Treaties

Around the turn of the twentieth century Metis inhabitants of the present day Treaty 10 area began requesting scrip to be issued in the region, in recognition of their Aboriginal land rights - just as it had in other regions such as Manitoba. This led the Department of Indian Affairs to estimate the cost of settling both Metis and First Nations land claims in the region.

In 1915 the government began regulating the amount of fish that could be consumed by Aboriginal peoples. In 1917, special regulations for Saskatchewan limited the amount of fish that could be caught yearly by Aboriginal groups. An addition to this ordinance was made in 1920, which stated that during closed fishing seasons, Aboriginal peoples could only catch as much fish as they were able to consume in one day. This law did not allow the preservation of fish through curing or hanging for winter consumption.

Indian Agent Thomas Borthwick traveled to the Treaty 10 area in 1907 to gain additional adhesions to the treaty. William Apasis outlined to Borthwick that he was fearful the government was attempting to undermine their ability to fish and hunt. He indicated that if these practices were disrupted they would starve. Borthwick assured him they would not be impeded from fishing or hunting. However, in the following years greater game restrictions would be initiated in the North that put stressors on Indigenous peoples who relied on game and fishing.

In 1907 Thomas A. Borthwick traveled to the Treaty 10 area to attain additional signatories to the agreement as well as make annuity payments. When he met the Canoe Lake community, Chief John Iron outlined many grievances about the treaty making process and the treaty’s implementation. He complained that he did not receive enough time to present his views regarding the treaty to J.A.J. McKenna the previous year. He indicated their concerns about fishing and hunting rights. Lastly, he outlined that they received less in supplies and annuities than they had been given by McKenna. Records indicate that Borthwick did not take any of his concerns seriously. These grievances continued to be a source of tension between the Canoe Lake Nation (along with many other northern communities) and the government in the subsequent years.

A letter from a Department of Indian Affairs (DIA) official demonstrates that the potential for an adhesion to Treaty 8 or the creation of a new Treaty was being discussed for Aboriginal land owners in Northern Saskatchewan as early as 1883. In this letter, the Aboriginals in the area of Ile-a-la-Crosse and others north of Treaty 6 are recorded as being anxious to enter a treaty agreement. It was recognized by the official writing the 1883 letter that any plans of the government to extend the railway or another public work into the area could be prevented by the area’s Aboriginal inhabitants.------------------------------ A DIA memorandum from January 19th, 1887 demonstrates that the Aboriginals north of the Treaty 6 area were still requesting to enter treaty, and that a number of them were sick and destitute. The tribal groups in this area consisted of the Beaver, Slaves, Yellow Knives, Cariboo Eaters, Dog Ribs, Chippewayans, Cree and Metis. There was a scarcity of food the winter prior in this area due to a lack of wildlife such as rabbit and lynx. Hudson’s Bay Company representatives argued that it was the government’s responsibility to provide for the sick and destitute individuals in this area, since they had purchased the Company’s interest in that region. As such, the government was perceived to be the natural protector. Since the government still didn’t need the land for settlement, railways, or resource exploration in the area, however, they continued to postpone treaty negotiation with the respective individuals. Most of the area of northern Saskatchewan was unsuitable for agriculture, with the exception of the Peace River district. The same memorandum states that occasionally the Aboriginals in the area had been given gifts of fishing supplies and ammunition, but nothing more.------------------------------ By 1904, there was still intra-governmental discussion as to whether the federal government should treat with the Aboriginals in this area or not. A memorandum from 1904 demonstrates this: “The Department has for some time had under consideration the advisability of admitting to Treaty No. 8 the Indians of Portage la Loche and Isle a la Crosse. Not long after this treaty was made, the Department began to be urged to admit these Indians. The half-breed claims within the district were also brought up, but action upon these cognate matters has remained in abeyance until the present.” Discussion centred on the financial burden that would be incurred by the government should they enter into a treaty agreement with the Aboriginal groups in this area. The memoranda remarked as such: “I think we should be careful not to burden the Dominion with any extensive charges for the purchase of the Indian title to this country. We may be reasonably sure that it is not an agricultural country whatever its capacities may be, and that to give a quid pro quo on the same basis as for a country with great agricultural possibilities would be a mistake.” A letter from the Department’s accountant shows that up until May 5th, 1904, all that had been spent on the Aboriginals in the Portage la Loche and Ile-a-la-Crosse areas respectively was $76.52 and $287.12. The maintenance of a boarding school at Ile-a-la-Crosse amounted to an additional expenditure of $72 per year. (The researcher advises that these figures are in dollar amounts from 1904 - no adjustment for inflation has been made.)------------------------------- The 1904 memoranda also noted that in light of the lack of agricultural land available for settlement in the area, it would be more advantageous to the government to model the terms of a potential treaty on the terms that were provided in Treaty 9. Given the familiarity of the Aboriginal people in the area with the penny-pinching terms of treaty 9, however, it is doubtful that they would have considered these terms acceptable, and thus the terms of treaty 8 were used as a guide, albeit edited to omit provisions that related to agricultural assistance.------------------------------ On July 20, 1906, Superintendent General of Indian Affairs Frank Oliver set up the Treaty 10 Commission via an order of the Privy Council. J.A.J. McKenna, the appointed Commissioner for the treaty, was not able to conclude negotiations with all First Nations in the Treaty 10 region in 1906, so Thomas A. Borthwick was employed to finish the job in the summer of 1907. In a report dating to January 18, 1907, the official notes with respect to the actual negotiations that had occurred the summer past that “There was a marked absence of the old Indian style of oratory, the Indians confining themselves to asking questions and making brief arguments. They all demanded even more liberal terms than were granted to Indians treated with in past years, the Chief of the English River Bend going so far as to claim payment of “arrears” from the year when the first Treaty was made; some expected to be entirely fed by the Government, after the making of the treaty; all asked for assistance in seasons of distress; and it was strongly urged that the old and indigent who were no longer able to hunt and trap and were consequently often in destitute circumstances should be cared for by the Government.”------------------------------ Because the government required McKenna to work with a pre-drafted Treaty that could not be altered despite Aboriginal discontent, there was an expressed fear on the part of the Aboriginal leaders that entering into treaty would curtail their hunting and fishing privileges. These leaders did not want lakes or rivers to be monopolized or depleted by commercial fishing operations. There was an additional fear that entering into treaty would allow the government to enslave them, in regards to which the report states “I was able to disabuse their minds of this absurd notion and to make it clear that the Government’s object was simply to do for them what had been done for neighbouring Indians when the progress of trade or settlement began to interfere with the untrammelled exercise of their aboriginal privileges as hunters...I made it clear that the Government had no desire to interfere with their mode of life or to restrict them to reserves and that it undertook to have land in the proportions stated in the Treaty set apart for them…” The report also notes that there was a marked desire to secure education rights for their children, as well as the furnishing of medicines and a resident medical man. He also remarked that there were some Aboriginal people who demanded a few head of cattle for those who wanted to raise stock. ------------------------------ Because the government had informed the Commissioner that the terms of the treaty were fixed and that no negotiations would occur, the official attempted to assuage the fears of the Aboriginal leaders with reassurances such as the following: “I stated that the Government was always ready to assist Indians in actual destitution; that in times of distress they would without any special stipulation in the treaty, receive such assistance as it was usual to give in order to prevent starvation among them, and that the attention of the Government would be called to the necessity of some special-provision being made for assisting the old and indigent who were unable to work and dependent on charity for subsistence.”------------------------------

In 1919 the Department of Indian Affairs released a statement indicating that provincial game regulation laws would pertain to all Indians other than those signatories on Treaty 8. The provincial regulation included the employment of “game guardians” who were meant to discourage subsistence or commercial trapping.

Beginning in the 1870s and 1880s, introduced disease and famine afflicted Northern Indigenous peoples, and fur prices tumbled due to a worldwide depression. As a result, communities sought aid from the Canadian government who had taken over the responsibility from the Hudson’s Bay Company. However, in 1887 Deputy Superintendent of Indian Affairs Lawrence Vankoughnet argued that despite the clear responsibility that the Canadian government had accepted to provide aid through the Rupert’s Land Transfer, life in the North had not been altered by Canadian settlement the and as such remained the responsibility of the HBC.

In 1929 the Canadian Federal Government transferred control of Natural Resources to Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba. This transfer was made under the agreement that Aboriginal peoples could continue to hunt, trap and fish on Crown lands year round. However, between 1929 and 1938 Aboriginal peoples experienced restrictions. Pleas were made to provincial governments to allow destitute Aboriginal peoples to hunt during closed season, however the Department of the Interior was reluctant to provide First Nations peoples with "special treatment", despite the continued right to hunt, fish and trap being guaranteed in Treaty 8.

Between 1897 and 1898 the Canadian government began to realize the urgency of negotiating a treaty north of the Treaty 6 boundary due to abundant resources and growing agitation in the North. A key aspect of the government’s strategy for treaty making—as outlined in a letter from James A. Macrae (Inspector in the Department of Indian Affairs who was named Treaty Commissioner for Treaty 8) to James Andrew Joseph McKenna who also worked to negotiate Treaty 8—was to conclude treaties quickly before southern nations could inform them of the pitfalls or imbue the Northern peoples “with an intention to demand all those things the Crees from the south always claimed [the government] promised.”

After negotiations at Fond du Lac, Aboriginal leaders reluctantly signed onto Treaty 8. Father Breynat (a missionary working at Fond du Lac) indicates that the local Aboriginal population viewed the coming of the Canadian government as unavoidable, and entered into the treaty to attain some benefits before more Euro-Canadians arrived. Chief Maurice Pische (also referred to as Moberly), chief of the Fond du Lac Dene Naiton was present for the negotiations. Similar to earlier numbered treaties, Treaty 8 promised reserves, annuities, funding for school teachers, and a guarantee of hunting, trapping and fishing rights. Treaty 8 negotiations also included verbal promises of medical aid, in that the government would appoint persons to be in charge of free medical service distribution to all who required such service. Throughout the numbered treaty negotiations, First Nations leaders did not speak or write English fluently, thus relying on interpreters and oral agreements during the negotiations. Some of these agreements were not included in the written documents, a pattern replicated in the Treaty 8 negotiations as the government official responsible for recording the treaty did not include verbal promises in the final "legal"/written document. Breynat reported that: "Chief Moberley was the very best hunter of the entire tribe. How many times his gun had saved indigent people who without him would have died of starvation. He was also very conscious of his superiority and his pride would not tolerate any opposition. He feared that the treaty might restrain his freedom. His pride could only despise the yearly five-dollar bait offered to each of his tribes-men in return for the surrender of their rights, until then undisputed,and which, one must admit, rightly so - he held as incontestable. Robillard tried to placate him by explaining this and that -he only made him angrier. Thus the fight!I called for one of the elected councillors, Dzieddin ("The Deaf),known for his good character, his great heart and his good judgement.I explained to him: "If Chief Moberley, a great hunter and a very proud man, can despise and reject the help offered by the government, many old people without any income and many orphans, will appreciate receiving a five dollar annuity along with free powder,bullets, fishnets etc." I added, "Accept and sign the treaty on behalf of all those poor people. Anyway, even all of you together, all the Caribou Eaters, you cannot help it. You may accept the Treaty or not,but in either way the Queen's Government will come, and set up its own organization in your country. The compensation offered by the Government may be quite small, but to refuse it would only deprive the poor people of much-needed help."Dzieddin was convinced by this argument and he signed the treaty. Many Indians had previously always been needy. Now they started to leave the Hudson's Bay store and those of the free traders who had followed the treaty party, looking like wealthy people with supplies of tea, flour, sugar, gunpowder etc. Some families had received as much as $150 or more. The better off people who had sided with Chief Moberley were gradually drawn by the lure of an easy gain and came to receive their allowance One of the Chief's best friends came to me for advice - "So many people have already accepted Treaty. Don't you think it would also be good for me to accept it?"At last Chief Moberley himself came, with two or three of the last objectors. They went back, with happy hearts and a canoe loaded with goods. The first day's quarrel was completely forgotten. Goodold Robillard, the interpreter, was laughing within himself when he shook hands with them in farewell." (Fumoleau, As Long As the Land Shall Last, 81-82.)