11.07.2015 Views

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Part 8. Analysis <strong>of</strong> Historical Evidence as it Relates to the Parties' Interests 127Q. But in any event, their understanding is that …regardless <strong>of</strong> where these individuals actually comefrom, [they] are being sent by the government in Ottawa, correct -- as a practical matter theyunderstand that?A. I think they understand that the Queen's councillors that the governor is alluding to are in Ottawa.[Emphasis added.][605] Although he maintained on December 3, 2010 that the Ojibway believed they weretreating with the Queen through her representatives, Von Gernet conceded that by the end <strong>of</strong> thenegotiations, the Ojibway understood that the "Council" to which Morris referred was at Ottawa,that the Queen's Councillors were in Ottawa and that they would be dealing "on anadministrative level with the Government, not in England but in Ottawa." [Von Gernet's crossexamination<strong>of</strong> December 3, 2010.] He noted that Morris clarified any uncertainty that may haveexisted before the 1873 negotiations:A: … They would have understood that there was some kind <strong>of</strong> Queen's council in Ottawa whicheffectively was a government that was homologous to one <strong>of</strong> their own councils …the homologybetween the two, was only clarified by Morris in 1873. Prior to that I'm not certain how much theyreally understood. …[606] From that answer I concluded that Von Gernet agreed with Lovisek that after Morrisreferred to the Council that Governs a Great Dominion, the Ojibway understood the Queen'sgovernment they would be dealing with was the Government at Ottawa.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)[607] Chartrand did not initially agree that the Ojibway were relying on the Queen'sGovernment at Ottawa.[608] Counsel for the Plaintiffs read the following passage from the discovery <strong>of</strong> Chartrand intothe trial record:And so the question as to the identity <strong>of</strong> the government … I agree that they know there is agovernment operative in Canada, for example, the government that is building the Dawson Road, asit is variously called, and they make an allusion, at least once, anyway, in the record <strong>of</strong> oralnegotiations taken by the shorthand reporter to, again, a request for " the government," statedgenerically as such, to provide wood to assist in building houses.(Plaintiffs' Read-ins, Ex. 33, Tab 6, May 8, 2009, p. 364, Question 1337)[609] On October 1, Dawson referring to early treaty negotiations, said, "We made <strong>of</strong>fers asinstructed by the Government in good faith." Chartrand conceded in cross-examination (January21, 2010 at p 77) that it is very possible that at the early meetings, Dawson explained the nature<strong>of</strong> his authority to oversee construction and may have made reference to the Government <strong>of</strong>Canada/Council at Ottawa.[610] Chartrand's report (Ex. 60) contains the following at pp. 127-9:Between 1868 and 1870, Simon Dawson was employed by the Dominion Government, as a civilengineer in the Department <strong>of</strong> Public Works, in charge <strong>of</strong> overseeing construction <strong>of</strong> the section <strong>of</strong>the immigrant travel route from Fort William to the Northwest Angle <strong>of</strong> the Lake <strong>of</strong> the Woods. TheOjibway interacted with him at council meetings in which he explained the nature and progress <strong>of</strong> theconstruction work, sought to obtain their consent for the work to progress and inquired as to theirterms for compensation in regards to the construction <strong>of</strong> the route.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!