2. Women's Perspectives - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure ...

2. Women's Perspectives - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure ... 2. Women's Perspectives - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure ...

27.01.2015 Views

The first statutory definition of 'Indian' is found in An Act for the better protection of the Lands and Property of the Indians in Lower Canada, passed in 1850. The definition is quite inclusive. It includes all those of Indian blood and their descendants, non-Indians who have married Indians living on the designated lands, and even persons adopted in infancy by Indians. 15 Within one year, this definition became more restrictive as a result of amending legislation that denied non-Indian men who married Indian women the right to acquire Indian status, but Indian status could still be gained by non-Indian women who married Indian men. The descendants of all intermarriages who actually resided on a reserve would nonetheless still be considered Indians irrespective of the status of one of the spouses, since they would fall within that part of the definition of Indian that referred to Indian blood. 16 However, it is obvious that the same rule did not apply to men and women in mixed marriages as it had under the earlier legislation. For the first time, Indian status began to be associated with the male line of descent. The concept of enfranchisement was introduced in 1857 through An Act to encourage the gradual Civilization of the Indian Tribes in the Province, and to amend the Laws respecting Indians. 17 The act applied to both Upper and Lower Canada, and its operating premise was that by removing the legal distinctions between Indians and non-Indians through enfranchisement and by facilitating the acquisition of individual property by Indians, it would be possible in time to absorb Indians fully into colonial society. An enfranchised Indian was, in effect, actually renouncing Indian status and the right to live on protected reserve land in order to join non-Aboriginal colonial society. The modern department of Indian affairs describes the nature and effect of the Gradual Civilization Act as follows: [The act]…contained property and monetary inducements to encourage Indians to leave tribal societies and seek enfranchisement. An enfranchised person could receive land and a sum of money equal to the principal of the annuities and other yearly revenues received by the band. The intent of this legislation was that enfranchised Indians would continue to reside in the Native community but would have the same rights as non-Indian citizens. 18 The act applied only to adult male Indians. Under section 3 of the act, to be enfranchised an Indian had to be male, over age 21, able to read and write either English or French, reasonably well educated, free of debt, and of good moral character as determined by a commission of examiners. The right to exercise the franchise depended upon meeting the requirements in federal and provincial legislation in terms of property ownership. Thus, there was no automatic right to vote. Indians were given a three-year qualifying period to acquire these attributes. Women were not to be enfranchised independently. Yet if an Indian man was enfranchised, his wife and children were automatically enfranchised along with him, regardless of their wishes; willingly or not, they lost their Indian status. From a woman's perspective, this act perpetuated the notion of a wife and children as the husband's 24

property, his chattels. Unlike her husband, the enfranchised woman did not receive a share of reserve lands, because by this time, in keeping with prevailing Victorian notions, maleness and the right to possess and live on reserve lands were becoming fixtures of Indian policy. If an enfranchised man died, for example, his children of lineal descent were given precedence to inherit the estate and to live on his land. His wife would inherit the estate and land allotted to him if and only if there were no children of lineal descent. She would then have the right to use it only until her re-marriage or death, at which point it would revert to Crown ownership. In the pre-Confederation period, concepts were introduced that were foreign to Aboriginal communities and that, wittingly or unwittingly, undermined Aboriginal cultural values. In many cases, the legislation displaced the natural, community-based and self-identification approach to determining membership — which included descent, marriage, residency, adoption and simple voluntary association with a particular group — and thus disrupted complex and interrelated social, economic and kinship structures. Patrilineal descent of the type embodied in the Gradual Civilization Act, for example, was the least common principle of descent in Aboriginal societies, but through these laws, it became predominant. 19 From this perspective, the Gradual Civilization Act was an exercise in government control in deciding who was and was not an Indian. At Confederation, the secretary of state became the superintendent general of Indian affairs and, in 1868, acquired control over Indian lands and funds through federal legislation. The definition of 'Indian' was finalized on a patrilineal model, excluding non- Indian men who married Indian women but including non-Indian women who married Indian men. 20 The first important piece of post-Confederation legislation, the Gradual Enfranchisement Act, was passed in 1869. 21 This act went further than previous legislation in its 'civilizing' and assimilative purposes and in marginalizing Indian women: for the first time, Indian women were accorded fewer legal rights than Indian men in their home communities. The prevailing Victorian social and political norms were now extended to include reserve communities. 22 For example, Indian women were denied the right to vote in band elections; voting was now restricted to adult men, as it was in Canadian society generally. As well, a new provision was added to the provisions carried over from the Gradual Civilization Act. Now a woman who married an Indian man from another band lost membership in her home community, as did her children, and she became a member of her husband's band. In the eyes of Aboriginal women, the most damaging aspects of this legislation were the new provisions that penalized women who married non-Indian men. Under the earlier Gradual Civilization Act, there had been no penalty for such a marriage beyond the fact that the non-Indian husband did not gain Indian status upon marriage. Under this new legislation, by contrast, the Indian wife was legally stripped of her recognized Indian identity, and she and the children of the marriage lost the rights that flowed from Indian 25

The first statutory definition of 'Indian' is found in An Act for the better protection of the<br />

Lands and Property of the Indians in Lower Canada, passed in 1850. The definition is<br />

quite inclusive. It includes all those of Indian blood and their descendants, non-Indians<br />

who have married Indians living on the designated lands, and even persons adopted in<br />

infancy by Indians. 15 Within one year, this definition became more restrictive as a result<br />

of amending legislation that denied non-Indian men who married Indian women the right<br />

to acquire Indian status, but Indian status could still be gained by non-Indian women who<br />

married Indian men.<br />

The descendants of all intermarriages who actually resided on a reserve would<br />

nonetheless still be considered Indians irrespective of the status of one of the spouses,<br />

since they would fall within that part of the definition of Indian that referred to Indian<br />

blood. 16 However, it is obvious that the same rule did not apply to men and women in<br />

mixed marriages as it had under the earlier legislation. For the first time, Indian status<br />

began to be associated with the male line of descent.<br />

The concept of enfranchisement was introduced in 1857 through An Act to encourage the<br />

gradual Civilization of the Indian Tribes in the Province, and to amend the Laws<br />

respecting Indians. 17 The act applied to both Upper and Lower Canada, and its operating<br />

premise was that by removing the legal distinctions between Indians and non-Indians<br />

through enfranchisement and by facilitating the acquisition of individual property by<br />

Indians, it would be possible in time to absorb Indians fully into colonial society. An<br />

enfranchised Indian was, in effect, actually renouncing Indian status and the right to live<br />

on protected reserve land in order to join non-<strong>Aboriginal</strong> colonial society. The modern<br />

department of Indian affairs describes the nature and effect of the Gradual Civilization<br />

Act as follows:<br />

[The act]…contained property and monetary inducements to encourage Indians to leave<br />

tribal societies and seek enfranchisement. An enfranchised person could receive land and<br />

a sum of money equal to the principal of the annuities and other yearly revenues received<br />

by the band. The intent of this legislation was that enfranchised Indians would continue<br />

to reside in the Native community but would have the same rights as non-Indian<br />

citizens. 18<br />

The act applied only to adult male Indians. Under section 3 of the act, to be enfranchised<br />

an Indian had to be male, over age 21, able to read and write either English or French,<br />

reasonably well educated, free of debt, and of good moral character as determined by a<br />

commission of examiners. The right to exercise the franchise depended upon meeting the<br />

requirements in federal and provincial legislation in terms of property ownership. Thus,<br />

there was no automatic right to vote. Indians were given a three-year qualifying period to<br />

acquire these attributes.<br />

Women were not to be enfranchised independently. Yet if an Indian man was<br />

enfranchised, his wife and children were automatically enfranchised along with him,<br />

regardless of their wishes; willingly or not, they lost their Indian status. From a woman's<br />

perspective, this act perpetuated the notion of a wife and children as the husband's<br />

24

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!