Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T13:11:17.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Regulating Indian* and Chinese Civic Identities In British Columbia's “Colonial Contact Zone,”** 1858–1887

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2013

Abstract

When British Columbia was founded in 1858, the colonial regime classified Indians as savage, on the anthropological scale of civilization, and then imposed on them civilizing tactics designed to create semi-civilized British subjects. By the 1860s the colonial regime feared that the growing presence of Chinese immigrants, whom they initially classified as semi-civilized on the anthropological scale of civilization, would subvert this objective. They therefore disempowered Chinese through the imposition of de-civilizing tactics designed to create barbarian aliens. By 1887 these combined civilizing and de-civilizing tactics had resulted in the reclassification of Indians as semi-civilized and of Chinese as barbarian.

Résumé

Au moment de la fondation de la Colombie-Britannique en 1858, le régime colonial classait les Amérindiens en tant que «sauvages» sur l'échelle anthropologique des civilisations, puis leur imposait des mesures prétendues civilisatrices dans le but de créer des sujets britanniques «demi-civilisés». Dès les années 1860, le régime colonial craignait qu'une présence accrue d'immigrants chinois, qualifiés aussi de «demicivilisés», vienne renverser ces objéctifs. Par conséquent, celui-ci posait des gestes destinés à déconsidérer les Chinois en les assimilant à des «étrangers barbares». Vers 1887, ces tactiques combinées, visant à assimiler et à abrutir, eurent pour conséquence le réclassement des Amérindiens au rang de «demi-civilisés» et celui des Chinois au rang de barbares.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, 4th Parl., 3d sess., vol. 2 (1881), p. 1012Google Scholar (per Arthur Bunster, MP for Vancouver).

2 Loo, Tina, “Savage Mercy: Native Culture and the Modification of Capital Punishment in Nineteenth-Century British Columbia,” in Qualities of Mercy: Justice, Punishment, and Discretion, ed. Strange, Carolyn, 104–29 (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1996), 109Google Scholar.

3 For a critique of this “social evolutionary” discourse by leading Victorian anthropologists Herbert Spencer, E.B. Tylor, and L.H. Morgan see White, Leslie A., “Evolutionary Stages, Progress, and the Evaluation of Cultures,” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 3 (1947), 165CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Mill, John Stuart, “Civilization—Signs of the Times,” London and Westminster Review 25 (1836): 128, 2Google Scholar.

5 Stocking, George W. Jr.,Victorian Anthropology (New York: Free Press, 1987), 4445Google Scholar.

6 Tylor, E.B., “Ordeals and Oaths,” Macmillan's Magazine 34 (1876): 111Google Scholar.

7 Good, Reginald, “The Admissibility of Non-Christian Indian Testimony in the Colonial Municipal Courts of Upper Canada / Canada West,” Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 23 (2005): 5594Google Scholar.

8 MacNally, Leonard, The Rules of Evidence on Pleas of the Crown, Illustrated from Printed and Manuscript Trials and Cases (London: Butterworth & Cooke, 1802), 76Google Scholar.

9 Counsel for the “infidel” plaintiff, Omychund, framed the issues as “matters of commerce” arising from trade among “civilized nations,” which had to be determined upon “general” (i.e., Natural Law) principles of “reason, justice, and convenience” that provided a legally acceptable foundation for overturning long-standing common-law rules: MacNally, , The Rules of Evidence, 6980Google Scholar. This frame of reference found favour with the four judges in the case, each of whom delivered extensive reasons for judgment grounded in Natural Law reasoning.

10 le Van Baumer, Franklin, “The Conception of Christendom in Renaissance England,” Journal of the History of Ideas 6 (1945): 131, 148Google Scholar.

11 A General Abridgment of Cases in Equity, Argued and Adjudged in the High Court of Chancery, Etc., vol. 2 (London: W. Strahan & M. Woodfall, 1769), 408–9Google Scholar.

12 British Columbia Archives and Records Services [BCARS], R 45, file 829, Joseph Denman to Arthur Kennedy, November 18, 1864.

14 An Act to authorize the Legislatures of certain of Her Majesty's Colonies to pass Laws for the Admission, in certain Cases, of Unsworn Testimony in Civil and Criminal Proceedings (UK), 6 & 7 Vict, c 22 [(Colonies) Evidence Act, 1843].

15 Mawani, , Colonial Proximities, 4–5, 11, 127Google Scholar.

16 Mawani, Colonial Proximities, 7.

17 Testimony in the Colonies; (Colonies) Evidence Act, 1843; BCARS, GR-1372, file 54-19, Thomas Wood (Acting Attorney-General of Vancouver Island) to the Acting Colonial Secretary, November 24, 1864.

18 BCARS, GR-1372, file 142f, p. 16, Matthew Begbie (Chief Justice of British Columbia) to Frederick Seymour (Governor of British Columbia), November 9, 1864.

19 Wood to Acting Colonial Secretary, November 24, 1864.

20 “Legislative Council [Proceedings]” (January 18, 1865), British Columbian, January 21, 1865, 3Google Scholar.

21 S. Wells Williams, letter to President D.C. Gilman of Johns Hopkins University, June 4, 1877, reprinted in “Chinese Witnesses,” New York Times, June 8, 1877, 3Google Scholar.

23 Canada, HC, “Report of the Select Committee on Chinese Labor and Immigration” in Sessional Papers, No 13, App 4 (1879), 12Google Scholar.

24 British Columbians referred to the Teutonic and Latin “races” as natural allies of the Anglo-Saxon race: Canada, HC, Report of the Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration: Report and Evidence (Ottawa: Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration, 1885), lxxxiiiGoogle Scholar (per John Gray). Gray was a puisne judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

25 Morris, James H., “Notes of Travel in China,” The Canadian Journal (n.s.) 9 (1857), 161, 171Google Scholar.

26 “Legislative Council [Proceedings]” (January 25, 1865), British Columbian, January 28, 1865, 3Google Scholar; “Fourth Provincial Legislative Assembly: Third Session” (February 16, 1885), British Colonist, February 17, 1885, 3Google Scholar.

27 An Ordinance to amend the law of Evidence (British Columbia) (8 February 1865)Google Scholar, London, Public Records Office (Colonial Office, class 61, vol. 1, 149).

28 “Legislative Council [Proceedings]” (January 25, 1865).

30 Report of the Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration, 140, 145 (per Henry Crease). Crease was a puisne judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia from 1870 through 1896.

31 See note 27 above.

32 “The Governor's Speech” (January 24, 1867), British Colonist, January 25, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

33 “Legislative Council Proceedings” (February 1, 1867), British Colonist, February 1, 1867, 2.

34 “Tuesday's Sitting [of the Legislative Council]” (February 5, 1867), British Colonist, February 12, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

35 “Wednesday's Sitting [of the Legislative Council]” (February 6, 1867), British Colonist, February 12, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

36 “Friday's Sitting [of the Legislative Council]” (February 8, 1867), British Colonist, February 13, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

37 “Legislative Proceedings” (February 11, 1867), British Colonist, February 12, 1867, 2Google Scholar; “Legislative Council Proceedings” (February 11, 1867), British Colonist, February 18, 1867, 2Google Scholar. Interestingly, Cox did not mention having administered the customary English Bible-kissing to a Chinese witness on August 30, 1865, in the case of Wm Stewart v John Collins, Mary Boyle and Sam (a Chinaman) (unreported): “Cariboo Police Court.” The Cariboo Sentinel, September 2, 1865, 1Google Scholar. Presumably he was shamed into keeping this information secret because of criticisms raised in debates on the Native Evidence Ordinance, 1865, that such a procedure was blasphemous.

38 “Legislative Council Proceedings” (February 11, 1867); “Wednesday's Sitting [of the Legislative Council]” (February 13, 1867), British Colonist, February 18, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

39 An Ordinance to provide for the taking of Oaths and admission of Evidence in certain cases (British Columbia) (15 March 1865)Google Scholar, London, Public Records Office (Colonial Office, class 61, vol. 1, 245).

40 An Act to amend certain Laws respecting Indians, and to extend certain Laws relating to matters connected with Indians to the Provinces of Manitoba and British Columbia, SC 1874, c 21. This act was sometimes referred to as the “Indian Liquor Act” because section 1, which contained six subsections, dealt with preventing and punishing the sale of any kind of intoxicating liquor to Indians: Library and Archives Canada (LAC), RG13, vol. 1874, file 1418, J.W. Powell to Hewitt Bernard, July 31, 1874.

41 “Legislative Council [Proceedings]” (January 18, 1865).

42 Editorial, British Colonist, March 26, 1859, 2Google Scholar.

43 Proclamation respecting Sale or Gift of Intoxicating Liquor to Indians (1858), reprinted in List of Proclamations for 1858, 1859, 1860, 1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864 [and 1865] (British Columbia, ca. 1866), n.p.

44 An Ordinance to assimilate and amend the Law prohibiting the sale or gift of Intoxicating Liquor to Indians, SBC 1867 (30 Vict), c 67.

45 London, Public Records Office (Colonial Office, class 305, vol. 26, 21–31), Arthur Kennedy to Edward Cardwell, July 4, 1865.

46 “To the Editor of the British Colonist,” British Colonist, February 23, 1866, 3Google Scholar; “House of Assembly” (April 6, 1866), British Colonist, April 7, 1866, 3Google Scholar; “House of Assembly” (May 21, 1866), British Colonist, May 22, 1866, 3Google Scholar.

47 “Indian Liquor Law,” British Colonist, February 15, 1867, 2Google Scholar.

48 [emphasis added].

49 LAC, RG13, vol. 1416, file 135, Mr Justice John Gray to Sir John A. Macdonald, August 9, 1879.

50 “Indian Liquor Law,” British Colonist, January 31, 1875, 3Google Scholar

51 “Indian Liquor,” British Colonist, January 31, 1875, 3Google Scholar.

52 “The Indian Liquor Law,” British Colonist, February 3, 1875, 3Google Scholar.

53 Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, 2d Parl., 1st Sess., vol. 1 (1875), p. 238Google Scholar (per James Cunningham).

54 Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, 3d Parl., 3d Sess., vol. 1 (1876), p. 749Google Scholar (per David Laird).

55 SC 1876, c 18 [Indian Act (1876)].

56 “City Police Court,” British Colonist, June 14, 1876, 3Google Scholar.

57 “Municipal Police Court,” British Colonist, May 28, 1879, 3Google Scholar.

58 Mawani, Renisa, “Cross-Racial Encounters and Juridical Truths: (Dis) Aggregating Race in British Columbia's Contact Zone,” BC Studies 156/157 (2007/2008): 141–71, 165Google Scholar.

59 Mawani, , Colonial Proximities, 13Google Scholar.

60 Lord Dufferin, public address delivered in Victoria, BC, September 20, 1876, extracted and printed in Stewart, George Jr., Canada under the Administration of the Earl of Dufferin, 491–95 (Toronto: Rose-Belford, 1878)Google Scholar.

61 “British Law vs. Chinamen,” Victoria Times, August 9, 1884, 2Google Scholar.

62 Report of the Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration, 166.

63 Report of the Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration, xi, per John Gray.

64 “British Fair Play,” Nanaimo Free Press, January 23, 1885, 2.

65 Walkem, George, “Memorandum on Indian Affairs” (August 17, 1875), in British Columbia: Papers Connected with the Indian Land Question, 1850–1875 (Victoria: Richard Wolfenden, 1875), 19Google Scholar.

66 Harris, Cole, Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2002), 90Google Scholar.

67 An Act for the gradual enfranchisement of Indians, the better management of Indian affairs, and to extend the provisions of the Act 31st Victoria, Chapter 42, SC 1869, c 6. This legislation received royal assent on June 22, 1869.

68 Harris, , Making Native Space, 8991Google Scholar.

69 Order in Council, 18 August 1875. in British Columbia: Papers Connected with the Indian Land Question, 1850–1875 (Victoria: Richard Wolfenden, 1875), 1Google Scholar

70 LAC, RG10, vol. 3604, file 2521, I.W. Powell to the Minister of the Interior, December 3, 1873.

71 Banner, Stuart, “British Columbia: Terra Nullius as Kindness.” in Possessing the Pacific: Land, Settlers, and Indigenous People from Australia to Alaska, 195230 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

72 BCARS, GR 1727, volume 735, (Matthew Begbie Bench Book, Vol.XIII), pp. 127–29, Indian Reserve Case, 17 November 1885.

73 Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, 4th Parl., 1st Sess. (1879), p. 1261Google Scholar (per J.S. Thompson, MP for Cariboo, BC).

74 LAC, RG10, vol. 3638, file 7251, Matthew Begbie, “Memorandum,” September 11, 1876.

75 “British Law vs. Chinamen,” 2.

76 BCARS, GR-0429, Box 1, file 9, Caspar Phair to George Walkem, October 22, 1880, qtd. in Manawi, , Colonial Proximities, 123Google Scholar.

77 “The Chinese Element,” Nanaimo Free Press, 24 January 1885, p.2.

78 Cowan, George H., “Canadian Industry and the Chinese Question,” in Hopkins, J. Castell, Canada: An Encyclopaedia of the Country, ed. Hopkins, J. Castell, 5:499507 (Toronto: Linscott Publishing Company, 1899), 500, 506Google Scholar; LAC, RG17, vol. 395, file 42579, J.A. Mara (Speaker) to the Governor-General in Council, January 29, 1884.

79 “Legislative Assembly [Proceedings]” (February 19, 1879). British Colonist, February 20, 1879, 3Google Scholar.

80 British North America Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3.

81 “Legislative Assembly [Proceedings]” (March 28, 1879), British Colonist, March 29, 1879, 3Google Scholar.

82 “Legislative Assembly [Proceedings]” (April 7, 1879), British Colonist, April 8, 1879, 3Google Scholar.

83 “Legislative Assembly [Proceedings]” (April 22, 1879), British Colonist, April 23, 1879, 3Google Scholar.

84 “Fourth Provincial Legislative Assembly” (February 9, 1885), British Colonist, February 10, 1885, 3Google Scholar; “Fourth Provincial Legislative Assembly” (February 23, 1885), British Colonist, February 24, 1885, 2Google Scholar.

85 “Fourth Provincial Legislative Assembly” (February 9, 1885).

86 “Fourth Provincial Legislative Assembly” (February 25, 1885), British Colonist, February 26, 1885, 3Google Scholar.

87 Saxton, Alexander, The Indispensable Enemy: Labor and the Anti-Chinese Movement in California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), 129Google Scholar.

88 See, e.g.: “Public Meeting: The Chinese Question,” British Columbia, April 30, 1885, 2Google Scholar.

89 “HERE IT IS! The Reply of Hon. John Robson to the City Council,” Vancouver News, March 15, 1887, 1Google Scholar. According to Premier Robson, the Vancouver “authorities,” even though they had “ample powers” to quell the anti-Chinese riot, “strangely and persistently refrained from exercising them in the upholding of law and order.”

90 Cowan, , “Canadian Industry and the Chinese Question,” 503, 506, 499Google Scholar.

91 Anderson, Kay J., “The Idea of Chinatown: The Power of Place and Institutional Practice in the Making of a Racial Category,” in The Challenge of Modernity: A Reader on Post-Confederation Canada, ed. McKay, Ian, 156–86 (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1992), 159–60Google Scholar.

92 Anderson, Kay J., Vancouver's Chinatown: Racial Discourse in Canada, 1875–1980 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991), 19Google Scholar.

93 Roy, Patricia E., A White Man's Province: British Columbia Politicians and Chinese and Japanese Immigrants, 1858–1914 (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1989), 29Google Scholar.

94 Anderson, , “The Idea of Chinatown,” 163.Google Scholar

95 Cowan, , “Canadian Industry and the Chinese Question,” 500Google Scholar.