Is a child of Chinese parentage born in Vancouver able to work in the mines?

At first sight, the reasoning in the first part of the foregoing passage was equally applicable to the Union Colliery v. Bryden case. A child of Chinese parentage born in Vancouver city is a natural born subject of the King, and would be equally excluded from the right to earn his living by working in the mines. But, as it was pointed out by Lord Halsbury, the right to the franchise was not a right which invariably or necessarily accompanied or followed upon naturalization, and it was not an ordinary right of the inhabitants of British Columbia such as the right to work or engage in business.

Both the reasoning and the decision in Union Colliery v. Bryden, in my opinion, apply to the enactment now under consideration. The regulations which are here impeached are not really aimed at the regulation of restaurants, laundries, and other places of business and amusement or of the employment of female labour, but were devised to deprive the Chinese, whether naturalized or not, of the ordinary rights of the inhabitants of Saskatchewan. The right to employ, the right to be employed, the right to own property and to own, manage or conduct any business without being subjected to unequal and discriminatory restrictions, are just as truly ordinary rights of the inhabitants of Saskatchewan as the right to work.