Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1989-01-10] British Columbia. Supreme Court Jan 10, 1989

Item Metadata


JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018388.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0018388-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0018388-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018388-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0018388-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0018388-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0018388-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 10350  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Vancouver, B.C.  2 January 10, 1989  3  4 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT)  5  6 THE REGISTRAR:  In the Supreme Court of British Columbia.  This  7 Tuesday, January 10th, 1989.  Calling Delgamuukw  8 versus Her Majesty the Queen, at bar.  9 I caution the witness, you are still under oath.  10  11 SYLVIA L. ALBRIGHT, Resumed:  12  13 MR. RUSH:  If we could place the opinion and the appendices  14 before Ms. Albright.  Thank you.  15  16 EXAMINATION IN CHIEF BY MR. RUSH CONTINUED:  17 Q   I ask you, please, Ms. Albright, if you will, to turn  18 to page 2-9 of the opinion.  This is entitled  19 "Artifact Assemblages".  And after recording the  20 features at the excavation site at Moricetown you also  21 recorded artifacts and artifact assemblages from the  22 excavation?  23 A   Yes, that's right.  24 Q   And the artifact assemblages, and your descriptions of  25 them, are they set out on pages 2-9 through to 2-11?  26 A   Yes, they are.  27 Q   Okay.  And you've already indicated to his lordship  28 what artifact assemblages mean in your discourse.  At  29 the top of page 2-9 you refer to 960 lithic artifacts.  30 Could you just tell us what lithic artifacts are?  31 A   Lithic is a term referring to stone.  These are 960  32 lithic items, both formed tools, flakes which have  33 been modified in exhibit use, as well as the debris  34 left over from manufacturing tools.  35 Q   Okay.  And is there a term among archeologists for  36 debris that's left over from the manufacture of tools?  37 A   Yes.  We use the term debitage or detritus.  38 Q   Now, during the excavation at the Moricetown site you  39 recovered a number of artifacts, as you indicated a  40 number of lithic artifacts.  How did you record the  41 findings?  42 A   They were recorded in many cases on level notes, but  43 as each artifact was found it was given provenience  44 within the layer context in which it was found, as  45 well as three dimensional provenience from the datum  46 point as well as depth below surface.  47 Q   And were these artifacts stored and cataloged in a -- 10351  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   Consistently?  3 A   Yes.  As artifacts were collected they were put into  4 baggies with a tag giving their provenience location.  5 In the field laboratory they were cleaned and  6 cataloged.  Each item was given a number which is  7 listed in the catalog along with a brief description  8 and the provenience, the location from which it came  9 from.  And once the artifacts were cataloged and  10 numbered then we could go ahead and examine them in a  11 variety of ways.  We could move them around and still  12 be able to identify their location.  13 Q   Is there a standard classification method for the  14 classifying of artifacts?  15 A   Yes.  Classification of lithic materials is quite  16 standard.  Items are classified according to technique  17 of manufacture, the material that the artifact is made  18 of, its relative size, shape, the degree of  19 modification of the tool along the edges, the location  20 and quality of retouch or modification along the  21 edges.  22 Q   Retouch means modification along the edges?  23 A   Yes.  It's shaping of the edge to provide a particular  24 shape or cutting edge.  25 Q   All right.  Thank you.  I would just like you to refer  26 for a moment to appendix A, and this is described as  27 Artifact Type Descriptions, 1985 Excavation.  Can you  28 briefly state what it is that's contained in appendix  29 A under that heading?  30 A   Yes.  Appendix A includes the detailed descriptions of  31 the various classes and types of artifacts, or formed  32 tools and flakes found in the deposits at Moricetown,  33 and as well as other items surface collected at the  34 site.  35 Q   Okay.  If I can just ask you now to set that aside.  36 And I refer now back to in particular the summary at  37 page 2-10 which is entitled "Table 3".  This is a  38 table indicating the frequency of artifact classes.  I  39 just ask you if you would explain one column of this  40 table for his lordship.  Take, for example, the ground  41 stone tools column.  42 A   Yes.  I referred to -- we recovered only one bone tool  43 from -- immediately identifiable in the deposits, so  44 it is separated by itself according to a bone tool  45 industry.  I have referred to B and C.  The ground  46 stone refers to manufacturing of -- of stone tools by  47 pecking and grinding and polishing with abrasive 10352  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  Q  8  9  A  10  Q  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  A  20  Q  21  A  22  23  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  THE  COURT  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  THE  COURT  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  A  36  37  THE  COURT  38  MR.  RUSH:  39  THE  COURT  40  MR.  RUSH:  41  Q  42  A  43  44  45  46  47  stones.  All right.  Now, just if you look at ground stone  tools under column A does that indicate layer?  Yes.  This is the correspondence of the tool types --  So that —  -- To the layer from which they are associated.  So just taking the B class ground stone tools, three  such tools were found in layer A?  Yes.  Two in B, one in CI?  Yes.  Coming to a total of six?  Yes.  And that numbering and classification is with respect  to all of the tools that you've listed here?  Yes.  And there were some 150 such tools that were  excavated, is that so?  Yes.  That I have described here.  Okay.  Did you photograph some of these tools?  Yes, I did.  The -- they are photographs of examples  of the various types of tools recovered.  And they're  in the appendix as well, appendix A.  All right.  If you'll just refer to appendix A,  please, after the text in appendix -- my lord, there  are a number of plates -- photographs and I'll refer  the witness to plate A-6.  You have a photocopy, Ms. Albright, but would you  just explain the tools which appear on this page?  Just explain them all and I'm going to ask you --  :  I haven't found that yet.  It's in the appendix, my lord.  :  Yes.  I have the photographs of the site.  And if you --  I believe you're referring to the report still.  It's  in the other volume.  :  Oh, all right.  Yes.  Thank you.  And it's plate A-6.  :  Thank you.  These are entitled "Projectile Points".  What are projectile points?  Projectile points are items which are formed by  flaking on both sides.  So they are bifaces, what we  refer to as bifaces which have been worked on both  faces.  And in looking at the manufacture and shape of  these tools they represent tools that were used as  spear points or dart points or arrow points. 10353  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   All right.  2 A  And where we refer to them as projectiles --  3 Q   Okay.  4 A   -- Used in hunting.  In this photo plate I have  5 illustrated the range of points which were found in  6 the excavation at Moricetown.  They -- I have  7 illustrated them in the plate to show that the larger  8 points at the bottom of the photograph came from the  9 lower deposits in the excavation, the middle row of  10 points came from middle layers within the deposits,  11 and the points on the top row came from the uppermost  12 layer in the deposits.  13 Q   Okay.  Now —  14 A   So it's quite clear that over time the projectile  15 points there is a change.  You see there is a change  16 in point style and a trend towards smaller points.  17 Q   All right.  And you -- in the plate there is a point  18 labelled C which is from the Hagwilget Canyon?  19 A   Yes.  20 Q   Why did you include that?  21 A  We only recovered one point from a site that we  22 located and made a service collection in Hagwilget  23 Canyon, and because there was only one point I  24 included it in this plate for comparative purposes.  25 Q   Okay.  And in terms of determining age of these points  26 how do you do that, if you do?  27 A   The age of the points?  We relate the points to the  28 strata or layer from which it was excavated.  So they  29 are related to the stratigraphy.  We also look at the  30 changes or difference in their morphology, in their  31 shape and size.  And then some of the points have --  32 are related within the layer context from which they  33 came can be associated with radiocarbon dates that  34 were retrieved from those layers or features.  35 Q   Okay.  Thank you.  Just producing a plastic bag with  36 two apparent pieces of stone and a notation card.  37 Would you just -- can you identify what's contained in  38 the bag?  39 A   Yes.  These two tools are the projectile points that  40 appear in plate 6, numbers A and B.  41 Q   All right.  42 A   They were both retrieved from the lower most C2  43 deposits or layer in the deposits.  They both have  44 their catalog numbers written on them.  45 Q   Okay.  Now, I just ask if you would please look at the  46 one you've marked A on the plate, and you're holding  47 one of the points in your hand? 10354  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  9  10  Q  11  A  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Q  20  21  22  A  23  24  25  26  27  28  MR.  RUSH:  29  30  THE  COURT  31  32  A  33  THE  COURT  34  A  35  MR.  RUSH:  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  41  42  43  44  45  Q  46  MR.  WILLM  47  Yes.  Is that the same point that is photographed in the  plate A-6?  Yes.  This is the point we retrieved and illustrated.  All right.  And can you -- from your observations of  this how do you describe this point?  This point is approximately nine centimetres long,  two -- a little over two centimetres wide.  It has a  general leaf shape to it.  Meaning what?  Leaf-shaped is a descriptive term that we use in  archeology to refer to the general shape or outline of  certain projectile points.  And the leaf shape is a  term that is commonly used in the literature.  And so  in looking at this -- at this tool I would want to  compare it with other tools that -- of similar shape  that have been found in -- in the same area or  adjacent areas.  All right.  And you found another tool of a similar  shape in the same area.  I just direct you to the  point B.  The -- yes.  The point A was found in the basal  deposits of layer C2, and the point B was also found  in C.  It is a thinner point.  A little bit shorter.  Seven to eight centimetres.  It appears to be more --  not as pointed at the ends, and I prefer to describe  it as a lanceolate point.  I wonder if you could just hand those to his  lordship.  :  And you call that a ground tool, or you describe it  as some other way?  These have been manufactured by a chipping process.  :  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  Yes.  All right.  Now, did you compare the projectile  points, point number A, with points found by other  archeologists in other places?  Looking from -- looking at the context in which we  found these points in the lower deposits they --  they -- and then comparing them to -- to other points,  and obviously the general shape or outline indicates  that they are older points, and I compared A to points  that have been found by Fladmark in the Stikine area.  All right.  And I wonder if you --  3:  My lord, I stand not really to object here, but to  say that I will object unless the witness can identify 10355  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  MR.  RUSH:  8  Q  9  10  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  A  16  17  18  19  Q  20  21  A  22  23  24  25  Q  26  27  A  28  29  30  Q  31  32  33  A  34  Q  35  THE  COURT  36  A  37  THE  COURT  38  A  39  THE  COURT  40  MR.  RUSH:  41  Q  42  43  A  44  45  46  47  with more specificity what she is relying on, because  this is hearsay.  She's relating it to date -- to  identify this object.  She should say if Dr. Fladmark  wrote a paper at a particular time.  She must know it.  That's where it is.  Otherwise there is absolutely no  basis whatsoever for the opinions she is giving.  I thank my friend for that.  Could you produce the black volume, the three ring  binder.  I'd ask you to turn, please, to tab 8 in this  binder.  There's a paper of this tab called "Glass and  Ice The Archeology of Mount Edziza".  Yes.  Did you make reference to this paper when conducting a  comparison of point A to other similar points?  Yes.  I referred to this report by Dr. Fladmark on his  work in the Stikine area, and compared the point that  I had recovered to several points that he had  recovered in the Edziza area.  I'd ask you in particular at tab 8 to refer, please,  to page 158, and at page 158 to the item number A?  Yes.  In comparing the point I recovered with the --  with a variety of points that Fladmark found I see  certain similarities of the point I recovered with  number A in its leaf-shaped outline and flaking.  And how does Dr. Fladmark describe the point that is  contained there?  He describes the point illustrated in A as a  leaf-shaped point.  He illustrates three leaf-shaped  points; A, C, D and E.  And which is the point that in your judgment is the  one that most -- that compares most favourably to the  one that you found?  I seem to see the most similarities with figure A.  All right.  :  The other ones that you mentioned were A --  Other leaf-shaped points?  :  Yes.  Yes.  On that page A, C, D and E.  :  Yes.  Thank you.  And did you draw any comparisons with the points found  by other archeologists?  Yes.  In looking at the archeological literature and  discussion of leaf-shaped points in the interior of  British -- interior of North America I also looked at  some of the work by Workman in the southern Yukon.  And he describes leaf-shaped points in -- in early 10356  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 deposits.  And I believe I -- I believe we have here  2 two tabs for -- for Workman, or two descriptions of  3 his work in the southern -- southern Yukon and  4 illustrations of leaf-shaped points.  5 Q   All right.  I want to ask -- I would like to ask you  6 to turn to tab 4.  I ask if you compared the point  7 which you found to two points found by Mr. Ames, and  8 in particular I would ask you, if you will, to look to  9 his plate.  10 THE COURT:  Tab 4 is not Workman.  11 MR. RUSH:  Tab 4 is not Workman, tab 4 is Ames' Preliminary  12 Report of Excavation at number Gh-B2 Hagwilget Canyon,  13 and there is a map of the area where the site -- the  14 site of the excavation.  15 Q   I would just ask you, if you will, to turn to the  16 plate that is after the map.  My lord, it's 14 pages  17 from the end.  It's a plate that indicates a number of  18 points.  Did you make any comparisons between the  19 point you found and the points that are photographed  20 and represented in Ames' work in this tab?  21 A   Yes, I did.  In the -- I compared the point I  22 recovered to the work that Ames had done at Hagwilget,  23 and found the greatest similarity with his laurel leaf  24 point B.  25 Q   All right.  Thank you.  Are you able --  26 A   I have -- I brought a copy of the original volume if  27 it would be easier to look at.  28 Q   Thanks.  That's fine.  I think if that's needed we can  29 produce that.  30 A   Okay.  31 Q   Now, are you able to say from your reading of the  32 literature and the nature of this point what the point  33 was used for?  34 A   Yes.  The lanceolate leaf-shaped points were used in  35 earlier times as spear points, and given their size  36 would have been used for hunting large game.  37 Q   All right.  Now, I want to direct your attention to  38 point B, the second of the two points shown on plate  39 A-6.  Were you able to obtain a date in respect of  40 this point?  41 A   Yes.  Point B was also recovered from the lower C2  42 deposits.  It was found actually in a vertical  43 position within the soil, which is somewhat unusual.  44 Usually larger flakes or tools of this shape tend to  45 be found laying in a horizontal position.  This tool  46 was found in a vertical position within the matrix  47 right beside a post mould, the darker stain of a 10357  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  decayed post of a former structure, and it appeared to  have been set -- have been at one point left leaning  against a post to a handle -- to a shaft.  Q   Did you date the post?  A Yes. There are two posts within 20 centimetres of  within the same unit, and we'd retrieved a date of  4700 years ago for the post.  Q   All right.  And does that permit you to draw a  conclusion about the date of that point?  A   Yes.  Found in the context that we did in association  with the radiocarbon determination I will conclude  that the point was used at the same time period of the  post, the standing post structure.  Q   All right.  All right.  I wonder if you could just  return those two points to that -- well, I'll do that.  I'd like you to examine another point.  This is  just the next one.  I'm producing another bag  containing a rock piece, it appears to be a  projectile, and as well a card.  Can you just identify  that for us, please?  WILLMS:  My lord, I wonder since those other pieces were  referred to they should be marked. The witness spent  some time examining them and referring to them. They  should be entered as an exhibit.  Well, I hadn't proposed to do that, my lord.  If  there's some reason to do it I'm -- I don't really  object to doing it.  The photographs of the points and  the descriptions and the samplings, in my view, ought  to be sufficient to sustain the record, but if there  is some compelling reason to mark them I don't object.  I just don't think it's necessary in the  circumstances.  Do you have a purpose in mind, Mr. Willms, apart  from just the fact that the witness has referred to  them?  WILLMS:  Well, my lord, the purpose in mind is there will be  other witnesses giving evidence in this proceeding,  and the other witnesses are archeologists, and the  purpose is for comparing the artifacts with actual  photographs which don't show exactly what the item  looked like.  That's the purpose.  MR. RUSH:  Well, I guess I should ask that my friend hasn't  indicated up to this point in the trial any interest  in the artifacts or any indication that he was going  to pursue a comparison through any expert  archeological evidence, or call any further expert to  comment on these points, or any other points covered  MR.  MR. RUSH  THE COURT  MR. 10358  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  THE  COURT  3  4  5  6  7  8  MR.  WILLM  9  10  MR.  RUSH:  11  12  13  THE  COURT  14  MR.  RUSH:  15  Q  16  17  A  18  19  THE  COURT  20  21  A  22  THE  COURT  23  A  24  THE  COURT  25  A  26  THE  COURT  27  A  28  THE  COURT  29  A  30  31  MR.  RUSH:  32  Q  33  34  A  35  36  Q  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  41  42  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  by this witness.  :  I think for the time being I will not order them be  marked, but on your assurance, Mr. Rush, that they  will be available if they are required, if that's  convenient.  If that's inconvenient to you maybe the  best thing is to have them marked so they will at  least be here if required.  3:  As long as they're available in Vancouver, my lord,  then that will be agreeable.  No issue on that, my lord.  I have a box here of the  artifacts, and my friend is happy to look at them any  time.  :  All right.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Just returning to the artifact that's in front of you.  Can you identify that for his lordship?  Yes.  This is a point that we recovered from a site in  the Hagwilget Canyon.  :  I'm sorry.  Just a moment.  Can I ask you, it's not  shown on this photograph?  It is illustrated as number C in photo plate A-6.  :  All right.  Just a moment.  Yes.  :  Oh, yes.  All right.  Thank you.  This point --  :  Found by you?  Yes , it was.  :  Thanks.  During a surface collection at a site in Hagwilget  Canyon.  GhSv 85-A.  Are you able to draw any points of comparison between  the A and B projectile points and C?  This point also has a general lanceolate outline or  shape with a concave or indented base.  Now, was that point dated in any way?  No, we have no date for this point.  All right.  Thank you.  Only an approximate age range based on comparison with  points found in the excavation, both the work that I  did at Moricetown Canyon as well as work done by Ames  at Hagwilget Canyon.  All right.  And just in terms of that work then how  does the point C compare to the two points found at  Moricetown?  I would -- well, this point has a general lanceolate  outline similar to point B, although there is a 10359  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  Q  7  8  9  10  11  A  12  13  Q  14  A  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Q  22  23  24  A  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Q  37  38  A  39  40  41  Q  42  THE COURT  43  44  A  45  THE COURT  46  MR. RUSH:  47  THE COURT  distinction in it, the general outline.  And its size  and the nature of its flaking suggests to me that it  is from an earlier time period and may be comparable  or somewhat younger than the point that we dated at  4700 B.P..  All right.  If you can just return that to me.  I want  to show you -- just going -- all right.  I'm showing  you first another plastic bag containing certain  items.  Can you just describe those items for his  lordship as they relate to the photograph plate A-6?  Yes.  There are four points in this bag which are  illustrated in plate 6; D, E, F and G.  These were all found at Moricetown?  These are all found at Moricetown in CI and B  deposits, the middle deposits within the site.  They  are smaller in size and somewhat different in shape.  Some of these may be dart points.  You can see that  they are of different materials; basalt and chert.  Two of them have side notching and one has a corner  notch to it, and one is a small triangular point.  All right.  I want to show you a fourth bag containing  smaller apparently points.  I wonder if you could just  relate those to the photograph as well?  Yes.  This bag contains very small projectile points,  most of which are illustrated in the plate A-6.  They  are in the range of two centimetres or less in length.  They have small side notches on them.  In some cases  we have the tip of the point or the base of the point  given that they have been broken either in manufacture  or use.  These were used as arrow points.  They are of  both basalt and obsidian materials.  These are similar  or quite characteristic of small arrow points that  were used throughout the interior of British Columbia  during late -- late period times.  Late pre-contact  time.  When you say late times what period of time are you  referring to?  Within the last 1500 years is -- is a period of time  referred to in the archeological literature as late  prehistoric.  All right.  Thank you.  Now, I --  :  Are all -- are all of the points H to 0 shown in the  photograph in that bag?  Yes, they are.  :  Thank you.  Would your lordship like to see these?  :  No, thank you. 10360  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  MR.  RUSH:  2  Q  3  4  5  6  A  7  8  THE  COURT  9  A  10  MR.  RUSH:  11  Q  12  A  13  14  15  16  17  Q  18  19  20  A  21  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  THE  COURT  28  29  MR.  RUSH:  30  31  32  33  34  A  35  36  37  38  Q  39  40  41  42  43  A  44  45  46  47  All right.  Now, I'd like to now, Ms. Albright, to turn to plate  A-4 -- excuse me, plate A-7.  Now, can you describe  what is contained in A-7?  What is shown there,  please?  Plate A-7 shows several bifaces.  These are thin  bifaces having been worked on on both sides, and --  :  Is that what biface means?  Yes.  Yes.  Go ahead.  And given the nature of the -- the edges, the chipping  or retouch along the edges with sharp angles, and the  thinness of these I've called these thin bifacial  knives which were likely used for cutting, butchering  of fish or cutting of food.  Okay.  And your photograph indicates under its  description the layer from which these bifaces came  from, is that so?  Yes.  A and B at the top are from layer CI, and the  two at the bottom are from layer A.  Okay.  Would you just briefly go back in the  appendices to page A-4 through A-7, and I would ask  you if the description of the bifacial tools and their  sub-categories is set out by you at that point.  This  is --  :  I'm sorry.  Where are you asking the witness to go  now?  I'm asking her to go back into appendix A and at  pages A-4 to A-7, and there is a number of description  of bifacial tools at that point, and I'm simply asking  her if those are the descriptions of the tools that  are indicated in the photographs.  Starting at A-4 I've described four bifacial tools  which include the projectile points which we have  already described -- discussed.  Then on page A-6 I  have a description of thin bifacial knives.  Thank you.  Now, would you please look at plate A-8  and A-9.  Those are the next photographs in sequence.  Now, do these illustrate artifacts that were recovered  at Moricetown and then Hagwilget?  I'll first ask you  to look at plate A-9.  Yes.  These are -- the items in plate 9 are also  referred to as bifaces in that they are worked on both  sides, but they are quite thick tools in thickness,  but they have steep angles of retouch.  In other  words, they have less than 45 degree angles.  No.  No. 10361  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 They're more than 45 degrees.  2 What I wanted to say is that the thin bifacial  3 knives have quite sharp angles of retouch which makes  4 them very appropriate for cutting, but these have  5 steeper angles of retouch, because the tool is thick,  6 usually greater than 45 degrees, and are more likely  7 to have been used in scraping activities or heavier  8 perhaps woodworking activities.  9 Q   Okay.  10 A   Because they are much sturdier -- sturdier as a tool.  11 Q   Now, if you'll turn -- I will not direct your  12 attention at the moment to plate A-8, but I would like  13 to direct your attention to A-10, which is described  14 as Formed Unifacial Tools at Moricetown Canyon.  These  15 are artifacts that you recovered from the Moricetown  16 excavation site as well?  17 A   Yes, they are.  18 Q   All right.  And what does unifacial tools -- what does  19 that refer to?  20 A   It means that they are flaked and retouched on one  21 side.  So one face, unifacial, which is quite  22 character -- quite characteristic of tools used as  23 scrapers.  There are several tools here that have been  24 used as scrapers, and they often tend to have again  25 steeper -- steeper angles along the working edge.  26 These tools are made of a variety of materials, as is  27 clear in the original photograph.  28 Q   All right.  And what would these have been used for?  29 A   They -- they would have been used as an -- as scraping  30 tools.  31 Q   All right.  And it does not indicate under the  32 description of the photograph the place where these  33 tools were found.  Can you tell his lordship where in  34 the stratigraphy these tools were located?  35 A   I believe we have examples from layer CI to layers A.  36 So layer A, B, and I believe CI.  I'm referring back  37 to the table on page 2-10 of the report.  38 Q   Yes.  That's at page 2-10.  That's Table 3?  39 A   Yes.  4 0 Q   All right.  Thank you.  41 Now, Ms. Albright, would you please move ahead in  42 the list of plates to plate A-15, which is the last in  43 the list which depicts four tools which are entitled  44 "Cobble Spall Tools Moricetown Canyon"?  45 A   Yes.  46 Q   What are cobble spall tools, please?  47 A   These are relatively large flakes greater than ten 10362  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 centimetres that have been chipped off of a large  2 river cobble, and they tend to have the outside edge  3 of that cobble, or what we refer to as the cortex as  4 part of the -- on one face as part of the tool.  So it  5 has been flaked or spalled off the outside edge of a  6 river cobble.  They tend to have a variety of shapes,  7 and they can come in a variety of sizes as well.  8 Q   All right.  9 A   The -- they usually have some retouch along one or  10 more edges.  And this -- this could be either a very  11 sharp angle of retouch or steep angle of retouch  12 depending on the intention of the tool.  So these  13 could be used as heavy duty cutting tools or scraping  14 tools.  15 Q   All right.  And your Table 3, does that indicate the  16 source or the place where these particular cobble  17 spall tools were found?  18 A   Yes.  They came from different -- different layers in  19 the site, including the lower CI and C2 deposits, and  20 as well as layer A.  21 Q   All right.  Now, just before I move away from this,  22 Ms. Albright, I'd ask you just to refer to plate A-5.  23 And this is described as Miscellaneous ground stone  24 tools.  2 5 THE COURT:  A-5?  26 MR. RUSH:  Yes, plate A-5.  I jumped back.  I omitted this one.  27 Q   Were these as well tools recovered from Moricetown?  28 A   Yes, they are.  29 Q   And when you describe them as ground stone tools can  30 you briefly tell his lordship what that refers to?  31 A   Yes.  They were shaped by a grinding -- pecking and a  32 grinding technique.  They tend to be made of quite  33 hard stone, so rather than flaking the edges are  34 ground into shape and often polished with abrasive  35 stones.  We also include in this category abrasive  36 stones that are used for -- for grinding and  37 polishing.  38 Q   Are they called abrador --  39 A  Abrador stones, yes.  40 Q   Sorry.  At appendix A-2 and A-3 you describe ground  41 stone and the various catagories of the ground stone  42 industry.  43 THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  Where are you now?  44 MR. RUSH:  Appendix A-2 and A-3.  45 THE COURT:  Okay.  4 6 MR. RUSH:  47 Q   And there's a category entitled "B Ground Stone 10363  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  A  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  11  A  12  MR. RUSH:  13  14  15  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  22  23  24  25  THE COURT  26  A  27  MR. RUSH:  28  Q  29  A  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Q  37  A  38  39  Q  40  41  42  A  43  44  45  46  47  Industry" and sub-categories of adzes, slate mirrors,  abrador stones and miscellaneous ground stone  fragments.  Yes.  That is a description of several tool types that  we recovered both from Moricetown as shown in this  plate as well as from Hagwilget.  All right.  Now, the -- the tools that were  photographed and are shown in the various photographs  to which I have directed your attention, did you  number, catalog, bag and store all of these tools?  Yes, I did.  All right.  I just advise your lordship I don't  intend to show Ms. Albright all of these tools, but I  can advise my friends that I have them all here if  they wish to look at any or all of them.  Now, of the material -- of the tools, rather, that  were recovered, and some of which were shown in these  photographs, what was the type of material that these  tools consisted of?  These -- the tools were manufactured from a variety of  different stone materials.  Basalt was one of the most  common items.  Both a course or granular basalt as  well as a very fine grained basalt.  Several varieties  of chert, which is --  :  How do you spell that, please?  Chert.  C-H-E-R-T.  Does that come in --  These are crypto -- what is referred to as  crypto-crystalline materials that have predictable  flaking patterns and are common materials used for  making stone tools.  The chert comes in a variety of  different colours; red, gold, yellow, a green -- green  colour, and it is likely that these come from  different sources, different --  Other materials that you found?  Other materials include chalcedony, which is similar  to chert and obsidian.  Okay.  I want to ask you about obsidian, if I may.  Are there any particular properties of obsidian that  you observed or know about?  Obsidian is a highly valued material for making stone  tools.  They -- it is possible to flake obsidian with  considerable control.  And they -- it will produce  very sharp edges, and so it's a favored material for  cutting, particularly cutting edges.  One thing about  obsidian is that it comes from very localized sources. 10364  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  THE  COURT  13  A  14  THE  COURT  15  MR.  RUSH:  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  28  Q  29  A  30  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  36  37  38  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  44  THE  COURT  45  46  A  47  THE  COURT  It is produced through volcanic eruption and generally  found close to the volcanic source.  And obsidian is  produced by very rapid cooling of molten lava during  eruption which gives it its glossy texture.  There  are -- the sources of -- there are only limited  sources of obsidian, limited in terms of geographic  area of British Columbia.  There are two major  sources, geographic sources.  One is Mount Edziza, a  few hundred miles north of the Skeena, and Anahim Peak  in the coast range to the south of the Skeena, at  least two to 300 miles or more.  :  How do you spell Edziza?  E-D-Z-I-Z-A.  :  Thank you.  Now, just before I pursue that with you I'm again  showing you the small projectile points that you made  reference to in plate A-6.  Are any of these points  from the material obsidian?  Yes.  Just take my glasses off here.  The --  All right.  If I may just ask you, you've selected  four of the points?  Items, yes.  What distinguishes obsidian in the four you've  selected?  They -- it is very, very fine material, and is glassy  looking.  Have you --  Obsidian has sometimes been referred to as black  glass.  Right.  Have you encountered obsidian in your  archeological works prior to the investigations that  you made in Moricetown in 1985?  Yes.  I have observed obsidian in other -- other site  areas.  It's a very -- in the Stikine area where I've  worked obsidian is a very common material, and it  tends to be used for a wider range of tools being  close to the source.  Is that the source meaning -- which source are you  referring to?  The sources at Edziza.  All right.  I wonder if you could just put those back  in your bag, please.  :  Just so that we're all functioning with the same  terms of reference how would you spell obsidian?  Obsidian?  :  Obsidian. 10365  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  THE COURT  3  MR. RUSH:  4  Q  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  11  12  13  Q  14  A  15  Q  16  A  17  18  19  Q  20  21  22  A  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Q  30  31  32  A  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  41  42  43  44  45  Q  46  47  O-B-S-I-D-I-A-N.  :  Thank you.  Now, of the artifact material that you recovered at  the Moricetown excavation did you submit some of the  obsidian artifacts for analysis?  Yes, I did.  Can you --  In that there have been techniques developed for  comparing artifacts from an unknown source to  materials that -- from unknown source through x-ray  florescence technique --  All right.  -- For comparing materials.  What was the purpose of the analysis?  The purpose of this analysis was to identify the  sources of the obsidian that was used in -- in  manufacturing tools that we recovered at Moricetown.  All right.  And what's the significance of that to --  why is it significant to identify the source of the  obsidian?  Well, there are localized sources of obsidian, and  I've mentioned Edziza and Anahim, some distance away.  So in determining which source the material is from  the sourcing of materials gives us some idea of  previous movement of materials by people from one area  to another, and trading patterns between peoples in  different parts or different areas.  Okay.  Now, did you send a number of samples to a  Dorothy Godfrey-Smith at Simon Fraser University for  purposes of analysis to determine source?  Yes, I did.  Did some of those samples include obsidian samples  taken as well from materials found at Hagwilget?  Yes.  Okay.  Now, I want to ask you for a moment something  about Ms. Godfrey-Smith.  What is her particular field  of discipline?  She works in the physics department at Simon Fraser  University.  She did a masters thesis on the -- the  use of x-ray fluorescent technique for identifying  obsidian materials in -- from sites in British  Columbia, and a comparison with samples from known  sources of obsidian.  Okay.  And what's your understanding about the  technique that's used, the x-ray florescence analysis  technique? 10366  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   It's a technique that has been used for a number of  2 years in British Columbia.  Archeologists working in  3 different parts of the province have made use of this  4 technique for identifying sources of obsidian found in  5 an archeological context --  6 Q   Okay.  7 A   -- To look at patterns of movement of people and  8 materials.  9 Q   And is a comparison drawn between the obsidian sample  10 and known sources?  11 A   Yes.  In developing the technique over the years in  12 British Columbia sources or samples have been  13 collected from sources.  Earl Nelson, who did work on  14 the technique in the 1970's in the physics department  15 and is now in the archeology department at Simon  16 Fraser University has collected samples from both the  17 Anahim source and Edziza source.  So there tends to be  18 several flows of obsidian over -- over time, and these  19 flows and sources of material can be identified  20 through distinctions in their chemical composition.  21 Q   All right.  I'd like the witness to be shown the small  22 black binder, and I just refer you to tab 7 of this  23 binder.  This is volume 1 in the document book.  This  24 is -- what's shown here in this tab?  25 A   This is a sheet sent to us from Dorothy Godfrey-Smith.  26 Under sample it gives both a catalog number for items  27 which we sent to her.  28 Q   Are those your numbers --  29 A   Yes.  30 Q   -- Under sample numbers?  31 A   Yes.  32 Q   Now, they seem to be -- some of the sample numbers  33 seem to have penned in written alterations.  Can you  34 comment on that?  35 A   The GhSu that was originally written here actually  36 refers to GhSv.  37 Q   I see.  U should have been a V; is that right?  38 A   Should have been a V, yes.  The GhSv refers to sites  39 in Hagwilget Canyon.  And there is GhSv-2, a site  40 excavated by Ames, and GhSv-A is a site that I located  41 in '85.  42 Q   All right.  43 A  And GgSt-2 refers to our site excavations at  44 Moricetown Canyon.  45 Q   And the second entry under sample shows an alteration  46 of the three to a four.  You see that is -- that the  47 correct sample number is GgSt-2-124? 10367  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   All right.  Now, the results that are demonstrated on  3 this document, are they under the column headed  4 identification?  5 A   Yes.  For each -- for each sample Ms. Godfrey-Smith  6 has given the relative composition of various elements  7 that distinguish one sample from another.  And as  8 compared to known -- known samples from known sources  9 she has identified the -- the chemical fingerprint, as  10 it were, for various artifacts as to its source.  11 Q   Right.  Now —  12 A   The items from Moricetown under GgSt-2 would be her --  13 her sample numbers are 2, 3, 7, 8 and 11, indicating  14 that there are obsidians from both Edziza --  15 MR. WILLMS:  My lord, I rise now to object simply because as my  16 friend well knows, and we talked about this yesterday,  17 and I want to accommodate my friend, I said that I  18 would be in a position to admit this information if he  19 would provide me with some information such as a  20 curriculum vitae for the person who did the analysis,  21 and also the transmission document sending the  22 material from -- it appears from Ms. Ludowicz to this  23 person so that there be some semblance of continuity  24 established here.  My friend hasn't done that yet.  I  25 told him if he did that I would probably be able to  26 admit this document.  And I object to this witness  27 giving hearsay evidence about the source of this  28 obsidian unless my friend can do those very minor  29 things I requested so I can be a position so I can  30 make an admission for him.  Frankly, I'm surprised  31 he's leading the witness through this in light of our  32 discussions yesterday.  33 MR. RUSH:  Of course, I'm not asking the witness to give any  34 interpretation.  I'm simply asking her what the  35 numbers mean, and what the relationship is to the 3,  36 the 2, the 8 and the 4 as she understands it.  37 Just to refer to my friend's most recent comment,  38 I talked to Ms. Dorothy Godfrey-Smith last night and  39 she indicated that she would provide me with the  40 information, and I haven't been able to obtain a  41 curriculum vitae or a description of florescence x-ray  42 technique as of this time, but felt it was necessary  43 to lead the witness through some of her involvement in  44 continuity, and so on, and if my friend will -- is  45 satisfied with the evidence so far as continuity and  46 the references to the samples and the artifact numbers  47 then I'm happy to leave it until Ms. Godfrey-Smith 1036?  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  provides me with further information.  I think both  of -- neither of us wants to see Ms. Godfrey-Smith  called to go through her --  THE COURT:  Who's Ms. Ludowicz?  MR. RUSH:  She is one of the researchers that worked under the  direction of Ms. Albright.  THE COURT:  All right.  What the witness is telling me now  though is that the Moricetown samples that she sent  for analysis were given these item numbers 2, 3, 7, 8  and 11 --  A   Yes.  THE COURT:  — By Ms. Godfrey-Smith.  A   Yes.  During her processing she numbered the items.  THE COURT:  That's the problem, I think, is it not?  MR. WILLMS:  The problem is, my lord, and this goes back to, I  believe it was Dr. Gottesfeld and Beta Analytic, and  Dr. Gottesfeld wrote a letter to Beta Analytic and  said here's what I'm sending to you.  We accepted the  Beta Analytic analysis because we could see it going  down and coming back.  Now here all we have is the  letter coming back to Deanna Ludowicz.  We don't have  the letter going out to start with.  And, secondly, carbon dating is a little different  than whatever this analysis is, and I'd just like to  have a little more comfort about what this particular  witness or what this person did --  THE COURT:  Yes.  MR. WILLMS:  -- To do this, and so it's continuity and the  process.  THE COURT:  Yes.  MR. WILLMS:  I'm sure it can be worked out, but this witness is  in no position to give that evidence.  THE COURT:  Well, I tend to think that's right, but it's time  for the morning adjournment, and perhaps when I come  back things will be clarified.  Okay.  THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court will recess. 10369  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED)  2  3 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  4 a true and accurate transcript of the  5 proceedings herein to the best of my  6 skill and ability.  7  8  9  10 Peri McHale, Official Reporter  11 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  4 7 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO AN ADJOURNMENT) 10370  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  \R:  Order in court.  Mr. Rush.  1  2  THE REGIS1  3  THE COURT  4  MR. RUSH:  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  14  A  15  16  Q  17  18  A  19  20  21  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  34  Q  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  42  43  44  Q  45  46  47  Dealing with tab 7 in the results of Dorothy  Godfrey-Smith, Miss Albright, did you make reference  to these results in reference to the samples submitted  to Miss Godfrey-Smith in your opinion?  Yes, I did.  All right.  And has the technique of x-ray  flourescence analysis to determine the source of  obsidian being a technique that's been relied upon by  other archaeologists to your knowledge?  Yes.  It's been widely used by archaeologists  working in various parts of the province and --  And can you direct his lordship's attention to one  or other archaeologists who may have used the --  Yes.  Gary Coupland in his work at Kitselas Canyon  down river on the Skeena made use of this technique  for identifying the source of obsidian that he found  at the Paul Mason site which he excavated.  All right.  And he is --  You have the three-ring binder, the large one?  Yes, I do.  Just ask you to refer to tab 6 in the extract that's  contained there and, in particular, the page at 262.  Is this the reference to the Paul Mason site which you  have just given reference in your evidence?  Yes, it is.  This is his doctoral thesis on his  research at Kitselas Canyon and I have referred to  this volume in my opinion.  This -- his work has since  been published by the National Museum of Canada.  And does Dr. Coupland, is he a working  archaeologist?  Yes, he is.  And are there others who have utilized the x-ray  flourescence technique in determining obsidian  sources?  Yes.  Carlson, Dr. Roy Carlson from Simon Fraser  University has made use of x-ray flourescence  determinations in his work on the central coast of  British Columbia.  All right.  And I ask you to look at tab 22 and in  particular at pages -- extracts of pages 220 and 221.  If, when you refer to that, can you tell me is this  the source that you -- of the Carlson -- this is taken 10371  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 from the Canadian Journal of Archaeologists 1979,  2 contains a number of articles and the passage that I  3 am referring the witness to is at page 220 which is  4 part of the article by a Mr. Roy L. Carlson quoting,  5 and I quote, "The early period on the central coast of  6 British Columbia"?  7 A    On page?  8 Q    220.  9 A    220.  10 Q    Look at the last paragraph, please?  11 A    Yes.  He refers to the -- the results of x-ray  12 flourescence analysis which has been used to source  13 obsidian from the Namu or sites in the Namu area to  14 several different sources including the edziza and  15 anahim sources which I mentioned previously.  16 Q    Thank you.  Now, I just ask you if you will set that  17 aside and return to your opinion.  If you just look at  18 your opinion, please.  Now, before I asked you about  19 obsidian in particular, I had asked you about the  20 types of materials that were found in the artifact  21 remains that you recovered at Moricetown and I want to  22 ask you if there is anything that you can conclude  23 about the variety of the materials that were contained  24 in the tool types?  25 A    Yes.  The artifact assemblages can contain a wide  26 variety of different types of tools indicating a  27 variety of different kinds of activities taking place  28 at the site over time.  29 Q    All right, thank you.  Now, if you will please turn  30 to page 2-12?  31 A    Yes.  32 Q    And I would just ask you if your opinion regarding  33 the stratigraphy, artifact assemblages, featural  34 remains at the Moricetown excavation site is set out  35 at the last paragraph of that page?  36 A    Yes, it is.  37 Q    And I want to ask you in particular about the date  38 that you give your opinion about, you say that:  39  40 "The stratigraphy, artifact assemblages,  41 featural remains and dates from excavation at  42 Gg St 2 indicate continuous occupation of a  43 major settlement at Moricetown Canyon from  44 about 6,000 years ago up to the present."  45  46 And can you indicate why you say 6,000 years?  47 A    Six thousand -- 6,000 years takes into the 10372  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  consideration of the 5660 BP date that we obtained  from the post mould in the lower C2 deposits, and  6,000 is a rounding off of that indicating that the  date refers to an event or period of occupation at  that time if such a large structure were built at  about that time and people have been using resources  in that area and have occupied that area for a period  of time in order to establish themselves and expend  energies into construction of a large structure that  this post mould represents.  Q    That is to say the post mould that gave the date of  5660 plus or minus?  A    Yes.  THE COURT:  What does Kya Wiget mean in this context?  THE WITNESS:  Kya Wiget is the Wet'suwet'en name for the  Moricetown Village and I believe that the term means  Old Town.  All right, thank you.  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  A  Q  A  All right.  Now, I'd like to ask you to turn your  attention to investigations which you conducted at  Hagwilget Canyon and this appears in the opinion at  page 2-13?  Yes.  And here you refer to Tse Kya, Hagwilget Canyon.  Now, can you tell his lordship what type of  investigations you conducted in respect of the site  at, or sites at Hagwilget Canyon?  Yes.  In the Hagwilget Canyon I looked at -- studied  the investigations carried out at a site in the canyon  referred to as Tse Kya which again is a local name for  the site, and referred to -- recorded as an  archaeological site Gh Sv 2.  Investigations were  carried out at this site in 1966 by George MacDonald  and also 1970 by Kenneth Ames.  You have told us about Mr. MacDonald or Dr.  MacDonald.  Kenneth Ames, can you tell us something  about him?  Yes.  He worked under MacDonald or was a student of  MacDonald, shall we say, in working under the auspices  of the National Museum, and Ames returned to the site  that MacDonald had explored earlier in '66 to look at  it in more detail and to extend the excavations.  Ames  excavated three block areas at the site.  And is --  And I believe Ames in -- Ames in Ames' report, both  the preliminary report and published version of that 10373  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 report in the National Museum series, Ames illustrates  2 the site in the canyon.  3 Q    All right.  And has to your knowledge Dr. Ames  4 published his findings and had been active in doing  5 archaeological work for a period of time?  6 A    Yes, he has.  7 Q    And can you comment on the acceptance of his work  8 among archaeologists?  9 A    Yes.  He is a well-respected archaeologist who  10 continues to practise as an archaeologist and is a  11 university professor.  12 Q    All right.  And I just ask you to turn to the bottom  13 of page 2-14 to the paragraph, the last paragraph  14 that's found at that page where you state, and I  15 quote:  16  17 "Diagnostic artifacts at Tse Kya suggest  18 occupation of the site by 6,000 years ago.  19 The artifact assemblages, featureal remains,  20 and site stratigraphy indicate continuous  21 occupation of the site up to recent times.  22 About 3,500 years ago a shift is indicated  23 from permanent year round occupation to  24 seasonal occupation for fishing activities.  25 There appears to be an increase in intensity  26 of site use again during later times."  27  28 Is that your opinion with regard to the  29 investigations that you conducted of the works of Ames  30 and MacDonald that you have indicated?  31 A    Yes, it is.  32 Q    All right.  Now, I just would ask you if you will  33 explain what you did in respect of the investigations  34 that you conducted that had previously been conducted  35 and reported upon by Messrs. MacDonald and Ames?  36 A    I reviewed the site reports by Ames or MacDonald's  37 brief reference to the work and his two publications,  38 two short papers which we have already mentioned.  I  39 also looked at Ames' reports of his work at the site  40 and also obtained from the archaeological survey at  41 the National Museum a catalogue of the artifacts  42 collected and a large portion of the artifact  43 collection itself from the site so we did re-examine  44 much of the artifact collection from the site from the  45 work carried out by Ames.  46 Q    All right.  If you will just pause there for a  47 moment.  The reports of MacDonald and Ames to which 10374  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  THE  THE  THE  THE  MR.  you have made reference, are they in respect of  MacDonald found at tabs 1 and 2 if you will just  review 1 and 2, please?  This is the large three-ring  binder volume.  Those are extracts?  Yes, these are extracts of his papers and he has  mentioned his -- made brief mention of the work at  Hagwilget Canyon in his reports.  And the reports of Ames are found at tabs 4 and 14?  4, yes.  Tab 4 is the preliminary report of his  excavations.  And 14, 14 is an extract of a portion of his report?  Yes.  His final report?  Yes, 14 is an extract of the published report.  All right.  And the preliminary report and the published version  are almost identical --  All right.  -- in their discussion.  I am just going to ask you for a moment if you will  refer to figure 15 in your opinion.  Now, my lord,  this is found after page 3-13 and there are a number  of figures which appear there and it's the third one  along, figure 15.  You're not talking about figure 5?  No, figure 15, my lord.  After the photographs.  Yes, it is.  It is quite a way on.  And this is a  figure entitled "Hagwilget Canyon Sites" and I wonder  if by reference to that figure, Miss Albright, you can  assist us by illustrating where it was that MacDonald  and then Ames did their investigations so that you can  site us for specifically if you will to Hagwilget?  Does your lordship have that?  Yes, thank you.  WITNESS:  Yes.  The site Gh Sv 2 where MacDonald and Ames  carried out their investigation --  COURT:  Just a moment.  Where will I find it?  WITNESS:  Okay.  It's on the south side of the road crossing  the —  COURT:  Wait a second.  WITNESS:  -- the bridge, crossing the big bridge, crossing  the Bulkley Canyon there.  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  Q  A  And so that is the site that was excavated by  MacDonald and Ames?  Yes. 10375  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q    All right.  Now —  2 A    It's when you are crossing the bridge going into Old  3 Hazelton, it's on the left-hand side and down below.  4 Q    In the canyon?  5 A    In the canyon itself, yes.  6 Q    All right, thank you.  Now, if you will just  7 describe what it was that you did?  You obtained  8 certain artifacts or catalogued material that had been  9 excavated by MacDonald and Ames, is that it?  10 A    Yes, yes.  11 Q    And can you just say from where you got the material  12 and what you did with it, please?  13 A    Yes.  I obtained --  14 THE COURT:  I am sorry, is site done at water level, river  15 level?  16 THE WITNESS:  It is on a small bench above the river.  I believe  17 it is about ten metres above water, yes.  18 THE COURT:  All right, thank you.  Sorry, Mr. Rush.  19 MR. RUSH:  My lord, there are two photographs that Dr. Ames  20 includes in his preliminary report.  I think you may  21 have seen at least one of them before of the village  22 site in Hagwilget at the lower level below the bridge  23 and that's to be found at tab 4 and it's the first two  24 plates.  These were photographs taken in 1915 and it's  25 the area that was obtained --  26 THE COURT:  Tab 4 of the big black book.  27 MR. RUSH:  Of the big black book, yes.  2 8 THE COURT:  All right.  29 THE WITNESS:  These are two views of the site area excavated.  30 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  Thank you.  31 MR. RUSH:  32 Q    Now, Miss Albright, can you, just to go back to my  33 question, can you tell his lordship what you did with  34 the level bags, please, the material that you  35 recovered from the --  36 A    Yes.  37 Q    -- Ames' investigation?  38 A    In conjunction with Ames' report, his description of  39 his excavations and the materials, artifact materials  40 we obtained from the archaeological survey at the  41 National Museum and received permission to examine  42 those materials.  43 Q    These were housed at the National Museum?  44 A    Yes.  45 Q    In Ottawa?  46 A    Yes.  So I had them sent out to us to examine.  47 Q    And then what did you do with the material?  How did 10376  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  A  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Q  12  13  A  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Q  22  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  32  33  A  34  35  36  37  38  MR. RUSH:  39  40  THE COURT  41  42  43  MR. RUSH:  44  Q  45  A  46  47  THE COURT  you deal with it?  Well, each bag of materials is catalogued so in  conjunction with the catalogue we went through a  number of the level bags that were sent to us that  were made available to us.  And in looking through the  level bag material in particular we were able to  examine a lot of the flaking debris or flaking  detritus or material thrown in the level bag which  hadn't been actually described by Ames in his report  where he presents a discussion of finished tools.  Now, did you do any independent analysis of any of  the material contained in the Ames' level bags?  Yes.  In the level bags, there are a number -- we  noticed in the artifact descriptions there are a  number of artifacts made of obsidian, a couple of  spear points from the lower zone A and as well as a  scraper and, in looking through the level bag  material, we observed a variety of flaking debris as  well made of obsidian and we also noticed a few  microblades in those level bags.  And did you have some obsidian samples analysed by  Dorothy Godfrey-Smith in the manner that you have  briefly described with regard to the obsidian samples  from Moricetown?  Yes.  And in respect of her identification is that  contained in that identification results sent to Miss  Ludowicz?  Yes, it is.  Okay.  And in terms of the investigations conducted  on the level bags of Dr. Ames, is what you did set out  on pages 2-13 to 2-14 of your report of your opinion?  Yes, 2-13 is a description of the work carried out  by MacDonald and particularly Ames and his -- some of  his findings, and also on page 2-14 is noted our  observations of material in level bags and reference  to analysis of obsidian samples sent to Godfrey-Smith.  Thank you.  Now, separate from that, did you conduct  your own investigations at the Hagwilget Canyon?  :  Mr. Rush, I am a little bit lost in all of this  because I think I am following but I don't know what a  level bag is and I don't know what a microblade is.  Thank you.  Let's go back to that.  A level bag?  A level bag refers to a paper bag in which one would  put a variety of flaking debris or detritus and --  :  From a particular level? 10377  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE WITNESS:  From a particular level, yes.  THE COURT:  Or elevation?  THE WITNESS:  Ames excavated in six-inch levels within the  natural layers at the site and so he would -- he  bagged a variety of flake material from those levels  within each unit in level bags.  The artifacts --  finished artifacts which he did describe in the report  are usually bagged separately but a variety of flakes  that may not be identified immediately as tools are  put -- are often put in level bags.  Sometimes it  varies on the amount of time that one spends in trying  to identify materials as soon as they are collected in  the field.  RUSH:  Now —  COURT:  Is level bag a term that's used only for a  receptical for --  WITNESS:  The bag containing a variety of flake material  from a level.  COURT:  You only use the term level bag when you use the  term flake material?  WITNESS:  Yes.  Sometimes we might have a separate level bag  for faunal material, animal bones, or floral remains.  MR.  THE  THE  THE  THE  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  A  Q  A  Would you have a level bag for artifact remains?  Yes.  Usually finished artifacts that are identified  immediately in excavation are bagged separately.  And are they -- is that called an artifact bag or  something like that?  Yes, each one is provenient.  Often the material in  a level bag has been given the provenience of that.  In the case of Ames, the six-inch level in terms of  depth below surface as well as the one-by-one unit in  which it was taken from.  All right.  That would be the area of the  excavation?  Yes.  All right.  Now, in terms of microblades, can you  explain to his lordship what a microblade is?  Microblade is a small parallel-sided blade; it is a  flake tool that is manufactured by a specific  technique.  We refer to microblade technology as  production of microblades as being distinct from a  variety of other flake material.  It is -- as it is a  tool type and a technology that is distinguished from  other types of tools, so it's small, a small tool with  parallel sides and it's a relatively long, thin blade,  usually with very sharp edges for cutting. 1037?  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q    What would have been done with them?  2 A    They would have been inset into bone or wood handled  3 used as knives.  They may have been used as  4 projectiles as well.  5 Q    All right.  Thank you.  Now, I'd like to ask you --  6 A    We have several illustrated in the appendix that I  7 collected myself from -- I guess we will be getting to  8 that discussion.  9 Q    All right.  In terms of the investigations which you  10 conducted at Hagwilget, you surveyed a site at  11 Hagwilget and identified it as Gh Sv 85-A; is that  12 correct?  13 A    Yes.  14 Q    I want to refer you now please to figure 5 which is  15 just after 2-15 in the opinion?  16 A    Yes.  17 Q    And would you assist us in locating the area where  18 you conducted your investigations by reference to this  19 figure?  20 A    This is -- this figure illustrates the site area on  21 both sides of a small creek draining into the north  22 side of the -- from the north into the Bulkley River.  23 We found artifact material visible on the ground  24 surface in three areas or what we have identified here  25 as three areas in that area B on the left-hand side of  26 the page or to the -- on the east side of the small  27 creek we have designated B north and south of the road  28 and a large area A on the west side of the creek.  29 Q    In reference to the Ames' site that was at the  30 canyon floor close to the bridge, where is this site?  31 A    This site is crossing the bridge going into Old  32 Hazelton.  This site would be to the right at the bend  33 in the Bulkley Canyon, in the canyon.  34 THE COURT:  The site doesn't show on figure 15?  35 THE WITNESS:  Yes, it does.  3 6    MR. RUSH:  37 Q    I can refer you to that again if you will go to  38 figure 15, it is quite a bit ahead, Miss Albright,  39 after 3-13 I think.  40 A    Yes.  From the bridge, north of the bridge upstream  41 and around the bend around the corner is Gh Sv 85-A on  42 both sides of the road along the north side of the  43 river.  44 Q    And there are two oblong hatched circles there  45 shown?  46 A    Yes.  47 Q    And that's the site of the place that you have more 10379  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  particularly referenced in figure 5?  A    Yes.  THE COURT:  How about down further Gh Sv 85-C, and up higher, Gh  Sv 85-D, are those your sites, too?  THE WITNESS:  Yes.  MR. RUSH:  Q    Were those sites identified by you at the time that  you identified the 85-A site?  A    Yes.  They were identified approximately the same  time as we were conducting survey in this area.  MR. RUSH:  Okay.  The reference I am now making to or suggesting  that the witness look at is just in respect of the  85-A site.  THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  MR. RUSH:  Q    I will be coming to the other sites in due course.  Now, in respect of Gh Sv 85-A, what investigations did  you conduct there?  Did you conduct an excavation or a  survey?  Would you just explain to his lordship what  you did?  A    We located this site during survey and this site  consists of an extensive scatter of lithic materials  on the surface.  Part of some of this area in which  the materials were identified are ploughed fields so  materials are easily identified and visible on the  surface.  We asked permission from the owner, Mr.  Louie Parent of New Hazelton, to walk the fields and  to make a collection of these materials of materials  that were visible to us which he did.  So for each  area then we collected a range of lithic materials for  each area; we laid out a grid system, and for the  crew, three of us, paste along the grid one metre  apart and collected materials and bagged them  according to the grid system so materials within a  vicinity of a one-metre grid were collected into and  bagged.  THE COURT:  What does lithic mean, please?  THE WITNESS:  Stone, stone tools.  THE COURT:  Thank you.  MR. RUSH:  Q    And these materials that you collected, where were  they in reference to the area BN and BS where there  seems to be a designation of a ploughed field?  Is  there any relationship between that, the ploughed  field description and where you obtained the  materials?  A    Yes.  The materials were collected throughout the -- 10380  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 throughout the ploughed field itself.  2 Q    Okay.  And what apparent depth was the plough?  3 A    The plough zone was approximately 15 centimetres.  4 Q    Now —  5 A    So all of the materials collected are referred to as  6 a surface collection.  7 Q    Now, if you will just turn to plate number 7 which  8 is the photograph sequence number 7 in the opinion, I  9 would just ask you that photograph depicts one of the  10 areas that is referred to in figure 5?  11 A    Yes.  Plate 7 illustrates the ploughed field  12 referred to as area A on the west side of the small  13 creek so the trees in the background are on the edge  14 of the terrace, creek terrace.  15 Q    Now, apart from recovering a number of artifacts,  16 did you make any observations about the areas that you  17 identified?  18 A    Yes.  Besides collection of the artifacts  19 themselves, there were -- we observed also in the  20 ploughed surface large, ashy patches which -- and bits  21 of charcoal within those patches, and they were quite  22 distinct patches across the area, particularly area A  23 and B north, and these appear to be patches, patches  24 of ash, burnt charcoal.  We noticed in those patches  25 there were bits of burnt bone, as well, some of the  26 tools we collected from those patches were -- appear  27 burnt as well.  And these patches suggested there is  28 locations of former house structures at that site.  29 Q    Did you do any subsurface testing?  30 A    Yes.  We did a number of test units and they are on  31 the figure 5 on the map of the site.  They are noted  32 as the little squares.  33 Q    In area A?  34 A   A, B south and B north.  35 Q    Yes.  36 A    These were an attempt to determine if they were  37 below the plough zone, they were stratified deposits  38 or to evaluate the depth of the deposits.  And  39 particularly on the west side of the creek in area B  40 we noted the evidence of stratification differences in  41 the soiled layers and also retrieved a few artifact  42 items from those layers that occurred below the plough  43 zone.  44 Q    Now, it indicates on page 2-16 of your opinion that  45 a total of 452 lithic artifacts visible on the surface  46 were collected and then at page 2-17 in table 4 you  47 indicate the frequency of the artifact classes of the 10381  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 surface collection?  2 A    Yes.  We collected and catalogued these items and  3 the tools are described in the same manner for this  4 site as they were for our excavations at Moricetown in  5 terms of description of types.  6 Q    And those --  7 A   And the distribution, the areas for which we  8 collected them, area A, B north and B south.  9 Q    All right.  Now, there are 158 tools that are part  10 of this artifact description?  11 A    Yes.  12 Q    Were those all the tools that were found or is this  13 a sampling?  14 A    These are the items identified as tools, used tools.  15 Q    From the lithic artifacts you collected?  16 A    From the lithic materials collected.  There were  17 also a variety of -- of debitage or detritus collected  18 as well.  19 Q    And in terms of the material that the tools  20 described in table 4, what can you say about the types  21 of materials that made up these tools?  22 A    There were a wide variety of tool types again  23 retrieved from this site and they were manufactured  24 from a wide range of different materials, stone  25 materials including very coarse grained as well as  26 very find grained, basalt, several varieties of chert,  27 chalcedony, quartz crystal and obsidian.  And as well  28 as a jade or jadite material.  2 9 Q    Now, could you determine anything from your  30 observations of the artifacts and the material of the  31 artifacts about the age of the artifacts which you  32 recovered or the tools which you recovered?  33 A    We were not able to retrieve any charcoal samples  34 from this site since the materials are surface  35 collected.  The -- we looked at the artifacts in terms  36 of the types that are represented and looked at the --  37 in terms of identifying them by typology.  I group  38 them into three groups and on the basis of comparison  39 with materials from excavated context at other sites  40 suggesting that have materials of three different --  41 three periods of occupation at the site.  42 MR. RUSH:  And in terms of those three periods were you able to  43 put a -- some dates to those periods or --  44 MR. WILLMS:  My lord, I rise again.  This is — I rose before  45 the break, too.  She referred generally to other  46 excavations as is she referring to her own excavation  47 at Moricetown; is she referring to Prince Rupert; is 10382  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  MR. RUSH:  4  THE COURT  5  MR. RUSH:  6  Q  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  17  18  A  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Q  29  30  31  32  33  A  34  35  36  37  Q  38  39  40  41  A  42  43  44  45  46  Q  47  she referring to Vancouver?  My friend has to lead  that before the groundwork is laid for the opinion.  Show you plate A-6 in the appendix.  :  Plate 6.  Yes, plate A-6.  Now, Miss Albright, you have  already made reference to the point that's identified  in C?  Yes.  As a point that was recovered by you at Hagwilget  Canyon?  Yes, it is .  All right.  And in terms of the comparisons that you  drew, can you just state for his lordship and my  learned friends what comparisons you drew if any  between C and B and A of the projectile points on that  plate?  This particular point in C that I surface collected  at Hagwilget Canyon, I compared with material -- the  points from our excavations dated with dates at  Moricetown Canyon.  I also compared this point to  artifacts collected by Ames during his excavation of  the site in the canyon which is a distance of perhaps  a kilometre, a kilometre and a half, to the south of  the site in which I collected this one.  I also  compared this to materials retrieved from excavations  at Kitselas Canyon further down the Skeena River.  I will be coming to that in just a moment.  I want  to ask you however before I do if you will just refer  to plate A-14 which is a photograph entitled  Microblades at Hagwilget Canyon.  Can you identify  what's contained in that photograph, please?  Yes.  These are microblades which were retrieved  during our surface collection at Gh Sv 85-A, five of  them illustrated here are made of obsidian and one is  of quartz crystal.  Okay, thank you.  Now, if you will just refer for a  moment to plate A-l.  Was this recovered by you at  your investigation -- surface investigations at  Hagwilget?  Yes.  While we were carrying out our investigation  at the site, Mr. Louie Parent, the owner, produced  this tool indicating that he had retrieved this tool  from area B south while he had been ploughing fields,  the field there.  And you relied upon that information as an  assumption to your analysis of this tool? 10383  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  Q  4  5  6  A  7  8  Q  9  A  10  11  12  13  Q  14  A  15  16  17  18  Q  19  A  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  26  27  28  29  Q  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  A  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  A  47  THE COURT  Yes.  I believe that Mr. Parent indicated the true  origin of this tool.  All right.  And what about plate A-2 which is  described as a ground and polished straight adze  blade?  Did you recover this at the Hagwilget site?  This was given to us by Mr. Parent as well, the two  items.  All right.  And in terms of plate A-3?  Plate A-3 is a ground and polished slate.  It is  referred to in comparing this to items found in other  context.  It is referred to in the literature as a  mirror.  All right.  It is formed by grinding and polishing of the  surface.  It has a bevelled edge, and this was one  that I collected myself from the site as well as the  adbrador stone.  Which is shown in plate A4?  Yes.  Now, if you will just look to plates A-8 and A-9,  the photograph in 8-A identifies large acute edge  bifaces.  Were these recovered by you at your surface  investigation?  Yes, we did collect these.  They are large bifaces  worked on both sides with acute angles and probably  used for cutting -- as cutting tools.  They were a  variety of materials, are represented including basalt  and chert.  Okay.  And plate A-9 again identified as thick  steep-angled bifaces?  Those are from Moricetown.  I am sorry, excuse me then.  Let's move to plate  A-ll?  11, these are unifacial tools collected at Gh Sv  85-A at Hagwilget Canyon.  Again they are worked on  one face and these are -- these tend to have steep  angles of re-touch along the working edges and these  are used for scraping activities so we have  somewhat -- we sometimes call thumbnail scrapers, they  are very small and just a little bit bigger than the  thumb.  Thank you.  Now, if you will turn to --  They are made from a variety of materials as well.  All right.  And if you will look at plates 8 --  excuse me, A-12 and A-13?  Yes.  :  Is it convenient to do that after lunch, Mr. Rush? 10384  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 MR. RUSH:  We can, thank you.  2 THE COURT:  All right.  We will adjourn until 2:00.  3 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court adjourned until two.  4  5 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 12:30 P.M.)  6  7 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  8 a true and accurate transcript of the  9 proceedings herein, transcribed to the  10 best of my skill and ability.  11  12  13  14  15  16 TANNIS DEFOE, Official Reporter  17 United Reporting Service Ltd.  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47 10385  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO LUNCHEON RECESS)  2  3 MR. RUSH:  4 Q   Referring the witness back to plate A-12 in the  5 appendix, my lord.  This is entitled "Perforators  6 /Multi-purpose Tools".  Can you explain what a  7 perforator and multi-purpose tool is as it's shown in  8 this photograph, please?  9 A   Yes.  These are two tools that were surface collected  10 from GhSv 85-A at Hagwilget, and these are tools that  11 have worked edges with sharp edges along one side, a  12 notched indentation which indicate their use as  13 possible spokeshaves for perhaps smoothing arrows, or  14 arrow shafts, I should say.  And they also have a  15 pointed end which has been worked as well indicating  16 that they could have been used as drills or  17 perforators.  So they have working edges that indicate  18 their probable use in a variety of ways.  19 Q   All right.  And if you'll direct your attention now to  20 plate A-13, the photograph showing the chipped cores.  21 Maybe you can just describe a chipped core, please?  22 A   Yes.  A chipped core is a core or a remnant of a core  23 of lithic material which has been used in the  24 production of stone flakes and tools.  And you can see  25 the flake scars on a number of different faces of the  26 the stone piece.  And on some of the smaller items in  27 this plate are indicated that the material has been  28 used extensively.  So these are remnants of cores,  29 probably exhausted cores.  No more flakes could be  30 produced from them.  These also illustrate the variety  31 of stone materials that were used in the production of  32 tools and flakes at the site of cores.  A basalt,  33 obsidian and a variety of cherts and quartz crystal.  34 Q   The perforators are described in your description of  35 artifact types at page A-8 and the chipped cores at  36 page A-ll.  I'd just like you to confirm these  37 descriptions are in relation to the photographs that  38 you've just made reference to?  39 A   Yes, that's true.  40 Q   Okay.  Thank you.  Is it the case that in respect of,  41 indeed, all of the photographs that the tool types  42 that are displayed in the photographs are described in  43 the descriptions that come in the text prior to the  44 photographs?  45 A   Yes, that's true.  46 Q   Thank you.  Now, I'd like to ask you, please, about  47 plate A-3, which is the photograph of the ground and 10386  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  THE  COURT  3  MR.  RUSH:  4  THE  COURT  5  MR.  RUSH:  6  Q  7  8  9  A  10  11  12  13  14  Q  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  Q  33  A  34  THE  COURT  35  A  36  37  THE  COURT  38  MR.  RUSH:  39  Q  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  polished slate mirror.  :  A-3, Mr. Rush?  Yes, that's right.  A-3.  :  Thank you.  Now, did you make reference to any published work with  regard to identifying the artifact that is shown in  plate A-3?  Yes.  I've referred to two papers published by George  MacDonald which include reference to actually  illustrations of several slate mirrors that are housed  in the National Museum in Ottawa, and his discussion  of mirrors.  All right.  And do you have the large three ring  binder present?  Yes, I do.  All right.  If you would please direct your attention  to tab 24.  I ask you if this is the article of Dr.  MacDonald to which you've made reference, and in  particular to page 235?  Yes, it is .  And this mirror is the example of the mirror that he  was referring to on page 237 --  Yes.  -- In the upper left-hand corner?  Yes, it is.  And did you also make reference to the article by Dr.  MacDonald at tab 25 entitled "Prehistoric Art of the  Northern Northwest Coast"?  Yes, I have.  The same -- same mirrors are illustrated  in this paper on page 105.  And is that figure 6-6?  Yes.  :  Can I see it, please?  So this in this paper at tab 24 going to this  illustration and discussion.  :  M'hm.  Thank you.  And just again at the next tab, tab 25, the mirror  that is referred to by Dr. MacDonald at page 105 is  under figure 6-6; is that right?  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  Oh, in the --  Yes.  Go ahead.  MacDonald discusses the slate mirrors as -- as an  aspect of -- of Shamanic ritual in which the Shaman 10387  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 used this mirror in the process of meditation and  2 reflection and predicting the future.  And this  3 discussion by MacDonald is based on a previous review  4 of literature in North America as well as northeast  5 Asia concerning Shamanic practices.  6 Q   And the mirror, is that part of the tool type which is  7 described by you as a ground and polished tool type?  8 A   Yes, it is produced by a ground stone technology.  So  9 a method of tool production.  10 Q   Okay.  If you would turn, please, to page A-2 in the  11 appendix, and under B, Ground Stone Industry, do you  12 there describe the tool types typical of that form of  13 industry?  14 A   Yes.  The tool types that we recovered from Hagwilget.  15 Q   All right.  And you identify an adze as one such type?  16 A   Yes.  17 Q   And you've referred to that in plate A-l or photograph  18 A-l?  19 A   Yes.  Plate A-l shows a ground and polished grooved  20 adze from Hagwilget Canyon.  21 Q   I want -- I just want to show -- if you will turn,  22 please, to plate A-l.  I'm producing to you what  23 appears to be a stone tool, and I wonder if you can  24 identify that tool in reference to the photograph  25 plate A-l?  26 A   Yes.  This is the tool I illustrated in plate A-l.  27 Q   And in terms of tool type you identify at page A-2  28 that this is -- falls into the category of a ground  29 stone adze; is that correct?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   And you've indicated at page A-2 as well that such  32 adzes were recovered by Ames at Hagwilget Canyon and  33 by Allaire at Kitselas Canyon, and you give references  34 to those --  35 A  Adze blades.  36 Q   — Adze blades?  37 A   Yes.  There's -- I have illustrated in plate A-l and  38 A-2 two types of adzes, and they are both referred to  39 as adzes in that they were used in woodworking  40 activity.  But one is a large, very heavy tool that  41 was used in heavy duty woodworking activities such as  42 felling of trees and heavy duty shaping of wooden  43 planks.  44 Q   Okay.  I want to show you another apparent tool, and  45 I'd ask you to compare that to A-2?  46 A   This is the artifact illustrated in plate A-2.  It is  47 also produced by grinding and polishing of nephrite or 10388  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  Q  3  4  A  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  THE  COURT  18  MR.  RUSH:  19  THE  COURT  20  MR.  RUSH:  21  Q  22  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  28  29  A  30  31  32  33  34  Q  35  A  36  37  Q  38  A  39  Q  40  A  41  THE  COURT  42  43  44  45  46  47  jadite material.  Excuse me.  This appears to have a smooth surface.  Is  that what gives rise to that surface?  Yes, the polishing.  This is referred to as a straight  adze blade, and its shape and use is similar or  equivalent to use of modern adze blades.  All right.  Thank you.  Now, I would like to ask you  with reference to the microblades that were recovered  and identified by you at Hagwilget Canyon, and in this  respect I'd like to direct your attention, please, to  plate A-14, or the photograph at that plate.  Now, just with reference to the -- the microblades  you say at the bottom of page 2-16 that microblades  recovered from the Mount Edziza area had been well  dated at one excavated site at 100 B.P. and thought to  be earlier --  :  I'm sorry, Mr. Rush.  Where are you, please?  I'm at the bottom of page 2-16.  :  Thank you.  And I just want to refer you, please, to tab 8.  And I  would ask you if the reference to Fladmark at tab 8 is  to be found at page 152 of that extract?  Yes.  This is the article and the reference that I am  referring to at -- in my report at 2-16.  All right.  And I direct your attention in particular  on page 152 to the second paragraph and its discussion  on microblades.  Yes.  At this site which Fladmark excavated, Mount  Edziza, he identified two components at the site in  which microblades were present.  And the blades in the  lower component were also associated with a  radiocarbon date --  Yes.  -- From the lower component 4870 plus or minus 120  B.P. .  Thank you.  Which in my report I have rounded off to 4900 --  Yes.  -- For convenience.  :  Mr. Rush, I'm sorry, but there is a very important  document I have got to sign for a moment.  I've  brought it up.  I don't have to go back to my  chambers.  I'll just be a moment.  (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT) 10389  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  ]  MR. RUSH  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  26  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  34  Q  35  36  A  37  38  39  Q  40  41  42  43  44  A  45  46  Q  47  Now, I want to ask you about a projectile point that I  drew your attention to this morning, and that's found  again at plate A-6.  And this is projectile point C,  my lord.  And this morning you drew a comparison  between the two points found in the Moricetown  excavation and the point found by you during your  Hagwilget investigations.  And my question now is did  you compare the point found at Hagwilget, which is the  one shown here under C, with points found by other  archeologists and work done in other parts of the  region?  Yes.  The point illustrated in A-6, number C, I  compared to excavations conducted or projectile points  recovered by Ames in his excavation at Hagwilget  Canyon in 1970.  And he recovered ten -- I believe it  was ten large projectile points and this one is  similar to -- comparable to some of the points he has  recovered there.  If I can just direct you to tab 14 in the large black  book, and please refer to page 195.  And is there  shown on page 195 a projectile point that compares to  the one that you found?  Yes.  I see there is some similarity with a point Ames  collected to points that he refers to at C, D, E.  What he has referred to as a laurel leaf variant B.  So just to be exact, that would be on plate 3 and it  would be the points shown under C, D and E; is that  correct?  Yes.  I -- I myself prefer to describe it more as a  lanceolate point.  His description of these points are  laurel leaf variant B.  He describes two variants of  laurel leaf.  All right.  Did you also make a comparison with a  point that was recovered by Allaire?  Yes.  I also looked at materials recorded by Allaire  at the Gitaus site at Kitselas Canyon and looked at  some of the projectile points recovered there.  All right.  Would you turn to tab 12, please, and  plate 6 on page three.  This is an extract.  And to  which of the points that are illustrated on page 35  did you make your comparison with point number C in  plate A-6?  On plate 6 items F to I.  What Allaire has described  as flat lanceolate points with concave base.  And what did you conclude in the comparison that you  drew? 10390  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  THE  COURT  9  10  A  11  THE  COURT  12  A  13  THE  COURT  14  A  15  16  17  THE  COURT  18  A  19  20  21  22  23  THE  COURT  24  25  A  26  THE  COURT  27  MR.  RUSH:  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  34  Q  35  A  36  37  38  39  Q  40  A  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  A  46  47  He -- the similar point at Hagwilget identified by  Ames, all of the points that he illustrates are from  the early zone A.  Zone A is the earliest zone.  And  this underlies the zone identified by both Ames and  MacDonald in his earlier excavation as a break in  occupation and from which the radiocarbon sample was  retrieved and gave the date of 3430 B.P..  :  I'm sorry.  You said the earliest -- zone A was the  earliest zone?  Yes.  At Ames' excavation.  :  Not in yours?  No.  :  So he uses a different --  Well, when I excavated at Moricetown I started with  layer A at the top and went B, CI, C2, D, gravels.  So  I went from A at the top.  :  Yes.  And in describing his work at Hagwilget Canyon, his  excavation, he refers to zones of occupation.  Not  particularly fine layers or levels, but zones of  occupation which he has referred to A at the bottom, B  in the middle and C at the top, or most recent.  :  All right.  So it's just that that was his earliest  zone?  Yes.  His earliest zone.  :  All right.  Thank you.  All right.  And underlying the context for the radiocarbon date --  Yes.  Now --  -- In layers.  Yes.  That's what I was drawing --  In Allaire's work at Gitaus these similar materials  appear at Gitaus in zone 3.  Now, where is that in the A, B, C?  In his sequence he has numbered his sequence with  Roman numerals rather than give them letters.  And one  is an upper zone so Roman numeral one is the  uppermost --  Yes.  -- Zone and Roman numeral six is the earliest, or at  the bottom of the stratigraphic sequence.  Okay.  The zone 3 materials date from 3200.  That's B.P., isn't it?  B.P.. And Ames and Allaire both suggest in the -- in  their papers that -- that materials identified in the  lower deposits at Hagwilget appear in the -- in the 10391  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 zone 3 deposits at the Gitaus site at Kitselas Canyon  2 and postulate a movement of technology and people  3 bearing that technology differences in tool types from  4 Hagwilget to Kitselas.  5 Q   And Kitselas Canyon is located down river on the  6 Skeena?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   About how many miles from Terrace?  9 A  About half way between -- between Hagwilget and the  10 coast.  11 Q   Oh, I see.  Okay.  Now, I neglected to ask you a  12 question about the ground stone tools.  And if you'll  13 bear with me for just a moment I'd like you to set  14 aside what we have been discussing in terms of the  15 projectile points and take you back to the ground  16 stone tools.  And I want to ask you if the ground  17 stone tools, the kind you've identified in your  18 opinion, are associated with a particular time period?  19 A   Ground stone tools as a technique of manufacturing  20 tools proliferates -- is developed in the middle  21 period on the coast and is more predominant in later  22 periods, so is most characteristic of late -- late  23 prehistoric or late pre-contact times.  That refers to  24 the last 1500 years.  25 Q   So when you use the term late you mean the last 1500?  26 A   1500.  27 Q   1500 before the present?  28 A   Yes.  29 Q   And in terms of this periodization, if I may put it  30 that way, did you make reference to any published  31 material to assist you in determining that  32 periodization for the adze or the ground stone tools  33 which you recovered at Hagwilget?  34 A  Well, I looked at the discussion of materials  35 recovered by MacDonald and Inglis in their 1981 paper  36 summarizing the -- the results of the work in the  37 Prince Rupert Harbour area.  38 Q   All right.  Now —  39 A  And they -- they indicate a proliferation --  40 development and proliferation of ground stone tools in  41 that area.  42 Q   All right.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Now, I didn't  43 include an extract from that particular work, my lord,  44 but I have the original copy here, and I will provide  45 my friends with the particular reference, but I do  46 want to show you a copy of an article in B.C. Studies  47 dated Winter 1980 - '81 and ask you if the article by 10392  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Dr. MacDonald and Richard Inglis is the one to which  2 you have just made reference?  3 A   Yes, it is.  4 Q   And in particular the page that's page 46 of that?  5 A   Yes.  At page 46 is a table outlining the various tool  6 classes and types that were found along the coast or  7 Prince Rupert.  8 Q   And associated with various periods in these columns;  9 is that right?  10 A   Yes.  Relative abundance at various time periods.  11 Q   Thank you.  All right.  Ms. Albright, I'd like to  12 refer you now to page 2-18, and I would ask you if the  13 paragraph that's at the end of the page, or the last  14 paragraph, if that sets out your opinion with regard  15 to the comparison of the assemblages found at the  16 Hagwilget site with assemblages at other sites in the  17 region?  18 A   The last paragraph summarizes my opinion concerning  19 the -- our examination of the site GhSv 85-A based  20 on -- based on examination of the artifacts, and a  21 comparison of artifacts with those found in other  22 contexts.  23 Q   Now, if you will please turn to the table which is at  24 2-19 — after 2-19.  This is table number five.  It's  25 entitled "Temporal Comparison of Major Skeena Valley  26 Assemblages".  Did you compare -- the investigations  27 undertaken by you at Moricetown and Hagwilget, did you  28 compare those with other sites in the region?  29 A   Yes.  I looked at the -- I looked at the data from the  30 three major sites that I looked at in the Hagwilget  31 and Moricetown canyons, and looked at similarity and  32 differences in those sites, and then I compared our --  33 a summary of our findings in a sense of putting it  34 into context of other work that had been done in the  35 Skeena region previously.  So then they are seen --  36 this information is seen in comparison to information  37 from Kitselas about Kitselas Canyon and occupation of  38 the mouth of the Skeena at Prince Rupert Harbour.  39 It's based on information from the references that  4 0 I've already reviewed in my comparisons.  41 Q   And I would just draw your attention -- well, before I  42 do that I take it we have running down the left-hand  43 side of this chart the dates before present and across  44 the top the particular sites to which you made  45 reference?  46 A   Yes.  47 Q   Including the three sites where you did your 10393  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  A  7  8  9  10  11  12  Q  13  14  A  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  THE COURT  24  A  25  THE COURT  26  A  27  28  29  30  MR. RUSH:  31  Q  32  A  33  34  35  Q  36  37  38  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  47  MR. RUSH:  investigations.  And I would draw it to your attention  at the 3500 B.P. line a hatching that appears at the  Kitselas Canyon in the Paul Mason site and the Gitaus  site.  Now, can you explain the significance, if any,  in that hatching with regard to this table?  Yes.  The hatching at 3500 refers to a break in  occupation identified by Allaire at the Gitaus site,  and which he makes reference to in his report, and  also a break in the sequence at the Paul Mason site  identified by Gary Copeland in his report of his  investigations.  The --  Now, is there evidence of a similar break in the  findings that you made at Hagwilget?  In the excavations conducted at Hagwilget Canyon,  GhSv-2 by MacDonald and Inglis both have identified a  layer five feet below the surface where there is  extensive carbon stained soil, charcoal scorched earth  indicating -- indicating a break, and suggesting that  a major event occurred at the time that this -- this  break is identified.  The -- it is within this layer  that -- or this lens of charcoal and scorched earth  that the sample was taken for the date of 3430 B.P..  :  I'm sorry.  At what you say?  34 --  :  34?  3430.  3430 B.C..  That was the date obtained by  MacDonald originally.  Then looking at the ash patches  and burned bone and burned artifacts at -- at the GhSv  85-A.  That's Hagwilget Canyon?  At Hagwilget Canyon about a kilometre and a half north  of the excavation site suggested there was a similar  event happening at that site.  And the description, or at least the account in your  opinion with regard to this break, is that set out in  the second and third paragraphs on page 2-28 of your  opinion?  Yes.  Okay.  In the second paragraph I --  All right.  And as you say at page 2-19 table 5  presents a temporal comparison of those major Skeena  Valley assemblages?  Yes.  It's putting the work that -- my own analysis in  a comparative context with other -- other assemblages.  All right.  Thank you.  Now, my lord, I intend to go 10394  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 to the -- the next chapter, but before I do I'd  2 just -- I do not intend to direct the witness'  3 attention to the last paragraph, and nor do I intend  4 to rely upon the last paragraph on page 2-20.  5 Q   Now, I'd like to refer you to your chapter three,  6 which is at page 3-1 and entitled "Investigation of  7 Ancestral Village Localities".  Now, did you undertake  8 other investigations during the summer of 1985 with  9 regard to the location of certain ancestral villages?  10 A   Yes, I did.  11 Q   Okay.  And can you describe in general terms what it  12 was that you did in this respect?  13 A  We did a review of relevant ethnographic literature to  14 locate references to the villages of interest, to  15 retrieve references to their possible location or the  16 nature of those villages.  17 Q   Okay.  18 A   This -- the references we covered and used for the  19 basis of directing our survey efforts are found in the  2 0 appendix B --  21 Q   All right.  22 A   -- Under the name of each locality or study area.  23 Q   Okay.  Now, I just like to refer you to page 3-22  24 under heading 3.6 Summary.  It's quite a bit ahead, my  25 lord.  It's after figure 25 and just before the  26 beginning of chapter four.  And I refer you to  27 paragraph number -- well, the first paragraph under  28 heading Summary.  And it states here, Ms. Albright;  29  30 "Archeological investigation of ancestral  31 village localities tends to confirm the  32 reliability of Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en oral  33 histories.  The oral histories of Gitksan  34 and Wet'suwet'en Houses give the names and  35 general locations of several ancestral  36 villages or villages of origin in Gitksan or  37 Wet'suwet'en territories.  These village  38 locations are said to have been occupied  39 during an unspecified period of time in the  40 distant past.  They are rarely defined in  41 terms of precise locations of a single site.  42 Rather, they tend to be referred to in the  43 oral and ethnographic literature as general  44 localities or early population centers.  45 Given this interpretive framework then,  46 evidence of earlier occupation and land use  47 activities has been recorded in four of the 10395  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Q  39  40  41  A  42  43  Q  44  45  A  46  THE COURT  47  MR. RUSH:  five ancestral village localities  investigated during the 1985 field season.  In terms of antiquity of occupation of these  localities, investigations have resulted in  variable success."  Now, does that represent your opinion with regard  to the investigations of the ancestral village  locations as set out in chapter 3 of your opinion?  Yes, it does.  All right.  I want to ask you how you first embarked  upon the investigations, and I think some evidence was  given earlier concerning an ethnographic review.  You  indicated you conducted such a review since through  the assistance of Linda Burnard-Hogarth?  Yes.  And the list of the ethnographic references that you  obtained, that is set out in appendix B-l of the  appendix, is that so?  Yes.  And is this broken down in accordance to the various  villages that were investigated by you?  Yes.  For example, B-l refers to Gitank'aat', 2 to Temlaxam,  and so on?  Yes.  Okay.  Now, having done the review of the ethnographic  literature as it's set out here what did you and your  research team do following that review?  After a review of references to a village then we  established a study area in which to conduct  investigations on the ground in the field.  So a study  area was defined in terms of sort of highest priority  or the most likely location where -- where a  village -- evidence of a village might be found, and  then we proceeded to make arrangements to conduct  field work in those locations.  Okay.  And was the first location where you commenced  your field work in this respect a location known as  Gitank'aat'?  Yes.  That Gitank'aat' area is the first one described  in --  And that's described at page 3.2 and following, I  should say?  Yes.  :  I'm sorry.  3- --  3-2 and following is the -- 10396  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  THE  COURT  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  4  THE  COURT  5  MR.  RUSH:  6  THE  COURT  7  MR.  RUSH:  8  THE  COURT  9  MR.  RUSH:  10  Q  11  12  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  25  26  27  Q  28  A  29  30  31  Q  32  33  34  35  36  37  A  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Q  :  Oh, yes.  The investigations regarding the ancestral village of  Gitank'aat', my lord.  :  I'm sorry.  I'm not sure I'm on the right book.  You should be in the opinion.  :  In the opinion.  You may well be in the appendices.  :  Oh, number 3-22.  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  Now, I just refer you to 3-2, Ms. Albright, and in  particular I refer you to paragraph one under the  first heading 3.1.  Does paragraph one set out in  particular your opinions regarding the Village of  Gitank'aat'?  Yes, it does.  All right.  Now, I would like to refer you to the  ethnographic references that you summarized, and I  will ask you again to refer back to the appendices.  And here I'll jump back to the appendices, my lord.  Appendix B-l, does that set out the ethnographic  references that you drew from the literature as they  referred to Gitank'aat'?  Yes, it does.  We made use of -- of Barbeau's files  that had been held by Wilson Duff at the University of  British Columbia, and so these are copies of Barbeau  files.  All right.  As well as unpublished field notes of George Emmons  who had carried out ethnographic field work in the  area.  Just to assist us in terms of how to use the  references I'll direct you to the first entry on page  one, Duff's Barbeau file 16.1.  And the first entry is  Maggie Wells Sqayen.  It appears that's S-Q-A-Y-E-N.  Now, in respect to that entry how did you make use of  that in terms of your field investigations?  This is a number -- one of a number of references to  people living at a site, a village site referred to as  Gitank'aat', and there are a variety of spellings used  for the place-names.  And from Gitank'aat', now  Dorreen, on the Skeena these are excerpts of a larger  discussion by Barbeau with this particular informant.  We have excerpted pieces with reference to  Gitank'aat'.  And Gitank'aat' is referred to as being  at the location of a contemporary village named  Dorreen on the Skeena River.  All right. 10397  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   In some cases contemporary names of creeks in the area  2 are noted as well.  3 Q   All right.  If you'll turn, please, back to the  4 opinion.  And I would ask you if you also made  5 reference to a document called Men of Madeek.  And you  6 draw -- you describe certain statements made by a Mr.  7 Walter Wright on page 3-3?  8 A   Yes.  Yes.  Men of Madeek is a published version of  9 the Walter -- oral history described by Walter Wright  10 of the House of Gisgaast.  He belongs to the Kitselas  11 people.  12 Q   Okay.  Now, you also have included in figure 7 a map  13 from Duff's Barbeau file entitled "Kitwanga Laxski'k  14 Territory"?  15 A   Yes.  This is a copy from the Barbeau notes of a  16 territory on the middle -- on the middle Skeena  17 showing several creeks, and with both their recent --  18 more recent historic names as well as Gitksan names  19 regarded by Barbeau.  And to the north of -- between  20 Lome Creek and Fiddler Creek Barbeau has located  21 Gitank'aat' from the information obtained by him from  22 various informants.  23 Q   And that appears to be a point on a large river  24 system?  25 A   Yes.  In comparing this to the topographic map we see  26 that this refers to a spot on the Skeena River on the  27 west side, or southwest bank of the Skeena River  28 between Fiddler and Lome Creek, which have also been  29 identified with their Gitksan names.  30 Q   Okay.  And in terms of the field investigations which  31 you performed did you make assumptions, any  32 assumptions regarding the map from Duff's Barbeau  33 file, and as well about the Men of Madeek information?  34 A   Yes, I used these.  I felt that the -- in reviewing  35 the various sources that taken together they gave a  36 certain level of reliability in terms of the focus for  37 this village site.  So on that basis I accepted them  38 as useful for focusing our investigation.  39 Q   All right.  And if you look at figure 6, please.  It's  40 entitled "Map of Gitangat Study Area".  This map  41 illustrates the focus of your study area so far as it  42 pertains to Gitank'aat'; is that correct?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   And the area -- the particular area of your study is  45 contained within the two oblong circles, one entitled  46 GfTc 85-A and the second GfTc 85-B, is that so?  47 A   These were two site areas that we located during our 1039?  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 survey.  We surveyed the -- the area outlined with the  2 hatching part way back from the outlined area, from  3 Lome Creek in the north to below south of Dorreen as  4 the area which we surveyed.  So it included -- the  5 study area was defined as large enough to include all  6 possibilities represented by the various references  7 that we had.  8 Q   All right.  The other black triangles that are shown  9 on this figure, they indicate previously regarded  10 archeological sites?  11 A   Yes.  There had been two previous surveys carried out  12 in the area.  They're both brief linear surveys.  And  13 as a result there were three sites recorded.  One  14 refers to -- perhaps -- one refers to a single tool  15 collected at the mouth of Fiddler Creek, GfTc 1 by  16 Ames during a 1970 survey along the river.  17 Q   Okay.  18 THE COURT:  1970?  19 A   Yes.  2 0    MR. RUSH:  21 Q   Now, if you'll just pause there.  Just below that site  22 description there is another one, GfTc 16, and below  23 that is a word and then IR 8.  Do you know what IR 8  24 refers to?  25 A   Yes.  There is a reserve -- there's a line indicating  26 reserve area on the south side of Fiddler Creek also  27 bordering the Skeena -- the Skeena River, and the name  28 of that reserve when it was designated reserve, which  29 it still has, is Chiginkghit, which is also very close  30 to -- very close to the other references that we have.  31 THE COURT:  C-H-I-G-I-N?  32 A   Yes.  33 THE COURT:  K?  34 A   G-H — G-H-I-T.  35 THE COURT:  K-G-H-I-T.  Yes.  Right.  3 6    MR. RUSH:  37 Q   And do I understand, Ms. Albright, that by the  38 presence of the other archeological sites noted on  39 this map that you also investigated other  40 archeological data concerning sites in this area?  41 A  Well, I reviewed the literature to determine what --  42 what other field work had been done in the area, what  43 other surveys had been done through this specific --  44 this specific study area, and as I've already noted,  45 Ames had conducted a survey in the area and recorded  46 this site at the mouth of Fiddler Creek.  47 Q   Okay. 10399  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  MR.  THE  A  Q  A  Q  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  A  THE  THE  THE  COURT  A  COURT  REGISTRAR:  And there were two other brief surveys of -- of road  corridor, and the sites recorded at that time were  historic sites where there were recent standing house  structures or cabin structures.  Okay.  And a bridge.  Yes.  Now, at page 3-5 --  :  Is this a convenient time to take the adjournment,  Mr. Rush?  Yes.  :  Two recent house structures or two recent surveys?  Yes, two recent surveys.  And they found recent  historic materials.  They didn't find materials at  that time related to pre-contact occupation of the  area.  :  They found a house structure and a bridge?  Yes.  A cabin structure and a bridge, which has since  collapsed.  :  All right.  Thank you.  Order in court.  Court will recess,  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein to the best of my  skill and ability.  Peri McHale, Official Reporter  UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO AN ADJOURNMENT) 10400  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  \R:  Order in court.  Mr. Rush.  1  2  THE  REGIS1  3  THE  COURT  4  MR.  RUSH:  5  Q  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  A  13  14  THE  COURT  15  THE  WITNE  16  17  THE  COURT  18  MR.  RUSH:  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Q  31  32  A  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  A  39  40  Q  41  A  42  43  Q  44  A  45  46  Q  47  A  Yes, thank you.  I'll direct your attention, please,  Miss Albright, to figure 8 which is entitled Gitangat  Cache Pit Site Area.  And if your lordship will  perhaps keep one of your fingers at figure 6, this  cache pit site area shown in figure 8 is at Gf Tc-85-A  which is the most northerly of the two sites.  Is that  so, Miss Albright?  Yes. It is a large area between Fiddler Creek and  Lome Creek that has diagonal hatches to it.  :  These mile markers are on the railroad, are they?  3S:  Yes, it is.  Those are mile markers along the CN.  Railway on the west side of the Skeena River.  :  Yes, all right.  Now, you are referring to figure 8?  Now, this at figure 8, yes.  Could you just explain what's shown on figure 8 and  how you came to prepare figure 8, please?  Yes.  In surveying in this area we noted -- we  recorded 106 features, cache pit features, and they  are in -- are in clusters on two or three different  terrace levels and there is a small creek running  through the site.  So we spent time mapping in the  location of these and giving them record numbers or  numbering them in order to produce this map.  The circles indicate the cache pit sites that you  located?  Yes.  The circles refer to individual cache pits.  And you numbered each one of the ones that you  found?  Yes.  And what were the sizes or the range of sizing of  these pit sites, please?  These ranged in size from a metre and a half to  three metres.  And what about --  Or two -- I would say an average of a metre and a  half to two and a half metres was the average.  All right.  And the depth?  And the -- the depth averaged is half a metre to  over one metre deep.  Were you able to determine the age of the pits?  No.  We did not retrieve any material in which to 10401  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  Q  4  5  6  7  8  A  9  10  11  12  Q  13  14  A  15  Q  16  A  17  Q  18  19  A  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  36  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  45  46  47  THE COURT  radio carbon date this site or the period that these  pits would have been used.  All right.  I want to direct your attention to plate  8 which is a photograph, photograph 8 among the  photograph sequence, and this is entitled Cache Pit at  Site Gf Tc-85-A Gitangat Study Area; it is plate 8.  Can you identify that photograph?  Yes.  This is one of my crew members kneeling beside  one of the pit features in which there is a cedar or  hemlock tree.  We were working in a mature  cedar/hemlock forest.  Does the background show the general nature of the  area that you were working in?  Yes, the nature of the forest environment there.  Did you take the photograph?  Yes, I did.  Did you take all of the photographs that are in  these two volumes?  Yes, I did.  Thank you.  Now, I direct you to page 3-5.  I am  sorry, just before I do that, in respect of the  description of your field investigations, is that set  out on 3-4?  Yes.  Starting at 3-4 and discussion of this site is  on the following page.  All right.  And in terms of your opinion regarding  the Gitangat site at Gf Tc-85-A, that is to say the  most northerly one, is your opinion set out in  paragraph 2 of page 3-5?  Yes.  All right, thank you. Now, if you will please turn  to the description of the site at Gf Tc-85-B, this is  the southerly site?  Yes.  This site is located along the bank or close  to the bank of the Skeena River south of Fiddler Creek  approximately one kilometre.  All right. And in terms of the site in particular,  is that shown on figure 9?  Yes, it is.  And I want to direct you in particular to the  feature on this map which shows the house depression.  Can you identify that for his lordship?  Yes.  This site consisted of a cluster of eight  cultural features, the largest one is up on the  left-hand side of the page identified as a house  depression approximately five metres wide.  :  Is that the largest circle that was there? 10402  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 THE WITNESS:  Yes, it is, sir.  2 MR. RUSH:  3 Q    And that's marked number 8?  4 A    Yes, it is identified as 8.  5 Q    Did you do any testing at that site?  6 A    Yes.  Within the -- on the inside rim of the house  7 depression we opened up a small test unit, 50  8 centimetres wide by one metre.  The test revealed  9 several strata soil layers in the house feature.  The  10 uppermost layer was sterile.  11 Q    If you will just pause there.  Is the profile of the  12 test site set out at figure 10?  13 A    Yes, it is.  14 Q    All right.  And you have A through G zones  15 represented in this profile?  16 A    Yes.  17 Q    All right.  And you prepared this profile, did you?  18 A    Yes, I did.  19 Q    Zone E refers to a black carbon-stained silt about  20 five centimetres thick?  21 A    Yes.  That was found within a dark brown sandy  22 matrix.  This -- we took a sample of this  23 carbon-stained silt, lens.  24 Q    What did you do with the sample?  25 A   And we sent this sample to Beta Analytic for age  26 determination.  27 Q    And did you -- did you receive a result from Beta  28 Analytic which gave you an age for that?  29 A    Yes, I did.  30 Q    What was that, please?  31 A    The age —  32 MR. WILLMS:  My lord, I would be, and I have advised my friend  33 again, this fits right in with Beta Analytic.  I don't  34 have the documents sending the sample down; there is  35 no proof of continuity, and I object to this.  I am  36 sure I can admit it if my friend gets me the  37 transmission document of Beta Analytic but until I  38 have that, I can't.  39 MR. RUSH:  Well, my lord, this isn't a basis for an objection.  40 It may be a reason my friend doesn't give an admission  41 but I can demonstrate continuity by more than just  42 providing a piece of paper which says that such a  43 sample was sent to Beta Analytic.  If this witness can  44 attest to what she did in the course of saying what  45 she did, she demonstrates continuity of the exhibit in  46 the hands of Beta Analytic, then I think I have  47 hopefully gone some of the distance to satisfy my 10403  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 friend about the necessary admission which he should  2 make, but that's an issue between my friend and I in  3 terms of the court.  In my submission, I can lead this  4 evidence and if it assists the court and my friend,  5 then I think all the better.  6 MR. WILLMS:  Well, the formal basis, my lord, is that whatever  7 Beta said is hearsay.  It is only not hearsay and  8 admissible if I admit it and I have advised my friend  9 of a very simple procedure by which he can obtain that  10 admission, but until I can satisfy myself that the  11 admission is a proper one to make, I am not going to  12 make it and in the absence of the admission, it is  13 hearsay and it is inadmissible.  14 THE COURT:  Do you agree with your friend with respect to the  15 question of continuity, Mr. Willms?  16 MR. WILLMS:  Well, that's the other problem, my lord.  17 THE COURT:  He could undertake to prove continuity in some way  18 other than by an admission.  19 MR. WILLMS:  He most certainly could prove continuity other than  20 by an admission.  He could prove that the material was  21 sent down, that they received it, and call somebody  22 from Beta who said that they received it.  23 THE COURT:  Or could he prove it by saying in the ordinary  24 course of mail I sent something identified as such and  25 such to Beta and in the ordinary course of the mail I  26 got something back from Beta that corresponded with  27 the numbers that I sent?  28 MR. WILLMS:  All I am asking for is the ordinary mail, that's  29 it.  That's all -- he'd have to lead that and that  30 would do it.  31 THE COURT:  I think your friend is suggesting he doesn't have to  32 produce the documents, if the witness said she did it  33 in the ordinary course of the mail.  34 MR. WILLMS:  I have a problem with that, my lord, especially in  35 terms of material that I have already received on the  36 other carbon samples and there is, you know, a little  37 bit of, this is here --  38 THE COURT:  There is always the possibility of mistake in any  39 human endeavour.  I was hoping you were going to say  40 you agreed with your friend in that regard, Mr.  41 Willms, then I was going to ask your friend if he  42 agreed with your position that the result is hearsay.  43 MR. WILLMS:  I, my lord —  44 THE COURT:  If he agrees with that, well then, the answer is  45 that you are both right and we have solved the  46 problem.  47 MR. WILLMS:  Let me put it this way:  On all of the other 10404  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 samples I have seen other documents from the ground  2 where the witness has given a sample number to a  3 particular item, and that's in the Moricetown  4 excavation, and so then from that the witness can say  5 she -- that's what I dug out of the ground and that's  6 what I sent.  I don't have any background  7 documentation for this excavation, giving this a  8 sample number or anything.  Now, I don't know whether  9 that advances whether my friend is right or wrong but,  10 in terms of continuity, I suppose if from memory this  11 witness remembers that this was the only sample, other  12 carbon sample that was sent off --  13 THE COURT:  Well, she remembers the designation she gave.  14 MR. WILLMS:  And the designation that was given, then that would  15 take care of the continuity.  16 THE COURT:  Why are we having this trouble, Mr. Rush?  17 MR. RUSH:  Because I do not have a letter or a report that I do  18 in respect of the Moricetown samples for some reason,  19 it's lost.  It is gone.  So my remedy is to phone the  20 good scientists at Beta and ask them to send me a Fax  21 copy and I will do my best to get that if it will help  22 my friend, but I must say I was hoping that given the  23 fact that I had reports and transmission documents in  24 respect out of eight of the samples, I was hoping that  25 my friend might see that there might be a similar  26 reliable continuity in respect of the ninth, but be  27 that as it may, I will do my best to try and get the  28 report but as it stands now I don't have a  29 transmission document or a reporting sample form.  30 THE COURT:  Should I hear the evidence subject to the objection,  31 Mr. Willms?  32 MR. WILLMS:  That would be agreeable, my lord.  33 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  34 MR. RUSH:  35 Q    Yes.  Well, Miss Albright, you indicated that you  36 took a sample from zone E demonstrated on figure 10  37 and --  38 A    Yes.  We gathered into tinfoil approximately, oh, I  39 would say a kilogram of this black carbon-stained lens  40 and, from this lens, an attempt to perhaps receive an  41 age determination for this feature.  We did fill out a  42 standard information sheet on the data that Beta  43 Analytic provides on the context in which the sample  44 was taken and this -- this profile was part of that --  45 was on that data sheet as well as a description of the  46 site area, its general location, the site designation  47 area and it was the only sample that I did send in, so 10405  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  it was sample one.  It was one of one sample.  Q    Okay.  By this profile, you mean the one at figure  10?  A    Yes.  That was on the information sheet sent to  Beta.  And I am sorry for the misunderstanding here.  I guess in our excitement to get it sent to Beta for  determination, I overlooked to make a xerox copy of  it.  All right.  Or if I did, I have not been -- I have gone through  my filings and tried to find it, but I am sorry, I  haven't.  No need to apologize.  I am producing to you at tab 5  a document entitled Report of Radiocarbon Dating  Analysis and it's indicated date received July 10,  1985, and it indicates for Sylvia Albright, Sabrina  Research.  Have you got it?  MR. WILLMS:  I have got it at tab 6.  THE COURT:  What are you looking at, Mr. Rush, tab 5?  MR. RUSH:  Or it could be at tab 6.  We seem to be switching our  tabs around.  Yes, tab 6, I think.  Q  A  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  Q  A  A  Q  A  A  In any event, it is a document date received July  10, '85, and date reported July 30, '85.  My first  question to you, Miss Albright, is did you receive a  copy of this report of Radiocarbon Dating Analysis?  Yes. Yes, I did, and I have given you the original  copy that was sent to me.  This is a xerox.  All right.  It indicates date received July 10,  1985.  Is that in and around the time that you would  have sent your sample to Beta Analytic?  Yes.  We were at the study area late June.  All right.  And submitted the sample. This would have been the  date they actually received my sample in the mail and  have confirmed that here and by sending the report on  July 30.  Your sample number, it is indicated here R-SR-85-1.  You said it was the first sample and that obviously is  shown by the 1, I think.  Does this sample number, are  you aware or do you recall such a sample number being  attached to the sample that you remitted to Beta  Analytic?  Yes, it is.  Refers to R radiocarbon, SR to Sabrina  Research, 85 for the year, and this is the first  sample I have submitted to them. 10406  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  A  3  4  Q  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  12  13  14  15  16  Q  17  A  18  THE COURT  19  20  THE WITNE  21  MR. RUSH:  22  Q  23  A  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Q  31  A  32  33  Q  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  40  41  42  43  A  44  Q  45  A  46  47  What's Sabrina Research?  Sabrina Research is the name of my research company  that I have been working under.  And the report from Radiocarbon Dating Analysis that  you received from Beta Analytic indicates an age of  1,730, that's 1,730 plus or minus 60 BP?  Yes.  Did you do a second test at the southerly site at  Gitangat?  Yes.  We did another small test, 50 by 50 centimetre  test towards the river from the house pit feature and  which revealed the same stratigraphy, the same layers,  cultural layers, and within the culture layer  identified in the house pit feature we found two large  flake tools in the same cultural layer.  And what was the material of these tools?  These are coarse grain basalt.  Says in the report there, large flakes of granular  basalt?  SS:  Yes, coarse-grained or granular basalt.  So —  They indicate that they have both been worked --  they are large flakes that represent early stage  production until manufacture; they are not  particularly characteristic types of artifact,  artifacts or tools which are easily comparable with  others so they are not in that sense diagnostic of any  particular time period.  All right.  So it was not -- weren't able to assist the time  just based on the artifacts.  The description of the second of the two sites at  Gitangat and the findings that you made, are they set  out at page 3-6?  Yes.  The description of the site is at 3-6.  And you make reference in the last paragraph on page  3-6 to the larger house depression investigated at the  site is characteristic of expected featural remains of  the Daak style house noted in the ethnographic  literature and you site Duff.  That's Wilson Duff, is  it?  Yes.  And what do you mean by the Daak style house?  That is a Gitksan term which is found in the  ethnographic literature describing a house style which  has a central excavated area in which the fire pit 10407  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  A  22  MR.  RUSH:  23  24  25  26  27  THE  COURT  28  MR.  RUSH:  29  THE  COURT  30  MR.  RUSH:  31  THE  COURT  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  Q  34  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  41  A  42  43  Q  44  45  46  47  A  would have been contained.  The house also has a  higher platform or bench then at ground -- more ground  level which is around the outside of the central pit  feature.  And you indicate in the last paragraph on page 3-6  that the rim of the depression would lead you to  conclude that the original structure would have  measured at least nine metres per side?  Yes, and that the dimensions of the feature, the  depression of the feature from one edge to the other,  one rim to the other, was five metres across and  allowing for two metres of platform around the edge  would give approximately nine metres.  It could have  been larger than that but that's an estimate of the  size.  Thank you.  May I direct your attention to page 3-7  and I'd ask you if your opinions with regard to your  investigations at Gitangat in respect of both of the  sites investigated at Gitangat are set out in the two  paragraphs, the two top paragraphs on page 3-7?  Yes.  Thank you.  Now, my lord, I don't intend to refer the  witness to the second two or the last two paragraphs  on page 3-7.  All right.  Now, I'd like to direct your  attention to the investigations which you did at --  :  Mr. Rush, I am sorry, I am not sure what that means.  I am not relying on those.  :  I can cross them out.  You can cross them out.  :  Thank you.  Now, I'd like to ask you, Miss Albright, about your  investigations at Temlaham.  Did you follow a similar  study procedure in respect of your investigations of  the ethnographic and archaeological literature?  Yes, I did.  And the ethnographic review that you did, is that  set out on pages 3-9 through 3- -- excuse me, 3-8  through 3-10?  Yes.  This is a discussion of or discussion and  review of the literature.  And again, in respect of the appendices that appear  in the appendix volume, did you also make reference to  the ethnographic references in appendix B-2, that  would be from pages 3 through 8?  Yes.  These are references to the Temlaham area or 10408  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 localities referred to as being part of the Temlaham  2 area which we found in various sources of -- in the  3 ethnographic literature.  4 Q    All right.  And one of those sources you set out in  5 parenthesis on page 3-8 as that of Walter Wright and  6 the Men of Medeek?  7 A    Yes.  I have also referred to Walter Wright's  8 description in Men of Medeek.  9 Q    Now, you also conducted an archaeological review?  10 A    Yes.  11 Q    And the references to the authorities or  12 publications, are they set out on page 3-10?  13 A    Yes, 3-10 refers to a summary and a discussion of  14 previous work in the area.  15 Q    And again, the archaeological sites that are  16 referenced in the first two paragraphs under the  17 heading of Previous Archaeological Research, I take it  18 that those are sites recorded by the various authors  19 and archaeologists?  20 A    Yes, okay.  21 Q    And do they similarly appear at figure 11 in the map  22 of the Temlaham study area?  23 A    Yes, they do.  24 Q    Now, turning to that figure, can you briefly  25 describe to his lordship the areas of study that where  26 you conducted your field investigations at figure 11?  27 A   At figure 11, and the basis of reading references  28 and ethnographic literature to Temlaham or localities,  29 named places in the Temlaham area, we defined four  30 specific areas in which to focus our initial  31 investigation and these are areas 1, 2, 3 and 4 that  32 are hatched on the map, and areas 1 and 4 on the west  33 or north-west bank of the Skeena and areas 2 and 3 on  34 the south-west bank of the Skeena River.  35 Q    All right.  36 A    Or side of the river.  37 Q    In terms of focusing your field investigations, did  38 you make assumptions regarding the recorded  39 information in the ethnographic literature as to the  40 locality and the site?  41 A    Yes.  I assumed that these named places with  42 locations mentioned were accurate, that they could be  43 used as a focus for investigation.  44 Q    All right.  Did you similarly make any assumptions  45 regarding the archaeological information which led you  46 to focus on these four areas?  47 A    Yes.  I assumed that information recorded by 10409  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 previous archaeological work is also accurate.  2 Q    All right.  Now, in general terms, can you tell his  3 lordship what the nature of the investigation was that  4 you conducted of these four specific areas at the  5 Temlaham study area?  6 A    Yes.  In each of these areas we went to the area  7 with the -- with a topographic map and we conducted  8 foot survey in order to locate evidence of any  9 evidence of precontact occupation in those study  10 areas.  We also looked at cutbanks that were exposed  11 by roadways or the river banks themselves to see which  12 might reveal buried deposits that we might not  13 otherwise see just on surface survey.  And we did  14 record sites in areas 3 and 4 --  15 Q    Okay.  16 A    — of this.  17 Q    I will just come to that.  Did you record any sites  18 in areas 1 and 2?  19 A    No, we didn't.  20 Q    Okay.  Dealing with 3 and 4, there was a site  21 located at area 3 and can you just describe briefly  22 what it was that you found at area 3?  23 A    I will refer to area 3, 85-B is located along a  24 lower terrace of the Skeena River on the north side of  25 the mouth of Chicago Creek and we saw -- found a --  26 THE COURT:  You mean across the river?  27 THE WITNESS:  It is on the south — it is on the north bank of  28 Chicago Creek, it is on the south side of the river in  29 study area 3.  30 THE COURT:  On the south side of the Skeena.  31 THE WITNESS:  Skeena, yes.  32 MR. RUSH:  33 Q    I refer you to figure 12.  Does that show the  34 Chicago Creek site?  35 A    Yes, it does.  It's in with a group of several maps.  36 We found 46 pit features along the terrace adjacent to  37 the river, and they ranged in -- this is a very narrow  38 terrace adjacent to the river which is actively -- now  39 actively being eroded.  It appears to have been a  40 larger terrace in the past.  The activity of the  41 Skeena River is actively eroding this bank at the  42 moment.  The pits are varying in size and some of them  43 appear -- the smaller, very rounded shallow features  44 appear to have also experienced occasional high water  45 or flooding by high water with pits being filled in on  46 occasion by river silts.  47 Q    Okay.  Now, again, the circles with numbers attached 10410  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  to them, do they indicate the pit sites and the  numbers and the number attached to the particular pit  site as you recorded it?  A    Yes.  Q    Okay.  Now, let me direct your attention to figure  13, and figure 13 is site Gh Sw-85-C  Where is that  located?  A    Yes.  This is -- this site is another cluster of  cache pits.  This site is located in study -- in area  4 on the north bank of the Skeena and it's on a higher  bench above the river and back from the river a ways.  Q    And again, do the circles with numbers attached  indicate -- well, what do they indicate?  A    The numbers refer to individual pits as they were  recorded.  Q    All right.  A    On that same terrace level, these pits were found in  a forested edge of a terrace and to the north on the  same terrace in the property of Mr. Simms, we noticed  another site referred to as Gh Sw D.  Q    And whose site designation is that?  A    That is my designation using the Borden -- the  Borden system.  Q    Yes.  A   And a D as a lettering system for the sites we  recorded that summer.  RUSH:  Now, if you will just move ahead to figure 14.  COURT:  Are you going to come back to that?  RUSH:  Pardon me?  COURT:  Are you going to come back to that or can I ask what  is this site Gh Sw D, another pit?  WITNESS:  No.  That site was on the edge of Mr. Simms'  garden.  There actually is a photo plate of this in  the report.  If you are coming back to it, Mr. Rush, I am happy  to leave it.  THE COURT  MR  RUSH:  Q  A  I prefer to deal with it right now.  In the  description at page 3-12, it indicates that at this  particular point three black obsidian flakes were  found at the edge of the garden cultivated by Bruce  Simms?  Yes.  We found lithic materials at this site rather  than pit features and they were made of flakes of  obsidian and we found them along the edge of the  garden.  We did a test along the very edge of the  garden but he had his garden planted and we didn't 10411  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 want to disturb the garden area itself so our  2 investigation of the site was limited to just a few  3 pieces along the edge of it.  4 Q    Is the fact that you ascribed a separate site number  5 to this particular point, did it arise because of the  6 finding -- the separate findings of the three black  7 obsidian flakes?  8 A    Yes, and because of its separate -- its separation  9 from other site materials, or 200 metres north and  10 also on another, I believe to be, on another property.  11 MR. RUSH:  All right.  12 THE COURT:  Was it lying on the ground?  13 THE WITNESS:  Yes, they were just lying on the surface of the  14 ground along on the edge of his garden and being of  15 the obsidian which is very shiny and glassy, they  16 showed up very easily.  17 MR. RUSH:  18 Q    All right.  Now, I want to ask you about the figure  19 14 and this is an area at the south side of the  20 Chicago Creek and it's designated Gh Sw E-85?  21 A    Before we do go on, perhaps his honour would like to  22 refer to the photograph of that.  23 THE COURT:  I have looked at it.  24 THE WITNESS:  Oh, you did.  You found it.  25 THE COURT:  On the south side of Chicago.  2 6 MR. RUSH:  27 Q    Go ahead to figure 14.  28 A    Chicago Creek.  29 Q    Yes.  30 A    Yes.  This site is on the south side of the Skeena  31 on the south side of Chicago Creek.  At this site  32 there were a number of large featural remains again on  33 a narrow terrace above the river.  These features at  34 this site are quite large and rectangular.  35 THE COURT:  I think, Mr. Rush, I notice it is four o'clock.  How  36 long are you going to be on this particular item?  37 MR. RUSH:  I was -- this was the last item of the day.  3 8 THE COURT:  Yes.  39 MR. RUSH:  And I wasn't going to take very long.  Basically a  40 brief description.  41 THE COURT:  By all means.  Go ahead, please.  42 MR. RUSH:  43 Q    Thank you.  Just continuing with your description,  44 Miss Albright?  45 A    Yes.  These are large rectangular depressions and  46 there are also other depressions and features of  47 varying sizes and shapes.  Materials on the surface of 10412  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  the ground at this area are historic items since the  time of contact.  We did several shovel tests in the  area and they also yielded recent historic materials.  And from -- we determined this to be the site of the  historic or recent historic community of, known as  Seeley, which was a community at which some of the  river boats stopped at on their way up the river, so  this is not a precontact site but it is one we found  and one which I described in the report.  MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  That's as far as I was going to go today,  my lord.  THE COURT: Yes, all right. Well, I have — I'd like to leave  with counsel the suggestion that if we are at all at  risk, that we should sit tomorrow night.  I think in terms of my estimate, it is going to be a  little bit longer.  I am still aiming for noon  tomorrow but I don't think I will finish until early  afternoon.  Well, I just don't want to spring this on counsel  late tomorrow.  I don't think we have to decide now  but, if we are at risk, I think we ought to give  serious consideration to it.  MACAULAY:  Are you thinking of tomorrow night after eight,  that kind of thing?  COURT:  I am in counsel's hands.  MACAULAY:  I have some difficulty about later tomorrow  evening but my friend, Mr. Frey, will be here of  course, but if we could sit for a couple of hours  after four rather than coming back later at night, it  would be a great deal easier for me but I leave that  to your lordship.  MR. RUSH:  That's agreeable to me.  THE COURT:  That's agreeable to me with this change.  I think  that as we may find this to be a way of life with this  thing, we ought not to wear ourselves out and I find  if I can get away for an hour even that I am a lot  better, and I would be happy to adjourn at four and  come back at five and go for a couple of hours, or I'd  be happy to come back at seven for a couple of hours,  but I don't want to sit for four solid hours starting  at two and going to six or something like that.  I  think that's maybe unproductive but I would be happy  with either of the other arrangements.  If counsel  prefer that we just adjourn for an hour and start  again at five, that would be satisfactory.  Do you  think we should decide that now or can we leave that?  MR. RUSH:  Well, I am happy to decide it now.  I was going to  MR. RUSH  THE COURT  MR.  THE  MR. 10413  S.L. Albright (for Plaintiffs)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  make a counter proposal at 4:30, of taking a half hour  to accommodate my friend, Mr. Macaulay, but I am also  happy to go at five as well, but I think that's the  preferred option rather than to put us into the  evening.  WILLMS:  From my perspective, I would rather not sit in the  evening.  I would rather, as long as we can endure it,  get it done with before the evening.  Well, I am prepared to try it at 4:30, Mr. Rush.  We  will adjourn for half an hour and then go for another  two hours with maybe a short break at 5:30 and see how  that works out.  Fine, thank you.  Thank you.  Madam reporter, will you convey our  compliments to your management?  THE REPORTER:  Yes, I will, my lord.  THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court stands adjourned until  10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 4:07 P.M. TO JAN. 11, 1989)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein, transcribed to the  best of my skill and ability.  MR  THE COURT:  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  TANNIS DEFOE, Official Reporter  United Reporting Service Ltd.


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items