Inequality
...awrence that constituted the province of Quebec from 1763-1791. The Proclamation has continued to be an important historical document and influence throughout all of Canada (Miller,1989, 258.). Reservations are tracts of land set aside for the ownership and use of certain Native tribes. The term arises from 19th century agreements in which tribes ceded their lands to the government except for portions “reserved” for their own use. By creating reservations, the government hoped to avoid clashes over land boundaries between Natives and European settlers. Natives could be sectioned off into a small area of land where they could be kept track of. As settlement increased, reservations were made smaller and Natives were relocated to areas undesirable by whites (Natives.). Indian-white relations changed drastically between 1790 and 1830s. In 1830 Great Britain transferred jurisdictions of Indian affairs in Lower and Upper Canada. This shift of responsibility for Indian affairs from military to civilian officials foreshadowed a major change in the relationship. Men who dealt with Indians pre 1830 were respectful of the Native culture and people, unlike those post 1830. Assimilation, not extermination became the goal of the British and British-Canadians (Miller,1989,95.). Assimilation is defined as to absorb, while to exterminate is defined as to wipe out. They both imply the same idea, get rid of Natives. Is there any question that this is what Europeans were trying to do? From the beginning of contact Europeans used Natives in trade and war, caused the rapid decline of groups through disease, did not recognize them while making agreements over title to colonial Canada, and when the idea of reservations comes about, Europeans want to assimilate them into their culture? I think not. Their intentions have always been to annihilate them. European influence was felt most intensely in Upper Canada (Ontario present day), which stretched west from the Ottawa River along the north shore of the St Lawrence and the lower lakes. Upper Canada was the most vulnerable of the British North American colonies (Miller,1989,85.). In Upper Canada, European impact was immense. Movement of Europeans on Indian controlled land was rapid. After the War of 1812, this migration was still taking place however, the people also began coming from different countries. With the loss of the Montreal based fur trade, the relations between Indians and whites changed. The relationship was no longer based on a military alliance, but rather with the idea of removal of the Indians from the path of agricultural settlement (Surtees,1983.). Attempts to remove the Indians from the land and the initiation of a policy designed to change them from Indians to modified Europeans were the consequences of Upper Canada population shifts (immigration)(Miller,1989,91,92.). During the 15 years after the War of 1812, vast areas of lands in Upper Canada were transferred to agricultural settlers in seven land treaties. Indians were felt to be in the way of European settlement. The intention of civil government now that Indians were no longer militarily useful, was to concentrate Indians in settled areas, on reserves, and subject them to plenty of schooling, and instruction in agriculture. This strategy was based on the assumption that complete “assimilation” was “the only possible euthenasia of savage communities”. Euthenasia in this instance implies outwardly the want of Europeans to kill Native culture based essentially on the European notion that it would be the best road for Native wellbeing, and in turn theirs. In Upper Canada the present Christian missionaries provided for such a policy. Government participated in peaceful “euthenasia” in Upper Canada as well as using missionaries to foster assimilation (Miller,1989,100.). Can there be such a concept of a “peaceful euthenasia” when it is not your own idea to be euthanasized? Today we have a tendency to call the sorts of actions where if you dispose of a people- essentially try to eliminate them- as genocide, or ethnocide, not “peaceful euthenasia”! The government’s desire to reduce its expenditures for annual presents by encouraging Indians to become more self-sufficient through agriculture was one motivation towards assimilation. People in government saw Indians as social and economic problems that would benefit from following European lifestyle. Many Upper Canadian Indians realized that they needed new skills with the increase of European settlement. The rising costs of distributing presents, the pro-assimilation attitudes of the new Indian Department, missionaries, and the desire of some of the Indians, pushed the government into an experiment in reserves and agriculture in the 1830s(Miller,1989,100.). Due to the increase in European settlement and the need for more land, the British initiated several “experiments” in civilization in the 1830s (Tobias,1983,41.). The British adopted the policy of civilizing the Indian as an integral part of their relationships with Indians. This entailed the establishment of Indian reserves in isolated areas. Indians were encouraged to gather and settle in large villages on these reserves in isolated areas, where they could be taught to farm and would receive religion and education. These endeavors became the basis of the reserve system in Canada (Surtees,1983). The reserve system was conceived as a controlled area, where Indians could be prepared for coping with increased numbers of Europeans settling. In Upper Canada, Indian lands, including new reserves, were among crown lands in which settlers were forbidden to encroach on. By 1839 Native lands were given special status by being protected from trespass. Lower Canada issues differed than in Upper Canada. This was primarily from the result of less political involvement in new efforts to civilize the Indian, since the Catholic Church had been prominent in the Native life. The emphasis was based on the use of the lands - indeed, it seems probable that the Indians thought of the problem as that of the right to use their lands when they entered into negotiations of a treaty. Scholars tend to see the outright sale of the land as being an unfamiliar concept to them. Is this conceivable given the fact that contact and close relations between Natives and Europeans was known? It is definitely agreeable that Natives originally did have no concept of land sales, but after patterns emerged, would they not have some sort of understanding? An evaluation of the reserve experiment led to the conclusion that the reserve system as then constituted was impractical and a failure. However, rather than discard the idea of the reserve as a school or training center for civilizing the Indian, blame for the failure was placed on the fact that such programs were carried out in isolation from centers of European civilization. The thought apparently never emerged to Europeans that they had failed once again in their attempt to have total control Natives. Their solution was to make smaller reserves and be closer to European style of life. This difference in dealing with the Indians and their reserves brought about a change in the ultimate goal of British Indian policy. No longer was the goal to show Natives how to cope with Europeans, but rather to assimilate in colonial society. (Tobias,1983,128-130.). Europeans went from an idea of providing Natives with the necessary “skills” to cope with the influx of immigrants, to wanting to assimilate t...