[RACHEL KUPER, THE WHIG-STANDARD]
They came hoping to escape persecution, searching for a place to start anew. We remember the United Empire Loyalists fondly today but Brits loyal to the Crown fleeing the former American colonies were a pain to the governor of the day.
Today, they might not even get in.
If the same criteria were applied to the Loyalists today as, say, to a boatload of Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka and reportedly bound for Canada's west coast, Kingston may never have developed as it did.
Historian Larry Turner wrote in theLoyalist Gazettethat when the United Empire Loyalist refugees arrived in Quebec, Gov. Haldimand didn't know how to allow them into the region without causing big issues.
He had to figure out where to put them so they wouldn't bicker with the French, encroach upon the Natives or spy for the Americans.
Those are the same kind of fears we have today when people arrive as refugees, says a Queen's University law professor.
"We seem to have an aversion to people arriving by boat and we do our best to castigate them as security threats," Sharryn Aiken said, adding that, as with the Loyalists, there is no reason to assume the Tamils reportedly on their way here have terrorist tendencies or are a threat.
"The vast majority of Tamils are not Tamil Tigers."
The Tigers are a political and military group that has been fighting the majority Sinhalese for an independent homeland on the island of Sri Lanka since the 1970s. Canada considers the Tigers a terrorist organization.
In the wake of the American revolution, to neutralize whatever threat the Loyalist posed, Haldimand decided they should settle far from civilization -- on the Cataraqui River in the place where Kingston currently stands.
It's not that easy anymore and Aiken fears our first response too often is to find a way to exclude refugees. In the case of the Tamils, she wonders if the migrants aboard the MV Sun Sea were wealthier and able to travel by plane, they wouldn't be automatically suspected of terrorism.
She said this isn't the first time Canadians have been eager to accuse seafaring migrants of terrorist tendencies.
"Within the last year there was a boat load (of refugees) who came to Canada off the west coast," she said. "There was a suggestion they were all Tigers and (now we find that) none of them have been made out to be Tigers or security threats."
Aiken said the refugees may simply be trying to get to find refuge the only way they can.
"In many cases people fleeing conflicts have no choice but to get on a boat and head for a safe haven," she said, explaining that the migrants should be given the benefit of the doubt for now because once they arrive the security screening they will undergo will be stringent. Interviewers are looking to establish is whether the individual poses a threat to Canada and whether the country of origin poses a threat to the individual.
Aiken said the first thing is to determine if the claimant is in danger at home and therefore a true refugee.
"Everybody who arrives in Canada will be subject to an examination at the border to find out why they're coming," she said. "If they say they're coming to claim asylum they'll be given an interview and security checks to determine if they're eligible to make a refugee claim."
The refugees who came to Canada as United Empire Loyalists were similarly seeking asylum. They had been persecuted for their beliefs and felt unsafe in their homes, meaning they would be considered true refugees to this day.
Michael Grass, who led the contingent to Kingston, wrote in the Kingston Gazette in 1811 that they left to find a safe haven.
"I pointed out to them the (site) of their future metropolis, and gained for persecuted principles a sanctuary for myself and followers," he wrote, adding that before they arrived the land was complete wilderness.
If today's border laws had been in place when the Loyalists came from the U.S., Kingston may never have come into existence. Since the United States is considered to uphold reasonable human rights standards, Aiken said they are deemed a "third safe country," which means Canada does not accept American refugees except in very rare situations.
If an individual is ineligible to become a refugee, they could be admitted for another reason if, for instance, they had visas.
"I'm assuming none (of the Sea Sun passengers) have visas but we don't know because no one has met with them," Aiken said.
"It's really important not to repeat rumours and gossip about who they (might be)."
Aiken said that many Tamils are classified as refugees because of the state of the country since a civil war ended there.
"Since the defeat of the Tamil Tigers in May of 2009 there has been an exodus of asylum seekers from Sri Lanka because there have been serious human right abuses," she said, adding that the United Nations is also aware of the abuses going on and because of them, Tamils are often awarded refugee status.
"(In) the case of the 400 Tamils in Australia, 329 were accorded refugee status and many were alleged to have connections to Tigers," she said.
"Asylum is there to provide protection."
Ambra Dickie, speaking for Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, was tight lipped on the government's stance.
She wrote in an an e-mail that "Canada is aware of press reports suggesting that a vessel has departed South East Asian waters, and may be destined for Canada" but she could not say whether the government believes the passengers to be terrorists.
Canada is undergoing some particularly significant changes to its refugee system right now. After the The Balanced Refugee Reform Act received royal assent on June 29, the Canadian government put aside $540.7 million to help resettle new refugees over the next 12 to18 months.