D. Reaction to the Prairie Treaties

After each of the seven Western treaties of the 1870s was signed, it was taken to Ottawa to be ratified (or approved) by the Privy Council and implemented by the Department of Indian Affairs (formed in 1880). Meanwhile, on the Prairies, in consultation with their people, began the process of choosing reserves and settling on them to begin the transition to an agricultural lifestyle. In some cases, this transition was accomplished smoothly for both the government and the First Nations, however, there were also complaints from both sides. The Indian Act of 1876, unknown to the First Nations treaty signatories, now began to be applied. It established a draconian system of control over the Prairie peoples.

Treaties One and Two were concluded within a few days of each other and contained the same terms. Therefore, they must be considered as a single unit. After the signing of these treaties, they were taken to Ottawa to be ratified. The ratification took place without incident, however, the government was not aware of the promises that had not been included in the text of the treaty. They were later made aware of these "outside promises" through the treaty commissioner's final report several years after the negotiation had taken place. As a result, the government was extremely displeased with its negotiators who had not included everything in the treaty and who had overstepped the limits that had been set for them regarding terms. In addition, the government was reluctant to spend extra money on terms that had not technically been included in the text of the treaty and were viewed of little importance. Consequently, agricultural aid and other items provided for in the "outside promises" were not delivered to the Indians promptly, if at all, and when they did arrive, were of insufficient quantity and very low quality. Complaints from the Indians regarding the absence of supplies, which they believed were promised as a treaty right, began very quickly. Confusion continued as the Indian commissioner claimed that the Indians had not settled the land or applied to him for supplies and, therefore, none had been provided. However, the likelihood of the Indians settling in one place while they had no supplies with which to support themselves was very small, and the chance for treaty Indians to apply to the commissioner for help was limited since he lived in Ontario for most of the year. Tensions rose further as the First Nations became aware of the disparity between their treaty terms and those of Treaty Three. In response to what they viewed as the government's breaking of the agreement, the Treaty One and Two Indians refused their annuity payments and enlisted the assistance of a local Member of Parliament who suggested a delegation travel to Ottawa to discuss their grievances. The Indian commissioner, who acted on behalf of the government, rejected this suggestion. Finally, the agitation of the Indians had an effect and a new resident commissioner was appointed who set about administering the treaties. In the same period, four years after Treaties One and Two had been concluded, the government of Canada held a meeting with the Indian people to explain that a mistake had been made and would be rectified. Subsequently, the Privy Council ordered that the Indian commissioner's memorandum regarding the "outside promises" should be considered a part of the treaties. The government also stated that it could not consider any other claims as part of the treaty but did admit that a misunderstanding had occurred. As a result, the annuities were raised as compensation. This constituted the revision of Treaties One and Two.

The government of Canada was satisfied with Treaty Three in that annuities fell within the limits set and because treaty negotiations with the Salteaux people had failed on three previous occasions. Thus, the increased size of the reserves and the provisions for agricultural aid were seen as necessary elements in achieving a settlement with the Treaty Three bands. Despite their overall approval of the treaty, the cash-strapped government was reluctant to fulfil all of its financial obligations, and problems in administration of Treaty Three arose almost immediately. Government officials claimed the Indians did not really require as many agricultural supplies as had been stipulated in the terms of the treaty. Those that were received by the Salteaux were late and substandard in quality and quantity. Complaints were made by the treaty bands and remedial action was taken, albeit very slowly. The selection of reserve lands was also controversial as the Indians were denied the opportunity to combine their allotments to create a large reserve in the fertile belt, the area most attractive for white settlement. Eventually, the First Nations acquiesced and were given separate reserves in other areas. The Indians who negotiated Treaty Three initially seemed quite satisfied with the treaty terms, if not the administration of them, however, issues that seem to have been discussed at the negotiations but were not included in the text of the treaty soon arose. These extra stipulations were enumerated in the "Paypom Treaty," a set of notes made at the time of the treaty negotiations and dealt with issues such as military conscription and the status of Salteaux living in the United States. These claims were never added to the text of Treaty Three and no significant resistance arose because of them.

A Cree Man, Lac les Isles, Alberta, ca. 1926
Photographer: Edward S. Curtis
Courtesy of the National Archives of Canada

In the time after the negotiations of Treaties Four and Five, the government made little attempt to aid or enforce the establishment of reserves. The annuities were paid regularly, however, because settlement and the advance of the railway were not imminent in these areas, and the government felt little need to interfere with the First Nations of the Treaty Four and Five areas. In addition, the establishment and administration of reserves would require the delivery of agricultural supplies, a financial burden the Canadian government was reluctant to shoulder. The Indians of the Treaties Four and Five area were also reluctant to settle on reserves while a livelihood could still be made hunting buffalo. Thus, Indian complaints of the slow implementation of governmental treaty obligations only began once the buffalo had virtually disappeared. Once Native complaints began, all portions of the treaties began to be implemented. However, the government was very slow to move on the promises that required extensive manpower or money.

Following negotiations for Treaty Six, government treaty commissioners reported to Ottawa and found complaints that the terms that had been agreed upon were more onerous than any previous treaty. The chief negotiator was forced to defend the existence of the famine and pestilence clause, and the medicine chest clause. His major argument was that the treaty would not have been made at all without the inclusion of these terms. In contrast, the Indians who took treaty under the Treaty Six terms were relieved of their fears of starvation and having no method by which to sustain themselves. Despite this relief, some bands did not take treaty immediately and those who did sign took several years to settle on reserves. Those bands which refused to sign or adhere to Treaty Six did so primarily because a request that autonomy be assured in the text of the treaty was denied and they feared losing their freedom. Thus, Big Bear's statement that he did not want "the rope to be about [his] neck" entailed the loss of freedom that a wild horse experiences when it is led by the halter. It did not refer to a hanging. Big Bear and his fellow chief Little Pine held out for several years, hoping for a better treaty but were finally forced to sign and move onto reserves when their people began dying of starvation with the disappearance of the buffalo.

First Nations Reservations
Copyright © 2000 The Applied History Research Group

The conclusion of Treaty Seven in southern Alberta marked the end of the period of treaty making in the Canadian west. The government found itself pleased with the terms of their last treaty in this era because the terms were less onerous than those of Treaty Six and required little negotiation to achieve. The First Nations, believing it was a peace treaty, were initially pleased with the treaty, however, bad omens began to worry them and they began to blame themselves. The significance of reserve lands did not become clear to the Indians of the Treaty Seven area for several years and problems arose when some tribes realised the lands they had chosen were not appropriate for the farming and ranching life they were beginning. Revised treaties were signed with most of the tribes to allow them to choose new lands and to ensure their reserves did not fall in the path of railway construction. The Tsuu T'ina (Sarcee) exchanged their reserve lands while the Blood affirmed their choice. The Blood reserve later became controversial when the government claimed a census of the people had been inflated and their land area was reduced to reflect the governmental estimate. Claims have been made that some verbal agreements were not included in the text of Treaty Seven, however, some historians assert that this may be due to cultural differences or twentieth century transference of values.