June 3, 1924

COMMERCIAL TRAVELLERS MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS


Hon. H. H. STEVENS moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 23 respecting the Commercial Travellers Mutual Insurance Society. Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.


PROCEDURE-RULE 25

CON

Henry Herbert Stevens

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Vancouver Centre):

Mr. Speaker, with due deference to yourself, might I rise to a point of order? I am a little at sea. As I understand it, this is the opening of to-day's session. Have we passed the orders of the day?

Topic:   PROCEDURE-RULE 25
Permalink
LIB

Hewitt Bostock (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

We come back to the

orders of the day. After eight o'clock on Tuesday the first hour is for private bills; that is the standing order.

Topic:   PROCEDURE-RULE 25
Permalink
CON

Henry Herbert Stevens

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. STEVENS:

I quite understand that,

Mr. Speaker, but I was under the impression we should take the orders of the day first at the opening of the House in the usual way. I want to be sure, because I have some questions to put on the orders of the day.

Topic:   PROCEDURE-RULE 25
Permalink
LIB

Hewitt Bostock (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Rule 25 covers the case. It provides:

The ordinary daily routine of business in the House shall be as follows:-Tuesday: government notices of motion; government orders; public bills and orders; questions; notices of motions; from eight o'clock p.m., private bills for the first hour.

We will come back in a moment to the usual routine proceedings of the afternoon; but at eight o'clock every Tuesday the Speaker must call private bills.

Topic:   PROCEDURE-RULE 25
Permalink

PRIVATE BILLS

SECOND READINGS


Bill No. 145, respecting The Interprovincial and James Bay Railway Company.-Mr. Parent. Bill No. 146, for the relief of Angus Martin. -Mr. Sheard. Bill No. 147, for the relief of Lester Ernest Greenwood.-Mr. Ryckman. Bill No. 148, for the relief of Charles Law-son.-Mr. Arthurs. Bill No. 149, for the relief of Margaret Hickey.-Mr. Anderson. Bill No. 150, for the relief of William John Chenery.-Mr. Martell. Bill No. 151, for the relief of Florence Roberts.-Mr. Hocken. Bill No. 152, for the relief of Hugh Allan Macdonald. Mr. Hocken. Bill No. 153, for the relief of Wilhelmine Christina Slater.-Mr. Hocken. Bill No. 154, for the relief of Emma Doris Perley.-Mr. Martell. Bill No. 155, for the relief of Arthur Hill. -Mr. Jacobs. Bill No. 157, for the relief of Emily Elizabeth Reeder.-Mr. Clifford.


FIRST READINGS


Bill No. 158 (from the Senate), to incorporate Merchants Casualty Insurance Company. -Mr. Euler. Bill No. 159 (from the Senate), to incorporate The Laurentian Insurance Company.- Mr. Jacobs. Bill No. 160 (from the Senate), for the relief of Merlin Englehart Clubine.-Mr. Martell. Bill No. 161 (from the Senate), for the relief of Victoria Stella Haswell.-Mr. Gordon. Bill No. 162 (from the Senate), for the relief of Thyrza Ewart (otherwise known as Thyrza Hodgins).-Mr. Harris. Bill No. 163 (from the Senate), for the relief of Rebecca Messer.-Mr. Arthurs. Bill No. 164 (from the Senate), for the relief of James Henry Kirkwood. Mr. Anderson.


JAPANESE IMMIGRATION


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Henry Herbert Stevens

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Vancouver Centre):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to propound a question or two to the government and also to make a complaint-shall I say?-regarding answers to questions, particularly to one question to which I am now going to refer. I am not objecting to the right of the government to refuse an answer provided they take the responsibility of so doing, but answers when given should be accurate and complete,

Japanese Immigration

because we depend upon the information given lby the government for our guidance in considering public affairs.

I wish to draw the attention of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) to an important question that I put on the order paper the other day and that was answered yesterday, a question regarding immigration. The third question was as follows:

Has the government entered into a new agreement covering Japanese immigration with the Japanese government? If so, has a quota of 150 been fixed upon?

The answer to that was:

As a consequence of negotiations between representatives of the governments of Japan and Canada last year, the Japanese government undertook to restrict to 150 annually the number of Japanese emigrants going to Canada as household servants and agricultural labourers.

The next question was:

If a quota has been fixed, does the said quota include all classes of immigrants, such as merchants, students, etc., or are such admitted in excess of the said quota?

The answer to that was:

Answered by the answer to No. 3 above.

The inference being that the total restriction was to 150. In the agreement between the government of Canada and the government of Japan, a copy of which I have in my hand, provision is made for four or five classes of immigrants. For instance, there is the class which includes those previously resident in Canada, and the wives and children of such. Then, there are those who are in domestic service, when evidence of engagement is given. Then there is this class,-and this is of vital importance: provision is made for the admission of contract emigrants. These are hot covered in the answer to my question, and the result is that the whole situation is left in a vague and ambiguous state. In addition to that, there are emigrants brought in under contract by Japanese resident agricultural holders. Now, these are not necessarily included in the answer given, which refers to agricultural labourers and domestic servants. So, the answer does not, in reply to my question, give that light and information to which we think we are entitled. That is my complaint. I wish to ask the Prime Minister if he would have this previous set of questions again surveyed and a more complete answer given.

Secondly, I want to ask him in connection with this very vital and important matter whether he has noticed a despatch from Tokio stating that in view of the dispute between the American government and the Japanese government, the latter consider themselves

freed or liberated from all obligations to restrict emigration from Japan to Canada or Mexico, citing as the ground for their repudiation of these agreements the fact that when the gentleman's agreement was entered into with the United States some years ago Japan agreed with the United States that they would enter into similar agreements with Mexico and Canada as an additional protection to the United States. There was the suggestion in that connection that the so-called underground route was being frequently used and that immigrants were smflggled in from both borders. Now', the Japanese government declare that since the United States has passed legislation which they declare objectionable they are at liberty to repudiate both the agreements referred to, namely, that with the Mexican government and that with the government of Canada. If the Prime Minister has not noticed this I would draw his attention to it and ask him to make careful and early inquiry in order to provide for the protection of Canada in case the Japanese government actually give effect to this statement issued from Tokio yesterday.

Topic:   JAPANESE IMMIGRATION
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

I agree with my hon.

friend that any answer to a question should be as complete as possible, and I can assure him in regard to the question he has just asked that there was no intention on the part of the government not to give him the information he was seeking. I think the answer to the third part of the question [DOT] just quoted was as mentioned, that an agreement had been made on the part of the Japanese government restricting the numbers of agricultural labourers and domestic help coming into this country to 150. I think those were the classes covered by the previous, so-called gentleman's agreement,

Topic:   JAPANESE IMMIGRATION
Permalink
CON
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Then I am very glad my hon. friend has directed my attention to the question, because the purpose of the agreement with Japan was that the numbers being limited to 150 were the numbers corresponding to the classes that were included in the gentleman's agreement. I shall make a point of looking carefully into the question and seeing that my hon. friend gets a further answer.

As to the other question: The agreement with Canada was made before there was any agreement on the part of Japan with the United States or any country, and I should be very much surprised if the Japanese gov-

Supply-Interior

emment were to in any way claim that the Canadian government's agreement with Japan was affected by anything that happened except as between Canada and Japan. However, I shall look into that matter as well.

Topic:   JAPANESE IMMIGRATION
Permalink

OCEAN FACILITIES AT HALIFAX

June 3, 1924