The Douglas Treaties and the Numbered Treaties were treaties that started the transfer of land ownership negotiated between First Nations leaders and government officials. The Douglas Treaties were fourteen treaties that were about land on Vancouver Island. These treaties were signed between 1850 and 1854. The Numbered Treaties were seven treaties that were about land that covered most of the southern Prairie Provinces and Northwestern Ontario. These were signed between 1871 and 1877. Some aspects of bargaining these treaties were unfair. For example, the Hudson’s Bay Company needed to buy the First Nations people's land by getting them to sign the Douglas Treaties so that it could sell the land to the British settlers. This meant ending First
Nations rights to land. Despite this, the First Nations communities were allowed to keep their villages and enclosed fields. They also had the right to hunt over the unoccupied lands and to continue their fisheries. Some First Nations people thought they were creating an alliance that would be renewed every year, which is why bargaining these treaties was a bit unfair because some people were ill-informed about the terms of the agreements. First Nations communities got blankets or pounds sterling for their land. Some Indigenous people didn't want to sign the treaties because they did not want to lose their control over their lands. Some aspects of bargaining these treaties were fair. For example, the Numbered Treaties were made to get rid of First Nations title to their lands, but the Canadian government and First Nations people had different reasons to sign the treaties. The Canadian government wished to gain control over the territory, so it could bring Canadian settlers here. First Nations people were dependant on large buffalo herds for their food, clothing, and shelter. They were becoming worried that the population of these buffalo herds was decreasing and because of this the First Nations wanted to do farming to grow their own food and so they wanted the treaties to include farm education, tools, and animals. Many First Nations people believed that signing the treaties was necessary in order to ensure their survival. Overall, there were both unfair and fair aspects of bargaining these treaties. Did both sides have a choice to negotiate the treaties? Yes and no. Were the purposes, terms, clauses, and implications of the treaties clear to both sides? Again, yes and no. It's difficult to decide whether the Douglas Treaties and the Numbered Treaties were fairly negotiated because they were unfair at some points and then fair at other points.
America had a newfound fervor for land already occupied by the Indians. Although the Treaty of Paris ended the war, in the west, war continued. In the treaty the British gave up all claims to the lands, but declared the Indians still owned their lands. America thought the Indians had no real claims to the land so they made treaties to legitimize American expansion.
L. J. 433 (1979-1980) White, G. (2002). Treaty Federalism in Northern Canada: Aboriginal Government Land Claims Board. Publius Vol. 32, No. 2 -. 3, pp.
Further with "pieces of paper", the negotiation of the Halibut Treaty between Canada and the United States of America was also instrumental in establishing Canada's
The Adams-Onís Treaty was one of the most important land treaties in the United States
economy. He said " …the tax on imports furnished much of the money for paying
Coined in 1845 by journalist John L. O'sullivan the term Manifest Destiny outlined the idea that it was America's God given right to spread to the western territory bought in the Louisiana Purchase and beyond. Already swept up in the excitement of expansion, the people of America took up the term quickly, using it as yet another incentive to populate new lands in pursuit of riches. Manifest Destiny was used often to give reason to the nation’s imperialistic activities of conquering the west, including its justification for the war against Mexico in 1845- 1848. (Acuna 222, 226). America's desire for economic power and military prowess, as well as her wish to keep up with ever-expanding technology pushed her people west, with O'sullivan's Manifest
The Anglo-American Rapprochement, the Transcontinental Treaty, and the Monroe Doctrine all contributed to the achievements in American foreign policy from 1814 to 1823. The Anglo-American Rapprochement was a time of compromise and passive diplomatic decision making. Some of the achievements made during the Angle-American Rapprochement were the signing of a commercial convention making trade favorable for all parties involved, and the settling of the long unresolved boundary between the United States and Canada without the need for war. Also the agreement between the British and the United States in regards to the rearming of fleets on the great lakes. They agreed on one 100-ton vessel armed with an 18 pounder on lakes Champlain and Ontario, and two at all of the other great lakes. This demilitarization of the great lakes soon led to a demilitarization of the entire boarder. Lastly at the convention of 1818, Britain and the United states decided on the 49th Parallel as the northern boundary of the Louisiana Territory.
First of all,I believe that Treaty 7 was not very effective in uniting the Canadian and the First Nations,because the reasons it was made for and the terms.But before we get into the terms of the treaty,we should talk about the Treaty first.The treaty was the 7th in the Numbered Treaties,so we can easily spot the significance of the legal document.It was signed on September 22 ,1877.The Treaty was signed between the First Nations and the Canadians and,as often happens in history,First Nations mostly were assimilated and that was the case here as they did not fully understand the terms.So,since we talked about what the Treaty was,let’s talk about how effective in tightening the bond between the FN and the Canadians.130 000 km of land was given to the Canadians and the First Nations received terms,that seemed equal to the land they were giving.The Canadian government had to pay the First Nations 2 ,000$ for ammunition and 12$ were given immediately and 25$ annually.The FN did not clearly understand
Other tribal members criticized the treaty and claimed that it was entered under pressure and that those Indians who signed it did so without proper authorization from all concerned. The United States motives behind the Treaty of Fort Stanwix wasn’t only as a means to find more land for the settlers coming into the country, but as a means to an end to raise revenue that could be used to not only provide the funds the government needed to fund pensions for soldiers of the Revolutionary War, but that could also be sold for a profit to help eliminate some of the United States debt that was generated by the war, but ultimately provided available land in the territories for white
The colonist didn't respect the fact that the Natives had already claimed that land. By claiming the land that the natives had, we worsened relations with them. In document G, it states, "These soldiers cut down our timber; they kill my buffalo"(page 5). This shows that the American colonist are taking away from the natives. They were taking their food and cutting down buffaloes. In document F, it states that “a couple of years before it was nothing to see 5,000, 10,000 buff (shortened word for buffalo) in a day’s ride. Now if I saw 50 I was lucky"(page 5). This proves that the colonist were taking away from the natives and were killing their food. The colonist were killing too many buffaloes which was taking away from natives and ruined any relations with
In chapter 1 of Deloria’s Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties Deloria shows that although millenniums have passed, the abuses of the past are still present and the white man is still not regarded as a permanent fixture on the continent. The Indian nationalism and oppression required them to learn the language of protest with the help of liberal sympathizers that aid them in protest but stop them when trying to claim international status (Deloria, 1974).
e treaty because they wanted their land. The U.S. was forced to sign a treaty because they wanted to get what they wanted.
They were signed by Crown representative William Benjamin Robinson and Ojibwa chiefs in 1850 (Albers, 2011). The purpose of the Robinson treaties was created to let mining companies to legally mine the natural resources in northern areas of Lake Superior and Huron 1779 (Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, 2008). Initially, William was instructed to get one treaty signed, however, he could not convince the Batchewana and some other Indigenous tribes (Sayers, 2016). So two were made instead, Robinson-Superior treaty and Robinson-Huron treaty, the Indigenous tribes who wanted the first proposed treaty signed the Robinson-Superior treaty 1779 (Sayers, 2016). This allowed the Montreal Mining Company to legally mine the northern part of Lake Superior (Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, 2008). Eventually, the Indigenous tribes who opposed the originally proposed treaty were forced to sign it as the Indigenous people were starving needed relief and support from the Crown (Sayers, 2016). The treaties opened the land’s natural resources for mining and exploration (Albers, 2011). In the treaties, the crown promised the Indigenous northern inhabitants: a one-time cash payment, annuities, the privilege to hunt and fish in the crown owned territory, and the creation of 24 new reserves (Albers, 2011). These treaties allowed colonies to further develop and grow the northern areas of Lake Superior and Lake
Strong sectional implications arose from the terms of Jay’s Treaty. Tensions developed between the two political parties over Jay’s Treaty. Alexander Hamilton gave Jay advice on negotiating the treaty. “Hamilton recommended an approach that would both stabilize relations with Great Britain and guarantee increased trade between the United States and Great Britain” ( “John Jay’s Treaty, 1794-95”). The Republicans disagreed with the treaty and questioned the intentions of the Federalists in their negotiations. This strained the unity of the U.S. “The treaty also provoked a fierce debate in Congress over the role of the House of Representatives in foreign affairs” (Keene, et al. 175). The public also strongly disagreed with the treaty. “Riots
The Treaty of Waitangi is a very important document to New Zealand. It is an agreement that was drawn up by representatives of the British Crown and Maori Hapu and Iwi. It was first signed at the Bay of Islands on February 6th, 1840. There has been a lot of debate over the years about the translation of words between the English and Te Reo Maori versions of the text and the differences in the word meaning over the who languages. In this assignment I am going to cover the rights and responsibilities that the treaty contains and an explanation of the differences in wordings and I am also going to contextualise my understanding of the differences of wording against the Maori Worldview and the Declaration of Independence.