Q&A with John S. Long, author of Treaty No. 9

For more than a century, the vast lands of Northern Ontario have been shared among the governments of Canada, Ontario, and the First Nations who signed Treaty No. 9 in 1905. For just as long, details about the signing of the constitutionally recognized agreement have been known only through the accounts of two of the commissioners appointed by the Government of Canada.

In the newly released book Treaty No. 9, John S. Long provides a truer perspective on the treaty by adding the neglected account of a third commissioner and tracing the treaty's origins, negotiation, explanation, interpretation, signing, implementation, and recent commemoration.  

The MQUP sits down with the author for a Treaty No. 9 Q&A.

Why is Treaty No. 9 important?

Its unfulfilled promises of prosperity, happiness and cultural continuity impact more than half of Ontario, resulting in political impasses, cultural losses and reduced quality of life. Programs and policies imposed on the First Nations and Métis have too often been repressive, harsh and unsuccessful – pre-empting their inherent rights to govern themselves and determine their own solutions.

Was there a particular piece of information that pushed you to write this book? 

It has been an outsider’s 38-year journey of understanding. It was a newly-arrived teacher asking our Cree language teacher in Moose Factory, Nellie Faries, “How do you say ‘treaty’ in Cree?” Her matter-of-fact reply, “Shooleeyan [money].” It was asking fellow teacher Norm Wesley, “Are you going to buy a hunting licence?” His matter-of-fact answer, “No.” Later it was hearing elders share the oral traditions of treaty-making-as-promises that had been passed down to them. It was wondering, with Cree translator Greg Spence, “How did they translate these words on parchment?” It was agreeing with Peter Archibald that, from the First Nations’ perspective, post-treaty “developments” were actually “incursions.” And then it was astonishment at reading Daniel George MacMartin’s journal and realizing that those words were apparently not translated at all; realizing that most of the words on the parchments were a self-serving fiction of a two-headed Crown that sought to marginalize the Indigenous peoples who represented impediments to their development plans.

What surprised you the most during your research?

I was reminded that the Métis asked the treaty commissioners for consideration and are still awaiting a reply. I also came to realize that the First Nations negotiated an oral agreement. That their indigenous rights were not voluntarily surrendered. That before the treaty was signed, they asked two questions that were crucial not just for their survival, but for their ongoing physical-and-spiritual wellbeing: What about our hunting and fishing? Nothing will change. Will we be required to live on this reserve? No. The King wants you to be prosperous and happy. Here are some gifts. There are no strings attached. You will be protected.

Why was the account of the third commissioner forgotten?

The journals of the other two – Samuel Stewart and Duncan Campbell Scott, both employees of the Indian Affairs department – have long been available in Ottawa. Scott’s was first kept at Indian Affairs and then transferred to the Archives of Canada. Stewart’s was donated to same archives after his death. Scott’s published article, wherein he admitted that the treaty was simplified, was not clearly substantiated by other records.

MacMartin was well-connected politically but an Indian Affairs outsider. A miner from Perth, he would have known nothing about treaty-making – unless he read his former neighbour’s 1880 book The Treaties of Canada with the Indians of Manitoba and the North-West Territories (with its important subtitle Including the negotiations on which they were based). I think he realized that that this treaty was an anomaly, that the words on these parchments were not being negotiated at all. I imagine him asking to read his fellow commissioners’ journals and being troubled at Stewart’s assertion that full explanations of the treaty were given. I expect he was told to keep this information private, and did so. 

His incomplete 1905 journal ended up, perhaps after his death, in the private possession of Wallace Havelock Robb, a poet and naturalist with a deep interest in the Mohawks of Tyendenaga. Robb apparently donated MacMarten’s journal to the Queen’s University Archives in 1968. A couple of PhD students consulted it in the 1990s but no one appears to have recognized its significance. My colleague David Calverley was browsing university archive holdings on the internet, found it and knew I would be interested. As Treaty No. 9’s 100-year anniversary approached, I examined it and realized its importance. Concurrently, so did Toronto lawyer Murray Klippenstein, who earlier helped the Mushkegowuk First Nations of western James Bay to challenge the Mike Harris government’s workfare legislation and launch their Rupert’s Land Protection Pledge suit. 

What do you hope this book will accomplish?

I hope it reminds Canadians that the rights of the Métis remain ignored by the Crown to this day. And that it helps Canadians to understand that the aboriginal and treaty rights of the First Nations of far northern Ontario are very simple – and still exist. The treaty commissioners’ promises of cultural continuity, happiness and prosperity arguably mean an effective, culturally-appropriate Indigenous education system, control of child welfare (both on- and off-reserve), management of lands and resources, health care, etc. Those rights are recognized and affirmed in section 35.(1) of Charter of Rights of our 1982 Constitution Act, the highest law of the land.

Are you hopeful about the future for the First Nations and Métis people in northern Ontario?

The First Nations and Métis of far northern Ontario are amazingly patient and resilient peoples, worthy of our admiration and friendship. They have endured great injustices, including invasion (by Indian agents, game wardens, child welfare authorities and many other "developers") and the arbitrary imposition of federal and provincial laws. I hope that they will one day negotiate culturally-appropriate and accountable structures of their own to replace the federal and provincial programs and straitjackets that have been imposed upon them. Only then will the treaty commissioners’ promises of prosperity and happiness come true. Only then will we all be proud to say, yes, we are all treaty people.

For more on Treaty No. 9, click to play a CBC interview with the author

 Or Click to order a copy of Treaty No. 9