Sunday, August 10, 2008

History of Indian and White Relations 101 - Part II

Here's the next part of the Indian Industry version of events expressed in Saskboy's linked page:
"There were many promises made under the treaties. Education is a major Treaty right. The Treaties called for a promise to have schools on reserves and to pay teachers. However, schools could be contracted out to churches or to the provincial government."
The very first mention of education made during the negotiation of a treaty occurs in 1871 during the negotiation of Treaty 1 and Treaty 2, which cover parts of southern Manitoba and the extreme western portion of what is now Ontario, specifically those parts bordering the south east corner of Manitoba as it is now and the Lake of the Woods district. Both of the subsequently negotiated treaties contained a clause promising a school on the reserves. In Treaty 1 the clause reads:
"And further, Her Majesty agrees to maintain a school on each reserve hereby made whenever the Indians of the reserve should desire it." [Emphasis mine.]
In Treaty 2, it's exactly the same.

Previous treaties, the Selkirk Treaty of 1817, as well as the Robinson Huron and Robinson Superior Treaties of 1850 covering lands east of this, made no mention of education. The James Bay Attawapiskat Cree are no where near these territories and were not in any way shape or form parties to Treaties 1 and 2. They were, in fact, signatories to an adhesion of Treaty 9, originally signed in 1905, but their settlement on lands reserved for them did not take place until 1964.

The text of the Treaty 9 clause pertaining to schools reads as follows:
"Further, His Majesty agrees to pay such salaries of teachers to instruct the children of said Indians, and also to provide such school buildings and educational equipment as may seem advisable to His Majesty's government of Canada." [Emphasis mine]
But that doesn't mean education provided by Europeans had not already been undertaken. As early as the 1840s the churches were engaged in providing schools for Indians and the then colonial government representing Great Britain's interests in her Canadian colonies encouraged their efforts. Education in the 1840s consisted primarily of church run schools and Christianity based curricula in any case, whether in Britain or in her colonies, so it should not surprise anyone that the education provided by the churches to Indian communities was no different. Publicly funded education was not the norm at that time in history.

In their zeal to convert Indians to Christianity the churches wholeheartedly endorsed whatever efforts the colonial administration and subsequently, the Canadian government, undertook to provide education for Indians. This endorsement was mutual, as the government was only too happy to relieve itself of the financial burdens and lay it on the churches. Throughout the 1840s and the remaining part of the century, successive colonial and then Canadian governments developed policies that would remain the bedrock of their Indian policy well into the twentieth century.

In a nutshell, this policy can be described as the isolation and civilization strategy. In essence, isolate Indians on reserves sufficiently far removed from civilization, where corrupting influences were causing havoc, and let the churches teach them the accouterments of civilization. Consequently, the next sentence "schools could be contracted out to churches or to the provincial government" reflects the long standing practice of a colonial policy that the modern Indian movement detests, a policy that existed long before any of the treaties mentioning education were even contemplated, and which, although the statement appears intended to suggest such, it is not found in any text of any treaty nor in any record of negotiations leading to those treaties.

The remainder of that section of the document Saskboy links to is equally ridiculous.
"Another area of Treaty right is taxation. "Personal property on a reserve, including income, is not subject to taxation, either federal or provincial. This is an affirmation of oral promises made at the signing of the Treaties that the reserves shall be tax-free" (Brizinski, 1993: p. 188)."
For now, it's sufficient to note that the basis for the argument in the above quoted passage is a quotation taken from a book written in 1993 and seems to have no foundation in the examination of original documents or transcripts from the time during which the treaties were negotiated. The same can be said of other parts of the document. In other words, it appears to be some undergrad student's attempt at writing history, quoting secondary rather than primary sources. Neither the landmark Supreme Court decision of April, 2004, concerning Indian tax exempt status nor any of the historical context regarding that exemption are taken into account.

But I'll save that one for Part III.

2 Comments:

Blogger Louise said...

Interesting. Someone using a Canadian government computer station is reading this post. Who are you and why are you reading this? Shouldn't you be working? Or is this part of your job?

August 20, 2008 7:51 am  
Blogger Louise said...

By the way, stay tuned. I hope to post part III this weekend.

August 20, 2008 7:51 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home