Canadian Indians Seek Recognition

Northern Advocate, 10 January 1948, Page 3

Canadian Indians Seek Recognition

OTTAWA, Fri.—The New Zealand High Commissioner to Canada (Mr James Thorn) is present as an observer at the re-opening of one of the most long-drawn-out cases in the history of British jurisprudence—the efforts of the Six Nations Indians of the Grand River Reservation, Ontario, to obtain recognition as a separate state.

Mr Thorn said he was attending the hearings, in the Exchequer Court, “just as a matter of interest.” He added: “There is a remarkable parallel between the position of the Six Nations Indians in Canada and the Maoris in New Zealand. “We have had a number of court cases similar to this, based on happenings of over a century ago.” Mr Thorn said he would report to his Government on the outcome of the CASE STARTED IN 1860 The re-opening of the case, which started in 1860, represents the first public move by the Six Nations Indians since they were rebuffed at San Fran:cisco in 1945 in efforts to become charter members of the United Nations.

The actual dispute on which the case is based goes back to 1784.

The Six Nations Indians —the Mohawks, Tuscaroras, Oneidas, Senecas, Cnandagas, and Cayugas—originally lived in what is now the State of New York.

They fought on the British side in the War of Independence and as a reward George 111. granted them lands along the Grand River “to be enjoyed by them and their posterity forever.” "However, a chieftain consented to the sale of some of these lands by colonial officials who handled the Indians’ affairs.

Now the Indians claim that these land sales were illegal, and that in any case they did not get the money. CLAIM FROM CROWN

The Indians say they will not smoke the pipe of peace until they collect $1,289,467.20 from the crown. The basis for the Indian’s legal action is what the Indians call the Haldimand treaty and what the Canadian Government calls the Haldimand grant. The Indians say it was a treaty signed by two sovereign states —the Six Nations and Great Britain. The Canadian Government maintains that it was nothing of the kind, and that the present Government of Canada cannot be held responsible.

The present hearing is to determine whether there is any basis in law for the Indians’ action.