February 15, 1929

CON

Leon Johnson Ladner

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LADNER:

May I ask how that total is available amongst all the provinces?

Topic:   TECHNICAL EDUCATION ACT
Permalink
LIB

Peter Heenan (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. HEENAN:

I will give the various amounts -in round figures. Prince Edward Island has received $64,000, leaving $133,000 yet available, provided this amending act is passed. The corresponding figures for the other provinces are: Nova Scotia, $280,000 and $381,000; New Brunswick, $392,000 and $119,000; Quebec, $2,071,000 and $498,000; Ontario, $3,178,000-its total amount; Manitoba, $182,000 and $537,000; Saskatchewan, $142,000 and $705,000; Alberta, $604,000 and $73,000; British Columbia, $479,000 and $153,000.

Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Heenan thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 34, to amend the Technical Education Act.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Canadian Nationality

UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS his majesty's mail Mr. CHURCH:

For a copy of all letters, instructions, regulations, orders in council, telegrams, and other documents issued by the government of Canada or any member thereof, and any other person or persons, regarding the substitution of Canadas' Mail for His Majesty's Mail on postal offices, postal wagons, motors, or other postal equipment, and in relation to the removal of His Majesty's initials "G.R." from said post office equipment.

Topic:   TECHNICAL EDUCATION ACT
Permalink

CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-CAUSAPSCAL-GASPE

LIB

Charles Marcil

Liberal

Mr. MARCIL:

For a copy of all petitions, letters, telegrams and correspondence generally, exchanged between the Department of Railways and Canals and the opponents of a projected railway between Causapscal and Gaspe;

Also for copy of all letters and telegrams and correspondence generally exchanged between the Minister of Railways and Canals and the promoters of the above railway.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-CAUSAPSCAL-GASPE
Permalink

SIPTON, MAN., POSTMASTERSHIP

CON

Donald James Cowan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COWAN:

For a copy of all letters, telegrams, papers and other documents, with reference to the dismissal of William S. Assifat, postmaster at Sifton, Manitoba, and the appointment of a successor to the said position.

Topic:   SIPTON, MAN., POSTMASTERSHIP
Permalink
LIB
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

A number of these motions, including the one just called, have already bee-n called and I happen to know, with respect te several of the notices that stand in the names of members on this side, that they certainly could not be proceeded with until Monday. If they are called now they will be dropped. I suggest that we make some arrangement whereby they remain on the order paper. The members in whose names they stand are not ready to go on.

Topic:   SIPTON, MAN., POSTMASTERSHIP
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I understand that the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Bissett) is ready to proceed.

Topic:   SIPTON, MAN., POSTMASTERSHIP
Permalink

CANADIAN NATIONALITY

DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS

LIB-PRO

Edgar Douglas Richmond Bissett

Liberal Progressive

Mr. E. D. R. BISSETT (Springfield) moved:

Whereas Canada has by mutual consent of those concerned, now attained a position of equality in the commonwealth of nations which makes up the British Empire;

And whereas Canada is a member of the League of Nations having representation on the council thereof;

[Mr. Heenan.l

And whereas by an enactment of the parliament of Canada 11-12 George V, chapter 4, which said legislation now appears as "Canadian Nationals Act," chapter 21 of the revised statutes of Canada, 1927, the terms "Canadian nationality" and "Canadian nationals" are defined.

Therefore be it resolved: (1) That persons born in Canada (or otherwise, defined as Canadian nationals) shall be described as being of Canadian nationality in all legislation and official and other documents.

(2) That persons of the white race, born of parents whose family residence in Canada is of three or more generations, shall be described as being of the "Canadian race" in all legislation and official and other documents.

He said: The question of Canadian nationality and race is one which has been the cause of much controversy in our country for a number of years past, both in respect to the interpretation of these terms in the administration of the Immigration Act, and also as they have been applied to the classification of our population during the taking of the census. Part 1 of the resolution reads:

Whereas Canada has by mutual consent of those concerned now attained a position of equality in the commonwealth of nations which makes up the British Empire; and whereas Canada is a member of the League of Nations having representation on the council thereof; and whereas by an enactment of the parliament of Canada 11-12 George V, chapter 4, which said legislation now appears as "Canadian Nationals Act", chapter 21 of the revised statutes of Canada 1927, the terms "Canadian nationality" and "Canadian nationals' are defined.

Therefore be it resolved: (1) That persons born in Canada shall be described as being of Canadian nationality in all legislation and official and other documents.

As a result of the participation of Canada in the Peace treaty and in the League of Nations, it was necessary for an official definition of Canadian nationals and Canadian nationality to be made for the first time in Canadian history, since among different measures adopted in connection with the operation of the league were provisions defining certain rights and privileges to be enjoyed by the nationals of members of the league. A Canadian national was accordingly defined by 11-12 Geo. V, chap. 4, as:

(a) any British subject who is a Canadian citizen within the meaning of the Immigration Act, chapter 27 of the statutes of 1910, as heretofore amended;

(b) the wife of any such person;

(e) any person born out of Canada, whose father was a Canadian national at the time *f that person's birth, or with regard to persons born before the passing of this act, any person whose father at the_ time of such birth possessed all the qualifications of a Canadian national as defined in this act.

According to the Immigration Act, 1910, a Canadian, citizen is:

(1) a person, bom in Canada who has not become an alien;

(2) a British subject who has Canadian domicile;

(3) a person naturalized under the laws of Canada who has not subsequently become an alien or lost Canadian domicile.

It is thus quite clear that as the result of this legislation everyone born in Canada is entitled, under the laws of our country, to call himself a Canadian, when asked as to his nationality. This applies to all persons of all races, even to Chinese, negroes and Indians bom in this country. _

Since the existence of the Canadian national is now recognized, the people of this nation will sooner or later have to be regarded in official documents as Canadians.

In spite of the fact that we have legislation defining Canadian nationals, in our official documents there is no provision for such a race; apparently this legislation is for use abroad only. According to our official documents no one is born or dies a Canadian; we are listed as English, Irish, Scotch, Ruthenian and so on. In connection with this statement I would ask permission of the house to place on Hansard' copies of the official notices of births and deaths as supplied by the divisional registrar for vital statistics. Among the questions contained in the official notice of births there is no place where a father can list his child as a Canadian; item 10 asks for the racial origin of the father and item 16 for the racial origin of the mother. In a note on the side of the notice appears the following words:

The words "Canadian" or "American" should not be used, as they express nationality or citizenship but not a race or people.

The official notice of birth is as follows: Official Notice of Birth (By Parent or Guardian) Registration Division of... .Municipality of.... Questions to be answered by the informant of birth

1. Where was the child born? (Street and

house number or lot and block number or parish or river lot number, or fractional section, twp. and range; if in a hospital, give its name) [DOT]

2. What is the child's full name? (If child

died without being given a name, enter the words "Died unnamed"

3. Male or female? (Write the word in full)

A Was this a singie, double or other plural birth?

5. Was the child born alive?

6. Are the parents married?

7. When was the child born?

8. Full name of father? [DOT] * [DOT][DOT]

9. Residence of father (usual place of abode.

If non-resident give place and province)

10. Racial origin of father?

Canadian Nationality

11. Age of father (at last birthday)

12. Birthplace of father (if in Manitoba, give

exact location: if in Canada, province, and city, town, village, or nearest post office; if foreign, state country and post office address)

13. Occupation of father

14. Full maiden name of mother (if she has

been more than once married give names of former husband or husbands) [DOT] * [DOT] [DOT]

15. Residence of mother (usual place of abode.

If non-resident give place and province)

16. Racial origin of mother

17. Age of mother (at last birthday, in

years) [DOT][DOT]_[DOT][DOT][DOT][DOT]

18. Birthplace of mother (same description

as Item No. 12) [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] V

19. Children of this mother (including this

birth) [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] [DOT]

20. Occupation of mother (unless working at

some gainful employment) mark none

21. Was this birth premature or not?

22. Where were the parents married? (same description required as in Item No. 12) .. [DOT] * [DOT] [DOT]

23. When were they married? (Give day,

month and year) [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] * [DOT] [DOT] [DOT] ; \ [DOT]

>4. Name and address of attending physician, mid-wife or other person assisting at the birth (it is important that this item be not lelt blank)

25. Relationship of informant to the child.

26. Were you in the house at the time of

birth? [DOT] [DOT] : [DOT] ' * [DOT]' ' '

27. Your signature and exact location ot your

residence; your post office address

28. The date

Remarks:

The above-stated particulars are true, to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Signature of informant

Address y

29. Registered number filed in this

office on the day of 19.. ..

30 [DOT][DOT] [DOT]' '[DOT]

Signature of Division Registrar.

After being filled up, this form is to be sent to the Clerk of the Municipality in which the birth occurred. It will be transmitted postage free if placed in an envelope which has marked on the upper right-hand corner, above the address, the words "Dominion Statistics-Free. Penalty for improper use $300."

N.B.-In case of more than one child at a birth, a separate return must be made for each, and the number of each, in order of birth, stated.

Racial origin will be described by stating to what people or tongue each of the parents belong, whether English, Irish, Scotch, French, German. Russian, Ruthenian, Slovak, Galician, etc. The words "Canadian" or "American should not be used, as they express nationality or citizenship but not a race or people.

The same questions are asked on the official notice of death, which is as follows:

This form if placed in an envelope, marked "Dominion Statistics-Free, penalty for improper use $300," and properly addressed will pass through the Mail "Free."

Canadian Nationality

This is not a country of French-Canadians, English-Canadians or any hyphenated form of Canadianism. If the people of the Dominion are to be worth their salt, they must be Canadians, not classifications.

I contend that there are thousands who will subscribe to this statement, and the purpose of this resolution is to give it effect.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
UFA

Donald Ferdinand Kellner

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. D. F. KELLNER (Athabaska):

I would like to say a word in favour of this resolution. I think it is high time the people of Canada recognized the Canadian race. We Canadians are about the only people that do not recognize it. When a Canadian goes to the American border he takes a passport which permits him to cross the line, and I think he is the only individual of any racial origin who can do that. Not only that,'but he has with him a recommendation of character and ability. I believe a Canadian will find himself more favouraibly considered when he makes application for employment in the United States than a member of any other race. We are frequently reminded in the course of discussions in this house that the status of Canadians has been very high in Europe for the last few years. There is hardly a debate comes up but favourable mention .is made of the conduct of our soldiers 'and those who assisted in the Great war. In practically every country in the world the Canadian race is recognized, honoured and admired, but we here in Canada seem to have overlooked the fact that we have such a race.

In 1927 the United States Statistics showed that forty-two per cent of their immigration came from Canada. The opinion of the United States authorities was that that forty-two per cent was of the Canadian race, but the fifty-eight per cent that stayed at home m Canada are not of that race. They are divided, as the resolution suggests, into the various races Which originated in Europe.

When an immigrant comes to this country we do not neglect to tell him that he must become a Canadian when he arrives at our shore, but in doing this we ask him to become something which we as a country do not recognize as existing. I am sure it is not a healthy condition for a large country like Canada, with a great number of different nationalities within its borders, not to recognize native-born Canadians as such.

It is quite apparent that the people of Canada 'are not satisfied with our present method of obtaining statistics. During the taking of the last census many reports came in that people had refused to give their racial origin. Wuhin the last few months there have been

numerous criticisms of this method. I wish, therefore, to add my word in support of this resolution, and I hope the house will deal favourably with the request embodied therein, and that the resolution will 'be carried.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LIB-PRO

Robert Forke (Minister of Immigration and Colonization)

Liberal Progressive

Hon. ROBERT FORKE (Minister of Immigration and Colonization):

I rise with some degree of hesitation to enter into this debate as I cannot see any likelihood of my ever being classed as a Canadian, according to the arguments that- have been advanced by the various speakers up to the present. The mother olf my children happens to be a Canadian of the third generation, but I do not know exactly where my children will stand in this regard. From the female side they would be entitled to be called Canadians but from the male side there will have to be another generation or two before they can become members of the Canadian race.

I think some misapprehension exists here. I thoroughly agree with the idea of the recognition of Canadian nationality. The hon. member who moved this resolution (Mr. Bissett) has taken it for granted that because there is no Canadian race there can be no Canadian citizenship or Canadian nationality. The two are entirely separate and distinct. There is only one Canadian race in Canada today, and that is the Indian. The only pure Canadian race living in Canada is the Indian race. The basic stock of Canadians is composed of two distinct races at the present time, the French and the English races. They have not intermingled into one race and there is no Canadian race although they are citizens of the Dominion of Canada in every sense of the word.

If you look into this matter further you will find that there are only a few pure and distinct races in the world to-day. We speak about the Scottish race, but there is no real Scottish race; there is a Scottish nationality. The hon. member who moved this resolution spoke about the different races that go to make up the Scottish nation, but although they have lived together for centuries they have not intermingled to such a degree that you oan call them a pure and distinct race. When you come down to the borders of Scotland, where I was born, there is a distinct difference between the people of the Scottish border and the people of the Highlands. They are all Scottish, but they are not a Scottish race; they are a nation. To describe the people of the third generation as being of the "Canadian *race" I think would have a dividing influence. What about the second gener-

Canadian Nationality

ation? Are they to have some inferior status that they cannot be called Canadian in every sense of the word? Under this resolution they are to have a different classification from those who came of a race a generation lqnger in the country. I really cannot see the necessity for having the second clause in the resolution, but with the first clause and the first part of it I am thoroughly in accord; I would stress Canadian nationality everywhere. Where in the world do Canadians go to-day that they are not known as Canadians? It is not necessary to say that they are of the Canadian race. We have in Canada at present some fifty different nationalities, and dnring the course of centuries those nationalities will be intermingled in such a way that they can be classified as a race peculiar to the Dominion of Canada. But who can say to-day that there is any distinct type of Canadian that you can say is a race of people? They are Canadian nationals. That is about as far as I can go in regard to this question of defining a Canadian race.

The use of that column in the census papers to which reference has been made is rather annoying to many people whose forefathers have been in Canada for a generation or two, because there is no distinct column setting them down as Canadians. That ought to be rectified. On the other hand, I suppose those who compile this form desire to have some idea as to the mixture that is coming into Canada and the derivations of the people who are now making their home here. The classification may seem absurd on the face of it. The editor of the Manitoba Free Press told me at one time he was classed as a Dutchman, although he has but a very small amount of Dutch blood in his veins. Originally some Dutchman named Dafoe came to Canada and, of course, down through the ages his descendants will be classed as Dutch. The matter works out on the whole not so badly, because someone may have come to Canada originally classified under some other nationality, the two strains may become intermingled, and through these classifications and by keeping track of the racial derivations through the male line one can gain some idea of what the strains are that go to make up the Canadian people. That is the idea of using that column in the census returns, although later on it may be wiped out as being of no value.

I will close by saying again that the terms "Canadian", "Canadian citizen" seem to be broad enough to cover the whole matter without attempting to make a Canadian race out of a people composed of almost every nationality under the sun who are living in the

Dominion of Canada and who call themselves good Canadians without being named as a distinct race of people.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LAB

Herbert Bealey Adshead

Labour

Mr. H. B. ADSHEAD (East Calgary):

If I had not intended to speak on this question,

I should have been impelled to do so by the speech of the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Forke). He seems to confuse political citizenship with racial or physiological citizenship. It is quite true that, according to my hon. friend's definition, the Indians are the only true Canadian. There are the Crees, the Sioux, all the different races of Indians, and yet he is pleased to call them all Canadian. I am an Englishman; my ancestry, if traced back, would be Anglo-Saxon. There is no ancestry more complicated than that of the British people, who from a political standpoint are English, and those people who are bom in Canada or who come to Canada and are naturalized are Canadian citizens and should appear as such in the census papers. My children are Canadians; their mother is a. Canadian; they are of Canadian nationality and should be classified as such in the census returns. When the census man came aTound he would not at first accept the name "Canadian" from us; he wanted to know whether the nationality was English or Scotch or whatever it was. We refused to say, as regards our children, that they were anything but Canadian. I think the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) has many a time insisted upon cultivating a true Canadian spirit, but we cannot have that to its fullest extent unless we recognize that Canadians who are either naturalized or bom here, no matter what their ancestry may be, should be classified in the census papers as Canadians.

There is another good reason that I might bring forward-I do not know whether the mover of the resolution (Mr. Bissett) stated it or not. Supposing an immigrant is invited to our shores from Norway or Sweden and he comes to Canada. Much as we who are English or of British descent are attached to England, foreigners who come to Canada cannot have the same regard and respect for British institutions as they would for a Canadian citizenship. Therefore we should build up a Canadian nationality attached to our institutions in a way in which people could not be attached to the institutions of a country of which they have no particular knowledge. For that reason I am strongly in favour of the resolution of the hon. member for Springfield.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LIB-PRO

John Livingstone Brown

Liberal Progressive

Mr. J. L. BROWN (Lisgar):

The difficulties of settling this question have been made quite manifest by those who have

Canadian Nationality

spoken and by the resolution itself. Nobody will dispute the fact that there are anomalies in our system. It is certainly an anomaly to call a man a Dutchman whose ancestors on the Dutch side would date back perhaps half a dozen generations. I can call to mind neighbours of mine who are descendants of Pennsylvania Dutch who came over with the United Empire -Loyalists in the early part of the nineteenth century, and yet they are classed as Dutch. On the other hand, as the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Forke) points out, there are other families who are so-called Dutch, but who, on the female side, are intermarried with English-speaking people, and the ancestors of their children are described as English, Irish or Scotch, as the case may be.

If the purpose of this column in the census is to give the exact racial origin of every person in Canada, it is most decidedly a failure. It cannot do that, because it leads us into many absurdities. But is that the purpose? Is the purpose not to endeavour to arrive approximately at the racial origin of the people who compose the citizenship of Canada to-day? If that is the purpose, then it can be secured only by the method that we have adopted. The method does not do it accurately, but does it do it approximately? Is it worth our while to endeavour to know something of the racial origin of the people who constitute the citizenship of the Dominion of Canada? It it is not worth while, then we can abolish that column altogether. If it is worth while, I do not know how we can accomplish it by any other means that those we are following now.

The question that has always been in my mind when the matter is brought up by those who have persistently advocated this idea is this: What would be the definition of a

Canadian? Some will say: a person born in Canada. That immediately causes a difficulty. Let me instance an anomaly: I have a neighbouring family that came from Scotland thirty years ago. Some of the older children were born in Scotland, and if you take "born in Canada" as a sufficient definition of a Canadian, they would be classed as Scotch, whereas the younger children, who were born in Canada, would be classed as Canadians. But the definition as given in the resolution does not help us at all. It reads:

Persons of the white race, born of parents whose family residence in Canada is of three or more generations, shall be described as being of the "Canadian race" in all legislation and official and other documents.

Think of the trouble such a definition would cause in the matter of hunting up the marriage records of the different persons involved.

The hon. minister has told us something of his own family. My own case is very much the same. My mother was born in England; I was bom in Canada, and so on my mother's side I would not be eligible under this definition. On my father's side, it is true, he was bom in Canada, and I was bom in Canada, but even that would not make me a Canadian.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LIB

James Houston Spence

Liberal

Mr. SPENCE:

You must wait for two

hundred years yet.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LIB-PRO

John Livingstone Brown

Liberal Progressive

Mr. BROWN:

My children would beCanadians-no, my grandchildren, because they would be of the third generation. Think of the innumerable difficulties involved if we adopt this definition. It would land us in greater difficulties than we are in at thepresent time. After all, the point is this: Is

it worth while attempting to find out what the racial origin of the people of Canada is? If it is worth while, let us adopt the proper means of securing this information. If the intention is to get the exact racial origin of every individual, that will lead to many absurdities, and I have not been able to find any way out of the difficulty; but the resolution, I contend, would involve us in greater difficulties than those with which we are faced at the present time.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):

Somewhat along the line

taken by the last speaker (Mr. Brown), I would venture to suggest that the resolution be amended by striking out clause 2. It seems to me that we owe a great deal to the mover of this resolution for having brought before the house a matter that is of very great importance to the people of Canada. It is absolutely absurd that in the past most of us have had to characterize ourselves as English even although our ancestors may have been in this country for several generations. I can remember as a child feeling almost ashamed of myself because while my schoolmates, when asked what nationality they were, could say English, or Scotch or German, poor I could only say that I did not belong to any nationality, that I was only born in this country. I should be very glad to get away from that situation, and I think we ought to carry out the idea behind this motion. I thought of this the other day when we had to have Canadians defined as British subjects domiciled in Canada. I hope that such phrases will soon cease to be used in this country, and that we shall be quite content to call ourselves Canadian citizens.

But when we come to the question of race, it seems to me that we are in an altogether

Canadian Nationality

different position. I know that historians and ethnologists are very much divided as to what really constitutes a race. I suppose in a general way that, language is one of the outstanding marks of a race to-day, but that is not a conclusive distinguishing mark. Throughout the years certain groups have gradually come to have certain distinguishing marks in common. We have these great broad distinctions, one of which is recognized in the resolution, that of colour; we have the white race, the black race, the yellow race, and undoubtedly we subdivide those into a great many other groups. There are a good many differences among the French people, but I presume that the French people to-day have pretty well developed into a distinct race. There are a great many divisions, as has been pointed out, among the English, but I think we may recognize the English as a race. I Jo not think the Americans can yet say that there is an American race. Undoubtedly there is an American nationality, a nationality of which they are very proud, but they have not yet developed a distinctly American type. There are perhaps three or four types that are emerging, and at some time they may coalesce and become one, but that time has not yet arrived.

In Canada there are two main strains historically, the English, or the Anglo-Saxon, if you will, and I suppose undter the latter we must include the Irish, and other Celts, although they are not Anglo-Saxon; and then there is that other great strain, the French-Canadian. We have had a great many strains coming in since then-the Germans, and out in the west, the Slavs, and so on.

I do not know that a very great deal is to be gained by constantly referring to a man's remote ancestors. From a scientific standpoint it may (be desirable that we should know the racial origin as well as perhaps the political origin of the people who are coming to this country; hence I can see the reason for retaining in the schedules some term such as "race", which would designate the strain to which a man originally belonged. But I would not like this resolution to go through in the form in which it is here. I do not like the idea of distinguishing between the white and other races. I have friends, Indians, native-born Canadians, and I think they are as much Canadians as anybody thait I know of. I would go further and say that I have Canadian acquaintances who are of tlhe second generation of orientals, their fathers and grandfathers having been born in Victoria, British Columbia. As far as I am concerned, I think

these people ought to be classified as Canadians if you are going to make Canadians in this fashion. But unfortunately you cannot determine races by a resolution any more than you can make a Clydesdale into a Shetland pony by a resolution. You cannot do it that way. We can create a change of sentiment in political matters, and I suggest that racial sentiments even of the member for Southeast Grey (jMiss Macphail) will have to be changed a great deal before we can have a Canadian race for I heard her sympathetically applaud someone who said that he belonged to the Scotch race. If we were really a Canadian race, we would not have such applause as that from a nativeTiorn Canadian because we would not conceive ourselves as belonging to any other race than the Canadian race!

That brings up a difficulty which I think was referred to by the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Forke) and which in my opinion is a real one. If you insist that everybody whose people have been resident here for three generations belongs to the Canadian race and is quite different from everybody else, you will be apt to create class distinctions, I am not sure that that would not be a fairly healthy class distinction. I suppose that is because I would qualify for that group, but still I cannot help acknowledging that some of the people who of their own volition migrated ito Canada are just as much deserving of being Canadians in the very fullest sense of the term as those of us who have done nothing to account for our being here-who are here simply because our grandfathers had courage enough to cross the seas. I do not know that we gain very much by creating distinctions of that kind in this country. We would be on a sounder basis iif we recognized as being Canadian citizens, whether by birth or naturalization, all the people of this country who are determined to upbuild the Canadian nation. In order that this resolution should not be dropped, and on the other hand that we should not place ourselves in the rather awkward position of attempting by resolution to define ethnological divisions, I venture to move that the resolution be amended by striking out dlause 2.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink
CON

George Black

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):

Mr. Speaker, although I am entirely in favour of developing Canadian sentiment and Canadian individuality, I cannot see that this resolution either confined to the first clause or including the second, will do anything other than make confusion worse confounded so far as establishing a Canadian nationality is concerned. If paragraph one of the resolution should

Canadian Nationality

carry, then even orientals born in Canada would be of Canadian nationality. I do not think that is desirable at all. And as to the second paragraph, which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) has moved to strike out, it is entirely impossible from my own standpoint, because under it I would not be a Canadian! My parents were born and resided in New Brunswick before New Brunswick came into Canada at all. My grandparents did not live to see the maritimes become part of Canada. This paragraph would exclude the people of British Columbia, the middle west provinces and maritimes, and would only make Canadians of the bulk of the people of what was formerly Upper Canada and Lower Canada. I think we would do well to drop the resolution altogether.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONALITY
Subtopic:   DESIGNATION IN LEGISLATION AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Permalink

February 15, 1929