The dispossession began in December 1941 with the seizure of fishing vessels owned by Japanese Canadians, and eventually led to the loss of homes, farms, businesses, and personal belongings.
Ian MacKenzie, the federal
Minister of Pensions and National Health and British Columbia representative in Cabinet, was a political advocate for the dispossession of the property of Japanese Canadians. He campaigned to exclude Asians from the province of British Columbia, saying to a local newspaper in 1922, "Economically we cannot combat with them; racially we cannot assimilate them...we must exclude them from our midst and prohibit them from owning land." The
"Custodian of Enemy Property", an office of the federal government, was given administrative control of the property of Japanese Canadians, beginning in 1941 and continuing until 1952. As a bureaucracy under the authority of the Cabinet, the office of the Custodian took its directions from Order in Council 1665, as later amended by Order 2483, which allowed them to seize the property of Japanese Canadians. "This is not a confiscation" the government said, "the Custodian will administer property in the interests of the [owners]." The January 19, 1943, Order in Council 469 expanded the Custodian's power to sell the property of Japanese Canadians. "The Custodian has been vested with the power and responsibility of controlling and managing any property of the persons of Japanese race...the power to liquidate, sell, or otherwise dispose of such property" without their consent. These actions were carried out with significant public support. Citizens wrote to their representatives urging the removal of the Japanese Canadian community from British Columbia. Government officials reported property damage done to the homes of uprooted Japanese Canadians as members of the public engaged in "ransacking", "looting" and "wanton destruction". One official reported "[a]lmost every building formerly owned by Japanese...has been entered at one time or another.'''' The dispossession and sale of property of Japanese Canadians was recognized as having long term implications for Japanese Canadians. Secretary of State Norman McClarty stated that the forced sales would be "tantamount to saying that [Japanese Canadians] will never be returned to Vancouver...This may of course be desirable". Scholars note that Ian Mackenzie, the British Columbia representative in Cabinet, supported this "permanent exclusion of Japanese Canadians from the entire 'coast of British Columbia. Instead, the committee forced the sale of the fishing vessels, a decision that government lawyers later admitted exceeded the committee's terms of reference and therefore was illegal. Although officials claimed these measures were required due to war, fishing for salmon was a hotly contested issue between the white Canadians and Japanese Canadians. In 1919, Japanese Canadians received four thousand and six hundred of the salmon-gill net licences, representing roughly half of all of the licences the government had to distribute. In a very public move on behalf of the Department of Fisheries in British Columbia, it was recommended that in the future Japanese Canadians should never again receive more fishing licences than they had in 1919 and also that every year thereafter that number be reduced. These were measures taken on behalf of the provincial government to oust the Japanese from salmon fishing. The federal government also got involved in 1926, when the House of Commons' Standing Committee on Fisheries put forward suggestions that the number of fishing licences issued to Japanese Canadians be reduced by ten percent a year, until they were entirely removed from the industry by 1937. Yet, the reason the government gave for impounding the few remaining and operating Japanese-Canadian fishing boats was that the government feared these boats would be used by Japan to mount a coastal attack on British Columbia. Many boats belonging to Japanese Canadians were damaged, and over one hundred sank.
State management of Japanese-Canadian property During the process of internment, federal officials told Japanese Canadians that their property would be held as a "protective measure" only and then returned to its owners. However, as early as April 1942, as Japanese Canadians were being actively interned,
Ian Alistair Mackenzie began planning with
Thomas Crerar and Gordan Murchison for the use of Japanese Canadian land for veteran settlement under the upcoming ''Veteran's Land Act'' program. Property appraisal was undertaken by the
Soldier Settlement Board which valued the farms at less than half their actual market values. Order 5523 passed in June 1942 threatened jail time and $1000 fine for individuals attempting to make private arrangements for their farms.
Storage, looting, and vandalism In April 1942, the Office of the Custodian allowed Japanese Canadians to document the value of their property and possessions using registration forms prior to their displacement. However, insufficient warnings of displacement (sometimes as little 24 hours in advance) gave Japanese Canadians little chance to safely store their personal items. Some buried or hid belongings to protect them. Vacated Japanese Canadian communities were commonly vandalized and looted. The Office of the Custodian also struggled with a significant administrative task: multiple people were appointed to oversee and pinpoint how much property each Japanese Canadian had, the condition it was in, the value it held, as well as to establish title, maintain insurance claims, pay miscellaneous expenses and translate and type all communication with Japanese Canadian property owners. Before the Office of the Custodian could come up with a system for organizing and maintaining the property,
creditors, Japanese Canadians, other state officials, and members of the general public were all inquiring about property and pressuring the Custodian for answers. was a young
bureaucrat who established and directed the Vancouver Office of the Custodian during the time of the forced property sales. He held racial bias and believed skin colour determined loyalty, once saying that "the only way the Yellow Race can obtain their place in the Sun is by winning the war." In addition to acting as director of the Office of Custodian in Vancouver, McPherson acted as an intelligence agent for the British government. McPherson's role as a British agent was to send letters to update them on what was occurring in British Columbia. In these letters, he expressed prejudice against Japanese Canadians and his view that the RCMP was not doing enough to control them: "police intelligence is greatly understaffed and...the Japanese have developed a high inferiority complex." Glenn McPherson was asked to write the resulting order in council (469), which was passed into law on January 19, 1943.
Protest Japanese Canadians lobbied the government to reconsider the forced sale of their property. They wrote letters to government officials or the
Custodian of Enemy Property to protest. In British Columbia, officials identified 292 letters that they felt "gave a fair representation" of Japanese Canadians' concerns. A majority of the letters protested on the grounds of their property being sold for unreasonably low prices, without consideration of deeper property value or consent. In addition, the forced sale of property was seen as a violation of their rights as Canadian citizens. Several risks were involved in writing to the Custodian. In a time when they were viewed as 'enemy aliens', many Japanese Canadians wrote to threaten legal action, or attempted to invoke their rights as citizens. Others, such as Tomio and Akira Yokoyama, immediately returned their cheques to the Custodian, and risked the loss of all sale revenue to convey their message. A majority of the letters written by Japanese Canadians to the Custodian protesting or refusing the sale of their property did so on the grounds of the value of their lands. While Japanese Canadians' property and personal items were sold for less than their worth in market value, most owners contested that the Custodian had not taken into account the time, labour, and work owners invested in their land. Nor did the sales account for the memories, experiences and emotional value that many owners associated with their homes. In 1944, Toyo Takahashi wrote to the Custodian, explaining that when she and her husband moved into 42 Gorge Road, Victoria they spent over ten years of labour and hard work cultivating a garden of rare and exotic plants that won a horticultural award and was visited by the Queen in 1937. Many Japanese Canadians, including Takahashi, also emphasized the future value of their land, the labour put into building farms or businesses was an investment for many Japanese Canadians into not only their futures, but also for their children, and future generations. Japanese Canadians protested the sales forced upon them by the Custodian on the grounds that the sales failed to truly compensate owners for the holistic value of their land. were forced out of their homes and into internment camps. A few weeks after order 1665 was put into legal effect, the Canadian government released order 2483, which stated that the properties and belongings of interned Japanese Canadians were to be protected and held in their best interest by the Custodian. Japanese Canadians realized that the Canadian government was not acting in their best interest when their property began being sold without their consent. Eikichi Nakashima, Tadao Wakabayashi, and Jitaro Tanaka were three Japanese Canadians who were facing the loss of their properties to the Canadian government after spending time in internment camps. They were selected by their community to represent the fight against the sales by suing the Canadian government and the Crown. Their case was slow-moving, but with the assistance of their lawyer, J. Arthur MacLennan, they were able after some delay to secure a court date on May 29, 1944. The opposing lawyer, Fredrick Percy Varcoe, Deputy Minister of Justice, argued in front of Judge
Joseph Thorarinn Thorson that the sales followed from the "emergency of war". Also he argued that "the Custodian was not the Crown", so Japanese Canadians, on this logic, had named the wrong defendant. Further, Varcoe argued that "the relevant orders created no trust", emphasizing that it was well within the rights of the Custodian to sell the property of Japanese Canadians without defying order 2483. Finally, Varcoe argued that the animosity of white British Columbians toward Japanese Canadians made the sale of only some properties unfeasible because he claimed that white buyers would refuse to purchase if Japanese Canadians were expected to return to live alongside them. After three days of court, Thorson stated "I do not think anyone expects me to give judgment now". Three years later, after the war had ended and the Canadian government had begun to exile nearly 4,000 Japanese Canadians, Thorson released his judgment. On August 29, 1947, it was announced that Nakashima, Wakabayashi, and Tanaka had lost. In his judgment, Thorson did not acknowledge any of MacLennan's arguments and mentioned very little about the lives of the litigants. Without addressing the larger harms of the dispossession of Japanese Canadians, stated that "the custodian could neither be characterized as the Crown nor its servant"; therefore, the case ended before it began since the litigants had sued the wrong entity. In addition to losing their homes, Thorson also charged Nakashima, Wakabayashi, and Tanaka for the legal costs of the government.
Bird Commission In 1946 and 1947, pressure began to build for the federal government to address the forced sale of Japanese-Canadian property. In 1947, representatives from the Co-operative Committee on Japanese Canadians and the
Japanese Canadian Citizens for Democracy (JCCD) which had formed in 1943 asked the federal government's Public Accounts Committee to launch a
Royal Commission to look into the losses associated with the forced sales. In June 1947, the Public Accounts Committee recommended that a commission be struck to examine the claims of Japanese Canadians living in Canada for losses resulting from receiving less than the fair market value of their property. A Royal Commission was set up later that year, headed by Justice Henry Bird, with terms of reference that placed the onus on the Japanese-Canadian claimant to prove that the
Custodian of Enemy Property was negligent in the handling of their property. The terms of reference soon expanded to also include the sale of the property below market value, but no cases were accepted that dealt with issues outside the control of the Custodian of Enemy Property. In late 1947, Bird began to hear individual claims, but by 1948 it became clear to the commission that the magnitude of claims and amount of property in dispute could take years to settle and become very expensive for claimants because of legal fees. Thus, in the spring of 1949, the Bird Commission adopted a category formula that set out certain reimbursement percentages for each category of claim, except for unusual circumstances. The commission concluded in 1950; the report stated: • The commission found that claims relating to fishing boats should receive 12.5% of the sale price as compensation and receive the Custodian of Enemy Property's 13.5% commission. Out of the 950 fishing boats seized in 1941, only 75 claims were processed by the Bird Commission. • Claims relating to fishing nets and gear should receive 25% of the sale price. • Claims relating to cars and trucks should receive 25% of the sale price. • Claims relating to the sale of personal belongings were deemed mostly worthless and claimants received the Custodian of Enemy Property's commission plus 6.8% of the sale price. • Very few claims relating to personal real estate received any form of compensation because the Commission concluded that most were sold for fair market value. • Farmers whose property had been seized by the
Soldier Settlement Board received $632,226.61 combined, despite that being only half of their total claim. The top monetary award was $69,950 against a $268,675 claim by the Royston Lumber Company, and the smallest claim was $2.50 awarded to Ishina Makino for a claim against a car. After the report was released, the CCJC and National Japanese Canadian Citizens' Association wanted to push for further compensation, however, when claimants accepted their Bird Commission reimbursements, they had to sign a form agreeing that they would not press any further claims. By 1950, the Bird Commission awarded $1.3 million in claims to 1,434 Japanese Canadians. However, it only accepted claims based on loss of property, refusing to compensate for wrongdoing in terms of
civil rights, damages due to loss of earnings, disruption of education, or other factors. The issue of Japanese Canadian losses was not revisited in-depth until the Price Waterhouse study in 1986. == Postwar deportation ==