Transcription

File name: IMG_7395.
jpeg
Is hardly seems necessary to [illegible]
infinite number of [illegible]
and the Canadian Archives, subsequent to 1883, to the
Alliance between the Six Nations and the Crown or Great
Britain, or its terms.
In pre-revolutionary times the Six Nation warn by
formal treaty the acknowledged possessors of all the
lands determined by the Treaty of [illegible], a
country which they possessed in full enjoyment under the
pledged protection of the King of the Great Britain. They had
the right to manage their own affairs in their own country,
nor did white laws operate therein.
 Whenever, or in so far as a State does not contract

itself out of its fundamental legal rights by express
language, a treaty must be construed so as to give ef-
fect to those rights. Thus for example, no treaty can be
taken to restrict by implication, the exercise of rights
of sovereignty, of property, or self-preservation. Any re-
striction of such rights must be effected in clear and
distinct manner. Hall’s Int. Law, P. 338.
The six Nations, so long as 1754 were recognized to be a

State ( N.Y. Doc. 6, P. 893 ); They had their Capital at Chon-
daga where both British and French, sent diplomatic Agents,
and by a sort of Victory, governed the affairs of their De-
pendency in Pennsylvania. (Beuchamp’s Hist. Iroquois,Al-
bany, 1905, P. 272)
Indian Affairs. (RG 10, Volume 2285 File 57,169

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
File name: IMG_7397.jpeg
threatens to [illegible], precludes all im-

mediate consideration in the domestic concerns of the
Indians under your protection;nor it is to be expected
that any measure that the King may think fit to take,
for redressing the injuries they complain of respect-
ing their lands,can, in the present moment, be attended
with any effect. It will be proper however, that you
should assure them in the strongest terms of His Majes-
ty’s firm resolution to protect them and preserve them
in all their rights; and, it is more than [illegible]
ery that you should [illegible]
[illegible], whether any artificial [illegible]
in the support of the rebellious [illegible] of His
Majesty’s subjects, to counter-set such treachery and
to keep them in such a state of affection and attach-
ment to the King, as that His Majesty may rely on their
assistance in any case in which it may be necessary to
require it.
On the 24th. July,1773, Dartmouth again wrote Guy Johnson,
( N. Y. Doc. 8, P. 596 ) as follows,
“ I have already in my letter to you of the 5th. Install

hinted that the time might possibly come when the King,
relying upon the attachment of his faithful Allies, the
Six Nations of Indians, might be under the necessity of
calling upon them for their aid and assistance in the
present state of America. The unnatural Rebellion now
raging there calls for every effort to suppress 1t,and
the intelligence His Majesty has received of the rebels
having excited the Indians to take a part, and of their
having actually engaged a body of them in arms to sup-
port their rebellion, justifies the resolution His Ma-
jesty has taken of requiring the assistance of his faith-
ful adherents the Six Nations. It is therefore, His
Majesty's pleasure, that you do lose no time in taking
such steps as may induce then to take up the hatchet
against His Majesty's rebellious subjects in America
and to engage then in His Majesty's service”.
It is matter of history how the Six Nations were forced to
abandon their lands in New York and how the Treaty of Paris
of 1783, made no provision for them.
Haldimand, then Governor of Canada, bought the lands at Grand
River ( also Bay of Quinte ) from the Mississaugas, and

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
by an instrument under his hand and privy seal, set apart a
a home for the Six Nations. This document set out that, -
Whereas His Majesty having been pleased to divert [illegible]

in consideration of the early [illegible]
manifested by the Mohawk Indians [illegible] of their
settlement, which they thereby sustained, that a conven-
ient tract of land under His Protection should be chosen
as a safe and comfortable retreat for them and others of
the Six Nations, who have either lost their settlements
within the Territory of the American States, or [illegible] to
retire from them to the British;I have at the desire of
these His Majesty’s faithful Allies ,purchased a tract
of land from the Indians situated between the Lakes
Ontario, Huron and Erie, and I do hereby in His Majesty's
name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation, and such
ether of the Six Nation Indians as wish to settle in that
quarter to take possession of and settle upon the banks
of the River, commonly called Guse of Grand River,running.
into Lake Erie, allotting to then for that purpose six
miles deep from each side of the River beginning at Lake
Erie,and extending in that proportion to the Head of the
said River, which them and their posterity are to enjoy
for ever”. Dated 25th. October, 1764.
On the 14th. January, 1793, by formal grant under the Great
Seal, these lands were confirmed to the Six Nations,
“Giving and granting, and by these presents confirming to

the said Chiefs, Warriors, Women and People of the said
Six Nations and their heirs, the full and entire possess-
ion, use, benefit and advantage of the said district or
territory, to be held and enjoyed by them in the most
free and ample manner, and according to the several out-
come and usages of them the said Cheifs,Warroirs,Women and
People of the said Six Nations”.
A similar Grant in similar terms was made contemporaneous-
ly, to the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, settles there origin-
ally through a jealousy between Deseronto and Thyandangea.
The Royal Instructions of December 2nd, 1761( ante),were
most emphatic in their assurance so the Indians “ those Treat-
ies and Compacts which have heretofore solemnly entered into
with the said Indians by our Royal Predecessors, Kings and Queens
of this Realm”, would be kept “inviolable” and was natural
for the Six Nations after the Treaty of Paris and its disappoint-
on the 14th. January,1793, [illegible]
Seal, these lands were confirmed [illegible]
“ Giving and granting, and by these presents confirming to

the said Chiefs, Warriors, Women and People of the said
Six Nations and their heirs, the full and entire possess-
ion, use, benefit and advantage of the said district or
territory, to be held and enjoyed by them in the most
free and ample manner, and according to the several out-
come and usages of them the said Cheifs,Warroirs,Women and
People of the said Six Nations”.
A similar Grant in similar terms was made contemporaneous-
ly, to the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, settles there origin-
ally through a jealousy between Deseronto and Thyandangea.
The Royal Instructions of December 2nd, 1761( ante),were
most emphatic in their assurance so the Indians “ those Treat-
ies and Compacts which have heretofore solemnly entered into
with the said Indians by our Royal Predecessors, Kings and Queens
of this Realm”, would be kept “inviolable” and was natural
for the Six Nations after the Treaty of Paris and its disappoint-
Ments, to seek redress from the Ally- the King of England.
Joseph Brant was chosen as their Ambassador to visit
England, and went there in 1785. On the 4th. January, 1786,
he presented his letters, with the demands of the Six Nations
to Lord Sydney, Secretary of State. The following are extracts
from these documents and Sydney’s reply on behalf of the King,-
“ The cause of my coming to England being of the most

serious consequence to the whole Indian Confederacy, I

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
“ entreat your Lordship patiently to hear and listen to

what I am going to say - - - - - - -
whether we are to be considered [illegible]
Allies, and have that support and countenance such
and true friends expect. I beg leave to tell your Lordship
that your answer to these matters will be the means of re-
lieving all our Nations from that very troublesome and un-
easy suspense they now labour under, and this they all hope
for on my returns”. ( Can. Arch. Q. 26, P..I)
Sydney replied to this on April 6th. 1786(Can. Aroh.1907, P.549)
“ The King has had under His Royal consideration, the two
letters which you delivered to me on the 4th. January
last,in the presence of Colonel Johnson, and other Officers
of the Indian Department; the first of these representing
the claims of the Mohawks for losses sustained by them and
other Tribes of Indians from the depredations committed on
their lands by the Americans during the late War;and the
second, expressing the desire of the Indian Confederacy
to be informed what assistance they might expect from this
Country in case they should be engaged in disputes with
the Americans relative to their lands situated within the
territory to which His Majesty has relinquished His Sov-
ereignty”. After promising to make good these leases.
“ This liberal conduct on the part of His Majesty,He trusts
will not leave a doubt upon the minds of His Indian A1lies
that he shall at all times be ready to attend to their
future welfare, and that he shall be anxious upon every
occasion,wherein their interests and happiness may be con-
cerned, to give then such further testimonies of His Royal
Favour and countenance, as can consistently with due re-
gard to the National Faith, and the honor and dignity of His
Crown, be afforded to them. His Majesty recommends to His
Indian Allies to continue united in their Couneils, and that
their measures may be conducted with temper ant moder- ation
from which added to a peaceable demeanor on their part, they
must experience many essential benefits and be post-likely
to secure to themselves the possession of those rights and
privileges which their Ancestors have heretofore
enjoyed”. sd &c.
The language is diplomatic, but neither the occasion or the ef-
fect of these communications need be enlarged upon.
The Six Nations claim the exercise on their own tribal land
Of their ancient right of self-government, and allege the Faith
and Honour of the crown is pledged for this object.
Respectfully submitted,

that he shall at all times be ready to attend to their
future welfare, and that he shall be anxious upon every
occasion,wherein their interests and happiness may be con-
cerned, to give then such further testimonies of His Royal
Favour and countenance, as can consistently with due re-
gard to the National Faith, and the honor and dignity of His
Crown, be afforded to them. His Majesty recommends to His
Indian Allies to continue united in their Councils, and that
their measures may be conducted with temper ant moder- ation
from which added to a peaceable demeanor on their part, they
must experience many essential benefits and be post-likely
to secure to themselves the possession of those rights and
privileges which their Ancestors have heretofore
enjoyed”. sd &c.
The language is diplomatic, but neither the occasion or the ef-
fect of these communications need be enlarged upon.
The Six Nations claim the exercise on their own tribal land
Of their ancient right of self-government, and allege the Faith
and Honour of the crown is pledged for this object.
Respectfully submitted,
[signature]
Counsel for the Six Nations.
London, Ont. Oct. 8th. 1920

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

[seal of Department of Justice Canada]
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE
OTTAWA
Dear Mr Scott;
Referring to our recent conversation, I send you
herewith the original memorandum submitted by Mr Chisholm,
through Mr Sinclair,on behalf of the Six Nation Indians with
relation to their constitutional status and rights,
and I shall be obliged if you will be good enough to
return it to ne after you have finished with it.
I may say, that while I remain of the opinion
heretofore expressed that the Six Nation Indians are
subject to Dominion legislation applying to Indians and
lands reserved for the Indians and have no power to legis-
late except such as may be conferred by Parliament,it
would, I have no doubt,be quite competent to the Governor
in Council to submit to the Supreme Court for considera-
tion the questions which Mr Chisholm desires if you should
consider it in the interests of the administration to do
so.
Yours very truly,
D. C. Scott, Esq., F.R.S.C., [signature]

Deputy Superintendent general
of Indian Affairs,
O t t a w a

Deputy Superintendent general [signature]
of Indian Affairs,
O t t a w a

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

SIX NATION INDIANS AND GRAND RIVER TERRITORY
The following seem to be the relevant facts connected with

the claim of the Six Nation Indians to a tract of land extending
six miles on each side of the Grand River to the northeast of the
township of Hichol.
1. - 1779, 7 October - Frederick Haldimand, Captain General

and Commander in Chief of the Province of Quetec, signed a document
ratifying a previous promise made by Sir Guy Carleton to some of the
Mohawks of the villages of Canajoharree, Tiyondaroge, and Aughnvage,
to the effect that their settlements would be restared, at the expense
of government, "as soon as the present troubles were at an end."
This document, although submitted to me, does not appear to have

any particular bearing upon the question i hand.
2. - 1784, 25 March - In an interview with Governor Haldimand on

this day. Captain Brent expressed the wish that the Governor-
“should give the Superintendent and Inspector General of Indian affairs

instructions and empower Lieutenant-Colonel Butler to purchase from
the Mississagua, or proprietors, a tract of land consisting of about
Six miles on each side of the Grand River called Oswego running
from the River La Tranche into Lake Erie, for the use of the Mohawks
and such of the Six Nations as are inclined to join then in that
settlement. Colonel Butler is fully acquainted with the view and
inclinations of Captain Brant and the Mohawks respecting this settle-
ment, and only waits the General's approbation to make the purchase,
the sooner this can be done the better, as they would remove at
this spring........The above mentioned 1imits are only meant for the
Indians of the Six Nations who may settle there, but a more considerable
tract of land may at the same time be purchased on very reasonable
terms whereon to settle loyalists, or for any future purpose.”
And upon the memorandum containing Captain Brant's wishes,the Governor
made the following annotation:
“Sir John Johnson will be instructed to purchase the tract of

country between the three Lakes Ontario, Arie and Huron, out of which
the tract required by the Mohawks for the Six Nations will
be granted to them by deed. The rest will be reserved for Loyalists
or any other future purpose”(Arch. Series B, vol.169, p.151. Also
in House of Commons Return of 15 June, 1887).
this day. Captain Brent expressed the wish that the Governor-
“should give the Superintendent and Inspector General of Indian affairs
instructions and empower Lieutenant-Colonel Butler to purchase from
the Mississagua, or proprietors, a tract of land consisting of about
Six miles on each side of the Grand River called Oswego running
from the River La Tranche into Lake Erie, for the use of the Mohawks
and such of the Six Nations as are inclined to join then in that
settlement. Colonel Butler is fully acquainted with the view and
inclinations of Captain Brant and the Mohawks respecting this settle-
ment, and only waits the General's approbation to make the purchase,
the sooner this can be done the better, as they would remove at
this spring........The above mentioned 1imits are only meant for the
Indians of the Six Nations who may settle there, but a more considerable
tract of land may at the same time be purchased on very reasonable
terms whereon to settle loyalists, or for any future purpose.”
And upon the memorandum containing Captain Brant's wishes,the Governor
made the following annotation:
“Sir John Johnson will be instructed to purchase the tract of

country between the three Lakes Ontario, Arie and Huron, out of which
the tract required by the Mohawks for the Six Nations will
be granted to them by deed. The rest will be reserved for Loyalists
or any other future purpose”(Arch. Series B, vol.169, p.151. Also
in House of Commons Return of 15 June, 1887).
3. - 1784, 22 May – At a meeting between Lieutenant-Colonel

Butler and the representatives of the Mississaguas,the representatives
Spoke as follows:
“Father,- He the Mississagas are not the owners of all the Land
laying between the three Lakes, but we have agree and are willing
to transfer our right of soil and property to the King our Father,
for the use of His People, and our Brethren the Six Nations, from
the Head of the Lake Ontario or the Creek Wayhguats to the river
La Tranche then down that River until a south course will strike
the mouth of Catfish Creek on Lake Erie, this tract of land we
imagine will be quite sufficient both for the King’s people and our
Brethren the Six Nations, who may wish to settle and hunt thereon”
(Arch. Series B, vol. 23, p. 349).

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

4. - On the same day a deed from the Indians to the King was
taken of territory which was described as follows:
“all that parcel or tract of Lama lying and being between the Lakes
Ontario and Brie, beginning at Lake Ontario, four miles [illegible]
westerly from the point opposite to Niagar [illegible]
of Mississaga point and running from thence along said lake to
the creek that falls from a small Lake into the said Lake Ontario
known by the name Waghquata, from thence a north-west course until
it strikes the River La Tranche or New River, then down the stream
of said river to that part or place where a due south course will
lead to the mouth of Catfish Creek emptying into Lake Erie, and
from the above mentioned part or place of the aforesaid River La
Tranche following the south course to the mouth of said Catfish
Creek, thence down Lake Erie to the lands heretofore purchased
from the nation of Mississagas Indians and from thence along the
said purchase to Lake Ontario at the place beginning as above
mentioned (Arch. Series Q.,vol.329)
Captain Brant signed this deed as a witness (Letter T.5.B. Pardee,

Commissioner of Crown Lands, 27 June 1883: Return, p. 19). He was
probably aware of the nature of the transaction.
At this time no survey had been made, and current notions as to
the geography were by no means accurate. From Haldimand's letter above
quoted, it would appear that the River La Tranche and the Grand River
were in their upper waters thought to be identical, and that he
Haldimand intended the grant to the Six Nations to lie between the
bifurcation of the two streams and the Lake Erie.
It will be observed also that at the Council meeting the direction
of the boundary from the creek-Wayhguata to the River la Tranche was
not specified, whereas in the deed the direction is indicated as a
“north-west course”. But inasmuch as the “north-west course” would
not strike the La Tranche, the description is unintelligible. The
“fault” in the boundaries was observed by Sir John Johnson as early as
March 1791 (See his letter to John Collins: Arch. Series Q.,vol.629).
5. – 1784, 25 October – The purchase having been completed,
Haldimand signed and sealed with his own seal a document [illegible]
[illegible] in which he said:

were in their upper waters thought to be identical, and that he
Haldimand intended the grant to the Six Nations to lie between the
bifurcation of the two streams and the Lake Erie.
It will be observed also that at the Council meeting the direction
of the boundary from the creek-Wayhguata to the River la Tranche was
not specified, whereas in the deed the direction is indicated as a
“north-west course”. But inasmuch as the “north-west course” would
not strike the La Tranche, the description is unintelligible. The
“fault” in the boundaries was observed by Sir John Johnson as early as
March 1791 (See his letter to John Collins: Arch. Series Q.,vol.629).
5. – 1784, 25 October – The purchase having been completed,
Haldimand signed and sealed with his own seal a document [illegible]
[illegible] in which he said:
"I have at the earnest desire of many of His Majesty's faithful
allies purchased a tract of land from the Indians situated between
the Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron, and I do hereby in His Majesty’s
name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation and such others
of the Six Nation Indians as wish to settle in that quarter to
take possession of and settle upon the banks of the river commonly
called Ouse or Grand River, running into Lake Erie, allotting to
them for that purpose six miles deep from each side the river
beginning at Lake Erie and extending in that proportion to the head
of the said river, which them and their posterity are to enjoy
forever."
The points to be observed in connection with this document are;

(1) The document is not a patent from the King. It is a per
mission from the Governor in Chief, who was also General Commander
in Chief.

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

11. – 1891, 24 December - In the minutes of the proceedings of
the Quetec Committee above referred to, under this date is the
following:
“The Chairman presented Dr. Jomes's survey of the lands of the

Grand River promised to Indians of the Mohawk Nation [illegible]
sketch of the tract assigned to Captain Jones and others at the
Bay of Quinte.
The Committee having considered the whole are humbly of opinion
that as the faith of Government is pledged to the Mohawk chiefs
for the two tracts mentioned above, every precaution ought to the
taken to preserve them in the quiet possession and property of
them and the Committee submit that an Act of the provincial Legis-
lature or a grant under the Great Seal of the Province be made
in favor of the principal chiefs on behalf of their nation or per-
sons in trust for then for ever" (Arch. Series Q., vol. 329)
12. - 1792, 7 December - This is the date of the second surrender
by the Mississaugas. It is said to have been rendered necessary
because of
“the purchase money for the original 1784 transfer not having
been paid at the time or at any rate not in full" (Letter of Lord
Knutsford to Governor General Stanley of Preston, 3 September 1809,
See. 8).
The principal reason for the second surrender, as recited by itself,
was the inaccuracy of the description of the lands in the first – it
being impossible for a “north-west course" from the head of Lake Ontario
to touch the Thame's River. The Mississaguas complaint of non-delivery
of presents which formed part of the consideration for the land con-
tinued after the second surrender had been made (Despatch Governor
Since. 20 September 1793: Arch. Series Q., vol. 279, p. 488). The
description in the second surrender bounds the lands which have always
been enjoyed by the Indians. It may be seen in volume 1-9 of [illegible]
and Surrenders (p. 5) in the Department of Indian Affairs.

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

clauses in it prohibitory of [illegible]
"Captain Brunt had influence [illegible] to make

them peremptorily reject this [illegible] circumstances in his
favor that were highly offensive and improper
In conversation with him, he said that the Indian hunts being
worn out and their people fallen into disuse of that method of sub-
sistence and yet not being sufficiently advanced in agricultural arts
to maintain themselves the Letting of their Lands appeared to him
the most reasonable mode of making provision for their women, Old
Men and Children.
It being my duty to conciliate and unite the Indians as much as
possible to give efficiency to their generation [illegible] shortly
to meet the Commissioners of the United States in no case it
being advisable to irritate or provoke a quarrel with any of the
Indian Nations. I waived all further discussion on this subject
having previously in the Public Council offered to state to his
Majesty the wishes of the Indians when such should be intimated by
the Six Nations to who the Land was granted and not by the Mohawks
alone; but I suggested to Captain Brant whether the permission to sell
a township, on Lake Erie, and another through which the road must pass
that communicates between Burlington Bay and Oxford, to such persons
as the Kings Government should approve, and to place the money in the
British Funds giving the annual Interest to the Indian Proprietors
should not be the best expedient He seemed to acquiesce in this
idea, which remains for further consideration" (Arch. Series Q.,vol.279.
p. 488).
In a letter from Governor Maitland to Lord Bathurst of 22 February
1821, it is said that this Sincos grant
"was never registered, never audited. It is evident from these

deficiencies that it was proposed for some event, which never took
place, was never delivered but kept as an screw of a private con-
veyance supposed to be useless and invaluid until sanctioned by the
flat of the Attorney General, Registration, Audit adnDelivery.
That this patent was unknown to the Attorney General is obvious
from the case subsequently stated by him for an opinion on the
Legality of any grant to the Indians with power of alienation” (Arch.
Series Q., vol. 329, p. 47)
The patent was not registered until 20 February 1857. The original
is in the Dominion Archives.

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
Certified copy of a Report of the Committee of the Privy
Council, approved by His Excellence the Governor
General on the 27th November 1920
The Committee of the Privy Council have had
before them a report, dated 15th November, 1980, from the
Superintendent General of Indian affairs, stating that the
petition addressed to Your Excellency in Council on the
12th March, 1920, by the Six Nations Indians, reiterating
their claim to special status and rights, was referred to
him on the 25th March, 1920.
On the 15th July, 1920, the petition – together
with the brief filed by the counsel of the Six Nations and
a copy of an Order of Your Excellency in Council of 13th
November, 1890, which disposed of a similar claim made by
the Six Nations - was submitted to the Department of Jus-
ties by the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs for
consideration and advice. The Department of Justice has given
its opinion, dated 1st September, 1920, that it would
be a hopeless project for the Six Nations Indians to en-
deavour to Judicially establish before the Supreme Court
the claim set forth by the petitioner that they consti-
tute an Independent, or quasi independent, nation or that
in any respect, by reason of their history or circumstances
or the treaties which they have made or the concessions
which they have received, they are not subject to the legis-
On the 15th July, 1920, the petition – together
with the brief filed by the counsel of the Six Nations and
a copy of an Order of Your Excellency in Council of 13th
November, 1890, which disposed of a similar claim made by
the Six Nations - was submitted to the Department of Jus-
ties by the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs for
consideration and advice. The Department of Justice has given
its opinion, dated 1st September, 1920, that it would
be a hopeless project for the Six Nations Indians to en-
deavour to Judicially establish before the Supreme Court
the claim set forth by the petitioner that they consti-
tute an Independent, or quasi independent, nation or that
in any respect, by reason of their history or circumstances
or the treaties which they have made or the concessions
which they have received, they are not subject to the legis-
lative authority of the Dominion, or of the province of Ontario
in matters which it is competent for the province to legislates
The Honourable
The Superintendent General of Indian Affairs

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
legislate upon respecting the property or rights of Indians

that it is considered that there can be no possible doubt
that the desired reference, if made, would result in a
denial of the claims which are suggested on behalf of the
Indians, in so far as their legal or [illegible]
tien in concerned; and that therefore it is not considered
that it would be worth while to submit the matter to the
Supreme Court, unless the Department of Indian Affairs
considers it desirable to do so for the general advantage
of the administration of the affairs of the Six Nations.
The Superintendent General of Indian Affairs con-
curs in the opinion of the Department of Justice and recom-
mends that the Indians be so informed, as, after-careful
consideration he has concluded that no general advantage
would accrue to the administration of the affairs of the
Six Nations if the prayer of the petitioners’ ware granted.
The Superintendent General of Indian Affairs
further recommends that the Order in Council of the 18th
November, 1890, be affirmed to the effect that, while the loyalty
of their forefathers and the continued loyalty of the present
generation of the Six Nations Indians is fully recognized and
appreciated, their claim to special exemption from the effect of
the laws of the land, or to being rocog-
nized as other than subjects of His Majesty, cannot be sanctioned
nor held as valid.
The Committee advise that Your Excellency be
moved to cause the petitioners to be informed in the above
sense as recommended by the Superintendent General of In-
dian Affairs.
Clerk of the Privy Council.

The Six Nations of the Grand River, with sorrow in

their hearts, come to complain of wrongs done us in name of the
Dominion Government.
We complain because the Ministry of the Interior has
ceased to recognize our rights in our Grand River Retreat. The
Ministry has devised and prevailed on the Dominion Government
to enact a law designed to enforce on our people, one by one,
citizenship with Great Britain, and thus to open our domain,
without our consent, to piece-meal purchase by outsiders.
The Ministry has also devised and prevailed on the Parliament
to enact a law under which the Government is taking mortgages
on Indian soldier settlements, whereby these parcels of our
domain will be liable to sale on foreclosure to outsiders,
without our consent. The Ministry, well knowing the opposi-
tion of our people, is now engaged through its subordinates in
attempts to enforce both these measures upon us, and to induce
Individuals among us to land co-operation.
The Citizenship Law is manifestly designed to destroy
our Government by a gradual transfer of the allegiance of our
people and of all ultimately to the British Crown.
The means used violates the principle that change of allegi-
ance cannot take place without consent of the subject, which
may give or withheld as a matter of natural right. Either of
these laws, if enforced against us, would operate eventual-
ly to destry the tribal relations between our people through
the gradual dispersal of our people, which must follow upon
purchase of our homes by outsiders.
without our consent, to piece-meal purchase by outsiders.

The Ministry has also devised and prevailed on the Parliament
to enact a law under which the Government is taking mortgages
on Indian soldier settlements, whereby these parcels of our
domain will be liable to sale on foreclosure to outsiders,
without our consent. The Ministry, well knowing the opposi-
tion of our people, is now engaged through its subordinates in
attempts to enforce both these measures upon us, and to induce
Individuals among us to land co-operation.
The Citizenship Law is manifestly designed to destroy
our Government by a gradual transfer of the allegiance of our
people and of all ultimately to the British Crown.
The means used violates the principle that change of allegi-
ance cannot take place without consent of the subject, which
may give or withheld as a matter of natural right. Either of
these laws, if enforced against us, would operate eventual-
ly to destry the tribal relations between our people through
the gradual dispersal of our people, which must follow upon
purchase of our homes by outsiders.
These measures of the Parliament may only be ac-

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

band of Indians; they are merely declaratory as to what the
status of these Indians is and has been according to the best
legal advice that in obtainable on this question.
In the recent case of Jero T. Gault in which one of the

Indians of Tyendinage, former members of the Six Nations
Confederacy, we prosecuted for fishing in the Bay of Quinte
without a license, the question of the status [illegible] in-
cluding the Six Nations, was considered [illegible]
Judgment of Honourable Mr. Justice Riddell delivered on the
March, 1921, relating to this matter is as follows:
"It is well known that claims have been made from the
time of Joseph Brant that the Indians were not in-reality sub-
jects of the King but an independent people - allies of Hin
Majesty - and in a measure at least exempt from the civil
laws governing the true subject. "Treaties" have been made
wherein they are called “faithful allies" and the like [illegible]
there is extant an (unofficial) opinion of Mr.(afterwards
Cheif) Justice Powell that the Indians so long as they are
within their villages are not subject to the ordinary laws of
the Province.
As to the so-called Treaties. John Beverley Robinson,
Attorney-General of Upper Canada (afterwards Sir John Bever-
ley Robinson I.J.) in an official letter to Robert [illegible]
Herton, Under Secretary of State for War and Colonies, March
14, 1824, said:
‘To talk of Treaties with the Mohawk Indians residing
in the heart of one of the most populous Districts of Upper
Canada upon lands purchased for then and given to them by
the British Government, is much the same in my humble opinion
as to talk of making a treaty of alliance with the Jews in
Duke Street or with the French Immigrants who have settled in
England.’ Canadian Archives Q.337, pt. II, pp.367-368.
I cannot express my own opinion more clearly or con-
vincingly.
The unofficial view expressed by Mr. Justice Powell
at one time, we did not continue to hold.
The question of the liability of Indian to the general law
of the land came up in 1822. Shawanakiskie of the Ottawa
Tribe was convicted at Sandwich of the murder of an Indian
women on the street of Amherstburgh and sentenced to death.
Mr. Justice Campbell respited the sentence as it was contented that

-1A
Pt. 2)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

The Canadian government makes its pre- our right of home rule and independence
tension of sovereignty over the Six Nations boldly asserted. The status of the Six N-
by reason of the extensive home rule rights ations on the Grand River [illegible]
granted by the British Imperial Parliament official report of the [illegible]
under the British North American Act, cre- of the Province of Ontario for 1919, in which
ating the Dominion of Canada în 1868. By the following appears:
that Act the Dominion Parliament is vested
among other powers with the power to legis- “By Dr, R. B. Orr, archeologist, (1919.
laté in respect to Indians. That meant pow- page 55.)
er to legislate for Canada in respect to rela-
tions with Indians. The Imperial. Parlia- “The Six Nations hold their land under the
ment up to that time never pretended to pos- Haldimand Grant to this day. In this man-
sess sovereign rights to legislate over the Six ner His Majesty's faithful allies took posses-
Nations cannot be deemed to have intended sion of and ocupied the Grand River Tract.
to bestow a greater right upon the Parlia- Their sovereignty and identity were two
ment of the Dominion of Canada. Neither things that were conserved."
can that act by the language used be deemed
to authorize the Dominion of Canada to ig- In December 1922 the Canadian Indian of-
nore the obligations o of the Imperial govern- fice in apparent retaliation for the more de-
ment outstanding under a prior treaty with termined attitude on the part of the Six Na-
the Six Nations. The next year after the es- tions people caused our Six Nations country
tablishment of the Dominion the Dominion to be invaded by officials with writs of sum-
Parliament began its paternalistic legislation mons issued from Canadian courts for the
since enlarged into the code called the Indian seizure and arrest of Six Nations people, ac-
Act. Realizing that the Dominion govern- companied by men under arms. Instead of
ment was without sovereign authority over meeting the aggression by force, the Council
the Six Nations the Indian department call- determined to appeal for protection to the
ed a meeting of the various tribes to be held League of Nations and immediately present-
at Sarnia in June 1871, at which the formal ed to the representatives of the Netherlands.
acquiesance of the various tribes in that governments, at Washington, a petition to
Dominion legislature was sought. The con- the Netherlands, government to bring their situation
gress was duly attended, including delegates to the notice of the League of Na-
from the Six Nations but when the latter tions and the government of Holland did so
learned of the proposal that the congress in April, 1923. This situation was recogniz-
should consider for approval, the adoption ed by the Dominion of Canada government
of that legislation; the Six Nations delegates as involving a question which might in just-
immediately withdrew. ice, to have consideration, and a formal offer
was made that the issue of the status of the
The continued increase in the population Six Nations be taken up for judicial determi-
of the Dominion of Canada surrounding the nation. Since the tribunal proposed by Can-
Grand River lands has witnessed the grow- ada was to be brought into being as a British
ing disposition on the Dominion Indian office body, under Canadian legislation, and com-
to impose its will upon the Grand River peo- pensated by the Canadian government, the
ple. The paternalistic policy which has offer was rejected on the ground that such a
caused the attitude of the Dominion towards tribunal would not be a true international
scattered handfulls of aborigines of North tribunal, nor unprejudiced.
America north of the great lakes having
been yielded to or welcomed: the Indian That negotiation recognized: recognizes
office has become impatient at the exception the Grand River Council on the de facto and
presented in the case of the Six Nations, and de jure government of the Six Nations.
has supposed the time has come when the
Six Nations people should be coerced into As a consummation of determination of
obedience to its will. Never, however, until the Dominion government to subjugate the
the year 1922 has the Dominion Indian of- Six Nations, an armed force was quartered
fice resorted to force for that purpose. in their midst about the first of the year
The patience with which the Six Nations

have endured the increasingly contemptuous
attitude of the Dominion Indian office has
gone far to invite a continuance of the con-
tempt, but every, official manifestation of
such contempt by of action has been met
with formal protests on every occasion, and
File name: IMG_7420.jpeg A subtle and hypocritical hand has suc-
ceded in dividing our people into two oppos-
ing parties as an effective meanse of encom-
passing our precious autonomy.
1923, and has ever since been maintained

there, but inasmuch as that measure was
Laken in face of protest of the Six Nations
Council and while its appeal for protection
by the League of Nations was pending, Can-
ada stopped to claim that the resulting
and eating situation is the proper test of
the question whether the Six Nations consti-
tute an independent self governing state.
We are now restricted from dealing with

It has now become customary for the Ca- one another for the exchange of our products
nndian government to refer to our territor- without government license and not satis-
ial domain as Crown lands, which by process fied with the outrages carried out by the milli-
of aggression would bring us under British tary police, one Colonel Chief [illegible]
subjection, a condition we do and will always dian superintendent appointed [illegible]
reject. dian government of himself murderously
threatened our women with a loaded revolver
and being charged before the Brantford Po-
For many years past our people have been lice Judge, was convicted and only escaped a
regarded by our oppressors as inferior and gaol sentence by payment of money.
degenerate people and spoken of and discrim-
inated against as "savages."
We therefore, representatives of the Six
Nations of aborigines of North America in
We have been induced from time to time Council Assembled appealing to the Supreme
to part with large tracts of land of our ter- Judge of the world for the rectitude of our
ritory, and to that end are purported to have intentions, do, in the name and authority of
executed solemn deeds and writings under the good people of our confederacy solemnly
seal. These documents are couched in terms PUBLICLY DECLARE that our people are
unintelligible to us, and to which we and of right ought to be a free and independ-
appear to have sometimes put our mark for mere ent community and are absolved from all al-
nominal or no money or other consideration. legiance to the British Crown and its Over-
Large areas of our domain are taken from us seas Dominions in Canada or elsewhere, and
and occupied by others, in respect of which that all political connection between us and
no account is made. the British Empire is and ought to be totally
dissolved and that as a free and independent
people, we have full power to maintain peace,
Superintendents have been appointed from contract alliances, establish commerce and
time to time by the Candian government pro- do all other acts and things which independ-
fessing to be our friends, but are in reality ent people may of right do.
our greatest enemies and misappropriate,
embezzle and steal our resources. Very large
sums of money have professedly been in- And for the support of this declaration,
vested on our behalf and have been totally with a firm reliance on the protection of di-
lost to us. Enormous sums are withheld at vine providence, we mutually pledge to each
the Canadian Treasury, while our people are other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred
convicted of vagrancy, trafficing in liquor, honor.
and such kindred offences, brough about and the
immediate consequence of the aggres-
sion and conditions are daily becoming more Signed and declared by us Chiefs of the
acute and unbearable. Six Nations and hereunto is affixed the Com-
mon Seal of the Ho-De-No-Sau-Nees Confed-
eration of the Grand River.
We are penned in our reservation super-
vised by a form of militarism diluted with
a sickening brand of patronising ecclesiest- Done at Oswegen this 19th day of June, 1928.
ism, this latter has hitherto been a most ef-
fective weapon in the hands of our oppres-
sors. Our women and children pass sleep- Henry K. Powless
less nights and are in constant dread of the Mohawks
intrusions and behaviour of our so-called
guardians. The Royal Northwest Mounted Jacob, Salem Johnson Appointed Oniedas
Police, who have broken open our safes Robert Davies and
stolen our wampum belts and symbols of our Cayugas
ancient government and constitution.
Isaac General Elected
Senetas
Seaman Silver Chief of hereunto affixed and duly, signed and duly
Tuséarorus elected representatives of Six. Nations. in our
presence.
Joseph Logan
Onandagas Chief Chauncey Garlow, Speaker,
Other signers include Chief Jones Craw-

ford, Chief Patrick Longboat, Sergt. Major
Other members present: Mark Martin, Jacob W. J. Williams, Haldimand Regiment and
Lewis, A. S. C. Private William J. Staats, 29th Battalion in
France.
The, common seal of the Ho-De-No-Sau-

Nees Federation of the Grand River was
otice of the League of Na-

ernment of Holland did so lost-to us. Enormous sums are
his situation was recogniz- the Canadian Treasury, while our
on of Canada government. estion which might in just- convicted of vagrancy, trafficing
Heration, and a formal offer and such kindred offences, brough
e issue of the status of the the Immediate consequences of
ken up for judicial determi- sion and [illegible] aily beco
tribunal proposed by Can- acute and unbearable.
ught into being as a British
adian legislation, and com-
Canadian government, the We are penned in our reserva
on the ground that such a vised by a form of militarism di
ot be a true international prejudiced.: a sickening brand of patronising
ism, this latter has hitherto been
fective weapon in the hands
on recognized; recognizes sors. Our women and children
Council on the de facto and ent of the 'Six Nations. less nights and are in constant dr
intrusions and behaviour of our
guardians, The Royal Northwest
mation of, determination of overnment to subjugate Police, who have broken open
the armed force was quartered stolen our wampum belts and sym
about the first of the year ancient government and constituti
A subtle and hypocritical hand

ceeded in dividing our people into
ing parties as an effective means
passing our precious autonomy

-1 Pt. 5)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
REMARKS on REPORT rec. Jan. 16, 1923
The report ignores the unique TREATY between BRITAIN and her allies
the STI NATIONS,which neither side has ever renounced. It misrepresents
as a new thing, the Chiefs asserting their rights [illegible]
by constant Use and Wont been always, until recently, most carefully
respected,both by Britain and Canada.The only novelty is in these vener
-able rights being now questioned, this since the Six Nations resisted the
application of by officials of certain post-war laws to their self-govern
-ing territory.They rightly thought these laws hurtful & even dangerous
in themselves. They were made by the late Government, & the new Minister
of the Interior has admitted their danger by offering to amend them.
They have brought poverty to many who accepted their supposed privila
-eges.The report says the Six Nations are “protected by the Indian Act”.
I do not think that Act was ever held to apply to the Six Nations, but the
report says nothing of “The Act to Amend the Indian Act”, 1929, in which
section 109 instead of protecting any Indians whatever has er had the power to
destroy them as communities & protect only their grave-yards, at the Indi
-ans’ expense.
It is not quite correct to term the Grand River “the Indian reserve”
as their land was not reserve but a gift of compensation and acknowledge
-ment, from the King, “to be enjoyed by them and their posterity for ever”.
The word “fanaticism”, used in the report must be admitted to misrepresent
state of affairs. The report says that the majority of the people

-1X)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
In contradiction to the report the following is in Haneard--- from the speech
of the Hon. Frank Oliver, Minister of the Interior and Sup. Gen. of Ind
-aian affairs, May 11, 1914,......”The Six Nations [illegible]
Grand River, Ontario, who, I maintain, are in a different legal position from
any Inidan bands who are native to the country.They had their home in the
United States. At the close of the war of the revolution they emigrated to
Canada and were given lands under a special treaty, not as subjects of
Great Britain, but as allies of Great Britain”
-------- ........ -------
Section 109, Act to amend the Indian Act, 1920
“When a whole band, or the majority of the members of a band become
enfranchised, the common land or other property of the band may be sold
by the Sup. Gen. and the proceeds of such sale placed to the credit of the
band, to be divided”
The Indian Depart. Wrote me that “in no circumstances could the Inidan
land be alienated” and that “the Gov. had never even considered compulsory
enfranchisement” yet Hon. Mr Stewart admitted the “compulsory element”
when writing of amende being promised to the Indians. I gave up writing to
the Indian Depart. officials has the statements were not to be relied on,
or only half truths [illegible]

-1X)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
REMARKS on REPORT rec. Jan. 16, 1923
The report ignores the unique TREATY between BRITAIN and her allies
the STI NATIONS,which neither side has ever renounced. It misrepresents
as a new thing, the Chiefs asserting their rights [illegible]
by constant Use and Wont been always, until recently, most carefully
respected,both by Britain and Canada.The only novelty is in these vener
-able rights being now questioned, this since the Six Nations resisted the
application of by officials of certain post-war laws to their self-govern
-ing territory.They rightly thought these laws hurtful & even dangerous
in themselves. They were made by the late Government, & the new Minister
of the Interior has admitted their danger by offering to amend them.
They have brought poverty to many who accepted their supposed privila
-eges.The report says the Six Nations are “protected by the Indian Act”.
I do not think that Act was ever held to apply to the Six Nations, but the
report says nothing of “The Act to Amend the Indian Act”, 1929, in which
section 109 instead of protecting any Indians whatever has er had the power to
destroy them as communities & protect only their grave-yards, at the Indi
-ans’ expense.
It is not quite correct to term the Grand River “the Indian reserve”
as their land was not reserve but a gift of compensation and acknowledge
-ment, from the King, “to be enjoyed by them and their posterity for ever”.
The word “fanaticism”, used in the report must be admitted to misrepresent
state of affairs. The report says that the majority of the people

-1X)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
Governing by the old and admired laws of the Six Nations. I have yet to hear
of any dimensions.
The report says that the Canadian [illegible]
recognize the Chiefs’ claims. This ought be “of late”, as I have said,
and if so, why why has it met them by offering a Commission of Invest-
-tigation? The report mentions the first offer of a Royal Commission, but
does not say “of three judges of the court of Ontario”. The Six Nations acc-
-epted the modified offer in good faith of which I have the proofs,but what
people on earth would expect or be able to endure in such circumstances a
raid with fire-arms on some of their homes next morning, as if inspired by
someone who wished to prevent the commission of Investigation?
The report says nothing of the Six Nations’ large funds or of the
Chiefs’ repeated request for an audit &an account, but this was to be
one of the subjects for investigation by the Commission.
I omitted to say that the report, when telling of the Chiefs’ acc-
-eptance of the offer and of the writer’s observing that since then they
“had proceeded to Washington and attempted to lay their claims’, before the
League of Nations, (the world’s first league of Peace, thus called for 3
Centuries “the Six Nations”, well do so), says nothing of the infamous
Raid on the morning after the Chiefs wrote their acceptance of the Canadian
Government’s offer; which no doubt drove them to Washington.

-1X)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
In contradiction to the report the following is in Haneard--- from the speech
of the Hon. Frank Oliver, Minister of the Interior and Sup. Gen. of Ind
-aian affairs, May 11, 1914,......”The Six Nations [illegible]
Grand River, Ontario, who, I maintain, are in a different legal position from
any Indian bands who are native to the country.They had their home in the
United States. At the close of the war of the revolution they emigrated to
Canada and were given lands under a special treaty, not as subjects of
Great Britain, but as allies of Great Britain”
-------- ........ -------
Section 109, Act to amend the Indian Act, 1920
“When a whole band, or the majority of the members of a band become
enfranchised, the common land or other property of the band may be sold
by the Sup. Gen. and the proceeds of such sale placed to the credit of the
band, to be divided”
The Indian Depart. Wrote me that “in no circumstances could the Inidan
land be alienated” and that “the Gov. had never even considered compulsory
enfranchisement” yet Hon. Mr Stewart admitted the “compulsory element”
when writing of amende being promised to the Indians. I gave up writing to
the Indian Depart. officials has the statements were not to be relied on,
or only half truths [illegible]

-1X)
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA
Colonial Office Records

Pt. 1
Q. 282
Page 289-91
Council Chamber Navy Hall in the Country pf. Lincoln-

Monday April 1st 1793.
Present
His Excellency J. C. Simcoe Esq. Lieut. Governor &c &c &c
The Hon’ble Wm.Osgoode, Chief Justice.
The Hon’ble Peter Russell.
His Excellency Ordered a letter he had received

from it. Colonel John Butler (Deputy Agent for Indian
Affairs) to be laid before the Board and to be read
accordingly - This letter states the services to its
Majesty during the late war of Captains John, Isaac, and
Aaron, three Mohawk Chiefs at the Bayo of Quinte and
petitioning for the proportion of Land that other
Captains are entitled to.
Captains John and Isaac attended the Board.
Resolved that the above mentioned petitioners
(viz. Captains John, Isaaо & Aaron) do severally receive
the same quantity of Land, that other Captains are
entitled to, and that they be referred to the Land
Board of the county of Leeds in order that this
resolution may be put in Execution as soon as possible.
Read a Report on Lands reserved for the
Mohawk Indians, at the Bay of Quinte (signed D.W. Smith,
Acting Surveyor General and dated Surveyor Generals
Office,- Upper Canada March 29, 1792) submitting the
The Hon’ble Wm.Osgoode, Chief Justice.
The Hon’ble Peter Russell.
His Excellency Ordered a letter he had received

from it. Colonel John Butler (Deputy Agent for Indian
Affairs) to be laid before the Board and to be read
accordingly - This letter states the services to its
Majesty during the late war of Captains John, Isaac, and
Aaron, three Mohawk Chiefs at the Bayo of Quinte and
petitioning for the proportion of Land that other
Captains are entitled to.
Captains John and Isaac attended the Board.
Resolved that the above mentioned petitioners
(viz. Captains John, Isaaо & Aaron) do severally receive
the same quantity of Land, that other Captains are
entitled to, and that they be referred to the Land
Board of the county of Leeds in order that this
resolution may be put in Execution as soon as possible.
Read a Report on Lands reserved for the
Mohawk Indians, at the Bay of Quinte (signed D.W. Smith,
Acting Surveyor General and dated Surveyor Generals
Office,- Upper Canada March 29, 1792) submitting the
Following Tract relative to the Reserves in question.
PUBLIC ARCHIVES
ARCHIVES PUBLIQUES
CANADA

Transcription

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Transcription

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transcription

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

File name: IMG_7395.

Is hardly seems necessary to [illegible]

infinite number of [illegible]

and the Canadian Archives, subsequent to 1883, to the

Alliance between the Six Nations and the Crown or Great

Britain, or its terms.

In pre-revolutionary times the Six Nation warn by

formal treaty the acknowledged possessors of all the

lands determined by the Treaty of [illegible], a

country which they possessed in full enjoyment under the

pledged protection of the King of the Great Britain. They had

the right to manage their own affairs in their own country,

nor did white laws operate therein.

 Whenever, or in so far as a State does not contract

The six Nations, so long as 1754 were recognized to be a

Indian Affairs. (RG 10, Volume 2285 File 57,169

threatens to [illegible], precludes all im-

On the 24th. July,1773, Dartmouth again wrote Guy Johnson,

( N. Y. Doc. 8, P. 596 ) as follows,

“ I have already in my letter to you of the 5th. Install

It is matter of history how the Six Nations were forced to

of 1783, made no provision for them.

Haldimand, then Governor of Canada, bought the lands at Grand

River ( also Bay of Quinte ) from the Mississaugas, and

Indian Affairs. (RG 10, Volume 2285 File 57,169

by an instrument under his hand and privy seal, set apart a

Whereas His Majesty having been pleased to divert [illegible]

On the 14th. January, 1793, by formal grant under the Great

Seal, these lands were confirmed to the Six Nations,

“Giving and granting, and by these presents confirming to

A similar Grant in similar terms was made contemporaneous-

ly, to the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, settles there origin-

ally through a jealousy between Deseronto and Thyandangea.

The Royal Instructions of December 2nd, 1761( ante),were

most emphatic in their assurance so the Indians “ those Treat-

ies and Compacts which have heretofore solemnly entered into

of this Realm”, would be kept “inviolable” and was natural

on the 14th. January,1793, [illegible]

Seal, these lands were confirmed [illegible]

“ Giving and granting, and by these presents confirming to

A similar Grant in similar terms was made contemporaneous-

ly, to the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, settles there origin-

ally through a jealousy between Deseronto and Thyandangea.

The Royal Instructions of December 2nd, 1761( ante),were

most emphatic in their assurance so the Indians “ those Treat-

ies and Compacts which have heretofore solemnly entered into

of this Realm”, would be kept “inviolable” and was natural

Ments, to seek redress from the Ally- the King of England.

Joseph Brant was chosen as their Ambassador to visit

England, and went there in 1785. On the 4th. January, 1786,

he presented his letters, with the demands of the Six Nations

to Lord Sydney, Secretary of State. The following are extracts

from these documents and Sydney’s reply on behalf of the King,-

“ The cause of my coming to England being of the most

Indian Affairs. (RG 10, Volume 2285 File 57,169

“ entreat your Lordship patiently to hear and listen to

Sydney replied to this on April 6th. 1786(Can. Aroh.1907, P.549)

The language is diplomatic, but neither the occasion or the ef-

fect of these communications need be enlarged upon.