TREATIES are just old documents. Why should Canadians care? History is history: Indians should just get over it.
Those are some of the comments from non-Indians I have heard or read.
Some of the people who make these comments, or worse, may be racist. Others I believe are genuinely perplexed. They don’t understand treaties and land claims. It is this latter group that I want to reach.
Misunderstanding is understandable.
At one time, Indian history was either ignored by school history texts or reduced to a level of misconception on par with a John Wayne movie. Even with advancements in recent times, the quality of education about Indian issues is lacking.
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
The media also contributes to misunderstanding. There are outlets that encourage thoughtful examination of issues, but with others the objective is to create hot emotions.
The period of history when the treaties were signed is of tremendous importance. For the western part of Ontario, the Prairies, northeastern British Columbia and parts of the Northern territories, treaties were signed between 1871 and 1930.
Treaties were not identical but they had common themes. Each of the parties to the treaties had an overarching objective.
For the British Crown and Canadian government, the priority was to make Indian lands safe for settlement by immigrants from Eastern Canada and other parts of the world. For the Indian leaders, the purpose was to ensure their people and descendants would be able to enjoy a good life in perpetuity.ÂÂ
The Indian leaders understood the realities and given the overwhelming foreign forces building on the continent for about 400 years, they negotiated impressive treaties that provided for land, methods to secure a good livelihood, and education, among other things.
The treaties provided for a limited version of the life Indians had traditionally enjoyed, as well as the necessities of life in the world that would develop with Caucasian settlement.
The Indian people kept their part of the bargain. The main condition was that they would not harass the settlers. Except for lands set aside for reserves, Indians surrendered claim to a “plow’s depth” of topsoil on agricultural land. This is a bit of an oversimplification of treaty terms, but the description captures the gist of treaties.
At the time, this was a good deal for the Canadian government, which was preoccupied with the goal of making territories safe for immigrant farmers. Canada, meanwhile, let many of its commitments lapse once settlement was well under way.
This brings us back to the question of old treaties. Farmland across the Prairies dates back to the acquisition of land through treaties and the land-holding systems set up by the government.
A lot of farmland has been transferred several times through sale and inheritance, but ownership is still based on homestead registrations.
To deny the treaties is to revoke all current farmland ownership.
But don’t take my word for it. Read up on the treaties. You will find it worthwhile.
Shannacappo is grand chief of the southern chiefs’ organization that represents 36 First Nations in Manitoba.
