In developing the Bird Commission, its commissioner, Henry I. Bird, and other officials eventually chose to compensate Japanese Canadians for the forced sale of their property below free market value using property categories and set percentages. They developed strict formulas for each category that should have been easy to follow when reimbursing claimants. However, this was not the case. Commission officials failed to follow the procedures that they had developed when awarding compensation to Japanese Canadians. Claimants could collect awards that were below or above the amounts that the commission’s procedure predicted. This thesis aims to understand the reasons why Bird Commission officials failed to follow the formulas that they had developed when compensating Japanese Canadians for the dispossession of their property through an examination of the Bird Commission Casefiles and Custodian Casefiles. Using information gathered from these government records, this analysis employs statistical analysis to explain the factors which influenced commission officials to alter awards. Considering the historical context of the commission, this analysis also offers explanations for why the factors uncovered using regression analysis may have impacted the commission and its outcomes. Recognizing the deviations in the Bird Commission’s compensation offers new insights into the commission’s operations and impacts on Japanese Canadians. It highlights a close relationship between the commission and officials from the Office of the Custodian of Enemy Property, and it participates with the work of other scholars in acknowledging the efforts that Japanese Canadians made in making the Canadian government confront the injustices it had conducted against them. / Graduate