People's Party () was a political party in the Kingdom of Dalmatia.Branka Magaš. Croatia through history: the making of a European state. Saqi, 2007. P. 387.Mikulas Teich, Roy Porter. The National Question in Europe in Historical Context, p.282. It was founded in 1861 after the failure of Bach's absolutism, as a branch of the People's Party in Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. Its members were known as narodnjaci, aneksionisti or puntari.

Its political goal was uniting Dalmatia with Croatia and Slavonia, stemming from their ideological origins in the Illyrian movement. It also gathered prominent Dalmatian Italians as well as Dalmatian Serbs. However, a Serb faction splintered in 1878, led by Stjepan Mitrov Ljubiša, into the Serb People's Party. From 1887 People's Party was renamed People's Croatian Party (), as a result of an internal compromise between the conservative majority led by Miho Klaić and a radical minority led by Mihovil Pavlinović and Juraj Biankini.

It united with the Party of Rights in 1905 into the "Croatian Party".

Notable members

Gajo Bulat
Miho Klaić
Lovro Monti
Vid Morpurgo
Natko Nodilo
Mihovil Pavlinović
Lujo Bakotić
Jovan Sundečić
Konstantin Vojnović
Stefan Mitrov Ljubiša

Diet of Dalmatia elections

1861: 29/41
1864: 9/41
1867: 15/41
1870: 26/41
1876: 30/41
1883: 26/41
1889: 26/41
1895: 23/41
1901: 18/41

References

Category:Political parties established in 1861
Category:Political parties disestablished in 1905
Category:Political parties in Austria-Hungary
Category:Defunct political parties in Croatia
Category:Kingdom of Dalmatia
Category:1861 establishments in the Austrian Empire

However , a Serb faction splintered in 1878 , led by Stjepan Mitrov Ljubiša , into the Serb People 's Party .

From 1887 People 's Party was renamed People 's Croatian Party ( ) , as a result of an internal compromise between the conservative majority led by Miho Klaić and a radical minority led by Mihovil Pavlinović and Juraj Biankini .

Izvorni znanstveni članak
Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration
Iva Milovan
; Odsjek za povijest Sveučilišta u Puli, Pula, Hrvatska
Nevio Šetić ; Odsjek za povijest Sveučilišta u Puli, Pula, Hrvatska
Puni tekst: hrvatski pdf 224 Kb
str. 227-258
preuzimanja: 643
citiraj
APA 6th Edition
Milovan, I. i Šetić, N. (2008). Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration. Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku, (46), 257-258. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411
MLA 8th Edition
Milovan, Iva i Nevio Šetić. "Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration." Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku, vol. , br. 46, 2008, str. 257-258. https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411. Citirano 20.04.2022.
Chicago 17th Edition
Milovan, Iva i Nevio Šetić. "Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration." Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku , br. 46 (2008): 257-258. https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411
Harvard
Milovan, I., i Šetić, N. (2008). 'Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration', Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku, (46), str. 257-258. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411 (Datum pristupa: 20.04.2022.)
Vancouver
Milovan I, Šetić N. Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration. Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku [Internet]. 2008 [pristupljeno 20.04.2022.];(46):257-258. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411
IEEE
I. Milovan i N. Šetić, "Two General Croatian Meetings in 1890 and 1893 and Their Significance for the National Integration", Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti u Dubrovniku, vol., br. 46, str. 257-258, 2008. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411. [Citirano: 20.04.2022.]
On the basis of the 1867 Austro-Hungarian agreement, Croatian lands (Croatia, Slavonia, Istria and Dalmatia) were to remain administratively separated within the Habsburg Monarchy until 1918, giving way to a number of political processes advocating the idea of national integration. Political initiative manifested in the organisation of general meetings of Croatians from all their lands, industrial exhibitions in Zagreb (1864, 1891), symposia of Croatian teachers (1871, 1874, 1878), a gathering occasioning the opening of the new University in Zagreb in 1874, etc.
Considering their exceptionally high attendance and far-reaching implications, two conferences have drawn the authors’ particular attention. The first was held in Makarska in 1890, occasioning the erection of the monument to the writer Andrija Kačić Miošić (1704-1760), credited for the promotion of Croatian language and national identity. The other meeting was held in Dubrovnik in 1893, also occasioning the erection of a monument to the Dubrovnik-born poet Ivan Gundulić (1589-1638). Among the participants were the members of the parliament, mayors and municipal administrators, men of letters, eminent scholars, journalists, businessmen, teachers and professors, cultural exponents, including visitors from the remote corners of Croatian lands and from all social strata. The authors highlight Croatian political conditions of the time with emphasis on Makarska and Dubrovnik, examine the preparations and programs of these conferences as well as their reception in the press. They also point to the elements which demonstrate the emotional and political unity of the Croatians, and which further contributed to the process of national integration.
Dubrovnik, Makarska, national integration
28411
https://hrcak.srce.hr/28411
hrvatski
Posjeta: 1.392 *

Question: what was the people's party renamed in 1887

Answer: People's Croatian Party

Question: when did a serb faction splintered into the serb people's party

Answer: 1878

Question: when was people's party renamed people's croatian party

Answer: 1887

Question: who led a serb faction in 1878

Answer: Stjepan Mitrov Ljubiša

Question: who led the conservative majority in 1887

Answer: Miho Klaić

Question: what was the name of the serb faction that splintered in 1878

Answer: Serb People's Party

Question: what ethnicity was stjepan mitrov ljubiša

Answer: Serb


The Chinese Immigration Act, 1923, known today as the Chinese Exclusion Act (the duration of which has been dubbed the Exclusion Era), was an act passed by the Parliament of Canada, banning most forms of Chinese immigration to Canada. Immigration from most countries was controlled or restricted in some way, but only the Chinese were so completely prohibited from immigrating.

History
Before 1923, Chinese immigration was heavily controlled by the Chinese Immigration Act of 1885, which imposed an onerous head tax on all immigrants from China.

After various members of the federal and some provincial governments (especially British Columbia) put pressure on the federal government to discourage Chinese immigration, the Chinese Immigration Act was passed. It went into effect on 1 July 1923. The Act banned Chinese immigrants from entering Canada except those under the following titles:

 Diplomat
 Foreign student
 "Special circumstance" granted by the Minister of Immigration under Article 9 of the Act (This is the class that former Governor General Adrienne Clarkson's family fell under.)
 Merchant

The Act did not only apply to Chinese from China, but to ethnic Chinese with British nationality as well. Since Dominion Day coincided with the enforcement of the Chinese Immigration Act, Chinese-Canadians at the time referred to the anniversary of Confederation as "Humiliation Day" and refused to take any part in the celebration.

Because Canada became a signatory following World War II of the United Nations' Charter of Human Rights, with which the Chinese Immigration Act was evidently inconsistent, the Canadian Parliament repealed the act on 14 May 1947 (following the proclamation of the Canadian Citizenship Act 1946 on 1 January 1947). However, independent Chinese immigration to Canada came only after the liberalization of Canadian immigration policy under the governments of John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson, first by the elimination of restrictions based on nation origins in 1962, followed by the establishment of the world's first points-based immigration system in 1967.

Redress and legacy
On 22 June 2006, then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper apologized in the House of Commons. The first phrase of the apology was spoken in Cantonese Chinese, the most frequently spoken Chinese language among Chinese immigrants. He announced that the survivors or their spouses will be paid approximately  () in compensation for the head tax.

On 15 May 2014, then-Premier of British Columbia Christy Clark apologized in the Legislative Assembly. The apology motion was unanimously passed and aims to make amends for historic wrongs. Unlike the federal apology, no individual compensation was provided. However,  was promised to be put into a legacy fund which would help legacy initiatives. The formal apology went through a three-month consultation period with various parties to help ensure that the apology was done properly.

On 22 April 2018, then-Mayor of Vancouver, British Columbia Gregor Robertson issued a formal public apology.

The Act and its legacy have been the subject of at least three documentary films:

 Lost Years: A People's Struggle for Justice (2011) by Kenda Gee and Tom Radford
 In the Shadow of Gold Mountain (2004) by Karen Cho;Cho, Karen, writer/director. 2004. In the Shadow of Gold Mountain (documentary film). CA: National Film Board of Canada.

It has also been the subject of works of historical fiction:
 The Red Tiger (2019) by Chuck Lim

See also
 Chinese Exclusion Act (United States)
 Chinese Immigration Act of 1885
 Head tax (Canada)
 Immigration to Canada
 White Australia policy
 New Zealand head tax

References

External links

Category:1923 in Canadian law
Category:1923 in international relations
Category:Anti-Chinese activities in Canada
Category:Anti-Chinese legislation
Category:Canadian federal legislation
Category:Canadian immigration law
Category:History of Chinese Canadians
Category:History of immigration to Canada
Category:History of Vancouver
Category:Immigration legislation
Category:Legal history of Canada
Category:Racism in Canada
Category:Repealed Canadian legislation
Category:Chinese-Canadian culture in Vancouver

The Chinese Immigration Act , 1923 , known today as the Chinese Exclusion Act ( the duration of which has been dubbed the Exclusion Era ) , was an act passed by the Parliament of Canada , banning most forms of Chinese immigration to Canada .

Immigration from most countries was controlled or restricted in some way , but only the Chinese were so completely prohibited from immigrating .

No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
The Civil War in the United States was a sobering object lesson to the fathers of Canadian federation. In drafting the British North America Act of 1867, they sought to forestall the development of those problems which the experience of their neighbor to the south had shown to be incidental to the federal system of government. The division of powers between central and local governments has been the rock on which most federations, sooner or later, have foundered, and Canadians sought to escape a similar fate by three different political devices.
1 British North America Act, sec. 91, par. 2.
2 Ibid., sec. 91, par. 2.
3 Ibid., sec. 65.
4 Ibid., sec. 91.
5 British North America Act, sec. 92.
6 Ibid., sec. 92, par. 13.
7 Ibid., sec. 92, par. 16.
8 On this point of constitutional law, see Clement, , Canadian Constitution (3d ed.), pp. 452–453Google Scholar.
9 B. N. A. Act, sec. 95.
10 Clement, op. cit., p. 453.
11 B. N. A. Act, sec. 95.
12 Canadian Annual Review, 1923, p. 47Google Scholar.
13 Union Colliery Company v. Bryden (1899), A.C. 580.
14 R. v. Mee Wah, 3 B.C. 403.
15 Keith, A. B., Responsible Government in the Dominions (1912), Vol. II, p. 1075Google Scholar.
16 Tamey Homma's Case (1903), A.C. 151.
17 Revised Statutes, 1923, Chap. 38, sec. 5.
18 Acts of B.C., 1925, c. 32.
19 Field v. International Lumber Company, 1928, S.C.R. 564.
20 Lefroy, A. H., Leading Cases in Canadian Constitutional Law, p. 46Google Scholar.
21 Sec. 132.
22 Attorney-General of B.C. v. Attorney-General of Canada, 1923, 4 D.L.R. 698.
23 Revised Statutes of Canada, 1913, Chap. 27.
24 Queen v. Robertson, 3 M.R. 613.
25 King v. Stuart, 1925, 1 D.L.R. 12. This treaty created a similar problem in federal relations in the United States, which was decided likewise in favor of the central government in the case of Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416.
26 1925 S.C.R. 505.
27 See “The Provinces and the Supremacy of the Treaty-Making Power,” Queen's Quarterly, Aug., 1930, p. 543Google Scholar.
28 As a result of the provincial attitude, Premier King, at an informal conference with representatives of Quebec and Ontario, agreed that any development of the St. Lawrence which infringed upon the property rights of the provinces could be made the subject of special agreement in each case. Canadian Annual Review, 1929–1930, p. 105Google Scholar.
29 These resolutions are included in the Statute of Westminster as Section 7:
(1) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to apply to the repeal, amendment, or alteration of the British North America Acts, 1867–1930, or any order, rule, or regulation made thereunder.
(2) The provisions of section two of this Act shall extend to laws made by any of the provinces of Canada and to the powers of the legislatures of such provinces.
(3) The powers conferred by this Act upon the parliament of Canada or upon the legislatures of the provinces shall be restricted to the enactment of laws in relation to matters within the competence of the parliament of Canada or of any of the legislatures of the provinces respectively.
30 Canadian Annual Review, 1930–1931, p. 79Google Scholar.
31 Attorney-General of Canada v. Attorney-General of Ontario, 1930, S.C.R. 663.
32 1913 W.N. 225. See Fortnightly Law Journal, Dec. 1, 1931, p. 103Google Scholar.
33 On this point of constitutional law, Professor Munro says: “The doctrine of ‘all-residuary power in the Dominion’ received a rude jolt a few years ago when the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Toronto Hydro-Electric Case was handed down (Toronto Hydro-Electric Commission v. Snider et al. [1925] A.C. 412). The decision clearly intimates that the so-termed general residuary legislative power of the Dominion parliament to ‘make laws for the peace, order, and good government of Canada’ is restricted to cases arising out of some extraordinary peril to the national life, where the required legislation is of a character which obviously transcends provincial competence, and that under normal conditions, the residuum belongs to the field of ‘property and civil rights’ which is vested in the provinces.” American Influences on Canadian Government, p. 28.
34 1931, S.C.R. 541.
35 While the question of the legal power to regulate radio remained uncertain, radio development in Canada was virtually at a standstill. The government would announce no policy until the legal issue was settled, nor would it permit private companies to enlarge their activities until some policy could be formulated.
No CrossRef data available.

Question: who passed the chinese exclusion act 1923

Answer: Parliament of Canada

Question: when was the chinese exclusion act passed

Answer: 1923

Question: what was the chinese immigration act, 1923 known as

Answer: Chinese Exclusion Act

Question: who was completely banned from immigrating to canada

Answer: the Chinese

Question: what was the duration of the chinese exclusion act called

Answer: the Exclusion Era

Question: what act banned chinese immigration to canada

Answer: The Chinese Immigration Act, 1923

On 22 April 2018 , then - Mayor of Vancouver , British Columbia Gregor Robertson issued a formal public apology .

City of Vancouver formally apologizes to Chinese community for past discrimination
Chinese residents were denied right to own property, choose where to live in Vancouver
The City of Vancouver formally apologized to Chinese Canadians on Sunday for past legislation, regulations and policies that discriminated against them.
"This is an important day for council and all Vancouverites to come together and recognize historical wrongdoings committed against Chinese people and to build a better future together," said Mayor Gregor Robertson in a written statement.
An audience of 500 people witnessed the ceremony at the Chinese Cultural Centre, which was also broadcast on a screen along Keefer Street in the city's Chinatown.
Robertson said the formal apology reaffirms Vancouver as a city "in which diverse communities can share and learn from the past, collectively address current challenges and plan for a better future for all."
The apology was read in English, Cantonese and Sze Yup dialect.
'Stigmatized and dehumanized'
"I rise today to recognize and repudiate such acts that stigmatized and dehumanized the Chinese-Canadian community of Vancouver," Robertson read from the apology, which addresses policies in the city from 1886 to 1949.
"I rise today to formally apologize to the Chinese community of Vancouver and to all Canadians of Chinese ancestry for ... discriminatory legislation."
'I rise today to acknowledge and address a dark and difficult period in our past.'
Vancouver Chinese community members — such as war veteran George Ing, youth Melody P. Choi and Chinese Benevolent Association president Hilbert Yiu — welcomed the apology.
"While it's the right thing to do, it is also a very courageous step," said Ing about the apology.
Yiu said the gesture would help Vancouver overcome its past to welcome and embrace all newcomers to the city.
The formal apology was devised by an advisory group of Chinese and non-Chinese experts and community leaders, which included retired judges, former city councillors, community elders, historians and veterans.
B.C. Premier John Horgan said the apology was "necessary and important."
"We must recognize, remember and condemn the historic discrimination which so many members of the Chinese community endured," Horgan said in a statement.
Historical wrongs addressed by the apology include Chinese residents being denied basic human rights, the right to own property and to choose which neighbourhood they wanted to live in.
They were also denied the right to vote and made to pay a head tax. From 1885 to 1923, it's estimated that 82,000 people from China were required to pay up to two years worth of wages to gain entry to Canada.
"Families were broken apart by the head tax," said Horgan.
'Make sure these wrongs are never repeated'
Chinese immigrants were also denied the right to vote and to hold public office. They were restricted to working in dangerous and undesirable jobs and they couldn't freely pursue an education, according to the provincial government.
In 2014, B.C. apologized for 160 wrong and discriminatory policies and laws that targeted the Chinese community.
Since then, the province has recognized the role the Chinese community has played in the history of B.C.
"Together with the City of Vancouver, we recognize the historic wrongs suffered by the Chinese community, and commit to working every day to stop racism and discrimination, so we can make sure these wrongs are never repeated," said Horgan.
The apology was made on the same day that Vancouver held a Chinatown cultural day, which showcased Chinese culture through food tasting, games, crafts, dancing, music, tours and other ceremonies.

Question: who is the mayor of vancouver bc

Answer: Gregor Robertson

Question: when did the mayor of vancouver apologize

Answer: 22 April 2018

Question: in what canadian province is gregor robertson mayor

Answer: British Columbia

Question: what year did the mayor of vancouver apologize

Answer: 2018

Question: what did the mayor of vancouver do in response to the allegations

Answer: a formal public apology

Question: what city was gregor roberts mayor of in 2018

Answer: Vancouver

Question: what did gregor roberts do to the mayor of vancouver

Answer: public apology

Question: how many times has the president of the united kingdom been elected

Answer: 22

Lost Years : A People 's Struggle for Justice ( 2011 ) by Kenda Gee and Tom Radford In the Shadow of Gold Mountain ( 2004 ) by Karen Cho;Cho , Karen , writer / director .

Filmmaker Karen Cho travels from Montreal to Vancouver to uncover stories from the last survivors of the Chinese Head Tax and Exclusion Act, a set of laws imposed to single out the Chinese as unwanted immigrants to Canada from 1885 to 1947. Through a combination of history, poetry and raw emotion, this documentary sheds light on an era that shaped the identity of generations.
Pedagogical evaluations and study guides are only available to CAMPUS subscribers.
Features designed specifically for teachers. Learn more
Already subscribed? Sign in
In the Shadow of Gold Mountain, Karen Cho, provided by the National Film Board of Canada
This documentary short is very dated now. In 2006, the Chinese community in Canada received redress as they ought to (in my opinion). And there have been some excellent feature films and tv shows that have been done to showcase the Chinese Canadian history and the political movement that succeeded in the end. Just do a search online. Because as someone born in Canada, I was very unaware and thankful all these works have helped shed light on a subject I bet many Canadians did not know.Samantha Beck, 30 Apr 2021
This is an important film. I'm ashamed of the way Canada treated hard working, dedicated people who gave so much build this country.Maestrous, 4 Feb 2012
200,000 dollars refund for the Head tax is not enough......buying a car cost more than that!!....machoboy95, 18 Jan 2011
Changed???you kiddingmachoboy95, 16 Jan 2011
I think it was very unfair how they treated the chinese people! At least now it has changed.mrbrownsclass, 15 Apr 2010
we feel sorry for the people who had to live throught this. Even though Canada doesn't have very much money to spare, the chinese deserve their money back for the torture they had to go through.mrbrownsclass, 13 Apr 2010
Show all comments

Question: when did the movie lost years come out

Answer: 2004

Question: who wrote the book in the shadow of gold mountain

Answer: Karen Cho

Question: when was lost years: a people's struggle for justice released

Answer: 2011

Question: when was the movie in the shadow of gold mountain made

Answer: 2004

Question: what is the title of the 2011 book by kenda gee and tom radford

Answer: Lost Years: A People's Struggle for Justice

Question: who wrote the book lost years: a people's struggle for justice

Answer: Kenda Gee and Tom Radford

It has also been the subject of works of historical fiction : The Red Tiger ( 2019 ) by Chuck Lim

Past Imperfect
Chuck Lim brings the past to life and secrets to light in ‘The Red Tiger’. Visit 1930s British Columbia — Vancouver’s Chinatown , the blueberry fields of Pitt Meadows, the mountains and forests beyond — in this excerpt from Issue 24, Autumn 2019.
The Red Tiger
by Chuck Lim
On July 1, 1923, Canadian Parliament enacted the Exclusion Act, a law that prohibited entry by any ethnic Chinese into Canada. The law further required anyone born to a Chinese father to register within a year or else be deported. In its wake, Canada’s Chinatowns were left as squalid bachelor communities. Courageous family men who had come from China with the hope of eventually sending for their spouses and children were resigned instead to living out the remainder of their lives sad and alone.
Vancouver: March 1937
Canton Alley was decrepit in winter. All of Pender Street was. The main road through Vancouver’s Chinatown — just over the trolley tracks, though an archway in the heart of an eight-story, pagoda-gabled building — was where rows of rickety wooden buildings stood home to hundreds of bachelor men, crammed by the dozen into single boarding house rooms. They were as dreary as the interminable Vancouver drizzle: the rooms, the buildings, the men.
On the corner of Pender and Carrall streets, across from the Bank of Vancouver and the Peking Chop Suey House, was a two-story brick building with cracked plaster cornices. Saplings grew in the mossy undergrowth of the corduroys on the red pantile roof. A neon sign hung above the door, trimmed in yellow with red letters: “Jack Fan’s Tai Shan Emporium.” Another sign with hand-painted letters was taped in the window: “I Buy Watches.”
Jack sat hunched over a jeweller’s bench in the back room of his shop. The main room was filled with an eclectic assortment of imported goods: furniture, decorative accoutrements, ceramic kitsch hocked to tourists — all items that had once fetched a premium on Pender before the Depression had taken a toll on the import business. He now found himself fixing watches to supplement his modest income. Fan charged his customers a dollar to clean a watch. It would take him about an hour, but he’d say it took three so he could charge a little more.
Fan held a loupe between his cheek and brow, and a pair of forceps between his thumb and forefinger. He kept watch guts in a white ashtray beside a dish of benzene. Every so often, Fan took a long lungful of the stuff. Intoxicated by the aromatic vapours, he’d gaze across to the bank, then down Carrall Street along the harbour to the dim and distant mountains. In this light delirium, he’d think of his son, Kim-fei.
As he replaced a balance cock, he heard someone enter his shop. Footsteps crossed the floorboards and stopped at the front counter. Fan cleared his throat loudly while eyeing the stock of the shotgun he kept under his workbench. He placed the balance cock in the ashtray, laid down his forceps, dropped the loupe into his cupped hand, and made sure his workspace was in order before stepping out into the shop. He paused in the doorway as he caught sight of the man at the counter. It was strange: what gave Fan such pause?
The stranger wore hand-sewn canvas pants and a tweed suit vest over a dirty, white button-down shirt. The man’s long and thinning hair was tied behind his head in a tight bun. Though his features were coarse, there was something youthful underlying that coarseness, his face lined beyond its years. Fan thought he had seen him before — perhaps in the Alexander, or passing by the window on Pender. It was clear the man needed money. Best to approach him with politeness, he thought; the shotgun was under the workbench if he needed it.
Fan greeted the stranger in Mandarin. The man replied in Cantonese, nervously, choking to find the right words. He explained that he was out of work, but felt fortunate to be in Vancouver. He said his name was Red Tiger.
To find out what happens next, pick up your copy of Issue 24, Autumn 2019!
Chuck Lim lives in New York. He enjoys history, the outdoors, and restoring old Fords.

Question: what is the name of chuck limerick's 2019 novel about the tiger

Answer: The Red Tiger

Question: when is the red tiger coming out

Answer: 2019

Question: who wrote the book the red tiger

Answer: Chuck Lim

Question: what genre of literature has the red tiger been a subject of

Answer: historical fiction

Question: what is the name of chuck limerick's 2019 novel about a tiger

Answer: Red Tiger

Question: the red tiger has been the subject of what type of books

Answer: works of historical fiction

Question: what type of fiction is the red tiger

Answer: historical