Section 98, the Communist Party of Canada, and the Battle for Legality in the Interwar Period
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Capitalism on Trial: Section 98, the Communist Party of Canada, and the Battle for Legality in the Interwar Period by C. Scott Eaton B.A. (Hons.), Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2012 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences C. Scott Eaton, 2015 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Summer 2015 Approval Name: C. Scott Eaton Degree: Master of Arts (History) Title: Capitalism on Trial: Section 98, the Communist Party of Canada and the Battle for Legality in the Interwar Period Examining Committee: Chair: Roxanne Panchasi Associate Professor Mark Leier Senior Supervisor Professor Allen Seager Supervisor Associate Professor Tina Loo External Examiner Professor Department of History University of British Columbia Date Defended/Approved: 28 August, 2015 ii Abstract In 1919, the Canadian state enacted a law that criminalized the advocacy of radical politics. Section 98, as it became, was broad in its terminology, and carried a maximum punishment of twenty years imprisonment. In 1931, the state utilized the law against eight leaders of the Communist Party of Canada in an attempt to declare the organization to be illegal in Canada. The party, however, did not crumble under pressure. At trial, the accused were able to use the courtroom as a forum to protest the legality of the law; after the leaders were convicted, the party campaigned tirelessly for the release of their comrades, and for the repeal of Section 98. The party was successfully able to use its repression to forward its political agenda. This thesis explores how the party navigated Canada’s legal system in order to realize its political goals. Keywords: Section 98; Communist Party of Canada; radicalism; free speech; legal history; political trials iii Acknowledgements In its maturation, this project has received support in a variety of ways. It is my intention to acknowledge and thank those who have provided such assistance. Foremost, I am indebted to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for their most generous financial support, without which, this project could not have come to fruition. I would like to thank my supervisory committee. My senior supervisor, Dr. Mark Leier, has guided me with wisdom, humour, and patience. He has also lent me numerous books, which I promise that I will one day return. Dr. Allen Seager has similarly offered me his wisdom, posing me with puzzling, and fascinating philosophical questions. I am grateful to have worked with you both. Many people within SFU’s Department of History deserve mention. Ruth Anderson helped me get into the MA Program, and she has helped me with its “ins and the outs” throughout my time here. For that, I thank you. Dr. Aaron Windel, Dr. Willeen Keough, Dr. Andrea Geiger, and Dr. Roxanne Panchasi, Dr. Evdoxios Doxiados, and John-Henry Harter are but a few of the professors who have encouraged me, and remained somewhat conscious while I described my project. Many thanks to all of you. I thank my friends and classmates – Kathryn Hearn, Simone Hanebaum, Sarah Inglis, Liam O’Flaherty, Maddie Knickerbocker, Neal Adolph, and Andrea Samoil – for providing moral, and often times liquid support when I needed it the most. I must further thank Kathryn for her help in the editing process; your knowledge of grammar and syntax have helped my thesis in no small capacity. Lastly, I must thank my family. First, I thank my Mother for her continued love and encouragement. I similarly thank my sisters, Alison and Erin, for their love and support; you are all great inspirations in my life. Finally, I thank my Father. He is the model of a genuine, passionate, hard-worker, and he has been at the other end countless conversations that have shaped my project, my understanding of the law, and my life more generally. iv Table of Contents Approval .............................................................................................................................ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iii Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................iv Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. v List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................vi Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1. “That is irrelevant and does not hinge on the evidence filed:” Politics and the Law in the Trial of the Communist Leaders .............. 15 Pre-Trial Tactics .............................................................................................................. 20 Trial Strategies ................................................................................................................ 36 Election of Jury and the Crown’s Opening Address ............................................... 38 The Crown’s Case .................................................................................................. 44 The Defence ........................................................................................................... 53 Closing Arguments, Charge to the Jury, and Sentencing ...................................... 63 Chapter 2. “The verdict of guilty was to be expected in the courts of capitalism:” The CLDL & the Repeal of Section 98 ............................. 75 Capitalist Courts on Trial ................................................................................................. 77 Protests ........................................................................................................................... 88 The Irrational State .......................................................................................................... 94 The End of Bennett and Section 98 .............................................................................. 110 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 120 References ................................................................................................................ 124 Unpublished Primary Sources ....................................................................................... 124 Public Archives of Ontario .................................................................................... 124 University of British Columbia – Rare Books and Special Collections ................. 124 University of Toronto – Thomas Fisher Rare Books Library ................................ 124 Simon Fraser University – Special Collections and Rare Books .......................... 124 Newspapers ......................................................................................................... 125 Published Primary Sources ........................................................................................... 125 Secondary Sources ....................................................................................................... 126 Appendix A. Criminal Code of Canada – Section 98 (1919-36) ............................ 132 Appendix B. CLDL Form Letter – “Resolution RE: Section 98 of the Criminal Code of Canada.” ................................................................................................. 135 v List of Acronyms CLDL Canadian Labor Defense League CPC Communist Party of Canada CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union FOC Finnish Organization of Canada ILD International Labour Defence MWUC Mine Workers’ Union of Canada UFLTA Ukrainian Farmer Labour Temple Association of Canada UMWA United Mine Workers of America WET Workers’ Experimental Theatre WUL Workers’ Unity League vi Introduction At dusk on 20 October 1932, General Secretary of the Communist Party of Canada (CPC), Timothy Buck, sat alone in his cell at Kingston Penitentiary. Pandemonium, however, soon erupted. Troops, hired by the warden to break a prisoners’ demonstration, had surrounded the prison, and began firing shots into a number of the cells. Buck recalled seeing these troops approach his cell: I saw a detail of guards crossing the lawn with rifles at the slope, and a keeper in charge of them. They marched right up to the front of Cell Number Sixteen – that was mine – and there they left-wheeled, and stood facing me. From the slope, they cocked their rifles at the aim. I didn’t think at all. But there had been shooting, and I didn’t know what was happening, so I dropped to the floor. They fired, and the bullets entered my cell. One of the bullets hit one of the bars of my cell gate with a bang that seemed to shake the entire cell block.1 The troops fired both rifles and shotguns at Buck, but had narrowly missed with each shot. The Canadian state had attempted to murder the leader of the CPC. Notably, Buck was in Kingston Penitentiary, not for his actions, but for his political beliefs. This requires some explanation. On 22 May 1919, the House of Commons received a report from a committee considering the potential revision of Canada’s sedition laws. In the words of Judy Fudge and Eric Tucker, “the recommendations were truly draconian.” In bill form, the report’s recommendations were passed in the House of Commons on 27 June 1919. This officially brought