FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100  
101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   >>   >|  
in the East passed resolutions for the admission? Why did the former Minister of Labor in Canada say that "a minimum of publicity is desired upon this subject"? What did he mean when he declared "that the native of India is not a person suited to this country"? If the native Hindu is "not a person suited to Canada"--climate, soil, moisture, what not?--why isn't that fact sufficient to exclude the Oriental without any legislation? Italians never go to live at the North Pole. Nor do Eskimos come to live in the tropics. You may ask questions about Hindu immigration till you are black in the face. Unless you go out on the spot to the Pacific Coast, the most you will get for an answer is a "hush." And it would not be such an impossible situation if the other side were also going around with a finger to the lip and a "hush"; but the Oriental isn't. The Hindu and his advocates go from one end of Canada to the other clamoring at the tops of their voices, not for the privilege, but for the right, of admission to Canada, the right to vote, the right to colonize. At the time the first five or six thousand were dumped on the Pacific Coast, twenty thousand more were waiting to take passage; and one hundred thousand more were waiting to take passage after them, clamoring for the right of admission, the right to vote, the right to colonize. Canada welcomes all other colonists. Why not these? The minute you ask, you are told to "hush." South Africa and Australia "hushed" so very hard and were so very careful that after a very extensive experience--150,000 Hindus settled in one colony--both colonies legislated to shut them out altogether. At least South Africa's educational test amounted to that, and South Africa and Australia are quite as imperial as Canada. Why did they do it? The labor unions were no more behind the exclusion in those countries than in British Columbia. The labor unions chuckled with glee over the embarrassment of the whole question. II Each side of the question must be stated plainly, not as my personal opinions or the opinions of any one, but as the arguments of those advocating the free admission of the Hindu, and of those furiously opposing the free admission. A few years ago British Columbia was at her wit's ends for laborers--men for the mills, the mines, the railroads. India was at her wit's ends because of surplus of labor--labor for which her people were glad to receive three, t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100  
101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Canada

 
admission
 

thousand

 

Africa

 

unions

 

Pacific

 
British
 
clamoring
 

waiting

 
passage

Australia

 

question

 

colonize

 

Columbia

 

native

 

person

 

suited

 

Oriental

 
opinions
 

colonies


colony

 

settled

 

Hindus

 

experience

 
careful
 

people

 
surplus
 

receive

 

railroads

 
laborers

hushed

 

extensive

 

altogether

 

stated

 

exclusion

 

countries

 
plainly
 

embarrassment

 

chuckled

 

minute


personal

 

opposing

 

furiously

 

educational

 
imperial
 
arguments
 

advocating

 

amounted

 
legislated
 

advocates