Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

Commision Evidence of Jefferay Vincent Boys Vol. 6 British Columbia. Supreme Court Jan 26, 1990

Item Metadata

Download

Media
delgamuukw-1.0018485.pdf
Metadata
JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018485.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0018485-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0018485-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018485-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0018485-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0018485-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0018485-source.json
Full Text
delgamuukw-1.0018485-fulltext.txt
Citation
delgamuukw-1.0018485.ris

Full Text

 n/ch^ei  <3In tl\t £\xpTtmt Court of ^ritielj Columbia  (BEFORE THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)  Nc 0843  Smithers Registry  Victoria, B.C.  January 26, 1990  BETWEEN:  DELGAMUUKW, also known as KEN MULDOE,  suing on his own behalf and on behalf  of all other members of the HOUSE OF  DELGAMUUKW, and others,  Plaintiffs;  AND  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE  PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA and  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR CANADA,  Defendants.  (CONTINUATION OF)  COMMISSION EVIDENCE OF JEFFERAY VINCENT BOYS  »_*..«. ~_.*,,*»  m  «MvitMrrracftaeucnrrr uuraurt tP WMl ttVfll £fn % £upr*me Court of JSritiilj Columbia  (BEFORE  THE  HONOURABLE THE  CHIEF  OUSTICE)  No   0843  Smithers  Registry  Victoria,   B.C.  January   26,   1990  BETWEEN:  AND:  DELGAMUUKW, also known as KEN MULDOE,  suing on his own behalf and on behalf  of all other members of the HOUSE OF  DELGAMUUKW, and others,  Plaintiffs;  HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE  PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA and  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR CANADA,  Defendants.  (CONTINUATION OF)  COMMISSION EVIDENCE OF JEFFERAY VINCENT BOYS  •**> «~  «m*imktacrttfti mrrr tMrniut* tr v*r jmj atwni 291  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Victoria, B.C.  2 January 26, 1990  3  4 MR. RUSH:  All right.  We can begin this cross-examination on  5 your re-commission, Mr. Boys. And today is the 26th  6 of January 1990, a new decade. Now, I'd like you to,  7 if you will, Mr. Boys, answer my questions with a yes  8 or a no, or whatever explanation you'd like, but if  9 you can articulate your yeses and your noes, I would  10 appreciate that very much.  11 MR. PLANT:  That's by way of contrast to the "ah ha" answer.  12 THE WITNESS:  Um hum.  Yes.  13 MR. PLANT:  It doesn't look very coherent on the record.  14  15 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. RUSH:  16 Q  Now, as I understood your evidence of last Tuesday,  17 when you were posted in the B.C. Police in Telegraph  18 Creek between 1932 and 1937 you said that in your  19 travels you got to the headwaters of the Iskut; is  20 that right?  21 A  Yes.  22 Q  But you did not get to the headwaters of the Skeena  23 River?  24 A  No.  There's a very short distance between the two.  25 Q  But whatever the distance, you didn't get to the  26 headwaters of the Skeena River?  27 A  No, I didn't.  28 Q  All right.  And when you were the Indian Agent or the  29 Indian Superintendent of the Babine Agency, you did  30 not get to the headwaters of the Skeena River either,  31 did you?  32 A  No.  33 Q  Now, is it not case that when you were posted in  34 Telegraph Creek you also never got to the headwaters  35 of the Nass River?  36 A  No.  37 Q  And it's true, is it not, that when you were posted as  38 Indian Agent or Superintendent in the Babine Agency  39 you did not get to the headwaters of the Nass River?  40 A  No.  41 Q  Now, the other day, last Tuesday, you were asked about  42 various animals which were trapped by Indian people in  43 the Babine Agency.  Do you recall that?  44 A  Yes.  45 Q  And you were asked whether — well, excuse me — where  46 the Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en people trapped these  47 animals.  Do you recall that? 292  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  Yes.  2 Q  And you said that the fox was trapped in the non-  3 timber areas, correct?  4 A  Well, I said there may have been foxes.  I was asked  5 if any animals were trapped above timber-line, and I  6 said there may have been foxes trapped in that area,  7 but the majority of animals were trapped in timber.  8 Q  All right.  My question to you is the Gitksan and  9 Wet'suwet'en people in the trapping areas in the  10 Babine Agency did trap fox?  11 A  Yes.  12 MR. RUSH:  All right.  Now, I'd like you, if you will, please,  13 to place before Mr. Boys, Mr. Plant, Exhibit 42 and  14 also the original of the application for a registered  15 trapline of Bob Skawill.  Now, I'm going to be  16 making —  17 MR. PLANT:  Just to interrupt, I've got them both there, and by  18 original we're speaking of the blue original that we  19 referred to on Tuesday?  20 MR. RUSH:  21 Q  Yes.  Thank you.  Now, I'm going to make reference to  22 a couple of the applications for registration of a  23 trapline that are contained in Exhibit 42, and if  24 you'll turn in Exhibit 42, Mr. Boys, to the fourth one  25 along, which is the copy of an application for  26 registration of Kathleen Gunanoot, G-u-n-a-n-o-o-t.  27 A  Yes.  28 Q  Do you have that in front of you?  29 A  Yes.  30 Q  All right.  Now, when you were examined by Mr. Plant,  31 he asked you about the procedure for the registration  32 of traplines at the time that you were Indian Agent or  33 Indian Superintendent in the Babine Agency.  Do you  34 recall that?  35 A  Yes.  36 Q  Now, I'd like to go through that with you, and I want  37 to ask you some questions about that procedure, the  38 way that you and your office operated the system of  39 registrations of traplines. Now, as I understood your  40 evidence, Mr. Boys, you said that the person would  41 come to your office and that person would explain the  42 area as best he could that he wanted to register; is  43 that right?  44 A  That was often the case, yes.  45 Q  Okay.  I want to speak about what was — all right.  46 We can talk that this was often the case, but it  47 wasn't the only way it was done? 293  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  No.  2 Q  But let's talk about this example, all right.  You  3 agree that the applicant would come to your office and  4 that person would explain to you as best he could that  5 he wanted to register a trapping area; is that right?  6 A  That's right.  7 Q  All right.  Now, the office that you're speaking about  8 is where the Indian Agent had his office in Old  9 Hazelton; is that right?  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  Okay.  Now then, as I understood your evidence, you  12 said you as the agent or, in the case of Mr. Appleby,  13 Mr. Appleby then tried to locate the area on the maps  14 that you had in your office; is that right?  15 A  Yes.  16 Q  And this attempt to locate the area would be done on  17 maps which you kept in your office which showed the  18 traplines which had been registered?  19 A  Yes.  20 Q  Okay.  Now, as I understand it, Mr. Boys, you would  21 have gone through this procedure only in the period up  22 to November of 1947 because after that period you had  23 sent your maps to the game department in Prince Rupert  24 to be updated?  25 A  No, that procedure would still have been done using  26 the maps of the provincial policemen in Hazelton.  27 Q  All right.  I'm going to come to that. All right.  If  28 I can just back you up, however.  In terms of making  29 reference to the maps in your office, however, after  30 November 1947 you would not have made reference to  31 your office maps with the applicant because you didn't  32 have any maps in your office?  33 A  Well, that probably is so.  I can't recollect when  34 exactly we sent our maps to be — to the game  35 department to have them co-ordinated with their maps  36 in their files.  37 Q  All right.  Well, there's a clue to that, and you  38 testified to this some time ago, and if you'll just  39 keep a thumb in the part of the exhibit book that's in  40 front of you, I'll just ask you to look at Exhibit 43.  41 Now, you'll see here, and I'm reading from the second  42 paragraph of this letter by you to Mr. Gill of the  43 game branch in Prince George of November 20th, 1947,  44 and it says —  45 A  Yes, I see that.  46 Q  You see it says:  47 294  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 "I have brought my files up to date but I  2 understand that you still have the Trapline  3 maps from this Agency which were forwarded to  4 your office from Game Warden Martin at Prince  5 Rupert, because we were unable to amend them  6 from the maps in the Smithers or Prince Rupert  7 offices owing to considerable difference in  8 geography"?  9  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  Now, I suggest that it would appear from this map and  12 I think you've agreed with me on a previous occasion  13 that sometime in November 1947 or possibly earlier you  14 had sent your office trapline maps to the Prince  15 Rupert Game Department?  16 A  Yes.  17 Q  And they would not have been in your office in Old  18 Hazelton?  19 A  Correct.  20 Q  All right.  Now, I also understood your evidence to be  21 that these office trapline maps that were in the  22 Babine Agency office were out of your office until  23 after you had left the Babine Agency in the late  24 spring of 1951?  25 A  Yes.  I can't be sure when they came back.  They  26 didn't come back all in one batch.  They came back —  27 from time to time we would get a map sent back to us.  28 Q  But you don't dispute what I'm suggesting to you, that  29 these maps came back to you in 1951?  30 A  No.  31 Q  All right.  Now, Mr. Boys, I also understand that in  32 the period that the Babine Agency trapline maps were  33 not housed in the Indian Agent's office in Old  34 Hazelton that when an applicant came in you could make  35 reference to and did make reference to trapline maps  36 that were either held in the office of the B.C. Police  37 in Old Hazelton or held in the office of the game  38 department in Smithers?  39 A  That's correct.  40 Q  Now, just coming back to the sequence of what happened  41 in the process, as I understand your evidence, you  42 said that after trying to locate the area sought to be  43 registered on the maps you then described the area?  44 A  Yes.  45 Q  Okay. And do I take it that you described the area in  46 writing?  47 A  Yes. 295  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  And would this be in handwriting?  2 A  No, it was probably typed on the applicable form.  3 Q  All right.  My question to you is do you recall now  4 that when you or Mr. Appleby described the area sought  5 to be registered was it typed or was it written in  6 handwriting?  7 A  To my recollection it was usually typed.  8 Q  And was it typed on the form?  9 A  Yes.  10 Q  Okay.  And was the typed description a general  11 description of the area sought to be registered?  12 A  It was a description made to the best of our ability  13 describing the area that the applicant had asked for.  14 Q  Okay.  It was not a metes and bounds description?  15 A  In some cases it was — it wasn't measured, obviously.  16 We were not on the ground.  We didn't measure it.  It  17 was not the type of description that would be given by  18 a land surveyor, but it was a description following  19 natural boundaries as we could designate them, and the  20 applicant was then asked to sign this application and  21 it was forwarded to the game department.  22 Q  All right.  I just want to back up to the description.  23 Do you agree with me that you were not trying to do a  24 metes and bounds description when you did your written  25 descriptions on these applications?  26 A  That's right.  27 Q  Now, as I understand it, you wrote up this description  28 on the basis of the reference points which you had  29 been given and, I'd suggest, by geographic features  30 that you might have known?  31 A  Yes.  32 Q  Now, as I understood your evidence, you then said you  33 did a tracing; is that correct?  34 A  Yes.  35 Q  After the description had been done, you did a tracing  36 from the maps which you had access to?  37 A  Yes.  38 Q  Okay.  Now, we've got two situations here, one during  39 the period when you had the maps in the office and the  40 other being when you had to go to the B.C. Police  41 office or to the Smithers game office in order to  42 refer to the trapline maps?  43 A  Yes.  44 Q  I would like to deal with both situations, first where  45 you had the maps in the office.  I take it that you  46 did the tracing of the proposed registered area from  47 the maps you had in your office; is that correct? 296  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  26  27  28  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  35  36  37  A  38  39  Q  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  A  When we had them in the office.  When you had them there.  All right.  Now, when you  did not have them there, you did the tracing  apparently from maps that were held by B.C. Police in  Old Hazelton or the B.C. — or by the game branch in  Smithers; is that right?  Yes.  Okay. Now, was the tracing done by you at the same  time as the applicant came into your office?  I can't answer that.  I don't — I just don't  recollect when it was done.  Probably on some — in  some cases it was done at that time, and in some cases  it may have been done later. We could not formulate a  description without a map. We had to have some  reference point to start from, and we had to go to a  map to make some sort of a description for the  application form, so presumably, as I recollect it, we  would have made the tracing at the time the  application was being sought.  Do you agree with me, Mr. Boys, that if you had to go  to another office, the B.C. Police office or to the  game office in Smithers, you wouldn't have taken the  applicant with you to do the tracing at those places?  Well, we wouldn't — certainly wouldn't if we had had  to go to — to the game office in Smithers, but we  frequently had the provincial constable's maps in our  office.  He very rarely used those maps, and we  frequently had some of his maps in our office.  So you had them on loan?  Yes.  And you returned them to him, didn't you?  If he wanted them, yes.  My question is, though, is it not the case when you  did the tracings when you had to go to the B.C. Police  office or to Smithers that the applicant was not there  at the time you did the tracing?  Well, I — I'm sorry, I can't answer that.  I don't  recollect.  You don't recollect one way or the other?  No, I don't.  Now, in the sequence of things, Mr. Boys, you then  said that the applicant would sign the application  form; is that right?  Yes.  And he would sign the application form in your  presence?  Yes. 297  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  A  19  20  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  40  41  A  42  43  Q  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Okay.  Now, I want to show you, if I can, to have you  look at the application for registration of a trapline  that I have brought to your attention in Exhibit 42,  that of Kathleen Gunanoot on the date of February  21st, 1949.  You see that?  Yes.  All right.  Now, if you'll just have that in mind,  please look at that. This is signed by Kathleen  Gunanoot, correct?  Yes.  And it's also signed by you, and you see your  signature in the lower right-hand corner for district  headquarters?  That's correct.  All right.  Now, did the applicant always sign the  application at the time that he or she came in for the  application to register a trapline?  The applicant always signed the application that we  sent in at the time that he or she came to make the  application, yes.  And that would be at the time that you put your  signature on there as well?  Yes. And then —  All right.  Just — I'm going — if you're going to go  on in the sequence, I'm going to run right through the  sequence.  Okay.  So you can explain anything that you  like as we go along the time.  In referring to the  Kathleen Gunanoot application, you see her signature  there and above that is dated February 21st, 1949?  Yes.  You see that?  Yes.  That is the date that would have been on the  application form at the time she signed it, correct?  Yes.  All right.  Now, as I understood your evidence,  however, that the description that is in the column  under geographical description of trapline, that there  would have been a description placed at that point by  you?  Yes, but not necessarily this description on this  particular —  Correct.  Here.  That's correct.  This is probably an amended one, amended by the game  department. 298  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  This is what I want to get at.  As I understood your  2 evidence of last date, almost every description that  3 you tendered on an application for registration of a  4 trapline was amended by the game department after you  5 submitted it to them and an amended description was  6 returned to you?  7 A  Correct.  8 Q  So I want to suggest to you that in this example of  9 the Kathleen Gunanoot application form that the  10 description that appears here is not the one that you  11 would have typed on to the application form at the  12 time that it was originally submitted by you and  13 Kathleen Gunanoot?  14 A  No, probably not.  15 Q  Okay.  Now, Mr. Boys, I just want to keep the Kathleen  16 Gunanoot application in front of you, and the reason  17 that I — and I think you agree with this — the  18 reason I suggest that it was not the description that  19 you prepared at the time that the application was  20 initially signed by you and by Ms. Gunanoot is because  21 when you look at the original application for  22 registration of a trapline, here I have an example of  23 Bob Skawill, S-k-a-w-i-1-1, you have testified that a  24 white typed amended description was glued on to this  25 application by the game department?  26 A  Yes.  27 Q  And this is consistent with what you've said, that the  28 game department amended the descriptions that you sent  29 in to them, correct?  30 A  Yes.  They — they put the white paper on only if  31 their description was too long to go on the form  32 provided.  33 Q  Right.  And in the case of the Kathleen Gunanoot  34 application the description was short, so they could  35 fit it right on to the application form?  36 A  Right.  37 Q  In the case of the Skawill application it was too  38 long, so they typed it on a separate piece of paper  39 and glued it on the place in the application form for  40 the geographical description of the trapline?  41 A  Correct.  42 Q  Correct?  43 A  Yes.  44 Q  All right. Now, was the description that you  45 originally typed on to the application for the  46 registration of a trapline that you tendered to the  47 game department, was it typed in the place on the 299  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 application form where it says "Geographical  2 description of trapline"?  3 A  Was our original description?  4 Q  Yes.  5 A  Yes.  6 Q  All right.  So if I can say so, it would be in the  7 place where on the Kathleen Gunanoot application the  8 game department description appears on the  9 application?  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  Similarly, in respect of the Skawill application, it  12 would be in the place where the glued-on sheet of a  13 description was placed by the game department?  14 A  Yes.  15 Q  Do I also understand, Mr. Boys, if you look at the  16 reverse side of these two documents, that is the  17 Gunanoot application and the Skawill application —  18 we'll just pause for a moment.  19  20 (OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION)  21  22 All right.  Mr. Boys, coming back to the  23 application for the registration of a trapline, I was  24 asking you about the reverse side.  25 A  Yes.  26 Q  And do I understand the case to be that in the case of  27 the examples that I've put in front of you, the  28 Gunanoot application and the Skawill application, that  29 when you or your office submitted the application to  30 the game department in Smithers or in Prince Rupert  31 you would not have placed anything on the reverse side  32 of the application?  33 A  No.  34 Q  All right.  Now, you then said, as a matter of  35 sequence, Mr. Boys, that you sent the signed  36 application form together with the description which  37 you had placed in — typed in the place on the  38 application form and the tracing to the game  39 department?  40 A  Yes.  41 Q      Now,  did  the  applicant sign or  initial  the  tracing  42 when  it was  sent  to the game department?  43 A      Probably  not.  44 MR.   RUSH:     Now —  45 MR.  PLANT:     I'm sorry,   I didn't hear that.     Probably not?  46 THE WITNESS:     Probably  not.  47 MR.   RUSH: 300  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  4  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  A  20  Q  21  22  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  A  35  36  Q  37  A  38  Q  39  40  41  A  42  Q  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  Probably not.  Now, as I understood your evidence that  you gave when questioned by Mr. Plant, the game  department upon receipt of the application amended the  application description by redefining the geographic  description in a manner acceptable to them, and I'm  using your words in a manner acceptable to them?  Yes.  Is that correct?  Yes.  All right.  Now, the amended description, the amended  geographic description, that was done in the absence  of the applicant?  Yes.  And that was also done in your absence, correct?  Yes.  And just to continue, Mr. Boys, as I understand it,  the amended geographic description done by the game  department was done without consulting the applicant?  Yes.  Now, as I understood your evidence, the amended  geographic description was then typed on to the  application form or typed on to another piece of paper  which was then glued on or taped on to the application  form by the game department; is that right?  That's correct.  All right.  Now, if I can just have this example of  the Skawill.  Now, Mr. Boys, if the provincial game  department typed their amended description on to the  originally submitted application form, what happened  to the description that you did?  They probably discarded it.  Well, that's what I'm interested in finding out,  because if you look at the Skawill example —  They would probably have discarded their copy, but we  would have retained a copy of the original one.  All right.  You retained the original; is that right?  We would have retained a copy of the original.  Okay. And the copy that went to the game department,  what would have happened to the original copy that was  sent to the game department?  Well, they — they probably discarded it.  Does that mean, Mr. Boys, that they discarded the  whole of the application form?  Well, I don't know.  I wasn't there.  No, but you do know in some senses.  I'd just like you  to look at this, Mr. Boys.  I'm showing you the  Skawill application form.  You will agree with me, 301  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  A  7  8  9  Q  10  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  34  35  Q  36  37  38  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  A  will you not, that the place where the typed version  of the geographic description is placed on this  application form is right over top of where your  description must have had to have been placed; isn't  that correct?  Yes.  This is — this form that they used, this was a  blank form.  That was entirely new. They retyped it  putting their description on it.  All right.  So is it the case that when the game  department amended the form with their geographic  description they prepared a whole new form?  Yes.  All right. And what I have in front of you, what I am  placing in front of you is the Skawill application.  Do you say that this application then is a wholly new  form prepared by the game department?  Yes.  And similarly, if you look at the Gunanoot application  form, is this copy a copy of the form as prepared by  the game department?  It probably is, yes.  All right.  Then on that count, Mr. Boys, I'd like you  to look at the date again, because if it's a wholly  new form, then the date of February 21st, 1949, would  not have been the date that the document was  originally signed and tendered to the game department  by your office, would it?  NO.  No.  What date would it have been?  This? What date would the 21st of February have been?  Yes.  It would have been the date that we contacted Kathleen  Gunanoot and she accepted the amended description in  my presence.  Okay. Let's just follow that through. Back at the  game department I think we agree now that a wholly new  application for registration of a trapline was  prepared with an amended description of the geographic  area by the game department; is that right?  That is correct, if they didn't accept the original  description that we had sent in.  And I think you've agreed with me that in the vast  majority of cases they amended them?  They did, yes.  Now, do I take it then that this amended copy — this  amended application form came in more than one copy?  Yes. 302  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  A  4  Q  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  Q  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  32  Q  33  34  35  A  36  37  38  Q  39  40  A  41  42  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  All right.  Now, you've also said that the ganu=  department in Smithers also did a new tracing?  Yes.  Okay.  And the amended geographic description  new application form plus the new tracing were rrr:r  returned to you for acceptance by the applicani  Right.  Okay.  What happened to the original tracing?  I don't know.  It wasn't returned to you?  I — I really can't recollect what became of i  Well —  This is 40 years ago.  Yes, I appreciate that.  I appreciate that.  E   were asked the procedure, and I just wanted tc  little more detail on the procedure, Mr. Boys.   to suggest to you that the tracing that was re   to you was the amended tracing prepared by the  department.  Yes.  Isn't that right?  That's — certainly they sent us back a tracir.  or more than one tracing.  But you have no recollection that they returnee .  tracing that you prepared to you?  No, I can't recollect that.  All right.  And they didn't send back the oric  the — yes, the original application for reqiss=^z=:  with your typed-on description back to you, di  No, because we still had a copy of what we'd s^-—-  originally.    All right. Now, the applicant, you say, then :_^—  come into your office again to inspect the api)    :  form?    Well, not necessarily come into our office but   was possible that this could have been done e.■ - - : - -  at some time.    All right.  It could have been done at the pe. — :  home.  Would you have gone to the person's hom^ :  It's possible.  It could have been done at a c  meeting, could have been done somewhere outsic-rrrzn  office.    And was it normally done someplace outside you   office?  Oh, I wouldn't say it was, no, but —  It could have been done?    It could have been done where it was most conv= 303  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 and where it would — and where it could have been  2 done to save time.  3 Q  All right.  And then do I understand that you  4 presented the amended application form from the game  5 department for the signature of the applicant?  6 A  Yes.  7 Q  All right.  And the applicant would then sign it?  8 A  Yes.  9 Q  And you would sign it; is that right?  10 A  Yeah.  11 Q  Okay. And would you have presented the amended  12 tracing?  13 A  Yes, we would have. We would have attempted to show  14 on the map where the tracing was and — and the area  15 that was now described on — on the map.  16 Q  Okay.  Just let me understand it.  You would show the  17 amended tracing on the map to the person, correct?  18 A  Yes, yes.  19 Q  Now, you did not have the map from which the tracing  20 was taken with you at the time that you showed the  21 applicant the tracing, correct?  22 A  Well, we may have.  23 Q  No, did you have?  24 A  Well, I — yes, probably we did.  25 Q  Well, Mr. ~  26 A  We would certainly fit the tracing on a map when it  27 came back to us to make sure that we knew, and we  28 would fill it in on a map whether it was our map or  29 the provincial police map.  It wouldn't matter.  The  30 whole point of a tracing was so that we could trace it  31 on to our map.  32 Q  Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. Boys, but I'm not  33 interested in what you did yourself.  I'm interested  34 in what you did with the applicant, and my question to  35 you is did you take the applicant with you and show  36 the applicant the tracing together with the underlying  37 map from which the tracing was taken?  38 A  Yes.  39 Q  Well, how did you do that if you did — if you showed  40 the applicant the tracing at a band meeting or at his  41 home?  42 A  It's a simple thing to take a map. We frequently took  43 maps with us.  44 Q  And did you do that?  45 A  Yes.  46 Q  All right.  Then my question is, Mr. Boys, did you  47 compare the tracing that you sent to the game 304  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 department with the tracing that you had received as  2 an amended tracing back from the game department?  3 A  Yes. We would have to erase — we would have to erase  4 our original area that we had placed on our map from  5 which we had taken the original tracing. We'd have to  6 erase that and then put the game department's new  7 description on to our map.  8 Q  I suggest —  9 A  Or on to the map that we were using.  10 Q  You did not, though, in the presence of the applicant  11 compare your tracing with the tracing received back?  12 A  No, I don't suppose we did.  13 Q  All right.  Is it the case as well, Mr. Boys, that you  14 didn't compare the description on the original  15 application form with the amended description received  16 back from the game department with the applicant?  17 A  I don't — I'm — I can't be sure about that.  18 Q  Well, Mr. Boys, I'd suggest to you that practically  19 speaking you wouldn't have done that.  I'm showing you  20 the Skawill application form, which we've agreed was  21 sent back by the game department as an amended  22 geographic description of this trapline area, and I  23 suggest that you would not have placed this  24 application form beside the application form that you  25 had originally submitted and compared the two with the  26 applicant at the time they signed the amended one.  27 Isn't that right?  28 A  That's probably correct, but if there was some  29 important — perhaps a lake or something that had been  30 left out of the — of the original application and the  31 game branch had left that out, we would attempt to  32 point out to the applicant that this has been left out  33 but this part has been added.  34 Q  Well ~  35 A  Some people were much more capable of comprehending  36 the geography of — on a map than others were.  37 Q  And presumably, Mr. — well, I think you've agreed,  38 Mr. Boys, that some people were much better able to  39 read maps than other people?  40 A  Right.  41 Q  In fact, wasn't it the case that one of the  42 difficulties among the applicants was a difficulty in  43 reading maps?  44 A  Yes.  45 MR. PLANT:  Could I just interrupt? Was that — earlier he said  46 if something had been left out. Was it a date?  47 THE WITNESS:  No, it was — it was a topographical feature.  If 305  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 it was a lake or something of that sort.  2 MR. PLANT:  A lake.  Thank you.  3 MR. RUSH:  4 Q  And you'll agree with me, Mr. Boys, that in the  5 Skawill example that I've got in front of you here  6 that the amended description here is a metes and  7 bounds description?  8 A  Yes.  9 Q  And you'd have to be pretty sophisticated to  10 understand a metes and bounds description, correct?  11 A  Yes.  12 Q  Now, just on this description of the Skawill  13 application that I have in front of you, if you'd just  14 fold up here.  15 A  Yes.  16 Q  I want to be sure that I understand that this document  17 was signed after it had been returned to you by the  18 game department and amended by the game department?  19 A  Yes.  There was a signing when the area was applied  20 for, there was a signing when the amended area was  21 accepted.  22 Q  All right.  Now, what I want to do, Mr. Boys, if  23 you'll just look at Exhibit 42.  24 A  Yes.  25 Q  And start at the beginning, and I'm working from the  26 copies, and I'm going to flip through the application  27 forms that are here.  If you look at these application  28 forms, is it not the case that every one of these  29 application forms is one that was signed after the  30 description was amended and returned to you by the  31 game department, and just flip through them and see if  32 you can agree with me on that?  33 A  Yes, I think that's correct.  34 Q  Okay.  Now, if you'll just look, please, at Exhibit  35 41, can you confirm for me as well that Exhibit 41 is  36 also an amended description signed by Mr. Johnson and  37 yourself after it had been returned to you by the game  38 department?  39 A  Yes, it probably is.  40 Q  Okay.  In the examples that I've shown you in Exhibits  41 41 and 42 you will agree with me that none of these  42 are examples of the original application for a  43 trapline — registration of a trapline signed by the  44 applicant and yourself?  45 A  No, I don't think any of them are the original ones.  46 Q  Okay. And will you agree with me, and I'll just ask  47 you now to look at the example of the Bob Skawill, 306  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  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.  MR.  MR.  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH;  PLANT  RUSH:  PLANT  RUSH:  Q  that the Skawill copy in Exhibit 42, the first one in  line, the appearance of the copy is typical of the  amended application for registration forms that you  received back from the game department in its form —  Yes.  — and in its appearance?  All right.  Now, I want to look at the Skawill  application for a moment, Mr. Boys, and I want to draw  to your attention that the Skawill application was  apparently signed on June 19th, 1947, in Prince  Rupert. Do you see that?  Yes, that's what it says.  And the witness was Marie Janze?  Yes.  And your name is there?  Yes.  Now, I find it a bit perplexing, Mr. Boys,  secretary, Marie Janze, would have gone to  Rupert to witness the signing of an application for a  registration of a trapline.  That's most improbable, yes.  Is it more likely, Mr. Boys, that this was signed in  Hazelton?  It seems more likely, yes.  Throughout these documents the name of Mr. L.J. Cox  appears, and if you turn to the Gunanoot example again  and look at the reverse side — that's the fourth  application along in line in Exhibit 42.  Kathleen Gunanoot?  Yes.  :  Yes.  If you look at the Kathleen Gunanoot application for  the registration of a trapline, Mr. Boys, on the  that your  Prince  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  reverse  of L.J.  Yes.  side  Cox?  of the application you'll notice the name  He's there as the recording officer, and he signs as  this application —  and in  1949?  the district game warden,  this is dated April 26th,  Yes.  You knew Mr. Cox as the game warden?  Yes.  Are you able to say when Mr. Cox started as the game  warden in Smithers?  No, I'm not.  Was he the game warden when you were posted to the 307  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Babine Agency?  2 A  I'm not sure about that.  3 Q  Well, I'll just ask you, if you will, to look at the  4 application for registration which precedes the  5 Gunanoot application in Exhibit 42, and this is the  6 Ryan, Phillip Ryan application, which on the reverse  7 side shows Mr. Cox's application — sorry — Mr. Cox's  8 signature on the application, and this is dated  9 November 6th, 1948.  Does that assist you at all in  10 determining Mr. Cox's tenure?  11 A  The previous one is?  12 Q   '49.  13 A   '49.  14 Q  Yes.  So this is November '48.  15 A  Which one are we referring to?  16 Q  The Ryan application form.  17 A  Well, the reverse — oh, yes, it shows Smithers  18 detachment 1948.  19 Q  Right.  Can you agree with me that at least in 1948  20 Mr. Cox was the game warden in Smithers?  21 A  Yes.  22 Q  All right.  Now, Mr. Cox continued as the game warden  23 in Smithers after you left the Babine Agency in 1951,  24 didn't he?  25 A  I think so.  26 Q  Can you confirm for me that Mr. Cox stayed on as the  27 game warden until as late as 1969?  28 A  No, I can't.  29 MR. PLANT:  I'm sorry, the answer to that was no?  30 MR. RUSH:  31 Q  No, I can't.  32 A  No.  33 Q  Would you agree with me, Mr. Boys, that Cox, Mr. Les  34 Cox as the game warden in Smithers knew more about the  35 operation and administration of the trapline system  36 than you did?  37 A  When he first arrived?  38 Q  Well, in 1948, '49, '50 and '51, when the two of you  39 were there together.  40 A  I don't know if he knew more about it than I did.  I  41 had functioned in the same capacity that he had long  42 before he'd started.  43 Q  All right.  You're saying that you don't know whether  44 he knew more?  45 A  No.  46 Q  That's your answer, is it? Did you defer to his  47 knowledge on the registration of trapline procedures? 308  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  Yes.  2 Q  And you'll agree with me that Mr. Cox as the  3 provincial game warden was well known among the  4 Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en people in the Babine Agency?  5 A  He came to be well known, yes.  6 Q  Now, in your evidence, Mr. Boys, you were asked by Mr.  7 Plant that the Indian applicants for an application to  8 register a trapline, and these were your words,  9 presumably accepted the procedure for registration.  10 Is that correct? Am I correctly stating your evidence  11 here?  12 A  Yes.  13 Q  All right.  Is it not the case, Mr. Boys, that no one  14 really commented one way or the other about the  15 procedure, people just didn't comment on something  16 like that?  17 A  I can't recollect whether there were any comments  18 about it.  19 Q  Now, I want to refer you to Exhibit 36, please.  20 Reference was drawn to this by Mr. Plant.  On this  21 document there are two letters, Cox to Appleby of  22 January 20th, '51, and Appleby's response over your  23 name to Cox of January 22nd, '51.  Now, I first direct  24 your attention to the Cox to Appleby portion of the  25 letter in Exhibit 36, and in particular to paragraph 2  26 where Mr. Cox in his letter says, and I quote:  27  28 "I am having considerable trouble with the  29 Indians in this area at present and hope to pay  30 you a visit in the very near future.  In  31 checking fur books I find a lot of Indians have  32 sold fur and are not on the list of Indian  33 Renewals."  34  35 And my question is, Mr. Boys, did you understand from  36 this that Mr. Cox's trouble was the fact that he found  37 that there were native people who were selling furs  38 but who were not registered on a provincial government  39 registered trapline?  40 A  It seems that they were not on a list of renewals that  41 he kept.  42 Q  Well, that would be renewals —  43 A  Renewals.  44 Q  — for a registration of a trapline?  45 A  Of a trapline, yes.  46 Q  Right.  So there's not much to distinguish between an  47 original application and a renewal, is there? 309  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  Well, this would imply that that's so.  2 Q  Well, you understood that to be so, didn't you?  3 A  No. You say that there is not much difference between  4 an original application and a renewal?  5 Q  And an application for a renewal.  6 A  Well, there's a good deal of difference between an  7 original application for an area that — that a  8 trapper has not held previously and a renewal of the  9 area.  10 Q  An absence of a renewal for an application and the  11 absence of an original application, do they not lead  12 to the same conclusion, no registered trapline?  13 A  No, I don't think they do.  I think there's just been  14 a failure on the part of the holder of the trapline to  15 make an application to renewal — to renew it.  16 Q  And what's the effect of that in your mind?  17 A  Well, because —  18 MR. PLANT:  That is a question of law, but I'm not going to —  19 I'm certainly going to allow you to ask Mr. Boys what  20 his understanding was.  21 THE WITNESS:  The point is that it was a requirement of the  22 Game Act at the time that all trappers make a return  23 at the end of the season of all the fur that they've  24 taken, and this was on a form called Indian Trapline  25 Renewal, and on the back of this was listed just a  26 catch, 20 marten, 10 beaver and so on, and that was  27 sent in, but it didn't have the effect of cancelling a  28 trapline or re-applying for a trapline.  29 MR. RUSH:  30 Q  All right then.  Thank you for clarifying that.  What  31 appears to be Mr. Cox's concern here, and I want to be  32 sure that you understood it as such when you  33 apparently allowed your name to stand in response to  34 it, that there were many native people in the Babine  35 Agency who were selling furs but who were not on the  36 list of Indian renewals?  37 A  That appears to have been the case.  38 Q  Okay. Now, would you look at the reply.  This was  39 directed to you by Mr. Plant.  January 22nd, 1951.  40 And it says in the last paragraph, and I quote:  41  42 "I do not know just what your powers are as  43 regard to Indians or whites trapping without a  44 registration..."  45  46 Now, I just want to pause there, but it would appear  47 that you or Mr. Appleby interpreted Mr. Cox's concern 310  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  33  34  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A  as a failure to register trapline areas; do you agree  with that?  I — it appears that somebody was trapping on a  trapline that was registered in the name of somebody  else and he was not a member of a company or a group  or a partnership in that particular trapline.  All right.  Now, if I can just carry on with you on  that point, if that's — that's how you interpret  this?  That's how I interpret it, yes.  Let's carry on then, sir.  It says, and I quote from  the same paragraph:  "...but as far as this office is concerned I  have very little sympathy with them as they  have had all kinds of opportunity to either  register a line or become a member of some  existing registration."  And you were asked about this paragraph by Mr. Plant,  and my question to you is does this reflect the policy  of you and Mr. Appleby, that you had very little  sympathy with unregistered Indian trappers because  they had the opportunity to register or become a  member of an existing registration?  Yes.  Thank you.  Do I understand, Mr. Boys, that your  primary concern in respect of trapping was with the  trapping areas and the registration of those trapping  areas by the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en people?  My primary concern at the time was to ensure that all  possible areas were registered in the name of an  Indian trapper so that those areas would not be  available for registration by non-Indians.  Your concern was in relation to trapping; is that not  correct?  Yes.  It was not in relation to hunting?  No.  It was not in relation to hunting areas?  Hunting areas?  Hunting areas, yes.  No, it was in relation to trapping areas.  Thank you. Excuse me, sir.  You testified in response  to a question posed by Mr. Plant that Marjorie Harris  was a secretary in your office in Hazelton?  Yes. 311  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  12  Q  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  A  18  MR. PLANT  19  20  MR. RUSH:  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  31  A  32  33  34  35  Q  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  And you answered —  Margaret Harris.  I'm sorry, Margaret Harris.  Yes.  And you were asked whether Margaret Harris was the  daughter of Walter Harris?  No, I think she was the daughter of Chris Harris.  Yes.  But you were asked if she was the daughter of  Walter Harris, and you said that she was?  Well, this again is my faulty recollection after 40  years.  Yes.  She was the daughter of Chris Harris?  Yes, that's — I think so.  Thank you.  I ask you that question, Mr. Boys, because  I know Walter Harris, and he would have been pretty  young to be her father at that time.  Yeah.  :  I was surprised at that evidence too, unless there  was another Walter Harris.  Well, that was the purpose of the question.  Mr. Boys, I take it you were asked to speak in  respect — you were asked to speak by Mr. Plant in  respect of the policy which you applied or implemented  while you were Indian Agent or Indian Superintendent  in the Babine Agency.  Do you recall that?  Yes.  All right.  And I take it that you cannot speak in  respect of the policy in the area after you left the  agency?  Not for — not for a lapse of — well, from 1951  until — yes, I left in 1951, and in 1961 I came back  as Indian Commissioner of B.C., and I would then know  the general policy with respect to —  My question was in respect of the policy in the Babine  Agency in particular. After you left you cannot speak  for the policy —  No.  — in that area?  No.  Now, I want to refer you to Exhibit 35.  Now, this is  a letter referred to you by Mr. Plant from yourself to  Mr. McRae in respect of Mrs. Lucy Joe Nass of Telkwa,  B.C.  Yes.  Do you see that?  Yes. 312  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  Now, you said that you were asked for your opinion  2 with regard to this applicant by Mr. McRae, the  3 government agent in Smithers?  4 A  That's right.  5 Q  And your opinion is contained in the last paragraph,  6 and it says, and I quote from Exhibit 35:  7  8 "The applicant was very well spoken of  9 everywhere I went.  I therefore recommended her  10 as a suitable person to own land in Telkwa."  11  12 MR. PLANT:  The word that you read as recommended was actually  13 recommend?  14 A  Recommend.  15 Q  I'm sorry.  Let me rephrase it.  I want to be as  16 accurate as I possibly can here. The last paragraph  17 states:  18  19 "The applicant was very well spoken of  20 everywhere I went.  I therefore recommend her  21 as a suitable person to own land in Telkwa."  22  23 Now, you see that, do you?  24 A  Yes.  25 Q  And my question is that if you had not recommended  26 Mrs. Nass as a suitable person, would that have  27 prevented her from obtaining the land in Telkwa?  28 A  I don't know. I have absolutely no way of knowing  29 what effect it might have had.  30 Q  Can you tell me, Mr. Boys, do you know the reason that  31 your opinion as to her character was sought at all?  32 A  It may have been an opinion not only as to her  33 character but as to her health, her capability of  34 looking after herself.  I don't know.  35 Q  Well, there's nothing about health or capability.  36 It's about her character here, is it not, a suitable  37 person to own lad?  38 A  A suitable person to own land.  39 Q  Now, can you tell me, do you recollect why you were  40 asked for your opinion about the character or  41 suitability —  42 A  No.  43 Q  — of an Indian person to hold land in Telkwa in 1949?  44 A  No.  I don't have Mr. McRae's letter to guide me.  I  45 don't know.  46 Q  All right. Thank you. Were you frequently asked by  47 provincial government officials for your opinion as to 313  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  7  8  9  10  Q  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  15  Q  16  A  17  18  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  31  32  33  Q  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  A  43  Q  44  A  45  46  Q  47  the suitability of native people to hold land in the  Babine Agency?  You mean off reserve?  Anywhere.  Well, I wouldn't be consulted by the — by the  government agent except where there was an application  for acquisition of Crown land, and I've already  testified that so far as I can recollect there was  only one case during my tenure of office.  And this was the case?  No.  I see.  This — this was not a case where an Indian applicant  came to me for any guidance.  All right.  I was simply — obviously I was consulted by Mr. McRae  in this particular case about an application that was  made through his — directly through his office.  But I am perplexed about this, Mr. Boys, and that's  why I am asking you if you recall other instances —  No.  — where —  Very, very few.  Excuse me, let me complete the question.  Mr. Boys, do  you recall other instances in which your opinion as  Indian Agent was sought by a provincial government  agent in respect of the application for the ownership  of off-reserve land, whether Crown or non-Crown land?  No, I — I can't recall any other case, and I can't  recall any — I can't think of any case where the  government agent would be concerned with any land  other than provincial Crown land.  All right.  Can I ask you, Mr. Boys, why — do you  recall now why you bothered at all to respond to this  request in respect of Mrs. Nass?  Why I bothered?  Why would you bother? Why was it a matter of your  concern for non-reserve land —  Because I —  — that you comment on the suitability of a native  person to hold land?  Well, obviously because I was asked for an opinion.  Well, yes.  And I was attempting to help an elderly lady who  needed some help in order to acquire a lot in Telkwa.  Who apparently was pushed off of her land by some  other people who bought it from under her, correct? 314  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  A  4  5  6  7  Q  8  A  9  Q  10  11  12  A  13  14  15  Q  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  A  21  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  31  32  A  33  Q  34  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  MR. RUSH:  46  47  I know nothing about the background circumstances.  I see.  She apparently had — according to this, she had  apparently been living somewhere she didn't have  ownership, and the owner, I believe, took over the —  the —  Land where she was living?  The small house where she was living.  And you cannot assist us as to why you felt an  obligation to respond to this request by Mr. McRae  except that the request was made of you?  Yes, and that I wanted to be helpful to an elderly  Indian lady who wanted to acquire a place to live in  Telkwa.  I think it's a perfectly natural response.  Well, I do too, Mr. Boys, but I don't understand why  the response is in respect of her character.  I don't know that it was.  Well, it certainly was in respect of your letter, was  it not?  It — that appears to embrace — it may be interpreted  that way.  I see.  I'll refer you now, Mr. Boys, to a document I  have placed in front of you, which I have only one  copy of, and this is an application for the  cancellation of a registered trapline of the deceased  Joe Nass, whose address was Telkwa, B.C. And did you  know a Joe Nass?  I can't recollect him.  Do you know if there was any relationship between Mrs.  Lucy Joe Nass of Telkwa, B.C. and the deceased Joe  Nass?  No, I don't.  I want to direct your attention to the photocopy of  this application for the cancellation in favour of  Jimmy Michell.  Do you identify your signature on  that?  Yes, I do.  And you'll notice that there is no signature by any  applicant?  No.  This is a cancellation.  Thank you.  And can you just confirm for me that it's  likely that the second page here is the reverse side  of the application form?  Yes.  All right.  I am going to submit this as the next  exhibit.  I am going to provide — it's a three-page  document with a cover page, which I take it was 315  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  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  garnered from the provincial — excuse me — from the  federal document list, but is also disclosed in a file  reference number under the provincial archives.  But  it's a three-page document, application for the  cancellation of registered trapline of Joe Nass &  Company signed by Mr. Boys.  I do not have copies.  If  that could be the next exhibit.  All right.  So it's got an A.G. Canada stamp of  10830, and it also looks like it comes from Public  Archives of B.C.  RUSH:  Yes.  PLANT:  Or at least the first two pages do.  EXHIBIT 71 - APPLICATION FOR CANCELLATION OF  REGISTERED TRAP-LINE  MR. PLANT:  MR.  MR.  MR. PLANT  MR. RUSH:  Now, Mr. Boys, Exhibit 46, this is a group of  documents I believe 21 pages in length.  May I just interrupt for a second? We've been at it  for an hour and 15 minutes.  RUSH:  I'm just about finished.  PLANT:  Are you all right, Mr. Boys, for a few more minutes?  WITNESS:  Yes.  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  MR.  MR.  PLANT!  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  Fine.  Mr. Boys, this group of documents under Exhibit 46  refers to the Indian Advisory Committee?  Right.  And the Indian Advisory Committee referred to in this  bundle of documents was a committee whose function was  to advise you, is that correct, as the B.C.  Commissioner for Indians?  Yes.  It was advisory in nature only, was it not?  That was its purpose, yes.  And I take it that its recommendations would have been  subject to your own decisions and the department's  overriding decisions in this respect?  Yes, but their recommendations were usually accepted.  Well, they may have been, but they were still subject  to your —  Yes.  — authority?  That's right, isn't it?  That's correct.  All right. Thank you. Now, Mr. Boys, I asked of you  on November 18th, 1988, in Volume 4 of the initial 316  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  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  commission, I made a request of you and I directed it  to your counsel at that time, counsel for the  Attorney-General of Canada, at the bottom of page 235  to make a search of your files to determine for me if  you could obtain minutes of the 1958 surrender meeting  which led to the surrender of the land at Hazelton for  the — for the purposes of building the school in  Hazelton, and I think your testimony was that you  had — you could not recall or you did not have at  your fingertips this material.  And I really directed  this question to your counsel at that time.  Since  that time I have not received a response to this, and  I'm now re-voicing my request for this from you, Mr.  like you to determine if you in the  have made the search, have you  If you have, can you disclose them  MR. WOLF;  MR. RUSH:  MR.  MR.  WOLF:  RUSH:  for these minutes  will double-check on  formally on this,  advise me in  Wolf, that I would  intervening period  found the minutes,  to me?  Well, I believe that we did look  but haven't found anything, but I  that and advise you.  All right. And would you advise me  either like in the course of — just  terms of the —  I can advise you by letter.  Or any other form that's a formal response.  Secondly, and this again I direct my attention to  you, Mr. Wolf, that material from an exhibit that I  was provided was expunged from the document that I was  provided by your office, and it had to do with a  document number 12261.  It's at the bottom of page  247.  And your office saw fit to claim privilege on a  solicitor-and-client basis for the expungement in this  document that's referred to at the bottom of page 247.  I asked if you would provide me with an explanation  for that that justified your claim for privilege, and  I repeat that request because, again, in the  intervening time we have not received a response, and  I would like to have a response from you on that  subject.  my  Now, if you'll allow me a moment to consult with  clients, that may be the end of my examination.  MR.  MR.  (PROCEEDINGS  ADJOURNED PURSUANT TO A  SHORT  BREAK)  RUSH:    Okay.     I have completed my cross-examination.     Thank  you.  PLANT:     I have one or  two questions in re-examination,  Mr. 317  J.V. Boys (for Canada)  Cross-exam by Mr. Plant  1 Boys.  During his cross-examination of you Mr.  2 Grant —  3 MR. RUSH:  Mr. Rush.  4  5 CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. PLANT:  6 Q  I'm sorry, I apologize for that.  Let me see who it is  7 that you'll mistake me for.  During his cross-  8 examination, which was just completed, Mr. Rush asked  9 several questions in which he used the words Gitksan,  10 Wet'suwet'en, and my question for you is during the  11 time that you were the Indian Agent and then the  12 Indian Superintendent in the Babine Agency did you  13 know of the people from Hagwilget and Moricetown as  14 Wet'suwet'en or by some other name?  15 A  No, I didn't know them as Wet'suwet'ens.  16 Q  What was the name that you knew them by?  17 A  They were usually referred to as Carrier Indians.  18 Q  During his cross-examination Mr. Rush asked you about  19 your concern with respect to the registration of  20 trapping areas and then, secondly, your concern, if  21 there was one, in relation to hunting areas within the  22 Babine Agency.  I suppose I should phrase my questions  23 this way.  Did you, and I'm speaking now of your time  24 as Indian Agent and Indian Superintendent in the  25 Babine Agency, did you hear the Indians within that  26 agency use the term — the word trapping, the term  27 trap? Was that a term that you were accustomed to  28 hearing from them?  29 A  Yes, but the term trapping was often synonymous with  30 hunting.  They often referred to a trapline as a  31 hunting ground, so that if they were going trapping,  32 they may have said that they were going hunting, they  33 were going out to their — their hunting area.  34 MR. PLANT:  Thank you.  Those are all my questions in  35 re-examination.  Thank you very much, Mr. Boys.  36 MR. RUSH:  That concludes our examination?  37 MR. PLANT:  Yes.  38 MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. Boys.  39 THE WITNESS:  You're welcome.  40  41 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED)  42  43  44  45  46  47 318  Proceedings  1 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  2 a true and accurate transcript of the  3 proceedings herein to the best of my  4 skill and ability.  6 '-* . ->.^. sdv^XJ)   7 Leanna Smith  8 Official Reporter  9 United Reporting Service Ltd.  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 INDEX OF EXHIBITS  Number  Descri ption  Page Number  71  Application for Cancellation of Registered  Trap-1i ne  315 INDEX OF WITNESSES  WITNESSES FOR THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF CANADA  PAGE  BOYS, JEFFERAY VINCENT  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  Cross-exam by Mr. Plant  291  317 Appearances  Stuart Rush,  Esq., appearing  for the Plaintiffs;  P.   Geoffrey Plant,  Esq.,     appearing  for the Defendant,  Her Majesty the Queen in  Right of  the Province  of British Columbia;  M.   Wolf,   Esq., appearing  for the Defendant,  the Attorney-General of Canada.

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.1-0018485/manifest

Comment

Related Items