The Chinese in Toronto from 1878. Arlene Chan

Чтение книги онлайн.

      An interior shot a Chinese laundry in Toronto, circa 1900, shows the cramped living and working space. The average wage paid to Chinese laundry workers ranged from $8 to $18 per month, including room and board.

      Also behind the partition were the sleeping quarters and eating area. The absence of family life and the priority to save money led to living conditions that reflected little concern for personal health and well-being. The Chinese ate, slept, and worked in these small and crowded workplaces, which often reached temperatures upwards of 38°C (100°F). Common health problems included lack of sleep from working long hours, and chronic leg, arm, and back pain.

      As noted, Sam Ching was the first Chinese resident, who owned a hand laundry on Adelaide Street East. The fact that his laundry opened for business eight years before the completion of the Canadian Pacific Railway suggests that this man may have come from the United States, where Chinese laundries were already flourishing.⁴⁴ The preponderance of Chinese laundries in Toronto may not have been coincidental.

      By 1881, with a population of only 10 Chinese, there were four laundries, all within the working-class ward of St. Patrick.⁴⁵ Sam Ching’s laundry was now at 15 Adelaide Street East, Sam Lee at 42 Jarvis Street, Sam Sing at 1331/3 Queen Street West, and Tan Gee at 121 Yonge Street.⁴⁶ Seven more laundries opened, including addresses at 40 St. George Street, 91 Queen Street East, and 208 King Street East. Chinese continued to flock to the laundry business, numbering 24 in the 1891 city directory. This was at a time when there were only 33 Chinese in the city — an indication that most, if not all, were involved in laundries.⁴⁷

      Not without an eagerness to attract customers, one Chinese laundryman updated his manner of attire and store sign, as reported in the Toronto Star: “A wishee washee up town has been badly bit by Anglomania. He has sacrificed his queue and has put on trousers and tail coats … The new sign over his laundry, in white letters on a red ground, reads elegantly ‘J. Lee Wah.’”⁴⁸

      Chinese laundries became increasingly more newsworthy as their numbers grew. In 1894, torrential rains and high winds flooded and damaged many buildings in the city, including a laundry owned by Sam Lee at Jarvis and King streets. “The Celestial didn’t want to move,” reported The Toronto Star. “His countrymen were appealed to, but they took little interest and replied that if he didn’t know enough to get out he ought to be killed. Finally he was persuaded and he left none too soon, for almost before his chattels were all removed the building came tumbling down.”⁴⁹

      Another Toronto Star article in 1895 reported on a robbery. A laundry owned by Wah Sing on Queen and John streets was robbed of “a quantity of laundry and $1.50 by Charles Edwards.”⁵⁰ Chee Mo Lew, who owned a laundry at 399½ Queen Street West, later testified and identified a dagger and other stolen items found in Edwards’ possession.⁵¹ In another robbery, Chong Wing appeared in court to testify against a man who was charged with robbing his laundry of $10.25 at 611 King Street East. The laundryman had difficulty in taking the oath, even with the assistance of a Chinese interpreter, who spoke “very pigeony,”⁵² which is a reference to the pidgin language used by the Chinese, in this case, to speak English.

      Sadly, the tide of tolerance turned, not even six years after the opening of the first Chinese laundries. These establishments were condemned as a curse by labour union leaders and businesses. On December 26, 1883, the Canadian Labour Congress met in Dufferin Hall, where the president Charles March urged delegates not to disregard the “Chinese immigration curse.”

      The voice of opposition to the growing number of Chinese laundries was aired in a Toronto Star article, “The Evil the Chinese Do,” in 1894. A non-Chinese laundryman lamented the plight of the men, women, and girls whose economic survival was dependent on the employ of laundries. The news report claimed that the “Chinamen” were crowding them out of business with “no less than thirty separate and distinct Chinese laundries scattered over the city.” Further, it was difficult to ascertain the number of Chinese working in each laundry, because they were “seclusive in their habits and very reticent in giving information concerning themselves.” However, it was reported that a count made of “all the Chinamen who could be seen in the front working-room of their work-shops, showed exactly 73 men at work. And this number does not include those who were working in the rear part of the premise.”⁵³

      A year later, another Toronto Star news article in 1896 condemned Chinese laundries as “not the first shadow of claim for public patronage worthy of consideration.” Reportedly, Chinese laundrymen in Toronto did not pay taxes; rather, they sent $1,200 of revenue a week to China.⁵⁴ In another report in 1911, Jack Canuck was equally unflattering:

      One need only stroll through the above mentioned block [King, Queen, Yonge and York streets] and notice the throngs of Chinamen lounging in the streets and doorways to realize the ‘Yellow Peril’ is more than a mere word in this city. The average citizen would stand aghast did he but realize the awful menace lurking behind the partitions or screens of some of these innocent appearing laundries and restaurants.⁵⁵

      When Ah Chong tried to open a laundry at 1061 Bathurst Street in 1906, property owners faced him in opposition at City Hall. His application was turned down because the city’s Board of Control had visited the area and determined that there were already enough Chinese laundries.⁵⁶

      The Laundry Association and its white laundry owners urged health authorities to press attacks on the “dirty laundries” to prevent the spread of infection.⁵⁷ A Toronto Star report described the living conditions that were not “all too agreeable to the tastes of their patrons.” It was “alleged by those who claim to know, that in most of these places their working boards are used for bedsteads, and the soiled linen which comes from the houses of Toronto citizens are utilized for bed clothes.”⁵⁸

      While these and other protests were filed under the cover of endangerment of public health, the underlying issue was the competitive edge realized through lower operating expenses. Despite this advantage, Chinese hand laundries were hardly a threat to white-owned steam laundries that supported more profitable bulk washing for hotels and restaurants. It was a match of David and Goliath, but in this battle, Goliath was the victor. The city passed by-law No. 41 in 1902 to “license and regulate laundrymen and laundry companies and for inspecting and regulating laundries” and implemented a licence fee of $50. Chinese laundry owners protested that the fee did not take into account the number of employees and heavily penalized their small businesses. W.P. Hubbard, municipal alderman, successfully advocated on their behalf and the fee was changed to correspond to the number of employees. Small businesses, like the Chinese ones, paid as little as $5, while larger ones, like those owned by white laundrymen, paid up to $20.

      There would be further protests. At its annual convention in 1906, the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada demanded an increase of the head tax from $500 to $1,000.⁵⁹ The head tax remained as it was; however, the provincial government introduced “an Act to Amend the Factory, Shop and Office Building Act” in 1914. No Chinese person could “employ in any capacity or have under his direction or control any female white person in factory, restaurant or laundry.” The Chinese in Toronto pooled their funds to challenge this discriminatory law, but their case reached the Supreme Court of Canada without a successful outcome. The Consul General of China voiced disapproval, and the law was not strictly enforced СКАЧАТЬ