On 2 May 2, 2018, recognition by negotiation or by the voice of the courts ??? :

This question brings us to an update on our decision to have our Aboriginal Nation recognized in court, and many members are still asking this question today .

In the past and even today, bea ucoup clan and Métis groups have expressed differe nt s way to get to their recognition by the Canadian and Provincial Governments in Eastern Canada. None of these attempts have succeeded otherwise than in the courts or at the door of the Supreme Court of Canada, the treaty agreement and s s s past, governments do not comply without being obliged by this recent court told instances .

The only way to do that is to face these so-called government's court forcing nt s to respect the treaty, agreements that have been done in the past with our ancestors. See the Royal Proclamation of 1763, the treaty of Murr has there etc ... For these treaties you must refer to the originals, considering that the governances manipulates them, modifies them and presents them like a submission of the others in ways to deceive us, I made you see any s one s in annex.

Treaty and agreement are set schedule, which is found on the net and there is t s been changed to lie to you and swindle, cultural genocide plan by the governance.

The only court that definitively settle these historic decisions s is the Supreme Court of Canada that ref ry always the historic original texts.

Why the Supreme Court of Canada is the only court that will give us our constitutional recognition ?

T his yard is constructed 9 judges who have demonstrated during their careers remarkable impartiality and flawless. Moreover, their judgment is based on the C nt Canadian onstitution the Charter's right, the treaty agreement s and s of yesterday and today with the original texts that are actually contracts on jurisprudences and the C om o n L a w .

Only the Supreme Court of Canada , to this great power supported by a pure right and not in tow of the governments that politically put the most possible of judges who eat in their hands by gratitude to this dictatorial government and conviction .

On the other hand, and very much for us , he s is still a lot of s Democratic judge s, but it is not a t exostive training in Aboriginal law and pa r judgments allow us to move forward when they make their judgments we can bring on appeal.

Let me explain, when a judge makes a judgment , he tells us of the weaknesses of our request according to his understanding of the law. Without being an expert judge in Aboriginal law, it allows us to produce better s s request, more solid s requests in the following procedures. The law is very complex, difficult to understand, but it 't are the price we pay for living in a democracy. In fact the only real s expert in Aboriginal law are the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada who can afford to surround himself with the most refined and expert analysis every contract nt a surgical manner e.

1

Governments don 't we not only vice attempt to influence the courts of lower instances, they also developed political skulduggery s s, with appropriate budgets influence s s different grouping Métis, by luring them with full of promise that they will not go to court, our only r ecourt possible towards our gratitude.

I would not be surprised to hear one day that people among us have been paid to discourage us, influence us so that we abandon our legal fight to the recognition of our constitutional rights group s, these governance. And unfortunately some person s s n 'need only subjective promises to naively believe.

There is only a single way to be recognized, ie, es t through the courts, the Polwey arrest demonstrates, stopping Harry Daniels demonstrates, Sioui demonstrates (if in hold only to o rigid texts ) .

Find me, one constitutional right of Metis recognition agreement in eastern Canada, which has not been won in court I want to read it I tell you you will not find.

For a small $ 30 a year , Métis join our cause, the union is strength and please pay your annual fee , the nerves of the war is unfortunately the money . We are the only Métis Nation of the Rising Sun (Métis Nation of Gaspésie, Lower St. Lawrence, the Magdalen Islands) that by this research achieves nt we exceed our initial're boundaries and have spread across North America .

In annex, these few treaties , it is difficult to find the right s of need that have been modified with changed words modified headlight structures , always refer to the original texts :

Benoît Lavoie Grand Chief Métis Nation.

Aboriginal Treaties in Canada In Canada, aboriginal treaties are constitutionally recognized agreements between the Crown and aboriginal peoples. Most of these agreements refer to the exchange of Aboriginal nations agreeing to share some of their interests in ancestral lands through various payments and promises. These treaties sometimes have a deeper meaning, particularly in the minds of Aboriginal peoples who see them as sacred pacts between nations. According to them, the treaties define the relationship between those for whom Canada is the ancestral homeland and those whose family roots are in another country. Treaties thus constitute the constitutional and moral foundation of alliances between Aboriginal peoples and Canada.

2

Métis Certificate Certificate of Métis issued for the purchase of Crown land, September 15, 1905. (With the permission of Library and Archives Canada / Wikimedia Creative Commons) After the passing of the Manitoba Act in 1870, the Canadian government attempted to extinguish Métis securities by issuing land certificates with dollar value. Unlike people, each Métis' file is treated individually. Lots of land covering approximately 160 to 240 acres are available in the areas where certificates are issued. In order to use their certificates, however, many Métis have to travel long distances to get to one of the registrars. The difficulty of relocating their family and the excessive complexity of the procedures for accessing these lands make certificates more often than not used or sold for a fraction of their real value. Efforts to implement the certificate program are also often undermined by the fraudulent activities of resellers who manage to capture most of the resources for Métis communities. Fraudulent land speculators thus manage to take over land by posing as representatives of Métis heads of families. The authorities will resolve to amend the Criminal Code in 1921 to include this type of criminal activity. Many Métis were, however, harmed when they were expropriated. In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the government failed to distribute and protect the 1.4 million acres promised to the Métis in the Manitoba Act . The court does not invoke any remedy, but recognizes the right of the Métis to their native lands.

3

Treaty of Longueuil of Murray (1760) On September 5, 1760, three days before the capitulation of Montreal, the Huron leader of Lorette, who accompanied the French army in retreat from to the Montreal area, approached General James Murray in Longueuil. On September 5, 1760, three days before the capitulation of Montreal , the Huron leader of Lorette, who accompanied the French army in retreat from Quebec to the Montreal area, approached General James Murray in Longueuil. A peace treaty is concluded, under which the Hurons pass under British protection. The treaty gives them a safe conduct that allows them to return to their village of Lorette, near Quebec, without being subjected to ill-treatment. It is however much more than a safe conduct that the treaty grants them. They are received on the same terms as the Canadian militia: no punishment will be imposed on them for taking up arms against the British. The treaty also grants them free exercise of their religion and customs as well as freedom of commerce with the English. At the time, the free exercise of their customs meant the non-interference of Europeans in their way of life, their local government and their justice system. No law, no tax, no military service will be imposed on them, contrary to what happened under the French regime. Freedom of commerce has always meant an exemption from the duties or legal restrictions imposed on pioneers; it has never been limited to the fur trade and applies to all commercial activities. The stipulations of the treaty are respected during the first years of British rule. Over time, the provincial and federal governments again violated Huron rights until May 1990, when the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the validity of the treaty. You have just read the irigated understanding of Murray's treatise, the original is quite different ???

Treaty of Fort Stanwix , in 1768 The Treaty of Fort Stanwix , in 1768, is an aboriginal treaty between the Haudenosaunee (also known as the "Six Nations" or the " Confederacy") and the Superintendent of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Sir William Johnson. The Treaty of Fort Stanwix , in 1768, is an aboriginal treaty between the Haudenosaunee (also known as the "Six Nations" or the "Iroquois Confederacy") and the Superintendent of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Sir William Johnson . This is the first major treaty negotiated in accordance with the Royal Proclamation of 1763 . Five years after the Proclamation defined the Appalachian Mountains as the western frontier of the settlements, thereby reserving the vast North American interior to the Aboriginals, the Treaty of Fort Stanwix pushes that boundary west of the Ohio River. The Fort Stanwix Treaty originates from fur trading companies in Pennsylvania, who complain about the damage suffered during the Pontiac Rebellion . They are asking for compensation in a new way: with native lands. William Johnson (himself a furniture

4

speculator) wants to create, thanks to the treaty, a major land offer. He also seeks to ensure the continued dominance of his longtime allies, the Haudenosaunee . The Six Nations sign the treaty in their territory (at Fort Stanwix , ), and the majority of payments come to them, even though the lands they surrender under the treaty, the majority of what is now Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Maryland and western Pennsylvania, are ancestral lands of the Shawnee, Delaware and Cherokees. This surrender causes the emergence of inflexible Shawnee leaders, particularly the brothers Tecumseh and Tenskwatawa , in the debate among the Great Lakes Indians and the Ohio Valley who has the authority to sign surrender treaties. land. Until the end of the , these leaders insist that England honor its promise under the Treaty of Fort Stanwix , which wants the Ohio River to remain the eastern border of an internationally recognized indigenous territory . When Tecumseh died, during the war, the influence of the Confederacy disintegrated. Indigenous peoples are bitterly resented by the role of moveable speculators in the loss of much of their territory as a result of the ratification of the Fort Stanwix Treaty . William Johnson hoped that the treaty would quell the greed of the speculators of England and the Thirteen Colonies. However, the opposite is true: the lure of profit brings new speculative ventures, such as the IndianCompany , which includes the governor of New Jersey and Benjamin Franklin. Still manipulation in this treatise, the original is quite different ?????

Treaty of Easton The Easton Treaty is an agreement between the British and the Aboriginal peoples, established in 1758 at the fork of the Delaware River in what is now Pennsylvania. The Easton Treaty is an agreement between the British and the Aboriginal peoples , established in 1758 at the fork of the Delaware River in what is now Pennsylvania. The treaty was signed in October 1758, after a conference between British colonial agents and more than 500 chiefs representing 15 indigenous peoples from the eastern forests . Through the Treaty of Easton and several other agreements, the British managed to neutralize the alliance between the French and the natives in the Ohio Valley during the Seven Years' War (1756-1763) by guaranteeing the protection of the Native lands against the acquisition by Anglo-American settlers eager to get them. The British Superintendent of Indian Affairs in the Northern District, Sir William Johnson , plays a leading role in the negotiation of the Easton Treaty. William Johnson considers that his allies, the Six Nations (also known as " Haudenosaunee " or "Iroquois"), dominate the top of the Ohio Valley and its inhabitants, like the Delawares . Thus, the Easton Treaty is based on the principles of the Covenant Chain , a long- standing alliance between the British Crown and the Iroquois League. The Easton Treaty is also influenced by the Pennsylvania Friendly Association, a group of Quaker pacifists . This organization represented in the negotiations of the treaty by Isreal Pemberton feeds ideals Quakers about the colonization of North America, which dates from the seventeenth century, when William Penn founded Pennsylvania and try to coexist peace with the native inhabitants by buying their lands before European colonization.

5

The Pennsylvania Friendly Association is pushing for the definition and inclusion in the treaty of a firm boundary line between the lands of European colonization and that of aboriginal peoples. This boundary line is established in the Alleghenys , beyond which the vast valley of the Ohio is reserved as an aboriginal territory. With British title insurance, the Ohio Valley Indigenous Peoples are withdrawing their support from the French control of Fort Duquesne . The same year, the British take this strategic location (at the site of modern Pittsburgh) and name it " Fort Pitt ". The British campaign for the French defeat in North America is pushing the Crown to recognize ancestral rights in the Ohio Valley. However, the promises made during the Easton Treaty are soon forgotten or simply ignored. Pennsylvanians continue to settle in the Ohio Valley; the British do not stop them. Moreover, contrary to promises, the British are an imposing presence at Fort Pitt. Dissatisfaction with these issues led, in part, to the Pontiac Rebellion and, later, the Royal Proclamation of 1763 (sometimes called the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples"). In other words, it will take strength for the British to follow through on the promises made in the Easton treaty of affirming and protecting the interests of aboriginals in their ancestral lands. S handling in the original handling are quite different ???? Aboriginal Treaties in Canada In Canada, aboriginal treaties are constitutionally recognized agreements between the Crown and aboriginal peoples. Most of these agreements refer to the exchange of Aboriginal nations agreeing to share some of their interests in ancestral lands through various payments and promises. These treaties sometimes have a deeper meaning, particularly in the minds of Aboriginal peoples who see them as sacred pacts between nations. According to them, the treaties define the relationship between those for whom Canada is the ancestral homeland and those whose family roots are in another country. Treaties thus constitute the constitutional and moral foundation of alliances between Aboriginal peoples and Canada. Aboriginal Treaties in Canada. (Courtesy of Victor Temprano /Native-Land.ca) Introduction: Different interpretations of treaties In the minds of Aboriginal people , it is not the legal jargon of treaties that makes them sacred and enforceable. In their view, the true scope of the treaties stems from what has actually been said, often in Aboriginal languages , during negotiations. Treaty-making deliberations were frequently accompanied by ceremonies in which it was customary to smoke the sacred pipe or exchange gifts of symbolic significance, such as wampum belts . As a result, many Aboriginal people consider their elders, who are familiar with the oral history of their community, to be the supreme authorities for everything related to the spirit and intent of treaties. From the Crown's point of view , the principles governing the negotiation of treaties with aboriginal peoples are defined by King George III in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 , which establishes the constitutional foundations of Canada after the government of France gives up claiming territories in North America. The Constitution Act , 1982 ,

6

which describes itself as "the supreme law of Canada", renews the constitutional character of the old and future treaties between the Aboriginal peoples and the Crown. Section 35 of this Act recognizes and affirms "existing aboriginal and of aboriginal peoples" ( see Aboriginal Rights ). Since then, successive court decisions have continued to change the relationship between the federal government and Aboriginal people in the application of treaties. In 1990, for example, in the Sioui case , the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that " Indian treaties and statutes must be interpreted broadly and the uncertainties resolved in favor of Aboriginal peoples". The Court introduced on this occasion in Canadian case law a principle adopted in a judgment rendered in 1899 in the United States and that the treaties "should therefore be interpreted, not as an expert lawyer would, technically, but rather as the Aboriginals would do it spontaneously. " Despite the constitutional nature of the treaties, the non-Aboriginal people who write and implement them most often admit that they are instruments designed to favor certain interests rather than sacred pacts between independent nations. Originally, non- Aboriginal treaty negotiators viewed these agreements as inexpensive and convenient instruments for eliminating Aboriginal land rights on most Canadian lands for settlers to use ( see Aboriginal Territories). Even nowadays, the federal and provincial governments tend to interpret the treaties in a strictly legalistic way, claiming that under the terms of the treaties, the aboriginal people "surrendered and abandoned" all the rights and titles they held. on their ancestral lands. In other words, the treaties would be real estate transactions that have allowed the Crown to purchase aboriginal lands from reserve and single or continuous payments ( see Treaty Day ). This narrow approach to treaty-making has created a deep gap between the Canadian government's view and that of Aboriginal peoples. On the one hand, we have the government arguing that the treaties are legally valid instruments that extinguish aboriginal rights and, on the other hand, aboriginal people who see treaties as instruments for defining the relationship between them. autonomous peoples who agree to share Canada's lands and resources. According to this last point of view, the treaties did not extinguish, but rather confirmed the rights of the Aboriginal people. The treaties also recognize that indigenous peoples have the capacity to govern themselves. Bridging the gap between the two is a huge challenge for Canadian citizens and legislators. The complex history of treaty-making in Canada can be explored by examining four great epochs and the corresponding treaties: the first treaties established before the Conquest , those signed between 1763 and Confederation , those established between 1867 and the first modern treaties 1975, and two traded from 1975 to the present day. A careful examination of treaties in the context of constitutional and international law also tells us a great deal about their place in Canadian domestic and international affairs. Treaties with the French and the English, from 1676 to 1763 The first treaties signed in Canada date back to the time when Europeans arrived in North America. Europeans seek to establish alliances with Aboriginal people to maintain peace, provide access to natural resources, and forge commercial and military alliances in the context of colonial wars. The first time treated so roughly begins with the creation of the "Covenant Chain" in the 16th century, and extends to the royal proclamation in 1763.

7

The alliance chain Treaties of peace and friendship, from 1725 to 1752 Treaties of peace and friendship. (courtesy Victor Temprano /Native-Land.ca) Another set of treaty relations has also been described as a "chain of alliance". This tradition links the British Crown to the Mi'kmaq , the Passamaquoddy and Wolastoqiyik () whose ancestral lands include most Maritimes and part of the Gaspé Peninsula . Unlike treaties established after the Royal Proclamation, these Maritime Treaties do not focus on the issue of land ownership. These agreements, the most important of which are the Boston Treaty of 1725-1726 and the Halifax Treaty of 1752, are, in substance, mutual promises of peace and friendship. They also guarantee the right of aboriginals to trade freely and to hunt and fish according to their customs. They also provide the privilege for Aboriginal people to regularly receive food, supplies and ammunition from the Crown. At that time, the Mi'kmaq and Wolastoqiyik were largely Catholic . They are often deeply attached to their priests as well as to their francophone Acadian neighbors with whom they also contract mixed marriages ( see Acadie ). These two Aboriginal peoples are therefore in the habit of opposing the British, but the process of negotiating treaties will somewhat alter this attitude. In 1985, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that the Halifax Treaty of 1752 was still valid by revoking the conviction of James Simon, of the Shubenacadie Reserve , convicted of hunting in a closed period. Despite the Simon case, the governments of the Maritime Provinces, as elsewhere in Canada, do not accept that treaties between the Crown and Aboriginal peoples limit their provincial authority over Crown lands. Today, in Nova Scotia , the Treaty Day commemorates the establishment of a special relationship between the Mi'kmaq and the Crown. Celebrated annually on October 1 since 1986 (one year after the Simon case), this anniversary celebrates the signing of the 1752 Treaty. Sewn with deception, treaties and agreements from 1725 to 1752 , the originals are obviously different ???? We devon s us: Refer to the original we have and will file in court. Treaties and the Seven Years' War in North America, from 1754 to 1763 The Seven Years' War (or War of the Conquest) marks the beginning of a period of violence, first between the French and the English, then between the English and the Americans. In all these conflicts, Aboriginal nations exert considerable influence through their skilful sense of diplomacy and the effectiveness of their warriors in conditions that are often extremely difficult for European and North American soldiers. In the years before the war, the English know that their enemy, the French, has already established strong alliances with the indigenous peoples. They also want to forge strategic links with First Nations . It was to this end that in 1755 the British imperial government of London took over the colonies the responsibility of establishing treaties. The British imperial authorities then created within the Department of Indians the two directions of North and South, whose jurisdictions are roughly separated by the Potomac River and the Ohio River. These two directions are extensions of the armed forces and

8

they are placed directly under the authority of the king. The Northern Branch, headed by Sir William Johnson , an alliance chain expert, is focused on continuing the implementation of government administrations in English-speaking Canada. There is direct administrative continuity over time between Johnson's department, which will modernize and expand the original alliance chain, and the current Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada . During the Seven Years' War, Sir William Johnson, with the help of her counselor Mohawk , Molly Brant , managed to neutralize the old alliance francoautochtone through a series of treaties that guarantee the protection of indigenous lands against the Anglo- American settlers seek to appropriate territories north of the border. After the British victory over the French on the Plains of Abraham , William Johnson made several agreements with the Seven Nations of Canada (the Mohawks, , Anishinaabeg , Huron-Wendat and Onondaga ) who lived on several Catholic missions near of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence valley (see St. Lawrence River ), offering them to protect their homes, their businesses and their religious practices. The Treaty of Oswegatchie , signed in 1760, is part of this series. That same year, the Treaty of Longueil Murray , a peace agreement signed by General James Murray , provides for the Huron military protection and certain freedoms and rights after the withdrawal of the French. The Sioui case , in May 1990, will test the sustainability of this treaty. That year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a revolutionary decision that the governments of Quebec and Canada violated the rights of the Hurons to enjoy their traditional territories, rights that were guaranteed to them. by the treaty of Longueil de Murray. The court ruled that the occupation of the territories in question by the Crown is subject to the rights and customs of the Hurons. Still sewn lies, these rather Britan n ic who be sion to be secure, in combat, the text shows us the wild we Valions 10 British and more. Royal Proclamation of 1763 After the defeat of the French army in North America, the British government must decide on a strategy to establish relations with the Aboriginal peoples who still dominate most of Canada. An emerging coalition of indigenous nations, led by Chief Odawa Obwandiyag (also known as Pontiac), opposes British rule in a conflict later known as the Pontiac War (1763-1766). This coalition manages to conquer nine British forts located in Canada during the spring of 1763, a feat that further presses the British to make peace with the Aboriginals. Sir William Johnson is a strong advocate of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 (precipitated by the Pontiac War) which, in theory, precisely fixes the boundaries of the new British province of Quebec and the 13 Anglo-American colonies, and reserves the vast territory beyond the Appalachians to Aboriginals. He will also play a key role in signing the part of the treaty that will be ratified in Niagara in 1764. The proclamation sets out a procedure for the future opening of certain parts of the Aboriginal territories to the colonization and installation of non-Aboriginal Crown subjects. Under this proclamation, the Crown claims ownership and sovereignty over Aboriginal lands and is the only entity that can establish treaties with Aboriginal peoples. Therefore, while the proclamation appears to protect Aboriginal lands from outside

9

intrusions, it leaves the Crown the opportunity to self-perpetrate such intrusions. The king decreed that no individual or colony could buy land from Aboriginals, the British Crown being the indispensable player in any treaty negotiations. Confirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act , 1982 , the Royal Proclamation forms the constitutional basis of Aboriginal treaties in Canada. These principles still apply today for the establishment of contemporary treaties with Aboriginal peoples. Treaty Establishment in British North America, 1764 to 1867 Between the Conquest and Confederation, the British and the Indians made various alliances to protect themselves against the Americans during the American Revolution and the War of 1812. These agreements also allow the British to access the traditional territories to facilitate the installation of white settlers and the development of their communities. It was during this period that the colonial government began to hunt aboriginal people from their territories and to gather them on reserves. The first reserve in Canada ( Sillery ) dates back to 1637, but it was not until the mid 19 th century most of the reserves will be created. I apologize , but my grandfather refused to go on a reserve and said you will never make me live in a closed cow . Those living on reserves only thought to be well placed to trade and mediate between the British and we the Indians who lived in forest and are making good s case s , with profit and you have called the Indians , even the , deception and falsehood, before the court will be demonstrated. Treaty of Fort Stanwix of 1768 The first treaty of Fort Stanwix (another treaty bearing the same name will be signed in 1784) is the first major agreement negotiated under the provisions of the Royal Proclamation. When Pennsylvania's major fur-trading companies demand reparations from the British government for damages incurred during the Seven Years' War and the Pontiac War, Indian Affairs agents try to compensate them through a significant transfer of land. The Fort Stanwix Treaty thus pushes the boundary between native territories and the Anglo-American colonies far west to the banks of the Ohio River. The territories ceded by this treaty, which cover present-day Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Maryland, and western Pennsylvania, are in fact the ancestral lands of the Shawnee, Delaware, Cherokee, Seneca , Miami, Potawatomi, Mingo , Odawa and Wyandot. This transfer led to the emergence of radical leaders in the debate between the Aboriginal peoples of the Great Lakes region and the Ohio Valley; debate which then aims to determine who was allowed to cede territories in the context of the negotiation of treaties. Sir William Johnson, a land speculator, hopes the Fort Stanwix treaty will satisfy the business interests of the 13 colonies and England. The agreement, however, only feeds the greed of speculators. Some of them, including political representatives including Benjamin Franklin in Pennsylvania and Lord Shelburne in Britain, are trying to counter the Royal Proclamation by arguing that Indigenous nations could surrender land through treaties with companies directly. decolonization. However, in 1774, as these powerful business interests seemed poised to prevail, the British government responded by adopting the Quebec Act which favors the interests of the Montreal fur trade at the

10

expense of Philadelphia's land speculators and, on the other hand, agreements with the Aboriginals to the detriment of the expansionist aspirations of the Anglo-American settlers. The passage of this law is an important factor in the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1776 ( see American Revolution: Invasion of Canada ). But the original texts are agreements , contracts between large s nation s only th highest court of Canada will respect them. They n 'is no way to discouragement, you have to keep us supported us financially sustaining and we do communautairemen remains t and democratically.

Benoît Lavoie Grand- Chef Métis Nation of the Rising Sun

1

Original French text:

Les gouvernements n ' on t pas seulement le vice de tenter d'influencer les tribunaux d'instances inférieur , ils ont aussi développé les magouille s politique s , avec des budgets appropriés pour

11