Mr. MACPHERSON.

Hon. gentlemen may laugh. My only desire is to accomplish something, not to make political capital. When I hear hon. gentlemen who are lineal descendants of the men who brought Chinamen in 1882, against the demands of the people of British Columbia, and who, during eighteen years that the Conservative party were in power, positively refused to impose a head tax on Chinamen, except a paltry $50 -when I hear these hon. gentlemen talk today, it looks very much as if the leopard had attempted to change his spots. We know that, to meet the wishes of the people of British Columbia, the government of Sir John Macdonald appointed a commission to investigate the question of Chinese and Japanese immigration, and the commission brought in a report decidedly detrimental to the interests of the people of British Columbia, practically favouring Chinese and Japanese immigration. In British Columbia both political parties are agreed on this question. The Chinese question has been made a political football for demagogues in that province ; but no one party has a monopoly of it. In his resolution, my hon.

friend from East Simcoe has recognized only half the evil. The Japanese are to-day a greater menace to us than the Chinese could ever expect to be, and I ask that the government shall provide in the general Railway Act that no corporation receiving public money shall be allowed to employ Asiatics of any description. I will support the amendment of my hon. friend, but I want it to go further and include the Japanese as well as the Chinese. We do not wish to see any of these Asiatics employed on any railroad which may be built in the future. They are a menace to our civilization and a blot on the escutcheon of Canada. The province of [DOT] British Columbia contains about 20,000 of one kind and about 15,000 of the other. I do not want to see any political capital made out of this matter. I want to see it provided for in the general Railway Act, so that it will apply to all railroads and public works, whether they have received public money in the past or will receive it in the future.

Mr. THOMPSON (Haldimand).

It seems to me that the hon. member for East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett) has overlooked one thing, that is, the stringency in the market for farm labourers. I represent a farming constituf ency, and I know the great difficulty the farmers of Haldimand have to obtain the requisite amount of farm labour, and for what they do obtain they have to pay very high prices, so that the legitimate profits of agriculture have been seriously reduced in consequence. I am quite in accord with lion, members in wishing to see the Chinese out of the country, but inasmuch as we have increased the poll tax to $500, and there is no serious danger of their entering in large numbers, I see no cause for this amendment. As to those who are now in Canada, if they were excluded from working on the road that would be a deteriment to our farming class. They are not in any respect farm labourers, and their exclusion would simply mean that the railway navvies would have to be recruited from the farm labouring class, and the farmer would be the sufferer.

Mr. SPROULE.

It is interesting to know the position taken by the hon. member for Vancouver (Mr. Macpherson). He says that the exclusion of the Chinese was an important issue at the time of his election, and he desires that these people should be shut out. But if so why does he not move an amendment to that ^effect ? Being a supporter of the government .he would be more likely to get the government to accede to his request than if he were a member of the opposition. He makes the excuse that he will support an amendment to that effect to the Railway Act, but the Railway Act is not before the House. The Bill which is before the House is one which will involve the employment of a large amount of labour and which affords a good opportuity for the hon. gentleman to show his sincerity by moving to prevent the employment of

Chinese labour on the railway contemplated by that Bill. I am afraid that he will have a difficult task before him when called upon to explain his conduct in his own constituency.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

I do not think I would require to go to any night school to the hon. member. When it is time to go to the polls, I can attend to my own case, and the hon. gentleman may come up and oppose me to his heart's content. If he will only make as many dreary, verbose speeches there as he does here, without the relief of a single scintilla of wit or humour, my election will be made doubly certain. Let me tell the hon. gentleman that he is to-day breaking out in a new place. I am not aware that when the late government was in power, of which he was a zealous supporter, he ever raised his voice against the importation of the Chinese. I am not aware that when in 1882 his former leader, the late Sir John Macdonald, said it was absolutely necessary to have Chinese labour because the Canadian Pacific Railway could not be built without it, the hon. gentleman ever made the slightest protest. Would he do so now if he did not think some little political advantage was to be gained by it ? I doubt whether the province of British Columbia will ever owe anything to the hon. gentleman. He appears to utterly ignore the fact that good work may be done in a quiet way by a member of parliament and done much more effectually than by making himself an infliction on the House. I may say that I have not been neglectful of the interests of my constituents. One of the results of my election to this House has been the imposition of the head tax of $500 on the Chinese. I do not care to get out on the house-top and shout, but try to work for the best interests of my country, and I do not see any need of going to any night school to the hon. gentleman.

Mr. SPROULE.

The hon. gentleman will have to explain to his electors why he did not, when the opportunity presented itself, make an effort to keep out the Chinese. Instead of doing so, he is only offering his help to the government which refuses to accept tlie amendment now submitted. He asks, did I ever say a word on behalf of white labour or in the direction of keeping out Chinese labour. Well, if he will take the trouble to look up ' Hansard ' he will have his mind disabused of the impression which he evidently is labouring under, that I never did. I am afraid, however, that neither a night school nor a day school would furnish him with the information lie so much needs, but I can tell him that the proper time to act is when the question is before the House. It is all very well to talk of amending Acts which are not before the House, what he requires to do is to amend the measure which is now submitted to our judgment. t

Mr. SPROULE.

Mr. MACPHERSON; I said that I would be pleased to support the amendment, but I want it to go further and include the Japanese as well.

Mr. SPROULE.

Why do you not go further ?

Mr. MACPHERSON.

I am not taking the hon. gentleman as an example and do not require to be taught by him how I should act. If I should do what is wrong all the better for him and his party, and if I were to look up in ' Hansard ' all the speeches which the hon. gentleman has made, I would not have a moment to spare to do anything else. But I ask him again if he was not a member of the party which brought in the Chinese in 1882 ? It was the present government which made the head tax $100. That did some good, and it has now increased that tax to $500. As long as this question is made a political football, we cannot expect to have it settled. For my part I have no desire to make it a political issue and shall only be too glad to support the hon. gentleman's motion but hope be will make it stronger.

Mr. SPROULE.

The hon. gentleman is not well informed on parliamentary more than on any other history of his own country. If he were he would know that when the Mackenzie government were in power there was nothing done to keep out the Chinese, and that the first attempt was made by the government of Sir John Macdonald, which imposed a poll tax of $50. That government afterwards appointed a commission to get information on which the House could act intelligently and independently, and that information is in the possession of the present government: and the House. The hon. gentleman said that he was instrumental in getting the $500 poll tax imposed, but every member from British Columbia could say the same thing. All were instrumental individually. But whether they were instrumentally, individually or collectively, it was only in a very tardy way and at a very late hour that the present government carried out their express promise to the people of British Columbia. Does not the hon. gentleman remember the celebrated telegram that was sent out to the Pacific coast when the government desired to have one of its supporters elected, that, whatever the desire of the people in regard to the Chinese question was, it would be carried out. The government candidate was elected, but the promise on the strength of which he had been elected has not yet been carried out. The people of British Columbia asked the exclusion of the Chinese, and. assuming that the government were honest and intended to carry out their wishes, they expected to see the promise of the government fulfilled. But that promise was not fulfilled, and it is only lately that the government have made a move in

the direction the hon. gentleman referred to, by putting on a tax of $500.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

Mr. Chairman

Oh, oh.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

This House has not heard me speak very much, but I purpose exercising my rights. My constituents expect me to stand up for their rights and 1 intend doing it. I am a young member in this House and I only desire what is fair. 1 would tell the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) that when he attempts to draw a red herring across the track in a discussion with me, he is making a mistake. In 1881, when the contract with the Canadian Pacific Railway was made-I have looked up ' Hansard ' and could quote it in support of my assertions if it was necessary- the people of British Columbia fought) against the bringing in of the Chinese. But Sir John Macdonald who was leader of the government, said it was absolutely necessary to bring in the Chinaman. We did not have the yellow plague until that time. But after that time, boatload after boatload of these people came because they were expressly sent for by the government then in power. These are facts beyond controversy so what is the use of the hon. gentleman saying anything to the contrary ? You . could not have a law to keep them out, because they were not a menace to our prosperity at that time.

Mr. THOMPSON (Haldimand).

There was no occasion for Mackenzie to pass a law to exclude them.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

No occasion whatever. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) says that a commission was appointed by the Conservative government to inquire into this question. Did that commission consist of men from the west, or of men from the east, who are not in sympathy with the idea of putting on a head tax ? The hon. gentleman is conversant with the history of Canada for the last twenty-five years, and he knows that that commission was composed of men living in the east. I looked over the report and I failed to find a solitary straight-forward statement asking that a head-tax be imposed or an Exclusion Act passed to keep these people out of British Columbia. I am not finding fault with the commission. They may have reported according to the evidence they took. But the people of British Columbia still clamoured, for the redress of their wrongs. Then the present government come into power. The hon. gentleman asked me if I remembered a telegram that was sent to British Columbia. 1 do, and I was glad to see it. It told us that the wishes of the members from the west should prevail there. It took some time. But for my part I am prepared to accept a reform when I can get it. It was a pretty hard pull. If the hon. gentleman

was sitting on this side lie would understand the difficulties that face a government in this matter. He knows very well the opinion of the people in the east and he would have to deal with members of the government some of whom, perhaps, had given many hundreds of dollars to spread the gospel, among the Chinese, men raised in the same school as the hon. gentleman and who think it pretty hard that these people should not come into this country. Besides, these hon. gentlemen have the responsibility of government upon them. There is not one man in ten living east of the Rocky mountains who looks upon this question as we do. And for the simple reason that they are not up against the proposition as we are. They do not see their sons driven out of the country by the competition of these Chinamen. They do not see, in a kitchen, where a white girl should be working, a long tailed greasy Chinaman. They look at this question in the abstract.

Oh, oh.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

Under the old system there was no chance for girls to come into our country, no chance for young men to come in and, find places in our mills, Hon. gentlemen opposite seem inclined to make a little fun out of this discussion. But 1 can tell him that this means more to us than they imagine. I have seen some of our brightest and best young men leave our country because of this yellow plague. You can go into our mills, and, where you find ten white men you will find thirty-five yellow men-pig-tailed Chinamen .and short haired Japanese. This is a proposition that we are very

much alive to. Unless steps are promptly taken to prevent it, we shall be Hooded with this class of people who can never become citizens of our country. I have no desire to make political capital out of this matter. But I am glad to say we have a head-tax of $500, and I trust it will be provided that any corporation or body of men asking this parliament for aid or asking for any government work shall be forbidden to hire any but white men. I have no objections to the Chinese and Japanese in their own country. But I do strongly object to our country being overrun by a purely Asiatic people. They can never come farther east than British Columbia on account of the climate. Our climate is mild and humid and suits them. But the eastern provinces will never be cursed with them. The hon. member for South Simcoe (Mr. Lennox) need not fear that the Chinese will work on the eastern section because the country is too cold for them. They will remain in the west and swarm around our end of the line. I think I am as charitable as anybody, and I would be far from saying that any people who are now in our country should be denied the right to make a living. I do not employ

either Chinese or Japanese, and I would be glad to see it made so hard for them to make a living that they would prefer to live in some other country. Then we should have more room for white men. I do not care so very much whether they are Douk-hobors for in a generation these classes become good citizens. But this is not true of the Chinese or Japanese for they are of a different blood.

Mr. SPROULE.

The hon. gentleman (Mr. Macpherson) seems, as usual, to be entirely inconsistent and somewhat reckless in his statements. In the first place, he says they never had any difficulty with the Asiatic question until 1885. Why, I can remember when 'Cariboo' Thompson, when Sinister, when Amor De Cosmos, were in this House and spoke as strongly against the immigration of Chinese before 1882 as any men have ever done since. I can remember that this question was a burning question then, and we heard as much about it before 1882 as we have heard about it since. So much for the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Maepherson's) knowledge of his own province, concerning which he professes to be so well informed. Then as to the consistency of his party, where is that party today ? He says he remembers the telegram that was sent to the Pacific coast, and he was glad to see it-that the government would carry out the wishes of the people in the west. What was the wish of those people V Was it not that Chinese and Japanese labour should be excluded ? Did not they make these representations to the government V If so, why did not the government carry out the people's wishes, as they promised to do ? The hon. gentleman says it is different here in the east, and that we know nothing about the troubles they have to contend with. He says the government is face to face with the responsibilities of office, and it is hard to carry out these changes. Well, did not the government know that'just as well before they sent this telegram as afterwards ? If they made these promises, knowing that they could not carry them out, they were misleading the people when-they promised to carry out their wishes. The hon. gentleman says that the government has done all that was ever done for the people in the direction of excluding the Chinese and Japanese. Why, he says the present government have done more than any other government; comparatively speaking, they have done everything. Does he forget who disallowed the Act passed by the provincial legislature of British Columbia excluding these people, that it was the present government that disallowed that Act, and that when his own government passed an Act to exclude these people, they would have been kept out but for the fact that that Act was disallowed by the government here. Now. be says that no corporation receiving aid from this House should be allowed to employ either Chinese Mr. MACPHERSON.

or Japanese. He is about face to face with that condition now ; this company receives large subventions from the government, and why does he not support this amendment ?

Mr. MACPHERSON.

Who was the first Minister of Justice to disallow 'the British Columbia Chinese Act and what was the date of that disallowance ?

Mr. SPROULE.

That has nothing to do with the question.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

All right.

Mr. iSI'ROULE. Who was the first man that was called to account for boodling in British Columbia ? That question is as pertinent as the one the hon. gentleman has asked. I am dealing with the record of the hon. gentleman in this matter. He says: I desire to see the time come when no corporations receiving aid from this country should be allowed to employ Chinese or Japanese labour. Yet he approves of the employment of that very labour by a company receiving a large subvention from this country. He is so Inconsistent that he says he will not support the amendment.