Indg Studies - Ch. 12

Treaty One (Name)

Called the Stone Fort Treaty because negotiations took place at Lower Fort Garry, which was built of stone.

Treaty One (Date and Location)

Signed on August 3, 1871, at Lower Fort Garry; included 16,700 square miles (43,253 km²) in southern Manitoba.

Treaty Two (Name and Date)

Called the Manitoba Post Treaty; signed on August 21, 1871, by Anishinaabe, Nehiyaw, and others in central Manitoba.

Purpose of Treaties One and Two

The government sought to justify creating Manitoba and prepare for White settlement.

Indigenous Opening Demand (Treaties 1–2)

Indigenous leaders initially claimed reserves amounting to about two-thirds of Manitoba.

Government Response (Treaties 1–2)

Lieutenant-Governor Archibald and Wemyss Simpson called the demand “preposterous,” offering 160 acres per family of five and a $12 annuity.

Crown’s Threat During Negotiations

Officials warned Indigenous leaders that settlers would occupy the land without compensation if they refused the terms.

Chief Concerns (Treaties 1–2)

Leaders asked what would happen if they had more children, requested help for farming (schools, clothing, housing, tools), and questioned fairness of equal land to settlers.

Archibald’s Promise

Promised that additional land could be provided farther west, though those territories already belonged to other Indigenous nations.

Final Terms (Treaties 1–2)

$3 per person, $15 per family of five in goods or cash, 160 acres per family, a school on each reserve, and a ban on liquor sales.

Broken Oral Promises (Treaties 1–2)

Verbal promises of tools, livestock, and clothing were omitted from the written treaties, leading to later protests.

Revision of Treaties 1–2 (1875)

Crown revised the treaties to address complaints but still did not fulfill all oral promises.

Crown Negotiation Strategy

Officials emphasized ceremony to “overawe” Indigenous leaders but were instead forced to modify terms under Indigenous pressure.

Treaty Negotiation Skill

Chiefs successfully raised many issues later seen in future treaties, demonstrating strong diplomacy despite Crown’s “take-it-or-leave-it” stance.

Treaty Three (Date and Area)

Signed October 3, 1873, at Northwest Angle; covered 55,000 square miles (142,450 km²), mostly in Ontario, clearing title for the Dawson Road and future railway.

Anishinaabe Position (Treaty Three)

Chief Mawedopenais declared “the rustling of the gold is under my feet” and insisted the land was theirs by gift of the Great Spirit.

Treaty Three Negotiations

Lengthy and difficult; four years of talks before agreement. Terms were more generous than Treaties One and Two.

Treaty Three Terms

Included hunting and fishing rights, agricultural tools and supplies, schools, and a liquor ban on reserves.

Railway Request (Treaty Three)

Indigenous request for free railway passes was rejected.

Métis Involvement in Treaty Three

Métis were included at the request of Chief Mawedopenais; later excluded by the 1879 Indian Act amendment.

Impact of Red River Resistance

After the resistance, Ottawa excluded “halfbreeds” from treaties and the Indian Act, though Métis influence persisted.

Significance of Treaty Three

Reflected growing Indigenous political assertiveness and familiarity with colonial processes.

Mawedopenais Closing Speech

Emphasized transparency and accountability: “what has been done here today has been done openly before the Great Spirit and before the Nation.”

Symbolic Gesture (Treaty Three)

Mawedopenais took off his glove, shook hands, and invoked “as long as the sun goes round and the water flows,” linking treaty promises to eternity.

Euro-Canadian Assumptions

Officials freely made promises, assuming Indigenous peoples would assimilate or vanish, not persist as sovereign nations.

Treaty Three Legacy

Set precedents for later treaties, particularly regarding agricultural provisions and education.

Expansion of Manitoba (1881)

Manitoba’s boundaries were extended to include lands from Treaties One, Two, and Three.

Legal Aftermath (Treaty Three)

Led to Canada’s first Aboriginal rights court case—St. Catharines Milling and Lumber Co. v. The Queen (1888).

Topic

The transcontinental railroad and western instability

Context

As the transcontinental railroad expanded and bison populations declined (due to industrial demand for hides), settlers pressured First Nations and Métis lands, alarming Ottawa about instability and possible American frontier wars spreading north.

Reason for a Federal Police Force

Under the BNA Act, law enforcement was a provincial responsibility; a federal force could operate only in unorganized territories or by agreement with provinces lacking police forces.

Macdonald’s Original Police Plan

Sir John A. Macdonald planned to include Métis as half the rank and file of a western police force under British officers, following colonial models (e.g., India).

Change in Police Composition

After the 1869–70 Métis conflict and Ontario’s backlash, Macdonald abandoned his plan; the North-West Mounted Police (NWMP), formed in 1873, was mostly of British settler origin.

Cypress Hills Location

Near the Alberta–Saskatchewan border; sacred to Indigenous Peoples as a neutral meeting place for negotiation and trade.

American Traders and “Wolfers”

American traders sold liquor; “wolfers” trapped wolves using poisoned bison meat, killing Indigenous dogs and contaminating ecosystems.

Stolen Horses Incident (1873)

A group of wolfers from Fort Benton, Montana, lost horses and blamed Indigenous people without evidence; they raised a posse including trader George Hammond.

Cypress Hills Massacre

Event: Drunken wolfers attacked a peaceful Nakoda camp led by Little Soldier, killing 20–30 people and assaulting women, despite Nakoda’s offer of horses in good faith.

Actual Horse Thieves

Later determined to be Nehiyaw, not Nakoda; wolfers’ assumptions were false.

Legal Aftermath of Cypress Hills Massacre

Canada sought extradition of wolfers; two were tried in Winnipeg in 1876 but acquitted due to conflicting evidence. Case dropped in 1882.

Impact of Cypress Hills Massacre

Revealed need for law enforcement in the West; in 1873 nearly 100 Indigenous people died from lawlessness and Crown inaction.

NWMP Response

Canada dispatched 150 NWMP officers to confront traders and “wolfers.” Journey was harsh, animals died, and expedition was briefly lost.

Jerry Potts (Kyyokosi)

Guide who rescued the lost Mounties; son of a Káínaa woman and American fur trader; later became key scout and interpreter for the NWMP.

NWMP Arrival

Arrived at Fort Whoop-Up expecting resistance but found only one trader, who welcomed them to dinner.

NWMP Early Role (1873–1885)

Main duties: suppress illegal whisky trade, maintain peace with Indigenous Peoples, and develop trust, especially with Nehiyaw.

Relations with Indigenous Peoples

NWMP cultivated strong ties with the Nehiyaw (Cree); relationship with Niitsitapiikwan (Blackfoot Confederacy) was uncertain.

Superintendent James F. Macleod

Worked to establish friendship with Niitsitapiikwan chief Isapo-Muxika (Crowfoot), forming personal trust and cooperation.

NWMP Role in Colonial Policies (Post-1884)

Tasked with enforcing Indian Act amendments requiring Indigenous children to attend residential schools, removing children from homes, and returning runaways.

NWMP Enforcement of Reserve Restrictions

Also became responsible for preventing Indigenous people from leaving reserves without permission.

Isapo-Muxika (Crowfoot) – Background

Not a hereditary Siksika chief; born to Káínaa parents; became Siksika after mother’s remarriage; rose through bravery in battle; became leader of the Moccasin band in 1865.

Isapo-Muxika’s Leadership Style

Promoted peace, consultation, and consensus; built alliances among Métis, Euro-Canadians, missionaries, and NWMP.

Isapo-Muxika and the NWMP

Saw NWMP as allies against destructive whisky trade; his cooperation helped avoid violent conflicts during settlement in Siksika territory.

Isapo-Muxika’s Legacy

Through diplomacy and friendship with leaders like Pītikwahanapiwīyin (Poundmaker), he maintained influence beyond his nation and shaped peaceful relations in western Canada.

What system did the Canadian government set up in 1873 to manage Indigenous affairs?

Separate boards for Manitoba, the North-West Territories, and British Columbia.

What system replaced the separate boards in 1875?

The old superintendency system.

What was the purpose of the Indian Act of 1876?

To consolidate earlier legislation and assimilate Indigenous people into Canada through education, missionization, and Euro-Canadian farming.

How did the Indian Act interfere with Indigenous communities’ personal lives?

It allowed government interference at every turn, including restrictions on movement and governance.

Who was defined as an Indian under the 1867 legislation later codified in the Indian Act?

Any male person of Indian blood belonging to a band, any child of such a person, and any woman married to such a person.

How did the Indian Act affect matrilineal societies?

It interfered with traditional descent systems and marginalized women’s social and political roles.

Were Métis and Inuit included under the Indian Act’s protections?

No, they were excluded from the Act’s definitions and protections.

How were reserve sizes determined under different treaties?

Treaties One and Two: 160 acres per family of five; Treaties Three–Eleven: 640 acres per family of five; BC: 20 acres per family (not strictly followed).

Why did Indigenous communities lose access to traditional foods and medicines?

Because reserve lands restricted hunting, fishing, and harvesting, leaving no flexibility for natural disasters or changing conditions.

What was the purpose of enfranchisement under the Indian Act?

To grant full Canadian citizenship to Indigenous people in exchange for losing their Indigenous rights and treaty benefits.

Who could apply for voluntary enfranchisement?

Indian men over 21 considered sober and industrious by the Indian agent.

What happened to an Indigenous woman and her children if her husband was enfranchised?

They were automatically considered enfranchised and lost rights to live on the reserve or receive band services.

How did the Indian Act treat marital property for Indigenous women?

Initially, widows could not inherit property; after 1884, inheritance was allowed but required evaluation of “good moral character.”

What was the effect of compulsory enfranchisement introduced in 1880?

Certain educated or skilled Indigenous individuals could be enfranchised without consent, deepening distrust toward the government.

Which groups’ military service could trigger enfranchisement?

Men and women who volunteered to serve Canada, later including military service as a trigger.

What powers did the government have regarding reserve lands under the Indian Act?

Lands could be removed for public works, agriculture, or relocated communities without consent.

How did the Indian Act restrict Indigenous agricultural activity?

Indigenous farmers needed permits to sell produce or buy equipment; communal work was often denied; settlers were prohibited from buying from them.

Could lands held in trust by the Crown for First Nations be taxed or mortgaged?

No, except by a First Nations person or a band.

How did the Indian Act interfere with traditional Indigenous governance?

It imposed an elective system for chiefs and councils, allowing only men to run and permitting Indian Affairs to remove chiefs for undefined moral reasons.

Why did the Haudenosaunee Confederacy oppose the new electoral system?

It violated their traditions, including women’s rights to appoint or revoke chiefs.

Question

Answer

How does the Indian Act of 1876 define a band?

A band is a body of Indigenous people for whom the Crown has set aside lands or is holding monies for their use and benefit, or whom the Governor-in-Council has declared a band.

Who is considered a member of a band under the Indian Act?

A person whose name appears on a band list or who is entitled to have their name appear on such a list.

What is a reserve according to the Indian Act?

A tract of land set aside by the Crown for the use and benefit of a band.

When did the bureaucratic administration of Indigenous Peoples become a separate department?

In 1880, within the Department of the Interior.

Who held effective power over Indigenous affairs despite the Minister of the Interior being superintendent-general?

The deputy superintendent-general.

What power did the superintendent have regarding Indigenous leadership?

They could impose the elective system and designate only elected officials as band spokesmen, ignoring traditional leaders.

What was banned in 1884 under the Indian Act?

Potlatches and dances associated with religious Tamanawas rituals.

Why were potlatches considered illegal?

Their "giveaway" aspect was seen as conflicting with the concept of private property.

What did Judge Alfred Scow note about the impact of these bans?

They prevented passing down oral history, cultural values, and traditional governance systems.

What actions did missionaries take toward totem poles?

They removed them, especially from graves, and sold some to international museums.

What dances were banned in 1895 on prairie reserves?

Thirst dances (“sun dances”) and other large ceremonial gatherings.

What was the Ghost Dance and why did it worry officials?

A spiritual dance predicting the return of bison and ancestors; it strengthened resistance to assimilation and Indigenous solidarity.

What was the Indian Advancement Act (1884)?

An act transforming band regulations into municipal laws, giving limited powers of taxation, public health responsibilities, and bylaw enforcement.

How did the Indian Advancement Act change band councils?

It reduced councillors to six and replaced the three-year election system with annual elections.

Who decided which bands could adopt the Indian Advancement Act system?

The Governor-in-Council.

How did Indigenous Peoples view the Indian Advancement Act?

As an attempt to impose white ideas on Indigenous communities.

What amendments did the government make to the Indian Act in 1884 on the prairies?

It banned incitement to riot and restricted the sale or gift of ammunition to First Nations and Métis people.

What was the Electoral Franchise Act of 1885?

A law granting some Indigenous men the right to vote without losing Indian status, with property qualifications, mainly for those east of the Great Lakes.

Which Indigenous peoples were excluded from the 1885 Electoral Franchise Act?

First Nations in the North-West Territories, Keewatin, Manitoba, and perhaps British Columbia, as well as individuals of Chinese or Mongolian descent.

Why was the Electoral Franchise Act controversial?

It faced opposition because it allowed Indigenous people to vote without paying taxes, and was seen as putting them on equal footing with white citizens.

What happened to the Electoral Franchise Act?

It was passed by Macdonald but revoked by the Liberals in 1898.

When and where was Treaty Six negotiated and signed?

Treaty Six was negotiated and signed in two ceremonies at Fort Carlton in August 1876 and Fort Pitt in September 1876.

What provision in Treaty Six became the basis for free health care for status First Nations and some Inuit?

The treaty included a provision to maintain a “medicine chest” for the benefit of First Nations.

Why did the Canadian government initially resist negotiating Treaty Six?

They saw it as nonessential, but Indigenous groups were asserting sovereignty over their lands.

Who were appointed to negotiate Treaty Six on behalf of Canada?

William Christie (HBC officer), Alexander Morris (Manitoba and North-West Territories lieutenant-governor), and Métis leader James McKay.

What was Mistahimaskwa (“Big Bear”)’s response to the gifts sent to Indigenous leaders?

He rejected them, stating, “We want none of the Queen’s presents… Let your Chiefs come to us like men and talk to us.”