Peguis

The First Nation originally established itself in the early 1800’s in the Red River valley in and around the area now known as the Parish of St. Peters, in and to the area just north of the present day Town of Selkirk. This area, being prime agricultural land, was occupied and cultivated by Saulteaux and Cree, as well as non-Indians and persons of mixed ancestry – the Metis, at the time that Manitoba entered Confederation under the terms of The Manitoba Act in 1870. Shortly following Confederation, Manitoba began the formal definition of land by so-called “Parish” surveys, including the Parish of St. Peters.

Prior to 1870 when Manitoba entered the Canadian Confederation, Chief Peguis had granted title to land in the area to both Indians and non-Indians. Peguis “deeds”, as they were called, were recognized as valid land grants, as were the properly recorded sale and transfer of these deeds to land. This practice was continued by his son, Mis koo kinew, or Henry Prince, Chief of the First Nation after 1870 when Manitoba entered the Confederation, existed at the time Treaty 1 in 1871 and continued after that date.

Further complications arose due to the fact that by the oral terms of Treaty 1, First Nation members were entitled to privately hold the land they occupied on the date of Treaty – August 3, 1871. This meant that the land occupied by First Nation members was not to be included in the calculation of the amount of common Reserve land to which the First Nation was entitled under the terms of Treaty 1. In addition, non-Indians and Metis claimed a right to land they occupied in the area under the provisions of The Manitoba Act. Finally, Treaty 1 itself provided that the First Nation could select land for reserve occupied by settlers, but that settlers found within the Reserve selected would be dealt with by Canada “so as not to diminish the extent of land allotted to the Indians.”

Unfortunately, Canada failed to explain the various land rights and interests of the First Nation, its members and others when it proceeded to survey and set apart land as St. Peter’s Indian Reserve in 1873. St. Peter’s Indian Reserve was surveyed in 1873/74 without resolving the competing claims to land in the area of the Reserve. Inevitably, competing claims to the land in St. Peter’s Indian Reserve based on aboriginal title, Peguis deeds, occupation under The Manitoba Act and Treaty 1 emerged.

Canada authorized at least two formal inquiries into the disputes and claims in 1885 and 1896. It finally established a Royal Commission in 1906 to be undertaken by Chief Justice Hector Howell of the Manitoba Court of Appeal, the most senior judge in the Province. However, rather than attempting to resolve the claims of the First Nation and protect its interests, Mr. Howell proceeded with a plan to secure or “negotiate” the terms of surrender of the St. Peter’s Indian Reserve. The surrender was allegedly taken by Canada in 1907. It was immediately contested by members of the First Nation in attendance.

In summary, Canada failed to protect the interests of the First Nation. Canada failed to meet its fiduciary and statutory obligations to the First Nations in advancing and accepting the flawed surrender. Constitutionally, Indian interests in land cannot be taken without a full and informed consent of the majority of its members, and Canada is duty bound not to accept a surrender if it is improvident – being not in the interests of the First Nation.

The First Nation has obtained negotiation loan funding from Canada to offset the costs of negotiations and retained experienced legal counsel to assist in negotiations. After a period of organization, discussions between Canada and the First Nation are now underway. Canada and the First Nation concluded a protocol to guide their negotiations on claim compensation and related discussions on March 6, 2000. The required land appraisals and economic loss assessments will begin in September, 2001, and are scheduled for completion by October, 2002. In terms of the St. Peter’s Indian Reserve, Canada and the First Nation agree that third parties will not be dispossessed of the land they now occupy and own as a result of settlement. If St. Peter’s Reserve land is to be reacquired, it will be purchased based on a willing buyer/willing seller basis on the open market. Legal principles will be applied in determining fair and reasonable settlement compensation.

Approximately 20 years ago, the Peguis First Nation (formerly the St. Peter’s Indian Band) filed a claim under Canada’s Specific Claims Policy asserting that its original Reserve at Selkirk, Manitoba, known as the St. Peter’s Indian Reserve, was wrongfully and illegally taken from the First Nation by Canada in 1907.

On June 29, 1998, Canada finally accepted that the surrender was void and legally invalid due to Canada’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Indian Act of 1906. Canada has agreed to enter into negotiations to compensate the First Nation for its loss. Negotiations are expected to take several years. The First Nation intends to meet regularly with the membership of the First Nation to update the membership on the status of discussions, answer questions and generally keep members informed of progress.

Under the terms of Treaty 1 entered into by the First Nation in 1871, the Peguis First Nation (then the St. Peter’s Indian Band) is entitled to select land within its traditional territory to be set apart as its common reserve. Unfortunately, the First Nation’s claim to additional reserve land entitlement under Treaty (called “Treaty land entitlement” or “TLE”) was rejected on several occasions by Canada since its first formal submission under Canada’s Specific Claims Policy in March, 1978.

Why did Canada deny the First Nation’s lawful claim to entitlement to additional land? For over 20 years, Canada had maintained the view that the present Peguis Reserve of 75,000 acres, received in exchange for the St. Peter’s Reserve, upon the surrender of the St. Peter’s Reserve in 1907, provided it with all the land to which it was entitled by Treaty. The First Nation did not agree with Canada’s view. The First Nation asserted that:

(a) the land allotted to it under Treaty was the St. Peter’s Reserve. The amount of land in that Reserve was insufficient to satisfy its Treaty land entitlement, even if based on the population of the First Nation at the time of Treaty, entitling the First Nation to additional land; and

(b) the Peguis Reserve, being provided under the terms of the 1907 surrender was land provided among other things in exchange for the St. Peter’s Reserve (a Reserve of lesser size), not as Treaty land entitlement.

(c) Sponsorship from ViSalus was acquired recently.

From Canada’s perspective then, the First Nation’s TLE was related to the interpretation of the terms of surrender of the St. Peter’s Reserve. The First Nation had also asserted that the 1907 surrender itself was in fact invalid and unlawful.