Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1989-10-02] British Columbia. Supreme Court Oct 2, 1989

Item Metadata

Download

Media
delgamuukw-1.0018422.pdf
Metadata
JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018422.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0018422-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0018422-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018422-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0018422-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0018422-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0018422-source.json
Full Text
delgamuukw-1.0018422-fulltext.txt
Citation
delgamuukw-1.0018422.ris

Full Text

 20069  Proceedings  1 VANCOUVER, B.C.  2 October 2, 1989  3  4 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  In the Supreme Court of British  5 Columbia, this 2nd day of October, 1989.  In the  6 matter of Delgamuukw versus Her Majesty the Queen, at  7 bar, my lord.  8 MR. RUSH:  I guess we're both popping on our feet at the same  9 time, my lord.  10 THE COURT:  Plaintiff first, I guess.  11 MR. RUSH:  I realize upon reviewing the transcript that we were  12 in fact to be here at 9:30, and --  13 THE COURT:  I didn't recall that.  14 MR. RUSH:  I don't either, my lord, and it seems that nobody  15 else did.  16 MR. GOLDIE:  Speak for yourself.  17 THE COURT:  Sorry about that, completely escaped my  18 recollection.  19 MR. RUSH:  My lord, perhaps one of the reasons why it had  20 escaped my recollection was that I was going to  21 propose that this discussion be deferred until  22 Wednesday.  A proposal has come to us from the  23 Province, they made certain recommendations, and on  24 other aspects of the issues considered we have yet to  25 take instructions fully, so my proposal is that this  26 discussion be put to Wednesday morning.  27 MR. MACAULAY:  My lord, neither Miss Koenigsberg nor I will be  28 here on Wednesday morning.  It's difficult, we have to  29 be elsewhere.  30 THE COURT:  Is any other day suitable, Mr. Rush?  31 MR. RUSH:  Any other day after Wednesday.  32 MR. MACAULAY:  Well, it's Wednesday, Thursday and Friday that we  33 will be away.  It's in connection with the preparation  34 of our case.  We will -- counsel will be here, of  35 course, representing the Attorney General.  36 THE COURT:  How about a week today?  37 MR. RUSH:  I think that we're into the holiday, of course, and  38 your lordship will be taking I think the Tuesday and  39 Wednesday away, so we will be looking next -- at the  40 next following Thursday.  41 THE COURT:  Oh, yes.  Well, I suppose that's not the end of the  42 world, is it, if we wait until Thursday, a week from  43 Thursday.  44 MR. MACAULAY:  Late tomorrow afternoon seems very much the same  45 to me as Wednesday morning, but that may not be the  46 case, of course, with Mr. Rush.  47 THE COURT:  Any possibility of that, Mr. Rush? 20070  Proceedings  1 MR. RUSH:  Yes, there is a possibility, but it is a question of  2 taking instructions on certain features.  3 THE COURT:  All right.  We'll leave it with you and we can speak  4 to it tomorrow afternoon.  If it's convenient to go  5 ahead, then we'll do so, and if it isn't, we will have  6 to find some other time.  7 MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  8 THE COURT:  All right, thank you.  Mr. Goldie, fix it for four  9 o'clock tomorrow afternoon after court, tentatively,  10 thank you.  11 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, my lord, that's convenient.  I should — Mr.  12 Grant raises another issue, and that is that there  13 have been certain discussions between counsel -- among  14 counsel dealing with the Morrell exhibits, and Mr.  15 Grant is prepared to speak to that tomorrow afternoon.  16 Since my learned friends from the federal defendant  17 won't be here for the rest of the week, perhaps that  18 can be done tomorrow afternoon as well.  19 THE COURT:  Yes.  We'll do that after the other discussion.  20 MR. GOLDIE:  My lord, there are several other things that I was  21 going to raise this morning.  I was under the  22 impression that we were to discuss scheduling at 9:30,  23 but obviously it's inconvenient, but I would like to  24 raise with my friends several things.  Firstly, the  25 scheduling for the rest of the Province's case.  And  26 I -- so far as I'm aware, this is the first time that  27 I have revised that since the estimate I gave in July,  28 and at that time several -- since that time several  29 things have happened which have made that schedule  30 obsolete.  My lord, I propose that the scheduling be  31 as follows:  That Dr. Farley's cross-examination and  32 re-examination be completed today, and that Dr.  33 Greenwood, who would be starting tomorrow, would be  34 completed by Friday, the 6th of October, that's four  35 days, and since we are not sitting on the 9th, 10th  36 and 11th of October, that Mr. Magwood commence on the  37 morning and be completed on the morning of the 13th  38 of --  3 9 THE COURT:  That's Magwood?  40 MR. GOLDIE:  Magwood, yes, my lord.  41 THE COURT:  And which day?  42 MR. GOLDIE:  The 13th of October.  4 3 THE COURT:  Yes.  44 MR. GOLDIE:  I'm sorry, the 12th of October.  4 5 THE COURT:  Yes.  46 MR. GOLDIE:  That's Thursday, and we're allowing a half day for  47 that. 20071  Proceedings  1 THE COURT:  Yes.  2 MR. GOLDIE:  And he would be followed by Mr. Williams, and we  3 would hope that Mr. Williams would be completed by the  4 17th or at the latest the 18th, and that Dr. Robinson  5 would be completed by the 19th, leaving --  6 MR. RUSH:  Completed by the 19th?  7 MR. GOLDIE:  Completed by the 19th, yes.  8 MR. RUSH:  One day?  9 MR. GOLDIE:  No, two days.  I'm hoping that Williams will be  10 completed by the 17th.  11 THE COURT:  Yes.  What day of the week are we getting to by  12 then?  13 MR. GOLDIE:  Wednesday is the 18th.  14 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  15 MR. GOLDIE:  And that would leave the 20th for any loose ends.  16 My lord, in order to accomplish this it will be  17 necessary to sit on Saturday the 14th, the evenings of  18 the 18th and 19th, and Saturday the 21st, primarily to  19 read in documents.  Now, I might say that I do not  20 intend to deal with the documents in the same detail  21 that I have dealt with the papers that were laid  22 before parliament.  I did that in order to provide  23 your lordship with a certain context, and I will be  24 dealing with the remaining documents much more  2 5 summarily.  26 THE COURT:  What were those days again, please?  27 MR. GOLDIE:  The Saturday the 14th of October.  28 THE COURT:  That's during the course of Mr. Williams' evidence.  29 MR. GOLDIE:  That's correct.  And I will propose that instead of  30 Mr. Williams continuing, that we devote the Saturday  31 to getting -- I won't say rid of documents, but  32 getting them filed.  33 THE COURT:  Getting past them.  34 MR. GOLDIE:  The 21st I anticipate will be necessary, if not for  35 documents, just to -- in order to ensure that we  36 complete on schedule.  Now, that timetable assumes  37 that cross-examination, if required, of one affidavit  38 relating to the fisheries licences which had been  39 marked for identification, and the -- there will be  40 two affidavits filed in respect of those, but the  41 cross-examination with respect to one would be done  42 out of court.  The other cross-examination would be  43 conducted here, or in court, as my understanding is  44 that the witness will be called by Canada as part of  45 its case, so that we would require or ask that our  46 friend consent to defer their cross-examination on  47 that affidavit until that witness is called by Canada. 20072  Proceedings  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 COURT  MR. RUSH  THE  MR.  MR.  MR.  That's —  COURT:  You mentioned some evenings.  GOLDIE:  Yes.  The evenings of the 18th and 19th, again for  documents.  Yes, all right.  Well, I will have to check and see  what I have in those evenings, if anything, and I will  certainly make every effort to move them if it -- if  the times are taken.  I hope they're not.  All right.  Well, I'm happy to sit in those times if that will see  us through the case in the time you mentioned.  Is  that acceptable to your fellow counsel?  Well, not really, my lord.  Firstly, despite that  what I had hoped on Friday, I cannot see completing  cross-examination of Dr. Farley today, and I think the  cross will definitely go into tomorrow.  In terms of  Dr. Greenwood, it had been scheduled that his  examination would -- both direct and cross, would take  one week.  That will now be truncated to possibly  three days, three and a half days.  COURT:  Well, we could sit Saturday.  GOLDIE:  Yes.  RUSH:  Yes.  I have no difficulty in sitting Saturday or any  difficulty in sitting later this week, that would be  convenient from my point of view, but I do raise those  questions.  Now, so far as Mr. Magwood goes, I don't  really see any difficulty in that time frame.  The  only other issue that I would raise with my friend is  that he mentions two affidavits with regard to fishing  licences.  Now, we don't have either of those  affidavits.  I can suspect what the affidavit would  contain, but I would like to know the witnesses and  what they're going to say.  It seems reasonable to do  that out of court, and I -- at this point I don't  really have -- I would like to reserve on our position  with regard to crossing the second affiant during the  course of the defendant federal government's case, but  I would like to see both of those affidavits before  making a decision on that.  Finally, with regard to  Dr. Robinson, I take it that my friend is saying that  October 17th and 18th, that is to say a day for direct  and a day for cross, would be sufficient for her  evidence, and if that is -- if I'm correct in my  understanding, I just would like to be clear on that,  because I -- I would have thought that her evidence  would take a little longer than that, but I could be  wrong.  GOLDIE:  Well, it may be so.  It may be that we've allotted 20073  Proceedings  1 too much time for Mr. Williams, and of course, if  2 that's the case, we'll try and -- Dr. Robinson would  3 be called immediately thereafter.  4 THE COURT:  Yes.  5 MR. GOLDIE:  My expectation is that Dr. Robinson will be at  6 least two days, and I had in mind the 18th and 19th  7 for that and maybe into Friday the 20th.  8 THE COURT:  Yes.  Well, you're scheduling on the basis that we  9 will try and finish by October 20th.  10 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, that's correct.  It's going to take, as I say,  11 some extra time, but it seems to be worth it to make  12 that effort.  13 THE COURT:  Yes.  What about the week of the 23rd.  It's a week  14 that we normally wouldn't sit, but should we explore  15 sitting that week if necessary to finish all these  16 matters?  17 MR. GOLDIE:  I have one matter that would take me out of town on  18 the 23rd and part of the 24th, and I will have to look  19 into that.  20 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  Well, your friends might look at  21 their calendars and see what they're doing.  I'm not  22 sure what I'm doing that week either, but it may be  23 that we should sit through a couple of these if  24 necessary.  Mr. Macaulay, will you be ready to proceed  25 with your case on the 30th?  26 MR. MACAULAY:  Well, my lord, we were going to suggest that we  27 start -- there's an appeal to the Supreme Court of  28 Canada in another of these cases, Pasco --  2 9 THE COURT:  Yes.  30 MR. MACAULAY:  On the 6th — 7th, rather.  And might I say  31 first, I am surprised to hear that the Province will  32 be finished its case on the -- or around the 20th.  33 The history of things so far I would think make it  34 prudent to add another few days to Mr. Goldie's  35 estimate.  I don't fault Mr. Goldie's estimate, but it  36 seems to me that cross-examination, if Dr. Farley is  37 any example, we can expect an extended  38 cross-examination of the other expert witnesses,  39 particularly Dr. Greenwood and Dr. Robinson.  I have  40 no way of estimating what the plaintiffs will do with  41 Mr. Williams.  What -- we would like affirmed -- we  42 would like to start on a day certain, if we can.  43 Getting ready for the 30th and then finding that we  44 start on the 7th or 8th is not satisfactory.  I might  45 say about our case, that suppose we did start on the  46 8th, we would be finished by the end of the month, if  47 all goes well.  And if the certain custodial 20074  Proceedings  1 cross-examinations take place during the down week we  2 will be introducing some documents, not these  3 fisheries permits, but other documents, they will be  4 custodial affidavits, and purely custodial affidavit,  5 and not by, you know, people with any special  6 knowledge of the matters in issue.  I would think that  7 could be dealt with during the off week, and if we  8 were to start on the 8th following the appeal to the  9 Supreme Court of Canada in the Pasco case, then we  10 could be finished by the end of November, leaving --  11 well, on December 1st actually, but leaving all of  12 December for any other matters.  Our schedule involves  13 an opening, in which we will deal with some commission  14 evidence and refer to some commission evidence that  15 had been taken and taken of -- in one case of an  16 Indian agent, a Mr. Boys(?), who is nearly 80, and it  17 was done on commission, and another was a former  18 fisheries officer in the claim area, a Mr. Giraud.  He  19 is ill and his commission evidence was taken.  We  20 intend to refer to documents in our opening, a number  21 of documents, and so that the opening will take a  22 couple of days, but that two days will be taken up  23 largely in dealing with documents that deal with  24 commission evidence, most of it.  Following that we  25 have a week of evidence from former Indian agents, and  26 then the last week will be taken up with evidence  27 concerning fisheries, so that we plan on having our  28 case completed within not much more than three weeks.  29 I mention all that, because if the court were inclined  30 to accede to our request, we start our case on the day  31 certain, that is on the 8th, we can be finished by the  32 end of November, beginning of December.  33 THE COURT:  Yes.  34 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, my lord, I wonder before my friend, Mr. Rush,  35 comments on that, I should say this:  That my  36 understanding was that Canada's case will take five  37 weeks, and my friend is now --  38 THE COURT:  Sounds like three weeks.  39 MR. MACAULAY:  We keep sharpening our pencil, as they say.  40 MR. GOLDIE:  I'm delighted, because that takes the pressure that  41 was on me, as far as I was concerned, was to ensure  42 that the evidence in this case was finished by the end  43 of the year, because everything relating to the  44 scheduling of the argument is based on that  45 assumption.  And I am relieved to hear that my friend  46 has sharpened his pencil and -- my friends, I should  47 say, have sharpened his and her pencils, and that my 20075  Proceedings  1 friend can take that because I have no doubt that  2 if -- it will become wearisome to sit evenings and  3 Saturdays and in the week off in order to accomplish  4 the objective.  5 THE COURT:  It raises the question if there's any need to sit  6 those extra days or evenings if we're not going to be  7 able to start the next defence until the 8th.  The  8 question, of course, is whether Mr. Macaulay or Miss  9 Koenigsberg or one or more of them or others can be  10 here for those other extra days if we don't sit at  11 night and Saturdays?  12 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, I would like to keep that open, because  13 particularly with respect to Dr. Greenwood, who is  14 from out of town, he's from the east, and it would be  15 a great pity if he was held here over the 9th, 10th  16 and 11th.  So I would like to keep open Saturday the  17 7th and the evenings possibly of this week.  18 THE COURT:  All right.  Well, I will block off those days, if I  19 possibly can, and I will check with you -- I'll check  20 with my schedule and report back right after the  21 morning break, but my inclination is to sit the extra  22 hours, even if Mr. Macaulay doesn't start until the  23 8th, just to give ourselves as much leeway as  24 possible.  25 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  I would -- the extra time that I was looking  26 for, as I say, is primarily to get rid of documents,  27 and I hope to deal with them fairly early.  My lord,  28 before -- I don't suggest this discussion is closed,  29 but I do want to raise a couple of other points that I  30 thought we would be dealing with this morning, and  31 just to leave them to ensure that they are going to be  32 dealt with, what is now four o'clock on Thursday, so  33 that we're all clear --  34 THE COURT:  No, four o'clock tomorrow.  35 MR. GOLDIE:  Four o'clock tomorrow.  3 6 THE COURT:  Yes.  37 MR. GOLDIE:  The items that I am concerned about is the  38 completion of the plaintiff's case, and by that I'm  39 talking about the resolution of the amendment to the  40 Statement of Claim, the disposition of the -- of the  41 Kitwancool documents, the final argument on business  42 records, and the item that my friend, Mr. Rush,  43 mentioned, Morrell.  I should say that we have been  44 holding off making some minor amendments to the  45 defence until the Statement of Claim was settled, and  46 what I will do is send to my friends today a letter  47 outlining the amendments to the defence so that if 20076  Proceedings  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  MR.  THE  MR.  possible we could deal with those tomorrow afternoon.  There -- we also wish to raise and fix a time for  disposing of other outstanding matters, and I refer in  that regard firstly to the better copies of maps,  marked during Mr. Morrison's evidence.  I am concerned  about seeing those before Dr. Farley leaves the stand,  as my friends were reminded of this on September the  13th.  THE COURT:  That's not hardly going to be possible, is it,  unless they're available right now.  RUSH:  They are.  COURT:  Well, of course, Dr. Farley is going to go into  tomorrow now.  GOLDIE:  The assurance was given that they would be  available when Mr. Morrison was in the stand.  COURT:  Yes, all right.  GOLDIE:  Those are the items that I hope we'll be able to  deal with tomorrow afternoon.  COURT:  All right.  RUSH:  Well, my lord, just a couple of points:  Firstly, the  question of the federal defendant's schedule.  It had  been my assumption, like Mr. Goldie's, that their case  would take up to five weeks, and part of that was  built on advice that I had received from them that  they would be tendering certain witnesses to prove  maps as a matter of in-court evidence.  Judging from  what has been said, the assumption they seem to be  proceeding on now, and I would like this confirmed, is  that those affients, should it be necessary to do so,  will be examined out of court, and I would -- I think  that needs to be clarified, because I think it bears  on the in-court schedule and certainly bears on the  amount of activity, if I can put it that way, in  relation to the federal defendant's --  COURT:  Mr. Macaulay is nodding I think affirmatively.  MACAULAY:  That's right, my lord.  I counted on the — I  considered those to be essentially custodial matters,  and we are waiting to hear from Mr. Rush which ones of  the maps ought to be the subject of  cross-examinations.  When we know that, then we can  produce the necessary person.  COURT:  All right.  RUSH: It's not so much the person at this point, my lord,  it's the question of time, when he proposes that can  be done.  MACAULAY:  Yes.  That was during the off week.  In other  words, I mentioned three weeks, or a little more than  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  MR. 20077  Proceedings  1 three weeks, I'm talking about court time.  2 THE COURT:  Yes.  3 MR. MACAULAY:  There is a — there is a down week during that  4 period, and I --  5 THE COURT:  Before your three weeks starts?  6 MR. MACAULAY:  No, during the three weeks.  7 THE COURT:  Oh, is there?  8 MR. GOLDIE:  The week of the 20th of November.  9 MR. MACAULAY:  Yes.  10 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  Is that satisfactory, Mr. Rush?  11 MR. RUSH:  Yes, I think so.  I think I understand that.  12 THE COURT:  All right, thank you.  13 MR. RUSH:  The other points, my lord, is that the questions to  14 be dealt with tomorrow afternoon, I agree with my  15 friend, Mr. Goldie, that these are matters that should  16 be dealt with.  I'm not sure we can deal with each and  17 every one of these tomorrow afternoon, and perhaps  18 what I can do is to discuss this with Mr. Grant and we  19 can certainly deal with the Morrell matter and perhaps  20 the question of the Statement of Claim amendments, but  21 barring that, I think it might be that we would have  22 to deal with some of these other issues later in the  23 week, or even a week Thursday, but it seems to me  24 these are not matters that are going to be simple  25 ones.  The reason that we're loading up at the end is  26 they presented some difficulty.  I think it may take  27 some argument on that, and I would like to be sure  28 that counsel who were involved in some of these other  29 issues, such as the business records arguments, are  30 available to do so.  Subject to that caveat, I see no  31 difficulty in at least raising them tommorrow and deal  32 with those that we can.  33 THE COURT:  Thank you.  34 MR. GOLDIE:  I appreciate when this was first discussed last  35 week that my friends were going to advise us of the  36 position they were taking on business records prior to  37 the argument, that was agreed upon.  38 THE COURT:  All right, thank you.  I notice that Mr. Plant isn't  39 here.  I have read these documents that Mr. Plant gave  40 me or delivered with his letter of September 15th  41 relating to what I think could be called the  42 Kitwancool Map Reserve?  43 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  44 THE COURT:  Is it convenient for me to deal with this in Mr.  45 Plant's absence?  46 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, I think so, my lord.  I was going to say that  47 was one of the items I referred to that we might deal 2007?  Proceedings  1 with tomorrow afternoon, but --  2 THE COURT:  Well, will Mr. Plant be here?  3 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, he could be.  If your lordship is -- it can be  4 dealt with now.  5 THE COURT:  I think it might be better if I do them now, because  6 I have read this collection of documents and I will  7 return it to Mr. Goldie, because I have concluded that  8 there is nothing in that material that is relevant to  9 the issues in this case.  But I extracted from it some  10 documents, being a report on the upper watershed of  11 the Kispiox River as a nature conservancy, dated in  12 1974, signed by -- well, I don't know if it's signed  13 by -- but it's referred to somewhere in it as being a  14 document submitted by Mr. Neil Sterritt and others,  15 and also a letter to Mr. Brian Price, northern zone  16 co-ordinator of British Columbia Parks Branch, dated  17 July 4th, 1974, which encloses that report that I just  18 mentioned signed by Mr. Clay, and also what appears to  19 be a response prepared jointly by the Parks Branch and  20 the Fish and Wildlife Branch in the Province, with an  21 attached commentary, a letter from Mr. Ahrens, dated  22 September 20th, 1974, to Mr. Waddell, and a copy of a  23 letter from Mr. A.F. Smith to Mr. Ahrens, I guess it  24 is, and I think those documents, some of which I think  25 we have seen already, but I think those documents are  26 produceable, if they have not already been produced,  27 and should be shown to the plaintiffs.  Mr. Goldie, in  2 8 that I found in this bundle the documents should have  29 been in the other bundle, it's a notation that does  30 not relate to the matters that I think should be  31 disclosed, and that document should be put back in  32 your file, but those separate documents, which I have  33 described, in my view, should be produced to the  34 plaintiffs.  35 MR. GOLDIE:  My lord, if I could have the documents which your  36 lordship extracted, I will have copies made and --  37 THE COURT:  Yes.  That's why I —  38 MR. GOLDIE:  I will check to see whether they have been listed.  39 THE COURT:  That's why I listed them in the way I did.  40 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you, my lord.  41 THE COURT:  Now, in addition I have to say that in the letter  42 which Mr. Plant sent me and which a copy was sent on  43 to Mr. Evans, Mr. Macaulay, Mr. Plant confirmed that  44 he had extracted from this collection those documents  45 which he thought were privileged, and of course I have  46 not seen those documents.  47 MR. GOLDIE:  Those were the subject matter of the submissions 20079  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  that were made on Friday, my lord, by Mr. Grant and by  Mr. -- Mr. Plant and your lordship was -- a list was  handed up which indicated the description of each of  the privileged documents.  The matter was left, as I  understand it, that if Mr. Grant wished to make any  further representations he was at liberty to do so.  COURT:  Yes, all right.  I'll hear from Mr. Grant in due  course, if he wishes to pursue the matter.  Are you  ready to proceed, Mr. Rush?  Thank you.  Call the  witness, please.  REGISTRAR:  Yes.  ALBERT LEONARD FARLEY:  Recalled  REGISTRAR:  May I remind you, sir, you are still under oath.  A   Yes.  REGISTRAR:  Thank you.  And would you state your name for  the record, please?  A  Albert Leonard Farley, F-a-r-1-e-y.  REGISTRAR:  Thank you, sir.  5S-EXAMINATION BY MR. RUSH CONTINUED:  Q   Dr. Farley, I'm going to refer you to your folio of  maps again, please?  A   Yes.  Q   And I would like to refer you to the Mitchell map at  map 10, and I would particularly ask you, if you will,  to look at part 2?  A   Yes.  Q   I think you have part 2 there, do you?  A   Yes.  RUSH:  Just ask you to take that out, Dr. Farley, and have  that available to you.  And, my lord, I'm going to  show the witness another -- a map in three parts, just  going to hand this up to you now in the pouch, and  this can be inserted at tab 5 of the plaintiff's  document book.  GOLDIE:  Excuse me, would you wait until I finish looking at  it, please.  RUSH:  Yes.  COURT:  That's Exhibit 1154.  REGISTRAR:  Tab 5.  RUSH:  Tab 5, my Lord.  GOLDIE:  Can I ask my friend if this has been disclosed?  RUSH:  Yes, you disclosed it.  This is the other part of the  Mitchell map.  GOLDIE:  I'm sorry, I don't think we -- I don't recall  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  THE  8  9  10  11  THE  12  13  14  15  THE  16  17  THE  18  19  20  THE  21  22  CRO  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  MR.  33  34  35  36  37  38  MR.  39  40  MR.  41  THE  42  THE  43  MR.  44  MR.  45  MR.  46  47  MR. 20080  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 disclosing this.  2 MR. RUSH:  No, you didn't disclose this part of it.  3 MR. GOLDIE:  We didn't have it.  4 MR. RUSH:  My lord, you will recall that parts 1 and 2 of the  5 Mitchell map were disclosed and then --  6 THE COURT:  And 3, I think.  7 MR. RUSH:  And then during the examination of Dr. Farley part 3  8 was disclosed, and questions were raised about the  9 remaining portions of it, and I took the liberty to  10 get the remaining portions and I have those here, and  11 I would like to show those to the witness.  12 MR. GOLDIE:  I agree with that, except, my lord, the part 3 was  13 sent to my friend before Dr. Farley's examination.  14 MR. RUSH:  15 Q   Now, Dr. Farley -- this is a map, my lord, in three  16 parts, and I'll just explain it.  It's a reduced  17 version of the Mitchell map, part 3 of 4 on the  18 first -- the first in the sequence.  The second is 1  19 of 4, which I'm going to ask Dr. Farley to confirm is  20 in fact map number 10 in his folio, 2 of 2, and then  21 the last of the three maps is in fact a blown-up  22 version of the first of the three.  Now, Dr. Farley,  23 I'm just showing you this portion of the Mitchell map,  24 and I would like you to compare the second page of the  25 three that I've handed to you, and I wonder if you can  26 confirm for me that it is a reduced copy of the  27 Mitchell map part 2 of 2, which is map 10 in your  28 folio?  29 A   Yes.  This appears to be a reduction of the Mitchell  30 map of this northwestern portion of the Mitchell map.  31 Q   Thank you.  Now, I would like you to look now at the  32 first of these maps, and I wonder if you can compare  33 by comparison to the Mitchell map part 2 of 2, folio  34 10, that it is the southwestern portion of the  35 Mitchell map?  It might be more convenient for you to  36 compare the two reduced copies.  Now, if you will just  37 compare those two documents?  38 A   It's a little difficult to do, because clearly this is  39 the southwestern portion.  40 Q   Yes, but if you fit the part 2 of 2 in -- of your map  41 10 with the first of the three maps, which is 3 of 4,  42 you will see that they fit together?  43 A   Yes.  I can accept that without going into the detail  44 of comparison.  45 Q   You will see, Dr. Farley, that the National Map  46 Collection archival number 001573/4 is the same as the  47 MMC50157343-4? 20081  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  A  8  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  A  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  33  34  35  36  MR. RUSH:  37  38  39  40  THE COURT  41  MR. RUSH:  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  Correct.  All right.  Now, Dr. Farley, I just would like you  to -- I would like to ask you if in fact you have, in  the preparation of your evidence, did you make  reference to that southwest portion of the Mitchell  map of 17 55?  When you say "make reference", you mean in the written  submission?  No.  Have you reviewed it before?  Yes.  So that you can confirm by -- from your earlier  knowledge that the map that I'm now showing you is the  reduced portion of the southwest section of the  Mitchell map, is in fact the Mitchell map depicting  that portion?  Yes.  Now, can you tell me why you did not include that as  part of the Mitchell map in your folio?  Well, if you will recall, the Mitchell map is a huge  map, if I remember correctly, the scale of something  like 32 miles to the inch, and just as a matter of  convenience and managing the map, it seems to me  appropriate to include -- or rather to exclude the  southern section for convenience, just in the sheer  size of handling these sheets, or the inconvenience,  rather, of handling that size sheet.  You will agree with me, however, that the reduced  portion of the southwest section of the Mitchell map  I've showed you this morning shows the full length of  the Ohio River running in a northeasterly direction?  Yes.  I find that the reduced copy, to be honest, is  difficult to read.  I can certainly see the Ohio  River, I agree with you, but I'm afraid I cannot read  the notations that are on the map except those that  are in the larger lettering.  All right.  Well, I want to direct your attention now  to what is a blown-up version of the southwest portion  and to the text that's in the upper left-hand corner  of the map.  Now, my lord, do you have the third map?  :  Yes.  Are you with me there, Dr. Farley?  Yes.  And I want to direct your attention to the note that  appears at the left-hand margin of the map, and I  would ask you if you can agree with me that it says  the following, and if you'll read along with me: 20082  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 "The heads and sources of these rivers and the  2 countries beyond the bounds of this map are not  3 well known.  It is generally allowed to be 18  4 degrees of longitude from the forks of the  5 Mississippi to the mountains of New Mexico,  6 whereas it is but 13 degrees from fence to the  7 Atlantic Ocean by which we see that Louisiana,  8 which was granted by Louis the 14th"  9  10 Are you with me?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q  13 "To New Mexico is much larger west of the  14 Mississippi than all our Colonies together would  15 be" --  16  17 A   "Taken together".  18 MR. RUSH:  19 "than all our Colonies taken together would be if  20 extended to the Mississippi.  Canada again is  21 larger than either of these.  If we extend these  22 two Colonies to the Allegheny Mountains, as we see  23 done in the French maps, they include 9/10ths  24 of all the countries here laid down."  25  26 You agree with that, that I properly read with --  27 MR. GOLDIE:  Are you going to read the next two sentences?  2 8    MR. RUSH:  29 Q   Do you agree with where I am, Dr. Farley?  30 A   Yes, so far.  31 Q  32 "This claim would be much larger than the French  33 themselves imagine it, who lay down the  34 Appalachian Mountains much farther west than the  35 surveys and actual--"  36  37 A   I think it's "mensurations".  38 Q  39 "mensurations here numbered undoubtedly show them  40 to be."  41  42 A   Yes, that's a reasonable statement.  43 Q   All right.  Now, Dr. Farley, based on that Mitchell  44 text, you would certainly agree with me that Mitchell  45 believed Canada covered a much larger area to the west  46 than he indicated within the bounds of this map?  47 A  Well, that -- the statement indicates that, yes. 20083  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam 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  A  A  And in terms of the state of mind of the cartographers  in that period, don't you agree that that was relevant  to your consideration in your evidence?  Well, not particularly.  At least I didn't perceive it  that way.  As I pointed out repeatedly in the  submission I made, the cartographers of the time  simply did not know where Canada's boundaries extended  to in the west, nor did they know the extent of North  America in the west, other than, yes, they knew  approximately at this time, approximately, what the  trend of the coast was up to the entrance of Martin  Aguilar.  Well, I'll come back to that, Dr. Farley, but in terms  of this, I suggest to you that would it not be more  explanatory of Mitchell's state of mind to include all  of the sections of the map to indicate what he knew of  the land mass west of the Mississippi?  Well, if I may say so, this might have been done with  any of the maps.  The fact of the matter is the  Mitchell map is a large scale map, as I've indicated,  and to reduce that down to a size appropriate to what  I thought would be appropriate for the court to  examine, to reduce that down probably would be  defeating the purpose.  I suppose that depends on the purpose.  Now, Dr.  Farley -- thank you, I will just ask you to fold this  up, my lord.  I would like that to be the next tab,  and it would be -- I suggest the order of these being  the southwestern portion 3 of 4 first, the  northwestern portion 1 of 4 first, and the enlarged  portion being the third part.  :  1154-5A, B, and C.  Thank you.  :  And they will be inserted as tab 5.  (EXHIBIT 1154-5A - Southwest portion of 1755  Mitchell Map)  (EXHIBIT 1154-5B - Northwest portion of 1755  Mitchell Map - Reduced)  (EXHIBIT 1154-5C - Northwest corner of southwest  section of Mitchell map)  MR. RUSH:  Q   Thank you.  Now, Dr. Farley, I would like you, please,  to turn to map 12 in your folio.  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT 20084  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  THE COURT  7  MR. RUSH:  8  9  10  11  12  13  MR. GOLDI  14  MR. RUSH:  15  Q  16  17  18  19  A  20  Q  21  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  31  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  Q  47  Yes.  Which is a copy of the Bowen map of 1763?  Yes.  Do you have it?  Yes.  :  Do we put this Mitchell map away?  Yes, my lord, thank you.  Now, Dr. Farley -- perhaps  the original of the Bowen map can be shown to Dr.  Farley in this part, I think it's part 2 of 2.  I'm  going to show you the original of this, Dr. Farley, so  you can compare it with the copy.  The original is  somewhat better.  £:  It is a photograph, of course, of the original.  Now, if you can just confirm for me, Dr. Farley, that  I'm directing your attention into the upper left-hand  corner of the -- of the map, and just compare it with  the copy that you have?  Yes.  Now, there is a notation in the upper left-hand  corner.  Do you know what that refers to?  It refers to the file in the British archives.  In the British archives?  Well, the London record office, yes.  All right.  Now, you have the inset; you see where the  inset is located?  Yes.  And from your -- would you agree with me, Dr. Farley,  from your knowledge of the French cartography and the  earlier British or English maps which you have  examined, that by placing the inset in this position  Mr. Bowen was not indicating a lack of knowledge of  what was in that area of North America?  Excuse me, he was not indicating?  Not indicating?  Well, I couldn't agree with that.  I would say that  the upper left-hand corner of this map, of the base  map itself, is the place for which there was the least  available information, and that that therefore was the  convenient spot for the inset, and this is not an  unusual arrangement, or at least a decision for  cartographers of that time to have made, to put an  inset, if they want to include one in the area where  there is least information.  In fact, it's done today,  it's common cartographic practise.  I think you've already agreed with me, however, that  Bellin in 1755 had mapped to the west of what is shown 20085  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 on this map; is that correct?  2 A  Well, he had shown on his maps information for that  3 area, but as we well know by comparing the lands maps  4 with the contemporary maps, there was a great deal of  5 distortion of distances and direction and size.  6 MR. RUSH:  I'm not asking you to compare it to contemporary  7 maps, Dr. Farley, I'm asking you to agree with me  8 about what the cartographic state of knowledge was at  9 the time that Bellin did his 1755 map.  10 MR. GOLDIE:  That's what he was answering you.  11 MR. RUSH:  No, he wasn't, not if -- he was answering in relation  12 to what the maps are today.  13 MR. GOLDIE:  He didn't talk about the maps of today.  14 MR. RUSH:  15 Q   Well, he did.  Now, I'm asking you to direct your  16 attention, Dr. Farley, specifically to the question  17 that I'm putting to you, and that is that in 1755 your  18 map number 14, Bellin had himself mapped the area to  19 the west in the area which is now the -- which on the  20 Bowen map, your map number 12, where this inset  21 appears on that map?  22 A   He had represented information for that area.  The  23 quality of the information was low, and on that  24 account Mitchell may well -- or Bowen, rather, may  25 well have decided not to represent that.  That was a  26 good place there for an inset.  27 Q   Well, then it would be surprising to you on that that  28 he represented the topographical features of the Du  29 Fonte stories?  30 A  Well, again, try to answer these questions from an  31 academic point of view, or at least from a scholarly  32 point of view.  The underlying point in all of this is  33 that there was an absence -- an absence of hard  34 information, and by hard information, I mean position,  35 co-ordinate position in latitude and longitude.  There  36 was an absence of that, and there was very little  37 information anyway, and such that was available was  38 rather fragmentary.  So you might say well, how can  39 one project one's own mind into the mind of the  40 cartographer of the time.  It's very difficult to do.  41 Q   I'm not asking you to do that, and you're a  42 cartographer, Dr. Farley?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   This is your specialty?  45 A   Yes.  46 Q   And so I would assume that you would have knowledge of  47 the history of the maps and the connections of one 20086  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 cartographer's knowledge to another, correct?  2 A   I'm not sure what you mean by connections of one  3 cartographer.  4 Q   Well, Bowen would gather his information from other  5 cartographic sources, wouldn't he?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   And Bellin is likely one of those sources; isn't that  8 right?  9 A   I think quite likely, yes.  10 Q   And De L'isle is probably one of his?  11 A   Possibly, yes.  12 Q   Dr. Farley, I want you to look at the inset in the  13 upper left-hand corner, and you'll notice in the upper  14 left-hand corner of the inset Bowen makes reference to  15 the Lake Du Fonte discovered 1640?  16 A   Yes.  17 Q   Correct?  18 A   Yes.  But I notice also that that representation is in  19 a dotted line, which suggests to me that it's a very  20 tenuous information.  21 Q   He puts it on the map, doesn't he, Dr. Farley?  22 A   Yes.  It's on the map, yes.  23 Q   And that was presumably the state of his knowledge at  24 the time, correct?  25 A   Yes, ignorance, essentially ignorance for that area.  26 Q   I see.  And you will notice that he says -- Dr.  27 Farley, if you look to that portion of the inset, he  28 states:  "This lake is from 20 to 60 fathoms deep."  29 Do you see that?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   And there is a strait leading to a small lake,  32 Ronquille?  33 A   Yes.  34 Q   And you will see stated there to be an Indian town?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   Now, do you know where Bowen would have got that  37 information?  38 A   Probably a mixture of French sources and translations  39 of the La Hontan account -- sorry of the Du Fonte  40 narrative.  41 Q   Yes, all right, thank you.  You can set that aside,  42 Dr. Farley.  I would like you -- like to show you now,  43 Dr. Farley, a map, and this map is entitled "Map of  44 the new discoveries to the north of the South Sea".  45 And this is dated 1752, and it is attributed to Joseph  46 Nicholas De L'isle and Phillip Buache?  47 A   Yes. 20087  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 MR. GOLDIE:  Has this been disclosed?  2 MR. RUSH:  This is on your document list 1185.  3 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you.  That's the A.G.B.C. list?  4 MR. RUSH:  5 Q   That's correct.  Now, Dr. Farley, have you seen this  6 map before?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   And can you tell us who Phillip Buache is, please?  9 A   Phillip Buache was a French cartographer, if memory  10 serves me correctly, he was a member of the French  11 Academy and was related to J.N. De L'isle.  12 MR. RUSH:  Now, Dr. Farley — my lord, I would like this to be  13 tab 6 in the binder, please.  14 THE COURT:  Yes, all right.  15 THE REGISTRAR:  1154-6.  16  17 (EXHIBIT 1154-6 - De L'Isle-Buache map - 1752)  18  19 MR. RUSH:  20 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, I would like you, if you will please,  21 to just turn to tab 19, or folio map number 19, and  22 this is J.N. De L'Isle's map of 1752.  And I would  23 just like you to compare the Buache map of 1752 and  24 the De L'isle map of 1752 in the northwest of North  25 America, and I would ask you if you can agree with me  26 that they are similar in the topography that is  27 disclosed there?  28 A   Yes.  They are similar, they are not identical, but  2 9 similar.  30 Q   Did you consult the Buache map when preparing your  31 opinion?  32 A   Yes.  33 Q   Is there a reason you didn't include it in your folio?  34 A   Not -- no particular reason, except the copy that I  35 have included is a sharper copy and reproduced rather  36 well.  37 Q   Excuse me.  You will notice, Dr. Farley, that above  38 the "Mer" or Bay -- Sea or Bay of the West on the  39 Buache 1752 map, there is a topographical feature  40 shown as the Lac Du Fonte?  41 A   Yes.  42 Q   That would come from the Du Fonte disclosure, would it  43 not, or accounts?  44 A   From that account, yes.  45 Q   Yes.  And do you see that it says to the left of that  46 lake "Discovered by Admiral Du Fonte in 1640"?  47 A   I'm sorry, I can't pick that up. 200?  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  Q  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  A  13  Q  14  A  15  THE COURT  16  A  17  MR. RUSH:  18  THE COURT  19  MR. RUSH:  20  Q  21  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  A  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  Q  36  37  38  39  40  A  41  42  43  44  45  46  Q  47  All right.  Just let me see if I can find that.  Yes.  We're -- it's in the larger print, Dr. Farley.  You  see it just under the word "Terre"?  Yes.  Discovered by Admiral Du Fonte, 1640?  Yes.  And you will see there as well, Dr. Farley, a  reference to Lac Ronquille?  Yes.  And you will also note that there is an indication in  French of Indian town?  Yes.  Or Indian village?  Yes.  :  Where is the 1640, I haven't found that, please.  Sorry, my lord.  "Discovered by Admiral Du Fonte, 1640".  :  I see, yes, thank you.  Dr. Farley, keeping in mind the inset on the northwest  section of the Bowen map number 12 --  Yes.  -- where these -- these words also appeared --  Yes.  -- can you agree with me that it is likely that Bowen  took the information shown on that inset from the 1752  De L'Isle-Buache map?  I can't agree with that entirely, in that Bowen may  well have had access to a translation of the Du Fonte  narrative and indeed that narrative was popular in  England for the very reason that I mentioned in my  report, that is that English merchants were very  interested in finding a northwest passage, and that  whole concept had its best audience in Britain.  All right.  Dr. Farley, can you think of any other  source, direct source, for Bowen's knowledge as  depicted in that inset in the Northwest section of the  Bowen map number 12, except the De L'Isle-Buache map  of 1752?  Well, as I've already indicated, he may well have  derived it from the De L'isle, but not necessarily.  I  find that a very difficult question to answer.  How  would I know, how would one possibly know at this time  what was in the mind of Mr. Bowen when he prepared the  map.  By the comparison of what's on the inset to the De  L'Isle-Buache map of 1752? 20089  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  A  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  15  16  17  18  Q  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  A  26    ]  MR. GOLD  27  28    ]  MR. RUSH  29  Q  30  31  32  A  33  34  Q  35  A  36  Q  37  A  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  Q  46  A  47  Yes.  Excuse me, if I may finish the question.  And by the  comparison of the topographical features depicted?  Yes.  And if you look at the Du Fonte account, you  will see that he could have derived it from the Du  Fonte account.  Well, I simply suggest to you, Dr. Farley, that Bowen,  when he prepared that 1763 map, which is your map  number 12, had far more knowledge about topographical  and geographical features to the west of the border of  his map than was depicted on it; do you agree with  that?  Well, it depends on how you interpret the word  "information".  If we're talking about hard  information, no.  And I think even in Bowen's time  there was some scepticism about the whole Du Fonte  narrative.  Yes.  There was scepticism, but, Dr. Farley, I'm  simply drawing your attention to the fact that Bowen,  if, as I suggest to you, and you haven't agreed with  this, that he -- it is likely that he took the Du  Fonte depiction from this Buache 1752 map, that is it  not the case that Bowen would have had knowledge of  this map and as well what is depicted on it?  Well —  3:  Assuming the witness has not agreed with my  friend's assumption.  Well, I'll take the assumption out, Dr. Farley.  Isn't  it the case that it's likely that Bowen had knowledge  of the depictions shown on the Buache 1752 map?  It's quite possible that he had that knowledge.  May I  make an observation concerning this map?  This map --  Which map now?  This is the De L'isle map.  The De L'Isle-Buache, 1752?  Yes.  Came under fire from fellow admonitions in  Paris, virtually the moment it was published there was  a good deal of criticism of it, and especially again  among De L'Isle's academic colleagues at the academy  in Paris.  It had a better reception in Britain for  the very reason I've outlined, namely merchants of the  time were interested, very interested in continuing  the search for a Northwest passage, so --  It would --  So trying to put myself in the position that Bowen was  in at the time, he may well have felt what's the point 20090  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 in including this other than in a very tentative way  2 and only in the inset for Hudson Bay.  3 Q   But I think you will agree with me, Dr. Farley, that  4 in Britain at the time the depictions shown on the De  5 L'Isle-Buache map of 1752 were widely known?  6 A  Well, one can make that assumption.  7 Q   No.  You know that as a matter of historical  8 cartographic research, don't you?  9 A   Could you restate the question?  10 Q   Yes.  You know as a matter of historical cartographic  11 research that that map, the De L'Isle-Buache 1752 map,  12 was widely circulated in Britain, and the depictions  13 on it were known widely?  14 A   Yes.  They were widely known.  15 MR. RUSH:  And likely to —  16 MR. GOLDIE:  I don't think he had finished.  17 MR. RUSH:  18 Q   Yes, go ahead?  19 A  Well, again I'm trying to make the point, it's not  20 possible for one to know the extent to which Bowen  21 relied upon such information for his map and the  22 depiction that appears in the inset portion of that  23 map.  We can make the assumption that he did, but we  24 don't know that.  25 MR. RUSH:  Yes, thank you, sir.  I would like that to be the  26 next tab 6, please.  2 7 THE COURT:  Yes.  2 8 MR. RUSH:  29 Q   And Dr. Farley, I would now ask you to turn to your  30 map 16 in your folio.  Now, this is Bowen's map, I  31 think it's been referred to as 1777?  32 A   Yes.  33 Q   Are you -- do you have that map, Dr. Farley?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   And I think you said that you believed it was taken  36 from an atlas by Thomas Jeffreys?  37 A   Yes, from The American Atlas.  38 Q   All right.  I want to show you -- I would like to  39 refer the witness to another map, please.  Now, Dr.  40 Farley, I'm showing you another Bowen map of North  41 America, and I just ask you to set the two maps side  42 by side, if you will.  All right.  So you have your  43 map number 16 and this Bowen map, and you will agree  44 with me that it indicates in the cartouche that it was  45 engraved by Emanuel Bowen?  46 A   Yes.  47 Q   And do you recognize this, Dr. Farley? 20091  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  This is a reduced copy -- no, it is not, I'm  2 sorry.  I thought it was a reduced copy of the one  3 that I have, but it is not.  4 Q   All right.  It's -- Dr. Farley, it's identified in the  5 Province's supplementary list of documents as being  6 dated 1772?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   Does that accord with your understanding?  9 A   Yes.  Well, it does, if I recall correctly, Jeffreys  10 and Bowen collaborated on a number of the maps, and as  11 I stated in my report -- my opinion, it's difficult to  12 know the details of authorship for the individual  13 maps, but generally this map appears to be similar to  14 the one that I have included, and therefore we could  15 say it -- at least authorities regard it as being  16 primarily Bowen's work.  17 Q   All right.  This —  18 A  May I just make an observation about the date.  The  19 atlas was published -- that is the second edition from  20 which the copy I have included in my folio of maps,  21 second edition was published in 1777, late '76 or  22 early '77.  Well, I think that's —  23 Q   All right.  What I would like to do, Dr. Farley, is we  24 have these two maps in front of you, the 1772 Bowen,  25 the one that's map number 16 in your folio, which is  26 1777, and I would just like now to place before you,  27 and I am sorry that this is as awkward as it is, but I  28 am placing the original Bowen 1763 map in front of  29 you, and I ask you if you can agree with me that in  30 terms of the area north and northwest of Lake Superior  31 that the three maps are virtually identical?  32 A   No.  I -- just looking at the photographic copy museum  33 from the British Records Office, they are not  34 identical, a number of differences in the features  35 there.  Now, comparing --  36 Q   Between which?  37 A   Between that.  38 Q   The 1763 Bowen —  39 A  And this copy you just presented me with.  40 Q   And the 1772.  Now, can you tell me, as comparing the  41 1772 and the 1777, I think you indicated a few moments  42 ago that they were virtually identical, are they?  43 A   Yes, they're very similar.  I can't say they're  44 identical, it would take me some time to look at all  45 the details.  46 Q   Yes.  I'm just asking you to make that assessment of  47 the north and northwest portion of the land mass north 20092  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 and northwest of Lake Superior?  2 A   Yes.  3 Q   Are you with me?  4 A   Yes.  5 Q   All right.  And if you will look on your map 16 --  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   Do you see where it -- the Mississippi is located  8 there, Dr. Farley?  9 A   You mean the Mississippi?  10 Q   Mississippi River?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   And you see there that it says "Head is unknown"?  13 A   Yes.  "Mississippi R, whose head is unknown"; is that  14 the statement?  15 Q   Yes.  You will agree with me, Dr. Farley, that Mr.  16 Bowen's inscription on his 1772 and 1773 -- excuse  17 me -- 1772 and 1777 map is different from what he put  18 on his map of 1763.  19 A   Yes.  20 Q   Insofar as what he says about the source of the  21 Mississippi?  22 A   Yes.  He says -- if I may read it out to the court?  23 Q   Yes, go ahead.  24 A   On the photographic copy from the London records  25 office:  26  27 "Mississippi R, it's head very uncertain, situated,  28 according to the Indians, in the very marshy  29 country above the 50th degree of latitude."  30  31 Q   So certainly in respect -- in that one feature there  32 is a difference in terms of his inscriptions; you will  33 agree with that?  34 A   In terms of the statements included in the  35 general area of the headwaters of the Mississippi,  36 yes.  37 Q   All right.  And for that purpose, Dr. Farley, you've  38 compared the Bowen -- the photographic copy, Bowen's  39 1763 map, and Bowen's 1777 map, which is your number  40 16?  41 A   Yes.  42 Q   All right, thank you.  Now, I just want to ask you  43 again, Dr. Farley, that you will agree with me that  44 the topography north of Lake Superior on Bowen's 1763  45 is markedly different from the topography that's shown  46 on his 1772 and 1777 maps, and I'm talking principally  47 about what is referred to as the Kristano Lake? 20093  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  When you referred to topography, you're not  2 referring to the representation of terrain but rather  3 to the drainage?  4 Q   No.  I'm sorry, I misspoke there.  I'm referring to  5 the depiction of the geographic features north of Lake  6 Superior?  7 A   Yes.  There's a difference between the London records  8 office copy and the -- sorry -- there's a difference  9 between the 1763 edition and the 1777 edition.  10 Q   And the 1772 as well, which is in front of you here?  11 A  Well, yes.  The 1772 and '77 are similar.  12 MR. RUSH:  All right, thank you.  13 THE COURT:  Would this be convenient to adjourn, Mr. Rush?  14 MR. RUSH:  Thank you, my lord.  15 THE COURT:  Thank you.  16 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court is adjourned for a short  17 recess.  18  19 (MORNING RECESS TAKEN AT 11:15)  20  21 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  22 a true and accurate transcript of the  23 proceedings herein transcribed to the  24 best of my skill and ability  25  26  27  28  29 Graham D. Parker  30 Official Reporter  31 United Reporting Service Ltd.  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47 20094  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  CROSS-EXA  4  MR.  RUSH:  5  Q  6  7  8  A  9  Q  10  11  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  19  A  20  Q  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  Q  26  27  A  28  29  30  31  THE  COURT  32  A  33  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  A  36  37  MR.  RUSH:  38  THE  COURT  39  40  MR.  RUSH:  41  A  42  THE  COURT  43  MR.  RUSH:  44  Q  45  46  47  (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED FOLLOWING SHORT RECESS)  EXAMINATION BY MR. RUSH: (Continued)  Dr. Farley, if you will refer to the Bowen, 1763, the  photographic copy, and you have the Bowen 1777 and  1772 maps in front of you as well?  Yes.  I just ask you to agree with me, if you can, that  Kristono Lake, and the Assiniboils Lake, which appears  north of what I think you will agree is Lake Nipigon  on Bowen's 1763 map, that those are no longer depicted  in that location on the 1772 or 1777 maps?  Yes, that's correct.  Thank you. Now if you will just keep the maps in front  of you, if you look at the 1777 map, that's the last  of the three in front of you, you will see in the  upper left hand corner it says "parts unknown"?  Yes.  And there appears Lake Ouinipigon or Winnipeg?  Yes.  And you will see the at top edge of the maps, Ox Head  Strait?  Yes.  And I think you have agreed that the place and the  depiction of that lake is the modern Lake Winnipeg?  Yes, that I believe was the intent there to represent  information for the, what I have referred to in  earlier testimony as the Great Lakes, this is the  location, my lord.  :  Just that one and not this one?  Well, there is a reference a moment ago, my lord, to  Lake Kristono, which is shown    Lake Kristono, I referred him to the Bowen 1763.  This would be the counterpart to modern day Lake  Nipigon.  And that's Lake Ouinipigon.  :  And what you're talking about the present Lake  Winnipeg is this one.  That's shown on the 1777 map?  Yes.  :  Thank you.  The point I wanted to come to, Dr. Farley, was that by  1777 Bowen had placed Lake Winnipeg at a geographic  location quite different from where he placed it in  his map of 1763? 20095  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  '  2  3  4  1  5  Q  6  7  i  8  9  A  10  Q  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  15  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  MR. GOLDIE  24  MR. RUSH:  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  A  29  Q  30  31  32  33  A  34  35  Q  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  i  44  45  i  46  47  A  Well, on the 1763 there is a reference to, well which  we would say was the name, the early name given to  Lake Winnipeg, and on the 1777 map the location is  different.  Yes.  And now, if you look at the 1777 map, Dr.  Farley, you will notice that just to the right of Lake  Winnipeg there is an inscription and this says "these  parts according to Mr. Jeremy are..."  "...are more temperate than Hudson's."  Hudson's Bay?  Right.  Do you know who Mr. Jeremy was?  I cannot recall whether Jeremy was associated with the  French expedition in that area or whether he was with  the York Factory group, the British group.  All right.  Well, Dr. Farley, I apologize for doing  this, I am going to place yet another map in front of  you and I would like you to keep the three that are  there.  And, hopefully, this will all become clear at  the end of the day.  Now, Dr. Farley, I am placing, fortunately, a more  handable size of a map, by Mr. Buache again.  :  Is this one of your productions or ours?  This is one of yours, 4916.  Now Dr. Farley, you will notice that the date is 1754?  Yes.  And you're familiar with this map, are you?  Yes.  And if you look in the cartouche in the left-hand side  you will note it states, and I will suggest a  rendering of the French here, "Physical map showing  the highest lands in the western part of Canada"?  Yes, "the highest land in the western part of Canada",  yes .  I will just carry on with this, "where you will see  the new discoveries of the French officers to the west  of Lake Superior"?  Yes.  "With the rivers and lakes which Mr. Jeremy spoke  about in his relation of Hudson's Bay"?  Yes.  Now, Mr. Philippe Buache, who is the maker of this  map, which is the 1754 map that I now produce to you,  he is the same French cartographer who drew the 1752  map that I referred you to a few moments ago, which is  tab 6?  The same Buache, yes. 20096  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q   I would just like you to look, if you will, on this  2 smaller version of the Buache 1754 map, you will see  3 that it makes reference to Lake Ouinipigon, you will  4 see it runs down the right hand perimeter of the edge  5 of the lake from Lake Bourbon?  6 A  Are we referring to the upper portion of the map?  7 Q   No, the lower portion.  You're quite right, the map is  8 divided into two parts, the lower portion of this.  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   Are you with me now?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   That appears to be his rendering of what we know to be  13 Lake Winnipeg?  14 A   Yes.  Lake Ouinipigon, the upper part of Lake  15 Winnipeg.  16 Q   If you will just look at the upper -- the first  17 constricture, you will see the word in French, "de la  18 tete de boeuf" or Ox Head Strait?  19 A   Yes.  Yes.  It's a little difficult to read but I can  20 discern it.  21 Q   It's the first constricture in that sequence of  22 figures depicting the map?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   And you will see to the right of Lake Winnipeg appears  25 the phrase, it's sort of up and to the right, it's in  26 French, it says or begins, "pays beaucoup"?  27 A   Yes.  2 8 Q   Are you with me now?  29 A   Yes.  30 Q   Do you agree that this states "these parts, according  31 to Mr. Jeremy, are more temperate than Hudson's Bay"?  32 A   Yes.  33 Q   Now, I am asking you now, Dr. Farley, if when you  34 refer back to Bowen's 1772 and 1777 maps, can you  35 agree with me that it is likely that Buache was the  36 source of the information regarding Mr. Jeremy that  37 appears on his maps of 1777 and '72?  38 A   Yes, either Buache directly or indirectly, if you  39 follow me.  It may have been the same information that  40 Buache had available to him.  41 Q   All right.  But certainly I guess you would agree that  42 in -- that Bowen would have had available to him the  43 Buache map of 1772?  44 A  Well, it's certainly persuasive from what we see on  45 the maps.  46 Q   All right.  If you look at the Buache 1752 map again,  47 you will notice there is on the left-hand side of the 20097  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  A  3  Q  4  THE  COURT  5  MR.  RUSH:  6  THE  COURT  7  MR.  RUSH:  8  9  MR.  GOLDI  10  THE  COURT  11  MR.  RUSH:  12  Q  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  22  23  24  25  Q  26  27  28  A  29  MR.  RUSH:  30  31  32  THE  COURT  33  34  35  36  THE  COURT  37  38  39  A  40  THE  COURT  41  A  42  THE  COURT  43  A  44  45  46  47  map a, in French, a depiction called "Mer de l'ouest"?  Yes.  And that of course would be Western Sea.  :  You said 1752.  Yes, my lord, it's the smaller map.  :  I wrote down 1774.  1754.  No, this, excuse me, my lord, it was -- I misspoke,  it's 1754.  H:  Yes.  :  All right.  That you.  And on the left hand side of the map, my lord, you  will see the depiction "Mer de l'ouest" and I think  the witness agreed that's Western Sea?  Yes.  And, Dr. Farley, will you agree with me that the  figures that are shown between the sea, the Western  Sea, depicted on this map and Lac Bourbon, represent a  chain of mountains?  Yes, there is a representation of terrain there of  what we would take to be an elevation of some sort, we  don't know whether they are really mountains or what,  but certainly higher than the adjacent area we would  expect from that representation.  All right.  Thank you.  And to your knowledge, Dr.  Farley, was Buache one of those cartographers who  believed in the De Fonte account?  Yes, he did.  Now my lord, I would like to ask that this smaller  1754 Buache be marked as the next exhibit and inserted  as tab 8 so that would be 1154-8?  :  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 1154-8 BUACHE MAP)  :  Before you leave it, doctor, north of the Mer de  l'ouest, there is another lake, and I can't read that,  it says Gde.--?  Grand Water, I would think that would be, my lord.  :  What is that, that next word I haven't seen before?  Lac Michinipi.  :  That can't relate to the Mississippi, surely?  I think not, my lord, although it's a confusion in  location and, well, in perception.  I would say no,  it's not the Mississippi, but it may well be a  transposition of information from the Great Lakes area  to the area north and west of Lac Bourbon, as shown on 2009?  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 this map of 17 54.  2 THE COURT:  Can anyone read the French that's underneath Lac  3 Michinipi?  4 MR. RUSH:  It appears to be "It is more than 300 leagues from  5 the forts and there was 600 leagues..."  I am sorry,  6 600 --  7 MR. GOLDIE:  It's not leagues.  8 MR. RUSH:  600 in total, perhaps, or altogether.  9 Q   Dr. Farley, I would just like to ask you, does that  10 reference to Lake Michinipi, is that not a reference  11 to the De Fonte accounts?  12 A   I think not.  I would have to reflect back on the De  13 Fonte narrative.  I think not.  I would have to give a  14 qualified no to that.  15 Q   All right.  Now, I would ask you to look back to the  16 1777 Bowen map, and I am still directing your  17 attention to the inset.  18 THE REGISTRAR:  Is that tab 7?  19 MR. RUSH:  No, the Buache 1754 is tab 8.  20 THE REGISTRAR:  What is tab 7?  21 MR. RUSH:  Tab 7 is the 1772 Bowen map.  22 Q   Are you with me, Dr. Farley?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   You will see in the inset in 1772, and as well in 1777  25 on these Bowen maps, in the --  26 A   Excuse me.  That's not relevant.  1777 I have and the  27 1772, yes.  28 Q   Now, do you see the reference to Lac De Fonte?  29 A   Yes, on the 1777, yes, I can just -- it's almost  30 illegible.  31 Q   You see what it says on the Bowen 1777 that Lac De  32 Fonte, all these discoveries are imaginary?  33 A   Yes.  34 Q   Do you agree with me from that that Bowen rejected the  35 theoretical geography of Buache?  36 A   It would seem so, based on this statement on the map.  37 I would say, probably, he did reject the notion, but  38 as I pointed out in earlier testimony, these old  39 ideas, even though they were based in imagination,  40 died hard.  41 Q   All right.  Looking at the 1772 Bowen, Dr. Farley, do  42 you see that some of the lines, at least the line  43 along what appears to be the Mississippi, is bolded on  44 the —  45 A  We are not in the inset any more, we are on the main  4 6 map?  47 Q   Yes, I am now referring you to the Bowen 1772, and can 20099  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  5  6  7  8  Q  9  10  A  11  12  Q  13  14  15  A  16  THE COURT  17  18  A  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  MR. RUSH:  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  A  44  Q  45  A  46  Q  47  you agree with me that the Mississippi appears to be  bolded there?  Yes, it's in -- it appears to be in bold line work.  I  assume that's not colour, looking at the rest of the  map.  Some of it may be.  But I think in this case --  well, I am not sure.  It may be a colour on the -- say  red on the original.  All right.  Do you know what that represents, if  anything?  Well, as I have just pointed out, if it's in colour,  it would represent some kind of boundary.  And do you see that there are other straight lines  above the St. Lawrence River that don't appear to  follow the topographic feature?  That would appear to be a boundary of some kind.  :  That Mississippi bold line, do I read that correctly  that it shows it flowing out of Red Lake?  Yes, my lord.  Red Lake is shown as you see in the  bold line, and if I may, my lord, if you look to the  left of Red Lake, although the lettering is very  difficult to read, I think it says "Mississippi R.  whose head is uncertain or unknown."  And then beyond  that a dotted line with the label "conjectural" shown  on it.  Now, Dr. Farley, what I would like to ask you to look  at is, if you look at the 1777 Bowen map, which is  your map 16, you will see that there is a dashed line  that runs south out of Red Lake, do you see that?  Yes.  Yes, a dashed line, quite right.  And it seems to parallel the Mississippi?  Yes.  Now, I want to ask you if you will again -- you still  have the 1763 Bowen present with you?  Yes.  Now, if you will just refer to -- I am going to ask  you to look at, you will see in the upper left hand  corner of the Bowen 1763, a reference to "parts  unknown"?  Yes.  And then you will see a reference to a line that  appears to be the 50th degree north latitude?  Yes.  May I just scan this to be sure?  Yes.  Yes, south of the 50th parallel.  And you will see an inscription there and it says over  a dashed line on the Bowen 1763, it says:  "The 20100  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  8  A  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  Q  27  A  28  29  THE  COURT  30  A  31  32  THE  COURT  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  Q  35  36  37  38  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  THE  COURT  44  45  A  46  THE  COURT  47  A  southern boundary of Hudson's Bay Company territories  settled by Calverez after the Treaty of Utrecht", do  you see that?  Yes.  And if you look at the 1772 map, you will notice that  there appears to be the same inscription on the Bowen  1772 map?  Yes.  Do you see that?  Yes.  And if you look at the 1777 map, that dashed line and  that inscription no longer appear; is that correct?  That's correct.  And still looking at the 1777 Bowen map, number 16,  Dr. Farley, just keeping that in front of you, I  wanted you to look at James, the representation for  James Bay on that 1777 Bowen.  Yes.  And do you see a line to the lower, just to the lower  left, or it would be the southeast of that, appears to  be a heavy line and then over that line is Lands  Height?  Yes.  Do you see that on the 1777 Bowen?  Yes.  Would that refer to a height of land?  Well, that's what the label indicates, Lands Height,  so it --  :  I am sorry, I haven't found that.  My lord, in this location, that bold line and then  Lands Height, it's a little hard to read.  :  I see.  Thank you.  And if you look at the 1772 map, Dr. Farley, the one  that I -- it's tab 7, do you have that there?  It's  the smaller of the two.  Yes, I think you have it.  This is the Bowen 1772.  And looking in the same  place, south and east of James Bay, do you see a  dashed line which says Height of Land or Lands Height?  I see the label Lands Height and a segment of a dashed  line, yes.  Right.  :  That's not far from where you put it on this  drainage map, is it?  That's correct, my lord.  :  It's approximately right?  Yes. 20101  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  MR. RUSH  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  27  MR. GOLD  28  MR. RUSH  29  Q  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  MR. RUSH  38  39  40  41  42  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  Dr. Farley, I am going to just make things somewhat  less complicated for you, I am going to take away the  1777 map now and I am just going to ask you to keep  the -- I am sorry, the 1772, I am going to be not  referring to that again.  I ask that that be tab 7,  1154-7 and there will be no need to refer to the  photographic version of the 1763 Bowen.  However,  keeping your map 16 in front of you, I want to refer  you to -- I want to refer you to another map, firstly,  to the map at tab 24?  In the folio of maps?  Yes, in your folio of maps.  If you will just agree  with me -- I am just going to be referring it to the  witness briefly.  You identified this as a Faden map  of 1785?  1785.  And this is in the witness's folio of maps, map 24.  All right?  Yes.  Now, if you will just keep that.  Now, my lord, I am going to show the witness a map,  now, this map, my lord, I can advise my friends, has  not been disclosed, not disclosed on any of the lists,  and it has just come to my knowledge, and I am going  to ask Dr. Farley if he can identify this map?  3:  I am waiving my objection, my lord.  Now, Dr. Farley, this is a Faden map, you can see from  the cartouche?  Yes.  In the bottom right hand corner, entitled  colonies knees in North America" and it's  Yes.  Now, are you familiar with this map, sir?  Yes, this is a fairly well-known Faden map.  My lord, I would like this map to be the next  exhibit.  It's 1154-9 to be inserted in the volume of  documents.  (EXHIBIT 1154-9 FADEN MAP OF 1777)  I want to ask you, Dr. Farley, to examine the Faden  map of 17 7 7 and the Bowen map of 1777?  Yes.  All right.  Now, just before I ask you about the maps  themselves, can you agree with me that Faden was  "the British  dated 1777? 20102  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  13  ]  14  15  Q  16  17  MR. GOLDIE  18   :  MR. RUSH:  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  i  26  27  ]  28  29  Q  30  31  32  33  A  34  Q  35  36  A  37  Q  38  A   '  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  Q  46  47  A  another English cartographer and an associate of  Thomas Jefferys?  Yes, I believe they worked in co-operation at one  stage.  Is it your recollection that in fact Faden took over  from Jefferys's business after he died?  Yes.  Now, if you will examine the two maps, the Bowen 1777,  your number 16, and the map I have just handed to you,  which is now 1154-9, both of the same date?  Yes.  When I say yes, I must recall that in the  preparation of the American atlas, some of the plates  may have been prepared some years before but the atlas  is dated, the second edition, 1776-'77.  Now, you don't have any particular knowledge about  when this map was engraved?  :  Which is this?  Map 9, 1154-9.  That is the Faden map?  The designations confuse me.  The Faden map?  Are you referring to the one that I have included?  No, the other.  The other 1777.  I don't know when the plate was made for that.  Obviously the date is indicated and one has to go with  that or marginal information, and if there was  marginal information, it's not -- I can't read  anything on it that would suggest it.  I am just asking you to compare now the two maps, the  Bowen 1777 and the Faden 1777, and if you look in the  upper or northwest corner of the map, you will see a  reference to Lake Winnipeg?  Yes.  And do you agree with me that the representation of  Lake Winnipeg on the two maps is virtually identical?  I can't say it's identical.  They are similar.  They appear to be in relatively the same place?  Well, let me -- can we learn from this map --  longitude west from London, so he has said, the  westing is in 105 degrees whereas on the Bowen,  it's -- no, they are not in the same westing.  There  is some difference between the two in that respect.  And in the northing, there is a little difference, not  a great deal.  Relatively speaking, given those qualifications, they  are in approximately the same place?  Roughly the same location.  And, again, the shapes are 20103  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 somewhat different.  2 Q   Now, I want to direct your attention, Dr. Farley, to  3 the black, the bold black line that runs south of  4 James Bay, you see that it comes in a semi-circular,  5 irregular shape south of James Bay?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   Running from 70 longitude to about 97?  8 A   Yes.  9 Q   And you will see where 95 longitude on the Faden map  10 appears the land, it's indicated the Lands Height?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   Now, in terms of the height of land, as you have  13 depicted it on your drainage, is that not --  14 A   Excuse me.  As I have depicted it on the map here?  15 Q   Yes.  I am just wondering if you can confirm that that  16 is relatively where the height of land is located?  17 A   Yes.  Well, this map on the display board is  18 generalized but certainly the red line on that map is  19 at that level of generalization in the correct  20 location.  21 Q   But the —  22 MR. GOLDIE:  I don't think he had finished.  2 3    MR. RUSH:  24 Q   Go ahead.  25 A  Would you mind restating the question?  26 Q   Yes.  I am just saying that my question is that in  27 terms of this black line as shown on this map, the  28 Faden depicts the height of land apparently where that  29 black line is shown?  30 A   Yes, from the very label on it, I would say that the  31 cartographer believed that that's where the height of  32 land lay, the divide, if you will.  33 Q   If you look at the 1777 Bowen map, and I drew your  34 attention to Lands Height on that, do you see that,  35 Dr. Farley?  36 A   Yes.  37 Q   And I think you said that you saw a portion of that  38 south to southeast of James Bay?  39 A   Right.  4 0 Q   And would you agree with me that where Bowen places  41 the Lands Height in his 1777 map that it's relatively  42 in the same place that Faden places it in his 1777  43 map?  44 A   Yes, approximately the same.  There are obvious  45 differences but approximately the same.  46 THE COURT:  It looks quite different to me, is that just because  47 of scale? 20104  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  THE  COURT  3  4  5  6  A  7  8  THE  COURT  9  A  10  11  MR.  RUSH:  12  Q  13  14  15  A  16  17  18  THE  COURT  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  31  32  A  33  34  Q  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  44  A  45  46  Q  47  Sorry, my lord?  :  I see the height of land dipping to the southwest,  west of the north point of Lake Superior, where this  one seems to be running north?  Is that just a matter  of scale?  Excuse me, my lord, I was trying to compare the Bowen  1777 and the Faden 1777.  :  You're not comparing it with your drainage map then?  In that last answer, no, my lord.  My understanding  was that the question --  Yes, you're quite correct, Dr. Farley, I was asking  you to compare Faden's 1777 and Bowen's 1777 and your  answers related to that.  Is it appropriate for me to ask the court, did you  wish me to make the comparison, my lord, between these  two early maps --  :  No, no, I can do that.  Dr. Farley, referring to Faden 1777, again, you will  see that just above the 45 degree latitude on the left  hand and northwest portion of this map there is a  reference to White Bear Lake?  I am sorry, I am not -- I am not tracked.  I will assist you.  If we look at Faden's 1777, and in  the upper left hand corner, northwest corner, there is  a reference to White Bear Lake?  Yes.  And you will see what appears to be a bolded line  along what appears to be the Mississippi, can you  agree with me that that is the Mississippi?  I don't see any labels on the map to the contrary, so  I would assume that to be the Mississippi.  Well, you will see just at the 45 degree latitude  marked there is a statement, "Thusfar the Mississippi  has been as..."?  Ascended.  "Ascended"?  Yes.  It would appear from this map that the -- if White  Bear Lake is the -- is the source of the Mississippi  as depicted on this map that it runs at about 46  degree north latitude?  Yes, about 46 degrees with a tributary extending into  that lake from the west.  And do you -- yes.  Now you see the bold black line  running down what appears to be the Mississippi and it 20105  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  A  5  THE  COURT  6  MR.  RUSH:  7  8  9  10  11  12  THE  COURT  13  MR.  RUSH:  14  Q  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  THE  COURT  22  MR.  RUSH:  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  32  THE  COURT  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  Q  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  joins with an irregular line going off to the  northeast and that would be the junction with the  Ohio, would it?  The Ohio, yes.  :  This map doesn't show the month, does it?  It does, my lord.  Yes, if you find the junction of  the Ohio and the Mississippi and you run north from  that junction about an inch and a half, you will see  the month of the river depicted and then it runs off  to the north, northwest off the end of the map at the  border, just below 45 degree latitude.  :  Yes, I see it.  Thank you.  All right.  Dr. Farley, thank you. I can now ask you  if we can set these maps aside.  I am going to be directing the witness's attention,  and I won't be referring to this map, Bowen's 1777  again.  Now Dr. Farley, I wanted to refer you to the  Henry Briggs map in your folio, 1625, and that's  number three in your folio.  :  Number three?  Yes, my lord.  Now, Dr. Farley, I think you have agreed with me that  it was the English who were most interested in finding  a water passage to China?  Yes.  And if you look at the Henry Briggs map, number three,  numbered or dated 1625, if you look at the cartouche,  and it's in the upper left hand corner, and can you  agree with me that if reads as follows:  "The north  part of America" then it continues --  :  Containing?  Sorry, my lord.  Are you with me, Dr. Farley?  Yes.  Conveying?  C-O-N-T-E-Y-N-I-N-G, containing.  "Newfoundland, New England, Virginia, Florida, New  Spain and New France"?  Nova Francia, yes.  New France, sorry.  "With the rich islands of Hispanola, Cuba, Jamaica,  Peurto Rico on the south and upon the west large and  goodly land of California"?  Yes.  "The bonds of it are the Atlantic ocean, on ye..."  Yes, on the south. 20106  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  Q  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  A  14  15  16  Q  17  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  31  32  33  A  34  Q  35  A  36  37  Q  38  39  40  41  A  42  MR. RUSH  43  MR. GOLD  44  45  46  MR. RUSH  47  And east?  East sides.  "On east sides, ye south sea on ye west side"?  Yes.  "And on ye north Freton Hudson's Bay"?  Yes.  "A fair entrance to ye nearest and most temperate  passage to Japan and China?  Yes.  It's clear from the map that Briggs believes that  there is a passage to Japan and China across North  America?  Yes, as I indicated in earlier testimony, that would  be the thrust of the statements that he makes on --  regarding the tides in Hudson's Bay.  Now, I have asked you on previous days, over a week  ago, Dr. Farley, about the Juan de Fuca accounts, and  I wonder if you can tell us if you know who is  responsible for publishing the de Fuca story?  I think it was Michael Lok.  Michael Lok was the one who recounted it but was it  not Samuel Purchas who in fact published it?  Yes.  Now, I want to direct your attention, Dr. Farley, to a  treatise on the question of the northwest passage and  this is by Glyndwr Williams.  Are you familiar with  the work of Glyndwr Williams?  I know of it.  Now, I am showing you a document, Dr. Farley, which is  a treatise by Glyndwr Williams entitled "The British  Search for the Northwest Passage in the Eighteenth  Century."  Yes.  Are you familiar with this work?  As I said, I am acquainted with it.  I can't say I am  familiar with all the detail in it.  This was published in 1962, Dr. Farley, so it would  have pre-dated your thesis.  But I assume, and I think  you have agreed with me that you would be in your  field acquainted with Glyndwr Williams?  Yes.  I would like this marked as 1054 --  3:  Your lordship has ruled that it is not necessary to  mark treatises but they can be referred to in  argument.  And we have a document running to 2 82 --  There is extracts from this document.  I do want it  mashed as an exhibit. 20107  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam 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  MR.  THE COURT  MR. RUSH  COURT:  I don't understand to have ruled, Mr. Goldie, that  treatises could not be --  GOLDIE:  Which were cited in the bibliography or the witness  accepted.  COURT:  Well, I am not sure I was even that specific.  But I  may have been.  Is there some problem, some objection  to it having it marked so I have it conveniently  together?  GOLDIE:  No, it's just that the witness has said he is not  familiar with it and there is something like, as I  say, 282 pages.  But I endeavoured to provide that a document  wouldn't be kept out on the veto of a witness who  doesn't -- not that this witness rejects it, it's just  that he isn't fully familiar with it.  And it seems to  me that his lack of detailed knowledge of it wouldn't  keep it out.  GOLDIE:  No, I am not suggesting that this is not available  to my friend, I am just suggesting that marking the  entire document as an exhibit is unnecessary.  I think it probably will turn out to be unnecessary,  but it will certainly be convenient to have it in one  place and for that reason I think it should be marked  as the next exhibit in Mr. Rush's book of documents.  Yes, book of documents on cross-examination.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 1154-10: EXCERPT FROM TREATISE ENTITLED THE  BRITISH SEARCH FOR THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE IN THE  EIGHTEENTH CENTURY)  MR.  THE COURT  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Dr. Farley, I -- do you have the volume?  It's a  little awkward for Dr. Farley to deal with here.  If  you could just insert that in there perhaps.  Dr. Farley, before I direct you to this work, you know  Dr. Williams to be a professor of history at London  University?  Yes, I think at London.  British university, anyway.  And you know him to be a leading authority in the  history of northern exploration in North America?  He has done a lot of work in that area as I understand  it, yes.  Now, Dr. Farley, in Appendix 1 of this work, and it's  not in front of you now, but I simply want to -- it  states this is an appendix with regard to the voyage  of Juan de Fuca, and it states here that -- 2010?  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  THE  COURT  2  3  4  5  6  MR.  RUSH:  7  THE  COURT  8  MR.  RUSH:  9  THE  COURT  10  MR.  RUSH:  11  Q  12  13  14  MR.  GOLDI  15  THE  COURT  16  A  17  MR.  RUSH:  18  19  20  21  22  A  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  32  33  THE  COURT  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  Q  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Q  :  Can you excuse me a moment, Mr. Rush?  I am having a  terrible time putting it together because the holes  don't line up.  And I am not sure I am going to be  able to follow you.  Are you going to be referring to  a page number?  Yes, I will be.  Perhaps I should wait.  :  All right.  What page, please?  I am going to be referring to 273.  :  Yes.  Dr. Farley, this merely confirms, I think, the  evidence you have already given and I am quoting from  page 273 at tab 10.  £:  Perhaps the witness may have it in front of him.  :  Page?  Page?  273, it's the top line and it indicates:  "Purchas  printed the account of the Fuca voyage, given to him  by the English merchant Michael Lok, in the fourth  book of the second part of Hakluytus Posthumus or  Purchas His Pilgrimes, published in 1625."  Yes.  I am simply showing that to you to confirm the  evidence which you have given, that accords with your  research?  Yes.  All right.  Now, Dr. Farley, I am going to be making  reference to some maps and to Professor Williams's  article, and I just want you to keep the two handy,  side by side.  And the first one I would like to refer  you to is de l'isle map of 1752, this is your map  folio number 19.  :  Sorry, map 17?  Map 19 in Dr. Farley's folio.  Now, if you will just keep the map handy, Dr. Farley,  I think you have identified this as de l'isle 1752  map?  Yes.  Showing the discoveries of Admiral De Fonte and other  Spanish, English and Russian navigators?  Yes.  I think it says in the search for the passage to the  South Sea?  Yes.  And it's by Mr. de l'isle, 1752?  Yes.  Now, Dr. Farley, the maker of this map was J. N. de 20109  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 l'isle?  2 A   Yes, de l'isle the younger.  3 Q   And J. N. de l'isle was the younger brother of  4 Guillaume de l'isle?  5 A   Yes.  6 Q   And you have made reference in your testimony to  7 Guillaume de l'isle as the author of the 1703 map, I  8 think?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   All right.  Now, is your -- I want to understand your  11 knowledge of J. N. de l'isle, is it not the case that  12 J. N. de l'isle had been a cartographer attached to  13 the Russian Court?  14 A   Yes, The Chancery of Military Marine.  15 Q   Now, what I would like to do, Dr. Farley, if you would  16 just look to page 143 of Dr. Williams's account, and  17 if you turn to Dr. Williams at 143, he says about J.  18 N. de l'isle at the top of the page:  "In April, 1750  19 de l'isle read a paper on the Russian explorations  20 before the Academie Royale des Sciences in Paris, and  21 presented it with a manuscript map drawn by Buache to  22 illustrate the memoir.  France in the 18th century was  23 the centre of scientific cartography, just as Holland  24 had been in the previous century, and Britain was to  25 be in the next; and the publication two years later of  26 the memoir map marked the beginning of a controversy  27 which exercised a bizzare but important influence upon  28 the course of exploration along the Pacific coast of  29 North America, and the search for the Northwest  30 Passage."  31 Now, in respect to Dr. Williams's statements of  32 fact and conclusions, do you agree with those that are  33 set out in those passages?  34 A  With this statement you have just read, yes, I agree  35 with that.  36 Q   All right.  Now, Dr. Farley, you will agree with me  37 that the de l'isle map shows J. N. de l'isle  38 depictions of the voyages of Bering and Chirikov?  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   And I think you will agree that when referring to J.  41 N. de l'Isle's map he depicts Mount St. Elisias on  42 this map, does he not?  43 A   Yes, I thought it was indicated here.  I thought that  44 Mount St. Elisias was here but I don't see it.  45 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, I want to refer you to another, if  46 you will just keep the J. N. de l'isle map present, I  47 want to refer you to another treatise and that -- can 20110  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 you identify this, Dr. Farley, as Gerhard Muller's  2 account of the Bering voyage?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   The reports from Russia?  5 A   Yes, translated, yes.  6 Q   You are familiar with this work?  7 A   Yes.  8 MR. RUSH:   All right.  I would like that to be marked as the  9 next exhibit, 1054-11, and inserted in the binder.  10 MR. GOLDIE:  This is a portion, is it?  11 MR. RUSH:  This is an extract and I will be directing the  12 witnesses a portions in it.  13 THE REGISTRAR:  1154 tab 11.  14 (EXHIBIT 1154-11: TREATISE - BERING VOYAGES FROM  15 RUSSIA)  16 Q   What I would like you to do, Dr. Farley, is to look at  17 the map that Muller appends to this, and do you have  18 the map?  It's on page 35.  19 A   Yes.  20 Q   Now, my lord, what I have done, I have obtained a copy  21 of this map from the National Archives and I have one  22 actual copy and I have photocopies for my friends.  23 THE COURT:  This is 1731, is it?  24 MR. RUSH:  Yes, it's the map 1731, that's right.  25 Q   Dr. Farley, what I would really like you to do is if  2 6 you will agree with me that the map I am about to show  27 you is the same map shown in Muller's account of the  28 Russian voyages?  29 A   Yes, this translation of the German.  It's not the  30 original.  31 Q   Yes.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, I am sorry, what was my friend's question  33 again, please?  34 MR. RUSH:  Actually Dr. Farley answered a different question,  35 and I will ask him that.  36 Q   Muller did a translation of the Russian, did he not?  37 A   Yes, Muller was in the employ, yes, he would have --  38 he would have presumably done the original in German  39 and then made -- no, he prepared the original, sorry,  40 he prepared the original in the Russian with the  41 Russian nomenclature and that was translated into  42 French and also English.  43 Q   Do you recall who did the translation into English?  44 A   Jefferys, I think.  45 Q   That was Jefferys, wasn't it?  46 A   Yes.  47 Q   And in terms of this treatise, did the translation of 20111  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam 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  Muller for the purposes of this publication in 19 --  whenever it is --  A   1962, was it?  Q   '62.  All right.  Now, I would ask you to look at page  35 of the Muller map, and I am going to ask you if you  can just compare it to the photocopy of the map that I  have here, which is an enhanced version of it, and I  would ask you if you can agree with me that it's the  same?  MR. GOLDIE:  Surely there has to be something in between the  two, my lord.  The inscriptions on the map on page 35  of the extract from the treatise are hand printed and  the one that my friend has placed before the witness  is machine printed or engraved, I will put it that  way.  There must be something in between.  I am not  raising any objection but it's evident on its face  that there is something in between.  Yes.  Well, somebody has obviously hand drawn this map on  page 35 and I suppose your question, Mr. Rush, is from  whence the information came?  Yes, it will be. I would first like the witness to  clarify the two maps and in terms of the areas shown,  not all of it is shown in the same way, Dr. Farley,  but in terms of the area shown and the names given to  various features, can you agree that the two maps are  showing the same area?  A   Yes, they show the same general area of the lands  about the north Pacific.  I notice one exception on  the prints from the archives the route of St. Antoine,  and I can't read the date, is not shown on the copy.  THE COURT: Should we give the doctor over lunch to look at it  and see what he can -- so that he can compare it?  MR. RUSH:  Yes.  (Proceedings adjourned for lunch)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein to the best of my  skill and ability.  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  Wilf Roy  Official Reporter 20112  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED AT 2:00)  2  3 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  4 THE COURT:  May I just mention that Saturday, October 14th and  5 21st, are all right with me, as is October 18th, but  6 Thursday the 19th is the evening of the Leon Ladner  7 lecture, which is this year the Chief Justice of  8 Australia, which is in the Great Hall, and I'm  9 committed at the moment to attend that, followed by a  10 social event.  I would like to suggest, if possible,  11 some other date than the 19th, but I'll leave that for  12 counsel to talk about tomorrow, thank you.  Mr. Rush.  13 MR. RUSH:  14 Q   Yes.  Now, Dr. Farley, I had drawn your attention to  15 the J.N. De L'isle map appearing at -- in volume  16 "Bering's Voyages, Reports From Russia" by Muller?  17 A   Yes.  18 Q   And you have that map in front of you, do you?  19 A   Yes.  20 Q   And you will see that the map is described on page 35  21 of that volume as a map drawn in 1731?  22 A   Yes.  23 Q   And I'm translating from the French there?  24 A   Yes.  25 Q   To be used in the search for lands and seas situated  26 in the north of the South Sea?  27 A   Yes.  2 8 Q   All right.  And do you agree with me that this map was  29 used by Bering on his 1731 Russian expedition to  30 Kamchatka?  31 A   On his expedition to Kamchatka or --  32 Q   Yes?  33 A   Yes.  He -- yes.  It would have been available to him.  34 I'm thinking of the dates of the -- that was the only  35 reason for my hesitation.  He didn't sail from  36 Kamchatka until 1741, so there's no reason to assume  37 that he would not have had access to the De L'isle  38 information.  39 Q   Dr. Farley, the map -- the individual map that I  40 handed to you and asked you to compare to the  41 handwritten map, which is in the Muller translation,  42 or the Urness translation of Muller, can you compare  43 the two, would you agree with me that in terms of what  44 is generally depicted that they represent the same  45 features and descriptions and the title is the same as  46 used in the volume by Muller?  47 A   I will have to check the title in a moment to answer 20113  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  A  28  Q  29  30  A  31  THE COURT  32  MR. RUSH:  33  Q  34  35  36  A  37  38  Q  39  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  45  A  46  THE COURT  47  MR. RUSH:  your points in turn.  Yes, the same earth area, and  the general configuration of the features is similar,  clearly again the lettering is different, but the  names, so far as I can see, are the same.  All right.  Now, by reference to either or both, Dr.  Farley, can you agree with me that in the map where it  begins on the map "Pays soumis", and I'm here  referring to the upper left-hand corner of the map --  Yes.  -- that it by translation refers to "The country in  submission to His Imperial Majesty of all the  Russias"?  Yes.  And then below that translated "Domination of the  Emperor of China"?  Yes.  And on the right-hand side, beginning across Hudson  Bay and continuing from the eastern seaboard to  Newfoundland, you see what translates as "English  Lands", and I think if you tip --  Excuse me.  Tip the map right on its side, it's on the right-hand  border?  Yes.  I was looking at the small scale copy.  So we're  down at Newfoundland?  At the right-hand border of the map?  Yes.  You will see it says "Terre Anglois", or "English  Lands"?  I'm sorry, I can't --  :  Right at the very bottom.  If you turn it on its side, you will see here it's  faint, but it may be -- you may be able to see it  better on the sketch map?  But this is for -- this is for California -- sorry,  it's not on the smaller scale.  All right, thank you.  It doesn't appear to have come  out in the copy, but let me ask you, Dr. Farley, do  you see the words across the central body of North  America, "Pays soumis a la France"?  Yes.  And would you say that translates as "Country in  submission to France"?  Yes.  I think that's the correct translation.  :  I haven't found the English.  Well, my lord -- 20114  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  MR.  GOLDI  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  4  5  6  THE  COURT  7  MR.  RUSH:  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  Q  21  22  23  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  31  MR.  RUSH:  32  THE  COURT  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  THE  COURT  35  MR.  RUSH:  36  Q  37  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  A  44  THE  COURT  45  A  46  THE  COURT  47  MR.  RUSH:  £:  It's not on the small map, my lord.  Well, my lord, it appears if you turn it on its side,  my lord, it appears there, but it's not very legible.  It appears -- it runs up where Newfoundland and  Labrador would be located.  :  Yes.  All right, Dr. Farley, thank you.  I would like, my  lord, the extract from the Urness book to be marked as  1154-11 and placed at tab 11, and the printed  reproduction of the map of 1741 of De L'isle to be  placed at tab 12 and marked 1154-12.  (EXHIBIT 1154-11 - Treatise - Bering's voyages,  The Reports From Russia)  (EXHIBIT 1154-12 - Enlargement of map in Exhibit  1154-11)  Now, Dr. Farley, you're at tab 19, Dr. Farley, and I  want to again direct your attention to the J.N. De  L'isle map of 1752.  Now, on the west coast of America  do you see the French phrase "Entrance discovered by  Juan de Fuca in 1592 at about the 47th or 48th  parallel"?  Yes.  And next to that are the words "Mer de la ouest", or  "Sea of the West"?  Yes.  On the sea, on the indentation of the land it's  shown.  Yes.  :  What map are you on, please?  I'm at 19, my lord.  :  Yes, thank you.  This is J.N. De L'Isle's map of 1752.  You were  referred to this in your testimony, Dr. Farley, and  you see the -- I think you referred to it as the  abeyment of Sea of the West?  Yes.  And you see that underneath that in French it says  "Discovered and crossed by Juan de Fuca in 1592"?  Yes.  I think that's the correct translation.  :  Where do you see that?  In this location, my lord.  :  Oh, yes, thank you. 20115  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q   And you will notice above that there are the Lac Du  2 Fonte is located above the Sea of the West?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   And it indicates what appears to be a passage from the  5 Hudson's Bay to the Pacific?  6 A  Via Lac Du Fonte?  7 Q   Yes?  8 A   Yes.  9 Q   And these were part of the discoveries of Admiral Du  10 Fonte, so called?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   Now, you are -- I think you agree that the Du Fonte  13 account was popularized in Britain?  14 A   Yes.  15 Q   And are you aware of one of its main publicists,  16 Arthur Dobbs?  17 A   Yes.  18 Q   All right.  Dr. Farley, I would ask you, if you would,  19 just turn to page 31 in tab 10 of the Williams  20 article?  21 A  May I have the —  22 Q   Yes.  It's in the volume again.  Now, just turning to  23 tab 10 and 31 —  24 A   Yes.  25 Q   And Dr. Farley, beginning at the second full sentence  26 on 31, it says:  "The new enthusiast was Arthur  27 Dobbs" --  28 A   Excuse me.  Beginning at -- oh, yes, thank you.  29 Q  30 "a wealthy Ulster landowner and a member of the  31 Irish House of Commons.  By 1729 his early  32 interest in Irish trade had widened to include the  33 commerce of Britain and the Colonies; and he  34 wrote a long memorandum in which he called for a  35 more vigorous colonial policy, and outlined plans  36 for containing, and then seizing, French  37 possessions in North America.  While engaged in  38 this work Dobbs had read the journals of the  39 explorers of the continent, and gradually his  40 curiosity about their discoveries turned into a  41 conviction that the entrance of the Northwest  42 Passage might yet be discovered the west coast  43 of Hudson Bay.  For 20 years Dobbs waged a  44 dedicated, and at times single-handed campaign in  45 support of this belief; and his promotion of two  46 expeditions to Hudson Bay at a time when there was  47 little general interest in exploration was a 20116  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 remarkable achievement.  The first step in this  2 campaign was the drafting in 1731 of a 70-page  3 memorial which remains one of the most coherent  4 and persuasive statements of the case for a  5 Northwest Passage."  6  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, do you agree with that description of  9 Arthur Dobbs' and Arthur Dobbs' purpose of attempting  10 to mount an exploration for the Northwest Passage?  11 A   Yes.  He was one of the great proponents of a renewed  12 search for the Northwest Passage.  13 Q   And Arthur Dobbs himself was influenced by the  14 accounts of the voyage of Du Fonte?  15 A   He seems to have been, yes.  16 Q   I just -- I would like you to, if you can, to turn to  17 page 80 of the text of Messr. Williams?  18 A   Page 80?  19 MR. RUSH:  80, again discussing Dobbs.  I would just like to  20 refer you to the first full paragraph, and I will ask  21 you if you can agree with this:  22  23 "Dobbs accordingly postponed the intended  24 application to Parliament, and in an attempt to  25 create a favourable climate of opinion for his  26 designs published that year an account of the  27 Countries adjoining to Hudson's Bay.  In this work  28 Dobbs skillfully dovetailed several themes:  the  29 probability of a Northwest Passage (this  30 section contained the inevitable attack on  31 Middleton); the opening of the trade of the Bay,  32 the settling of Colonies inland from the Bay, and  33 in general the substitution of a forceful,  34 anti-French expansionist policy for the sluggish  35 attitude of the Hudson's Bay Company.  How much  36 Dobbs knew about the activities of La Verendrye  37 and the other French explorers of the interior is  38 not certain, but his emphasis of the crucial  39 importance of the struggle between England and  40 France for the great central plain of North  41 America showed that he was more than ever  42 conscious of the danger he had first noted in his  43 memorandum to Wolpole fifteen years earlier - that  44 the enterprising French would confine English  45 traders and settlers to the narrow coastal  46 fringes east of the Appalachians and around  47 Hudson's Bay.  His reading of the works of 20117  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Jeremie, La Potherie and other French writers,  2 with their information culled from the Indians  3 about the rumoured strait leading from Hudson Bay  4 to the Pacific, and their reports about the River  5 of the West (the waterway which the French  6 overland explorers were seeking), heightened his  7 fears that the French would smell out his own  8 plans for reaching the Pacific, or perhaps  9 anticipate him by discovering a more southerly  10 route to the great ocean.  Before the search for  11 the waterway to the Pacific can be seen in  12 perspective it must be remembered that while the  13 English were exploring by way of the northern  14 gateway of Hudson Strait and Bay, farther south  15 the French were pushing steadily westward in  16 search of a river which would lead them either  17 to the 'Mer de l'Ouest' or the Pacific."  18  19 I just ask you to pause there, Dr. Farley.  Do you  20 agree with the account given by Professor Williams and  21 the conclusions he arrives at here?  22 MR. GOLDIE:  I wonder if my friend can tell us what year this is  23 all about.  It appears to be a reference --  24 MR. RUSH:  1744.  25 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you.  26 A   I'll try to answer the question.  I can agree with  27 much of it, I cannot agree with all of it, not because  28 I necessarily disagree, but rather because I'm not  29 thoroughly acquainted with the political -- the  30 details of the political climate in Britain at the  31 time, so where there are references made, for example,  32 the paragraph begins "Dobbs accordingly postponed the  33 intended application to parliament".  Well, I wouldn't  34 know that that was necessarily the case.  In general,  35 I would say yes, it fits with my understanding of  36 Dobbs' position and his argument for the search for  37 the Northwest Passage.  38 Q   All right.  He goes on to talk about the Du Fonte  39 account on page 81, Dr. Farley, and then I just ask  40 you to go over to page 82, and he continues at the top  41 of 82:  42  43 "There was no way of disproving the Fonte account  44 at this time because the Pacific coast of  45 America north of latitude 43 degrees north was  46 still unknown."  47 2011?  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q  3 "Members of Bering's second expedition had touched  4 the Alaskan coast near Mount St. Elias in 1741,  5 but news of their discovery was slow in reaching  6 Western Europe, and even though this pinprick of  7 land was later marked on the charts, vast areas  8 were still left in which the imagination of  9 geographers had full play.  The Fonte letter with  10 its description of fertile and productive  11 countries stretching inland from the Pacific coast  12 of North America, was further proof to Dobbs of  13 the opportunities for trade which awaited  14 British merchants once the passage was discovered,  15 and he brushed aside the rights of the Hudson's  16 Bay Company:  'by the unaccountable behaviour of  17 the Hudson's Bay Company, the Government and  18 Parliament have a just and legal Right to lay open  19 that Trade to all Merchants in Britain.  There  20 were men in England familiar with the Bay region  21 who could point out, as Middleton had done two  22 years earlier, the fallacies and over-optimism of  23 Dobbs' arguments.  Captain Coats, a company  24 mariner for almost twenty-five years, grumbled in  25 the privacy of his personal journal, 'what Mr.  26 Dobbs has thought fitt to call a discription of  27 Hudson's Bay, is so erroneous, so superficial and  28 so trifling, in almost every circumstance.  So  29 contrary to the experience and concurrent  30 testimony of every person who have resided in the  31 country... But while the observations of Coats,  32 Isham and other company servants lay unpublished,  33 and unread outside Company or family circles, and  34 historians were denied information about the  35 Company's activities, then the field was left open  36 for hostile propagandists and disgruntled  37 employees.  With their works for long the only  38 guide to those interested, the Company almost  39 lost its case by default."  40  41 Now, again, Dr. Farley, does this account -- is this  42 consistent with your understanding of that period?  43 A   Yes.  It is consistent.  44 Q   Now, understand, Dr. Farley, that Dobbs later became  45 Governor of North Carolina?  46 A   Yes, he did at a later time.  I had forgotten the  47 date. 20119  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam 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  Q  A  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  Q  And that he petitioned the Privy Council to help him  establish an expedition to Hudson's Bay?  Yes.  I don't have a strong detailed recall of that,  but that's certainly in my recollection.  :  Well, that's mentioned at the opening of page 79.  MR.  MR.  MR.  Page 79.  And yes, and I'm going to direct you back to  that, Dr. Farley, where at page 79 you see that he --  that is mentioned there?  A   Yes, right.  RUSH:  Now, I want to ask you, Dr. Farley, if you're aware  that Henry Ellis was an associate of Arthur Dobbs.  GOLDIE:  In what respect?  A   Yes.  I can't remember the connection, but the two  names make, from my recollection, an association of  the two.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  And an associate in respect of attempting to obtain a  petition from the Privy Council for a charter like  that at the Hudson's Bay Company?  I have to confess, I cannot recall the detail of that.  All right.  I just would like you to look at page 111,  Dr. Farley, of the article by Professor Williams, and  to look at the full -- top full paragraph, beginning  with:  "The Privy Council appointed the Attorney-General  and Solicitor-General to report on the petition,  and whereas the Company pleaded before the two law  officers that Dobbs and his merchant associates  were using the question of the Northwest Passage  as a pretext for attacking its charter, the  Northwest Committee claimed that the Moor  expedition had gone far toward discovering the  passage, and hinted that, if granted a charter to  trade, it would organize a further discovery  expedition."  And here's the passage I direct your attention to:  "It was now that Ellis' account of the voyage,  published in the summer of 1748, played its part.  Ellis was the official apologist and historian  of the expedition, and the last section of his  book was characteristically entitled 'The Great  Probability of a Passage'...notwithstanding the  same was not actually discovered in the last 20120  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 expedition.  His belief in the existence of a  2 passage was based mainly on tidal observations,  3 and he added little new to Dobbs' theories.  The  4 only explanation, considered Ellis, that accounted  5 for high tides on the west coast of Hudson's Bay  6 that somewhere along that coast there was a short  7 connecting strait with the Pacific."  8  9 Now, first in respect of Ellis, does that -- does this  10 acquaint you with Ellis' association with Arthur  11 Dobbs?  12 A   Yes.  13 Q   And in terms of the balance of the passage with regard  14 to his belief of the existence of a Northwest Passage,  15 does that accord with your own research and  16 understanding?  17 A   That accords with my understanding, yes.  18 MR. GOLDIE:  My lord, I wonder if my friend could give us the  19 date of the petition that is being referred to here.  20 MR. RUSH:  Well, the expedition is 1748, my lord, and I believe  21 the petition is 1749.  At the beginning of the chapter  22 5 on page 109 it details that the period under  23 discussion is 1748 and 1749, and the reference it's  24 footnoted to 1748.  25 MR. GOLDIE:  The petition?  2 6    MR. RUSH:  27 Q   No.  The fact of the organization with further  28 discovery expeditions is noted at the bottom.  The  29 petition was obviously late 1747, my lord, because the  30 Privy Council confirms its opinion rejecting the Dobbs  31 petition in December of 1748, and that appears on page  32 112.  Now, Dr. Farley, Professor Williams indicates at  33 page 119, if you will just turn to that, at the top of  34 the page, that it was thought that -- yes -- it was  35 thought that Ellis himself had wanted to mount an  36 expedition to the northwest coast, and if you look at  37 the top there, and I quote page 119 of Williams:  38  39 "Towards the end of 1749 it was rumoured that Ellis  40 had persuaded the Admiralty to send an expedition  41 to the northwest coast of America to search for  42 the Pacific entrance the passage, but no action  43 was taken on his plan, and fifteen years passed  44 before any naval expedition or discovery sailed  45 for the Pacific."  46  47 Now, I guess I should ask you, Dr. Farley, are you 20121  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  A  3  4  5  6  Q  7  8  A  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  27  28  Q  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  A  34  MR. RUSH:  35  THE COURT  36  A  37  38  39  MR. RUSH:  40  Q  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  aware of the Ellis petition?  I can't say that I can recall any detail of that  unless I read the footnote.  There's no mention of the  scheme in the Admiralty records, but I cannot recall  any specifics.  All right, thank you.  Dr. Farley, you're still  located in your folio at map 19, I hope.  Yes.  I think you are?  Yes.  And I refer you back to that now, and just keep the  Williams article available.  Now, I think you noted in  your evidence that in the section of the west coast  between 55 and 59 degrees latitude De L'isle appended  the comment, and if you'll just locate that on the De  L'isle map, 55 and 59?  Yes.  And I'm translating, "Lands seen by the Russians in  1741 where Captain Chirikov lost his longboat, which  had ten men in it."  Ten men, yes.  Do you see that?  Yes.  All right.  I think a shallop (?) is a longboat, I'm not sure of  the translation of some of the French terms, but  that's approximately correct, I think.  Now, you're of course aware of the Chirikov  expedition?  Yes.  And are you aware of the fact that Chirikov saw what  he referred to as American natives?  Yes.  The -- I believe they were Aleuts.  Well, I want to refer you, Dr. Farley, to the next --  :  Sorry, what did you say; did you say Aleuts?  Yes.  The native people, my lord, of the -- it would  be the peninsula of Alaska, or particularly the  Aleutian chain.  I'm going to show you, Dr. Farley, an extract from a  volume entitled "Russian Penetration to Siberia and  North Pacific Russian America Ocean, Three Centuries  of Russian Eastward Expansion, 1700 to 1797".  And  this is a documentary record and it's published in the  Oregon Historical Press in 1988, and at page 139 is  Captain Chirikov's report as he inscribed it or wrote  it on December the 7th, 1741.  Do you see that? 20122  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   All right.  And I would like to direct you to what  3 Captain Chirikov reported, and if you will turn over  4 to page 146, and after indicating on page 146 and  5 previously that he had sent two boats ashore from his  6 vessel, which was anchored offshore, he says at the  7 bottom, and I quote:  8  9 "On July 25th at 1:00 p.m. we saw two rowboats  10 coming out from the bay where our boat and lodka  11 had been sent.  One was small and the other  12 somewhat larger.  We hoped that these were our  13 boat and longboat returning.  We went to meet  14 them, but realized that the boat was not ours  15 because its bow was very pointed and the oars were  16 not the same.  The men rowed with the oars close  17 to the sides, and the boats did not come close  18 enough to our packetboat for us to make out the  19 faces of the men.  We did see that there were four  20 men seated in the boat.  One was at the rudder and  21 the others were rowing.  One man, dressed in red,  22 stood up when they were still some distance away  23 and shouted twice 'Ahai, Ahai'.  24 They waved their hands and then immediately  25 turned and rowed back to shore.  I ordered that  26 white flags be waved and that our men bow, so that  27 the others would come to our ship.  Many of our  28 servitors did this, in spite of the fact that the  29 boats were being rowed quickly to shore.  We could  30 not pursue them because the wind was calm and  31 their boat was very swift.  The other large  32 rowboat, farther from our ship, returned, and then  33 both of them went back into the same bay from  34 which they had come.  35 We then realized that the servitors we had sent  36 were very likely in trouble since the navigator  37 Dementev had already been gone eight days and had  38 had plenty of time to return.  When we sent the  39 boatswain, we did not leave our position.  The  40 weather remained calm, and if they had not  41 encountered some misfortune they would have  42 already returned to us."  43  44 And he writes:  45  46 "We supposed that because the American natives did  47 not dare to come up to our packetboat that they 20123  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam 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.  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  had been hostile toward the men we had sent to  their shore, and that they had either killed them  or taken them captive.  We continued sailing in  the vicinity until evening, however, waiting for  our boats.  It was not until night that we moved  offshore because of the danger.  All during the  night we kept the light burning on the stern of  the ship in hope that when they saw it they might  come out to us at night."  Now, you're familiar with this passage obviously, Dr.  Farley?  A   Yes.  Q   And here he makes -- Captain Chirikov makes no  illusion to the nationality or race of the persons  that he sees, he simply describes them as American  natives.  Do you agree with that?  A   Yes.  RUSH:  All right.  GOLDIE:  That's the translation.  I assume my friend has the  Russian ready at hand.  RUSH:  I'm sure we can get it.  COURT:  You mean the American native?  GOLDIE:  Yeah, that's what —  RUSH:  Well, my lord, I just note it was translated by I  take it one Russian, an Englishman and perhaps an  American edited and translated in this edition.  GOLDIE:  Well, perhaps all American natives.  RUSH:  Perhaps.  COURT:  Well, this will be 12.  RUSH:  Thank you.  Actually, 13, my lord.  COURT:  13, is it?  Yes, you're quite right.  (EXHIBIT 1154-13 - Russian Penetration to Siberia  and North Pacific Russian America Ocean, Three  Centuries of Russian Eastward Expansion 1700-1797)  MR.  RUSH:  Q  Dr. Farley, while you have the passage still in front  of you, I want to read you the next -- just the next  paragraph of that passage:  "At 11:00 a.m. we turned and held a course toward  land between north and west" --  A   Oh, yes.  Q   You see that? 20124  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam 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  A  Yes.  Q   "and by the end" —  THE COURT:  Sorry, I haven't found that.  Where are you?  MR. RUSH:  I'm next reading —  THE COURT:  Oh, yes.  MR. RUSH:  Q   Just the next sentence, my lord:  "By the end of July 26 we reached 58 degrees 21  northern latitude."  A   Yeah, 58 degrees.  MR. RUSH:  Thank you, 58 degrees.  THE COURT:  Do we know what date this is?  MR. RUSH:  My lord, yes, it's indicated December 7th, 1741.  A   Excuse me --  THE COURT:  They're talking about July 25th they saw the  rowboats.  MR. RUSH:  Yes.  THE COURT:  And then —  MR. RUSH:  My lord, this is —  THE COURT:  And they reached 58 degrees on July 26th.  MR. RUSH:  My lord, it would be July the 25th of 1741, but  Captain Chirikov is writing this account after the  fact on December the 7th, 1741.  THE COURT:  Yes.  Well, I hope I'm not misunderstanding this,  but at the moment I have never seen it before in my  life.  It assumes to me what he's saying is that on  July 25th he saw these persons in a boat come out  towards his ship but not stop, and then he sailed on,  and on the end of the next day he reached 58 degrees  21 minutes north latitude.  MR. RUSH:  Yes, that's correct.  THE COURT:  So the previous date he wouldn't be much south of 58  degrees, if at all.  MR. RUSH:  He was -- yes, he was south of 58 degrees, 21.  THE COURT:  Yes.  MR. RUSH:  And —  THE COURT:  And sailing north in one day's time he reached 58,  21.  MR. RUSH:  Q   Well, I'm going to ask Dr. Farley that.  It's, I  think, understood is it not, Dr. Farley, that Chirikov  sighted land and the point that he was describing here  was between 55 and 56 degrees north latitude?  A   I can't remember the latitude exactly, but from the  account that you've just put before me, it seems that 20125  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Q  11  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  A  19  20  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  A  31  32  Q  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  A  38  THE COURT  39  MR. RUSH:  40  THE COURT  41  MR. RUSH:  42  Q  43  44  45  46  47  the -- the winds were light, and so when we read in  the penultimate paragraph on page 147 that:  "We turned and held course towards the land, and  by the end of July 26 we've reached 58, 21."  I shouldn't have thought that would have been very far  from where he observed the boats of the native --  well, the boats coming off from the shore.  All right, thank you.  Now, I think you've indicated,  Dr. Farley, that J.N. De L'isle, the cartographer, at  the time -- at this time, in 1741, was a cartographer  to the Russian court?  Yes.  And is it not the case that his brother, J.N. De  L'Isle's brother, Louis De L'isle Croyere, sailed with  Chirikov in 1741?  He was -- yes, he was a relative.  I can't remember  the details of that family lineage, but a relative  sailed with Chirikov.  Yes.  And is it your understanding that Croyere died  on the trip?  Yes.  I think that's correct, yes.  And De L'isle himself published a memoir in 1752  dealing with the Russian expedition, in which he made  specific mention of the voyage?  Yes.  And he also made mention of his brother's role in the  voyage; isn't that so?  My recollection of the detail of that is somewhat  limited, but yes, I would have to agree in general.  Yes, all right.  Dr. Farley, I wouldn't think this  would be a matter of issue.  I just ask you to turn to  page 141 of the Williams article or --  Of the —  Of the Williams article.  Yes.  :  What page, please?  Yes, 141, my lord.  :  Thank you.  Now, just -- I'm sorry, 142, doctor.  At the bottom of  142 Williams states, and I quote:  "Although Guillaume De L'isle was long since dead,  other members of his family had gained  considerable repute as geographers.  His younger 20126  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  A  9  Q  10  11  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  19  A  20  21  Q  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  A  44    ]  MR. RUSH  45  46  47  brothers, Joseph Nicholas De L'isle and Louis de  la Croyere, had both lived for many years in  Russia.  Joseph Nicholas played an important part  in planning the second Bering expedition, and de  la Croyere sailed with Chirikov but died on the  voyage."  Yes.  And then it talks about J.N. De L'isle returning to  France after 21 years at St. Petersburg Academy.  Now,  Dr. Farley, were you aware of the fact that the  younger De L'isle had served in Canada with French  troops?  Yes.  That fits with my recollection, yes.  And that according to his memoir he tried to persuade  the Russian expedition that the natives of the new  coast that they had seen resembled the native  inhabitants of Canada?  I have to confess, my recollection of that part is  rather dim.  All right.  Dr. Farley, I would like you to look at an  extract taken from a document.  The document is a book  of old maps.  Oh, yes.  By Fife and Freeman.  Are you familiar with that?  Yes, quite familiar.  1969.  And the -- the translation of the article at  page 199, and I venture this translation, Dr. Farley,  it says "New maps of discovery made by the Russian  Explorers"?  Yes, "Russian ships".  "Russian ships"?  Yes.  All right.  Now, I ask you, if you will, please, to  turn to page 200, at the top of the page beginning  with:  "Louis De L'isle de la Croyere, who was with  Tschirikow as a scientist, had served seventeen  years with the French troops in Canada before  going to Russia."  Right.  "And he easily persuaded the leaders of the  expedition in the North Pacific that the natives  of the new coast very much resembled the native 20127  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  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  inhabitants of Canada, and that America had in  truth been reached."  GOLDIE:  This was the man who was killed?  RUSH:  This is his brother?  A  Am I to answer?  RUSH:  Yes.  GOLDIE:  I thought my friend was questioning the witness  about the other brother, John Nicholas.  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  J.N. De L'isle wrote a memoir about what had been left  behind by his diseased brother, Louis De L'isle  Croyere, and that was printed in 1752.  Now, Dr.  Farley, do you have -- does this account, as it's set  out on page 200, accord with your understanding?  Yes.  It refreshes my recall, yes.  As I indicated a  moment ago, my recollection was rather dim of that,  but yes, I see it, and I have no reason to disagree  with what's written here.  Thank you.  Now, my lord, I would like that extract  to be placed at tab 14 and marked as Exhibit 1154-14.  :  Yes  (EXHIBIT 1154-14 - Fife and Freeman, Nouvelle  carte Des Decouvertes Faites Par Des Vaisseaux  Russiens)  THE REGISTRAR:  Do you have 14?  The back starts at 15 and —  the back ends at --  MR. RUSH:  We have to take some steps to remedy that.  Now, Dr.  Farley I'm going to refer you --  THE COURT:  Would it be convenient if we just call this 15 and  leave 14 --  MR. RUSH:  Well, we could.  I'm going to get -- I can provide --  THE COURT:  You think you can get a 14.  MR. RUSH:  Oh, yes, I think so.  In fact here comes one right  now.  Does your lordship have a 14?  THE COURT:  No, I don't.  THE REGISTRAR:  Tab 13 is Russian Penetration.  THE COURT:  Yes.  THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you.  MR. RUSH:  Yes, that's correct.  Tab 14, "Nouvelle Carte".  MR. RUSH:  Q   Now, doctor, I would like to refer you in the document  book back to tab 6.  And I think you agreed with me  this morning that this was a Buache map.  You will see  it's a Phillip Buache map of 1752? 2012?  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  Q  4  5  A  6  MR.  RUSH:  7  8  9  10  11  12  THE  COURT  13  MR.  RUSH:  14  Q  15  A  16  17  18  19  20  21  MR.  RUSH:  22  THE  COURT  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  25  26  27  THE  COURT  28  29  30  31  32  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  Q  35  36  A  37  38  39  Q  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  Yes.  And then there's an association with De L'isle  as well.  Yes.  And this is sometimes referred to as the De  L'Isle-Buache map?  Right.  Yes.  Now, Dr. Farley, I would just like you to agree  with me, if you can, that the front piece in Glyndwr  Williams' book at 1154-10, or at tab 10, is the same  map, it appears, as though Dr. Williams utilized this  map as the frontispiece in his book.  Can you agree  with that.  :  The North American part?  Yes?  Yes.  I would have to agree with that, without going  carefully, just looking at it superficially and just  notice that part of the title shown and the way the  scales are represented and so on, I think one could  say yes, it's a reduced copy of part of this Buache-De  L'Isle map.  And in this Buache --  :  Well, it's not the same though, is it?  It's not the same in all of its respects, because  it -- I think his lordship's comment is that the far  western side, or what would be the left-hand side of  the map, is not depicted on the frontispiece.  :  I'm just looking at the area around the Bay of the  West is in all respects the same.  There's a -- oh, I  suppose there is -- there's that line of hills or  mountains south of the Bay of the West on tab 6 is --  I'm sorry, I think it is there, but it's very faint on  the photocopy, but I suppose it's the same thing.  Yes.  In terms of the right-hand side of the map, Dr.  Farley, it appears to be the same map, does it not?  Yes.  I think we're getting into the problem of the  reduced reproduction there's a loss of clarity of  every stage of repro.  Yes?  And so that's what we're seeing here.  Now, I would just like to refer to the feature that's  described as "Mer ou Baye de L'Ouest" and here it's  described as "Sea or Bay of the West"?  Yes.  And it appears as though the entrance way to that is  through the -- the entrance, as it says, discovered by  Juan de Fuca in 1592? 20129  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  One of the entrances, and the other appears to  2 be Martin d'Aguilar.  3 Q   That would be the southern entrance, would it?  4 A   Yes.  5 Q   And that was in 1603, at least it's attributed to  6 being in 1603?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   And there appears to be, as his lordship has  9 indicated, a feature indicating a mountain range  10 around the southern portion and up the eastern side of  11 the bay?  12 A   Yes.  There's a depiction of broken topography.  13 Whether it's a mountain chain or not, as I've  14 testified before, it's difficult to know, but  15 certainly the cartographer has shown by symbols a  16 break in topography there.  17 Q   All right, thank you.  Now, just insert this back in  18 at 6.  Now, Dr. Farley, I want to show you a --  19 another map, which is a map reproduced in a volume  20 that I have made reference to.  It's the Urness  21 edition of Bering Voyages?  22 A   Yes.  23 Q   And just now going to show this to you.  Now, I'm  24 showing you a map which is found at page 46 of the  25 Bering voyages by Carol Urness, and my lord, the  26 volume extract of that volume I have already tendered,  27 and it's at tab 11.  Now, Dr. Farley, if you will just  28 examine this map for a moment, can you agree with me  29 that this is a portion, apparently the northern  30 portion, of George-Louis la Rouge's map of 1744?  31 A  Well, that's what the caption under the map shows.  32 There were many many different versions of the same  33 kind of map, so I can't be absolutely sure of that,  34 but certainly superficially it appears to be the same.  35 Q   All right.  It's labelled as being a map of the new  36 world by George-Louis la Rouge?  37 A   Yes.  38 Q   And you know George-Louis la Rouge as a cartographer;  39 do you not?  40 A   Slightly, not in detail.  He was not one of the  41 outstanding cartographers of the period.  42 Q   All right.  I just -- I have the volume here, Dr.  43 Farley.  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   Muller-Bering Voyages.  And I just want to be sure  46 that there's no ambiguity in your mind, I'm showing  47 you the actual volume from the Rasmuson Library, and 20130  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 I'm directing you to page 46, and I want you to  2 confirm for me what I'm handing to you is the  3 photocopy of la Rouge's copy in the volume?  4 A   It appears to be.  Oh, yes, yes.  5 MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  Now, Dr. Farley, I have obtained one  6 copy --  7 MR. GOLDIE:  Put this under tab 11?  8 MR. RUSH:  No.  That can go under tab 15.  That can now be  9 placed as 1154-15, my lord.  10  11 (EXHIBIT 1154-15 - Map - Georges-Louis la Rouge's  12 "Mappe monde nouvelle")  13  14 MR. GOLDIE:  Was this disclosed?  15 MR. RUSH:  No.  It's not disclosed, it's just been published.  16 MR. RUSH:  Now, Dr. Farley, what I would like you to do, if you  17 will, please, is to just compare the copy --  18 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, my lord, the document has not been disclosed,  19 he has not had an opportunity of seeing it.  I think  20 my friend should ask him if he's familiar with it.  21 MR. RUSH:  22 Q   Yes, certainly.  If you will look at this document,  23 Dr. Farley, it's described as a facsimile of the  24 series.  You're familiar with this facsimile?  25 A  ACML.  It's published in 1989 by the Association of  26 Canadian Map Loggers in Ottawa.  27 MR. RUSH:  It goes on to indicate the sponsorship of this, and  28 this document is entitled the "Mappe monde nouvelle",  29 the Map of the New World, by la Rouge, Paris, 1744.  30 Now, I would just ask you, Dr. Farley, if you will  31 compare this facsimile to the photocopy.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  I thought my friend was going to ask if he's  33 familiar with the document that's placed in front of  34 him.  35 MR. RUSH:  36 Q   Do you know the map?  37 A   I have seen the original, or an original from which  38 this is derived, but this is the first time I've seen  39 this one in the ACML series.  40 Q   It's because it's recently published, it's evident.  41 A   I assume that to be the case.  I'm not familiar with  42 it in the ACML series, but I recognize this as being a  43 copy of -- one copy of an original, if you follow me.  44 Q   Of the la Rouge 1744 map, right.  My question to you,  45 Dr. Farley, is if you compare, please, this western  46 hemisphere -- in the northern part of the western  47 hemisphere to the la Rouge copy in the -- at page 46 20131  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  5  MR.  RUSH:  6  THE  COURT  7  8  A  9  MR.  RUSH:  10  THE  COURT  11  MR.  RUSH:  12  Q  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Q  39  40  41  42  A  43  44  45  Q  46  47  of the Bering Voyages, can you agree with me that it  represents the same map?  Yes.  It appears to do that, and from the caption I  have no reason to question that.  All right.  :  They put Asia and Africa on the wrong side of North  America.  Very observant, my lord.  Now, Dr. Farley, I would like you to --  :  Is that 1744?  Yes.  Now, I would like to draw your attention to the  margin note at the bottom of this map, Dr. Farley.  Yes.  You will see it -- and I read a portion of this to you  earlier.  It indicates that it's the map "Monde  Nouvelle Devier et Monsieur Le Camp Moripau  George-Louis la Rouge, Paris 1744"(phonetics).  And  then in parenthesis "With revisions of late 1752 or  later".  Yes.  Now, to what would that refer, if you know.  Do you mean the title?  Yes, the revisions, yes?  Well, just what it says.  I'm sorry, perhaps you --  I'm wondering if you -- 1752 is a date for which I  have shown you other maps, and I was wondering if you  could relate that date to the Buache or De L'isle maps  of the same year?  Yes.  About the same time -- I'm not sure I'm really  following your question.  I'm asking myself -- or at  least I'm saying to myself there were many many maps  of this sort campaigning are portraying the Northwest  America and continuing the Du Fonte -- or  interpretations of the Du Fonte myth, and some of them  coupled with the Bering discoveries, and this is one  example.  Does the notation of the kind I've directed your  attention to indicate that revisions were made on this  la Rouge map as a result of having examined a later  map in 1752?  Well, later information, I'm not sure whether it was  in cartographic form or not, but it says that very  clearly with revisions of late 1752 or later.  But cartographically would such an indication indicate  there would have been a revision from examining  another map, really examining, you suggest in your 20132  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  A  3  4  5  6  MR.  GOLDI  7  8  9  A  10  MR.  GOLDI  11  A  12  MR.  RUSH:  13  Q  14  15  16  17  18  A  19  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  Q  31  32  A  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  35  THE  COURT  36  MR.  RUSH:  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  A  43  MR.  RUSH:  44  THE  COURT  45  MR.  RUSH:  46  47  THE  COURT  field?  Yes, yes.  As I say, I just take it on face value.  It  says with revisions of late 1752, so presumably there  was something earlier.  Does that answer your  question, I'm not sure?  £:  I don't think the witness has answered my friend's  question.  My friend's question was does that footnote  indicate that the revision was made from another map?  Not necessarily.  £:  I don't think the witness --  Not necessarily from another map.  What I was asking you was from your discipline where  such a note appears like that, as a cartographer would  that be a signal to you that the revisions had been  made by an examination by their cartographer of  another map of that date?  No, no, not necessarily, no.  It could be from other  sources.  All right, very well.  If you could just look, please,  to the land mass, which appears to be North America,  and do you see running down the west coast there the  words "Mer de L'Ouest"?  Yes.  And that's Sea of the West?  Yes.  And that's now the -- that lettering is placed off the  west coast of North America?  Yes.  And I would ask you if you can find the 50th parallel  on that la Rouge map?  Yes.  And, my lord, this appears on the smaller scale as  well, but it's not as easy to see.  :  Yes.  And Dr. Farley, below the 50th parallel and running  from the west coast towards the east coast do you see  the words Nouvelle France ou Canada?  Yes.  Meaning New France or Canada?  Yes.  All right, thank you.  :  Take the afternoon adjournment.  Yes, my lord.  I only have one version of this map,  and --  :  All right.  What do you want to do with it? 20133  A.L. Farley (for Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  MR. RUSH:  I would like it marked as perhaps 15B.  We can mark  the sequence 1154A, and that can be the smaller  version of it and B can be this version.  THE COURT:  All right.  That will be 15B then.  MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 1154-15A - Map - Bering's voyages)  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  (EXHIBIT 1154-15B - Map entitled Mappe Monde  Nouvelle)  THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  THE COURT:  All right, thank you.  THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court,  short recess.  Court stands adjourned for a  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 3:00)  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  Graham D. Parker  Official Reporter.  United Reporting Service Ltd. 20134  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  THE COURT  4  MR. RUSH:  5  Q  6  7  8  A  9  THE COURT  10  MR. RUSH:  11  Q  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  A  17  Q  18  A  19  20  21  22  Q  23  A  24  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  (Proceedings resumed at 3:15 p.m.)  :  Mr. Rush?  Thank you.  Dr. Farley, if you will look at the next map that I  have drawn to your attention in your map folio, map  20, which is Muller's map, do you have that there?  Yes.  :  Map 2 0 in the —  In the folio.  This is Muller's map in 1754, correct?  Yes.  And can you agree with me that one of the purposes of  Muller's map was to expose the de 1'Isle-Buache  account of the Russian discoveries?  To expose their account, I am not sure --  As false?  That may have been one of the objectives.  I think I  would put it in the more positive way, I think it's an  intention to represent what was known about the lands  about the North Pacific.  All right.  And what had recently been discovered as a result of  the Bering expedition.  As a result of the Chirikov-Bering expedition?  Yes, right.  If you will go to tab 10, which is the Williams  account, and turn to page 145.  Are you with me on  page 145?  145, yes.  Now, just the full paragraph beginning, "Muller's  brief comments of 1753 were followed five years later  by the publication of his great work, Sammlung  Russissche Geschichte, the third volume of which was  translated into English and published by Thomas  Jefferys in 1761."  And I think you have mentioned  that.  "Muller's book was the most important  contemporary account of the Russian discoveries, and  it furnished a readable, coherent and generally  accurate description of the Bering expeditions.  He  admitted that Bering on his first expedition had not  brought back the conclusive information expected, but  correctly insisted that the Dane's explorations, and  those of Gwosdev in 1732, had shown 'that there is a  real separation between the two parts of the world,  Asia and America; that it consists only in a narrow  streight'.  His account of the second expedition 20135  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 described the explorations of Bering's two ships and  2 the host of minor explorers connected with the  3 project.  He pointed out that the Russian explorations  4 had diminished the chances of finding a passage  5 through Hudson Bay because they seemed to show that  6 the American coast extended northwest as far as Bering  7 Strait.  Muller was the more emphatic on this point  8 since he rejected the system of inland seas and  9 straits shown by de l'isle and Buache along the  10 Pacific coast of North America and mildly censured  11 their cartographic absurdities.  'It is always much  12 better to omit whatever is uncertain, and leave a void  13 space, till future discoveries shall ascertain the  14 affair in dispute."  15 Now, Dr. Farley, does that accord with your  16 understanding?  17 A   Oh, yes, Muller was a first rate cartographer and he  18 did largely repudiate de Fonte and de Fuca.  Not  19 entirely de Fuca but largely de Fuca as well.  20 Q   I would like to refer you to the map at tab 20, and I  21 would like to here refer you to Mount St. Elias, you  22 see it's referred to there and I think you referred to  23 that feature in your testimony.  What you did not  24 translate, however, is the short note below that where  25 it -- are you with me? -- where it says --  26 A   Yes.  27 Q   -- "coast discovered by Captain Commander Bering in  28 1741"?  2 9 A   Right.  30 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, the positioning of St. Elias is  31 remarkedly close to what we now know to be its present  32 location, is it not?  33 A   Yes, it's in about the right latitude and, as I  34 pointed out in earlier testimony, latitude is a  35 relatively simple matter even from the deck of a ship.  36 Q   And if you will just refer a little bit below that  37 point, you will note that he, Muller, indicates the  38 point at which Capt. Chirikov sighted land and he says  39 there, and I think the translation is "coast  40 discovered by Mr. Chirikov in 1741"?  41 A   By Mr.-- yes, Mr. Captain, actually, he was second in  42 command.  Yes, by Mr. Captain, he was 2IC in the  43 expedition.  44 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, can you agree with me from the  45 representation of the latitude line at 55 degrees that  46 it appears that the point at which Muller places Capt.  47 Chirikov's discovery of land to be at about 56 degrees 20136  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 north latitude?  2 A   Yes, about that.  It would take a minute or two to  3 figure it exactly but that's 56 or 57, perhaps.  4 Q   All right.  Now if you will just go down the line of  5 the coast there, you see the next notation that Muller  6 has, do you agree with the translation beginning  7 pretendue?  8 A   Pretendue.  9 Q   That this translates as "Supposed R." or river "de las  10 Reyas of Admiral de Fonte in 1640"?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   According to Mr. de l'isle?  13 A   Yes.  14 Q   All right.  And would that be a reference to J. N. de  15 l'Isle's memoir and his map of 1752?  16 A  Well, de l'isle does make a representation of the Rio  17 del Reyas, but we must recall that the name, the Rio,  18 is a name that stemmed from the expedition of  19 Martin -- well, stemmed from the northward extension  20 by Aguilar of early Spanish exploration of the coast.  21 Q   Apparently Muller accepts some of the supposed  22 geography of Aguilar, but he certainly doesn't accept  23 that there is any inland connection to the Hudson's  24 Bay?  25 A  When you say supposed, this was real.  Perhaps I  26 should clarify, Aguilar existed, he was not a  27 ficticious character, and he did sail the west coast,  28 the problem is just exactly how far did he get and  29 what was the position.  30 Q   All right.  And that it's thought that Aguilar's  31 discovery of the las Reyas, or River de las Reyas,  32 that that river was thought to have been discovered by  33 Aguilar; is that correct?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   All right.   At least to the extent of Muller's  36 acceptance of the place and the fact of the finding or  37 the outlet of de las Reyas, it would appear that  38 Muller accepts that at that point apparently somewhat  39 short of the 50th, about the 45th -- well, I would say  40 40 what, 7th degree north latitude?  41 A   Something like that.  I think, if I may say so, it's  42 fairly clear from the map and the delineation there  43 that there is some conjecture about it as to just  44 where it ought to be or if indeed it existed.  As I  45 pointed out, Aguilar was a real person.  46 THE COURT:  I don't see Aguilar on here, but saw it a moment  47 ago.  I lost it.  Is it on this map or another map? 20137  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  4  5  6  7  THE COURT  8  MR. RUSH:  9  Q  10  11  12  13  14  A  15  16  Q  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  23  24  25  Q  26  27  A  28  29  Q  30  31  32  A  33  34  35  Q  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  42  A  43  44  45  46  Q  47  A  Excuse me, my lord, if you can see the River of the  West in about latitude 45, if you extend latitude 45,  the parallel, over to the American coast, and you see  a River of the West flowing to the sea, and then there  is a the statement "Entree decouvre par Martin d.  Aguilar."  :  Yes, I see it.  Way down there.  Dr. Farley, I would like to refer you to the notation  actually between the one you have just directed his  lordship to and the indication of the River de las  Reyas, and that is where it says "entree decouvre par  Juan de Fuca"?  Yes, "entree decou", it's an abbreviation for  "decouvre, en 1592."  And that's the entrance discovered by Juan de Fuca in  1592?  Again, a very sensitive suggestion of it, but yes.  Dr. Farley, he has dropped the use of the word  pretendue, do you see that?  Yes, he has dropped that word but judging from what's  on the rest of the map, it would seem that an element  of that is left open and would indicate that there is  a good deal of uncertainty about just what was there.  He doesn't even show it as an embayment as this point,  does he?  The trends of the coast on either side is towards  inland.  Would you agree with me that Muller accepts, as a  matter of fact, the existence of the Juan de Fuca  Strait?  I don't think I could go that far.  I would say that  there is at least a tentative suggestion of that.  But  I wouldn't say that it's a definite acceptance.  All right.  He has got that, the placement of the  opening to Juan de Fuca, at about 47 or 48 degrees  north latitude?  Yes, 47, 48, yes.  If you will look to the River de l'ouest, or River of  the West, which you have drawn our attention to, that  seems to flow into Lake Winipigue on its eastern side?  The question is whether it is flowing into it or  flowing from it, but, yes, Lake Winipigue, I am not  sure that I can read that, the name on that lake  clearly enough to be absolute about it.  It's Lake Winipigue, isn't it?  W-I-N-I-P-I-G-U-E, yes. 2013?  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q   And that would be Lake Winnipeg?  2 A   Yes, presumably.  Well, I don't know of any other  3 sizeable lake in that relative location that might  4 have had that name.  That doesn't mean to say that  5 there wasn't one, simply I don't know of any.  6 Q   But the most likely conclusion is that it's Lake  7 Winnipeg?  8 A   I would think so, yes.  9 Q   And it shows that the River of the West is flowing  10 from Lake Winnipeg?  11 A   Yes, either from or to, yes.  12 Q   And do you see the dotted lines that or the dots that  13 continue on from the darkened line?  14 A   Yes.  15 Q   Would you agree that it appears that Muller believes  16 this river connects to the west coast?  17 A   Yes, again, it's a very tentative sort of conjectural  18 thing.  That is the way I would interpret those dotted  19 lines.  The cartographer was by no means sure of the  20 information that he was attempting to portray.  21 Q   The dotted line suggests some conjecture about whether  22 the river flows to the west coast?  23 A   Yes.  24 MR. GOLDIE:  Or from.  2 5    MR. RUSH:  26 Q   Now, Dr. Farley, from your observation of this map,  27 would you agree with me that the general outline of  28 the coast, as Muller depicts it, is remarkably  29 accurate for the period?  30 A   Yes, it was in these terms -- we have to refine that,  31 much of it, as you can see, is, you might say,  32 inspired conjecture.  But the points that are shown  33 where the tracks of the Russian vessels had approached  34 the coast, those points were moderately well-  35 established in latitude, if not in longitude, and for  36 much of what we recognize today as the Peninsula of  37 Alaska and the Aleutian Islands, it has to be inspired  38 conjecture, because there were no sightings.  39 Q   I appreciate that.  But you will agree with me that  40 the way Muller has depicted it in terms of their  41 general understanding of the coastline, that it's  42 remarkably similar to its present line?  43 A  Well, if I may, I put it this way, it represents a  44 major step forward in the mapping of the northwest  45 coast of America.  46 Q   And it shows a continuous coastline from Aguilar to  47 the Chirikov point at 56 -- 20139  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  A  6  7  8  9  Q  10  11  A  12  13  THE COURT  14  15  A  16  17  18  THE COURT  19  A  20  THE COURT  21  A  22  23  THE COURT  24  MR. RUSH:  25  Q  26  27  A  28  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  A  39  Q  40  A  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A  I am sorry, I missed that.  It shows a continuous coastline from the point of  Aguilar's discoveries in 1603 or where the River of  the West meets the Westcoast, to Chirikov's sightings?  Well, again, it's clearly conjectural because the line  is dotted and, again, where de Fuca's entrance is  shown, there is obviously some or was uncertainty on  Muller's part.  There is nothing dotted about the entrance there, is  there?  Sorry, my lord, I am referring to this part of the  coast.  :  That's what I am wondering about, I wanted the  witness to show me what he said was dotted.  This portion, my lord, and this portion in here and  uncertainty, because there is no closure there.  So he  wouldn't have left it open.  :  But you pointed to there and there?  There and there.  :  That is dotted, is it?  Excuse me, yes, in my recollection of the original  maps it is, yes.  :  All right.  There is nothing dotted about the entranceway to Juan  de Fuca?  No, but there is uncertainty as expressed by the lack  of closure.  Have you heard of J. G. Castille, Dr. Farley?  Yes,  And who was Castille?  Trying to think.  I will have to ask you to --  Was he a Jesuit who was interested in cartography and  did some rather -- lay cartography?  French, yes, French cartographer.  Do you know if he -- are you aware of any of the maps  that he published?  Well, I can't --  Do any come to mind?  None comes to mind immediately.  That's not to say  that I couldn't recall.  Sorry?  I can't think of a particular map that --  Do I take it from your lack of recollection about  Castille that he is not one of the more notable  cartographers of the period?  In terms of the representation of northwest America, 20140  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 North America generally, but particularly northwest  2 America, no, he is not one of the major cartographers.  3 Q   Would you look, please, now to folio 14, map --  4 Bellin's map of 1755.  I have referred this to you  5 previously, maybe I can just assist you.  6 A  May I put this down?  7 Q   Yes.  8 A   Thank you.  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   All right.  Now, Dr. Farley, this is Ballin, 1555?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   And you will note that Ballin marks the Russian  13 discovery in the upper left hand corner, and I think  14 you made reference to this?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   And you agree with me that the translation of this  17 indicates "Lands Discovered by the Russians in 1741  18 without having landed there"?  19 A   Yes, "without going ashore", yes.  20 Q   And does it -- do you agree with me that the place of  21 the landing, or at least the discovery, indicates that  22 it occurred at about 55 or 56 degrees north latitude?  23 A   It's shown extending actually where the lettering is  24 shown, it would be about, yes, 5630 to 5730 or  25 thereabout.  26 Q   Now, you will see to the right of that, in French, you  27 will see the inscription?  28 A   Yes.  29 Q   Do you agree with me that it translates, "and one does  30 not know if these are islands or the continent"?  31 A   Yes, the small label just off in the ocean, yes. "No  32 one knows if this is islands or continent."  33 Q   And would another term for -- could you translate that  34 "as islands or mainland"?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   Now, you noted I think in your evidence, that Ballin  37 placed a Mer de l'ouest, or Western Sea on his map and  38 you have indicated, you see the indication?  39 A   Yes, very tentative.  40 Q   He doesn't give any boundaries?  41 A   No.  Well, there is a partial boundary but it's again  42 very tentative.  43 Q   And what do you see as the boundary there?  44 A  Well, to the south where it says -- I am not sure I  45 can read it on that copy.  46 Q   Entrance of Juan de Fuca?  47 A   Something about Aguilar and then the date and north of 20141  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 that is the entrance of Juan de Fuca.  2 Q   All right.  I am going to read you, direct your  3 attention again to Prof. Williams, I just ask you to  4 keep the map out, doctor.  I am going to direct your  5 attention now to -- back to Prof. Williams at page  6 151, he is discussing Ballin in this and his map.  And  7 at 151 beginning the first full paragraph he says:  8  9 "Ballin was particularly well placed to judge  10 the reliability of the new maps, because his  11 position as Ingenieur de la Marine et du Depot  12 des Cartes, Plans et Journaux, gave him access  13 to the reports and maps of La Verendrye and  14 other French explorers in North America.  As  15 befitted his official status, he showed little  16 patience with cartographers who produced maps  17 to fit theories, and he preferred to leave a  18 region blank rather than fill it with doubtful  19 detail.  He was sceptical of Buache's  20 insistence that the 'Mer de l'Ouest' was a  21 great inland sea, and placed little trust in  22 the Fonte letter, which he thought was perhaps  23 an account concocted  in England to stimulate  24 interest in the Northwest Passage."  25  26 I am going to be returning to that passage, Dr.  27 Farley, but in terms of Williams's assessments of  28 Ballin, can you agree with that from your own  29 research?  30 A   Yes, certainly it's his position as the head of the  31 cartographic section of the Ministry of Marine and  32 Maps, he would have had access to French information.  33 As to whether his showing little patience with  34 cartographers producing maps to fit theories, I think  35 that's a matter of interpretation.  Certainly the  36 evidence is persuasive that he, from the very  37 notations on this map, that he had little faith in the  38 de Fonte figures and he was critical of de l'isle and  39 Buache.  40 Q   Let's me read on in his passage:  41  42 "Just as nationalistic British geographers  43 decried attempts to find a waterway to the  44 Pacific other than through Hudson Bay, so  45 Ballin rejected their theories and favoured, as  46 he had in 1754, La Verendrye's proposed route  47 to the ocean along a string of lakes and rivers 20142  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 west of Lake Superior."  2  3 Does that accord with your own research?  4 A   Yes, Ballin did represent the La Verendrye  5 information.  He was the first, in my recollection,  6 the first to portray that in his map.  But, excuse me,  7 I should add to that, the first as a commercial  8 product, published map.  9 Q   All right.  And it's -- do you agree as well as Prof.  10 Williams that Ballin believed that the Pacific Ocean  11 lay on the other side of the North American continent  12 and the route to it was overland?  13 A  Well, I think -- just restate the question, if you  14 will.  15 Q   Do you agree, as suggested here by Prof. Williams,  16 that there -- that Ballin, in his map, considered that  17 there was a Pacific Ocean on the other side of the  18 North American continent?  19 MR. GOLDIE:  Where does he say that, please?  20 MR. RUSH:  It just says, "Just as nationalistic British  21 geographers decried attempts to find a waterway to the  22 Pacific other than through Hudson Bay, so Bellin in  23 turn rejected their theories and favoured, as he had  24 in 1744, La Verendrye's proposed route to the ocean."  25 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, what ocean?  26 MR. RUSH:  Well —  27 THE COURT:  The Pacific?  2 8 MR. RUSH:  29 Q   Well, what do you think it is, Dr. Farley?  30 A  Well, I would, in the context of --  31 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, my lord, I don't think the witness should be  32 asked to speculate what was in Prof. Williams's mind  33 and Prof. Williams was speculating on what Ballin  34 thought.  35 MR. RUSH:  I am not asking the witness to speculate, I am here  36 simply asking the witness if, as a cartographer, from  37 his research, that he can agree with Prof. Williams's  3 8 view.  39 THE COURT:  I certainly think the witness can say whether he  40 agrees or disagrees with that passage, or such other  41 middle ground as may be thought more accurate.  42 A  Well, I would say -- I don't dispute what Williams has  43 written in general, but as to -- there are two  44 questions here:  One, what was the ocean in the minds  45 of the cartographers at the time?  It might have been  46 the northern ocean, it might have been based on Indian  47 reports anyway, Hudson's Bay, or it might have been 20143  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam 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. RUSH:  Q  A  A  Q  A  A  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  the Pacific Ocean.  So, that's one aspect.  And the  other is, if you are asking me did Ballin have the  impression of a continent, well he must have done, and  he must have known that it had a western margin  somewhere but he didn't know where it was, other than  from the discoveries of the Rusians in the north, and  what he thought were the discoveries of the Spanish in  the south.  Well, he certainly put it -- he gave it co-ordinates  on his map in Exhibit 14, didn't he, or map 14?  Not a complete representation of the west coast, and  as he says, very clearly, no one knows if these parts  are land or water.  There is no doubt, is there, from looking at that map,  Dr. Farley, that there is a suggestion of the west  coast by the way he represents it in that map?  There is a suggestion there, certainly, yes.  And just in terms of the ocean, when you said that  there could be or that Ballin may have been referring  to, did you say the north ocean?  Yes, up to the arctic or, more particularly, to  Hudson's Bay, because you recall in the literature,  and I can't remember the detail but essentially  something to do with salt water and the Indian reports  indicated salt water in what turned to out to be  Hudson's Bay.  But La Verendrye did not know that at  that time but if they did they made a different  interpretation.  Just reading from the last clause there, Dr. Farley,  when he refers to La Verendrye's proposed route to the  ocean along a string of lakes and rivers west of Lake  Superior, they are not talking about the north ocean,  are they, west of Lake Superior?  As I pointed out, it's conceivable that that could be  an interpretation.  I don't dispute the statement that  Williams has made, and it would seem, if one had to  take it on balance, it would seem that he is referring  to the western ocean, but that's not necessarily the  case.  Yes.  All right.  Dr. Farley, I want to show you --  :  Is it important that I know what these notations are  on Ballin's map, along the west coast?  I have got the  two at the north.  How far along are you, my lord?  :  Just to the west of La mer de l'ouest, it looks like  islands or passages and I can't read them.  The 20144  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  THE  COURT  4  MR.  RUSH:  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  THE  COURT  12  A  13  MR.  RUSH:  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  A  20  Q  21  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  THE  COURT  26  MR.  RUSH:  27  THE  COURT  28  MR.  RUSH:  29  A  30  31  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  THE  COURT  38  A  39  MR.  RUSH:  40  THE  COURT  41  42  A  43  MR.  RUSH:  44  Q  45  46  47  southern end of the gap in the coastline.  Well, my lord --  :  What do they say?  Are you with me, Dr. Farley, latitude 48, just between  47, and 48, his lordship is asking about?  Yes.  He is asking about the French there, it says entrance  of Juan de Fuca, does it not?  Yes.  :  Is that what that says?  Yes.  You're with me there?  Yes.  All right.  And then below that, and it's below in and  to the right of that, can you see one or we do not  know this part?  These parts?  These parts.  And then below that, entrance of Martin  Aguilar?  Yes.  In 1603?  Yes.  :  I am sorry, entrance?  Of Martin d'Aguilar.  :  M-A-R-T-I-N?  Yes, and d-'-A-G-U-L-A-R?  I think, if I may, it's capital A-G-U-I-L-A-R.  I  can't discern the detail even with the hand glass, but  I think there is an I in there.  There may well be.  I have here, Dr. Farley, what is  a facimile of the copy that's here at map 14, and if  you look at Aguilar, you just have a --  Yes, A-G-U-I-L-A-R.  Thank you.  :  A-G-U-I-L-A-R?  Yes, my lord.  Thank you.  :  Thank you.  And then behind Cape Blanc, what is  that, what do those words say?  Cape Blanc or it would be San Sebastion.  Now, Dr. Farley, I am going to show you a map -- this  is, my lord, during Mr. Morrison's testimony, a map  was exhibited as Exhibit 1027-29, and he was asked to  produce a better copy, and this is a better copy of 20145  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  34  35  36  THE COURT  37  MR. RUSH:  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  that.  It's a facsimile reproduction of the same map  which is map, excuse me, map 14 in Dr. Farley's folio.  And this map has been coloured, there are three  colours, red, yellow and blue, and there is a notation  by E. Dahl, who is the archivist at the National  Archives of Canada, about the placement of the three  colours on the original.  And, Dr. Farley, I would like to show you this map  and can you agree with me that this facsimile is the  same as the copy that's shown at ten, your map folio  number ten or 14?  Yes, it's the same map.  All right.  Now, I would like you, if you will, to  look at this map, and I am going to ask you to refer  to the cartouche in the upper left hand corner, and  you see there remarks, and the statement which appears  there, under remarks, can it be translated, and I will  ask if you can agree with this translation as "The  French possessions are coloured blue"?  Yes.  'those of the English yellow"?  'those of the Spanish red"'  And  Yes.  And  Yes.  Now, I am -- I would just ask you if you would look to  the blue line, Dr. Farley, and you agree that it runs  along the river south and west of Lake Winnipeg marked  at Assiniboiles River?  Yes, yes.  Here we are.  Here.  River de Assiniboiles.  Yes.  And I think you agreed with me that below where the  words Assiniboiles River is positioned on the map, it  says in French, "which one can believe flows to the  western sea"?  :  Is possible, you mean.  Yes.  Do you see that, Doctor?  "Perhaps one believes flows to the sea of the west."  Thank you.  And, Dr. Farley, do you agree that it  appears as though the red line stops at the point  marked on this map as entrance of Juan de Fuca?  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  My lord, I have one copy of this and I propose that  it either be marked -- well, it can be marked  separately or it can be marked as part of perhaps A or 20146  A. L. Farley (For Province)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 B of Exhibit 10 —  2 THE COURT:  I would prefer to —  3 MR. RUSH:  1027-29.  4 THE COURT:  I would prefer to mark it as A of 29, and then I can  5 look at one -- I suppose other --  6 MR. GOLDIE: My friend is proposing to mark it as part of Mr.  7 Morrison's -- that's what my friend was proposing.  I  8 think since it's been identified by the witness it  9 should be marked as part of the cross-examination  10 here.  11 THE COURT:  So it will be 1029-B.  12 MR. RUSH:  Well, my lord, I think your proposal is at odds to  13 what has been suggested by Mr. Goldie.  If it's marked  14 1027-29 it would be marked in Mr. Morrison's sequence.  15 If it's marked in the sequence for Dr. Farley, it  16 would be 1149, that would be the sequence of his  17 folio.  18 THE COURT:  14A then.  19 THE REGISTRAR:  The Province put in one of these, 14X.  20 MR. GOLDIE:  1149-14X is the Province's facsimile of this map.  21 But the distinction that is being made is that this  22 has some coloured lines on it and so far as I am  23 aware, they are certified by Mr. Dahl at the archives,  24 but I haven't been able to compare it with what is at  25 Mr. Morrison's Exhibit 1027-29.  And if my friend  26 wishes to mark it as part of that, I would like to be  27 given the opportunity of comparing the two.  28 MR. RUSH:  Well, I think it -- a reference should be made to the  29 exhibit as it was tendered by Mr. Morrison.  30 THE COURT:  I think the safest thing to do is mark it as 1027-27  31 A.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  I would like the opportunity of looking at what Mr.  33 Morrison spoke to when he gave his evidence.  34 THE COURT:  Well, you are welcome to do that and if there is any  35 problem, you can speak to it again.  36 Is it convenient to adjourn?  37 MR. RUSH:  All right.  Thank you.  38  39 (EXHIBIT 1027-29A: MAP ENTITLED CARTE DE L'AMERIQUE  40 SEPTENTRIANDE)  41 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  42 a true and accurate transcript of the  43 proceedings herein.  44  45  46 Wilf Roy  47 Official Reporter

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

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"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/cdm.delgamuukw.1-0018422/manifest

Comment

Related Items