If hon. gentlemen are finished, although I do not blame them for being a little bit uneasy at what they have invited, I would like to tell them the difference between the condition of affairs with respect to the Chinese Exclusion Act at the time they were in power and the present. We found that when hon. gentlemen were in power the exemptions under the Act were made the instruments, not of keeping Chinese out of Canada, but of bringing them into Canada under the pretence of a right of exemption when they had no such right, upon paying a toll of $100 secretly instead of the $500 to be paid openly, four-fifths of which $100 went, as shown by the evidence before the commis- ^ sioner, to the campaign fund of the Liberal party. We have confidence that under the present Administration the use of the Chinese exemption clause to provide funds for party purposes has become a thing of the past. I know of no reason why Chinese who desire to be educated in the universities of Canada should not have the privilege of being educated in those institutions, and it is because of my belief that that is the honest intention of this amendment, and not that lit is opening the door to the surreptitious entry of Chinese for the benefit of some grafters in British Columbia that I am content to accept the Bill.
Whenever I find that this exemption is being used as the exemptions were used during the regime of hon. gentlemen opposite, then they may depend upon it that I shall be quite as vigorous in calling at, tention to it as I ever was in calling attention to the abuse of Chinese or other oriental immigration. In the meantime, the Chinese, like the Japanese and Hindoos, are very valuable Allies of the British cause, the Canadian cause. They are, in very large numbers, coming forward for the purpose of serving as labourers in France, and the Chinese Government is showing every disposition to assist in every possible way the cause of the Allies in contributing of the labour of their country. It does seem to me that with respect to the
Chinese in a smaller degree as with respect to the Japanese and Hindoos in a larger degree, all those people are entitled during these times of the stress of war to a little more consideration than we owed to them in times of peace.
I have been expecting some hon. gentleman opposite to rise in his place and express the fact that he was terribly shocked and horror stricken at the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Taylor), at this time of stress introducing petty, party politics.
The hon. gentleman speaks of graft and makes charges against the Liberal party- and the hon. gentleman is a colonel too, and one of the political colonels of whom we in this Parliament are so proud.
I rise to a question of privilege. The hon. gentleman says, in what I would not call a sneering manner, because it is not parliamentary to use that term, but I cannot find the proper word to express it-but the hon. gentleman challenges my being a member of His Majesty's army. I wish to know if that is the position of the loyal Opposition in this House, that it has become a crime to become a member of His Majesty's army?
Mr. P.UGSLEY: I would not suggest that for a single moment. What I rose especially to do was to express my profound astonishment that gentlemen on the other side of the House had not risen in their places and protested against the hon. gentleman introducing petty, party politics during this time when the attention of Parliament should be directed to greater issues. If gentlemen pn this -side were to follow that hon. gentleman, we might
4 p.m. get into a discussion which would be exceedingly unpleasant and exceedingly out of place. I should think that a member of this House, and particularly one who wears His Majesty's uniform, should be rather above that sort of thing at the present time.
I wish to understand my hon. friend's position. My understanding of what he said was this, that he rose to express his profound astonishment that no one -on this side protested against my hon. friend from New Westminster introducing petty, party politics.
and Commerce (Sir George Foster) knows well enough that if he, as acting leader of the House, had risen and asked his hon. friend to refrain from the unseemly conduct in which he was indulging, it would have at once produced a proper result. My hon. friend from New Westminster says that the Japanese are giving great aid in this war, that the people of China are also giving aid to the Allies, that our Indian fellow subjects are giving great aid to the Empire. That is all true, but they are giving it under the present law which contains restrictions against which there has been no very strong complaint so far, and what I think is that the minister should leave the law with regard to China just as it is. If, by reason of the present condition of affairs, the door is opened wider and young men from China are induced to come in, and then if it is thought they are not as steadily pursuing their studies as assiduously as it might be expected, they are deported from this country, it will provoke ill feeling which would be of very great disadvantage in the future. We ought not to go too far. A few years_ a-g-o, a great many people were coming' from China and from Japan and from India, and a great deal of feeling was created particularly among people who said that British Columbia -should be kept as a country of white people.
not inflict any special hardship. It provides that Chinese youths coming to Canada for the purpose of obtaining an education, attending a university or other educational institution approved by the minister, after their studies have been concluded can make an application and get back a refund of the $500 head tax which they paid on entering the country. No strong complaint has been raised against that.
speak as to that. I do know that along the Pacific coast of the United States there has been a great deal of dissatisfaction by reason of oriental immigration, so much so that the Legislature of California has passed laws which have provoked very great irritation and have caused the greatest possible friction between the Legislature and the people of California and the Government and Congress of the United States. I know that much, but what has caused it I do not know beyond the fact that it has been felt that there has been too much oriental immigration into the western coast states of the United States of America. Just a word with regard to the remark of my hon. friend from Rouville (Mr. Lemieux) as to the criticism which was levelled at the late Government when a rather liberal arrangement, but at the same time a fair arrangement, was made between the Government of Canada and the Imperial Government of Japan. This Government was very bitterly criticised by Conservative members from British Columbia by reason of that arrangement. The hon. member for Neyr Westminster (Mr. Taylor) speaks of what has happened to-day, that Japanese cruisers have helped to protect the Pacific coast. Well, that shows how foresighted was my right hon. friend who was then the leader of the Government (Sir Wilfrid Laurier), because I well remember that in this House, when he was seeking to defend the action of the Government in making this arrangement with the Japanese Government, he said that the time might come when the ships of Japan would be riding side by side with the ships of Canada in defence of the cities and coasts of British Columbia.