Seventy years ago today, British Columbia took a major step forward along the path of human rights.
On April 2, 1947, the legislature made it legal for people with origins in China or the Indian sub-continent to vote in provincial elections.
It marked a major change in our collective attitude. People of Chinese descent had been barred from voting here since 1874, and “Hindus” — the term at the time for anyone from India — had been deemed ineligible since 1907. That meant they were automatically prohibited from practices such as pharmacy, law and mining.
The notion of basing the franchise on race might seem odd these days, but race was a much bigger issue in the 1940s. Consider, for example, a decision made in the Victoria school board offices just two weeks before the provincial government’s move.
On March 17, 1947, the school board ordered its purchasing agent to stop buying school supplies or vegetables from “Oriental merchants.” Trustee Waldo Skillings — who went on to become a respected MLA and cabinet minister — raised the issue after questioning a payment to what he described as an “Oriental firm.”
When told that the city’s Oriental firms had always given good service, and that the purchasing agent had asked for quotations from “white firms,” as well, Skillings said that was not good enough. His motion passed in a 6-3 vote.
The board’s move drew immediate protests from the Royal Canadian Legion and from three Chinese community organizations.
“Among the most loyal, hard-working and faithful citizens of Greater Victoria are members of the Chinese community,” the Daily Colonist said in an editorial on March 20.
“Under Dominion law, the Chinese in Canada, many of whom are Canadian born and bred, are free in this country. Under city bylaws, they pay the same trades licences for their right to do business as any other merchant pays.
“No civic body, we submit with respect, can revoke in part what the city itself has granted,” the editorial said. “A merchant, whatever his racial stock, is free to vend and is, moreover, entitled to even consideration with every other merchant when it comes to sales to public authority in any form.”
Ying Hope, a merchant on Government Street, wrote in a letter to the editor that he was brought up in Victoria and educated in Victoria schools, yet was classed as an “Oriental” and therefore not allowed to vote. He noted that the lack of the franchise had been cited as a reason to ban purchases from firms owned by Chinese merchants.
“To a person who has just returned from four years of observation abroad, only a group untutored in democratic principles can allow itself to take such a step,” he said.
In another letter, Tu Ball said since his discharge from the army in September 1945, he had worked at the wholesale firm in question. Racial discrimination, he said, was one of the chief causes of the war.
Common sense prevailed. Four days after agreeing to ban purchases from Oriental firms, the school board met again and unanimously rescinded the motion.
Board chairman Austin Curtis said it was unfortunate that the original motion had carried without enough discussion.
“It is not the board’s intention to sever connections with any firm involved, but rather to distribute the purchase of supplies with impartiality,” he said.
In the end, the board did the right thing, but it was clear that in 1947, there was still uncertainty about the concept of equal rights for all, regardless of racial origin.
Just two years earlier, the legislature had defeated a bill that would have given “Hindus” the right to vote. And even after expanding the franchise in 1947, exclusions remained. Mennonites and Hutterites were left out until 1948, Japanese and indigenous people until 1949, and Doukhobors until 1952.
The 1947 changes also made understanding French or English a requirement, which served as a subjective, nudge-wink way to limit the franchise. That rule remained until 1982.
Seventy years ago today, British Columbia saw a major expansion of the franchise, and an admission that people from Asia had basic rights.
That is a reason to celebrate. It is not the only major anniversary of electoral reform this month, but that’s a story for Wednesday.
