Keewatin v. Minister of Natural Resources

Part 7. The 1873 Negotiations 85…I think we should do everything to help you by giving you the means to grow some food so that ifit is a bad year for fishing and hunting, you may have something for your children at home.[Emphasis added.][375] Lovisek's report (Ex. 28) contains the following at pp. 92-94:The next day, October 3, 1873, the parties returned to negotiations. It had now been two days ofnegotiations and the only reference to the taking-up clause was in the opening offer made by Morrison the first day: "It may be a long time before the other land are wanted, and in the meantime youwill be permitted to fish and hunt over them."On what would be the final day of negotiations, Morris offered an increased amount of annuities,agricultural assistance and a perpetual payment of $1500 for ammunition and twine. In offering theperpetual payment of $1500 for ammunition for hunting and twine for fishing, Morris was actuallyoffering less than what the Saulteaux had requested based on Morris' estimation of the cost in the1869 List of Demands. Morris had estimated the cost of the ammunition and twine demanded by theSaulteaux in the 1869 List of Demands and concluded that these costs would comprise a substantialamount of money. According to his calculation, the cost of twine alone, excluding annuity payments,amounted to the second largest expenditure. Morris estimated that powder (ammunition) would cost$1,500 and twine, $13,600 per year. The largest expenditure, excluding annuity payments, was forfood (pork, flour and tea) which Morris estimated at $14,250. The Saulteaux, who did not understandthe relative value of money, were in no position to assess the value of $1500 of ammunition andtwine or what it amounted to. They knew what ammunition and twine would be used for, and thatMorris was offering it to them every year to support their hunting and fishing.[376] In addition to providing twine and ammunition, Morris offered to increase the gratuityfrom ten to twelve dollars per person.2011 ONSC 4801 (CanLII)[377] He made it clear (in Von Gernet's words) that this was no mere "real estate deal:"I wish you to understand we do not come here as traders, but as representing the Crown and to dowhat we believe is just and right.Morris, Ex. 9, page 67; Cross-examination of von Gernet, December 10, 2009[378] Counsel for the Plaintiffs submitted that while Morris did not specifically articulate theconcept of the Honour of the Crown during the negotiations, it is clear he understood that thesewere not hard bargaining sessions in which the Crown was free to be as aggressive, devious ortough as it could have been if negotiating with well-educated English-speaking personsrepresented by counsel.[379] The Ojibway then made a series of requests to which Morris or one of the otherCommissioners responded. With one noteworthy exception, the documents consistently reflectdiscussion of the following topics sequentially:[a] The amount of the gratuity payment.[b] Annual payments for ammunition and twine.[c] The delivery of farming implements.[d] The provision of tools.[e] The provision of provisions and clothing for the Chiefs.[f] A request for guns.[g] Treatment of Ojibway from the United States [The Manitoban and the Dawsonnotes refer to a promise to allow the children of British Indians [not American