On June 28, 1923 he set sailed aboard the Empress of Australia from Hong Kong and arrived at Victoria, BC, Canada on July 17. Held in a holding cell until his sixth uncle, Zhong Xuan Chow (周宗漩), came and paid the $500 Head Tax. Together they went to Milestone, Saskatchewan where his fourth uncle, Zhong Lan Chow (周宗瀾), was staying. Went to school during his stay at Milestone.

In 1924 he moved to Plato, Saskatchewan where his uncle, Zhong Xuan, had just bought a restaurant. Next year went to Conquest, Saskatchewan because Uncle Zhong Xuan had sold the business and returned to China. Spent a year in Conquest then went to Elrose, Saskatchewan and worked as kitchen aide in the Elrose Hotel.

In 1928 return to China where he got married to Der She Chow (謝秀琴). He stayed in China till the end of 1929. He returned to Canada on the Empress of Russia on November 8. While in China, the new couple welcomed a baby boy into the family. However, the baby didn’t survived.

After returning from China he went to Plato where he stayed till 1943. This was the Great Depression years. Despite the fact he seldom talked about it but from the bits and pieces we know it was hard. He went prematurely grey. Potato must be the main food staple because he had an aversion to it. One of the benefits of slow business is ample spare time. He used this time to raise chicken, to go fishing, to learn curling. This love of curling never left him. Up to his last days it is the only televised sport he would watch. He even arranged his meals so it wouldn’t interfere with his viewing.

In 1943 he moved to Elrose where he purchased the Royal Cafe and changed the name to Liberty Cafe. Applied and became a Canadian citizen in 1949. In early 1950, after almost twenty years, his wife joined him in Canada. They started to raise a family in Canada with the birth of their only daughter, Margaret (周惠連), two sons, Harry (周錦達) and Kam (周錦東).

During the 50′s he, in keeping with Chinese tradition, arranged to bring his eldest brother, Shui Shao Chow’s (周瑞韶) second son, Ming (周錦信), his younger brother, Shui Can Chow’s (周瑞燦) eldest son, Kam Fay (周錦煇), his wife’s older brother, Ping Xiang Xie’s (謝平相) second son, Jim Der (謝丁財). In fulfilling a promise made to his former business partner, he arranged for Lai Chow (周黎) to come over from China. All four were in their late teens, no more than a year apart in age. They stayed and worked at the cafe. Eventually the time came for them to spread their wings. Ming was the first to leave. He and his family is now in Edmonton, Alberta. Jim settled in Rosetown, Saskatchewan operating his own restaurant. In 1982, a year after his death, his family moved to and settled in Vancouver. Lai and Kam Fay continued to operate the Liberty Cafe until 1965 when Lai, a non-smoker, died of cancer. In 1981 when Kam Fay sold the restaurant and moved his family to Vancouver, BC.

In 1960 after selling the business to Lai and his nephew Kam Fay, he moved his family to Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. His intention was to operate a restaurant there. This never happened because of lacking a suitable partner. He converted the upstairs of the building earmarked for his new restaurant into a rooming house for elderly Chinese. He spent the next quarter century looking after his tenants’ needs, such as booking and accompanied them to doctor’s appointments, writing letter to relatives, corresponding with all levels of government, and keeping them abreast with events of the outside world.

Canada’s more liberal immigration policies of the 70′s enabled him and his wife to sponsor one more nephew to Canada. In 1980 his wife’s youngest brother, Ping An Xie’s (謝平安) son, Tho Lim Der (謝素林), arrived at Moose Jaw. A year later his family joined him there. In 1986 they moved to Vancouver where he now operates his own restaurant.

In September 1984, almost two years after the death of his wife, he moved to Burnaby, BC, to live with his daughter and her family.

An Eulogy
by
Patrick Lee

My grandfather will be remembered as a hardworking and modest man. He had simple needs. He was forthright and honest, a person with humble beginnings who placed a great value on education and friendship.

I will remember him as the only grandparent I ever knew. I will remember him as a man who was content with what life had given him. He never asked for much and in the years I knew him, he lived a simple life.

My grandfather’s lifetime could be divided into three different parts.

He was born in An Kai Lai, Kaiping, Guangdong, China on May 29, 1909.

The direction of this early period started with his steamship voyage at the age of 14 from China to Victoria, B.C., Canada, in 1923. He was held in a holding cell until his 6th uncle came and paid the Head Tax.

His early life was marked with many obstacles and hardships. He worked as a kitchen aide and cook in various small towns in Saskatchewan, where he learned to speak and write English. He developed an independence that I could still see during the time that I knew him. At age 19, he returned to China in 1928 to get married to Der She Chow, returning to Canada alone in 1930.

He lived through the Great Depression of the 1930′s in Saskatchewan, becoming prematurely grey in his 20′s. He didn’t talk much of this period of his life. From the bits and pieces he shared with family, it was a very difficult time for him. However, he did learn the game of curling, a favourite Saskatchewan sport. His love of curling never left him. Up to his last days, it was the only event he thoroughly enjoyed to watch on TV. He even timed his meals around the curling schedules. It gave him great pride whenever Canada won the world titles.

From 1943 to 1960, he purchased and operated the Liberty Caf?in Elrose, Saskatchewan. Despite the long days in the restaurant business, he developed many close and valued friendships with the Canadian townspeople and farmers within the community. People called him “Lee” and loved his home-baked pies, sugar doughnuts, and fresh bread. When the surrounding farmers came into town for their supplies, it was a special treat to stop into the Liberty Caf?for coffee and a piece of pie. He took pride in his abilities and in the respect he had earned in the community.

He became a Canadian citizen in 1949 and arranged for his wife to join him in early 1950, after a separation of 20 years. At the late age of 41, my grandfather was able to start his family in Canada with the birth of his three children: my mom, Margaret, and two sons, my uncles, Harry and Kam. Also during this time period, he was able to assist extended family still in China by bringing over some nephews to Canada. It is good to see that all their families are presently thriving.

The second part of my grandfather’s life covered another quarter of a century from 1960 to 1984 when he moved his family from Elrose to Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. He owned and operated a 3-story building in which many of the tenants were elderly Chinese. Besides being their landlord, his tenants became his friends and they trusted him to be their English translator in personal and medical matters. He was respected and active within the Chinese community in Moose Jaw. In the 1970′s, he was able to sponsor another nephew, Tho Lim Der and his family, to Moose Jaw.

After my grandmother, Der She Chow, passed away in late 1982, my grandfather spent the third part of his lifetime in retirement in Burnaby, B.C., living with my parents and me. He spent the last 20 years of life in relatively good health. During the 92 years of his life, he spent more than 75 years in Canada. He helped many people and he fulfilled some heavy responsibilities. Through it all, he remained a practical man with simple needs. Perhaps this was a secret to his longevity.

My grandfather was a man who touched each of our lives in different ways: as a father, as a grandfather, as an uncle, and as a friend.

I will remember him growing snow peas in the garden. I will remember him teaching me card games. I will remember him laughing at how hot it is in the summer, how cold it is in the winter, how rainy it is in the spring, and how windy it is in the fall. I will remember carving pumpkins with him on Halloween. I will remember joining him on walks as a child. And on those walks stopping to talk to neighbours. Neighbours who’d greet him as if they’ve known him for years. Just from his daily walks, he’d gotten to know everyone in the neighbourhood, and everyone had gotten to know him. I don’t think his small town roots ever left him. He was a man who held basic values of trust, honesty, integrity, and friendship.

It is so difficult for my generation to understand the hardships endured by those who walked before us. Seldom do we recognize the sacrifices made for us. Hearing stories of my grandfather’s life, I cannot imagine what it must have been like. Such a life is not lived without courage, determination, and perseverance. It’s true that the battles and times we face now are different than those of the past, but we can always draw from the knowledge that we too can find inner strength during hard times just as he did.

So as we commemorate his life, we celebrate the legacy he has left us. His legacy is in his family and his friends. His legacy is the people that he has helped, and in the lives that he has touched. He has left us a history. A history of pride in culture and of pride in family. And now this history is in our hands to carry on where he left off.

He will be greatly missed and always remembered.

July 16, 2001

Bookmark to:

The Chinese, as a rule, aren’t big on details when giving account of events. A major historical event may be recorded simply by cause and effect. Anybody reading older Chinese writings on historical events can’t help but observe this briefness. So Dad was no exception when he talked about himself.

When he talked about his journey to Canada, the wording was something in the nature of “the ship docked, Uncle came aboard to meet me, he paid the Head Tax and I stayed.” Nothing was said about the ship, the living conditions, the living quarters, the food or the fellow passengers. The probing of his feelings and fears in leaving home and traveling to a far and foreign land at such a young age never came up. The over-crowded condition in Southern China made going abroad to work and support the family an accepted part of life. This, personal sacrifices for the family, is in-line with traditional Chinese culture. Thinking back, there was a feeling that living conditions in the new home may not be that much better than those in China.

Upon his arrival in Canada, Dad went to school for about two months before starting to work in his uncle’s laundry, The Charlie Li Laundry, on St. Denis Street. There he would stayed, except for the four trips back to China, until 1952 when he decided to enter the restaurant business. The hours at the laundry were long – eighteen-hour days were the norm. I remember he talked about falling asleep on his feet while ironing. He showed me one of the irons. The were heavy. It was more of an anchor than iron.

Another part of Dad’s job was collecting and delivering laundry. He showed me his black lunch box which had a thermos bottle inside and the bag he used to hold the laundry. It was a huge looking monster, almost as tall as him. I could imagine the difficulties he must have had in hauling it through his route. It must be really brutal during the months with the heavy Montreal snow-falls. He said there were occasions when the bus drivers wouldn’t let him on because of the enormous laundry bag while other times he would get a free ride because of it.

In 1921 Dad went back to China and got married to Jiu Thue Loon (趙翠鸞). It was, as was the custom of the time, an arranged marriage. They didn’t enjoy too much time together as Dad returned to Canada shortly after.

The next trip home for Dad came in 1927. Their eldest child, Lin Feng (琳鳳), was born on July 11, 1928. Not long after my sister’s birth, Dad returned to Canada and to the laundry, just in time for the Great Depression.

He didn’t say too much about the Depression. I only remember two of his comments:

• Times were hard. There just wasn’t any work. This condition didn’t change until the war came. Then there was so much work that even children were pressed into service.
• Letters from home weren’t something to look forward to. The wording might be different but the theme was always the same: send money.

Despite the Depression, Dad managed to save enough for another trip back to China in the late 30′s. During this trip two major events took place:

• Dad purchased a lot on the edge of the village and built a new house; and
• the birth of their second child, Helen (鳴鳳), on March 25, 1938

Shortly after, Dad returned to Canada. Apparently not a moment too soon, as the war on the Pacific escalated and shipping lanes were closed until the end of World War II. A large number of people were caught in this situation and their Canadian visas expired.

After the war, Dad embarked on a trip to China again. While away, his eldest daughter, Lin Feng, grew up and married. Dad missed her wedding but was on hand when on November 15, 1948, she gave birth to a baby girl, Yuk Ling (麥玉玲).

While in China, Dad purchased some farm land because as he was approaching 50 and retirement was on his mind. He planned to return to Canada for a few more years then retire to China and farm. The hardship Mom and the family suffered when the shipping lanes were closed during the war was another major factor.

Their first and only son, Kevin, was born on February 27, 1949. Upon returning to Canada, Dad continued with the laundry trade until 1952 when he joined a group buy and operate the Jade Garden Cafe in Montreal’s Chinatown. It was a major decision as he ventured into a brand new line of business at the twilight of his career. Friends and relatives advised him not to stay put and avoid risk at his age. Whether he had foreseen the hand laundry business as a sunset trade and the upcoming popularity of Chinese restaurants is something we don’t know. All we know is he made the switch.

Dad’s retirement plan went down the drain with the Communist’s take over of China. The farm land he acquired was confiscated during the Land Reform (土改). Actually, we were fortunate that we didn’t have enough land to be classified as landlords (大地主). Another factor was that both of my parents were the mild mannered type so they didn’t have any enemy who may wanted revenge by coming forward with any charges and accusations.

So, Dad decided that the best course of action was for him to become a Canadian citizen and have the family join him in Canada. However, he did wanted his son to started school and learned some Chinese before coming to Canada. Even after arriving in Canada he would buy from Hong Kong the more traditional text books such as The Thousand Words Poem (千字文)

It was at this point in time Dad and his cousin, Lee Hay Yim (李希蔭), Da Gong’s son, in the time honoured Chinese tradition agreed each will arranged to bring over a nephew from China. This arrangement was to ensure my grandfather and each of his siblings will have a descendant in Canada and take care of their own family. When filing their naturalization papers both Dad and his cousin reported an extra son with the intend of bring the nephews to Canada. The arrangement was for Dad to bring San Gong’s (三公) grandson, Lee Kwan Hym (李群欽) over. My uncle was to bring his cousin Lee Yi Wing’s (李亦榮) eldest son Lee Kwan Fu, (李群富) over. The plan fell apart, however, as my uncle sold the paper intended for Lee Kwan Fu to a distant cousin, Lee Hay Nuan (李希暖) who used it to bring his son, Lee Lum Yi (李倫益), to Canada.

However, all was not lost. Lee Kwan Hym’s immigration process went smoothly. During the interview he gave all the right answers, so to speak. He left Hong Kong for Canada in either late 1956 or early 1957 because at the time there was a host of cousins going through the immigration process resulting in many trips to the airport.

On the evening of December 20, 1957, Dad and his cousin, Hay Yim or On Shu (安叔), were on the platform of Windsor Station waiting for the arrival of the train with members of his family whom he last saw more than seven years ago.

Working conditions in the restaurants were poor. The standard was 6.5 days a week and 12 hours a day with an annual 2 weeks vacation. Dad worked the day shift which was from 10 am to 10 pm. I only get to see him early in the morning and late at night. Tuesday was the day to forward to because it was Dad’s day off, half a day actually. He still had to go in and worked till 4 in the afternoon. In the summer we would take advantage of the long daylight and visited the park. We frequented Lafontain Park which is close by the laundry shop on St. Denis. On occasions we visited relatives and friends. After supper Dad would tell stories of famous people, experiences of the older overseas Chinese, or passages from the old Chinese writings. Unfortunately I manage to retain some but forgotten most.

Every day before going to work Dad would drop by to see his Third Uncle (三叔), Yin Gang (賢簡), who was a long term tenant in a Chinatown hotel, the Hangzhou Hotel (杭洲旅館). I remember the visits to his room. I think it was room 7, a corner unit on the second floor. I was most intrigued by the grandfather clock standing in the corner of the room.

Dad would generally arrive home from work at about 10:30 or so. If it rained unexpected we would meet him at the bus stop with his umbrella. He liked to relax with some peanut and herbalized gin, about 3/4 of a shot-glass. He wasn’t much of a drinker because his face and neck would turned beet red.

Bookmark to:

We don’t have a lot of information on him but from data on hand and knowledge of Chinese customs we can make certain deductions. Firstly, it is safe to say that Xie Wingshui was born in 1883 or there about. His second daughter and fourth child, Der She Chow, was born in 1911. Males at that time were generally married between the age of 16 and 20. If we take the medium age and assume he was married at 18. There seems to be a pattern of a child every other year. Then in 1911 he would have been 28 which means he was born in 1883.

From here we can establish the approximate year of his arrival in Canada. If they were to go overseas and work another common practice for them to leave at the age of 14 or slightly older. This means Xie Wingshui arrived in Canada around 1897 and paid the prevailing $50 head tax.

From what we know, he stayed in the BC Lower Mainland area and worked in the vegetable farms. Since this was seasonal work thus he would returned to China during the off-seasons to save on the living expenses. He may not had made the trip every year but at least every other year.

During WWI he again returned to China. He stayed as long as permitted by his Canadian traveling paper. Made his way to Hong Kong to catch the steamship for the journey to Canada. However, the better ships were requested by the government for the war effort. After seeing the rust bucket masqueraded as passenger ship and recalled the soothsayer’s warning, he decided to postpone his return journey to Canada. Earlier a fortune teller had warned he would die away from home. In seeing the ship’s condition, he decided not to tempt fate.

Safety was a compelling reason for him to wait but there are cultural reasons also. To the Chinese, especially those of the older generations, the concept of “fallen leaves return to the root (落葉歸根)” is of utmost important. This is based upon the true home-grown Chinese religion, ancestor worship. In ancient time not worship one’s ancestors was cause enough for the a leader’s removal. Chinese history is littered with references of appointing a male heir to ensure the offerings were made at the appropriate times. It became the unspoken obligations to make offerings to one’s ancestors om all important occasions and to visit the grave sites at least twice a year, Spring and Autumn, for offerings and maintenance. Because of poor transportation and the associated high cost people die while traveling most likely wouldn’t be buried in the family or clan’s ancestral burial ground and have their graves tended to.

Unfortunately, during the War most ships were requisitioned by the government and commercial ships were few and far in between. Consequently Xie Wingshui missed the return deadline on his travelling Canadian paper. He started to sell seedings at Taishan City (台城) which is in another county but not far from his village. All was well until 1939 when the Japanese invasion finally reached the area. One of the Japanese tactics was to bomb local cities and towns. He was caught in one of these daytime raids and killed. Thus in a way he met fate on the road he took to avoid it.

Bookmark to:

What sets Canada’s action apart from the others is the head tax was imposed soon after the completion of the TransCanada railway. During the latter phrase of this project thousands upon thousands of Chinese workers were brought in not only as a cost saving measure but also they were the only people who would worked in areas so dangerous that others had refused. Because the Chinese workers were paid substantially lower than the Caucasian workers the Canadian government’s saving was estimated to be nearly $3 million dollars.

These Chinese workers were assigned to work along the treacherous Fraser Canyon. Names such as Hell’s Gate, Jaws of Death Arch, and Indictment Hole give an indication of the terrain. Some say for every foot of railway a Chinese died. Another reason for the high casualty is due to the fact the Chinese were more often than not given the backbreaking and hazardous jobs of tunneling and handling of explosives.

How important was the railway to Canada? One of British Columbia’s conditions in joining the Dominion of Canada was a railway linking it to the rest of the country over the Rockie Mountains. Without the Chinese workers we could say with certainty there wouldn’t be any railway. This was acknowledged by Sir John A. MacDonald, Canada’s first Prime Minister. Without the railway, British Columbia wouldn’t had joined the confederation of Canada. So Canada as we know today wouldn’t even exist. However, during the Last Spike, a ceremony to commemorate the completion of the railway linking Canada from coast to coast, not one Chinese was present.

What consequences did these measures had on the Chinese aside from barring their entry? How did it affected the families, the wives and children? Did it affected the grandchildren?

In Australia, more than a few Caucasians were surprised (shocked?) to discover their Chinese roots. Relations were suppressed such that grandchildren didn’t know their grandparents despite the almost daily encounters. The term living windows and paper sons is a byproduct of the American Chinese Exclusion Act and its loophole. This was not, however, confined to those immigrated to the USA. It was more or less similar for those immigrated to Canada. Repealing the Chinese Immigration Act in 1947 created many paper sons Canadian style.

The head tax prevented all but a few wealthy Chinese from having their families joined them in Canada. As a matter of fact it took them years of hard work and saving just to repay their own head tax loans. It was only after the head tax loan was repaid then they can saved for the return trip. Then it is no surprise the immigrants were generally married at a later age than their stay-at-home counterparts. The Chinese Exclusion Act together with the Great Depression and the Japanese invasion and occupation of China meant many husbands and wives never meet again after their wedding. It was not uncommon for them to be separated for twenty or thirty years before they see each other again. For the more fortunate ones this interval was shorten to between five and ten years. All these meant many started their family only when they were in their forties or the age differences between siblings are such that they represented different generations. In most cases these children were deprived of knowing their grandparents and many of these parents didn’t lived to see their children entered adulthood. We have at least two generations who weren’t able to connect with their culture, heritage and past beyond their parents. We have at least two generations who did not know their grandparents.

Contrast this with the much heralded Canadian Homestead Program where immigrants predominately from Eastern Europe to settle in the Canadian prairie. The government gave them free acrages of land in one of the world’s bread baskets and generous assistance in establishing a new life in Canada. Click here for more detail. Yes, it is hard to believe we are speaking of the same country and in similar time frame.

As of today New Zealand is the only country whose government had openly apologized for imposing the head tax or the poll tax as it is called there. Many Canadians are seeking redress from the Canadian government. Compensation is a sticky issue within the Chinese community itself. Not just in Canada but on an international scale as the writings of Dr. Henry Chan and Kenda Gee give us examples of this great divide.

The Canadian government on November 16, 2005 announced a settlement of the Headtax issue with the National Congress of Chinese Canadians. Reactions from the Chinese community are far from favourable. Here is an article by Brad Lee of Toronto. David Wong of Vancouver wrote in his website:

” Ottawa’s token $12.5 million belongs to the Lo Wah Kiu (pioneer Chinese Canadian) community. It is not to be “shared” with other organizations for whatever altruistic reasons of “diversity, harmony or any of that other ‘noble’ stuff”. This sort of happy funding is already in place by the Feds, and is being well tapped into by those who pander to Ottawa.

Our Headtax money is for the memory of our Lo Wah Kiu’s, and is to be used for Chinese Canadian books, songs, poems, commemorations, films, movies, scholarships, parades, and aerial fly-throughs. Well okay, realistically… maybe $12.5m will pay for a couple of books and GST.”

On June 22, 2006, on behalf of the Government of Canada, the Prime Minister apologized in the House of Commons for the implementation of the Chinese Head Tax. As part of the apology and redress the government opted to compensate the surviving Head Tax payers and surviving spouse of Head Tax payers only.

The conditions set by the government limited this ex-gratia payment to approximately 500 head tax families with a surviving head taxpayer or a spouse of deceased head taxpayer. This represents only about one half of one percent of all affected Head Tax families.

Not surprising many descendants of Canadian Head Tax payers continue to seek a full redress from the Canadian government.

Bookmark to:

Thank you for inviting me to discuss the Head Tax issue with all of you today. Even though I have not, up until this point, taken part in any of these discussions, I have been reading, listening, watching, as well as participating in discussions at the federal level with M.P.s, and at meetings held by the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism. Please keep in mind that I most likely don’t have all the facts, and would be more than happy to be corrected and to listen to everyone’s opinion.

I will discuss the issue from a national perspective, based on historical and recent events.

Before I begin, I would like to thank Prof. David Lai for providing me with the proceedings of the National Conference held in March, 1991, in Winnipeg, as well as the results of the survey on this issue done by Victoria University and Simon Fraser University in 1996.

First, I would like to put the issue in its historical context. There has never been any doubt that Canada was a racist country, like all other Western countries at the time. Many of you are aware that our immigration policy remains discriminatory despite the fact that the racial and cultural qualifications were removed in 1967.

Everyone here today is aware of why the Head Tax was imposed. The main reason was that the B.C. politicians were concerned by the rapid growth of the Chinese population in comparison to the rest of the population in the province, and they were also afraid of losing the support of the working class who feared competition from Chinese labour. The Head Tax was meant to discourage Chinese migration to Canada after the completion of the Canadian Pacific Railway, when Chinese labour was no longer needed. The reason the amount was set at $50 in 1885 was based on information gathered by the Royal Commission of 1884. The amount was just above the maximum amount a Chinese labourer was able to save per year after his living expenses were paid, which were estimated to be $48.

However, we know that the Head Tax did not discourage Chinese immigration, and so the amount was increased to $100 in 1900, and to $500 in 1903. It is interesting to note that between 1885 and 1903, 39,925 Chinese paid the Head Tax to immigrate to Canada. From January 1904, after the tax was increased to $500, until the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1923, 42,444 Chinese paid the Head Tax to come to Canada (between 1886 to 1924, a total of 82,369 paid the Head Tax to enter Canada. The Chinese Exclusion Act in the U.S. was passed in 1882). What these figures tell us is that the Chinese clearly wanted to come to Canada, and that no amount of Head Tax would discourage them.

Most of you would know that the reasons for migration were economic. This was mainly due to a huge increase in the population in Guangdong province without enough land to feed the population. There were also wars and rebellions that caused a great deal of suffering. At the same time, because of the abolition of the slave trade (Britain 1833), labour was needed by Western countries in their colonies. Going overseas meant survival, and despite discrimination, it was still the preferred option for the poor peasants in China. That is why we have the term “Gold Mountain.” Going overseas became a tradition and chain migration started. And, because of the great impetus for the Chinese to immigrate to the New World, countries such as the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand imposed a Head Tax to try to discourage their entry.

In reading the transcripts of the Winnipeg Conference of 1991, the point was made that there was a treaty signed in 1904 (Treaty Series #7) between the United Kingdom and China on the Employment of Chinese Labour in British Colonies and Protectorates, meaning that the Chinese should have had the right to immigrate to Canada which was a British Colony. Technically, yes. However, Canada became a country in 1867, and had its own immigration policy, and besides, most Chinese who immigrated after the completion of the CPR came as family members in the form of chain migration. So, in effect, this treaty did not apply. If I’m wrong, please correct me.

From everything I’ve read so far, no one has mentioned anything about Chinese tradition and culture, which are very important points. A lot has been said about the Canadian government separating families, but if you look at the pattern of Chinese immigration overseas until after the Second World War, the immigrants were mostly adult males. The women were left behind in China, not by their own choice, but because of Chinese tradition. Even after the Second World War, if it had not been for the civil war in China, many of the women and children would still have been left behind. Villages in many parts of south China consisted mainly of women and children because as soon as the boys were old enough they would be sent abroad, despite having to pay the Head Tax. These families were known as the “overseas families.” But that’s another story which I’m not going to expand on at this time.

There is absolutely no question that the Head Tax was unfair, and that the Chinese were discriminated against by the Canadian government, since we were the only group singled out by racial origin to have legislation passed against the entry of many of our ancestors. However, we must realize that other groups, such as the South Asians also had legislation passed against their entry by the “Continuous Journey” amendment in the Immigration Act (1910), which just about excluded them from coming to Canada, even though they were not mentioned specifically by name in the legislation.

Canadian politicians wanted Canada to remain a white country, and as British as possible. That was why Eastern and Southern Europeans were not welcome until after the Second World War, and only then, partly because of the war against Fascism, but mainly because of the booming Canadian economy and the need for labour. So, aside from race, anyone with a different religion or customs, such as the Hutterites and the Doukhobors, was considered unable to assimilate. You can say that Canada had a discriminatory history similar to other immigrant receiving countries such as the United States and Australia.

In order to prevent those of non-British origins from entering, Canadian politicians did all they could to bar their entry. One of the ways was through negotiations with foreign governments. The Canadian government did attempt to abolish the Head Tax in exchange for self-regulation by the Chinese government on the emigration of its citizens, similar to the Hayashi – Lamieux agreement with Japan. I know the following information has been presented by Prof. David Lai in the past, but because it is so important, I am going to repeat it for those who are not aware of it. In 1908, Mackenzie King went to Beijing to discuss the issue with Liang Tun-yen, the acting president of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, the officials at Foreign Affairs suggested that King return to Canada, and bring forward any matter for discussion with the Chinese Consul-General who was being appointed, and in turn, he would refer the Canadian position to the Chinese Foreign Ministry for instruction. So, the opportunity for an agreement was missed because of the evasive and indecisive attitude of the Manchu government. In June, 1914, the Chinese Consul General in Ottawa suggested that the Chinese government was willing to restrict the number of emigrants to 1,000 per year, but the Canadian government felt that the number was too large, and no agreement was reached. So, I do put the blame partially on the Chinese government at the time.

Now, I will go over the chronology of the Head Tax redress campaign. For those of you who are very familiar with it, I hope you will bear with me for the sake of others who may need this information.

In 1984, an elderly Chinese-Canadian went to the office of MP Margaret Mitchell (NDP) of Victoria and asked if he could expect to be compensated for the Head Tax he paid. That was, to my knowledge, the beginning of the Head Tax redress issue.

We all know about the success of the redress movement of the Japanese-Canadians in 1988. Like everything else in Canada, events seem to follow those in the U.S. In 1980, the U.S. Congress conducted hearings into the internment of Japanese Americans. A year before the Canadian agreement by the Mulroney government, the U.S. government offered an acknowledgement and individual compensation package to the Japanese American internees.

In 1988, Prime Minister Mulroney formally acknowledged the wrongs done to the Japanese Canadians, and authorized the provision of C$21,000.00 to each of the individual survivors of wartime detention. The language used in the official document was “acknowledge” the treatment of the Japanese Canadians, and the government “pledge” to ensure it won’t happen again, as well as to “recognize” the commitment and loyalty of the Japanese Canadians to Canada. Please note that nowhere was the word “apologize” ever used. This is important because the Chinese communities all want an apology, even if they cannot agree on anything else. Please remember that the federal government will be very reluctant to use the word “apology”, because legally speaking, it means liability, and the government can be sued for monetary compensation. And because there are so many groups out there asking for redress, the government feels that there would be no end to it.

The Japanese redress movement was successful and a comparison has often been drawn to that of the Chinese Head Tax redress. I want to point out that there are at least two major differences:

1. the Chinese who paid the Head Tax to come to Canada were Chinese nationals and not Canadians. The Head Tax was to prevent the Chinese from entering the country. The Japanese who were interned were Canadians or residents of Canada;
2. Unlike the Japanese Canadians, the Chinese were not interned, and to my knowledge, they never had their belongings and properties confiscated and sold.

So, comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

In a speech given to the National Congress of Italian Canadians and the Canadian Italian Business Professional Association on November 4, 1990, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney mentioned that he would apologize to the Italian Canadian community for the internment of 700 Italian Canadians during the Second World War in a speech to the House of Commons during that session of Parliament. This event was seen as a boost to the Chinese redress campaign. However, by the end of the parliamentary session, he still had not apologized. And to my knowledge, no apology was ever made.

On May 22, 1992, the British Columbia government approved a motion calling on the federal government to provide reasonable redress for the injustice of the Chinese Head Tax. This is a complete reversal of the earlier B.C. policy of urging the Dominion government (as it was known at the time) to stop Chinese immigration. After the Head Tax was instituted, the B.C. government was given part of the proceeds, which became very profitable for the province. Between 1885 and 1903, a quarter of the Head Tax, certificate fees and penalties went to the B.C. government. From 1903, half was paid to the B.C. government. So, the question is, is the B.C. government willing to compensate the Head Tax payers? I am not aware of any decision on their part.

I should like to mention that, at this time, some of the other groups who are seeking redress are:

1. the Italian Canadians (internment, WWII)
2. the Ukrainian Canadians (WWI internment – almost 9,000; Bill C-331 Inky Mark – public commemoration and restitution to be devoted to education and promotion of tolerance),
3. the German Canadians (internment during both World Wars)
4. the Canadian Jewish Congress (turned away the St.Louis – 900 Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany),
5. the Doukohbors (for 6 years, the B.C. government kidnapped their children and confined them in the New Denver Institution),
6. the National Association of Canadians of Origins in India (Continuous Journey; Komagata Maru) and
7. the African Canadian communities (slavery legal until 1833; Africville and the Black Loyalists – the African Canadian Coalition Against Racism formed in 2001 is a coalition of a number of black Canadian organizations).

Redress petitions were sent to then Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, Sheila Finestone, (by the Chinese Canadian National Congress, the National Congress of Chinese Canadians, the German Canadian Congress, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the National Association of Canadians of Origins in India, the National Congress of Italian Canadians, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, and the Canadian Ukrainian Civil Liberties Association), and on December 14, 1994, Minister Finestone made the following statement, “we wish we could rewrite history. We wish we could relive the past. We cannot…We believe our only choice lies in using limited government resources to create a more equitable society now and a better future for generations to come. Therefore, the government will not grant financial compensation for the requests made.”

I got to know Sheila Finestone when she was appointed to the Senate about three years ago. One day, I asked her why she made that announcement in 1994, and she said the Cabinet refused to pay compensation, and her hands were tied.

In 1995, the Canadian Race Relations Foundation was established with a grant of $24 million, as a fulfillment of the commitment under the Japanese redress in 1988, as well as the commitment of the government in 1994. Going through their website, I can see that many groups have had grants for initiatives and specific projects against racism, but up to this year, the Chinese Canadians have not received any significant funding from the Foundation for any educational projects on the Head Tax or the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1923. I thought the Foundation is exactly what many in the community have been asking for. It is available, and we should make use of it.

Interestingly enough, also in 1995, a head tax of $975.00 per person was imposed on all immigrants by Citizenship and Immigration Canada, on top of $500.00 per adult and $100.00 per child as a processing fee. These amounts have been raised to $550 and $150 respectively. There are other fees as well for different kinds of sponsorships. Many people have complained and charged that the government is being unfair to immigrants. Have you ever wondered what the descendants of these immigrants may do in the future?

In 2001, the Chinese Canadian National Council launched a class action suit against the federal government “Mack vs. Canada”, acting for the survivors and relatives of those who paid the Head Tax to enter. The claim was for financial compensation, with compound interest, of the tax paid, as well as for general damages for pain and suffering. This failed, and the CCNC appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada on November 15, 2002, which was rejected, and a complaint is now underway with the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

On February 12, 2002, Prime Minister Helen Clark of the New Zealand government issued a formal apology to the Chinese New Zealanders, and announced the beginning of a process of reconciliation with the ethnic Chinese who had to pay poll tax until 1944. Funds and resources will be provided for the purpose of restoring and maintaining the Chinese heritage, culture and language. I think it is important to learn from the Chinese New Zealanders.

On December 10, 2002, Inky Mark introduced Bill C-333, which basically asks for:

1. an apology;
2. restitution to be devoted to educational materials on Chinese Canadian history, and the promotion of racial harmony.

The latest that I know of is that this May, the CCNC launched a New Redress Website and Canadians for Redress Campaign. It has won the support of, among others, the NDP leader, Jack Layton, June Callwood, Mathew Coon Come of the Assembly of First Nations, the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, the Metro Toronto Chinese as well as the Southeast Asian Legal Clinics.

Before we discuss the way forward, we should look at what the Chinese Canadian communities really want. From the survey that I have, there are many different points of view from the Head Tax payers and their descendants, from wanting personal compensation, to an apology, to education, to nothing at all. As long as there is such extensive division in the Chinese communities, the federal government will not deal with us seriously.

I now propose the following questions for discussion:

1. Do Chinese nationals have the right to compensation when another government tried to prevent them from entering the country?
2. Did the Chinese culture and tradition of keeping the women and children in China, while the men went abroad to work, not play a role in separating families as well?
3. If conditions had been better in China, would we be here discussing the Head Tax?
4. Are we responsible for the sins of past generations? As tax payers, are we responsible for what the politicians did generations ago? Should we set a precedence that future generations should pay for our sins?
5. What happened to the Chinese in the past was against human rights, but the concept of human rights was not even part of our vocabulary until after the Second World War. The claim by the different groups for redress is based on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms passed in 1982. Is it possible to claim retroactive rights?
6. In order that past mistakes are not repeated, future generations must know the truth about Canadian history. Would education not be the key to solving the problem. Since education is a provincial responsibility, is it not up to all of us to make sure that accurate history is taught in our schools and in our homes?
7. Is the new Human Rights Museum (Winnipeg) an effective venue for educating Canadians about past wrongs?
8. Should there be a Chinese Canadian National Museum like the one the Japanese Canadians have in Burnaby, B.C., or the Abbotsford Sikh Museum, also in B.C.? And if so, where do you think it should be located?

For all of you who really want to learn about the insider story of the Japanese Canadian redress, you should read Bitter Sweet Passage by Maryka Omatsu, who is a judge in Ontario, and who was intimately involved with the negotiations. I agree with her that, if it had not been for the settlement in the U.S., and the economic clout of Japan, it would not have happened in Canada.

No matter what any government says, history can repeat itself, so we must always be vigilant. Ultimately, I think political power is the only way to ensure that past wrongs will not be repeated. So, to all the members of the younger generation here, please keep that in mind, and play an active role in Canada’s future government.

Views | 1 | 2 | 3 |

Bookmark to:

In April 2003, the Supreme Court of Canada denied plaintiffs leave to appeal in Shack Jang Mack Quen Ying Lee and Yew Lee v. Attorney General of Canada. In doing so, the Court shed some light on a sensitive but important issue: the limitations of the courts in providing redress for a past injustice which was itself the result of government policy.

The history of that policy is certainly deplorable in retrospect – something that all parties agree on, including the Crown and the courts. In 1885, Parliament passed legislation imposing a duty or “head tax” exclusively on Chinese people immigrating to Canada. The legislation reflected contemporary prejudices, such as those of one member of Parliament who declared that “there is not much room for the Chinaman in Canada. He displaces a good Canadian, or a good British subject” (Nathaniel Clarke Wallace, speaking in 1900). In 1923, that tax was replaced by legislative restrictions on Chinese immigration, amid claims that “the wily oriental has found some means or subterfuge to circumvent any regulations that may have been imposed upon him” (as MP John Armstrong MacKelvie told the House of Commons). The legislation was finally repealed altogether in 1947.

In December 2000, head-tax payers and their families launched a class action in Ontario, seeking recovery of monies paid to the federal government, as well as damages for pain and suffering, injury to dignity, and lost opportunity inflicted by the legislation. Plaintiffs’ counsel estimated the claim to be worth more than $1 billion.

The Crown brought a preliminary motion to strike out the statement of claim on the basis that the legislation in question had been validly enacted more than 115 years ago and repealed more than 50 years ago. Mr. Justice Cumming of the Superior Court of Justice agreed, and struck out the claim in its entirety in July 2001.

The plaintiffs turned to the Ontario Court of Appeal, which, in unanimous reasons released September 13, 2002, dismissed the appeal. Finally, leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was denied on April 24, 2003.

The plaintiffs’ argument had primarily two branches. First, they made a claim in international law, as received into Canada through human rights legislation, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Canadian jurisprudence. Second, they argued that a discriminatory law, even when validly enacted, does not constitute a legal or sufficient reason for unjust enrichment.

The history of [the head tax] policy is certainly deplorable in retrospect – something that all parties agree on, including the Crown and the courts.

The Crown took the position that it was not enough for the plaintiffs to allege that they had been subject to discriminatory legislation in the past. Indeed, that fact was never at issue in the case. As Justice Cumming declared, “the legislation in its various forms was patently discriminatory against persons of Chinese origin. By contemporary Canadian morals and values, these pieces of legislation were both repugnant and reprehensible.” The Court of Appeal added that “Canada’s treatment of people of Chinese origin who sought to immigrate to this country between 1885 and 1947 represents one of the more notable stains on our minority rights tapestry.”

The Crown did not dispute these findings, arguing instead that Canada had made a clear policy decision not to provide redress for such historic wrongs. In 1994, the Honourable Sheila Finestone, then Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, announced that the Government of Canada would not compensate six groups seeking compensation over past discriminatory immigration practices or wartime measures. Ms. Finestone stated:

In the past Canada enforced some immigration practices that were at odds with our shared commitment to human justice. Canadians wish those episodes had never happened. We wish those practices had never occurred. We wish we could rewrite history. We wish we could relive the past. We cannot. … The government understands the strong feelings underlying these requests. We share the desire to heal those wounds. The issue is whether the best way to do this is to attempt to address the past or to invest in the future. We believe our only choice lies in using limited government resources to create a more equitable society now and a better future for generations to come.

In ruling against the plaintiffs, Justice Cumming stated that “the court’s function is not to usurp the power of Parliament. Rather, its role is to adjudicate claims based upon their legal merit within the framework of Canadian constitutional law.”

The message was clear: historic wrongs are best viewed as mistakes not to be repeated rather than as lingering grievances to be resolved by the courts.

What is significant about this case is that it was decided so quickly. A statement of defence had not been served; limitations defences had not been raised; the matter had not reached even the certification stage, let alone trial. Yet the courts found it plain and obvious that the claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action. The message was clear: historic wrongs are best viewed as mistakes not to be repeated rather than as lingering grievances to be resolved by the courts. As the Court of Appeal pointed out, after reiterating their condemnation of the actual policies in question:

The head tax laws ceased to operate 79 years ago, in 1923. During their life, they were constitutional in domestic law terms and they did not violate any principles of customary international law. The doctrine of unjust enrichment is an equitable doctrine. However, even the broad purview of equity does not provide courts with the jurisdiction to use current Canadian constitutional law and international law to reach back almost a century and remedy the consequences of laws enacted by a democratic government that were valid at the time.

| 1 | 2 | 3 |

Bookmark to:

]]>