Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Part 11. Post-Treaty Events 185us letters in Ottawa, don't come travelling to Ottawa, you know, don't go outside the frameworkwe've created?A: It wasn't started. It was a -- very much a continuation of policy …in force …prior to the treatyagreement when, I believe in 1872, Chief Blackstone attempted to travel to Ottawa, and in the end,Wemyss Simpson ended up taking certain steps to ensure that he never left Prince Arthur's Landing.… [I]f you're asking me … were there directives transmitted down the chain of communication to theOjibway emphasizing that there was a proper chain of communication to be followed, the answer isan unqualified yes.Q: Right. And that included with respect to matters related to hunting and fishing rights off-reserve?A: I would tend to think, and I don't claim to have conducted exhaustive research on every issue thatthe Ojibway were ever faced with, but I would tend to think that chain of communication would havebeen insisted on in regards to any matter of life on reserves or life of the Ojibway.Q: And sorry, it's the on-reserve part that I want to deal with. It's not just on-reserve, it's also withrespect to treaty rights issues, hunting rights issues, fishing rights issues?A: Yes, that's correct."[Emphasis added.][955] Chartrand observed (January 21, 2010 at p. 65) that the Ojibway consistently framed theircomplaints in terms of the relationship. They expected their Treaty partner to address theircomplaints and have due regard for their welfare.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)[956] Dennis reported to Ottawa that the Chiefs had generally taken exception "to the mannerin which they had been treated, so contrary to what they had been led to expect." In a letter datedOctober 1, 1875, he quoted Chief Powawassan and two other chiefs verbatim as follows:We wish to thank the Minister for sending you to see us, not alone because of the result of settlingour reserves but because representing the Minister, you have been able to give us the assurance thateverything will be done for us that …we are entitled to under the Treaty. We hope … nothing wassaid … displeasing to the Government."[957] Lovisek gave evidence on November 18, 2009 at p 71 that at an Indian Council onOctober 3, 1875, Dennis said, "This is the proper way for the Indians to do if they have anycomplaint, and you may depend upon it that when you bring forward complaints in this way, ifthey prove to be well-grounded, the Government will listen to your wants and will remedy allreasonable grievances. You have proffered your complaints in a most courteous way and I shallinform the Minister accordingly."[958] In his Annual Report to Indian Affairs dated October 30, 1875 (Ex. 4, p. 282-283),Provencher, the Indian Commissioner, noted that the previous year, Treaty 3 Indians hadreceived revenue from hunting and fishing exceeding $25,000. They had reserved to themselvesthe right of selecting their Reserves and were making many demands. He proposed that theGovernment educate them on the true meaning of the Treaty. [Emphasis added.][959] 1876. In March 1876 in a speech to the Commons, Sir John A. Macdonald, then theLeader of the Opposition, on the introduction of the Indian Act, said: "The Bill is a veryimportant one. It affects the interest of the Indians who are especially under the guardianship ofthe Crown and of Parliament." [Emphasis added.][960] After Ontario pressed its claim in the Boundary Dispute to lands as far west as the forksof the Saskatchewan River, Prime Minister Mackenzie wrote a letter to Premier Mowat in