Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Part 11. Post-Treaty Events 211willingness to stand up for Treaty 3 Rights and on its waning attendance to them as time passed.What had been federal priorities/"burning issues" in 1873 were becoming less pressing after theCPR had been built and the Dawson Route had fallen into disuse.[1098] Muirhead's article contains the following:At p. 12Clearly the federal government recognized its treaty obligations in the early 1890s. … Even moresurprising was Ottawa's willingness to appoint special fisheries officers to enforce its regulations infavour of the Indians and against white fishermen. Unfortunately for the Natives, this federaldetermination to observe its responsibilities under Treaty 3 was short-lived.…By 1892 a number of factors served to cause a change in government policy. The death of PrimeMinister Macdonald removed a defender of Treaty 3 prerogatives from the federal scene…That year Concession 5 of the Lake of the Woods was opened to gill and pound nets.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)At p. 15:Perhaps it was more than symbolic that the Deputy Superintendent of Indian Affairs for 18 years wasforced out of office … in 1892. Further, the Department underwent a debilitating reorganization.[1099] Chartrand was cross-examined on January 25, 2010 on the Muirhead article:Q. … Professor Muirhead … goes on to discuss how the Department of Indian Affairs becamemarginalized, once, I suggest to you, effectively the Indians' right issues could no longer be used toadvance other federal agendas.A. Yes, that's correct. He makes the point.Q. …I'm going to suggest to you that's a point that does have support in the overall factual matrix;isn't that fair?A. Yes, I agree that there's some support for the position. ...Q. ...Professor Muirhead's conclusion, in the paper that you've cited from, that ultimately the "Indianrights as negotiated under treaty were ignored as governments pushed ahead with …other agendas?"…A. Oh, yes, he actually uses the term [ignored.] I consider it a bit strong, because we do have someevidence that the federal government made attempts to protect treaty rights and look after the welfare,the well-being, of Aboriginal peoples. But -- so I think where I would diverge from ProfessorMuirhead is simply in terms of the strength of the language that he uses.… In my opinion, I'd say thatthe interests were simply not recognized and pressed, pressed forth, very strongly, but to say that theywere simply omitted altogether is a bit strong, because we do see efforts being made.At pp 13-14:Q. And then Professor Muirhead's opinion, starting at the bottom of … page 12…:Unfortunately for the Natives, however, this federal determination to observe itsresponsibilities under Treaty 3 was short-lived. Instead, the government became moreconcerned over the rising costs of Indian administration.Now, that's an observation by Professor Muirhead.A. Yes.Q. And won't you agree with me that there's some basis in what we see of governments' conductpost-Treaty to support this?A. Yes.[1100] I have found that in 1873, Morris intended and I have referred to his correspondenceunderlining how important it was for Canada to keep its promises.