. The Prime Minister went rather far in that assertion. It is, of course, much too far to go to assert that laws have not been passed in countries excluding from their borders those of a certain race or those of different classes of races. That has been done more than once. It is the law of the United States to-day as respects China. None of us disputes that.


James Horace King: Is it the law as respects Japan?


Arthur Meighen: No. There is effective exclusion in the United States of Chinese. There is effective exclusion in Australia. We may have exclusion without using the word exclusion.


James Horace King: It is the same arrangement as we have.


Arthur Meighen: As regards Japan?


James Horace King: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: I thought my hon.
friend referred to Australia. I will not state to the House what is allowed under the understanding with Canada as I have always been under the impression that those figures
99i
were not to be made public, but in the United States they have some similar understanding. What their figures are I do not know. But there is effective exclusion in Australia, and as I understand the matter, effective exclusion in New Zealand. Exclusion can be effective even though, in the statute upon that subject, the word '"exclusion" may not be used.


James Horace King: When my right hon. friend speaks about effective exclusion, do I understand that he means that no one is permitted to come in?


Arthur Meighen: Oh, no.


James Horace King: If he does not mean that, if he means "effective restriction," there is no disagreement between us.


Arthur Meighen: I mean what I said, and I tried to be clear. I mean effective exclusion as regards immigrants as defined by our law, and that is as far as the resolution goes-exclusion of immigrants, not exclusion of students. Students are excepted under the terms of our definition; students are, in practice, excepted; tourists, clergymen are excepted. There are six or seven cases excepted within the definition of our law, if my memory serves me aright; and as long as the spirit of the term is used, that is as long as the restrictions as regards only those coming to reside are kept up, it would be quite consistent with the terms of that resolution that those exceptions might be modified.


James Horace King: Does my
right hon. friend not recognize, in using such a word in a State document, if I may so describe it, or resolution, a danger that is very grave in these international transactions? May not the use of the word "exclusion", even in this resolution imply, when the cable reaches Japan to-morrow, that this Parliament has enacted a resolution in favour of the exclusion of Japanese? It is that danger that the Government is seeking to avoid.


Arthur Meighen: There could not be justly a cable sent except one that was faithful to the resolution passed. I will proceed to argument that we ought to be able to say, without offence, that the time has come for effective exclusion of that class of people from our shores as residents here. That is all we intend to say by this. Let us proceed to argu-
12 m. ment. I stated first that there had been effective exclusion of the inhabitants of China in the United States.
Oriental Aliens

My hon. friend says: "Oh, yes, but China is not a first class power." Are we to modify our language according to the number of troops that there may be in the nation to which that language refers? I do not think Japan would expect us to do that; I do not think China would be flattered to know that that is the reason she is excluded. The United States has for years excluded the Chinese. I do not know whether Canada once excluded them or not; I am included to think she did. I quote this from a speech delivered by Sir Wilfrid Laurier on the 2nd day of April, 1913, in this House. . Sir Wilfrid Laurier was speaking at that time on a motion by Sir Robert Borden for the second reading of a bill ratifying, on behalf of Canada, the Immigration and iTrade Treaty between Japan and Great Britain. Sir Wilfrid Laurier supported the ratification and he used this language:
We did not hesitate some years ago to exclude by statute Chinese people from coming to this country, but when consideration had to he given to the question of excluding the Japanese by hostile legislation the late government-
That is, his own government.
-would not do so, for the simple reason that the Japanese were our allies, and we did not care to submit them to that indignity.
If that is correct, we did formerly exclude Chinese, and we did not maintain wholly the exclusion, but subsequently came to a policy of restriction by means of a head tax. There is effective exclusion, though the term may not be used, in the legislation in Australia as regards both Chinese and Japanese. There is effective exclusion in New Zealand of both. There is effective exclusion in the United1 States of Chinese now; and if Sir Wilfrid Laurier was right, we once had effective exclusion of Chinese. Why should this be offensive to any country. We do not ask for the exclusion of any people unless we are prepared to accept at their hands the very same treatment. There are reasons existing to-day why we are denied in Japan certain things that the Japanese are not denied in this country. I make no complaint of that. That suits their policy. There may be reasons why we should deny the Japanese certain rights in Canada which they would not feel like legislating as against us. But if they feel like doing that, certainly we can take no offence. We suggest, we ask for the exclusion, not out of any disrespect for the Japanese empire or the Chinese empire. We ask for it because it is for the permanent interest
[Mr. Meighen.)
of the people of both those countries, that we maintain here our racial purity, just as they have considered it in their permanent interest to maintain their racial purity. It is not that we consider them an inferior race. Who can consider the Japanese people an inferior race? They have different standards of living from ours, standards of living that we describe as lower; but the Japanese nation in the last thirty years has, perhaps, made the greatest progress of any people of the world. It has made great progress in the advancement, not only of their military standards, but of their	science, in the	development of their arts and literature. In all that goes to make the highest type of a civilized nation the Japanese have gone ahead in the last thirty years faster than has any other great nation in the world. It is simply because they as a people so differ from us that the two races will not assimilate.	They cannot work together
industrially. Therefore it is for the peace and concord of both that we wish to say to them frankly: You can keep us from your country if you desire; we must keep your people from becoming residents in our country; and we will be better friends if we adopt that policy.
Suppose we take that stand, suppose this resolution passes, it is quite open to the Government to bring about the result in the method adopted by Australia. But that is not effective restriction, that is effective exclusion. Change this resolution to read, "effective restriction", and at once there is no authorization to the Government to change the present law at all, it would simply leave things the way they are. If the Government do not care to do it that way, they can do it the way it is done in other countries for there are other ways of bringing this about. I do not see why it is less offensive to say to Japan: "We won't let your people in unless they can speak French", when we know there is not one of them can do so, than to say: "We will not let them in, and frankly the reason why is because they won't assimiliate with us." I prefer to take the second course, but the first is open to the Government.
So long as there is effective exclusion of people coming here to live as defined by our law, then the terms of this resolution are sufficient; but if this resolution can be modified so that it will mean exclusion without saying so, then I have no objection at all to the modification. But I do not want to accept a modification that really does not call for any change in the present

Oriental Aliens
law at all, that won't get us where we frankly want to get, namely, to the point of exclusion, because after we have exclusion there is going to be a sufficient multiplication of these races in this country to constitute all the race problem that we want to have for many years to come.
We want to get to the point that is at all events mentioned. I know it is the almost unanimous opinion of British Columbia, and I find that opinion moving eastward pretty rapidly. There is no doubt in the world that before very long opinion in Alberta will be just as pronounced as is opinion now in British Columbia, and at the rate this immigration is going on that opinion will in time be as pronounced in provinces further east. Let us therefore take occasion by the hand now at a time when it is less difficult, because the more Asiatics you get here the more difficult the problem is going to be. Permit those races to be multiplied twice, three times, four times over, whether by procreation, immigration or by some other process, and then put your exclusion up and you will be faced with an infinitely more difficult problem than confronts you to-day.
Therefore I think we must go to the length of saying to the Government that the will of this House is that we have effective exclusion of the oriental type of immigrants. Let us go that length. By what language you achieve that goal I care not. The language suggested by the Prime Minister would not reach that goal at all, and for that reason I cannot accept it.
Let it be understood that so far as I am concerned I favour exclusion. I think we must have it. I do not care how it is brought about, but I do think it has got to be brought about. Restriction will not do, It must be restriction of such an absolute character that it excludes. That is the position I take on this motion, and I appeal to the Government to help us reach a wording that will leave no doubt in the minds of the people of Canada or in the minds of the people of Japan as to just what the will of this Parlament is.


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior) :: Mr. Speaker, I have listened with close attention to this debate, for naturally as the minister in charge of immigration I am intensely interested in this question. I am interested, too, because it has become a question we must take notice of in the province from which I come. I know something, although not
a very great deal, of the condition's existing in the province of British Columbia, where the question has become so acute.
I am not going to enter upon a further discussion of this question to-night, because I think everything has been said about it that could usefully be said. All I want to add is that there appear to be two or three salient facts. I think my right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen), knowing full well as I do the care which he exercises with respect to matters of this kind, slightly overstepped the mark in the position he has taken to-night. I agree with what my hon. friend from Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens) has said. Indeed, I agree with practically everything that has been said, except in respect to this one word in the resolution which everyone who has spoken this afternoon has asked for

that the Government " exclude " the immigration of orientals into Canada. That is what is being asked for.
You admit in the same breath that there is an agreement between Canada and Japan which you are not very clear upon, and that that agreement has been lived up to. If I followed the speeches correctly this afternoon, nearly all the speakers referred to what is known as the Lemieux arrangement.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Although I know the minister would not do so intentionally, still I would not like to have our position misstated. We do not ask for exclusion and for the continuance or recognition of that agreement. We say that the agreement and the existing methods have been ineffective and disastrous, and we ask for the abrogation of that -agreement and the substitution of exclusion.


Charles A. Stewart: Exactly; I had not misunderstood my hon. friends. There is an agreement in effect. I am not arguing whether it has been lived up to or not, I do not know, but in my short experience in public life I have learned upon more than one occasion that an agreement is a sacred thing and an agreement with Japan is just as sacred to the people of Canada, at least to those of British stock, as an agreement with any other nationality. Therefore that must be taken into account when you are dealing with this matter in a resolution of this character.


John Arthur Clark: Does the hon. minister suggest that the agreement with Japan was made for all time?
Oriental Aliens


Charles A. Stewart: No. If my hon. friend will give me a chance, I think I shall reach the point I am trying to make. I am not suggesting anything like that. I am just as anxious as are my hon. friends opposite that we reach a basis that will be satisfactory to the people of western Canada, because I take it I am as much interested in this question as any hon. member sitting opposite. I said that I accepted everything that had been said about this question. I accept the description qf the menace as presented by hon. gentlemen opposite, but we are trying to get to the point where the Government can take this matter up and deal with it effectively. What the Prime Minister said was that he did not think you were putting the Government in a fair light if you adopted the resolution as it stands upon the Order Paper now. The hon. member for Vancouver Centre did not say that in the case of Natal, Australia, or New Zealand the words "effective restriction" were used; it has been shown that by means of an educational test exclusion was practically effected. An hon. gentleman asked me a moment ago whether we could not make a new arrangement with the countries concerned looking to restriction of immigration. Well, the Prime Minister has just stated that already he has taken steps with that purpose in view; but I cannot agree with the leader of the Opposition when he suggests that before we begin negotiations we state by resolution of Parliament that we demand exclusion. I want to say to every hon member who has spoken on this question that so long as I remain in my present position I will make every effort to bring about the condition they are so desirous of establishing, but I do not believe it can be brought about in this way. I do not think we are going about it in the right way if we seek to begin negotiations on any such premises.
My hon. friends say that we have dallied with this question. Well, for years I have read of it in Alberta; I have read of discussions taking place in this House and being participated in by representatives from British Columbia,-but apparently no action was taken. So far as I am concerned, and' so far as my influence in the Government is concerned, I am ready to back up the Prime Minister in settling this question in a satisfactory way. I realize fully the menace, I realize that the question is one that must be dealt with. But in view of the suggestion that negotiations should
(Mr. Clark. 1
be entered into, I do not think we should set out by stating definitely that we cannot make an arrangement on any other basis than that of exclusion. I think my rgiht hon. friend the leader of the Opposition would not want to approach the question from that point of view if we were to negotiate upon it. I do not think that we will reach any satisfactory conclusion; I do not think we will obtain the desired end, if we start out on such premises.
My hon. friends, with the best intentions in the world, have said some very hard things about the Japanese people. I do not know whether or not they are true; I have no information on that point. I do know the menace; I do know that I am ready and willing to go the full length in meeting them. We have the absolute right to say whom we shall have in Canada; there can be no question about that. All I am questioning is the desirability, in the face of an agreement already in effect, of proceeding by using the words set forth in the resolution.


Mr. LAFLAMME:: Will the minister
allow me a question? A distinction seems to be made between absolute or rigid exclusion on the one hand and effective exclusion on the other. I have not been able to understand that distinction.


Charles A. Stewart: I am sorry, but I do not catch my hon. friend's question.


Napoléon Kemner Laflamme: I understood the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) to urge a rigid or absolute exclusion, and if I followed the remark of the right hon. leader of the Opposition '(Mr. Meighen), he seems to incline toward what he calls effective exclusion. I cannot see the difference between the two-"effective" on the one hand, and "absolute" on the other.


Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I have not had a legal training and do not get these fine distinctions. All that I know is this: we are all endeavouring to get to the one place. I do agree with everything my hon. friends have said about this matter; I am entirely in sympathy with the object of the resolution, but if that object is to be obtained, we must be careful about the methods we employ. As I have already suggested, not one of my hon. friends has pointed to the use of the words "absolute exclusion" in the case of Australia, New Zealand, and Natal, yet

Oriental Aliens
there is effective exclusion from those countries of the people whom they do not wish to have. The Government have already gone into this matter; would it not be better, in the interests of all parties concerned, to bring about the object aimed at without arousing the antagonism of the Japanese by the use of a word that undoubtedly must be offensive?
I hold in my hand a resolution passed by the British Columbia legislature on the first of November, 1921. It reads as follows:
That a respectful address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, praying him to convey to the Dominion Government, through His Excellency the Governor General of Canada, the respectful request of this House that the Dominion Government amend the Immigration Act of Canada so, as near as possible, to totally restrict the immigration of Asiatics into this province, keeping in view the wishes of the people of British Columbia that this province be reserved for people of the European race, and that the Dominion Government consult with the provincial Government in the proposed amendment^.
Be it further resolved, that His Honour the Lieutenant Governor be requested to forward a copy of this resolution to the Honourable the Secretary of State at Ottawa, the Hon. the Premier of Canada, the Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, and Hon. Mr. Crerar.
I do not intend to follow the argument any further. I pi'esume I shall have some small part to play in this matter, and I shall do what I can to further the objects sought to be attained. But I do think you will put us in a much better position if you agree to the elimination of the word "exclusion" in the fifth line of the resolution. I therefore move, Mr. Speaker:
That the word "exclusion" in the fifth line of the resolution be struck out and the words "effective restriction" be substituted therefor.


Arthur Meighen: With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and the permission of the Prime Minister, I might make this suggestion. In the act passed in 1910 the following language appears:
Prohibit for a stated period, or permanently, the landing in Canada, or the landing at any specified port of entry in Canada, of immigrants belonging to any race deemed unsuited to the climate or requirements of Canada, or of immigrants of any specified class, occupation or character.
That is an act which gave power to exclude any race, but the word "prohibit" is used. I would suggest, if the word "exclusion" has any historic meaning carrying with it offence, that the word "prohibition" be used instead, and that to make it clear after "immigration" the words "for residence purposes" be added.


Hon. S. F. TOLMIE (Victoria City) :: While this oriental question has been brought before the federal House of Commons on many occasions it is very doubtful if it has ever before received the reception that it has on this occasion. For many years this has been a problem peculiar to British Columbia, but as the orientals have scattered over Canada towards the east, we find that it is becoming an eastern question as well as a western question and that our eastern friends now lend a more receptive ear to our warnings of the dangers of this oriental invasion.
Having been born and brought up in British Columbia, I have had an opportunity to observe the development of these Asiatics. I remember the day when there was but one Chinese store in the city of Victoria, and at that time the present site of the city of Vancouver was a timber limit. I have watched their development in agriculture. I have seen them absorb completely the truck-farming business. I have seen excellent Old Country gardeners come out and attempt to compete with them and be wiped out of existence, first, because the Chinamen would work much longer hours and work on Sundays, and secondly, because the Chinaman met a Chinese cook at the door when he went to sell his vegetables who stood in with him and bought his vegetables from him in preference to the white man.
I have seen them take hold of the small fruits industry also. At first they were received with open arms in some portions where fruit farming was carried on. The fruit growers welcomed them because they expected to produce their fruit at a lower figure on account of the cheap labour, but they soon found out that their employee of yesterday was their competitor of to-day and to-morrow and right along. The Chinaman and the Japanese went into these farming districts and worked for wages first. After that they insisted on working on shares, and later they would lease the land and finally purchase it, if possible, and put up a very strong competition with the white grower.
As has been pointed out this afternoon, our fisheries are largely now in the hands of the Japanese. It was pointed out that we have no less than sixty logging camps on the coast operated by Japanese. Only a few weeks ago I saw that the Japanese were negotiating for some of the largest timber holdings in the province of British Columbia.
Oriental Aliens

There is hardily a steamer leaving the Pacific coast that does not carry tens of thousands of dollars shipped by these orientals to their home land; so the man who spends his money with an oriental in British Columbia or any other part of Canada is building up a home in Canton or Yokohama or some other eastern place, at the expense of the country where the money was earned.
With the Chinaman came the opium den, followed by the usual demoralization of the white race. We have found the orientals handling narcotics to a great extent, so they certainly have not raised the morals of the Canadian people by their coming. We find that the Japanese are much more aggressive than the Chinamen and - ou will probably have noticed the tremendous progress orientals have made in the last ten or twenty years as compared with previous years. It is largely attributable to the fact that they are now worth more money, and having that capital on hand, they are in a position to make much greater progress than they were before.
It has been dearly pointed out this afternoon that we cannot assimilate with these people. Therefore, they are a bad class of immigrant to allow into this country, which is a white man's country. We have had pointed out to us the conditions in California and the Hawaiian islands. Are we to stand idly by until we reach that point, or shall we be up and doing and protect ourselves against this Asiatic invasion? We have in our hands a very heavy responsibility, the responsibility to preserve this country for the white generations to come after us. It is simply a ease of this kind: We have either to keep out these Asiatics or get down to their level to compete with them. We have noticed great improvements in late years in our methods of living, in education and so on. This is very desirable and should be encouraged in every way, but the Asiatic is going to prove a very great barrier to any improvement along these lines.
Why do we hold out for this word exclusion? That word was placed in there simpl because the restrictions of the past did not satisfactorily restrict. They have not given us results, and we feel, those of us who have been living in British Columbia for a number of years right up against these Asiatics, that the methods used in the past have not been suitable and 
therefore it is necessary to adopt even more drastic measures in the future.
I do not think that the exclusion of these few immigrants coming from these countries where there are hundreds of millions of people will interfere very seriously with trade, particularly when we take into consideration the fact that these countries have restrictions against us. I feel that if we can sell our raw products at a satisfactory price both the Chinese and the Japanese will buy them, whether we allow their immigrants here or not.
I fully realize too that the relations of the British Government with Japan make it rather more delicate for us to pass any legislation of this kind through this Parliament. Still, at the same time, I believe that when it comes to a show-down the British government will pay a great deal more attention to the welfare of one of her important Dominions than she will to her relations with any of these countries. Therefore, I strongly support the resolution as presented b * the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie).


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Mr. Speaker, it is certainly not my intention to take up very much of the time of the House at this late hour. That this question is a very important one is evidenced by the fact that we have been debating it since three o'clock this afternoon, and I doubt very much if anything new in the way of argument can now be said upon the matter.
I agree with the observation that has fallen from the lips of some hon. members that the question of immigration, particularly in a new and developing country like Canada, is of the greatest importance. In providing for immigration to Canada, and laying the foundation of the future nation to inhabit this Dominion, we have seen to it in the past, that that foundation has been laid in the stocks of the peoples of Europe. It is true that there has been diversity among those people who have come to our shores; it is true that among those we have welcomed to Canada there have been differences in language, differences in religion, differences to quite a considerable degree in social standards and social ideals; but nevertheless these peoples that we have brought from Europe to Canada are sueh that we can look with confidence to the future, to find them coming together and evolving a distinctive Canadian type. I have a great deal of sympathy with my hon. friends from British Columbia in

Oriental Aliens
the position they have taken. Without saying anything in derogation of the Japanese or the Chinese, both great peoples, we are nevertheless conscious of, and must realize the fact, that ethnically these peoples are different and we cannot expect to successfully assimilate them. The question then arises: How shall this problem be handled? We have heard this afternoon-particularly from hon. members from British Columbia who are close to the conditions which they describe and who I am sure speak with certainty of knowledge-that economically the oriental alien, against whom this resolution is directed, is supplanting, and will supplant, the white or Caucasian races in the economic sphere. That in itself is not the most serious matter to my mind however; it is not so serious as the other objection that I referred to a moment ago-the ethnical fact that these peoples will not unite in the future. I think it is no reflection upon either the Japanese or the Chinese to make that statement. They are different peoples from us. They are great peoples. I would say that there is nothing in the realm of science, of art, or of literature that the Japanese could not do, probably with as great, possibly with even greater distinction than the European races. Consequently I offer that observation without the slightest hint or suggestion that there is any inferiority in these races-I base the observation on larger and broader grounds than that.
We come then to the consideration of how this question shall be treated, and I must take issue with my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition in the argument he has advanced in respect to the resolution. Let me read it. It is:
That, in the opinion of this House, the immigration of oriental aliens and their rapid multiplication is becoming a serious menace to living conditions, particularly on the Pacific coast, and to the future of the country in general, and the Government should take immediate action with a view to securing the exclusion of future immigration of this type.
The criticism of my right hon. friend, I think, is that unless the resolution were couched in this precise language it would fail to carry the full meaning that would necessarily obligate the Government to make a change in policy. In that respect I differ with him. I propose to support the amendment that has been offered by my hon. friend from Argenteuil (Mr. Stewart) and I propose to do so for this reason. We must in these international matters-and this is a question of international concern- observe with the most scrupulous care the
necessity of giving no offence whatever to a great and friendly power I think that is absolutely essential. After all, Japan has lately been the ally of Great Britain, and probably would be the ally of Great Britain to-day had it not been for the fact of the Washington Conference, and the change in the international situation that that conference brought about. But even to-day Canada is a signatory with Japan to the treaties that were negotiated at Washington only a few months ago, and this House will shortly be asked to ratify those treaties. We are also aware of the fact that Canada, along with Japan and China, is a signatory to the Peace Treaty that was negotiated at Versailles in 1919 and that all three countries sit in the League of Nations as equals. Consequently these facts require this House to observe the greatest possible care in its treatment of this quesiton.
The resolution as it stands at the present moment is open to this objection-that no matter what the views of the hon. members who have discussed it may be, pass this resolution as it stands on the Order Paper and it will go out not only through the papers of Canada and the papers of the United States but over the cables to Japan that the Parliament of Canada has voted to exclude the Japanese from this Dominion- you cannot put any other construction upon it. And yet, if I understood aright the argument advanced by my hon. friends from British Columbia this afternoon, they do not propose to go even so far as that- they propose still to admit to this Dominion those who may be of the student class, those who may be of the tourist class, those who may be of the merchants class coming here temporarily for the purposes of trade
I think the amendment offered by the Minister of the Interior is one that should be accepted by the House; and in all sincerity, and with a single desire to further the cause that my hon. friends from British Columbia have at heart , I would suggest to them that they should accept this amendment. What does it mean? It means, in the first place, that there goes from this House a unanimous expression of opinion on this question, and if you read the resolution that emanated from the Minister of Interior it can carry no other meaning than this: It is a declaration from this House that there is to be a change of policy in respect to this matter, if you like, perhaps not a change of policy but at any rate an absolute and complete enforcement of the idea that stands behind the resolution. That,
Oriental Aliens

I take it, from the statement of the Prime Minister, is the intention of the Government; and I have no hesitation in stating; that in my opinion it is the policy that should be followed by the Government. We do not wish to ban from oriental countries, those who wish to come here for the purposes of trade, who wish to come here as tourists, who wish to come here for the advantages of the educational facilities that Canada possesses-we should welcome all of these. The great hope for the future lies in disseminating the best ideas of education and giving these people all that is valuable in our culture and if possible getting for ourselves all that is valuable in their culture.
I submit, Sir, that end will be obtained if the amendement which has been moved by the Minister of Interior is accepted. Under that amendment, I think, it would be quite possible for the Government by friendly negotiations, by friendly means, to secure almost precisely the same position that exists in South Africa, that exists in New Zealand, and that exists in Australia today. And that can be done without, in a public way, by declaration of this Parliament, offending the sensibilities of a proud people in a manner which I am sure hon. members from British Columbia and other members of this House do not wish to do. My hon. friend from British Columbia would be well advised, in my opinion, and would1 further the very cause they have at heart, if they accepted the amendment offered by the Government. If that is done, and the Government are given an opportunity, they can be held to account in this House if they did not seek earnestly and seriously to give effect to the sentiments that have fallen from hon. gentlemen's lips in this House on both sides in respect to this very important question.


Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg Centre) :: There are a few things which should be said in regard to this question.


An hon. MEMBER:: At this time of the night?


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes, at this hour of the night. A good deal has been said with regard to the maintenance of our Canadian standards, and especially with regard to the necessity of seeing that the standards of labour should not be lowered. I agree that, under existing circumstances, with as much unemployment as we have at the present time, it becomes very essential that we should restrict immigration. That

is a temporary expedient, but I should like to have it clearly put before this House that it is, at best, but a temporary expedient. It is no solution of this great problem which we face. A great deal has been said with regard to the orientals coming into this country and forcing themselves upon us. I should like to know who brought them into this country. For years labour has been pleading that something should be done to prevent unfair competition. The great corporations went ovei to China and Japan and brought coollie labour into this country. Why? Simplj for two reasons, in the first place because it was cheap labour, and in the second place because it could be more readily handled. That is undoubted, and we can go all over the coast, and we have been able to do so for a good many years, and find great corporations who are doing this. In the first place the Canadian Pacific Railway brought the orientals in to work on construction on the docks and later on at other kinds of work. Other large corporations brought in these orientals because it was cheap labour and easily handled. Some of the orientals who have been brought in during these years are beginning to acquire a little money and going into business, and now, for the first time in all these years, we hear the cry going up from some business men, the retailers' association, and some of the financiers, that something must be done, as these orientals are beating us at our own game. I think it is well on this occasion that we should review the past and recognize very clearly that it is these big corporations and financial organizations that have been responsible for the oriental immigration to this country. I desire to suggest here that, even if we passed exclusion laws at this time, we would not begin to solve the problem. Why? Simply because we are beginning to get cheap labour done over on the other side of the Pacific. We have our transportation facilities now, our ships and so on. I remember two or three years ago while working on the docks in Vancouver, handling a cargo of crude tobacco from the southern states that came over the Great Northern. It was sent to China. I cannot say that the very self-same firm to which it was consigned afterwards sent back the return cargo, but I know there was a return cargo of manufactured cigars and cigarettes. If some of the big firms cannot get the cheap labour here they are going to get it over there. It is only

Oriental Aliens
about a year ago we read in the financial papers that some of the big steel com-panieswere finding that steel manufactured in China could be laid down more cheaply in San Francisco than steel manufactured in Pittsburg, and from that time steel plate was to be brought from the Orient, rather than to be manufactured on the American side of the water. As long as we permit competition of the kind we now have we will not solve our problems by saying that we are not going to have cheap labour on this side of the ocean. We will have it on the other side.
A good deal has been said that showed racial prejudice and an appeal made to racial bigotry. I want to protest that the civilization of China and Japan is not what we have sometimes called "heathen" and that it is not a low type of civilization. We must remember that we face a much bigger problem than has been suggested. It has taken several thousand years for the white race to travel, first by slow stages across Europe and then after crossing the Atlantic, to cross in the course of the last hundred years the North American continent. We are to-day faced with a world problem. The west has met the east. We have gone completely around; the circle is complete, and to-day the west looks out to the east.
I do not believe for a moment that the 800,000,000 of people in the Orient are expecting to come over and invade our coast. The picture was overdrawn. I do not know that Japan is very anxious to take Canada as a field for exploitation, but I recognize that we face a serious national and international problem. That being the case, it is all the more necessary that we do nothing to alienate any of these oriental nations, that we recognize the seriousness of the question and proceed in such a way as will promote, as the Premier has well said, a feeling of good will. It has been suggested that we have a much higher type of education here and that these people are illiterate. With regard to the Chinese, I desire to say that after their children have finished the regular day's school in Vancouver they proceed to their own Chinese school, as some of the Jewish people do in Winnipeg and Montreal, in order that they may further their education.
One of the troubles with us, as has been admitted on the floor of this House, is that a great many of these people are more competent than we are, and unless we look to our educational system in this country, we are going to be outdone either in this
country or by competition from other countries. I had a few years ago the duty of making some investigation as to educational conditions in the western provinces. Among very large groups of our immigrants I found one-third of the children not attending any school whatever. If I remember the figures aright-and I have been somewhat in touch with the question of education in Japan-96 per cent of the Japanese children between the ages of 6 and 16 are attending school. Unless we are more careful than we have been in caring for the people in this country, and seeing that they are not unfairly dealt with, we are going to have to face this problem unprepared and confessedly be unable to meet the competition.
A great deal has been said of the way in which these Japanese and Chinese are increasing. For the past two or three years I have had a good deal to do with the loggers on the Pacific coast. I may say that of some 20,000 loggers in the union, as I am informed by the men who know best the personnel of that union, 75 per cent are unmarried. Under the conditions under which logging is now carried on, these men can never hope to have homes of their own. I would venture to say that you may bring in all the exclusion laws you please but so long as you force our own white people to live so that they cannot afford to have wives and children, you are not going to keep Canada a great empty country with the orientals locked out. These are matters which should be studied in connection with a debate of this kind.
What is the solution? One or two things I should like to mention. The first perhaps a temporary restriction of immigration, such as has been suggested. Certainly I think the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has taken the right position when he says that we have a right to stand guard over our doors and to say who is to be admitted to this country. We have a right to say, under what conditions, this great experiment of building up a nation is to be carried forward. It would seem to me however that we would be attacking the problem on a great deal safer ground if we decided that we would maintain in this country certain minimum standards. Why is it that, as we were told to-day, girls go into Chinese restaurants? Simply because they are driven into doing so, because they cannot get decent wages. Why is it that Japanese women work long hours? I have seen them working in the canneries
Oriental Aliens

at Steveston. Who is employing them? They are employed by white corporations that refuse to pay the wages that will keep our people there. That is where the trouble lies, and that is something that ought to be said. We would he going, perhaps, along saner lines if we said that we would make it a crime for any individual or corporation to pay any man or woman less than a living wage. As Paul Kellogg years ago said in his Study of Oriental Immigration in the United States, if we had minimum standards, we would erect an immigration tariff that would be more effective than any other kind of tariff we could possibly have.
We say that these orientals can get on better because they are united. Let me say that they have strong unions of their own. Although for many years labour has been bitterly opposed to oriental immigration, some labour unions-not many, I confess, are beginning to see the necessity for organizing the orientals who are already in this country. Speakers have said to-day that the orientals have succeeded because they have a strong organization. Yet there has been and there still is in existence, across this country from coast to coast, a policy that would tend to crush the unions that are the only safeguards that hitherto the labour people have had. I can take you to the coast, where my home has been for some years and still is and show you at the mines how, in the last few years, again and again the labour people have endeavoured to keep the oriental out of the mines. It is with the greatest difficulty that they have accomplished this. Indeed there are certain mines in British Columbia where the orientals, despite what the labour people have been able to do, are working not only above ground but underground. I can take you among the loggers. I know the Japanese have captured the shingle-bolt industry up the coast, and why? For the self-same reason, that they were willing to work long hours and under conditions which a white man would not tolerate. As one large employer said to me one day: "Why do we take these orientals? We want them because they will work cheaper and because they are a great deal easier to handle." He thought he could deal with them individually, put them to work longer hours at less agreeable types of work and all that kind of thing. That was the reason why to-night, even at this hour, I could not let the opportunity pass, in connection with this debate, without saying that we are not going to solve this

problem short of a definite effort to maintain in this country certain minimum standards for our people.
Sometimes we have failed to recognize how the world is unified to-day. I for one contend that we cannot maintain this idea of positive exclusion of one race from this country, and hope that that will be the solution for any of our problems. The world is too much unified to-day for anything of that sort. We remember that Japan remained a hermit nation for years, and Japan stagnated because of that; we remember that it is centuries since China tried to put a wall around herself and exclude other nations, and China remained static for many centuries. We would suffer the same penalty if we could keep ourselves away from the rest of the world. I maintain it is impossible in this day to do anything of that kind. We are trading in all parts of the world; goods from the Orient as well as from other parts of the world are coming into Canada; and if we maintain our trading and financial interests with other parts of the world, I cannot see how we are to adopt a rigid policy of exclusion of the people who are coming here. Some people say that this ought to be a white man's country. What about South Africa or India to-day? We claim the right to go in and dominate India, and yet at the very same time refuse to let the races of India come into Canada in any numbers at all. I am not pleading for permission for them to enter this country, but we must have regard to the larger international issues. May I be permitted to read just a word or two with regard to our rather arrogant position from a recent work by Stoddard on "The Rising Tide of Colour?" He says:
I showed that the white stocks together constitute the most numerous single branch of the human species, nearly one-third of all the human souls being whites. I also showed that white men racially occupy four-tenths of the entire habitable land area of the globe : while nearly nine-tenths of this area is under white political control. Such a situation is unprecedented. Never before has a race acquired such a combined preponderance of numbers and dominion.
I have no desire to extend this debate at this hour; but we would be dealing wisely with this question if we realized these larger international questions which, especially since the world war, have been borne in upon us, and recognized that we cannot solve this particular question 1 a.m. in a negative sort of way by mere rigid exclusion, without having regard to those larger international

Oriental Aliens
problems that face us on every side. Even should we exclude the orientals, we cannot thereby succeed in maintaining those standards of living which apparently has been the main purpose of the mover of this resolution.


Alan Webster Neill: Can the leader of the
Government give us an assurance that, in his mind, the words "effective restriction" in the amendment convey such a measure of restriction as is, at least, equal to the present Immigration Act in force in Australia to-day?


James Horace King: I have in
mind the same object exactly as the people of the country, to which my hon. friend has referred, had in mind when they enacted their legislation, namely, to have a restriction that will be effective. If there is any meaning to the English language at all, the term "effective restriction" comes as near as anything that I can think of to describing what has been aimed at where it has been sought to bring about an effective restriction of any character. I cannot find words to describe anything short of exclusion other than the words "effective restriction".


Mr. MANION:: Could not "effective
restriction" be variously interpreted by various people?


James Horace King: I do not think there can be a doubt as regards the intention of the Government in the mind of any one who reads the debate after what I have said this evening and after what the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) has said. I think it must be perfectly clear both in our use of words and in the phrases and every expression we have used.


John Arthur Clark: Does the hon. member not
suggest that the present restriction is not effective?


James Horace King: Most decidedly so. I think the present restriction is not effective; -the Government is prepared to seek to make it effective. That is what we wish to do.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Mr. Speaker, I merely
wish to make my position clear on the amendment.


An hon. MEMBER:: No more speeches.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am doing this out of
courtesy to the Government. I have as much right to speak as has the hon. gentleman who interjects his observation.


William Stevens Fielding: The hon. member has a right to speak on the amendment.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I cannot support the
amendment. If time would permit I should like to go into some argument on it, but I shall not do so. If I put my position bluntly, I trust the Government and the Prime Minister will not misunderstand my motives. I think I can speak for a large section of British Columbia in any case when I say that we feel that this is exactly the kind of attitude with which our demands have been met by the rest of Canada. I do not want to appear to draw a distinction; but there must be one, because it has been emphasized by those who have spoken against or in question of the resolution that it is peculiarly a British Columbia question. We feel that that would just simply be doing what has been done in the past, putting the question off. My hon. friend the minister (Mr. Stewart) warranted me, I think, in taking that view when he said he objected to "exclusion" because it meant stating your position before you negotiate. What are you going to negotiate? We are opposed to further negotiations regarding how many orientals shall come in; we want immigration from the Orient stopped. We are not prepared to negotiate on the question as in the past of a limited number, and if time would permit I think it would be quite possible for me to convince my hon. friend and others opposite, with due regard to the intentions of the Government of Japan to observe the Gentleman's Agreement, that in fact that agreement has not been observed. I do not say that the individuals who evaded the agreement, who came in spite of it, were doing so at the instigation of the government of Japan, but I say that so far as Canada is concerned we suffered because of the evasion of that Gentleman's Agreement.
For that reason I would only add that so far as I am concerned I cannot support the Government. We offered a change in working to "prohibition", we are prepared to offer the Government other phraseology, but the Prime Minister does not seem to be willing to accept that offer.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Some hon. members laugh at the word "prohibition" but it is
Oriental Aliens

used in the Immigration Act. For instance, "The Governor-in-Council may, by proclamation or order", and so forth, "prohibit the landing," and so on. The word is used half a dozen times.


Charles A. Stewart: You have it in one Order-in-Council practically bearing upon all immigration into Canada, with the single exception of immigration from the one nation with who you have an agreement. My hon. friend's interpretation does not quite bear out what I said. All I am asking is that you insert nothing offensive to the government of Japan while that agreement is in effect. I think it is sufficient to say that this Government is already negotiating with Japan for the very purpose which your resolution sets out.


James Horace King: I want to make perfectly clear to hon. gentlemen opposite the position of the Government in this matter. If they are sincere in desiring exclusion of oriental immigration they will not insist upon a resolution which includes that word.


Henry Herbert Stevens: We offered in substitution the word "prohibition", which is recognized in the Immigration Act.


James Horace King: I think we have had enough of prohibition.


An hon. MEMBER:: British Columbia prohibition is not effective.


James Horace King: I might point out to my hon. friend that last November the legislature of British Columbia passed a resolution on this very subject, but it did not use the word " exclusion". It was left out advisedly. They used the phrase, " restriction as nearly as may be possible." I am quite agreeable to that. I do not see any reason why we should be called upon to go further than the legislature of British Columbia itself has requested us to go in a communication addressed at the time to my right hon. friend opposite.
In order that hon. members may see the possible consequence of passing a resolution such as that moved, let me ask them to consider for a moment what feeling would come over this country if we read to-morrow morning that the parliament of Japan had voted a resolution in the nature of exclusion against Canadians entering Japan.


An hon. MEMBER:: Exclusion of immigrants?


James Horace King: My hon. friend asks, " exclusion of immigrants." He

knows as well as I do that among the great body of people reading the press of the country there is not that careful discrimination or discernment in the use of words that is to be expected among members of the legal profession, and if to-night the parliament of Japan were to pass a resolution in the terms of the resolution before this House, the impression of the Canadian people to-morrow on reading the cabled despatches would be that the Japanese were excluding Canadians from their country. A similar effect would be created in Japan to-morrow by any resolution we might adopt in this form. If this country wished to create a grave problem for the whole British Empire, we could not do it more effectively. I plead with hon. gentlemen opposite to consider not only their duty as Canadians, but their duty as citizens of the British Empire, and to try to uphold the position that the Empire has sought to assume in its relations with, oriental peoples.
My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition was present at the conference of premiers in England last year, and I can point him to the proceedings of that conference where oriental immigration was discussed and the greatest care was expressed on the part of those present to avoid the use of the word " exclusion " in touching formally upon matters of this character. I took care before speaking on this resolution to read the proceedings of the conference at Paris, and I found that there over and over again the discussion turned on the question of whether the word " exclusion " might or might not be used, and that conference, composed of the nations of the world, decided that it would be inadvisable to use the word in any single resolution that was to be adopted. Are we in this Parliament going to create an international problem not only affecting the British Empire but other countries, simply that hon. gentlemen opposite may be able to point to the word " exclusion " when they go before their constituents in the province of British Columbia? Let us be honest.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I want to raise a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. My hon. friend is wholly unfair.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, he is not.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am speaking to a point of privilege. I took the initiative in bringing the British Columbia members together, and we have presented this reso-

Oriental Aliens
lution to the House without the slightest tinge of partisanship. My hon. friend is doing us gross injustice when he seeks to place that construction on our attitude.


James Horace King: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to do anyone injustice, but I do wish the House and the country to know exactly what took place. A few days ago I spoke to the mover of this resolution (Mr. McQuarrie) about the serious international consequences involved in the use of the word " exclusion, " and I told him we would gladly accept his resolution if he used language acceptable to the different countries comprising the British Empire. He came to me a day or two ago and told me he regretted that that step could not be taken because the British Columbia members attached so much importance to the word " exclusion."


Henry Herbert Stevens: Our action was non-political; the supporters of my hon. friend and the supporters of the hon. leader of the Progressive party (Mr. Crerar) were included in a joint meeting-the whole of the members from British Columbia, of whom we here number seven and the others six.


James Horace King: Then I accept my hon. friend's interpretation that it was non-political; I will appeal to him now on the ground of national interest as against sectional interest. A few days ago, I made an appeal to our western friends to consider the interests of the Dominion of Canada as a whole in regard to a measure that was before this House. I appeal now to hon. gentlemen directly opposite in the interests of this country as a whole, and as a part of the British Empire, not to insist upon a resolution the adoption of which is certain to embarrass not only our own country but all parts of the British Empire. Let me say this further and make it perfectly clear, speaking with a full sense of the responsibility that is mine: If this Government to-morrow tried to bring about an effective restriction with Japan and had to meet the Japanese with a resolution to the effect that this Parliament stood for exclusion of Japanese, the Japanese Government would refuse to treat with us. Where would we be? Where would the hon. gentleman go? Whom would he look to in the matter of carrying out a resolution of this kind? How are we going to carry it out?


Henry Herbert Stevens: Have we no powers?


James Horace King: What powers have we to pass a law that is offensive to another nation, in terms that are offensive and which will not bring about the desired results?


Henry Herbert Stevens: Does my hon. friend suggest we have not the power or the right to pass any law with regard to the exclusion or prohibition to land in Canada of any immigrant from any part of the world that we choose?


James Horace King: I made it plain that every country should have the right to control the composition of its own population.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Then why negotiate it in Tokio?


James Horace King: It is not negotiated in Tokio.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is what my hon. friend suggests.


James Horace King: I suggest nothing of the kind, and my hon. friend knows that perfectly well. He may be attempting to ascribe to me a motive and a position that are absolutely false. But I want to put the position of the Government plainly before him. The Government are anxious to bring about an effective restriction of this oriental immigration in a manner serviceable to all parts of this Dominion. We believe that we cannot do that if a resolution passes this House using the word "exclusion." We believe that we can do it by negotiation, by seeking to foster good-will between the different countries and to keep down ill-will. It is for that reason and that reason only that the amendment has been moved.


Arthur Meighen: I submit that the
Prime Minister has used language much stronger than the circumstances warranted. In my judgment he was not justified in going the length he did as respects what would be the attitude of any other nation or as respects just what is going to happen if we do this or do that. I do not myself know how he knows; furthermore, I do not think he does know. We presented this resolution-or, rather, it was presented by an hon. member on this side and another hon. member to the left-with the desire to get an expression of the will of this Parliament upon the real question. There was no desire to offend any nation; indeed, we were not aware of the fact that there was
Oriental Aliens

some special offence hovering around the word "exclusion," but if it was thought that there was, we were prepared to substitute for it another word. Now, how are we met? We are met, in the first place, by an amendment which says that it is the duty of Canada to put in operation a policy of effective restriction. If that had the same meaning as what we desired to have Parliament express, that would be quite as good to us; but "effective restriction" is one thing and "effective exclusion" is another. Restriction means letting in certain-


James Horace King: May I ask
my right hon. friend a question, please?


Arthur Meighen: Oh, yes.


James Horace King: What is the difference between the expression "effective exclusion" and "exclusion"?


Arthur Meighen: None at all.


James Horace King: Certainly
not.


Arthur Meighen: I did not pretend there was. But effective restriction means that we should adopt a policy of letting some more into this country and keeping some others out-letting some in and keeping some out. That is what effective restriction means.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Arthur Meighen: Who is it that is murmuring? Am I not making myself clear?


Mr. DUFF:: Do not look at me, please.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Hewitt Bostock: Order.


Arthur Meighen: For myself, I do not want to be a party to a resolution which affirms it to be the will of this Parliament that we should adopt a policy of letting some more into the country. I do not approve of that course, even if it is accompanied by a policy of "effective restriction." Now, my hon. friend says that we can have exclusion all right if we do not use the word. Well, I have tried to meet him in that respect, and I will try again. But I want him to understand now -and I say this without the slightest offence-that I am not prepared, for my part, to agree to a resolution which means something that I do not believe should be the future policy of this country, even

though to say that may help him to make something else the policy. I do not think that is the right way of getting any policy. If we want a certain policy, let us express our desire for it, not in language that is offensive; let us choose language that can carry with it no offence at all. I do not know why "exclusion" has become a word to be shunned, but if it has, let us use something else. I used the word "prohibition," and also I suggested that after the word " immigration," in order that there could be no room for misunderstanding at all, the words " for residence purposes" be inserted. My hon. friend does not discuss the merits or demerits of the word "prohibition." I adopt it only because it is the word that had been adopted before in the language of the act of 1910. Now, I suggest this-and I ask the Government to consider it; if they do not, then it appears to me there is no use of our trying further to come to common ground-that instead of the words "securing the exclusion of future immigration of this type" we use this phrase: "bringing to an end further such immigration for residence purposes."


Some hon. MEMBERS:: What is that, again?


Arthur Meighen: I will read the whole resolution with that inserted instead of the words it would replace. I am not moving it by way of amendment for the moment, but I should be glad to have that done if it meets with the approval of the Government:
That, in the opinion of this House, the immigration of oriental aliens and their rapid multiplication is becoming a serious menace to living conditions, particularly on the Pacific coast, and to the future of the country in general, and the Government should take immediate aotion with a view to bringing to an end further such immigration for residence purposes.
The House divided on the amendment of Mr. Stewart (Argenteuil) which was carried on the following division:
Archambault,
Beaubien,
Beland,
Binette,
Bird,
Black (Huron), Boivin,
Boucher,
Bourassa,
Brown,
Bureau,
++YEAS
Messrs.
Cahill,
Caldwell.
Campbell,
Cardin,
Carroll,
Carruthers,
Chevr.ier,
Chisholm,
Clifford,
Copp,
Crerar,

Oriental Aliens
d'Anjou,	Mackinnon,
Davies,	Maclean (Halifax),
Delisle,	MacLean
Demers,	(Prince, P.E.I.),
Denis (St. Denis),	Maophail,
Desaulniers,	McConica,
Deslauriers,	McCrea,
Desrochers,	McDonald
Duff.	(Timiskaming),
Elliott (Dundas),	McGiverin,
Elliott (Waterloo),	Mclsaac,
Ethier,	McKay,
Fafard,	McKenzie,
Findlay,	McMurray,
Fontaine,	McTaggart,
Forke,	Marcil (Bonaventure),
Forrester,	Marcile (Bagot),
Fortier,	Mercier,
Fournier,	Michaud,
Gardiner,	Millar,
Gauvreau,	Milne,
Gendron,	Mitchell,
Good,	Morrison,
Gordon,	Motherwell,
Gouin (Sir Lomer),	Murdock,
Gould,	Ouimet,
Graham,	Papineau,
Hammell,	Pelletier,
Hodgins,	Pritchard,
Hoey,	Putnam,
Hudson,	Rankin,
Hughes,	Raymond,
Hunt,	Reed,
Irvine,	Rinfret,
Jelliff,	Robinson,
Johnson (Moosejaw),	Ross (Simcoe ),
Johnston (Last	Sales,
Mountain),	Savard.
Kennedy (Edmonton),	Sexsmith,
Kennedy (Essex),	Shaw,
Kennedv (Port Arthur Sinclair	
and Kenora),	(Queens, P.E.I.),
King (Huron),	Speakman,
King (Kootenay),	Spencer,
King, Mackenzie ( York), Steedsman,	
Kyte,	Stewart (Argenteuil)
Laflamme,	Stewart (Humboldt),
Lafortune,	Thurston,
LanctOt,	Tobin,
La-pierre,	Trahan,
Lapointe,	Turgeon,
Leader,	Walsh,
L6ger,	Ward,
Dogan,	Woods,
Lovett,	Woodsworth-130.
Lovie,	
NAYS	
Messrs.	
Anderson,	MacKelvie,
Black (Yukon),	McBride,
Boys,	McKillop,
Chaplin,	McQuarrie,
Charters,	Manion,
Church,	May-bee,
Clark,	Meighen,
Dickie,	Neill,
Garland (Carleton),	Ross (Kingston),
Grimmer,	Senn,
Guthrie,	Simpson,
Harris,	Spence,
Hubbs,	Stansell,
Humphrey,	Stevens,
Kellner,	Stewart (Leeds),
Ladner,	Stork,
Lewis,	Tolmie,
Lucas,	White-36.
100	

The list of pairs as furnished by the Chief Whips is as follows:
Messrs.	*
For the amendment Against the amendment Macdonald (Pictou), Ryckman.
Motion as amended agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the House adjourned at 1.45 a.m. Tuesday.
Tuesday, May 9, 1922