Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Part 8. Analysis of Historical Evidence as it Relates to the Parties' Interests 129Canada. Statements attributed to Ojibway spokespersons identify the Dominion governmentgenerically as "the government."[617] In his "corrections" issued after Spies J. referred to that answer in her reasons dated May23, 2006 and in his cross-examination at trial, Chartrand resiled from those answers.[618] Despite his earlier answer on December 2, 2005 that the Ojibway understood they weredealing with individuals who belonged to a central government that was established at a placecalled Ottawa, Chartrand refused in cross-examination on January 26, 2010 to concede theOjibway knew the Treaty was with the Government at Ottawa, at pp 106-114:Q. Okay. And so now it is your evidence that we cannot, in fact, put all of these pieces together tosay that they did understand that they were dealing with a government …-- at Ottawa?A. That the treaty was with that government, no. That's an opinion --Q. That's not -- okay. That's not the question. Because the question is who were they dealing with.That's the answer you gave. You made a very clear distinction in your answer between the treatybeing with the Queen but them knowing they were dealing with officials from the Government ofCanada? …A. Because that account, in my answer, suggested something that, in 2005, in not quite the rightwords I was trying to express, that I could express more clearly through the benefit of subsequentwriting, that there is no evidence indicating that the Ojibway understood that they were dealing with afederal government in the Euro-Canadian sense of federal government.…Q. My question, though, is, are you saying that the Ojibway could not understand the concept thatthey were dealing with a government in Ottawa, or a government in Canada, unless they alsounderstood that there were provincial governments?A. No. What I'm indicating is that to the best of my knowledge, their concept of this governmentwas a generic entity and that what we don't have in the historical records is … any clear indication atall that the Ojibway understood that the government at Ottawa might be distinct from any other Euro-Canadian government bodies.In fact, my opinion since then has evolved somewhat to the extent that it is not at all clear to me thatthe Ojibway understood that there were distinct Euro-Canadian government bodies operative inCanada.Q. But the thing is, my questions haven't been asked to ask if you can agree that they understoodthere were distinct governments. What I'm getting at is is they understood that there was agovernment. They may have thought it was a unitary government, but they understood there was agovernment at Ottawa that they were dealing with?A. They understood that this government at Ottawa, as Alexander Morris referred to on fouroccasions, would have a role to play in the administration of treaty promises that Alexander Morriswas making as coming from the Queen, and having the power to offer those promises under authorityof the Queen.Q. And I think you'll agree with me, then, that they certainly were not led to believe that any othergovernment would have a role in administering the promises?A. I believe that I addressed that question in 2005, although I'd be hard-pressed to find the page. Inmy opinion, that question is not even an ethnohistorical question because we have no evidence thatthe issue was ever raised.…Q. So if somebody were to say, look, they were -- they understood that, you know, the governmentof Ontario could interfere with their treaty rights, the answer would be, no one even explained thegovernment of Ontario to them?A. Which is the basis on which I say that the issue is not even an ethnohistorical issue as best I candetermine. It was simply not addressed.…2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)