The Immigration Act of 1910 is a piece of legislation that formed the cornerstone of restrictive immigration policies in Canadian history. It reinforced and expanded on another legislation: the Immigration Act pf 1906. In its totality, this law was a guide of exclusionary powers granted to the Cabinet. It granted authority to:
-exclude “immigrants belonging to any race deemed unsuited to the climate or requirements of Canada.”
-a 3 year ‘probationary’ period during which a person could be deported for moral or political unsuitability
-a prevention of Courts from interfering or ruling in these cases
-a head tax of $200 on all Asian immigrants
-exclude immigrants sponsored by charitable organizations unless with explicit permission
-a head tax of $25 on all immigrants arriving outside of winter
Daniel Coleman, in his argument on the project of white civility, identifies an intentional move by nation-builders to “formulate and elaborate a specific form of [Canadian] whiteness based on the British model of civility” (5). And if ever there was a particular “literary endeavor” in Canadian history to exemplify this, this Act fits that bill.
The fictional story of the whiteness of the Canadian nation and its history was directly challenged by immigration and this law was meant to deal with that issue and circumvent it. (Ironic, considering the immigration of this same British “whiteness” is what challenged and disturbed the indigenous nations of this land.)
The “whiteness” of Canada was being created by this legislation in its discrimination and exclusion of peoples of Asian descent. This extended to Japanese, Chinese, and Indians, amongst others. In one example, an Indian man named Munshi Singh fought his deportation in Court, ultimately losing. But the words that the Judge used in handing down his decision were more reflective of the systemic racism that pervaded Canadian institutions than of that case alone.
The Judge said, “the better classes of the Asiatic races are…undesirables in Canada.” “Their ways and ideas may well be a menace to the wellbeing of the Canadian people.” “The Parliament…may well be said to be safeguarding the people of Canada from an influx which…might annihilate the nation…introduce Oriental ways as against European ways.”
But a fictive version of whiteness, being a brand of civilization free from whatever was deemed contrary, was also being created. The laws against charitable organization’s sponsoring of immigrants specifically responded to an influx of poor British peoples in 1907 brought to Canada through charity. The $25 head tax depending on seasons also targeted undesirable European prospective immigrants by narrowing the scope to those with money: the rich and therefore of a particular class.
The Immigration Act tried to create a Canada with a particular brand of British “whiteness”, a fictive population that did not exist even in Britain. Is this fictive story a part of Canadian history? I would argue that the answer is no. The narrative is one that is still being perpetuated, that Canadians held a front-row seat to in recent months.
Under the previous government, Canada saw the creation of “safe country” lists which excluded many from immigrating as refugees including some of the most discriminated European groups like the Roma of Hungary. Former PM Harper’s references to Muslims and Islam as a “barbaric culture” climaxing in the creation of the Barbaric Cultural Practices Against Women and Girls perpetuated this story of the “old stock Canadians” being the desired bedrock of this country. It is interesting furthermore as we also saw the refusal to investigate let alone act on the entrench and longstanding issue of the horrible tragedy of abducted and murdered Aboriginal women in which the desired narrative would be implicated. The same arguments of incompatible lifestyles and a threat to Canada are still being used today in the attempted exclusion of Muslim immigrants. And even with the government change, the sentiments are still rumbling loudly in groups like JDL and Pegida Canada.
Works Cited
“Forging Our Legacy: Canadian Citizenship and Immigration, 1900–1977.” Government of
Canada, 1 July, 2006. Web. Accessed on 11 March, 2016.
Gagnon, E., Raska, J., Van Dyk, L., and Schwinhamer, S. “Immigration Act, 1910.” Canadian
Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. N.d. Web. Accessed on 11 March, 2016.
Kanji. Azeezah. “The disturbing movement against Syrian refugees in Canada.” Thestar.com.
Toronto Star Newspapers. 10 March, 2016. Web. Accessed on 11 March, 2016.
Keenan, Edward. “When Stephen Harper refers to “barbaric culture,” he means Islam — an anti-
Muslim alarm that’s ugly and effective because it gets votes.” Thestar.com. Toronto Star
Newspapers. 5 October, 2015. Web. Accessed on 11 March, 2016.
Lenard, P. T. “Stephen Harper’s abhorrent record on refugees and immigration.” The Broadbent Blog.
Broadbent Institute. 12 September, 2015. Web. Accessed on 11 March, 2016.
Hi Maryam!
I’m getting a little ahead of myself here, but I’m reading through blogs to figure out who I want to team up with for the future conference!
I really enjoyed your response to this question. Firstly, I appreciate how you looked at the past and tied it to the present. I think many people nowadays assume that Canada ‘doesn’t have racism anymore’, when that’s far from true. As you pointed out, even our most recent PM spouted racism which obviously stems from the systemic Canadian whiteness Coleman discusses.
One other thing that struck me in your assignment is how this blatant discrimination towards non-white (in this case, Asians) isn’t a thing of the past. (Note, when I say non-white, i’m not necessarily talking about skin colour. I’m more referring to those who do not assimilate to Canada’s systemic whiteness – this “fictive ethnicity” that Coleman coins. I talk a lot about this in my own response to assignment 3:2.) While the judge you quoted expressed things that could never be explicitly said in Canadian courts today, many of those underlying feelings have not gone away.
A great example of this is Vancouver’s housing crisis. Vancouver is facing a high volume of Chinese immigrants/real estate investors and there has been a lot of talk about what we should do about the resulting housing problem. Of course, foreign real estate investment is becoming a huge issue as our house prices are sky rocketing, but from my own experiences of living in Vancouver, the underlying anger and frustration is rooted in prejudices & racism against Chinese (and/or Asian) immigrants and even Chinese/Asian-Canadians. I think the fear of not being able to purchase a home in a place you’ve grown up in is legitimate and understandable (I, myself, am frustrated and nervous about it); however, I cannot count the number of times I have had a discussion on this topic with someone who has gone on a long rant about how “‘they’ don’t assimilate to our culture” and a long list of what assimilation would look like to them. I’m not going to go on because it’s incredibly insensitive and I’m sure anyone living in Vancouver knows what I’m talking about. Long story short, it’s evident that Canadian whiteness (stemming from British civility) – and along with that, the expectation for assimilation to the system – is still relevant and a really big problem.
I’ve really enjoyed reading your blog posts & I’m interested in working with you for this upcoming group project! Feel free to peruse my blog and let me know what you think 🙂 (Also, I don’t have many posts on there because I have been sick this semester, so please don’t think that reflects who I am as a student/group member!).
Oh, I forgot to add, feel free to contact me through Facebook.
Hi Maryam,
This post definitely resonated with me, particularly because I am of Asian descent. I am 4th generation Canadian and don’t particularly identify with my Chinese heritage. My family was pretty much all born and raised here and we don’t have any knowledge or ties to China in any way. However, that being said (and to tie off what Julia mentioned in her comment), I do agree that the discrimination faced by Asian/Canadians is not over. With myself identifying as being Canadian, people I meet are often confused as to where I’m from. When I answer that I am from “North Van” they immediately respond with “but where are you ACTUALLY from?” As if I must be from somewhere else other than Canada.
My question to you is – do you think this discrimination is happening with other cultures as well and not just Asian cultures?
– Courtney
Hi Courtney. Thanks for an insightful comment. I agree that this discrimination against Asians is still present in Canada…but furthermore I think it is being experienced by many other cultures too.
Referencing back to the idea of the project of white civility, I think that it does not extend to Canada only but the ‘new world’ in general. My family likewise have little to no ties toGuyana, where my grandparents immigrated from. But identifying as Canadian is not taken as a sufficient answer. But on top of that, many have a similar reaction to identifying as coming from Guyana. Te question then becomes ‘but you look indian’. And so the only sufficient an answer includes the information that my ancestors were slaves/indentured labourers from India brought to work on plantations by the British.
It makes me think back to the idea that was perpetuated by colonizers,that these are lands of a certain type of ‘white’ people…the ‘other’ must come from some other part of the world and there is no satisfaction if they say they come from the ‘here’
Hi Maryam,
I really enjoyed reading your blog post! I thought you did a great job at outlining the immigration act of 1910, and I liked how you tied in modern issues too.
I completely agree with you that Canada has a strange habit of perpetuating a certain form of British “whiteness”. Like you said we could very clearly see the shift in immigration policy back to a more restrictive form under Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.
In Regards to the Liberals accepting a large number of Canadian refuges do you think Canada is improving? Do you think that the government taking these positive actions will be able to influence certain public opinions that are against accepting refugees?
Hi! Thanks for the comment. I think it is a step in the right direction and a positive sign of improvement. But i also think it is not an immediate one. Currently, the policies being enacted have brought supporters, etc to the face and for front of the issue. But there is a very ugly and rampant anti-… movement simultaneously taking place. I think though the real improvement is in the next few years, when those children who grew up with this atmosphere of caring, global concern, etc move into the policy-making sphere.
I like to think of it like 1970s laws dealing with Aboriginal issues including the white paper. They were band-aids that did not stop or change the sentiments of indifference and hate towards the indigenous groups. But the children who grew up experiencing these things today are at the forefront of challenging the laws based on genuine caring.
Hi Maryam,
Thank you for your post. I think the way that you have analyzed the question and presented the Immigration Act of 1910 is very astute. I especially appreciate the connection you made between the immigration policies of 1910 and today.
I believe Canada has become more inclusive, but that true multiculturalist policies, not influenced by public opinion or economics, is still distant.
The debates about the fairness of fast tracking immigration for Syrian refugees vs other refugees come to mind. Cynics – and I’m referring to comments made in this CBC article – may read the racheting up of admissions for Syrian refugees as a political strategy for the Liberal party. I recuse myself from any judgement in this case, not being super confident in my ability to read Canadian politics. It also seems distasteful somewhat to criticize refugee policies that are clearly benefiting thousands and thousands of people. But, I ask – wouldn’t a true multicultural immigration policy reflect in more generous admission policies for other refugees as well? My knowledge of Canada’s involvement is limited mostly to what is relayed through the news, so I acknowledge that my understanding of this issue may be skewed through journalism’s lense.
– Merriam
Hi Merriam! And thanks for a thoughtful posting and question that really got me thinking too! I also hesitate to criticize the liberal government’s move as I know there are so many more factors to consider and simply wanting something and having it happen are two different things. While I no doubt agree that there are many countries with serious situations, I do not think that more generous admissions solves the issue. Syria has presented a unique case as per the UN with 5+ years of war,complete destruction of the country, and no foreseeable possibility of return. The dangers of people trying to escape by sea has prompted the UN to urge other countries to offer alternatives, very few of which have stepped up. But I would hate to think that immigration is the best alternative for all people in a bad situation. It seems a eurocentric approach to assume that, when instead countries can act to support the others to become viable homes again.
That being said, I believe that the liberal gov. has taken steps to make immigration to Canada easier by reverting to pre-Harper policies and making a few new changes such as removing the ‘safe countries’ list which used olitics to stop refugees from certain countries.
Hi Maryam!
Thanks for a wonderful and insightful post. Just reading the comment section I wanted to respond to Merriam’s comment that although it’s fantastic to help Syrian refugees, we should also be paying equal attention to other refugees. I completely agree with Merriam’s principle. However, my opinion is coloured by stories I’ve been told by my aunt who works in the immigration department of the federal government. On a regular basis, she receives refugee applications with the exact same story she’s read five times over. It bewilders me, but there are actually people who pay for someone to write them a refugee story, so they can fast track their immigration to Canada. And with those kind of morals, you can imagine they aren’t likely to be the most law-abiding citizens once they get here… I’m all for accepting genuine refugees, but there does need to be a process to it, and time for that process to happen. The trouble I have with Trudeau’s recent push to get Syrian refugees in so quickly is that I don’t believe there was time to do the proper investigations on those individuals. Hopefully it will work out anyways!
Caitlin