Your search

Not much is known about the origins of the labour movement in the pre-Confederation Canadas. The fifties in particular are well worth a closer examination than they have received at the hands of Canadian labour historians. The mid-century decade saw labour pass through the sunshine of the greatest boom of the century, and the shadow of the severe depression which followed the Crash of 1857. The years between 1853 and 1855 were surprisingly turbulent in terms of strike action among both skilled and unskilled men in the Canadas. After a generation of passivity, Canadian labour embarked on a path which led to the birth of a genuine labour movement in the Canadas. Though the scale of the movement was small by comparison with that of Britain or the United States, it was no less vigorous and dynamic during the years which saw the birth of the "new unionism" in both America and Britain. The labour activism of the fifties was largely a response to inflationary pressures brought on by the great railway development boom. In addition, the Canadas were coming more and more under the influence of the forces unleashed by the industrial revolution, and technological innovation created pressures which helped to spur strike action and union organizing activity. The leaders of the "wages movement" and the "insurrection of labour" were working men in the traditional crafts and trades. The most active were those in what might be called the "middle trades," which took in the building trades, shoemakers, tailors, and others who were not among the labour aristocrats of their time. The labour force was dominated by the recent immigrants, and the men who founded the unions of the fifties were men with strong traditions of labour. Many of them were Irish, and the Irish deserve credit for being the co-founders of the unions of the fifties. In Canada the Irish had successfully penetrated a number of the middle rank trades, and many were active participants in the unions of their day. After 1854, unionism had a foothold in the major Canadian cities. Linkage with the parent movements was precipitated by the post-1857 depression. Pragmatic, wage-conscious, and basically non-ideological in character, the Canadian unions did not differ significantly from the British or American unions of their day, except in ways which were a function of the differing scale of the three societies. The 1854 climax of unrest among skilled men was a significant turning point in the relations between labour and capital in the Canadas. The breakthrough was most visible in the Toronto-Hamilton region, which was the focal point of labour activity. Labour in the two cities exhibited a dynamism which was unprecedented in Canada up to that time. The sixties, which brought the further growth of trade unions, and affiliation with American unions, saw the logical extension of a process which was begun in earnest a decade earlier.

The migration of East Indians to the Dominions was an unorganised exercise. Indian membership in the British Empire gave them the status of British subjects and Imperial citizens but the Dominions were opposed to coloured migrants. By 1900 Australia and New Zealand had established their immigration policies for 'Whites only'. Canada experienced the East Indian migration after 1900. It coincided with that of other Orientals, namely Chinese and Japanese. Meanwhile ideas of social Darwinism prevailed in the North American continent. There arose an organised labour movement on the Pacific Coast. These factors reinforced the anti-Oriental feeling which resulted in the outbreak of anti-Asiatic riots at Vancouver. Exclusion of East Indians was the basic policy of Imperial and Canadian leaders. But an open ban on Indians could create a difficult situation with the possibility of its exploitation by anti-British elements in India. Therefore, effective but indirect restrictions were imposed on East Indian immigration. However, at times, such prohibitory immigration regulations could not sustain the test in the law courts. The migration question reached its climax with the arrival of the Komagata Maru in Vancouver but the failure of this enterprise completely reversed the migration trend. In its repercussions it contributed to the eruption of anti-British unrest and a revolutionary movement in the Punjab. Demands for equal treatment of Indians echoed all over India, After the First World War restrictions on Indian wives and children to join their husbands and fathers in Canada became a focal point. This matter was settled under the arrangement of Reciprocity of Treatment made in the Imperial War Conference (1918), Restrictions on further migration from India remained in practice, With the granting of independence to India and Pakistan, Canada sensed the urgency of coming to an understanding and arrangement With them. India could use this excuse for leaving the Commonwealth. Canada agreed to accept a small fixed number of South Asian immigrants. By the 1960s Canadian economic needs for skilled manpower increased tremendously while ideas of social Darwinism waned. The arrival of a large number of Europeans from various parts of Europe changed the Canadian outlook. Economic prosperity and radical changes in Canadian commercial and industrial life set aside the Asiatic take-over fear. Characteristics of South Asian migrants changed to a very great extent. Worldwide development of rapid transportation and communication helped to create a better understanding. Canada decided to apply her immigration regulations without racial regard. This transformation of the Canddian immigration policy from complete exclusion to equal acceptance has economic and social reasons. It is a paradox of history to find East Indians being excluded when India was part of the British Empire and now being accepted when the Empire is part of history.

Labour history is frequently equated with the internal workings of trade unions and radical parties in isolation from the society on which they are based. This paper treats these institutions as important, though not the sole expressions of working class activity. It discusses reactions to labour unrest and industrial conflict from within the working class, and from without, and the effect of these reactions on community relationships. This paper demonstrates how the relationship of the working class with the middle class changed from one of amity in 1903 to one of hostility in 1913, and that this came about in two ways: (1) through the changing relationships of the principle sub-groupings within the working class, organized labour, the immigrant communities, and the radical parties; and, (2) through changes in middle class attitudes brought about by reactions to this first development and by changes in the local economy. The primary catalyst for change was violence which occurred in four labour disputes during the period. In examining the source of violence and the means of its suppression, the paper will argue that while cultural conditioning influenced the actions and attitudes of those involved, the nature of their class relationships was the decisive factor.