View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE

provided by UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for

May 2000

CITIZENSHIP AND TREATY RIGHTS: THE INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA AND THE CANADIAN INDIAN ACT, 1946-1948

Laurie Meijer Drees Malaspina University College,Vancouver Island

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly

Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons

Meijer Drees, Laurie, "CITIZENSHIP AND TREATY RIGHTS: THE INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA AND THE CANADIAN INDIAN ACT, 1946-1948" (2000). Great Plains Quarterly. 20. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/20

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Great Plains Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 2 (Spring 2000). Published by the Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Copyright © 2000 Center for Great Plains Studies. Used by permission. CITIZENSHIP AND TREATY RIGHTS THE INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA AND THE CANADIAN INDIAN ACT, 1946,1948

LAURIE MEIJER DREES

In the spring of 1946, J. Allison Glen an­ schools, and "any other matter or thing per­ nounced a public inquiry into Canada's fed­ taining to the social and economic status of eral administration of Indian Affairs and the Indians and their advancement."! This much­ Indian Act. In Parliament on 13 May 1946 awaited announcement led numerous mem­ this minister of Mines and Resources respon­ bers of Parliament to rise to their feet and sible for Indian Affairs moved "That a joint congratulate the minister on his motion that committee of the senate and house of com­ day. Following lengthy discussions, both sides mons be appointed to examine and consider of the House enthusiastically endorsed the the Indian Act ... with authority to investi­ proposal. For once, concern with Indian gate and report upon Indian administration in peoples seemed deep and widespread in general" including treaty rights, band mem­ Canada. bership, enfranchisement of Indians, Indian The Special Committee appointment, workings, and final report are significant for a number of reasons. The creation of the Spe­ cial Committee reflected the Liberal govern­ ment's response to pressure to "improve," or address, the condition of Indian peoples in Canada. As the committee worked through Laurie Meijer Drees teaches in the First Nations Studies its mandate, its vision of Indian peoples' role Department at Malaspina University College on as workers and citizens in postwar society Vancouver Island. She formerly taught at the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College. Her current emerged. This investigation process also rep­ research focuses on Indigenous political thought, and resented one of the first opportunities for In­ she is working a history of the Fairbanks Native dian groups across the country to publicly air Assocation. their views on their place within Canada. Al­ though the Canadian government had re­ ceived petitions from Indian leaders across [GPQ 20 (Spring 2000): 141-58] Canada on a variety of issues, the Special

141 142 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000

Committee hearings represented one of the placing them under the restrictive jurisdic­ first times the federal government actively can­ tion of the Indian Act. vased Indian views on Indian Affairs nation­ The committee was also concerned with wide. Indian peoples' assumption of full citizenship The hearings of the Special Committee are rights. However, committee members believed considered here because they reveal Indian that Indian people could assume full citizen­ and federal government views on the relation­ ship rights only when, in the members' views, ship between Canadian citizenship and treaty they were first "educated" in their civic du­ rights at a particular point in Canadian his­ ties, and second, only when they were "fully tory. In fact, the dialogue initiated at these contributing" to the Canadian economy. The hearings between Indian leaders from Alberta committee did not view the treaties as the and the Special Committee contained impor­ basis for full citizenship for Indian peoples. tant ideas that still continue to resonate in Instead, Committee members supported the political discussions to the present, albeit in a long-standing government policy that Indi­ modified format. The purpose of this investi­ ans should remain wards of the Crown under gation is to analyze the workings of the com­ the Indian Act until they had acquired the mittee and to reveal one particular First standards of Canadian citizenship. Members Nation's perspective on treaty rights in the ofthe committee were, at the start ofthe hear­ 1940s. More specifically, it aims to highlight ings, certainly not interested in treaties. Alberta Indian leaders' views on Treaty rights Although the two parties had different per­ in the 1940s as documented in their submis­ spectives on citizenship and its meaning, both sions to the Special Committee and other believed that gaining social rights for Indian available records, official and unofficial. To people was necessary before full political rights date, specific analyses of either the committee could be granted. Consensus on these ideas or of First Nations presentations before the formed the basis of a common dialogue be­ committee have yet to be done. tween Indian leaders and the federal govern­ At a time when the practical legal status of ment at this time. Historians have at times treaty rights was unclear in Canada, the In­ emphasized the antagonistic nature of discus­ dian Association of Alberta (IAA) argued sions between Indian leaders and the federal before the Special Committee that treaty rights government; however, I see in the set of sub­ could be reconciled with citizenship. lt sug­ missions an attempt by an Indian political gested that the treaties between Indian group to initiate a discussion along common peoples and the Crown were the source of lines in the 1940s. IAA leaders were answer­ citizenship rights for Indian peoples. The IAA ing a government call for input with language outlined in its brief submitted to the Special that matched government concerns but still Committee that the treaties already promised emphasized that Treaty Indian peoples' access certain rights to Indian peoples, including full to citizenship derived from a unique source. rights to education and social security, so that In this way, prairie Indian leaders were pio­ Indian people might take their place as citi­ neering a public discussion on treaty rights in zens within Canada. In the words of the IAA: a manner unprecedented in the history of In­ ''It was then clearly the objective of the Trea­ dian-government relations, and at a time when ties to promote progress among the Indians discussion of treaty rights was unpopular. and make them self-sustaining, loyal citizens The Special Committee issued a series of of the Crown."2 At this time, Indian leaders in reports on its findings between 1946 and 1948, the IAA were requesting the treaties be con­ and its final nonbinding recommendations sidered a source of rights because the federal were made public in 1948. In the end, the government had, until that time, denied Treaty committee's work represented a conservative Indian peoples "full" citizenship rights by critique of Indian administration in Canada THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 143 and eventually led to full-scale policy and leg­ in the twentieth century? What has been the islative changes in Indian administration. Al­ significance of treaty rights at various times in though the IAA did not affect Indian Affairs Canadian history? How have discussions of policy on a grand scale, their points were noted treaty rights affected Indian policy? An inves­ by the committee, and their brief did bring to tigation of the Special Committee hearings in light an interesting set ofarguments revealing the 1940s gives some insights into how Indian how Indian groups utilized and interpreted leaders promoted their treaty rights and how their treaty rights in the past. The single no­ government viewed those rights. table impact of the IAA's brief can be mea­ Similarly, analyses of the Special Commit­ sured by the fact that the Special Committee, tee are also few in number. Ian V. B. Johnson in its final report to Parliament, called for an has written a short, general overview of the investigation of treaty rights. origins and workings of the Special Commit­ tee.4 His work, however, does not specifically TREATY RIGHTS AND GOVERNMENT: analyze the individual submissions of First EXISTING STUDIES Nations to the committee. Other general de­ scriptions of the committee's activities can be A growing body of literature addresses the found in the Historical Development of the In­ history of treaties on the Canadian prairies, dian Act (1978), which discusses the evolu­ particularly Indian perspectives on the origi­ tion of Indian legislation in Canada, and in nal promises contained within the treaties, John Leslie's A Historical Survey ofIndian-Gov­ and the signing process. Works by the Treaty ernment Relations, 1940-1970 (1993).5 There Seven Elders and Tribal Council (1996), do exist a handful of references to specific as­ Hugh Dempsey (1987), Richard Price (1986), pects of the committee's actions,6 but to date John Snow (1977), and Harold Cardinal in-depth investigations into specific Native (1969) all deal to varying degrees with Indian groups testifying before the committee and the interpretations of the western treaty process. nature of their presentations are lacking. As Sarah Carter, Walter Hildebrandt, and Dorothy First Rider point out in their analysis STATUS OF INDIAN PEOPLES IN CANADA of Treaty No.7, the research of historians on TO 1946 these subjects generally corroborates the views of elders,3 and thus a consistent history of the During the decades leading up to the treaty-signing process has emerged for the Ca­ committee's hearings, Indian peoples living nadian West. in reserve communities across Canada held an In contrast, little research has been done unusual position in Canadian society: specifi­ into the history ofthe dialogue on treaty rights cally, they were subject to the Indian Act, between Indian groups and government fol­ while many were also simultaneously party to lowing the conclusion of these agreements. treaties between their nation and the Crown. The intellectual history of treaty rights in Together, the act and the treaties bestowed Canada is thin. Harold Cardinal's work The upon Indian peoples unique rights, and these Unjust Society (1969) and research on the were drawn to the committee's attention as a Saskatchewan treaty rights movements by his­ result of the IAA's submissions. torianJohn Tobias (1985) stand virtually alone The Indian Act at this time was a formi­ in their attempts to describe historical inter­ dable piece of federal legislation outlining pretations of treaty rights by government and the special legal rights and restrictions faced Indian peoples. Despite the lack of scholarly by registered Indian peoples nationwide. First attention to this subject, there are many ques­ formulated in 1876 as a consolidation of pre­ tions that can be asked: How have Indian existing Indian-related legislation and peri­ groups and government portrayed treaty rights odically amended, it regulated the existence 144 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000 of Indian peoples in various ways. This statute unable to fully assume their rights to vote (pro­ defined who could be considered an "Indian" vincially and federally) and were further de­ and thus be considered "registered" or "sta­ nied access to the public education system, tus;" who could live on the reserve; it con­ full property rights, and the newly emerging trolled band membership; it regulated the social welfare programs such as Old Age Pen­ education of Indian children, the use of re­ sions, Mother's Allowances, and Indigent Re­ serve lands, and the sale of agricultural prod­ lief as a result of the existence of this act. In ucts and other resources produced on reserve; short, the Indian Act controlled virtually ev­ it outlined the activities of local governing ery aspect of Indian peoples' lives, including band councils; and even regulated the move­ the composition of their communities, their ments of Indian peoples. Significantly, Indian governments, and their economies.8 Overall, peoples were designated "wards" of the Crown the notion that Indian communities were in­ under the act. As legal historian Sidney L. capable of governing themselves or their re­ Harring points out, beginning in 1858 with sources was implied by the structure of the the passage of one of the pre-Confederation act. As Arthur Ray notes, "the act created a Indian Acts, "the inferiority of Indians in re­ special class ofpeople designated solely on the gard to their legal rights and liabilities as com­ basis of their race, and it established a means pared with Her Majesty's other subjects" was for governing them autocratically."9 Reserve acknowledged. 7 Under the 1857 Indian Act, a communities across Canada were all governed system of legal dualism was initiated in which by this same piece of legislation. During the Indians held different legal rights than non­ interwar years, Indian peoples living in the Indians and in which Indians were viewed a province of Alberta viewed the act as restric­ "wards." This principle was maintained in sub­ tive and incomprehensible; in particular, sequent Indian Acts passed through Canada's Alberta Indian leaders viewed the act as in Parliament following Confederation. conflict with their historic treaties. From its inception, the Indian Act did out­ The terms of nineteenth-century treaties line a process by which Indian wards could signed between local Indian leaders and do­ divest themselves of their "registered" status minion government also influenced life in and assume their full citizenship rights. This many Canadian reserve communities. Treaty process, known as "enfranchisement" under terms differed across Canada, but they did the act, was one whereby a status Indian per­ confer a unique relationship on the Crown son would be removed from under the juris­ and Treaty Indian peoples. In the prairie west, diction and restrictions of the Indian Act, treaties included those numbered one through thereby gaining the same voting, property, tax­ seven, signed between 1871 and 1877. Funda­ paying, and social rights as non-Indian citi­ mentally, the prairie treaties promised Indian zens. The enfranchisement process was meant signatories rights to hunt and fish, land for to "advance" those individuals who were reserves, European-style schools and educa­ deemed no longer requiring the protection of tion, assistance with agriculture, and a pay­ federal legislation, and who were deemed ment of annuities and gratuities. From the assimilatable into Canadian political life. Be­ perspective of the Crown, the underlying aim tween 1919 and 1922, "enfranchisement" of the prairie treaties was to encourage Indian could be involuntarily bestowed upon Regis­ groups to assume a sedentary lifestyle based on tered Indians by the Department of Indian agriculture, or in the north, to continue their Affairs, and although the act was amended to subsistence hunting and fishing as long as pos­ eliminate involuntary enfranchisement for a sible. In Alberta specifically, Treaty No.6 and decade, the process was reestablished between No.7 resembled each other closely, both con­ 1933 and 1951. At the time of the committee taining promises to assist Indian communities hearings, Indian people were still considered to begin farming or ranching. 10 Treaty No.8, THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 145 in turn, followed the general outline of the of the basics of community life including re­ previous treaties; however, treaty commission­ serve lands, education, and monetary assis­ ers were authorized to exercise a larger degree tance, while the other by regulating everyday of discretion in negotiating reserves than in affairs-the act and the treaties were of daily the earlier treaties since there existed wide­ significance. spread opposition to the reserve system in the middle north where local economies were THE INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA: firmly rooted in subsistence hunting, trapping BACKGROUND and fishing (see map).l1 The oral and written promises made by the The Indian Association ofAlberta was nei­ treaty commissioners and contained within the ther the only nor the first Indian political as­ treaties were imbued with great significance sociation on the prairies to concern itselfwith by the leaders of the bands who signed the treaty rights. Before World War II Indian po­ agreements. Cree historian Stan Cuthand sug­ litical organizations on the Canadian prairies gests that the promises were viewed as "sa­ were small in size, informal, and limited in cred" but not in the European sense of the their activities. Before the war, groups formed word. According to Cuthand, those who signed and split up, as communities had great diffi­ Treaty No.6 believed the treaty promises to culty carrying on political meetings when re­ be based on goodwill and trust, statements to sources were scarce and travel between be dealt with wisely and cautiously and for­ communities difficult and costly. One organi­ ever binding in mythological terms. 12 Indian zation, "The League of Indians in Western Association of Alberta leaders were particu­ Canada," did manage to function successfully larly concerned with their specific treaties, No. as an early and popular arena for discussions 6, No.7, and No.8. For these leaders, the treaty on reserve social conditions, government promises were viewed as the foundation of the policy, and treaties for many reserve commu­ relationship between Indian peoples and the nities in Saskatchewan and Alberta. Founded Canadian government. The treaties were per­ in eastern Canada in 1918 by the Mohawk war ceived as negotiated and concluded in good veteran Fred Loft, the league managed to es­ faith, and each of the terms was subject to tablish itself on the prairies by 1920. Separate fulfillment as part of the whole. Clearly, the Alberta and Saskatchewan divisions of the treaties promised Indian peoples a relation­ league formed in 1932, but by 1939 conflict ship with the Canadian government based on between leaders led to the formation of a sepa­ trust, protection for their Indian lands, sup­ rate and distinct political union in Alberta, port for their economies, and education oftheir the Indian Association of Alberta. Initially children. the IAA largely represented bands from cen­ To Alberta Indian leaders in the war and tral Alberta and Treaty No.6 regions, but by immediate postwar years, the treaties and the 1946 had members in southern and northern Indian Act appeared to be in conflict with Alberta reserve communities in Treaty No.7 one another in many ways. The act controlled and Treaty No.8 areas, respectively. and regulated Indian life, while the treaties From its inception, the Indian Association had promised a relationship based on mutual of Alberta emphasized the need to improve respect and consideration of interests between social conditions in reserve communities and government and Indian groups. At the same called for revision of Indian administration time, the act was viewed by many in Alberta and federal Indian policies. The observance of reserve communities as protecting treaty prom­ treaty rights was also part of its agenda. In ises. 13 Since both determined life in reserve 1944 Metis leader and IAA organizer Malcolm communities-one by establishing the rela­ Norris wrote to members ofthe Blackfoot com­ tionship with government and providing some munity that IAA aimed for "the betterment of 146 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000 their [Indian members] social and economic The petitions were well-received in Ottawa, conditions as promised under the Proclama­ and when Mackenzie King's Liberal govern­ tion and Treaties."14 ment announced its intention to investigate The importance of the treaties was widely and reform Indian Affairs in 1946 as part of its understood by Indian leaders at the commu­ postwar reconstruction plans, IAA leaders nity level, but these agreements had not re­ were invited to present their concerns before ceived a great deal of public attention or the committee. By linking treaty rights to gov­ government consideration before World War ernment discussions on social and political II. In part, negligence of treaty rights was a rights, IAA leadership was able to open treaty result of standard government policy. Until rights up for public consideration and atten­ the 1950s the sentiment prevailed that trea­ tion. ties were not law and could therefore be ig­ nored, and that treaty rights were vague and CREATING THE SPECIAL JOINT difficult to realize. Contemporary court rul­ COMMITTEE ings underscored this mindset. For example, in Rex v. Commanda, a 1939 hunting rights The creation of a Special Committee to case heard in the Ontario Supreme Court, the investigate the Indian Act and Canada's In­ judge ruled "it does not matter whether the dian administration was in part a result ofcon­ Indians have any rights flowing from the res­ cerns within government circles over the role ervation in the Robinson treaty or not. Such of Indian peoples in postwar Canadian soci­ rights (if any) may be taken away by the ety. Government discussions questioning the Ontario Legislature without any compensa­ role of Indian peoples in reconstruction pro­ tion."ls Similarly, those who concerned them­ grams began before the end of the war. As selves with Indian political activity and treaty early as 1944, for example, the Special Com­ rights believed that asserting treaty rights mittee on Reconstruction and Reestablish­ might lead to their degradation or erosion. 16 ment heard witnesses speak on plans for the Plainly, the idea that treaty rights could and inclusion ofIndian peoples into Canada's post­ should be supported by government or the war economy. At this time many felt that In­ courts was not popular at the time. As a result, dian peoples could best be kept self-sufficient it also seems that Indian leaders themselves on their reserves or in their communities. It were reticent to focus their attention on rights was believed that Indian workers could best that were perceived as unassertable outside be recruited into schemes related to their tra­ Indian communities. ditional pursuits, as returning Indian war vet­ Despite the general reticence to deal with erans would experience too much competition treaty rights, IAA leaders did attempt, in a with non-Indians in more "preferred employ­ very conservative manner, to bring treaty-re­ ment." In addition, the committee noted that lated issues to government attention in the Indian workers would most likely be the first closing years of the war. It seems that at this to lose their jobs when the war ended and time the political climate was favorable for non-Native veterans returned to the domestic discussing rights of citizens and the role of workforce. Failure in urban areas would prob­ citizens in national reconstruction. IAA ex­ ably lead them to want to return back to their ecutive leaders noted this opportunity, and in communities.17 In the words ofone of the wit­ 1944 and 1945 the IAA sent formal petitions nesses before the committee, "That is what we in the form of "Memorials" to the federal gov­ have to guard against in the immediate post­ ernment, calling for reform in Indian Affairs. war years."IB The petitions emphasized social and economic Thus anticipating changes in Canada's reform in Indian Affairs, but also made brief economy and Indian unemployment, the gov­ and understated references to treaty rights. ernment planned to initiate programs encour- THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 147 aging Indian peoples to work in their own com­ cause they also wanted to see Indian workers munities in the areas of fur-trapping, handi­ take their full place in the workforce and see crafts, and housing projects. Cooperative fur communities improve their condition. The conservation and production programs were Edmonton Bulletin, for example, asked the fed­ promoted for northern parts ofthe prairie prov­ eral government "to educate the Indian along inces' including Alberta, and handicraft in­ lines ofself-help to assist them in holding their dustries would be encouraged across the own in industry" because it was feared this country. Housing projects, in turn, "would take group of people might otherwise "fall into a care of the returned soldiers among the Indi­ state ofdecadence or complete obliteration."25 ans pretty well, and it would do a remarkable In a postwar economy that seemed to hold a job in clearing up the deplorable conditions myriad of opportunities for all citizens, the which exist in many Indian communities as to general public believed that Indian peoples housing."19 Government concern was squarely should also contribute or they might fall be­ focused on encouraging unskilled and seasonal hind or fail to advance themselves. Rather work in Indian communities, not training In­ than see Indian peoples become or remain dian workers for skilled positions off-reserve. 20 state-dependent, citizens wanted government This attitude toward Indian labor was a to press for the "improvement" of Indian carryover from before the war, and it remained peoples by giving them work, preferably in unchallenged until late 1945 when sectors of industry. Canadian society-and the IAA-began to Human rights, a full economic role for In­ demand changes to the policy. dians in the workforce, and a desire to im­ Outside government circles there was also prove Indian community life-all these factors public demand for the reform of Indian Af­ motivated Indian Affairs reformers at this time. fairs. Historian J. R. Miller notes how Cana­ It was recognized that Canadian governments dian society became more "human rights and society had a responsibility to better the conscious" following World War II, and that state ofIndian communities since "the shame­ this contributed to a public perception that ful conditions under which many of these Canada's paternalistic Indian policy was un­ people live ... is ultimately the responsibility acceptable.21 Historian John Tobias similarly of all Canadians."26 At public meetings, aver­ indicates that "the public was generally con­ age citizens and professionals alike deplored cerned with what was regarded as the treat­ the social dependency of Indian communities ment of the Indian as a second-class person and called for measures to alleviate the situa­ and with the fact that the Indian did not have tion. It was clear that Indian peoples were not the same status as other Canadians."22 Indian expected to remain on reserves because that participation in the war effort was often touted would only hamper their ability to contribute as the basis for their rights to full citizenship to the Canadian economy. and thus the need for reform. The popular Thus, economic considerations were a sig­ publication Newsweek reported in 1946, "More nificant factor leading to the creation of the than 2600 Indian men and women served in Special Committee. Government policy in­ the armed forces. Thousands took various war adequately dealt with the economics of re­ jobs. Many Canadians believe Indians should serve life and at this time the public demanded possess full rights of citizenship."23 One pub­ Indian peoples no longer be kept apart and lished opinion poll even heralded that 85 per­ "dependent." In addition, the mood ofthe fed­ cent ofCanadians surveyed believed Canadian eral government and policy makers was chang­ Indians had come into their own and had equal ing after years of receiving petitions from rights to their non-Indian fellow citizens.24 Indian communities through organizations Canadians thus concerned themselves with such as the IAA and other similar unions in Indian issues immediately after the war be- BritishColumbia, Saskatchewan, and Ontario. 148 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000

In May 1946 the Liberal government spon­ controlled a rather large committee composed sored the formation of the Special Committee oftwenty-two Liberals, eight Progressive Con­ composed of twenty-two ministers of Parlia­ servatives, two Cooperative Commonwealth ment and twelve senators. The Liberals chose Federation members, one Social Credit, and a parliamentary committee over a royal com­ one Independent member. Obviously, the mission, as they felt that since Indians were committee was far from balanced in terms of constitutionally a federal responsibility an partisan politics and this served to limit its analysis of Indian affairs should not involve capacity for critical policy and legislative other divisions of governmentY The federal analysis. Committee members were also poorly government had invoked committees since informed on matters of Indian policy, history, Confederation for purposes of examining and and contemporary issues. As the hearings of processing legislation without placing in­ the committee progressed, members struggled creased demands on the House of Commons. to understand the history of Canada's treaty Special committees also gave government signings, the contents of the Indian Act, and some opportunity to research policy issues in the nature of Indian communities across the greater depth since the committee process al­ country. As the committee engaged in its busi­ lowed for the hearing of witnesses on certain ness, members who revealed themselves most questions and provided civil servants the interested in reforming existing government chance to contribute to government policy practices were the CCF representatives, W. formation. Finally, committees also allowed Bryce and G. H. Castleden. work to be completed by government in a less The Special Committee began its investi­ partisan atmosphere than existed in the gations in May 1946 by questioning Indian House.28 Affairs civil servants. Next, it held consulta­ Despite these advantages of the committee tions with government-designated "experts" system, C. E. S. Franks has pointed out how, on Indian issues. Finally, Indian representa­ until the late 1950s, "committees were gener­ tives were called to speak before the commit­ ally not active nor were they an important tee, starting with the North American Indian part of parliament."29 Until the reform of the Brotherhood's veteran leader Andrew Paull committee process in the 1960s, other prob­ from Vancouver in June 1946.32 The Indian lems also prevailed. Committees, for example, Association ofAlberta leaders followed in May were prevented from acting in any indepen­ 1947. Witnesses from Native communities dent fashion because they were tightly con­ were called last because committees generally trolled by government and generally composed consulted those who implemented policy and of individuals sympathetic to existing govern­ legislation first-the administrators.33 From its ment practice and policy.3o Furthermore, com­ inception, the policy of this committee was mittee members were notorious for their low that it "should not call witnesses from outside attendance records, and members were fre­ points until after it has completed the hearing quently inadequately briefed on matters they and examination of officials of the Indian Af­ were appointed to consider.31 Not surprisingly, fairs Branch and other government agencies"34 the Special Committee on Indian Affairs dis­ because "We want to know what the picture is played all these problems. generally from the departmental point of Indeed, the shortcomings of the Special view."35 However, Indian representation was Committee on Indian Affairs became visible not ignored, and the committee recognized its from the moment of its first convening. To obligation to afford every opportunity to re­ begin with, the Liberal government strategi­ ceive submissions from outside interests. cally appointed Liberal member D. F. Brown Throughout their sitting, committee mem­ as co-chair together with Liberal senator J. bers expressed an overriding concern with the Fred Johnston. Together, these individuals nature of Indian citizenship in Canada. Time THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 149 and time again they questioned witnesses on that Indian communities have access to their Indian education, the state of their econo­ social rights derived from a stable economic mies, and band governments. Not surprisingly, base and use their own local governments in a all of these issues related directly to a Liberal self-determining manner. Through the attain­ concept of citizenship that emphasized the ment ofcitizenship Indians could become truly importance of a minimum living standard for "free" and fully functioning members of the all, government responsibility for protecting Canadian community. At the same time, the its citizens from outside exploitation, and the committee also believed Indian peoples would redistribution of wealth within society. These not be able to assert citizenship rights until Liberal ideas stood in contrast to classical lib­ they had been suitably and sufficiently edu­ eralism, which emphasized personal freedom cated. This position was revealed by the in a laissez-faire economy, and limited gov­ lengthy committee discussions on the poor ernment.36 state of Indian education. In the eyes of the In postwar Canadian society the idea pre­ government, only formal education would vailed that government had a positive role to properly prepare First Nations for their civic play in society and the economy for the pur­ duties. When Special Committee Member pose of improving the lives of its citizens. It Case stated "I can understand why Indians was a strongly held sentiment in intellectual might not administer their own affairs"39 dur­ and government circles that the responsibil­ ing the committee hearings, his understand­ ity for human welfare lay squarely on the shoul­ ing was doubtlessly that Indian peoples were ders of government; that government should not prepared for such duties. actively remove any obstacles in society ham­ pering human welfare.37 According to this INDIAN REPRESENTATIONS TO THE view, the rights of citizens included the right SPECIAL COMMITTEE to benefit from government protection and the exercise ofpolitical rights. Notions of citi­ The involvement of Indian peoples in the zenship rights therefore encompassed both committee's investigation process began in social and political rights. According to soci­ 1946. In order to canvas input from Indian ologist T. H. Marshall, this idea of expanding communities across the country, the commit­ citizenship beyond its purely political func­ tee empowered its counsel, Norman E. Lickers tion was partially a result of postwar prosper­ of the Six Nations on the Grand River and ity. In his view, the diminution of economic Ontario's first Status Indian lawyer, to act as inequality strengthened the demand for its its liaison officer.4o In early June 1946, Lickers abolition. The incorporation of social rights sent a circular letter to Indian bands across into citizenship rights was viewed as one way Canada requesting their views on the eight to reduce economic inequality.38 Governmen­ separate issues within the committee's man­ tal concern with the notion of citizenship is date. Over the ensuing months, Lickers re­ not surprising given that in this in this same ceived many replies, all filed for later time period, Canada's Parliament enacted its consideration. Most submissions were rela­ first Citizenship Act (1946), illustrating the tively short, answering directly and in a few concern of this issue generally. sentences the questions posed by the commit­ Immediately, the Special Committee rec­ tee. ognized Indian peoples to be existing in a state No attempt was made by the committee to of fundamental inequality. The granting of ensure that Indian communities understood citizenship rights, including both social and what was being asked of them, and the com­ political rights, was viewed by committee mittee solicited little direct contact with In­ members as the answer to Indian peoples' prob­ dian communities. All communications lems. The politicians believed it imperative between the committee and Indian peoples 150 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000 was directed to Liaison Officer Lickers. Jim constitution to copy at this meeting.43 Laurie's McMurtry suggests that Indian submissions to attendance at the meeting was critical to the the committee are questionable because they IAA's involvement with the Special Commit­ were most likely written by missionaries, law­ tee because through it he reestablished con­ yers, and others "largely due to the substan­ tact with a former acquaintence, Morris dard English writing skills and lack ofpolitical Schumiatcher, who now worked as a lawyer sophistication of the greater number of Indian for Premier Douglas. Schumiatcher subse­ leaders."41 In Alberta, Indian leaders may have quently became involved in writing the IAA's received assistance from "outsiders"; however, brief to the Special Committee as a result of they certainly lacked neither political sophis­ this contact. tication nor an understanding of their posi­ Although the record is incomplete, USI tion, as the submissions of the IAA indicate. lawyer Schumiatcher had been preparing the The IAA stood poised to address the Spe­ IAA brief in the summer of 1946. At the IAA cial Committee at an early date. Since 1945 it annual general meeting on the Peigan reserve had petitioned for an investigation of the In­ that same summer, IAA President Callihoo dian Act and Indian administration, present­ emphasized the importance of the committee ing Indian Affairs members of government hearings to the future ofAlberta's Indian popu­ with its second "Memorial" that year. Over lation. In his opening address to attending del­ the winter of 1945-46, the leaders of the IAA egates he pleaded with them to consider continued to formulate material on the In­ carefully their statements to the committee: dian Act and the needs of reserve communi­ "I beg you to think clearly and to speak wisely ties. With the sitting ofthe Special Committee in these matters. You must keep in your mind the Alberta group finally saw an opportunity that you are going to be blamed or praised by to present some of its concerns directly to gov­ your great-grandchildren for what you have ernment. Unlike some other Indian groups in done this year ... I say think carefully and Canada, the IAA considered its brief to the speak wisely." In addition, he announced that committee for months prior to receiving gov­ an official briefwas being prepared by the IAA ernment requests for input. In this way, the for the committee: "A very clever lawyer has IAA represented a pioneering force in Cana­ been hired to work on a Brief for presentation dian Indian political activity. to the Parliamentary Committee in Ottawa. Interestingly, the IAA executive leadership He is one of the cleverest young lawyers in did not prepare its submissions in isolation. In Canada and is in full sympathy with the aims fact, the submission of another Indian politi­ ofthe Indian Association ofAlberta. This Brief cal group, the Union ofSaskatchewan Indians will be presented at the proper time."44 The (US!), was written together with that of the young lawyer was Schumiatcher. This is one IAA. In mid-winter, the IAA's Executive Sec­ of the few indications we have as to how the retary John Laurie participated in the organi­ IAA brief was created. zational meeting ofthe Union ofSaskatchewan It is important to note that the technical Indians in Regina. There, newly elected so­ process involved in the creation of the IAA's cialist Saskatchewan Premier Tommy Douglas brief saw only limited input from IAA locals; worked together with Indian leaders from this was not a document explicitly relating across the province in the hope of establish­ grassroots concerns. Although Schumiatcher ing a provincial-level Indian union that could was already writing the IAA Briefin July 1946, work to assist Status Indians to assert their IAA locals around the province did not begin rights with the federal governmentY Douglas to consider the request for information by the hoped to model the union on the IAA, and committee until Lickers circulated his letter IAA Secretary Laurie provided Douglas and that same month. As a result, the brief was the USI organizers with a copy of the IAA created more by the IAA executive leadership THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 151 than by the locals. In order to assist the com­ of a serf and was to be educated so that he munities in preparing responses to the gov­ might be able to compete on equal terms with ernment call for submissions, IAA Secretary the white man."46 The treaties were less im­ Laurie and President Johnny Callihoo spent portant for their recognition of Indian nation­ the summer touring the northern part of the hood and special or distinct rights than for province and visiting bands, offering help. their recognition of Indians as full and loyal Laurie and Callihoo tried to convince the vari­ citizens. In the words ofthe brief, "It was then ous communities to let the IAA speak for them clearly the objective of the Treaties to pro­ before the committee, but they were not com­ mote progress among the Indians and make pletely successful. Laurie's idea of having the them self-sustaining, loyal citizens of the IAA speak for band councils did not appeal to Crown."47 The crucial inclusion of the words all chiefs, and the Blackfoot and Blood re­ "self-sustaining" acknowledged the importance serves submitted their own briefs to the com­ of the treaties in sustaining the economies of mittee. Indian communities. Economic success and In the end, the IAA submission to the Spe­ citizenship were related through the treaties. cial Committee was one of the most extensive Finally, the brief employed the treaty-given and in-depthofall those made by Indian groups right to education as the basis for arguing that across the country. In addition to the official only a program of education and technical brief, IAA locals contributed supplementary training would assist Indian peoples to become briefs including a survey of education, hous­ full citizens, as "only by fitting themselves to ing, health, and agriculture in Alberta's re­ discharge the responsibilities of modern civi­ serve communities.45 The IAA also submitted lization can they hope to take their place in yet another copy of its 1945 Memorial on In­ society today."48 dian Affairs to the committee. These interpretations ofthe treaties formed The IAA's official brief focused on three the critical basis of the entire thesis of the main issues: the concept of treaty rights, gain­ brief: that Indian peoples had the right to be ing social benefits for Indian peoples, and the treated as Canadian citizens with the full ar­ shortcomings ofthe Indian Act. In many ways, ray of political and social rights being granted the content ofthe briefstood in stark contrast to other non-Indian citizens in Canada in the to the survey material; the survey results rep­ late 1940s. The brief also addressed head-on resented the daily concerns of the communi­ the public outcry over Indian exclusion from ties while the legalistic brief represented the Canadian society. In postwar Canadian soci­ theoretical recognition sought by Indian com­ ety, the public and politicians alike were con­ munities and their leaders and supporters. The cerned that Indian peoples did not enjoy living brief asserted that government was obligated, standards at the social minimum. As previ­ through the treaties, to include Indian peoples ously mentioned, freedom from poverty and in Canadian society and give them increased ignorance were deemed necessary for Indian self-determination. peoples if they were to participate fully in the The heart of the brief's argument was treaty nation's affairs. In Canada the institution of rights. Specifically, this document emphasized the welfare state during and after the war was that treaty rights were the foundation upon an expression of the state's responsibility to which the relations between government and its citizens, in return for their active partici­ Indian communities rested, and that treaty pation in national life, yet this principle had rights were originally intended to give the In­ been denied Status Indians because they were dian equality: "as early as 1873 in Canada the viewed as federal "wards" protected by the Crown applied the concept of Brotherhood of Indian Act and therefore not requiring access Man to the Indians living among the whites. to public social welfare programs. Here the The Indian was to be elevated from the status briefprovided the reasoning to include Indian 152 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000 peoples in Canada's citizenry: the treaties possessed rights beyond those accorded promised and intended this to happen. nonaboriginal citizens, the IAA was still only Through the treaties the IAA was seeking promoting the idea that they had the right to equality in law for its people. an adequate education and equality before the This focus on treaties was not surprising: it law based on the treaties. represented the primary concern of the IAA's Discussions pertaining to social legislation founders. IAA leaders had a longstanding con­ and the Indian Act further supported the cern with the neglect of treaty rights, and they brief's fundamental thesis. Extension of so­ viewed this committee as the opportunity to cial legislation to Indian peoples was neces­ raise this concern while the issue was not popu­ sary as part ofthe state's duty to its own citizens. lar in legal circles. Luckily, the IAA found a The Indian Act, in turn, needed to be reformed sympathetic assistant in the Saskatchewan law­ in recognition of the self-determining abili­ yer. ties ofIndian communities and individuals. In Schumiatcher's ability to highlight these the brief, recommendations respecting the unique treaty rights could very well have been Indian Act emphasized the importance ofself­ related to his own understanding of the trea­ government through band councils and the ties. Ten years after contributing to the IAA need to remove or change restrictive and con­ Brief, Schumiatcher himself published an ar­ trolling clauses within the act. The act was ticle dealing with the treaties and citizenship viewed as legislation that interfered with the in the popular magazine The Beaver. Surpris­ treaties and their promise ofprogress, advance­ ing for the time in which it was written, ment, self-reliance, and equality for Indian Schumiatcherpromoted his view that the trea­ peoples. ties were compatible with citizenship: Overall, the entire document was a com­ plex argument against dependency. Herein lay he [the Indian] is prepared to be a citizen. the primary significance of treaty rights to the Unfortunately, at the present time, becom­ entire committee process: this was an issue ing a citizen means that he must renounce the public, politicians, and Indian peoples the rights which his ancestors secured from could all agree on. Both parties-government the Queen almost a century ago. The In­ and the IAA-appeared to agree that employ­ dian is given the hard choice of either re­ ment, education, and self-determination were maining treaty bound-without status as a fundamental to improving the condition of citizen-or of becoming a Canadian citi­ Indian peoples in Canada. The IAA based zen by forsaking the rights guaranteed him this reasoning on the treaties; government by treaty. To me, there appears nothing based its arguments on a liberal democratic inconsistent or contradictory in the con­ view of citizenship. Reform Liberalism of the cept of Indian Canadians sharing in the Mackenzie King government of the day held rights of citizenship and at the same time that state intervention was necessary to en­ enjoying the special benefits that treaties sure the sharing of wealth within the national grant them.49 community and a minimal standard of living for all. Through its brief, the IAA reconciled Although Schumiatcher was not so bold as to Indian leaders' desire for recognition of treaty suggest in his 1946 brief what in the 1960s rights and self-determination with the liberal would come to be understood as a "citizens political ideals en vogue at the time. plus" view of Indian people and their rights, This interpretation of the treaties and their the roots of this idea were present in 1946. significance was reinforced when IAA repre­ Tempting as it is in the 1990s to view the sentatives testified in person before the com­ Special Committee hearings as a time when mittee. In April 1947, a delegation of IAA Indians leaders first aired a notion that they members boarded the train in Calgary bound THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 153 for Ottawa. The government agreed to pay In his words, "A successful farming commu­ the expenses of three representatives from nity is the real strength of a country. This is Alberta to testify, two representing the IAA also true if the Indian is to make the progress and one unaffiliated representative, while oth­ that our members wish for themselves."53 Nei­ ers could attend as observers if the IAA fi­ ther man added any information to their pre­ nanced their trip.50 Those who boarded the sentation that was not already in the brief. train in April included IAA President Johnny The committee did not press the IAA del­ Callihoo, Secretary John Laurie, Bob Crow egates for any additional information follow­ Eagle from the Peigan reserve, Frank Cardinal ing their presentations, and Crow Eagle and from Sucker Creek, Albert Lightening of Callihoo were invited to return the following Hobbema, Mark Steinhauer of Saddle Lake, day for a question period. Both Callihoo's David Crowchild from the Sarcee reserve, Ed and Crow Eagle's presentations appealed to Hunter ofthe Stony reserve, and finally, James the committee's concern with citizenship. Both Gladstone, Joe Bull Shield, and Cecil Tallow emphasized Indian education for future du­ from the Blood reserve (see photograph). The ties, economic advancement through social IAA selected Teddy Yellowfly ofthe Blackfoot legislation, and economic planning for Indian reserve to represent the unaffiliated Indian communities so they could and would eventu­ peoples of Alberta; Callihoo and Crow Eagle ally take their full place in the Canadian po­ were chosen as the official IAA delegates, one litical system. for northern Alberta, one for the south. As On 22 April, although the question period the men boarded the train, their mood was was intended to focus on the testimonies of optimistic. Mark Steinhauer said to a waiting the IAA representatives, it quickly turned reporter, "You see, we hope to get our rights into a free discussion involving all the Alberta this time-full implementation of the trea­ delegates in the room, official and unofficial ties."51 In Ottawa the IAA delegates were alike. Questioning became unsystematic, and warmly welcomed by their parliamentarian it covered issues ranging from band member­ connections, including Member of Parliament ship, trust funds, and education to the powers Doug Harkness and Senators Dan Riley and of band councils. It was clear from the ques­ w. A. Buchanan, who took time to host the tions posed by the various committee mem­ representatives. The Alberta men were also bers that their focus was again on matters able to tour Ottawa a little, though their stay pertaining to Indian status and the right to was brief. 52 vote (franchise and enfranchisement) and the On their first day before the committee, ability of Indian bands to govern themselves Callihoo and Crow Eagle presented prepared in the present and future. All of these issues speeches that summarized the most important were related to the concept ofcitizenship, and parts of the IAA brief. Callihoo emphasized all were also related to certain rights outlined the significance of education and called for in the treaties. improvements in the educational system for Upon completing their presentations, the Indian children to permit them to gain an IAA members quickly returned home. Ac­ education equal to that of non-Indian chil­ cording to IAA Secretary John Laurie, Presi­ dren. He also stressed the need for reserve dent Callihoo was not impressed with the communities to be able to govern themselves proceedings, saying "these people will not be more freely, both through their band councils allowed to make any serious and lasting and by a loosening of restrictive regulations change. I can see that the Federal Govern­ outlined in the Indian Act such as the permit ment is just going through the motions of system. Crow Eagle, in turn, pressed the point satisfying the public."54 The impact of the that improvements in housing and agricul­ IAA on the Special Committee investigations ture were critical to the reserve communities. was not immediately apparent and the IAA 154 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000 members were initially disappointed. Upon committee acknowledged the importance of their return to Alberta, the delegation dis­ social rights and even treaty rights as related banded and IAA business continued where it to Indians' citizenship rights. This was a con­ left off. cept the IAA had striven to bring to the at­ tention of the bureaucrats. Even more THE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE impotantly, on the significance of Treaty COMMITTEE rights, both the committee and IAA could agree. Despite their frustration with the process, Although historian Ian V. B. Johnson has IAA members did see some of their ideas ad­ written an excellent overview of the com­ vanced in the closing report of the Special mittee's work, his work did not review the Committee. When the committee made its specific contents of First Nations' presenta­ final representation to Parliament in February tions before the committee. Specifically, his 1948 after 128 meetings and after considering concluding remarks that the works ofthe com­ over 400 briefs, it concluded that the Indian mittee "revealed the fundamental differences Act be completely overhauled and it recom­ in outlook between Indians and government mended a new Special Committee be struck during the post-war period" and that the com­ to formulate a draft bill amending the act. mittee contemplated assimilation for Indian Most significantly, the report emphasized "All peoples while Indian political leaders argued proposed revisions are designed to make pos­ for self-government and independence does sible the gradual transition of Indians from not quite seem to fit given the specific evi­ wardship to citizenship." Despite the broad dence of the IAA presentations. A specific mandate of the committee, citizenship even­ analysis of the IAA's presentations shows a tually became the focus of its attention and more complex situation. I suggest it might be the basis for its reformist suggestions. The com­ more interesting to view these events as a case mittee recommended the extension of addi­ of two parties discussing a shared, not oppo­ tional social legislation to Indian peoples, it site, concern: the nature of Indian citizen­ called for greater self-government within In­ ship.56 dian communities through the granting of The final report of the committee was not greater powers to band councils, and it recom­ particularly extensive or in-depth. Moreover, mended that economic betterment ofthe com­ since its recommendations were nonbinding, munities be a priority. its influence was not direct. The work of the Surprisingly, perhaps, treaty rights also fig­ committee and its final report were impor­ ured prominently in the final report. As a re­ tant, however, as a public statement of gov­ sult of the IAA linking citizenship to treaty ernment intentions to integrate Indian rights, the committee also emphasized that the peoples into the Canadian polity and as a new nature of treaty rights be definitely estab­ recognition of treaty rights. Before the war, lished by government. In its fourth report to Indian peoples were encouraged to a much Parliament in 1948, it stated openly that gov­ larger extent to remain separate from Cana­ ernment "inquire into the terms of all Indian dian society as a group, and treaty rights were treaties in order to discover and determine, not subject to any in-depth consideration. The definitely and finally, such rights and obliga­ committee's final report represented a change tions as are therein involved and further, to in this line of thinking. As a group, Indian assess and settle finally ... all claims ... peoples were to be actively prepared and eased arisen thereunder."55 Citizenship was a con­ into citizenship, and government was re­ cept that embodied more than the right to minded of the importance of treaty rights in vote, and in making its recommendations the this process. THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 155

CONCLUSIONS "self-sustaining, loyal citizens of the Crown." Although historian John Leslie suggests that The creation of a Special Committee to the impetus for administrative and legisla­ investigate the Indian Act and Indian admin­ tive reform came primarily from within gov­ istration in Canada in 1946 marked the be­ ernment circles-with the exception of ginning ofgovernment reassessment of Indian British Columbia Indian leaders who pres­ policy and legislation. The committee worked sured Ottawa for reform as early as 1943­ throughout 1946 and 1947 to establish a new this history of IAA activity indicates the IAA direction in Indian policy and legislation also played a significant role in the call for through hearings with Indian Affairs civil ser­ reform. 57 vants, recognized "experts," and even Indian The IAA submissions to the Special Com­ representatives themselves. Over the course mittee of Parliament in 1947 provided impor­ of its sittings, the committee heard from a va­ tant exposure for treaty rights in an era when riety ofsources, and the Indian Association of they were not subject to serious consideration Alberta, Alberta's first provincial-level Indian outside Indian communities. By couching its political group, made a substantive contribu­ discussions of treaty rights in terms of Indian tion to the committee's investigations with its citizenship, the IAA executive astutely played official brief and supporting materials. into existing government concerns, providing The final report of the committee and the the state with sound reasons for extending full overall thrust of its findings focused on the social and political rights to its Indian "wards." granting of full citizenship to Indian peoples This provided government with an opportu­ and on creating an environment to support nity to dialogue with Indian leaders on what the exercise and existence of the full range of appeared to be a shared cause. Its insistence citizenship rights. It also supported the inves­ on the significance of treaty rights also gave tigation of treaty rights, a concept largely ig­ the IAA an opportunity to criticize govern­ nored to that date. As a direct result of the ment Indian administration, and more spe­ IAA submissions to the committee, the ques­ cifically, the Indian Act. The IAA's discussion tion of rights and their extension to Indian of treaty rights in the late 1940s was unusual peoples was linked to the concept of treaty but boldly hooked into issues of the day, rights. In the contemporary context, this link­ thereby giving its arguments relevance and ing of treaty rights to the right to full citizen­ credibility. By 1951 these arguments provided ship seems unusual, as treaty rights have since a foundation for Indian Affairs reform. come to be viewed as unique rights, over and The nature of Indian citizenship was the above citizenship rights, accruing to Treaty central interest the Indian Association of Indian peoples in Canada. The IAA presenta­ Alberta shared with the committee. The Com­ tions could be considered as revealing the his­ mittee favored integrating Indian peoples into torical precedent of the more contemporary Canadian society insofar as this meant mak­ "citizens plus" position on treaty rights. ing the long-denied benefits of "civilization," In the 1940s the official IAA brief empha­ the material benefits of society, available to sized the need for expanded social and politi­ this segment of the population through edu­ cal rights, specifically additional social welfare, cation, increased social assistance, improved improved education, and increased powers of health care, and increased self-determination. self-government for Indian communities. Similarly, the IAA favored and lobbied hard Where the Indian Act interfered with reform for just such changes, except it argued that it measures, changes to the act were demanded. was through the treaties that Indians became Most signficantly, the entire argument in the Canadians, entitling them to the material ad­ brief was based on the treaties, which, the vantages of life in mid-twentieth-century brief argued, promised to make Indian peoples Canada. 156 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000

The IAA's brief to the Committee is in Canada and gives some insight into the work­ signficant because it provides an example of ings of the committee. See also John L. Tobias, "Protection, Civilization, Assimilation: An Out­ the interpretation of treaty rights at a specific line History of Canada's Indian Policy," in Sweet point in Canadian history. Following the ne­ Promises, ed. J. R. Miller (Toronto: University of gotiation and signing of the treaties in west­ Toronto Press, 1991), pp. 127-54, for a mention of ern Canada, these documents and their the committee and its works in the context of the meaning were given little specific attention history of Indian policy. Tobias gives little insight into the stimuli behind the establishment of such a by government. Within Indian communities, committee or of the presentations made at its hear­ however, the treaties maintained their signifi­ ings. cance. It was in the 1940s that the concept of 7. Sidney L. Harring, White Man's Law: Native treaty rights and their meaning and applica­ People in Nineteenth-Century Canadian Jurisprudence tion once again became part of a dialogue be­ (Toronto: University ofToronto Press, 1998), p. 107. 8. Over the decades, the Indian Act evolved tween government and Indian leaders as into a complex and large statute. With each revi­ Alberta and Saskatchewan Indian leaders sion of the act, more provisions were added, serv­ pressed for their recognition. This dialogue ing to further undermine or control the social, has continued sporadically since this time and political, and economic activities of Registered forms part of a long history of the interpreta­ Indian peoples. For example, in the 1880s the act contained amendments controlling the consump­ tion and application of treaty rights. tion of liquor by Indians, forbidding the holding of traditional ceremonies and gatherings including REFERENCES the potlatch, and allowing the Indian Affairs ad­ ministration to override band council decisions. 1. House of Commons, Debates, 13 May 1946, In the 1920s further oppressive measures were in­ p. 1446. serted into the act, including section 141 (1927) 2. Ibid., p. 575. which explicitly forbade the bands from attempt­ 3. Treaty Seven Elders and Tribal Council, with ing to raise funds for the purpose of pursuing claims Walter Hildebrandt, Sarah Carter, and Dorothy against the government. First Rider, The True Spirit and Original Intent of 9. Arthur Ray, I Have Lived Here Since the World Treaty 7 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Began (Toronto: Lester Publishing, 1996), p. 205. Press, 1996), p. 353. 10. Alexander Morris, The Treaties of Canada 4. Ian V. B. Johnson, Helping Indians to Help with the Indians (Saskatoon: Fifth House Publish­ Themselves-A Committee to Investigate Itself: The ers, 1991), p. 250. For a detailed discussion ofTreaty 1951 Indian Act Consultation Process, (Ottawa: No.7, see Treaty Seven Elders, True Spirit (note 3 Treaties and Historical Research Centre, Indian above). and Northern Affairs, 1984). 11. Abel, Kerry, Drum Songs: Glimpses of Dene 5. John Leslie and Ron Maguire, The Historical History, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Development of the Indian Act, (Ottawa: Indian and Press, 1993. As Abel points out, "Because of the Northern Affairs, Treaties and Historical Research strength of the opposition to the creation of re­ Centre, 1978), pp. 133-45; John F. Leslie, A His­ serves, the treaty commissioners decided to leave torical Survey ofIndian-Government Relations, 1940­ the reserve question in abeyance. Although they 1970 (Ottawa: Claims and Historical Research duly reported that the Natives did not want re­ Centre, 1993). serves, the clause stipulating that they were to be 6. Jim McMurtry, "The 1946-1948 Special Joint created was left in the text of the treaty" (p. 171). Committee on the Indian Act and Educational Unlike in the southern regions of Alberta, reserve Policy," (M.A. thesis, University ofAlberta, 1985). lands were less of an issue within Indian communi­ McMurtry's thesis focuses on the educational policy ties in the north since the local economy was firmly that emerged from the Special Committee. Of in­ based on hunting, trapping, and fishing. terest in this work is his questioning of Indian 12. Stan Cuthand, "A Sacred Treaty" (unpub­ participation in the consultation process. See also lished manuscript, no date), in author's collection. Peter Kulchyski, "Anthropology in the Service of 13. Muriel Manywounds, personal communica­ the State: Diamond Jenness and Canadian Indian tion with author, September 1996. The relation­ Policy," Journal ofCanadian Studies 28, no. 2 (sum­ ship between the treaties and the Indian Act was a mer 1993): 21-50. Kulchyski discusses the role of continual subject of discussion in IAA meetings Diamond Jenness in the formation of Indian policy and amongst the leadership. THE QUESTION OF CITIZENSHIP 157

14. Malcolm Norris to Ben Calfrobe, Murray 35. Ibid., 21 June 1946, D. F. Brown, p. 266. Dobbin private papers, 13 September 1944. 36. For a description of reform and classical lib­ 15. Rex v. Commanda (1939), 5 Canadian Na­ eral ideologies see Mark O. Dickerson and Thomas tive Law Reporter (1987), p. 372. Flanagan, An Introduction to Government and Poli­ 16. John Laurie, executive secretary of the IAA tics: A Conceptual Approach, (Scarborough: Nelson from 1944 to 1957, believed asserting treaty rights Canada, 1990), pp. 94-116. Mackenzie King's Lib­ might do more harm than good. Canadian histo­ eral federal government has been identified as a rian Hugh Dempsey, also a former IAA secretary, reform liberal government. confirms the idea that these rights were seen as 37. See S. K. Jaffary, "The Social Services," in vague and difficult to assert in the two decades Reconstruction in Canada: Lectures Given in the after World War II. This notion is corroborated by University of Toronto, ed. C. A. Ashley (Toronto: the lack of government attention paid to the con­ University of Toronto Press, 1943), pp. 104-20, cept. Hugh Dempsey, personal communication with especially pp. 119-20. In a lecture at the Univer­ author, September 1996. sity of Toronto on the reconstruction of Canada 17. Report of the Special Committee on Recon­ after the war, Jaffary emphasized the role of gov­ struction and Re-establishment, Minutes of Pro­ ernment in delivering social services and prevent­ ceedings and Evidence (Ottawa, 1944), p. 238. ing unemployment. Jaffary's lecture is revealing of 18. Ibid., p. 243. liberal reform thinking of this time period. Doug 19. Ibid., p. 253. Owram, The Government Generation: Canadian In­ 20. Ibid., pp. 259, 256. tellectuals and the State, 1900-1945 (Toronto: Uni­ 21. J. R. Miller, Skyscrapers Hide the Heavens, versity of Toronto Press, 1986), pp. 121 and 189, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), pp. identifies similar trends in thinking as characteris­ 220-21. tic of Canada's Liberal party and civil service. 22. Tobias, "Protection" (note 6 above), p. 139. 38. See J. M. Barbalet's discussion of T. H. 23. National Archives of Canada (NAC), Marshall in Barbalet's, Citizenship: Rights, Struggle Record Group 10, vol. 6811, file 470-3-6, part R, and Class Inequality (Milton Keynes: Open Uni­ (Reel C-8534), Newsweek, 15 April 1946. versity Press, 1988), pp. 45-51. 24. Ibid., Vancouver Sun, 15 May 1946, David 39. Special Joint Committee (note 34 above), Spencer Inc. Poll. p. 141. There was an error in the minutes. Case 25. Ibid., Edmonton Bulletin, 15 December 1945. later revised his statement to read "I can under­ 26. Ibid., unidentified Victoria clipping, 15 stand ..." (see p. 218 of Minutes). March 1946. 40. Norman Lickers studied law at Osgoode Hall 27. House of Commons, Debates, J. A. Glen, 13 in Toronto and later acted as a consultant to the May 1946, p. 1447. federal government on amendments to the Indian 28. See C. E. S. Franks, The Parliament of Canada Act in 1951. In 1969 he participated in protesting (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987), es­ the Liberal White Paper on Indian Affairs. See the pecially chapter 8. Brantford Expositor, 16 March 1987; Tekawennake, 29. Ibid., p. 162. 19 March 1987. 30. Ibid., pp. 164, 166. 41. McMurtry, "Special Joint Committee" (note 31. Ibid., pp.167, 169. 6 above), p. 40. Apparently, translation of Lickers' 32. The North American Indian Brotherhood circular letter was a problem in some communities. was given an early hearing because it was conve­ Hugh Dempsey remembers the chiefs of the Blood niently in Ottawa in June 1946 for an NAIB con­ reserve in Alberta struggled to have the questions ference. In order to accommodate the NAIB, the made clear to them. Only with the help ofthe local Special Committee agreed to hear from two del­ Indian agent and IAA member James Gladstone, egates of the Indian organization, Andrew Paull who was fluent in English and Blood, were they and Thomas Jones. Peter Kelly ofthe Native Broth­ able to successfully answer the questions. erhood of British Columbia was also heard at this 42. The histories of the IAA and the Union of time. British Columbia Indian groups were there­ Saskatchewan Indians (US!) are intertwined. Both fore among the first to be recognized and to repre­ organizations originated with the League of Indi­ sent their claims to govenrment. ans in Western Canada, and although their rela­ 33. See Franks, Parliament (note 28 above), pp. tionship was not close in the 1940s the founding of 161-85. the USI reestablished bonds between Indian lead­ 34. Special Joint Committee of the Senate and ers in both provinces. For a history of the USI see the House of Commons Appointed to Consider articles by Pitsula, James M., "The CCF Govern­ the Indian Act, Minutes of Proceedings and Evi­ ment and the Formation of the Union of Sas­ dence, (Ottawa, 1946-49), 14 June 1946, p. 217. katchewan Indians," Prairie Forum, Vol. 19, No.2, 158 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, SPRING 2000

Fall 1994, pp. 131-52. James Pitsula, 1994; Rauncie contributed to the credibility of the IAA's presen­ Murdoch, "The Union of Saskatchewan Indians" tations. (unpublished manuscript, 1995). For more infor­ 46. Ibid., p. 574. mation on the CCF's involvement with Aborigi­ 47. Ibid., p. 575. nal people see F. L. Barron, Walking in Indian 48. Ibid., p. 577. Mocassins: The Native Policies of Tommy Douglas 49. Morris Schumiatcher, "The Buckskin Cur­ and the CCF (Vancouver: University of British tain," The Beaver, Outfit 290 (autumn 1959): 12­ Columbia Press, 1997). 15; 14. 43. Meeting minutes of the Union of Sas­ 50. Dempsey, Hugh A. The Gentle Persuader: A katchewan Indians, 4 January 1946, R834, f.37, Biography ofJames Gladstone, Indian Senator, Saska­ Saskatchewan Archives, Regina, SK. toon: Western Producer Prairie Books, 1986, p. 115. 44. President's message, 7th General Meeting of 51. Calgary Albertan, 19 April 1947, NAC, RG the IAA, 1946, Murray Dobbin private papers. 10, vol. 6811, file 470-3-6 pt. 2 (reel C-8534). 45. With their surveys, the IAA locals made their 52. Ibid., Lethbridge Herald, 8 May 1947. most direct contribution to the Special Commit­ 53. Special Joint Committee, Minutes (note 34 tee investigations. Previously, the IAA executive above), 21 April 1947, p. 545. circulated a questionnaire on agriculture and hous­ 54. John Laurie, "The Indian Association of ing to its various locals, and the returns were col­ Alberta," John Laurie Papers, M656, f. 22, p. 29, lated for the committee into a comprehensive Glenbow Archives, Calgary, Alberta. survey of contemporary conditions in those com­ 55. Special Joint Committee, Minutes (note 34 munities. A short discussion of reserve health care above), 4th report, 22 June 1948, p. 187. needs was later added to the survey findings. In 56. Johnson, Helping Indians (note 4 above), p. this way IAA locals and members across the prov­ 43, 53, 54-55. McMurtry (note 6 above) also sug­ ince were able to submit short statements outlin­ gests the aim of the committee was the "assimila­ ing their views on housing and agricultural tion" of Indian peoples, stating, "Assimilation was problems. These statements were probably the most truly the Committee's primary goal" (p. 50). direct evidence the committee received from a 57. Leslie, Historical Survey (note 5 above), pp. grassroots level, and they revealed firsthand many 3-5. Leslie suggests that changes in Indian Affairs practical issues confronting reserve communities. staff and the Liberal postwar reconstruction agenda The IAA strategically chose agriculture and hous­ both contributed primarily to the reform of Indian ing as issues for discussion not only because of Affairs. In his view, Minister J. A. Glen initiated practical reality, but also because these were two reform in Indian Affairs. It is suggested here that areas were primary concerns of the Indian Affairs the minister was more likely responding to outside Branch. The surveys appealed to issues already pressures from various sources including the IAA, considered important to the branch, and thereby rather than acting in an innovative manner.