Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

Commision Evidence of Jefferay Vincent Boys Vol. 4 British Columbia. Supreme Court Nov 18, 1988

Item Metadata

Download

Media
delgamuukw-1.0018524.pdf
Metadata
JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018524.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0018524-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0018524-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0018524-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0018524-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0018524-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0018524-source.json
Full Text
delgamuukw-1.0018524-fulltext.txt
Citation
delgamuukw-1.0018524.ris

Full Text

 <3ln % jguprra* Court of Jiriiisli Columbia  (BEFORE THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)  Na 0843  Smithers Registry  Victoria, B.C.  November 18, 1988  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  UNITED REPORTING SBMCE tm. 610 -1030 WEST SEW«W STREH WNCOUVER. &C V6E 4H4 (604)689-1088 <3fn tl]c j&uprsm* Court of Jlritislj Columbia  (BEFORE THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)  Na 0843  Smithers Registry  Victoria, B.C.  November 18, 1988  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 MAOESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE  PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA and  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR CANADA,  Defendants.  (CONTINUATION OF)  COMMISSION EVIDENCE OF OEFFERAY VINCENT BOYS  UNITED REPORTING SERVICE UH. 610 -1030 WEST GEORGIA STREET WCOUVER. RC V6E 4H4 (604)689-1088 APPEARANCES:  STUART RUSH, Esq;  MS. MARVYN KOENIGSBERG and  MURRAY WOLF, Esq;  Appearing for the Plaintiffs;  Appearing for the Attorney-  General of Canada INDEX - WITNESSES  WITNESSES FOR THE DEFENDANTS  PAGE  BOYS, 3EFFERAY VINCENT  cross-examination by Mr. Rush cont,  178 INDEX TO EXHIBITS  Number  Description  Page Number  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  Letter dated January 22, 1950 187  Letter dated February 26, 1951 188  Letter dated February 24, 1950 to 0. Boys  from H. Sinclair 195  Letter dated February 27, 1950 to H. Sinclair  from O.Boys 196  Letter dated March 6, 1950, from H. Sinclair  to 0. Boys 197  Letter dated November 7, 1946 from H. Sinclair  to 0. Boys 199  Letter dated November 14, 1950 from 3. Boys  to Mr. Arneil 208  Memo dated May 10, 1962 from 0. Boys to  Superintendent Fry 210  Letter dated August 22, 1947 from 0. Boys  to the Indian Commissioner for B.C. 211  Letter dated march 31, 1947, from 0. Boys  to the Indian Commissioner for B.C. 213  Letter dated November 27, 1964 from H.R.Conn  to the Indian Commissioner for B.C. 233  Document entitled "Surrender of Minerals";  three-paged agreement; and letter dated Dec.  17, 1947 234  Letter dated May 30, 1949 from 0. Boys to the  Indian Commissioner for B.C. 236  Letter dated January 5, 1973 from Larry Wight  to "All District Supervisors" 238  Letter dated October 18, 1947 from 0. Boys  to Mabel Clifford and Games Angus 238  Letter dated August 28, 1950 from 0. Boys  to the Chief Geographer 239 INDEX TO EXHIBITS  Number Description Page Number  67 Letter dated November 2, 1956, from W.S.  Arneil to Col. H.M. Jones 241  68 Minutes of the first meetings of Indian  Advisory Committee dated April 8, 1959        242  69 Group of six letters between the Honourable  John G. Diefenbaker, Q.C., Maisie A. Hurley,  and the Honourable Ellen Fairclough 245  70 Letter dated November 29, 1961, to Mr. R.  Williston from 3. Boys 246  11 178  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Victoria, B.C.  2 November 18, 1988  3  4 JEFFERAY VINCENT BOYS, Previously  5 sworn:  6  7 CROSSrEXAMINATION_CONT^_BY_MRA_RrjSH:  8 Q  All right. We can begin the continuation of the  9 cross-examination of Mr. Boys, and today's the 18th of  10 November.  11 Mr. Boys, I want to refer you again to the Walter  12 Blackwater trapping file, as it's been referred to  13 here, and in particular I'd like to ask you about the  14 application for registration of the trapline which is  15 Exhibit 18, and I see that you have it in your hand?  16 A  Uh-huh.  17 Q  And I would particularly direct your attention to the  18 second page of that which indicates that it was dated  19 on June 4th —  20 A  Yes.  21 Q  — of 1951; do you see that?  22 A  Yes.  23 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  When you say the second page, Mr. Rush —  24 MR. RUSH:  The back page.  25 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  You mean on the back?  26 MR. RUSH:  27 Q  Yes, I'm sorry, for my copy it's the second page  28 because they were separated, but on the back side of  29 that you'll see the date of June the 4th, 1951?  30 A  Yes.  31 Q  Now, the description that's on the face page of that,  32 was that description provided to you by the game  33 department?  34 A  Well, I couldn't say for sure whether it was or not.  35 We would make a description and on some occasions the  36 game department would amend it on the application that  37 was accepted.  38 Q  Right.  3 9 A  And this is stamped as having been accepted.  40 Q  The reason that I thought this to be the case was that  41 you indicated that you had made a description and  42 forwarded it to the game department and they returned  43 it to you and it was adjusted to include a larger land  44 area in the trapline area?  45 A  Yes.  46 Q  And it — because this was dated in Smithers June the  47 4th, 1951, I thought this to be the description of the 179  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 game department?  2 A  Yes.  It seems most probable that it was.  3 Q  All right.  There's another indicator on the face of  4 this.  If you look underneath the portion that is  5 taped onto the top, you'll see that there is a date  6 again on the face of it, June 4th, 1951?  7 A  Right.  8 Q  And it's dated in Smithers?  9 A  Right.  10 Q  And this is signed by Walter Blackwater, which would  11 suggest to me that Mr. Blackwater had to go to  12 Smithers to do this; is that right?  13 A  Well, it would indicate — it would seem that that's  14 highly probable.  15 Q  All right. Do you have an independent recollection of  16 this, Mr. Boys? Do you remember?  17 A  No, because actually it appears that Mr. Appleby, my  18 assistant, was responsible for accompanying Walter to  19 Smithers, if that is the way that the application was  20 made.  21 Q  All right.  22 A  If it was made in the game warden's office, I would  23 suggest that Mr. Appleby took or accompanied Walter to  24 Smithers and that the thing was — the matter was  25 processed in the game warden's office.  26 Q  All right.  It looks to me by the predominance of Mr.  27 Appleby's signature on this, and I thought other  28 documents, that he was mainly responsible for handling  29 this; is that your recollection?  30 A  He handled a lot of trapline applications.  Yes.  31 Q  Okay. And, in particular, did he handle the Walter  32 Blackwater application?  33 A  Well, he appears to have done so because I recognize  34 his signature on this.  35 Q  All right. And it appears from this that this was  36 witnessed in Smithers and it's likely that the  37 description there is the game department's?  38 A  Yes.  3 9 Q  Okay. Let me now refer you to the next document in  40 this sequence, it's the sketch which is Exhibit 19,  41 and I'm going to be referring you to each one of the  42 three sketches, but first to Exhibit 19, if you'll  43 look at that, please?  44 A  Yes.  45 Q  Now, this is the tracing of the Gelly trapline; is  46 that right?  47 A  Yes. 180  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  And I understand your evidence to be that you cannot  2 say from which map this tracing was taken?  3 A  No, I can't.  I can't be sure which edition of the map  4 of that area that this particular tracing was taken  5 from.  6 Q  Okay. And you had never been to this area yourself?  7 A  No.  8 Q  Now, I want to show you the next one which is Exhibit  9 21?  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  Now, this is a sketch of the trapline for which Mr.  12 Walter Blackwater was registered?  13 A  Right.  14 Q  And I think it was your evidence that it was likely  15 that this sketch was done by Mr. Appleby at the time  16 of the application?  17 A  No, I think that the other one that — the one that  18 I've just identified was Mr. Appleby's. This I think  19 was done by the game department.  20 Q  I see.  21 A  To include all of the waters of the — of the creeks  22 right to the headwaters of those creeks.  23 Q  Okay.  24 A  Which was their custom.  25 Q  All right. And this would have been done after you  26 had submitted Mr. Blackwater's application?  27 A  Right.  28 Q  Okay. And presumably this was the sketch to be  29 attached to the application form of June the 4th,  30 1951?  31 A  Yes, this.  32 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  "This" being Exhibit 21.  33 MR. RUSH:  34 Q  Yes.  35 A  Yes.  I don't know whether this actual sketch was, but  36 a sketch of this area was. This is the area described  37 I think in the — on the application for the trapline.  38 Q  Right. A sketch like this should have been  3 9 attached —  40 A  Yes.  41 Q  — to the application form which was Exhibit 19?  42 A  Yes.  43 Q  All right. Now, I think it was your evidence that the  44 area that's shown in Exhibit 21 was expanded it  45 appears considerably?  46 A  Uh-huh.  47 Q  By the game department? 181  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  A  10  11  12  13  14  Q  15  16  17  18  A  19  20  21  22  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  28  29  Q  30  31  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  Q  Yes.  All right.  Now, I think you also indicated that it  was common for the game department to make adjustments  in the boundaries of the trapping areas?  Right.  And does that mean that they would have not only  expanded them, as they did in the Walter Blackwater  situation, but also reduced them?  That's a possibility.  I'm not sure.  I can't tell you  conclusively that they did do so, but they certainly  adjusted them so if they — the tendency was to expand  them so that they took in all of the — all of a creek  right to the headwaters to the height of land.  Right.  But I take it that the corollary of that would  be that if another trapping area had to be reduced,  they would do that in order to conform to the heights  of land?  There may have been some minor reductions in order to  fit it in.  I don't think they would — I don't think  they would substantially take away any land from  another trapline without some consultation with the  owner of the other trapline.  Okay. Well, that's what I was coming to, Mr. Boys.  Isn't it the case that these adjustments were made  without consultation with the trappers?  Well, I would suggest that this area that's included  in here was not included in anybody else's trapline at  the time.  Well, leave that question aside.  It may or may not  have been, but my suggestion to you is that, from your  knowledge, the game department did not consult with  the trappers when they made the adjustments to the  trapline?  I — I can't answer that.  I wasn't there.  Okay. Just if you'll just keep that sketch in front  of you?  Uh-huh.  This is Exhibit 21.  I want to ask you if you'll also  place before you Exhibit 20 and if you'll just have  the two side by side, and if you'll just compare them  for a moment?  Yes.  You'll agree with me, won't you, that there are  considerable — there is a considerable number of  differences between the content of the two sketches?  You mean the detail?  Yes. 182  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  Q  31  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A  Yes, I can see some differences.  The Exhibit 20 sketch — the Exhibit 20 sketch is  dated in 1954?  Yes.  It seems to be in the bottom right-hand corner.  Do  you see that?  Yes.  And if we make the assumption that the — because of  the later date that the sketch was in fact drawn or  prepared at a later time, between the time of the  first sketch, which is Exhibit 21, and the second one  later in time dated 1954, Exhibit 20, a number of  geographic features have been added to the later  sketch; isn't that right?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  Now, I just want to ask you, if you will, to agree  with me, if you can, about some of these changes, and  I'd ask you to just look at the bottom of the sketch.  You'll notice that in the Exhibit 20 sketch dated '54  there is a feature indicated as "canyon" in the middle  of the page in the bottom half of the page. Do you  see it?  Uh-huh.  It appears to be a mountain with an elevation  registration of 5702 feet; do you see that?  Right.  Yes.  And that's not present on the Exhibit 20 or earlier  sketch is it?  No.  If you just go north on the main river feature, which  appears to be the Skeena, you'll see that there is a  creek above fourth cabin called Glide Creek; do you  see that?  Yes.  That's not present on Exhibit 21?  Well, the creek is there, but it's not marked Glide  Creek.  That's right.  It's not marked at all on Exhibit 21?  The name is not marked, but the —  The creek is shown?  The creek is defined.  Yes, I think that's a fair observation.  Uh-huh.  Now, if you'll just go farther up the Skeena above the  half-way divider on the map you'll see Babiche Hill,  B-a-b-i-c-h-e, Hill, appears on the Exhibit 20 —  Yes. 183  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  A  4  Q  5  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  12  A  13  Q  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  35  36  37  38  A  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  — sketch, and it's not present on the Exhibit 21  sketch?  Right.  Uh-huh.  Similarily, I want you to, if you will, carry on up  the Skeena and there is a — you see where 17-Mile  Cabin is —  Yes.  — indicated? Above that and to the left of that on  the west side of the Skeena appears to be a mountain  geographic feature called fifth, with an elevation of  5428; do you see that?  Yes.  That's not present on the Exhibit 21 map?  No.  And if you'll just carry on farther north on the  Skeena just above quarter cabin, which appears on  Exhibit 21 but not on Exhibit 20, to the east of the  Skeena there's a feature called Stephan,  S-t-e-p-h-a-n, which appears to be a mountain feature?  Yes.  And that's not present on the Exhibit —  No.  — 21 map?  No.  All right. And if you'll just carry on farther along  the Skeena and to the left or west side of the Skeena  on Exhibit 20 you'll see a mountain designation of  Blackwater with an elevation of 6134. Do you see that  on Exhibit 20?  Oh, yes.  And it's not present on Exhibit 21?  No.  All right.  Now, it's clear is it not to you, and it  was your experience, Mr. Boys, that geographic  features such as the ones that I've addressed and I've  directed your attention to here were added to later  maps?  Yes.  I think I can explain why because in the early  1950's a survey was undertaken of that area and all of  these mountains that you've shown that are designated  as little triangles were the triangulation stations  that the surveyor used. And I explained earlier in  our last session that there were subsequent editions  of the maps of the area that were updated and more  accurate and so the earlier map would not show these  triangulation stations and wouldn't show perhaps some  of the — some of the other names that were added such 184  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  8  A  9  Q  10  A  11  MR. RUSH  12  13  14  MS. KOEN  15  16  17  18  19  MR. RUSH  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  as Glide Creek.  All right.  It would be the case, as time moved on,  more knowledge was obtained about the features?  Yes.  All right.  But you'll see even in Exhibit 20 there  are a number of creeks such as the one that appears to  the left of the mountain feature "canyon"?  Uh-huh.  That still has no name to it?  Yes.  Okay. You'll agree with me that a number of the  creeks that appeared on the later trapline maps were  not named?  3SBERG:  Just so I'm not confused, Mr. Rush, if you're  referring to the creek on map 20 which is above the  designation "canyon" with the elevation, on the  earlier map, if I'm looking at the correct creek, it  does have a name.  On the earlier map, Exhibit 20, to the right of  "canyon" is the name Canyon Creek, but I'd ask you to  go left to the — what appears to be the lake that is  to the left of that which is unnamed on Exhibit 20?  Uh-huh.  And further to the left of that on Exhibit 20, again  we're keeping in mind this is in 1954, there is a  creek that flows south, appears to be a major creek,  that flows south which is unnamed?  Yes.  All right.  Or a continuation of Canyon Creek.  Well, it could be one or the other couldn't it?  Yes.  Okay.  Now, you'll also agree with me when you look at  Exhibit 20, Mr. Boys, that there are names on some of  the geographic features which are clearly names of —  which are Indian names or Gitksan names?  Yes. Uh-huh.  And I refer you to Damdochax Lake. You see that in  the north part of Exhibit 20?  Yes. Yes.  And Wiminisik, W-i-m-i-n-i-s-i-k, Lake?  Yes. Uh-huh.  Okay. Now, will you also agree with me, Mr. Boys,  that despite the efforts of the game department to  follow heights of land, in many cases the geographic  descriptions on these traplines did not follow any 185  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  A  3  4  5  Q  6  A  7  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  A  43  Q  44  45  46  47  A  geographic feature?  Well, certainly there are — in the descriptions there  are such things as to, let us say, third cabin thence  westerly 14 miles.  Uh-huh.  That might be a typical description in some cases.  Yes.  Okay.  But I'd just like to ask you to look at the  northern part of the Blackwater — the Walter  Blackwater trapline sketch here?  Uh-huh.  And if you look at the north-westerly point of this  sketch, and I'm pointing now to Exhibit 20, and that's  directly above sixth cabin, the designation of sixth  cabin, there is no geographic or topographic feature  at the corner of that description is there?  No, unless it be the headwaters of that unnamed creek.  Okay. Well, we could go back to the description and  look at that, and if you look at the description,  Exhibit 18, in the third line, at the end of the third  line you'll see what it says at the end, and if you  can follow me, Mr. Boys, the end of the third line in  the description "thence northerly" —  North-easterly.  Sorry, "north-easterly two miles to sixth cabin"?  Yes.  ",YTL".  Then it says "thence north two and a quarter  miles"?  Yes.  Do you agree with me that this is at that point?  That point, yes.  There's no reference to the headwaters there?  No.  And then it says "thence south-easterly six and a  quarter miles"?  Yes.  "To a point on Slow Maldo Creek approximately two  miles from the confluence with Damdochax Creek"?  Yes.  And that is — there's no geographic reference with  respect to that?  No. No.  And the other point that I want to draw to your  attention is that you'll agree with me will you that  the description that's shown here crosses over Slow  Maldo Creek?  Right. 186  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  And apparently crosses over Sansixmor Creek or in  2 Exhibit 20 is parenthetically called Cottonwood Creek?  3 A  Yes.  4 Q  All right.  5 A  That's right.  6 Q  And I'd just like to suggest to you, Mr. Boys, at this  7 time it was common for trapline descriptions that you  8 were aware of not necessarily to follow topographic  9 features, that what I directed your attention to —  10 A  Not all of them had been amended to conform to  11 topographic features. Uh-huh.  12 MR. RUSH:   Okay.  13 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Are we finished with the maps?  14 MR. RUSH:  15 Q  Just a moment. Oh, just one other point, Mr. Boys,  16 while you have Exhibit 20 in front of you, will you  17 agree with me that it is likely that the topographical  18 features that I referred to you as a difference  19 between Exhibit 21 and Exhibit 20, that those features  20 were added by the game department?  21 A  I would suggest that this was probably amended after  22 the game department got a revised map following the  23 survey of the — I can't remember exactly what year,  24 but it was the latter 40'sf and then I think the map  25 was produced subsequent to that in Victoria and then  26 the game maps were amended according to the new — the  27 new edition of the map, and this was part of our  28 problem that we were not provided with the new maps as  29 quickly as the game department were.  30 Q  Wasn't it also the case that topographic knowledge  31 came to the game warden and he added them by hand on  32 to the maps, even ones that had been corrected by the  33 provincial chief geographer?  34 A  Well, I can't answer for that.  I certainly didn't  35 witness that.  36 Q  Okay. Well, I suggested that to you only because it  37 appears that on Exhibit 20 there is what appears to be  38 a typed form of printing and as well a handwritten  39 form of printing on other parts of the map.  Now,  40 maybe you can agree with that or not.  I don't know.  41 A  No, I think I would suggest that possibly somebody who  42 made this tracing — or that two people were involved  43 in making this tracing.  44 Q  I see.  45 A  Two different —  46 Q  Two different hands?  47 A  Two different hands I would suggest. 187  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  MR. RUSH  33  34  35  36  MR. RUSH  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  Okay. All right. We can set that aside, Mr. Boys.  Oh, by the way, you wouldn't know one way or the other  as to whether or not Exhibit 20 was given to Mr.  Walter Blackwater, would you?  No, I wouldn't.  All right. Mr. Boys, I'd like to now direct your  attention please to Exhibit 22 in this commission,  which is a letter from yourself to Mr. Blackwater  dated January 31st, 1951.  It was the case, wasn't it,  that you were — you took the initiative to obtain Mr.  Walter Blackwater's agreement to purchase this  trapline?  Uh-huh.  This was something that you wanted to do and Mr.  Walter Blackwater was somebody that you contacted to  do it?  Uh-huh.  Right. Okay.  Now, you had contacted Mr. Blackwater  the previous year in order to discuss with him the  purchase of this trapline and you can confirm for me  that this letter that I'm showing to you dated January  22nd, 1950, is a letter that was sent out on your  behalf to Mr. Walter Blackwater?  It appears to be Mr. Appleby's signature. Yes.  Right.  This was sent with your authority though?  Yes.  And if you look at Exhibit 22 it's a year later that  you once again make the same request of him?  Yes.  Right.  Uh-huh.  All right.  Can that be an exhibit, please?  This?  Yes.  (EXHIBIT_51: Letter dated January 22, 1950)  Now, Mr. Boys, it was your understanding at the time  of your letters of January 22nd, 1950, which is now  Exhibit 51?  Uh-huh.  And your subsequent letter of January 31st, 1951,  which is Exhibit 22, that Mr. Walter Blackwater was  trapping on his father's trapping area?  Uh-huh. James Blackwater's.  Right. And you understood that Mr. James Blackwater's  trapping area was to the north and to the west of the  area of the Gelley trapline? 188  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  Q  Q  A  Q  A  Q  Yes.  Just about due north of it.  Okay.  And this was an area that Mr. James Blackwater  had passed through and visited on several occasions;  is that not correct?  I couldn't be sure of that, but it's logical to  suppose that he did because the trail was up the Yukon  telegraph line.  Okay.  And he would probably have used that trail.  Okay.  Maybe if I can just show you this letter of  February the 26th, 1951.  This is over your name and  apparently dictated by you and addressed to W.S.  Arneil, Indian Commissioner?  Uh-huh.  And if you look at the fourth line it says:  "The trapline has been visited annually since  then by James Blackwater, father of Walter  Blackwater for whom we are making  application to purchase the Gelley trapline,  and with Mr. Gelley's permission,"  A  Uh-huh.  Q  I'll just finish the line out,  "this Jimmy Blackwater has made use of some  of the cabins, equipment and traps on the  line, in other words if it is found that  some of the equipment is not where it was  left by Mr. Gelley when he last trapped then  it is in the possession of James  Blackwater."  Now, my — in terms of the visitation by Mr. James  Blackwater to that area, this letter sets out what  your understanding was at the time?  A  Yes.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  Can that be the next exhibit, please?  (EXHIBIT_52: Letter dated February 26, 1951)  MR. RUSH:  Q  Okay.  Now, I'd just ask you to look please, Mr. Boys,  at Exhibit 23 which is the next exhibit in sequence?  A  Uh-huh.  Q  And can you agree with me that the description of the  trapline here is in general terms? 189  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  12  Q  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  Very general. Yes.  All right.  It certainly does not describe the  trapline as is contained in the sketch Exhibit 19?  No.  Nor does it describe the trapline that was shown in  the sketch Exhibit 21?  No.  And I take it that this agreement was one that was  prepared by you for Mr. Blackwater*s signature?  It was prepared probably by Mr. Appleby.  He signed it  as a witness.  Very good.  Thank you. Now, if you'll look at Exhibit  24 please, Exhibit 24 is a letter over your name to  Mr. Arneil, A-r-n-e-i-1, on February 12th, 1951.  And  I direct your attention please to paragraph 1 and the  last line which says, and I'm quoting:  "This and two or three similar traplines to  the north of it were formerly Indian  trapping grounds as the local names  indicate."  Right.  Uh-huh.  Now, when you referred to the "local names", you were  referring to the names that were the Gitksan names  were you not?  Right. Yes.  And when you referred to the Gitksan names, were you  referring to names like the ones that I directed your  attention to on Exhibit 20, Wiminisik Lake?  Yes.  And Damdochax Lake?  Yes.  And there were other names like that that were there?  Oh, lots of them.  Yes.  Now, the situation with Mr. Walter Blackwater in  the — and by this I mean the purchase of the Gelley  trapline between I think it was third and sixth  cabins?  Uh-huh.  For Mr. Blackwater, this was a unique situation in  your experience at the Babine Agency?  You mean in respect to the purchase of a trapline?  By the department, by the agency, on behalf of a  Gitksan person?  I can't recall any others.  Okay. 190  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  But it was the — it was our intent to try and secure  2 those traplines that had been — that had been  3 abandoned by the linemen to try and secure them for  4 one or another of the Indians of the agency.  5 Q  Yes.  I appreciate that.  But, as I understand your  6 evidence, the purchase of the trapline from Mr. Gelley  7 and the agreement reached with Mr. Walter Blackwater  8 was — is the only one that you recall?  9 A  That's the only one I recall.  10 MR. RUSH:  All right.  And do you recall any purchases like  11 this on behalf of any Carrier people or Wet'suwet'en  12 people, as they are called, and do you recall any  13 similar purchases in respect of that geographic area  14 of the Babine Agency?  15 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Far from me, Mr. Rush, to suggest that  16 somebody break down their questions.  17 MR. RUSH:  18 Q  No, I appreciate it.  I'm always glad to have help in  19 further and better articulating my questions.  Let me  20 ask — let me try to make it more clear.  21 I suggest, Mr. Boys, that in respect of your  22 tenure as the Indian Superintendent of the Babine  23 Agency, the Walter Blackwater agreement is the only  24 one that occurred that you have knowledge of?  25 A  I can't recollect any other, but you have to bear in  26 mind that you are asking me to recollect over a period  27 of more than 40 years and —  28 Q  Yes, I appreciate that.  29 A  And I don't recollect any similar one.  3 0 Q  Okay.  Very good.  Now, I want to ask you about  31 another matter that was touched upon in your direct  32 examination and that pertains to estates, and I will  33 be returning to the question of traplines in a moment,  34 but I first want to ask you about some estates that  35 were administered while you were the Indian  36 Superintendent, and if you would please look at  37 Exhibit 10 for identification.  This pertains to the  38 Alexander White estate.  Now, I want to direct your  39 attention in particular — the whole thing is Exhibit  40 10.  41 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Sorry.  42 MR. RUSH:  But I only wish to direct Mr. Boys' attention at this  43 point to Exhibit 10 C, which is the handwritten will.  44 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Has it been marked?  45 MR. RUSH: Yes, it should have been marked as —  46 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  As 10 C.  47 MR. RUSH:  As 10 C.  I — maybe I can tell you that 10 A was the 191  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Application for Administration or Probate.  2 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Yes, here it is.  Here it is.  3 MR. RUSH:  4 Q  Yes.  All right.  Now, this document is a two-paged  5 document, Mr. Boys, and I want to be sure that you  6 have both pages in front of you. Okay.  Now, you'll  7 note Mr. Boys — I want to be sure we're both looking  8 at the same document.  If I could just have a look at  9 your copy.  Yes, we are.  Thank you.  This will is  10 apparently dated April the 18th, 1946?  11 A  Uh-huh.  12 Q  You see that?  13 A  Uh-huh.  14 Q  And at the bottom of the page, which is really the  15 first page of this will, are the signatures of two  16 witnesses apparently?  17 A  Uh-huh.  18 Q  One Fritz Harris by his mark, an "X"?  19 A  Yes.  20 Q  And the other the signature of Joseph C. Neale,  21 N-e-a-1-e; do you see that?  22 A  Yes.  23 Q  Who's Joseph Neale?  24 A  I really don't know.  25 Q  Okay.  26 A  I might say that I was not at the agency at this  27 particular time.  28 Q  Yes.  Okay.  I understand that, but this will came to  29 your attention in order for the probate —  30 A  Yes.  31 Q  — to occur?  32 A  Uh-huh.  33 Q  Isn't that right?  34 A  Yes.  3 5 Q  All right.  I want to — I want to ask you about the  36 will.  The will is dated April the 18th, 1946?  37 A  Uh-huh.  38 Q  And Mr. White died on April the 22nd, 1946?  39 A  Uh-huh.  40 Q  Was there a practise of the Indian Agent to obtain  41 wills from ailing Indian people?  42 A  No, there was a — there was a practise to try to  43 encourage Indians to make a will at the soonest  44 possible time, but I suppose that it perhaps became  45 more urgent in the view of a family if somebody was  46 thought to be likely to pass away.  47 Q  Uh-huh.  Did you know — did you know Alexander White 192  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 had a hereditary chief's name?  2 A  No.  3 Q  Did you know the chief's name of Wiigyet, and I'll  4 spell it W-i-i-g-y-e-t?  5 A  I remember the Wiigyets; at least I remember the  6 names.  Wiigyets, yes.  7 Q  All right.  Let me just direct your attention to the  8 first page of this will at the bottom.  It says:  "I,  9 Alexander White, hereby request that Joseph Star be  10 appointed chief.", and then it's got in brackets,  11 "(Weget)", W-e-g-e-t, closed brackets, "in my stead."  12 A  Uh-huh.  13 Q  Did you know that Alexander White held the name of  14 Wiigyet before he passed on?  15 A  I — you know, I can't remember anything about this  16 particular estate.  17 Q  Okay.  18 A  And I never met Alexander White.  19 Q  All right.  20 A  So —  21 Q  You did meet Joseph Star though?  22 A  Oh, yes.  Uh-huh.  23 Q  All right.  And did you know that Joseph Star held the  24 name of Wiigyet?  25 A  Well, not that I can recall.  No.  26 Q  Okay.  Now, look at the top of the page as well.  It  27 says:  "I, Alexander White, hereby bequeath to Joseph  28 Star my trapping ground on the Babine River which is  29 registered in my name."  30 A  Yes.  31 Q  That trapping ground was in fact passed to Joseph  32 Star, wasn't it, under the period of time that you  33 were the Indian Agent in the Babine Agency?  34 A  Well, I would have to consult the estate documents to  35 confirm that because I don't recollect it.  36 Q  All right. Well, it certainly would have been your  37 obligation —  38 A  Yes.  39 Q  — to follow the direction in a will such as that?  40 A  Right.  41 Q  All right.  Now, Mr. Boys, will you agree with me that  42 if I am correct that Alexander White held the name of  43 Wiigyet before he passed on, and if Mr. Joseph Star  44 took the name of Wiigyet after Mr. White's death, that  45 this is a bequeath of a trapline in accordance with  46 the successorship of the clan and hereditary system?  47 A  Yes, he would be — he would be quite free to bequeath 193  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  Q  4  5  6  7  8  A  9  10  Q  11  A  12  13  14  Q  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  A  24  25  Q  26  27  A  28  Q  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  A  44  MR. RUSH  45  46  47  his trapline to whomsoever he pleased if he left a  will.  But you would understand this, would you not, as a  direction in accordance with the hereditary system?  I'm here talking about your own knowledge of this will  at the time that you were involved in its  administration.  But, you know, I really don't recall this particular  administration.  I'm —  All right.  It's a long time ago and I don't recall what my  thoughts were, only that it was something that was —  had to be administered.  All right. And that's what you did, you administered  this will as it would appear to be the case from the  Exhibit 10 A, which is the Application for  Administration or Probate?  Yes.  And you would give effect to the terms of this will  wouldn't you?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  Did you know Joe Star personally, Mr. Boys?  Yes.  I certainly met Joe Star, but if you were to ask  me to identify him now I'm afraid I couldn't do it.  Okay. Did you know that he took the name Wiigyet at a  feast?  No, I didn't.  You knew Mr. Star to be a person who trapped?  Yes.  Did you know his trapping area?  I couldn't tell you where it was.  Okay.  At this stage.  The reference in the will by Mr. Alexander White to  appointing Mr. Joseph Star as the chief in his stead,  as shown in Exhibit 10 C?  Uh-huh.  That, of course, was not something that you could give  effect to?  No.  But you'll agree with me that it was a direction to be  given effect to in some way?  It certainly was an expression of his wish.  All right.  Now, Mr. Boys, I'm advised that the  Babine Agency often transferred property of a deceased  Gitksan or Carrier person, as you knew it — as you  knew the name then, to his or her clan successors and 194  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 not necessarily to family descendants. Can you agree  2 with that?  3 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Can you put a time period on that?  4 MR. RUSH:  5 Q  During the period of time of Mr. Boys' tenure in the  6 Babine Agency.  7 A  There may have been cases where a deceased left a will  8 and so directed and then the terms of the will, if the  9 will was validated, would be carried out.  10 Q  I suggest to you more than that, Mr. Boys, that in  11 fact in the absence of a will, but upon the direction  12 of the family, that there were transfers of property  13 in accordance with the inheritance succession, not in  14 accordance with the Indian_Act?  15 A  Not to my knowledge.  16 Q  I want to show you a document and I'll ask you if you  17 can recognize this.  This is a document from the  18 federal government's document list numbered 10807.  19 I'm finished with Mr. Alexander White's estate file.  20 And this document is a letter from Mr. Harold Sinclair  21 on the stationery of the Native Brotherhood of British  22 Columbia and it's dated February the 24th, 1950, and  23 I'd ask you to turn to the last page, and if you can  24 agree with me that the faint photocopy of the stamp in  25 the bottom left-hand corner is the stamp of the Babine  26 Agency?  27 A  Yes, it appears to be.  28 Q  All right.  And do you remember this letter from Mr.  29 Harold Sinclair?  30 A  No, I don't.  I had a fair amount of correspondence  31 from Mr. Harold Sinclair.  32 Q  And you'd recognize his handwriting?  It's pretty  33 distinctive, isn't it?  It's certainly better than  34 mine.  35 A  Yes, I've read that letter.  36 Q  All right.  Thank you.  It's likely that you received  37 this letter in the offices of the Babine Agency?  38 A  Yes.  3 9 Q  I direct you to page 3, second paragraph, and I'm  40 quoting:  41  42 "Chief Wilitzqu is the definite owner of  43 Meziadin Lake Trapline. After Chief  44 Wilitzqu died then Lazarous Wilitzqu Grey,  45 being a nephew of Chief Wilitzqu, then takes  46 over as a successor.  And when Lazarous  47 Wilitzqu Grey died his nephew Mr. John 195  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Robinson is now a successor. All three  2 Chieftainship mentioned are of the same  3 clan, Wolf.  In the first place Chief  4 Wilitzqu, father of the three sons, as  5 mentioned above, is the owner of the  6 Meziadin Lake Trapline. Then comes the  7 successors. That is the true story of the  8 Meziadin Lake Trapline, which the new  9 generations and the successors of the  10 Kitwancool Band cannot change."  11  12 Now, you understood that to be a statement that  13 the successorship of the Meziadin Lake trapline was to  14 follow the clan successorship; is that not correct?  15 A  Yes, it appears to be.  16 MR. RUSH:  All right. And I'd like that to be marked as the  17 next exhibit.  18  19 (EXHIBIT_53: Letter dated February 24th, 1950, to Mr.  20 Boys from H. Sinclair)  21  22 MR. RUSH:  23 Q  All right.  Now, you penned a letter back to him, Mr.  24 Boys, and this is dated February 27th, 1950, over your  25 name?  26 A  Uh-huh.  27 Q  And you would agree with me that it's likely that this  28 letter was dispatched by you?  29 A  Yes.  30 Q  I'd like you to refer to the first paragraph if you  31 will?  32 A  Yes.  33 Q  It says:  34  35 "I am in receipt of your letter of February  36 24th, and thank you for your information  37 about the Wilitzque Trapline.  I am writing  38 today to Mr. John Robinson to offer him the  3 9 trapline as he is apparently the rightful  40 successor."  41  42 A  Uh-huh.  43 Q  You see that?  44 A  Yes.  45 Q  Do you agree with me that you accept Mr. Sinclair's  46 statement that the successorship of the Wilitzque  47 trapline passed to Mr. John Robinson according to the 196  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  Q  A  Q  MR.  A  RUSH:  clan inheritance?  Yes, this appears to accept that.  I think the problem  was that we had to accept the people in possession of  the trapline because we simply could not go back and  administer several estates back maybe two or three  generations to determine who might have been the  logical or the rightful owner of it, so we accepted  whoever was in possession at the time that we started  administering according to the requirements of the  lB<Iian_Act. And this evidently was one of those  situations.  Mr. Robinson was in possession of it and  so he was accepted.  Well, the letter of Mr. Sinclair of February the 24th  indicates that he, Mr. Robinson, was the rightful  successor, and it certainly doesn't appear from the  letter that he was the rightful successor because he  was in possession; you'll agree with that, won't you?  Oh, yes, but I don't — I would like to see the  trapline as of 1950 to determine who was shown as in  possession of the trapline at that time.  Well --  I would suggest that it was probably Mr. Robinson and  that Mr. Robinson's heir would be the next registered  owner of the trapline.  Okay. Well, we can certainly check that.  Yes.  We know what happened after Mr. Robinson passed on,  and you'll agree with me, Mr. Boys, that in respect of  the first paragraph of your letter of February the  27th, 1950, it makes no reference to the fact of Mr.  Robinson being in possession of the trapline?  No, it doesn't.  Okay.  Can that — that will be the next exhibit,  pi ea se.  <EX.HIBIT_54: Letter dated February 27, 1950 to H.  Sinclair from Mr. Boys)  MR. RUSH:  Q  All right.  And I just want to show you another letter  from Mr. Harold Sinclair which is dated March the 6th,  1950, and it is confirming receipt of your letter of  February the 27th, 1950, and you'll see in the first  paragraph, which is really the paragraph to which I  wish to make reference, he says:  "I have your letter of February 27th, '50 and 197  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  have learned that you are now writing to Mr.  John Robinson who is now the rightful  successor of Wilitzque Trapline."  A  Uh-huh.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  Can that be the next exhibit, please?  <EXHIBIT_55_: Letter dated March 6, 1950, from H.  Sinclair to Mr. Boys)  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  Now, it's your understanding, Mr. Boys, that Mr.  Sinclair was a person who I think wrote to you on  several occasions concerning the people at Kitwanga?  Yes.  And he was the person who made the statements to you  that the trapping area should be devolved in  accordance with the hereditary system of  successorship?  That was the — that was contained in that letter that  you've shown me.  Yes.  That's right.  But in addition to that wasn't Mr.  Sinclair someone who wanted to make it clear to you  that the people of Kitwanga sought to have the  trapline areas passed to the successors in accordance  with the hereditary clan system?  Well, I wouldn't say that Mr. Sinclair spoke for all  of the people or in many cases not even for the  majority of the people in Kitwanga, but he spoke for  some of them.  All right.  Well, let me show you a letter for —  which I think was received in your office for some of  the people that he probably spoke for.  This is also  taken from the federal document list document number  10807.  Now, I just direct your attention to the first  page?  Yes.  And I quote:  "As a secretary for the villagers here in  Kitwanga, I have been adviced", he says, "by  Village Councillor to write into your office  for explanations. Whereas you are realized  by our villagers that you are our new Indian  Agent of our department and that you may not  have the understanding of our Kitwanga  Band's individual trapping ground title 198  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 rights surrounding our Kitwanga vicinity.  2 Since of the very ancient times that  3 there are only a certain number of clans  4 here in Kitwanga that has any title rights  5 of trapping grounds as ownerships. And  6 there never was any false claim or any  7 dispute over their own known trapping ground  8 properties. But now, since the last few  9 years after the deaths of those head chiefs  10 and title holders there seem to be some  11 people here who are strongly trying to  12 deprive such properties by false claims  13 because as at first of course they knew  14 definitely that they had no grounds or  15 anything to prove their claim."  16  17 You'll agree with me that he is advocating that  18 the title rights of the trapping grounds are  19 associated with and belong to the clan chiefs of  20 Kitwanga?  21 A  That's what he's advocating. Yes.  22 MR. RUSH:  Now, there's no doubt on your part is there, Mr.  23 Boys, as you look at this letter, that Mr. Sinclair  24 was advancing the aboriginal claim of the Kitwanga  25 hereditary chiefs in this letter?  26 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Are you quoting from the letter —  27 MR. RUSH:  No.  28 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  — with your description?  29 MR. RUSH:  No, I'm summarizing from what Mr. Boys' state of mind  3 0 would have been had he — when he received this  31 letter.  32 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  If he understood this to be the aboriginal  33 claim of the Kitwanga?  34 MR. RUSH:  Yes.  Yes.  My question to you is that, having read  35 this letter, when you received it back on November the  36 9th, 1946, that there wasn't any doubt that Mr.  37 Sinclair was expressing to you and advocating the  38 claim of the Kitwanga hereditary chiefs as to their  39 aboriginal lands.  40 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I'm going to object to the question because I  41 think what you're asking is for Mr. Boys to have  42 understood a particular state of mind as opposed to  43 the meaning of the words used of Mr. Sinclair and I  44 don't think that he can answer that question.  45 MR. RUSH:  46 Q  Go ahead, Mr. Boys. Your counsel's objection is  47 noted. 199  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  4  5  Q  6  7  8  A  9  Q  10  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  MR. RUSH:  18  19  20  21  22  23  MR. RUSH  24  Q  25  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  39  40  41  A  42  43  Q  44  45  46  47  Well, I can't tell you exactly what my thoughts were,  but he was advancing claims on behalf of certain —  certain people of who were crest members in Kitwanga.  Yes.  Okay.  Now, you understood at the time that there  was — that the claims that he was advancing were  claims in accordance with the Gitksan system of laws?  System of?  Of laws or rules.  That there were rules that the  Gitksan people conformed to upon the death of a  person, a Gitksan person, and this is what he was  addressing?  Yes.  And you understood these to be laws or rules by which  the Gitksan people themselves followed?  Yes, I would — I would accept that.  All right.  Can that be an exhibit, please? Exhibit  56.  (EXHIBIT_56: Letter dated November 7, 1946 from H.  Sinclair to Mr. Boys)  Mr. Boys, the administration of estates in the Babine  Agency was a matter that continued on for many  decades; that certain estates required that they be  administered over a long period of time?  That —  It took a long time to administer certain estates?  Oh, yes.  Uh-huh.  And is it not the case that as a general matter that  the administration of the estates in the agency was  never up-to-date?  No.  It was not finished when I left the agency.  It's my instructions that there were a number of  outstanding issues that arose because of the Gitksan  and Carrier peoples' insistence on following the crest  system for successorship of property; that these led  to a number of outstanding matters with regard to the  administration of estates in the agency?  You mean that they influenced the administration of  estates?  That the fact of their insistence that the hereditary  system be followed led to investigations and inquiries  that had to be made by the department as to the  rightful successors following the administration of  estates in the agency? 200  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  4  5  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  12  13  Q  14  A  15  Q  16  A  17  Q  18  A  19  20  21  22  23  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  34  35  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  41  Q  42  43  44  45  A  46  MR. RUSH  47  Well, there was no question if a person died intestate  as to what was the right of descent of property.  If  there was a will and the property was left to somebody  who was a crest member, then the wills — the requests  of the will would be recognized and accepted.  In the absence of a will, was it not your experience  that clan members of a deceased chief or deceased  Gitksan or Carrier or Wet'suwet'en person insisted  that property follow the clan's successorship rules?  There was — representations were made to that end,  but they didn't influence the administration of the  estate.  I suggest that they did, Mr. Boys, that —  No.  That in fact —  I don't accept that they did.  All  right.  In fact, I recollect that there are — there are  exhibits here, and one of them a letter I think  written to somebody that we do not — explaining that  we do not accept that type of succession; that the  Indian_Act states that the succession goes to the —  directly to the heir of the deceased.  Yes.  That was a letter I think to Mr. Ray Morgan that  you raised on the last occasion, but I want to suggest  to you that that was the formal position that was  taken by you, but informally throughout your tenure  you did give preference to succession of property to  the clan or crest successors —  No.  — on an intestate —  No, I don't think that a — I don't think that an  estate would have been accepted, an intestate's estate  would have been accepted, had it been administered in  that way contrary to the provisions of the Indian_A.ct.  Well, it didn't have to be contrary to the provisions  of the Indian_Act, did it, in order for you to give  preference to the crest or clan system?  Not if they — not if the crest devisee was also the  heir of the deceased, but otherwise it would.  It's my instructions that in fact in the Babine Agency  preference was given in the administration of  intestate succession to successors who were clan or  crest members?  No, I — certainly not.  All right. Do you want to take a break?  It's  11:15.  Take a ten minute break. 201  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Sure.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  MR.  RUSH!  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR A BRIEF RECESS)  All right. We can continue now, Mr. Boys, with a few  more questions about the administration by the Babine  Agency of traplines, and it's my understanding that  there was, at the time that you were the Indian Agent,  a requirement under the B..C.._Game_Act to register  trapping areas?  Uh-huh.  Yes.  Right.  And trappers registered their traplines  because they were required to under law?  Yes.  There was — there was a possibility that if  they didn't have them registered that that area might  be applied for somebody else and it might be  registered in somebody else's name.  So despite that though I think we went over this  before and you agreed that there were some areas that  were not registered?  Right.  Okay.  And the — you sought as part of the  administration of traplines to protect hereditary  trapping areas as a matter of policy during your  tenure as Indian Agent?  I attempted to have any area that was not covered by a  registered trapline registered for security of one of  the Indians of the agency.  Okay.  And would you agree that the Indian people, the  Gitksan and Carrier people with whom you dealt,  believed that the registration system would protect  their trapping areas?  Yes.  And was it the case that many of the Gitksan and  Carrier trappers that you had dealings with only spoke  their native tongue?  Yes, a number of the older people.  And in some cases there were a number of people who  had difficulty, if they spoke English they had  difficulty in speaking with you; that their —  Some were certainly much less fluent than others.  And when you dealt with the trappers, the Gitksan and  Carrier trappers, you dealt with them either through  your use of English and their attempt at fluency in  English or with a translator? 202  J.V.  Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.   Rush  1 A  Yes.  2 Q  And would you agree that there were many problems in  3 accurately determining the trapping boundaries in  4 trapping areas?  5 A  Yes.  6 Q  And I think you've already agreed with this, but  7 certainly one of the major problems was determining  8 the topographic features being referred to by an  9 Indian trapper on the ground?  10 A  Yes.  That's correct.  11 Q  Okay.  And as I understand it from your previous  12 evidence, that you never went to a trapping area  13 yourself with a trapper in order to determine the  14 exact boundaries of his or her territory?  15 A  No.  I have been on one or two traplines with an  16 Indian, but not for the purpose of determining exactly  17 the boundaries of his trapline.  18 Q  Okay.  And in terms of the two, you said one or two  19 occasions of being on a trapping area, do you recall  20 who it was that you were with at the time?  21 A  Well, I was with Ben McKenzie on one occasion and I  22 was with somebody from the Babine Band on another  23 occasion, and I can't recollect exactly the name of  24 the person that it was, but —  25 Q  Okay.  26 A  — his trapping area was not very far to the north of  27 the Babine, Fort Babine Band.  28 Q  All right.  And that would be on the eastern extremity  29 of the agency or was it — was it even in the agency?  30 A  Yes, it was in the agency.  31 Q  Okay.  So it must have been right on the eastern  32 extremity?  33 A  The north-eastern extremity.  Yes.  34 Q  Okay.  Now, in answer to a question that you were  35 asked by Mr. Mackenzie you agreed with him that the  36 Gitksan and Carrier people, as you knew them then,  37 accepted the boundary lines as redrafted by the game  38 department, that is to say, when they came back from  39 the game department, and my question to you is did  40 they really have any choice in it?  41 A  Well, they had an opportunity of making a protest if  42 they felt that they had been deprived of some part of  43 their — of the area that had been registered to them  44 or of an area that should be registered to them.  If  45 they felt that a revised registration encroached upon  46 an area that they had formerly held, then they had a  47 right of protest, and I vaguely recollect that we did 203  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  Q  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  A  9  Q  10  11  A  12  13  Q  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  A  28  Q  29  30  31  32  A  33  34  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  45  Q  46  47  have one or two protests, but I couldn't tell you  specifically by whom or where.  But the game department was the final arbiter of the  descriptions; isn't that right?  They held the master maps, yes.  And — but under the legislation they were the  legislative —  Yes.  — body that made the determination about what these  descriptions were going to be?  They were the people who registered the traplines,  yes.  And it had to be registered by both a map and a  description?  Right.  Now, mention was made of an inquiry by an Arthur  Seymour to sell his trapline, and I think you —  Uh-huh.  — identified an item of correspondence to that  effect?  Yes.  It was not the case though that it was common that the  native people in the Babine Agency wanted to sell  their traplines?  Not very often.  In fact, that's the only case you remember, isn't it?  Well, I don't recollect any others, but —  Now, the descriptions that were prepared by you or Mr.  Appleby, that is to say, descriptions of trapping  areas and their boundaries, these were descriptions  that were written by you; is that right?  The initial application on behalf of an Indian. Yes.  We would assist the Indian in formulating a  description of the area that he wished to apply for.  All right.  This was in your handwriting or your  typing, whatever the case?  Yes.  And your words were used?  Yes.  And is it not the case that in fact many of the Indian  Gitksan and Carrier native people who applied for a  registration could neither read nor write?  Yeah, there may have been some who could neither read  nor write at all.  In many of the cases that you have been referred to  there are X's that mark the place of the signature for  the applicant? 204  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 A  Yes.  Yes.  2 Q  And is it not the case that many of the applications  3 that were made were made on behalf of a company or a  4 group?  5 A  Yes.  6 Q  Are there people, Mr. Boys, that you recall who didn't  7 come to you to register a trapline, but who instead  8 went directly to Mr. Cox?  9 A  Yes, there were some, and some who went directly to  10 Mr. Martin in Prince Rupert.  11 Q  Right.  These — would those people have been from the  12 Babine Agency?  13 A  Yes.  14 Q  So it is the case, is it not, that you wouldn't have  15 handled every application that was made in the Babine  16 Agency?  17 A  Yes.  If the initial application was made directly to  18 the game department, the game department would have  19 sent them back to us.  20 Q  At some point you get a copy of them?  21 A  Well, at some point we get some consultation on them.  22 Yes.  23 Q  All right.  Are you able to recall what number of  24 these applications during your tenure as the Indian  25 Agent were made directly with Mr. Cox?  26 A  No.  Very few.  27 Q  Okay.  Okay.  I want to direct your attention to an  28 exhibit for identification in the proceedings at the  29 trial and this is Exhibit 719.  It doesn't appear to  30 be for identification, but my memory is that it was  31 for identification and I just wonder if you would look  32 at this exhibit, please, and it is a linen trapline  33 map —  34 A  Uh-huh.  35 Q  — which is — should say what the number is in the  36 bottom left-hand corner —  37 A   38 C.  3 8   MR. RUSH:   — on the other side.  It may not necessarily be the  39 same underneath there.  Does it indicate there?  40 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  There's an "8" in the bottom.  It could be —  41 oh, it's a 38 C.  42 MR. RUSH:  Very good.  43 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  In pencil with a "2" under it.  44 MR. RUSH:  45 Q  All right.  Now, as you look at this map, Mr. Boys, is  46 this — firstly, do you recognize any of the writing  47 on this map? 205  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  No, I can't say I do.  2 Q  This map was like the linen trapline maps kept by you  3 and the agency?  4 A  Yes.  5 Q  Okay.  I'll just roll it out this way.  6 A  Yes.  7 Q  All right.  I just want to show you on the back it's  8 identified as Nass River, Skeena River; do you see  9 that?  10 A  Uh-huh.  11 Q  Okay.  Is it probable that a map like this was kept in  12 your agency?  13 A  Yes.  14 Q  All right.  Thank you.  I'm now showing you a second  15 map which is Exhibit 720 in the proceedings.  I just  16 ask you if you would review this map.  It's also a 38  17 C.  18 A  Yes.  19 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  And on the back side it has a "B 17" over "38  20 C" and a "3".  21 MR. RUSH:  22 Q  Thank you.  Now, do you recognize any of the writing  23 on this map, Mr. Boys?  24 A  I think there is a fair amount of Mr. Mallinson's  25 writing on this map.  I think this writing is probably  26 Mr. Mallinson's.  27 MR. RUSH:  Okay.  Mr. Boys has referred to the bottom centre —  28 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Williams, Alice, and company.  2 9 MR. RUSH:  30 Q  All right.  Do you recognize the writing which is just  31 south and west of the Thutade Lake?  32 A  I think that probably is Mr. Mallinson's.  33 Q  All right.  Okay.  34 A  And I think Simon Morrison's trapline is in Mr.  35 Mallinson's writing and some notes here:  "According  36 to Simon, this..." I can't tell you what that says.  37 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  "According to Simon"?  38 THE WITNESS:   "This particular".  39 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Or "pasture"?  No?  40 THE WITNESS:   I don't know.  "According to Simon, this part  41 only belongs to James."  42 MR. RUSH:  43 Q  Okay.  And that's just to the right of the word  44 "river" showing the Skeena River?  45 A  Skeena River.  I think that's Mr. Mallinson's.  46 Q  Mr. Mallinson was the —  47 A  He was my immediate predecessor. 206  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  As the Indian Agent in the Babine Agency?  2 A  Yes.  3 Q  Okay.  It's probable then that this exhibit was kept  4 by the Babine Agency in your offices?  5 A  Yes.  6 Q  Okay. All right.  Thank you.  I don't think there's  7 any other identifying features on it.  Thank you very  8 much.  I have one more for you.  Now, this one is also  9 marked 38 C and is Exhibit 718.  Now, is there any —  10 if you'll just look right over to the right-hand  11 corner here, can you identify any of the writing on  12 this map?  13 A  No, I can't say I can.  14 Q  All right.  Can you confirm for me that a map like  15 this or maps like this one were kept by you in the  16 Babine Agency?  17 A  Yes.  Uh-huh.  18 Q  Okay.  All right then.  Very good.  Thank you.  Okay.  19 Thank you very much.  Now, I want to ask you about  20 another subject, Mr. Boys, and this pertains to the  21 evidence which you gave about fishing. And you gave  22 evidence that a number of the Gitksan people each  23 summer went to the coast in order to participate in  24 the commercial fishery?  25 A  Right.  Uh-huh.  26 Q  It's my understanding that the time that people went  27 down to the coast was for the opening of the sockeye  28 salmon run on June the 15th?  29 A  Yes. Well, they — the families usually went down or  3 0 a large number of people went down in advance of that.  31 Q  Yes?  32 A  And they were — many of them were employed at the  33 cannery to, oh, get — help them to get the boats in  34 order and the nets in order and the cannery lines set  35 up, and so on.  36 Q  Now, is it your understanding that the sockeye season  37 ran to about August the 15th?  3 8 A  I'm not just sure how, you know — I think sometimes  39 the run was delayed and I'm not quite sure how long it  40 would run, but it ran for two or two and a half or  41 three months. Yes.  42 Q  The period of time that I understand that most of the  43 people were at the coast fishing in the commercial  44 fishery was between June 15th and August 15th or  45 thereabouts in order to fish for the sockeye runs?  46 A  Uh-huh.  47 Q  And that some of the people stayed on for the end of 207  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 the August and into September in order to fish coho  2 and chum?  3 A  Yes.  4 Q  All right.  Now, when you said that there was a number  5 of families that went to the coast from among the  6 Gitksan villages, you were certainly not suggesting  7 that all of the people in these villages went to the  8 coast to participate in the commercial fishery?  9 A  No.  10 Q  Okay.  And it is your recollection, is it not, that  11 during the summer there was, from among the Gitksan  12 people, fishing done on the — that is inland fishing  13 done on the Skeena and the Bulkley and Babine Rivers?  14 A  Yes.  15 Q  Now, I just want to ask you about the Carrier people,  16 and you understood, did you not, that Hagwilget and  17 Moricetown were both villages of Carrier people?  18 A  Right.  19 Q  Or Wet'suwet'en people?  20 A  Yes.  21 Q  And both the Carrier — both people from Hagwilget and  22 from Moricetown fished in the inland fishery?  23 A  Right. Uh-huh.  24 Q  The Moricetown people fishing at the Moricetown  25 Canyon?  26 A  Uh-huh.  27 Q  And the Hagwilget people fishing in parts of the  28 Hagwilget Canyon?  29 A  Right.  Uh-huh.  30 Q  Now, there were — there was a considerable amount of  31 fishing farther upstream on the Bulkley River as well,  32 was there not, by Carrier or Wet'suwet'en people?  33 Now, I mean upstream from Moricetown.  34 A  On the Bulkley?  35 Q  Yes, upstream from Moricetown up from the canyon up to  36 as far as where the Morice River meets the Bulkley.  37 A  Oh, I don't recollect seeing any.  The major place for  38 inland fishing was at Moricetown and there were a  3 9 number of —  40 Q  Right.  41 A  — smokehouses or fish-drying racks built at  42 Moricetown and a large number of people participated  43 there.  44 Q  All right. Was it also your understanding that there  45 were Wet'suwet'en people or Carrier people who, from  46 Moricetown and Hagwilget, who went to the coast to  47 fish -- 208  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  There were —  2 Q  — in the commercial fishery?  3 A  — a few I think. Yes.  4 Q  Okay. Will you agree with me that among the  5 Wet'suwet'en or Carrier people from the villages of  6 Hagwilget and Moricetown there was considerable  7 reliance and importance placed upon the summer inland  8 fishery?  9 A  Yes.  10 Q  The Moricetown and Hagwilget people were concerned,  11 extremely concerned, about the strength of the runs  12 and the availability of fish at the Hagwilget Canyon  13 and at the Moricetown Canyon?  14 A  Well, I'm sure they would be.  15 Q  Well, you had occasion to receive complaints  16 registered to you by the Moricetown people concerning  17 the building of the fishway —  18 A  Yes.  19 Q  — at Moricetown?  20 A  Uh-huh.  21 Q  And in fact was there not considerable displeasure  22 expressed by the Moricetown people concerning the  23 fishway?  24 A  I think they were very apprehensive when it was first  25 discussed that they might not in future get the  26 numbers of fish that they felt they had got in the  27 past and that they would need.  28 Q  Okay.  I'm going to come to that because I think that  29 you were involved there at two different periods of  30 time with regard to the Moricetown fishery.  I just  31 want to show you a letter which you wrote from  32 federal — the federal government's document list  33 number 2921 from yourself to W.S. Arneil dated  34 November 14th, 1950 concerning the fishery at  35 Moricetown.  36 A  Uh-huh.  37 Q  It was your understanding that there was some threat  38 to the peace that was exhibited by the Moricetown  3 9 people over the fishway at Moricetown?  40 A  Yes, they were very apprehensive about it.  41 MR. RUSH:  All right.  Can that be marked as an exhibit,  42 please?  43  44 (EXHISI1_5_7: Letter dated November 14, 1950 from Mr.  45 Boys to Mr. Arneil)  46  47    MR. RUSH: 209  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  4  A  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Q  12  13  A  14  15  Q  16  17  18  19  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  26  A  27  28  Q  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  40  Q  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  And you met Mr. Boys with chiefs and other people from  Moricetown who expressed their apprehension to you  during that period of time?  Well, it wasn't — it wasn't only to me.  I arranged a  meeting of the people of Moricetown and — to be  attended by representatives of the Department of  Fisheries and I attended and this was to be a meeting  where the fisheries would explain what their intent  and purpose was and where questions could be asked  about the — about the fishery.  Was Mr. Giraud — do you remember a Vic Giraud? Was  he present at that meeting?  Well, I remember the name, but I can't remember  whether he was present at the meeting or not.  Okay. All right.  I want to ask you if in fact it  wasn't the case that the Moricetown and Hagwilget  Carrier people continued to express their apprehension  about the strength of the runs up the Bulkley River to  you when you were the Indian Commissioner in British  Columbia, if you recall that?  I don't recall it.  Okay.  In fact, is it not the case, and I'd ask you if  you recall, that you received a petition or a number  of petitions from the Moricetown and Hagwilget people  concerning their fish runs?  Well, I have to admit that I don't recall it, but I  certainly wouldn't deny it.  All right.  Let me show you this memorandum.  This is  a memorandum to the Indian Commissioner for British  Columbia dated May 10th, 1962?  Uh-huh.  Over your name as Indian Commissioner for British  Columbia with a copy going to the Superintendent from  the Babine Indian Agency.  Can you confirm that this  was written on your behalf?  Yes. That's — that's Mr. Kendall's signature.  I see.  He was our officer in charge of game and fishery in  the office.  All right. And can you confirm that this was your  understanding at the time, and I in particular direct  you to paragraph 2 where it says in part, and I quote:  "It is thought that you should know of  petitions which were sent to the Regional  Office in October, 1961 by the Moricetown  Band who feel precisely the same about the 210  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  15  A  16  17  Q  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  31  32  33  Q  34  35  A  36  37  Q  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q"  43  A  44  MR. RUSH  45  46  47  situation as do the people at Tsitsk."  Tsitsk.  Tsitsk. Yes.  You understood that to be the —  Hagwilget.  Hagwilget?  Uh-huh.  And you'll also notice that there is — you say then,  and I quote:  "I also enclose my reply to Mr. David  Dennis at that time."  Uh-huh.  And I take it that Mr. David Dennis had written to you  concerning the situation of the strengths of the  salmon runs at the Moricetown Canyon?  Yes, certainly that's the implication.  I don't — I  don't specifically recall this one letter, but —  All right.  Now, as — can you confirm, as you read  paragraph 2, that that was your understanding at the  time?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  Okay.  And can you confirm at the bottom of the page  that it was your view, and I quote:  "It is just another case of fish versus power  and should the latter one win out, the  Indian people would certainly suffer to a  greater extent than they are now."  Well, I can't say that I recollect specifically this  correspondence which was — but I do recollect that  there was a — that there was a problem involved with  the diversion of water from the — to Kemano.  Resulting in a concern of the reduction in water flows  at the Moricetown Canyon?  Well, resulting in — yes, resulting in a smaller fish  run, annual fish run at Moricetown.  Okay.  Now, this memorandum —  Is this to be —  Yes,   I just wanted to confirm with you that this  memorandum was  sent out over your name as it appears?  Yes.  And with your authority?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  All right.  Can this be an exhibit, please?  (EXHIBIT_58: Memorandum dated May 10, 1962 from Mr.  Boys to Supt. Fry) 211  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  MR. RUSH  3  Q  4  5  6  7  8  A  9  10  Q  11  12  A  13  MR. RUSH  14  15  16  17  18  MR. RUSH  19  Q  20  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  A  30  31  32  Q  33  34  35  36  37  A  38  39  40  41  Q  42  A  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  All right.  Thank you. All right. Mr. Boys, I want  to refer you to another letter which you penned or at  least it appears that it was written over your name in  August of 1947 and I wonder if you can confirm that  this was either written by you or on your behalf?  Yes. That was my letter and it sums up the situation  as it existed at that time.  Thank you. And the Babine River was in the Babine  Agency?  Right.  Uh-huh.  Thank you.  Can that be an exhibit, please?  (EX.HIBIT_59: Letter dated August 22, 1947 from Mr.  Boys to the Indian Commissioner for B.C.)  All right.  I now would like to ask you, Mr. Boys, if  you would please turn to Exhibit 31, and Mr. Mackenzie  asked you some questions pertaining to certain  declarations of a chief or a councillor, and I'm going  to ask you some questions about this.  Yes.  The Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en or Carrier people that  you dealt with on the Band Councils while you were the  Indian Agent were for the most part hereditary chiefs,  were they not?  When I got there to the agency there were chiefs in  place, chiefs and councillors acting on behalf of the  band there.  All right.  My question to you is that were the chiefs  and councillors that you had dealings with while you  were the Indian Agent hereditary chiefs, hereditary  under the successorship laws or rules of the clan and  crest system?  Well, I don't know how some of these came to be —  came to be appointed or — but during my term of  office some bands elected to change to an elective  system.  Okay.  And we supervised the elections.  Okay. Prior to those elections occurring, there were  appointed chiefs; is that right?  Uh-huh.  Did you understand some of those chiefs to be  hereditary chiefs? 212  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  3  4  Q  5  6  A  7  Q  8  A  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  33  A  34  Q  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Well, I suppose they were hereditary chiefs.  Yes.  I  mean they were — they were in place.  I didn't — I  didn't do any research to find out how they became —  All right.  If you'll look at — if you'll look at the  first document under Exhibit 31?  Uh-huh.  It refers to Christopher Harris?  Right.  Did you know Christopher Harris?  Yes.  Did you know him to have the name and hold the name of  Luus, L-u-u-s?  No.  Okay. You'll notice that in respect of this  declaration that the declaration was read to the —  Mr. Harris in both Gitksan and English? It's the  second full paragraph of the main paragraph?  Yes.  All right.  Just turn to the next page, please, Moses  Morrison?  Yes.  Did you know that Moses Morrison at that time held the  name of Gitludahl?  No, because you're referring to a time when I was not  yet in the agency.  All right.  But presumably the — you knew Moses  Morrison?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  And I'm asking —  Well, I didn't know him by any other name.  All right.  Just let me turn — ask you to turn to the  next page.  Uh-huh.  And I want to ask you if you knew that Wallace Morgan,  David Wells, and Edward Benson, held Gitksan  hereditary chief's names?  No, I didn't.  All right.  I just knew them by these names.  All right.  I'd just ask you to carry on please to the  declaration in respect of Glen Vowell, Johnathon  Brown, Thomas Brown and James Woods.  Did you know  them?  Oh, I'm sure I knew them.  Did you know them by their hereditary chief's names?  I knew them by — by these names.  No, I didn't know  them by any other name. 213  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  All right.  Joseph George, this is with respect to  Hagwilget or Tsitsk, Joseph George, Charles Austin and  Phillip Austin?  A  Uh-huh.  Q  Did you know that Joseph George holds the name of  Hoogit, H-o-o-g-i-t?  A  No, I didn't.  Q  Or that Charlie Austin held the name of Gax?  A  No, I didn't.  Q  All right.  I want to ask you if — I want to show you  a document which is from the plaintiff's document  list. We can set that aside now, Mr. Boys.  Thank  you.  I'm showing you a document over your name dated  March 31st, 1947, to the Indian Commissioner for B.C.,  Vancouver, and I direct your attention in particular  to the second — I'm sorry, the third paragraph, in  the middle portion of the third paragraph where it  reads in part, and I quote:  "A meeting was held at the Kitanmax Hall on  February the 11th, but it transpired that  because the matter of restoration of graves  affects their old potlach customs no  decision could be made until a fully  representative meeting could be called.  I  was not asked to be present at this  meeting."  Do you recollect that?  No, I don't recollect it, but —  Can you confirm that you sent that letter?  Well, it's — it's over my name and it hasn't my  signature on it, but yes.  A  Q  A  Q  A  It's likely yours?  Most certainly, but I just don't recollect the exact  circumstances of the content of the letter.  MR. RUSH:   Thank you.  Can that be marked the next exhibit,  please, Exhibit 60?  (EX.HIBIT_6_0: Letter dated March 31, 1947, from Mr.  Boys to the Indian Commissioner for B.C.)  MR. RUSH:  Q  All right.  Mr. Boys, you indicated that you visited  the villages in the Babine Agency during the course of  your tenure as the Indian Agent?  A  Yes. 214  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  You didn't visit all of the villages every week?  2 A  Oh, no.  3 Q  You couldn't possibly do that could you?  4 A  No.  No.  5 Q  Okay.  In fact, in terms of the village of Kitwanga  6 there were often transportation difficulties getting  7 to the Kitwanga village, were there not? You had to  8 cross by ferry?  9 A  Yes, and there were periods when the river was in  10 flood in the spring when the ferry was not working.  11 Q  Okay. Would you agree with me that there would be up  12 to as many as two months go by between your visits to  13 some of the villages?  14 A  I would agree with that so far as the villages on  15 Babine Lake are concerned.  That's true.  But I think  16 that the frequency of my visits to the other more  17 accessible villages were more frequent than that.  18 Q  All right.  I understand that, at least I'm advised,  19 that conditions such as the spring breakup and the  20 muddy conditions of roads would have made it more  21 difficult to transport yourself in a vehicle to some  22 of the villages?  23 A  Yes, some of them.  Uh-huh.  24 Q  Would you agree with me that the frequency of your  25 visits to the villages, and I'm speaking generally  26 here, would be between one to two months that you  27 would have visited the villages?  28 A  There wasn't any set pattern.  It would depend upon  29 the amount of business or the request that we might  30 have from a given village for a visit and a visit  31 would be made either by myself or later, when I had an  32 assistant, by Mr. Appleby.  33 MR. RUSH: All right. Okay. Do you — I have a major area that  34 I'm going to move into next.  I think that we can  35 comfortably finish this afternoon.  36 MS. KOENIGSBERG: What are you thinking of?  37 MR. RUSH:  Breaking now.  Either breaking now or my starting —  38 I'd prefer not to start and just break and we can  39 carry on.  I'd like us just to have our lunch and come  40 back.  41 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Maybe we can just go off the record.  42  43 (OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION)  44 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR LUNCH RECESS)  45  46 MR. RUSH:  47 Q  All right.  We can recommence this cross-examination 215  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  A  15  16  17  Q  18  19  A  20  Q  21  A  22  23  24  25  26  27  Q  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  then, Mr. Boys.  I think you said last day that you knew the  Gitksan people to be people who had feasts as part of  their cultural system?  Feasts?  Yes.  Yes.  And did you understand the Carrier people to have  feasts as part of their system or potlatches? You  might know them as potlatches.  No, I didn't.  Did you understand there to be any difference between  a feast and a potlatch?  Well, I think that a feast was always a potlatch.  I  mean, a potlatch was always a feast. But I'm not sure  that the reverse was always true.  Okay. You understood there to be some difference  between the two did you?  Yes.  Can you explain what you thought the difference to be?  Well, not exactly, but a potlatch I understood was  usually — it usually involved the giving of gifts or  a feast put on by a chief, whereas I think — I was  under the impression that a feast might be simply the  same — might have just the same implication as a  feast among non-Indian people.  Meaning what?  Well, just a celebration of any event.  Okay.  Had you ever attended a Gitksan feast?  No.  Okay. Did you ever attend a Gitksan potlatch?  No.  Did you ever attend a Carrier or Wet'suwet'en feast?  No.  Did you ever attend a Carrier or Wet'suwet'en  potlatch?  No.  How did you know about them?  Well, I didn't know about any potlatches.  How did you know about any feasts?  Oh, some member of a village might speak of having had  a feast to mark some event.  Okay.  I'd like to use the term feast in the sense  of — in the sense that you used the term potlatch.  Uh-huh.  All right. And in particular connoting the passing of  gifts as witnessing for events that take place at the 216  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 feast or the potlatch?  2 A  Uh-huh.  3 MR. RUSH:   Now, how did you — how did you come by the  4 knowledge that a feast, in the sense that I've used  5 the word, was a place or an event where gifts were  6 conveyed to people who were in attendance?  7 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I'm just going to stop you there just to  8 clarify something, Mr. Rush.  I'm not objecting to the  9 question, but I believe you had Mr. Boys giving you  10 the evidence that his understanding of gift — that  11 there was gift giving in a potlatch, but I believe you  12 then, in adopting the word "feast" to stand for  13 "potlatch", added your understanding of witnessing  14 events being part of that.  But I don't believe Mr.  15 Boys has given the evidence that that was his  16 understanding.  It may be, but he hasn't given that  17 evidence.  18 MR. RUSH:  19 Q  Let's use your terminology, Mr. Boys.  A potlatch in  20 your understanding involved the giving of gifts?  21 A  Yes.  22 Q  How did you come by that knowledge?  23 A  Oh, I suppose somebody told me.  24 Q  Do you recall who or when?  25 A  No, I don't.  26 Q  How did you come by your knowledge of the feast as  27 being — as having the same implication as a  28 celebration?  29 A  Well, that's implied in our own language too.  30 Q  Yes, I understand that that would be the implication  31 that might be carried in our language, but I'm asking  32 you about your knowledge of the Gitksan or Carrier  33 cultural system and the application of the word to  34 that system, and my question is in terms of its  35 reference to that system.  How did you come by the  36 knowledge that a feast meant for that system an  37 implication of celebration absent the giving of gifts  38 as I took it?  3 9 A  I don't — I don't feel that I received any  40 significant information regarding feasts as such in  41 the — in the Indian sense being any different than a  42 feast in our sense except where it was a potlatch.  43 Q  All right.  Can you place Exhibit 27 before Mr. Boys,  44 please?  I'd ask you to look at this extract from a  45 quarterly report of J.V. Boys, Exhibit 27, Mr. Boys,  46 and I particularly ask you to look at about a third of  47 the way down where it is said here: 217  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2 "During his life a chief might enhance his  3 importance by erecting a totem pole.  This  4 became an occasion for extensive feasting  5 and potlaching and to pay for it the chief  6 would often beggar himself and his family."  7  8 And my question to you is:  How did you know that  9 the erecting of a totem pole was an occasion for  10 extensive feasting and potlatching?  11 A  Well, again I'm — I gather that I was told about this  12 by people in the agency, Indian people.  13 Q  And you can't do any better on your recollection than  14 that?  15 A  No, I can't.  16 Q  All right.  You said that you had attended one pole  17 raisinq and the pole raising, was that hosted by  18 Charlie Clifford?  19 A  Yes. A pole was erected, as I recollect it, on the  20 recreation grounds up the hill above the village of  21 Hazelton.  22 Q  And you were asked to come were you or did you just  23 happen by?  24 A  All of the Indian and non-Indian people were up there  25 on that occasion. There was no — no special  26 invitation from anybody.  27 Q  All right. Well, I'm — I guess I need to — I should  28 ask you if you were invited to come?  29 A  No.  30 Q  Okay. Did you understand that other people were there  31 to witness the pole going up?  32 A  Yes.  It wasn't — the people weren't there just for  33 the pole going up.  It was erected, as I recollect it,  34 on some day when there was some recreational programme  35 and this was part of the programme of that day.  36 Q  I see. And did you know if Charlie Clifford held a  37 Gitksan hereditary chief's name?  3 8 A  I don't know the name, no.  I only knew him as Charlie  39 Clifford.  40 Q  Did you know that he held a Gitksan hereditary chief's  41 name?  42 A  No.  43 Q  Okay. Just to refer you back to Exhibit 27, you said  44 in the next line, Mr. Boys, "Similar orgies took place  45 at the time of a chief's death." I'm just going to  46 stop there. What did you mean by "similar orgies'  47 took place at the time of the chief's death?  , b 218  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  Well, I suppose extensive feasting, and perhaps it was  2 a not too well chosen word.  I'm not — I'm afraid I  3 can't pin it down exactly at this time.  4 Q  You'll agree with me, won't you, Mr. Boys, that the  5 use of the word "orgies" even on your own definition  6 of a feast, was inappropriate?  7 A  Yes. A feast isn't necessarily an orgy certainly.  8 Q  That's right.  And even on your definition there was  9 no implication that the feasts, as you had been  10 informed to the extent that you were, were in any  11 sense an orgy?  12 A  No.  Okay.  13 Q  And that certainly had — that word was most  14 inappropriate in the reference to a potlatch?  15 A  Well, I don't know.  I never attended one.  16 Q  Were there other poles raised during the course of  17 your tenure as Indian Agent at the Babine Agency?  18 A  I don't think so.  19 Q  Did you know about the poles that were raised in  20 Kitsegukla in — just before your arrival there in the  21 summer of 1945?  22 A  No.  23 Q  You knew —  24 A  I've seen the poles at Kitsegukla.  25 Q  Yes?  26 A  Yes.  I've seen all the poles I think in the villages  27 around Hazelton.  28 Q  And there were quite a number of them standing weren't  29 there?  30 A  Yes.  31 Q      There were poles in the village of Kitsegukla,   I  think  32 you've agreed with that?  33 A      Uh-huh.  34 Q  And there were poles in the village of Kispiox?  35 A  Yes, and a number of them down in the village of  36 Kispiox.  37 Q  But a number of them standing?  38 A  Right.  And a number of them in Kitwancool and  39 Kitwanga.  40 Q  Right.  If I told you that at the time you were in  41 Kispiox there were ten poles standing would you  42 disagree with that?  43 A  No.  44 Q  If I suggested to you that in Kitsegukla there were 16  45 poles standing while you were in the Babine Agency you  46 wouldn't disagree with that?  47 A  No, I really wouldn't know just how many there were. 219  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  16  A  17  18  Q  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  A  34  Q  35  A  36  Q  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  41  Q  42  A  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  Okay. And there were 14 poles in Kitwanga that were  standing during the course of your —  Quite probably.  And there were seven in Hazelton?  Yes, I would think that's probably correct.  And you wouldn't disagree, would you, with the — if I  said to you that the totem poles among the Gitksan  people played an important part in the cultural life  of the people?  Yes.  True.  Now, were you familiar, Mr. Boys, with the old Kispiox  Hall in Kispiox?  Yes.  And did you know that to be a place where feasts  occurred or potlatches?  Well, I didn't know that.  I didn't know of a potlatch  taking place in that hall.  You never heard of one potlatch taking place in that  hall?  Not during my tenure in office, no.  All right.  Alexander White was the estate that you  administered during the time of your tenure?  It was one of them. Yes.  Mr. White died in April of 1946, April the 22nd I  think?  Uh-huh.  And I think you will agree that if you didn't know the  name of Wiigyet, it was certainly referred to in his  handwritten will?  I knew of the name Wiigyet. Yes.  Yes. Did you know that Mr. Joe Star succeeded to the  name at a funeral feast at the old Kispiox Hall?  No.  In the summer of 1946?  No.  Did you —  I wasn't there in the summer of 1946.  Okay. All right. Did you know Andrew Crosby?  Oh, the name is vaguely familiar, but I can't place  Andrew Crosby.  Did you know Alvin Weget?  Yes.  Did you know that Alvin Weget held a chief's name of  Neesquimanew?  No, I don't.  And that Alvin took the name of Neesquimanew at a  funeral feast in the summer of 1946? 220  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  Q  11  12  A  13  Q  14  A  15  Q  16  A  17  Q  18  A  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  Q  40  A  41  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  NO.  Upon the death of Mr. Crosby?  No, I don't.  You knew Abel Tait?  Yes.  Abel held the chief's name of Luus; did you know that?  No.  You knew Chris Harris?  Yes.  Because you did a — you handled a trapline  application?  Well, I knew Chris Harris quite well.  Did you know that he took the name of Luus —  No.  — at a funeral feast at the old Kispiox Hall —  No.  — in Kispiox?  No.  Did you know Thomas George?  Well, I — I couldn't tell you who Thomas George was.  Let me show you a photograph of him.  I'm producing to  you Exhibit 62-10.  The man that is sitting on the —  as you face the photograph on the right is Thomas  George.  If I tell you that that's Thomas George, do  you recognize him?  No, I can't say I do.  Do you recognize anyone in that photograph?  No, I don't.  You don't recognize Father Paull?  No.  Or Mr. Bill Nye?  No, I don't know — where did Father Paull —  At Moricetown.  Did he?  He attended the church at Moricetown.  No, I ~  This was during the time that you were the —  Uh-huh.  — Indian Agent.  Well, I'm sorry, I don't — I don't recognize anybody  there.  Okay. Do you recognize, Mr. Boys, that the people —  that the two people, not the priest, are wearing  ceremonial robes?  Yes.  Do you recognize those as robes?  Yes. 221  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  Had you seen those before?  2 A  Well, I've seen — I've seen robes like them, yes.  3 Q  All right.  Did you know those to be blankets that  4 they called blankets, button blankets or ceremonial  5 blankets?  6 A  Yes.  7 Q  All right.  Now, if I tell you that that photograph  8 was taken in Moricetown and that the two individuals  9 are Carrier-Wet'suwet'en people, does that help you in  10 your recollection as to whether or not there were  11 potlatches among the Carrier or Wet'suwet'en people at  12 Moriceton?  13 A  No, I don't recollect any potlatches among them.  14 Q  All right.  This photograph, Mr. Boys, was taken at a  15 potlatch or a feast of Mr. — of the name Sat San when  16 the name Sat San was passed on. Are you familiar at  17 all with the name Sat San?  18 A  No.  19 Q  Do you know Mr. David — or did you know Mr. David  20 Dennis?  21 A  I remember the name Dennis as a family name in the  22 agency.  23 MR. RUSH:  Okay.  I want to ask you if you've ever seen this  24 totem pole before.  This is exhibit — what is it  25 marked there?  26 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  62-9 or 62-A, I can't —  27 MR. RUSH:  28 Q  Thank you.  I think it's 62-9.  29 A  Nine I think.  30 Q  Yes.  Thank you.  31 A  Well, I don't remember it specifically.  32 Q  All right.  My instructions are, Mr. Boys, that that  33 pole was raised after the headstone feast of Sat San  34 and this pole was standing in 1948 in Moricetown. Did  35 you ever see the pole?  36 A  Well, I don't recollect seeing it, but possibly I did.  37 Q  All right.  I started this sequence of questions  3 8 asking you about Thomas George. You'll recall that I  39 referred you to a name on one of the linen trapline  40 maps which was the name of Joseph Nachlachs.  Do you  41 recall that on the last session? I think the name was  42 spelled N-a-c-h-1-a-c-h-s on that map.  Do you  43 remember that?  44 A  I don't specifically.  No.  45 Q  All right.  My question to you is do you recall  46 whether the person, Thomas George, held the name of  47 Gisdaywa? 222  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A No, I don't.  2 0 All right.  I think you've told us that you knew Pete  3 Muldoe?  4 A Yes.  5 Q And did you know William Jackson before he passed on?  6 A I can't recollect him.  7 Q All right.  Did you know that Pete Muldoe took the  8 name of Wii seeks, that's W-i-i s-e-e-k-s, at a  9 funeral feast for William Jackson in 1947?  10 A No.  11 Q You knew Steve Morrison?  12 A Yes.  13 Q Did you know William Dick?  14 A I can't recollect.  15 Q All right.  16 A I remember the family name Dick, but I can't recollect  17 these people.  18 Q Steve Morrison took the name of Wii Elaast, that's  19 W-i-i E-1-a-a-s-t, at the funeral feast for William  20 Dick in 1947.  Did you have any knowledge of that?  21 A No.  22 Q I want to ask you about the name of Geel, G-e-e-1, is  23 that a name that you were familiar with?  24 A G-e-e-1?  25 Q Yes, pronounced Geel?  26 A No, I don't recollect it.  27 Q All right.  Did you know Silas Johnson?  28 A Yes.  29 Q Did you know that Silas Johnson succeeded to the name  30 of Geel at a funeral feast held at the old Kispiox  31 Hall in 1948?  32 A No.  No.  33 Q And I think you've said that you knew Chris Skulsh?  34 A Chris Skulsh. Well, I can recollect the name, but I  35 can't place Chris Skulsh.  36 MR. RUSH:  Okay.  If you have Exhibit 40 you could place that  37 before Mr. Boys.  It's the trapline application of  38 cancellation form for Isaac Skulsh.  3 9   MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Exhibit stamps are on the inside.  40 MR. RUSH:  41 Q I'm sorry, it should be Exhibit 39. You'll see that  42 Mr. Chris Skulsh's signature appears on Exhibit 39?  43 A Right.  Uh-huh.  44 Q Along with that of Isaac Skulsh; do you see that?  45 A Yes.  46 Q And then do you also have Exhibit 40?  47 A Yes. 223  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  Q  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  A  13  Q  14  15  16  A  17  Q  18  A  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  33  Q  34  A  35  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  41  42  43  Q  44  45  46  47  And this is the application for cancellation handled  by Mr. Appleby?  Uh-huh.  And this is pursuant to the estate of Isaac Skulsh?  Uh-huh.  I think it was your evidence that Chris Skulsh was  heir to the estate, in fact it says so on the  application?  Uh-huh.  Right.  And he became the successor to the trapline; is that  your understanding?  Yes.  Uh-huh.  Now, did you know that there was a funeral feast upon  the passing of Isaac Skulsh in which Mr. Chris Skulsh  took the name of Gwiiyeehl in late 1950?  No.  Now, you knew Donald Gray, did you not?  Yes, at Hagwilget.  Right.  Yeah.  And Donald Gray had a large hall that was used for  feasts at Hagwilget didn't he?  Yes.  There was a hall at Hagwilget and it I think  belonged to Donald Gray.  Did you know this hall to be called Owl, O-w-1, Hall?  No.  Okay. Did you know that there were feasts or  potlatches, as you've called them, that were held at  Owl Hall at Hagwilget during the time that you were  the Indian Agent?  No.  I knew that there were celebrations held at the  hall, but not potlatches.  Well, how did you know they weren't potlatches?  Well, I mean, I did not know any feast to be a  potlatch that was held at that hall.  All right.  You're saying to me that there were  celebrations, but you didn't know that they were  potlatches?  No, there were feasts when usually there was a wake or  a feast or some sort of mark on the passing of the  head of a family or a person in the village, but I  would term that a feast.  All right.  Isn't it the case, Mr. Boys, that your  understanding was that on the occasion of the passing  of any member of a family there was an event that was  held and we're dealing here with Hagwilget, which  you've called a feast, but which may have been a 224  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 potlatch?  2 A  I only know that there were — that there were events  3 that took place, yes, on the passing of somebody in  4 most of these — in most bands. Yes.  5 Q  All right. And was this — were these events events  6 that you understood to be places or occasions on which  7 names were passed?  8 A  No, I never.  9 Q  You didn't understand that to be the case?  10 A  No.  No, that's not my understanding.  11 Q  All right. Did you — I'm now directing your  12 attention to your understanding of these events,  13 celebrations as you've called them or feasts as you've  14 called them, in Hagwilget, and I want to ask you if  15 you knew Lucy Joseph to be a resident of Hagwilget?  16 A  I don't remember Lucy.  17 Q  All right. Did you know Annie Gagnon?  18 A  I remember the name, but —  19 Q  Did you know that on March the 20th, Mr. Boys, March  20 the 20th, 1949, the name of Hag Wii Ganuu was passed  21 at a feast from Lucy Joseph to Annie Gagnon?  22 A  No.  23 Q  Would it be fair to say, Mr. Boys, that — well, let  24 me rephrase this: Were you aware of any feasts or  25 potlatches occurring in the village of Moricetown?  26 A  I was aware of feasts, but not potlatches.  27 Q  All right.  And were you aware that there was a feast  28 in Moricetown in July of 1952 — well, I guess that's  29 after you'd left wasn't it?  30 A  Yes.  31 Q  All right. Were you aware that the name that Houston  32 Tommy held in 1948 was passed at a headstone feast in  33 Moricetown?  34 A  No.  35 Q  You knew Houston Tommy?  36 A  Yeah, I vaguely remember Houston Tommy.  37 MR. RUSH:  All right. Now, I'd like still for you to refer to  38 Exhibit 27, Mr. Boys.  39 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Exhibit?  40 MR. RUSH:  27.  41 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Have we had that out before?  42 MR. RUSH:  43 Q  Yes.  44 A  Oh, yes.  Uh-huh.  45 Q  Now, if you look at the — about the middle of the  46 document where it says, and I'm quoting:  47 225  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 "Thus the family of the dead man lose not  2 only their breadwinner, but their home and  3 properties at the same time."  4  5 And then you say:  6  7 "This system persisted unchecked at the time  8 the writer came to Babine five years ago.  9 But today it is virtually nonexistent  10 through insistence on the provisions of the  11 Indian_Act as to descent of property and  12 rigid opposition to the potlach."  13  14 A  Uh-huh.  15 Q  Mr. Boys, if those events at Donald Gray's hall were  16 potlatches, and if those potlatches, as I've suggested  17 to you where names passed, occurred in the way and at  18 the time that I indicated, you would agree with me  19 that your conclusion about the system being virtually  20 nonexistent at that time was wrong?  21 A  It would depend, wouldn't it, upon what was my  22 interpretation of a potlatch and what somebody else's  23 interpretation may be.  24 Q  Well, yes, it would.  It would precisely depend on  25 that.  26 A  Uh-huh.  27 Q  But if your interpretation was wrong, your conclusion  28 was wrong?  29 A  Right.  30 Q  I want to ask you when you used the language, and I  31 quote, "rigid opposition to the potlatch", was this  32 some opposition which you say that you mounted?  33 A  No, not particularly, but there was rigid opposition  3 4 to —  35 Q  What was it?  36 A  — open potlatching by the police.  37 Q  Well, tell me about that. What did they do to rigidly  3 8 oppose the potlatch?  39 A  They made it known that it couldn't be.  There were —  40 if it came to the knowledge of the police that there  41 was a proposed potlatch, the police let it be known to  42 the proponents of the potlatch it couldn't take place.  43 Q  Did you — do you have any other mean for that?  Is  44 there any other so-called rigid opposition to the  45 potlatch that you're aware of apart from the police?  46 A  No.  47 Q  Okay.  Now, what's your direct knowledge about what 226  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 the police did? Did the police attend any — at any  2 place where they thought there might be a potlatch and  3 try to prevent it from happening, to your direct  4 knowledge? I just want to know what you know from  5 what you saw or what you participated in.  6 A  I was not with the police on a great many occasions,  7 but only through hearsay did I know the opposition of  8 the police.  9 Q  All right. And when you refer in this passage, Mr.  10 Boys, to the fact that the system was virtually  11 nonexistent as to descent of property, were you here  12 referring to the fact that you were insisting, as a  13 matter of your own practise, to the compliance of the  14 Indian_Act rules regarding the descent of property?  15 A  Yes, that's correct.  16 Q  And that's all you were referring to?  17 A  Yes.  18 Q  Did you know Wilson Duff?  19 A  Yes.  20 Q  You knew him to be an anthropologist?  21 A  Uh-huh.  22 Q  And did you know that Wilson Duff visited your agency  23 during the period of time of your tenure as the Indian  24 Agent?  25 A  I can't recollect where I first met him, but — no, I  26 don't recollect meeting him in Hazelton. He may have  27 been there, but not for any length of time.  28 Q  Okay. You understood Mr. Duff to be a person who made  29 observations of the Gitksan people?  30 A  Of all of the people of — all of the Indian people of  31 British Columbia.  32 Q  And would you agree that Mr. Duff, that his knowledge  33 of the Gitksan people and their culture would be  34 greater than your own?  35 A  Probably.  36 MR. RUSH:  Would you agree with the statement that Mr. Duff  37 wrote in 1952 that:  38  39 "Potlatch gatherings still mark important  40 social events. At these events the old  41 patrons of reciprocal functions among the  42 phratries still operate."  43  44 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I object to the form of your question.  I  45 don't think he can agree with it in the face of his  46 evidence.  He — if you put it to him that Wilson Duff  47 wrote that, I don't think we can do much more with it 227  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 than how far you've gone.  2 MR. RUSH:  3 Q  He can disagree or not agree. I note your objection.  4 I'm going to put the question again.  5 A  Uh-huh.  6 Q      All  right.    Do you agree with the statement written  in  7 1952 that:  8  9 "Potlatch gatherings still mark important  10 social events. At these events the old  11 patrons of reciprocal functions among the  12 phratries still operate."  13  14 A  Well, again I have to say that I — it would depend  15 upon the interpretation of what is a potlatch. You  16 know, Wilson Duff's interpretation of a potlatch may  17 be more accurate than my own, but — but if that was  18 his observation, well —  19 Q  You said that the Babine Lake was in the Stuart Lake  20 Agency; is that right?  21 A  No, it isn't.  22 Q  It isn't?  23 A  The southern part of Babine Lake was in the Stuart  24 Lake Agency, that is to say, Pendleton Bay and the  25 part just north of Burns Lake, but the line of  26 demarcation between Stuart Lake and the Babine Agency  27 was approximately half-way up Babine Lake so that  28 Topley Landing, Old Fort and Fort Babine, were in  29 the — were in the Hazelton Agency.  30 Q  All right.  You would not have had much contact with  31 the Carrier people in the Stuart Lake Agency?  32 A  No.  33 Q  All right.  Now, your — would you agree with me that  34 the most contact that you had with Carrier people was  35 with the people at Hagwilget and in the village of  36 Moricetown?  37 A  And in those villages at the upper end of Babine Lake.  38 Q  Yes.  I'm saying that even in relation to the villages  3 9 at the upper end of the Babine Lake that you had more  40 contact —  41 A  Yes.  42 Q  — and were more familiar with the people in  43 Moricetown than Hagwilget?  44 A  I was more frequently at those villages, yes.  45 Q  I think it refers to something you said earlier today  46 that they're closer and you would have visited them  47 more often? 228  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  Q  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  A  26  27  28  Q  29  A  30  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  41  A  42  43  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  Yes.  Right.  Now, what language did you understand the people at  Moricetown and Hagwilget to speak?  I can't recollect what the name of it was.  Okay. What tribe did you understand them to belong  to?  Well, I understood them to be Carriers.  When you talked of the differences between the Skeena  River people, that is to say, the Gitksan and the  Carrier people, you said, and I think I'm quoting  correctly:  "It was a historical fact that the  Carriers did not live in long houses."  That was my understanding.  How did you come by that knowledge?  Well, either through reading or hearsay.  Would you agree, Mr. Boys, that that understanding of  what you considered to be the differences between the  Gitksan and the Carrier people, was the major  difference that you understood — let me rephrase it.  The fact that you considered it a difference between  the Gitksan and Carrier people — it was a physical  historical fact that the Carriers did not live in long  houses was the major difference between the two  people?  No, my understanding was that the — the Carrier  people did not have a crest system.  That was a major  difference, to my understanding.  How did you come by that knowledge?  Well, I couldn't tell you specifically where I came by  that knowledge.  Okay.  Will you agree with me that the poles among the  Gitksan contained carved on them representations that  were the crests of the clans?  Yes.  If I told you that Exhibit 62-9, which is the pole of  Sat San, in 1948 —  Uh-huh.  — contained representations on the pole, would that  assist you at all in determining whether there were  clans among the Carrier?  Well, it — it has representations of animals or it  may or may not have been.  This pole is not anything  like as intricate as the poles of the Gitksan people.  I appreciate that.  There were differences in quality  of poles?  Yes.  Even among the Gitksan that was so, was it not? 229  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 A  Oh, yes.  2 Q  As with any artistic ability?  3 A  Uh-huh.  4 Q  There are differences in skills and ability?  5 A  Uh-huh.  6 Q  If I — would you agree with me when I'm showing you  7 Exhibit 62-10, Mr. Boys, that blankets such as the one  8 that is shown in Exhibit 62-10 were worn by Gitksan  9 people?  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  And that when worn by Gitksan people that they  12 represented crests which they belonged to?  13 A  Well, they were ceremonial attire.  14 Q  Did you understand — I'm sorry, did you have anything  15 more to say?  16 A  Exactly whether they — whether a particular blanket  17 represented a crest I am not sure about.  18 MR. RUSH:  Okay.  Thank you.  I want to ask you, Mr. Boys, I'm  19 going to show you a photograph.  I've got an extra  20 one.  21 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Has this been produced before?  22 MR. RUSH:  23 Q  Oh, probably.  I can't really recall.  This is a  24 photograph — do you recognize the gentleman in this  25 photograph?  26 A  No, I can't say I do.  27 Q  Do you know Johnny David?  28 A  I don't remember him.  29 Q  All right.  30 A  I'm sure that this is a much later picture than — it  31 wasn't taken during my era.  I don't think there were  32 any —  33 Q  You're quite right.  34 A  I don't think there were any TV aerials at that time.  35 Q  That's very observant of you. You're quite right.  It  36 was taken quite a bit later, and I can tell you that  37 the man with the hat is Johnny David, who's a  38 Wet'suwet'en or Carrier chief, and behind him is his  39 house, and in front of him are two poles, one of  40 which — the one behind him directly or on your right  41 was raised during the time of the currency of your —  42 when you were the Indian Agent, and I wanted to ask  43 you if you recognized that pole?  44 A  No, I don't. Where is this?  45 Q  It's in Moricetown; close to the church in Moricetown.  46 A  This could be the same pole as the other one that you  47 showed me. 230  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  If you look closely you'll see that they're different.  2 A  Oh, I see. Well, this one — this one is painted and  3 the other one — and this one has "48" on the top.  4 Q  Right.  I'm just asking you to look at the pole on the  5 right-hand side —  6 A  Uh-huh.  7 Q  — of the colour photograph —  8 A  Yes.  9 Q  — because that's really — the other pole was erected  10 at a later time.  11 A  Uh-huh.  12 Q  And I wondered if you had seen this pole in Moricetown  13 standing at the time that you were the Indian Agent?  14 A  Not to my recollection, no.  15 Q  All right.  Thank you.  Mr. Boys, I just want to come  16 back to one point to pick up a stitch if I can.  17 Houston Tommy's name I understand was Sat San; did you  18 know that?  19 A  No.  20 Q  And that David Dennis succeeded to the name of Sat San  21 in 1948 at a headstone feast in Moricetown; did you  22 know that?  23 A  No.  24 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I think you already asked him that.  25 MR. RUSH:  26 Q  Yes.  I didn't connect it with the previous one.  27 Now, I want to ask you, Mr. Boys, if you saw any  28 poles at Hagwilget, standing at Hagwilget, during the  29 time that you were the Indian Agent?  30 A  Yes, I seem to recollect seeing a few poles at  31 Hagwilget.  32 Q  All right.  And they were carved poles in the manner  33 of the Gitksan poles that were carved at Hazelton,  34 were they not?  35 A  I can't remember the details.  36 Q  All right.  All right. Do you recall who owned the  37 poles?  38 A  Oh, probably David Grey had one.  39 Q  Donald Grey?  40 A  Donald Grey I mean, yes.  41 Q  Do you recall anyone else owning one of those two  42 poles?  43 A  No, I can't.  I can't remember.  44 Q  All right.  45 A  I probably would have known at the time, but at this  46 stage of the game I can't recollect who owned the  47 other one. 231  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  All right.  There were on those poles, as best you can  2 recall, representations of animals, a frog or a bear  3 or a wolf or a beaver?  4 A  Yes, almost certainly.  5 Q  And you knew, did you not, at that time that those  6 animals were associated with crests?  7 A  Yes.  8 Q  So you would have known that, at least from the poles  9 that were at Hagwilget, that crests were associated  10 with Carrier people at Hagwilget?  11 A  It certainly would have appeared so.  Yes.  12 Q  I want to ask you about something different now and  13 that is the evidence which you gave concerning a  14 surrender of minerals at the Kisgegas Indian Reserve.  15 A  Uh-huh.  16 Q  And I think you gave some evidence to the effect that  17 there was a surrender that was taken of the subsurface  18 mineral rights; is that right?  19 A  Uh-huh.  20 Q  Now, it's your understanding isn't it that that —  21 that surrender was never acted on and hasn't been  22 acted on to the present day?  23 A  Well, what do you mean by "acted on"?  24 Q  Well, pursuant to that surrender under the mining  25 rights on Indian reserves in British Columbia  26 procedures there could be no prospecting or placer  27 mining that occurred without the permission both of  28 the Indian Agent and the band council; isn't that  29 right?  30 A  Uh-huh.  31 Q  And you know as a matter of fact that neither was  32 obtained in respect of the Kisgegas minerals?  33 A  That nobody applied to —  34 Q  Nobody obtained permission to do any prospecting on  35 the Kisgegas Indian Reserve?  36 A  I don't recollect any being done in my time.  37 Q  All right.  I want to ask you as well, Mr. Boys, that  38 the — an impetus for the surrender came from four  3 9 non-Indian people who wanted to prospect on the  40 reserve; isn't that right?  41 A  Not to my recollection.  42 MR. RUSH:  All right.  I want to show you a document — yes,  43 the first document I want to show you is one — it  44 appears to be November 27, 1954 or '64.  I can't make  45 it out unfortunately and I would ask you if you can  46 identify this document.  47 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  It's 1964. 232  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.   Rush  1 MR. RUSH:  Is it '64?  2 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  If you look at the third page of the pages  3 that you have clipped together.  4 MR. RUSH: All right.  Thank you.  5 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Is this part of the file that we've provided  6 here?  7 MR. RUSH: Yes, it is.  Did you want that file back? I took  8 copies from it and I wasn't sure whether you were  9 giving me the file or whether this was your file and  10 you wanted it returned because if you do I have it  11 here and I can return it to you.  12 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Perhaps you should return it to us because I'm  13 not certain when we gave it to you, and if we gave it  14 to you here it may have been the only one we had.  15 MR. RUSH: Okay.  I think —  16 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  The only copy that we took that is.  17 MR. RUSH:  Just let me take off my little notes and special  18 little comments to myself.  19 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I won't pay attention to them.  I have far too  20 many of those little yellow stickies to pay attention  21 to.  22 MR. RUSH:  23 Q  I'm asking you about this document mainly, Mr. Boys,  24 to see if you can identify for me the mining rights  25 and Indian reserves in British Columbia procedures I  26 guess that are attached to this letter of 1964?  27 A  Yes.  28 Q  And was Mr. H.R. Conn someone who worked under your  29 direction?  30 A  No.  Mr. Conn was at headquarters in Ottawa.  31 Q  I see.  32 A  And he was in the Department of Resources.  33 Q  All right.  Can you confirm for me your understanding  34 of the application of these procedures as set out in  35 Mr. Conn's letter of November 27th, *64?  36 A  Well, this is — this is something sort of out of  37 context, isn't it? There's a reference to a  3 8 memorandum from our office of November the 3rd and  39 also some direction that had been given to Mr. Cooper  40 who was then the superintendent at Babine Agency.  41 Q  Yes?  42 A  I don't know exactly what that refers to.  43 Q  All right.  I appreciate that.  Subject to that  44 limitation, can you confirm for me your understanding  45 of the procedures as set out in Mr. Conn's letter?  46 A  Yes.  47 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  You mean — I'm sorry. 233  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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: From his knowledge can he confirm that it's  accurately set out by Mr. Conn.  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  That the —  THE WITNESS:  That is the procedure that's normally required by  somebody —  MR. RUSH:  Q  A  RUSH!  MR.  All right.  — mining or prospecting on a reserve. Yes.  Okay. All right.  I'm going to ask that this be  marked as the next exhibit.  (EXHIBIT_61: Letter dated November 27, 1964 from Mr.  H.R. Conn to Indian Commissioner for B.C.)  MR. RUSH;  MR. WOLF:  MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  Now, Mr. Boys, the other document that I  wanted to show you, taken also from the same federal  government document file, which by the way is numbered  what?  11318.  Thank you.  I wanted to show you a document entitled  "Surrender of Minerals", if you would look at that,  please, and I'm particularly interested in your  looking at the document that is attached to it.  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Do you have an extra copy?  MR. RUSH: Yes.  Sorry.  Here we are.  If you can direct your  attention to the second document.  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  That begins "The purpose of this agreement..."  MR. RUSH:  Q  Yes. And if you look at the last document, which is a  letter from Mr. McRae, Gold Commissioner, to Mr.  Norman E. Kerr of Vanderhoof, and also received in the  Babine Agency office on December the 19th, 1947.  Yes.  Now, firstly, beginning with the last document first,  the one dated December 17th, '47, you can confirm can  you that that was received into the Babine Agency  office?  Yes.  And of the purpose of the agreement document, can you  identify that document as one having been received  into your agency's office?  This is — this is the application from the —  No, it's just the three-page agreement beginning "The  purpose of this agreement" and ending with the  signature "Mr. Maynard G. Kerr".  I can't see any —  If you'll just look — yes. There's the last page.  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q 234  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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.  I don't see any mark on this that indicates that it  was received, but it probably was.  All right.  I wonder now that you've read this, Mr.  Boys, if you can recollect if the impetus for the  surrender of the subsurface mineral rights at the  Kisgegas Reserve did not — or did come about as a  result of Mr. Kerr's interest in the minerals at that  place?  It seems probable that it was initiated that way.  Yes.  All right.  I'm going to ask that the whole bundle  of documents be marked as one. Do you have an  objection?  KOENIGSBERG:  I have no objection.  RUSH: All right.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT_62: Document entitled "Surrender of  Minerals"; three-paged agreement; and letter dated  December 17, 1947)  MR. RUSH:  MS.  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  Q  A  All right.  Just to complete this, Mr. Boys, from your  knowledge of the — of what occurred after the  surrender was taken, it is the case that no  exploration or prospecting was done pursuant to the  surrender, so far as you are aware?  Not in my time.  All right. Thank you. Now, I want to ask you about  the surrender by the Gitanmaax Band at Hazelton of the  land for the joint school —  Uh-huh.  — in the Hazelton Village.  I think you confirmed for  us last day that land was surrendered from the  Gitanmaax Reserve for the school?  Right.  And that was in fact used for the construction of a  school there?  Right.  Uh-huh.  And it was the case that the Gitanmaax people, the  people living on the reserve, wanted a school in their  community for the education of their young people?  No, they wanted a bigger and better school. There was  a school of sorts, but it wasn't — it wasn't a very  good one and it wasn't adequate.  And they wanted —  They wanted a joint school with Indian and non-Indian  children attending the same school. 235  J.V. Boys (for Detendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  Okay. And the desire for this joint school with a  2 bigger and better facility was the reason for the  3 surrender of the land?  4 A  Uh-huh.  Yes.  5 Q  Now, as I understand it, they — the councillors and  6 the chief and the people of the Gitanmaax Reserve  7 worked together with the Babine Agency and the  8 department in order to bring about this joint school;  9 is that right?  10 A  Uh-huh. There has to be a meeting, a surrender  11 meeting, in which the whole matter is discussed and  12 then a vote of the voting members of the band is  13 taken. As a result of the vote, the surrender is  14 consummated or not.  15 Q  All right.  Now, as I understand it, in this case  16 there were two surrenders; one that occurred prior to  17 your time in 1946, which contained certain conditions  18 on the surrender; do you recall that?  19 A  No, I don't frankly.  20 Q  Okay.  But there was a — let roe suggest to you that  21 there was a second surrender meeting during the time  22 that you were the —  23 A  There was a surrender meeting during my time.  24 Q  And that was in 1948?  25 A  Well, I can't tell you exactly when, but —  26 Q  Okay.  Can you tell me if at that surrender that you  27 attended if there was — if there were minutes kept at  28 that surrender meeting?  29 A  Yes.  30 Q  Okay. That would have been something that you would  31 do as a normal part of your activities as an Indian  32 Agent?  33 A  Yes.  34 Q  And would you have maintained these minutes in the  35 files of the agency?  36 A  Yes.  37 Q  Okay.  3 8 A  And a copy of the minutes would have been sent with  39 the surrender documents.  40 MR. RUSH:  Right.  Now, I've been unable to find in the  41 material relating to the surrender any minutes of that  42 meeting, which I understand took place in 1948, and I  43 would very much like it if you would search your  44 voluminous files and try to determine for me if you  45 can obtain these minutes.  46 (REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION)  47 MS. KOENIGSBERG: We certainly will put in a request 236  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  specifically for those minutes, but if they were with  the file that we received we would have produced them.  MR. RUSH:  Okay.  I can advise you that in May of 1948 the  official surrender took place.  Now, Mr. Boys, I want to show you a document of  May of 1949 which is a summary I believe of what  occurred and you needn't read the whole of the letter,  but what I would like you to do is to at least confirm  your signature on it?  Uh-huh.  It's dated May 30th, 1949, and it is from yourself  to the Indian Commissioner for B.C..  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Unless you choose to you don't have to read it  all.  If you look at the third page there's a  signature.  If you can identify that's yours —  THE WITNESS:   That's my signature.  MR. RUSH:  Q  Okay.  I'd like that marked as an exhibit, please.  I'm not going to question you on it, Mr. Boys.  I  simply want — I presume that what is set out here was  set out in the course of your duties as the Indian  Agent?  A  Yes.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  Could that be marked as the next exhibit  which —  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  63.  RUSH:  — should be 63.  Thank you.  MR.  MR. RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  <EXHIBIT_63: Letter dated May 30, 1949 from Mr. Boys  to the Indian Commissioner for B.C.)  All right.  Mr. Boys, I want to show you another  document which is dated January the 5th, 1973.  It's  from Mr. Larry Wight to all district supervisors, and  it contains a memorandum with your signature on it,  and I wonder if you'd look at that, and I'm  particularly interested in your confirming that it's  your signature on the memorandum that's attached to  this —  Uh-huh.  — letter dated January 22nd, '64.  Yes.  Right.  All right.  And if you'll just read your memorandum.  Uh-huh.  Yes.  And can you agree with me that it was the policy of 237  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 the department in 1964 to create district councils  2 among Indian bands in the province of British  3 Columbia?  4 A  Yes.  5 Q  And in this letter you apparently were encouraging the  6 superintendents in your agencies to foster the  7 development or creation of such district councils?  8 A  Yes.  9 Q  Is that right?  10 A  That's right.  11 Q  All right.  And the district councils were to be — to  12 contain groups of bands that were related by either  13 their — the tribal relations or some relationship  14 that had to do with the bands' language or  15 nationality, if I can put it that way?  16 A  Yeah, well, the fundamental rationale behind the band  17 councils was that each agency had to submit a budget  18 for its — the estimated funds required for the  19 following fiscal year, and it had been the practise  20 before this time to submit a budget on behalf of each  21 band without reference to the needs of other bands in  22 the same agency, and we would often get a great many  23 requests quite naturally for the expenditure of funds  24 for a variety of purposes and it was difficult to make  25 the funds that were provided to us go around.  So we  26 felt that if the various band representatives meeting  27 together had an understanding of the needs of all of  28 the bands of an area, that perhaps they could arrange  29 a programme of priorities for the expenditure of some  30 of these funds.  31 Q  On a district basis?  32 A  On a district basis because funds were voted on a  33 district basis on an agency basis, therefore it was  34 felt — that was the fundamental thought behind — I  35 initiated this and that was my thinking.  36 Q  All right.  Now, the district council was a district  37 council of bands which were grouped together; is that  38 right?  3 9 A  In the agency?  40 Q  In the agency.  41 A  Yes.  42 Q  All right.  And subsequent to this, tribal councils  43 were the successors to these district councils; is  44 that right?  45 A  Well, that may or may not be so.  I'm not sure.  There  46 were organizations that were tribal councils that were  47 initiated by the Indians themselves.  They were 238  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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.  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  associations of Indians, but they were not necessarily  for the same purpose as was envisaged in setting up  the district councils.  Before the associations were created by the native  people themselves —  Uh-huh.  — the district council was a structure designed to  group the bands together?  Right.  Within the agency?  Yes.  Now, my question is to your knowledge was there a  successor organization that developed after 1964,  successor to the district councils, that became known  as the tribal councils?  I could only remember two major organizations in B.C.,  the Native Brotherhood and the — there was an  Interior Brotherhood and I can't recollect the exact  name of it.  These were two major organizations that  spoke on behalf of the Indians of the province.  All right.  Now, the — just so that I understand it,  the districts that were contemplated here were the  agencies?  They were the administrative districts of the  department, yes.  Within the — but they were — the administrative  district was an agency, one of the agencies?  Yes.  All right.  All right.  I'd like that to be marked  as an exhibit.  (EXHIBIT_64: Letter dated January 5, 1973 from Larry  Wight to "All District Supervisors")  All right.  Mr. Boys, I just want you to confirm, if  you will, your — that this was sent by you.  There's  a copy for you.  Uh-huh.  It is a letter from yourself as Indian Agent to Mrs.  Mabel Clifford and Mr. James Angus, dated October  18th, 1947, and you will agree that this letter was  written over your name?  Yes.  Thank you.  That can be Exhibit 65.  (EXHIBIT_£5: Letter dated October 18, 1947 from Mr. 239  J.V.  Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 Boys to Mabel Clifford and James Angus)  2  3 MR. RUSH:  4 Q  And I want to show you this letter. This is  5 plaintiffs' document number 835, and it is a letter  6 over your name, Mr. Boys, to the chief geographer,  7 August 28th, 1950, and I'd just like you to confirm  8 for me that this letter was sent by you?  9 A  Yes, it certainly appears to be.  I can't recollect  10 the letter —  11 Q  All right.  12 A  — specifically.  13 MR. RUSH:  Okay.  I'd like that to be marked as the next  14 exhibit.  15 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  66.  16  17 (EXHIBIT_66: Letter dated August 28, 1950 from Mr.  18 Boys to the Chief Geographer)  19  20 MR. RUSH:  21 Q  All right.  Now, if you don't mind, Mr. Boys, I think  22 we can complete by 3:30 if we continue on, if you  23 don't want to take a break?  24 A  No, I'm all right for another half an hour.  25 Q  Very good. All right.  I want to ask you now about  26 another area that was canvassed by Mr. Mackenzie that  27 pertained to the B.C. Special Vote, and I want to ask  28 you your knowledge about the B.C. Special Vote.  I'm  29 going to show you a number of documents pertaining to  30 this, but before I do that I just want you to — to  31 ask you, you were involved in the administration in  32 British Columbia of the B.C. Special Vote funds?  33 A  Yes.  34 Q  And in that capacity and in doing that job you  35 familiarized yourself with the history of the B.C.  36 Special Vote?  37 A  Yes.  3 8 Q  And did you also familiarize yourself with the  39 correspondence in the province that pertained to the  40 B.C. Special Vote? The correspondence — there was  41 correspondence that your predecessor had —  42 A  Yes.  43 Q  — sent about?  44 A  Some of it.  45 Q  And I presume that when you came to your position as  46 the Indian Commissioner of B.C. in 1961 you had to  47 familiarize yourself of what your predecessor had 240  J.V.  Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 done?  2 A  Uh-huh.  3 Q  Right. Now, I think you told us about the  4 establishment of the B.C. Indian Advisory Committee  5 and your role as the Indian Commissioner of B.C. on  6 that committee?  7 A  Yes.  8 Q  And would you agree that there was dissatisfaction  9 about how the B.C. Special Vote money was being spent?  10 A  Yes.  11 Q  And that the coastal Indian communities did not  12 consider that they were getting an appropriate share  13 of the funds that were being allocated for that  14 purpose?  15 A  That's correct.  16 Q  All right.  And was it also the case that  17 dissatisfaction was being expressed on the basis that  18 there were native people in the province who did not  19 feel that all of the appropriation was being spent,  20 that only a portion of it was spent?  21 A  That only a portion of the total was spent?  22 Q  Correct.  23 A  Well, I don't recollect that, but —  24 Q  Okay.  25 A  — there was a change in the objectives for which the  26 money was voted.  27 Q  Uh-huh.  All right.  I'm going to show you some  28 correspondence now.  This is a document taken from the  29 Public Archives and I believe it appears on the  30 federal government's document list.  It's from W.S.  31 Arneil, whom I believe was your predecessor, to  32 Colonel H.M. Jones, Director of Indian Affairs Branch?  33 A  Uh-huh.  34 Q  On November the 2nd, 1956?  35 A  Yes.  36 Q  You can recognize Mr. Arneil's signature there?  37 A  Yes.  38 MR. RUSH:  And I wonder if you'd just peruse this and confirm  39 for me that this sets out your understanding at  40 that — when you became the Indian Affairs  41 Commissioner in '61?  42 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  If it matters, these documents are listed on  43 the provincial government's document list I'm advised.  44 MR. RUSH:  45 Q  Yes.  I wasn't sure just where it was listed.  46 A  Yes.  47 Q  Okay.  You can confirm that to be your understanding 241  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 at the time that you became Indian Affairs  2 Commissioner in reference to your administration of  3 the B.C. Special Vote?  4 A  Yes. Well, at the time I became commissioner there  5 was a committee in place.  6 MR. RUSH:   Already in place.  I appreciate that, and I'm going  7 to just come to that.  Can that be the next exhibit,  8 please?  9 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Exhibit 67.  10  11 (EXJIBIT_67: Letter dated November 2, 1956 from W.S.  12 Arneil to Col. H.M. Jones)  13  14 MR. RUSH:  15 Q  Thank you.  16 Now, when you became the Indian Commissioner for  17 B.C. and you initiated or began to participate in the  18 Indian Advisory Committee, you understood, did you  19 not, that the Indian participation on the committee  20 was not to be taken as an admission of the acceptance  21 of the hundred thousand dollar B.C. Special Vote  22 allocation?  23 A       I  don't quite follow.  24 Q      Well,   there were native participants on the committee?  25 A  Yes.  26 Q  And those participants had indicated that their  27 participation on the committee was not to be taken as  28 an acceptance or an admission that their — that they  29 were accepting a hundred thousand dollars allocated to  30 them as a result of the B.C. Special Vote?  31 A  Well, they were — they were engaged in recommending  32 the assignment of a hundred thousand dollars, so I can  33 only conclude that they did accept.  3 4 Q  All right.  Let me show you this document, Mr. Boys.  35 These are minutes of the first meeting of the Indian  36 Advisory Committee to the Indian Commissioner of B.C..  37 A  Uh-huh.  3 8 Q  You might have one that's marked there, do you?  I'm  39 not sure.  Maybe I have it.  Somebody has it.  Okay.  40 This is dated April 8th, 1959, the chairman is W.S.  41 Arneil, and Mr. A. Paull, F. Calder, and G.R. Williams  42 are there.  And I'd just like you to review at the top  43 of page 2 where it says "To Whom it May Concern:"?  44 A  Yes, I see that now.  Uh-huh.  45 Q  And it says:  46  47 "My appearance before this advisory board 242  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  called here today by the Indian Department,  is not to be taken as an admission of the  acceptance of $100,000 or any part thereof  as a waiver by me for myself, or the Indians  of British Columbia of their rights to the  lands of British Columbia, or other  aboriginal rights which they have."  And it's signed "Guy R. Williams".  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Just for the record, Mr. Rush, you didn't  ask —  THE WITNESS:  Your question to me didn't mention the word  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  "waiver of rights'  I'm sorry, I should have read it more clearly.  Yes.  You now understand the import?  I understand what you were getting at. Yes.  And if you'd just look at the last page in this bundle  of pages you'll see a statement dated April the 8th  1959 signed by Guy R. Williams. Do you see that?  A  Yes, I see that. Uh-huh.  Q  Now, you had knowledge of this statement, did you not?  A  I had read the minutes of the meetings of the  committee.  Yes.  Q  All right. And in particular you had read these  minutes?  A  I had read all of the minutes. Yes.  Q  And it was your — the statement of Mr. Williams was a  statement that you understood to be operative at the  time of your meetings with the committee in 1961?  A  Yes.  Q  All right.  A  Is this to be —  MR. RUSH:  Yes, I'd like to mark that as an exhibit.  Thank  you.  MR. WOLF: Sixty-eight.  MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT_68: Minutes of the first meeting of Indian  Advisory Committee dated April 8, 1959)  MR. RUSH: Now, in this period, Mr. Boys, or I should say —  yes, just prior to this period, who was the  Minister —  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I'm sorry —  MR. RUSH:  — of the Department, I guess at that time it was the 243  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 Department  of Citizenship and Immigration,  at the time  2 that you —  3 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Are we talking about 1959 or 1961?  4 MR. RUSH:  5 Q  We're going to talk about 1961 first.  6 A   1961?  7 Q  Yes.  8 A  The Minister was Mrs. Ellen Fairclough.  9 Q  Okay.  She was also the Minister in 1959 was she?  10 A  Yeah, I think so.  11 Q  Okay.  Now, were you aware that the government took  12 the position that Indian participation in discussions  13 about the allocation of the $100,000 B.C. Special Vote  14 money would not prejudice any of their land rights in  15 British Columbia?  16 A  I didn't know that the government had specifically  17 discussed it, but that was my — that was my general  18 understanding.  19 Q  Okay.  20 A  That it wouldn't prejudice those rights.  21 Q  Okay.  I understand that it's your understanding, but  22 I want to suggest to you that it was also the  23 understanding at the ministerial level?  24 A  I can't recollect any ministerial statement to that  25 effect.  26 MR. RUSH:  All right.  I want to show you a series of letters,  27 correspondence, between Maisie Hurley of The Native  28 Voice and Ellen Fairclough, the — well, firstly The  29 Right Honourable John G. Diefenbaker, Q.C..  30 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  J. Diefenbaker?  31 MR. RUSH:  And the Honourable Ellen Fairclough.  32 MS. KOENIGSBERG: We are still talking about the same John  33 Diefenbaker that is G. and not J.?  34 MR. RUSH:  Yes, we are.  John George.  35 And if you'll just flip through these, you'll see  36 that it's an exchange of correspondence between  37 firstly Mrs. Hurley and the Prime Minister in 1959 and  38 then Ellen Fairclough, the Minister responsible for  39 Indian Affairs in Canada, and I particularly want to  40 refer you to the last in the series of correspondence  41 which is a letter from the Minister of Citizenship and  42 Immigration to Mrs. Hurley dated February the 3rd,  43 1959, and at the top it indicates copy for Indian  44 Affairs Branch, and on the second page the last  45 paragraph, Mrs. Fairclough.  46 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Sorry, what page are you on?  47 MR. RUSH: 244  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Q  It's — the very last page states:  2  3 "Quite naturally, some of the Indians may  4 believe that if they advise the Department  5 on how the money is to be used, it might be  6 taken to mean that they accept the $100,000  7 as settlement of their land claim.  I am  8 told that, as a matter of fact, this matter  9 was raised by Indian delegates last April,  10 and they proceeded to discuss the special  11 grant on the assumption it would not  12 prejudice any rights they may have.  The  13 Advisory Committee would only be involved in  14 the administration of the grant now voted  15 annually by Parliament and, personally, I do  16 not see how participation in administration  17 would prejudice any rights the Indians may  18 have with respect to what is commonly known  19 as the Indian Land Question."  20  21 A  Yes.  22 Q  That was your understanding as well at the time that  23 you became Indian Affairs Commissioner, was it not?  24 A  Yes.  Oh, yes.  25 MR. RUSH:  All right.  I'm going to ask that this bundle be  26 marked as one exhibit.  27 MR. WOLF: Sixty-nine.  28 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I think we better — just better describe it.  29 MR. RUSH:  What I'll do is just — I'll indicate what the  30 letters are that are contained within the bundle.  31 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Okay.  32 MR. RUSH:  The first letter is a letter from Maisie,  33 M-a-i-s-i-e, Hurley, H-u-r-1-e-y, to The Right  34 Honourable John J. Diefenbaker Q.C.; and the next is a  35 letter from Ellen L. Fairclough. Did I give the date  36 for that? January 16th, '59. The next is a letter  37 from Ellen L. Fairclough to Maisie A. Hurley, January  38 21st, 1959; and then a letter from Maisie A.C. Hurley  39 to the Honourable Ellen L. Fairclough on January 24th,  40 1959; and then another letter from Maisie Hurley to  41 the Honourable Ellen L. Fairclough, February 20th,  42 1959; and then a letter of Ellen L. Fairclough to  43 Maisie A.C. Hurley, March 11th, 1959; and finally, the  44 letter to which I just made reference, Mr. Boys, the  45 letter of Ellen L. Fairclough to Mrs. Maisie A.C.  46 Hurley, Ottawa, February 3rd, 1959.  That will all  47 constitute Exhibit 69. 245  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1  2 (EXHIBIT_69: Group of six letters between the  3 Honourable John G. Diefenbaker, Q.C., Maisie A.  4 Hurley, and the Honourable Ellen Fairclough)  5  6 MR. RUSH: Now, when you became the Indian Commissioner for B.C.  7 there had been set up and was operating a special  8 Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons to  9 investigate Indian matters in Canada; isn't that  10 correct?  11 MS. KOENIGSBERG: Which one are you referring to?  12 MR. RUSH:  13 Q  Well, there was only one at that time.  14 A  This is in 1961?  15 MR. RUSH:   '61.  16 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  1961.  Okay.  17 THE WITNESS:   I can't — I can't recollect just when they  18 started and when they finished, but I recollect that  19 there was a Joint Commission for quite sometime and I  20 just don't recollect the dates.  21 MR. RUSH:  22 Q  All right. You in fact participated from a  23 departmental side, did you not —  24 A  Yes.  25 Q  — on this?  26 A  Yes.  27 Q  On these committee hearings. And there were hearings  28 throughout British Columbia, were there not?  29 A  Yes.  3 0 Q  And the committee rendered a report and made a number  31 of recommendations?  32 A  Yes.  33 Q  Okay. And one of the recommendations made by the  34 committee was that an Indian claims commission should  35 be established to hear the British Columbia Indian  36 land questions?  37 A  Yes.  3 8 Q  Now, was it not the case that it was thought that this  39 recommendation would dispose of Indian claims in B.C.  40 to non-reserve lands?  41 A  Well, I really don't know.  I mean, was it thought by  42 whom?  43 Q  By you?  44 A  I don't — I don't recollect "dispose" of claims.  45 Q  Or deal with claims —  46 A  Yes.  47 Q  — of Indian people in the province of British 246  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  Columbia as to non-reserve lands?  A  Yes. Yes, I would agree with that.  Q  It is the case, isn't it, it was your understanding in  1961, as the Indian Commissioner for B.C., that the  government did not consider the — that is, the  federal government did not consider the Indian land  question in B.C. to be settled?  A  That's true.  Q  Now, I want to show you a letter that you directed to  Mr. R. Williston, Minister of the Department of Lands  and Forests of the province of British Columbia dated  November 29th, 1961, and I just want you to confirm  your signature on it, if you will.  I'm sorry.  A  Thank you.  Q  I just direct your attention to the second paragraph  and to the recommendation for consideration by the  government that you quote there, and I'm quoting:  "An Indian claims commission should be  established to hear the British Columbia and  Oka Indian land questions and other matters,  and that the cost of Counsel to Indians for  the two land questions specified above be  borne by the Federal Treasury."  And then you said:  "If this recommendation is accepted, such a  commission, if set up, would appear to  provide the means of disposing, once and for  all, of the long standing claims of British  Columbia's Indians on non-Indian lands."  A  Yes.  Uh-huh.  Q  Now, this was referring to the claim by British  Columbia Indians of what has — what we now know to be  the aboriginal land claim; is that not correct?  A  Yes, a variety of claims.  MR. RUSH:  Yes. All right. Can that be the next exhibit?  MR. WOLF: 70.  CEXHIBIT_70: Letter dated November 29, 1961 to Mr. R.  Williston from Mr. Boys)  MR. RUSH:  Q  Now, I want to — I also want to ask you, Mr. Boys, it  was clear in the department at the time that you were 247  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  1 Indian Commissioner for British Columbia that the 1927  2 Joint Committee findings pertaining to the Indian land  3 question were not final; is that not correct?  4 A  Yes. Uh-huh.  5 Q  And that matter was under active consideration by the  6 department, that is, the matter of the resolution of  7 the Indian land question, as it was called?  8 A  Yes.  9 Q      You had dealings with a Mr.   Jules D'Astous?  10 A      D'Astous,  yes.  11 Q  D'Astous, who was Director of Support Services in the  12 Indian Affairs Branch?  13 A  Yes.  14 MR. RUSH:  All right. And I want to show you a document on the  15 federal government's document list numbered 12261.  I  16 just ask you to peruse the document.  It looks like  17 I've given you two copies of the same letter.  18 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  One looks like it's a copy of the signed copy.  19 MR. RUSH:  20 Q  Right.  Right.  Mr. Boys, can you confirm Mr.  21 D'Astous' signature for me?  22 A  No, I really can't.  I'm not that familiar with his  23 signature.  24 Q      All  right.     Do you have a  recollection of  receiving  25 this document?  26 A  Not a specific recollection, I don't, no.  I'm not  27 sure whether a copy was sent to us, but it would be  28 logical.  29 Q  All right.  The attached document appears to be — I  30 cannot make it out, but it is a — it looks like it is  31 the precis referred to in the covering memo prepared  32 by Miss Gilchrist in 1941 and the third paragraph is  33 expunged. And I wrote to you today, and you won't  34 have received this letter yet, but I wrote to you  35 earlier today asking for you to provide me with a  36 basis for which this claim for solicitor-client  37 privilege is made, that is to say, in respect of that  38 paragraph that's expunged from this document, and  39 there is also another one of your documents under  40 12261 which is a memo dated March 5th, 1965, where  41 there is a similar paragraph expunged from the  42 document, and I similarily ask for you to give me an  43 explanation for that, and I am simply repeating that  44 now.  45 (REQUEST  FOR ADDITIONAL   INFORMATION)  46 All right.  Mr. Boys, if you can't identify that  47 document, I'll just take it back from you. 248  J.V.   Boys   (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr.  Rush  1 A  Uh-huh.  2 Q  Thank you.  Now, I want to ask you if you can  3 identify — you worked with a Mr. Peter Clark during  4 the time of your — during the time that you were the  5 Indian Commissioner for B.C.?  6 A  Peter Clark?  7 Q  Peter Clark.  He was the Director of Reserves and  8 Trusts in the B.C. region?  9 A  Director of Reserves — may I have a look?  10 MR. RUSH:   Yes.  11 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Is this 1982?  12 MR. RUSH: Uh-huh.  13 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Oh, you think he was still there.  Oh, staying  14 power.  15 MR. RUSH:  16 Q  Some people outlast others.  17 A  Huh?  18 Q  We were just kibbitzing here.  19 A  I don't recollect Peter Clark frankly.  20 Q  All right.  This memo or letter is from Mr. Clark to  21 Mr. Leask and in the letter there is contained a  22 memorandum outlining the background of the British  23 Columbia Special Vote, and I would like you to look at  24 the — there are a number of memoranda attached to  25 this and I would like you to review the memoranda to  26 determine whether or not you can identify any of them?  27 A  Well, I've read these.  28 Q  Can you identify any of those memoranda as ones that  29 you received during the course of your tenure?  30 A  Well, I can't I'm afraid.  No. This is a memorandum  31 to the Minister, the second one.  32 Q  Yes. Are you able to tell me who the — what name  33 that is over the Deputy Minister?  34 A  The Deputy Minister at that time was a Mr. S.  35 Isbister.  36 Q  Oh, yes.  37 A  But I wouldn't recognize his signature.  38 Q  No. And what about the memorandum of the Deputy  3 9 Minister dated February 9th, 1965, from Mr. Battle it  40 looks like?  41 A  Yes, R.F. Battle.  42 Q  Yes.  43 A  Well, I can't recollect that a copy of this ever came  44 to my attention.  45 Q  All right.  Very well. Thank you.  Thank you very  46 much. Now, Mr. Boys, if you would please turn your  47 attention to Exhibit 35. All right. Just before I 249  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  Cross-exam by Mr. Rush  2  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  17  18  19  20  Q  21  22  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  33  A  34  35  36  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  refer you to that, during the time that you were the  Indian Agent in the Babine Agency from '41 to —  excuse me, '46 to 1951?  Yes, that's correct.  You can confirm, I think you gave this evidence  earlier, but I want to be sure that I understand it,  that income from trapping was a major source of income  for the Gitksan and Carrier people in your agency?  Yes.  All right.  Now, the letter that's at Exhibit 35, a  letter from yourself to a Mr. McRae, the Government  Agent, pertains to Mrs. Lucy Joe Nass?  Uh-huh.  Did you know Joe Nass?  No.  I — but I remember talking to an elderly lady, I  can't remember her name, in Telkwa, having a  conversation with her about her fears of not having a  place to live in Telkwa, but my recollection of this  is pretty vague.  All right.  I wonder if it's sufficient if you can  tell me whether or not Mrs. Lucy Joe Nass was living  on land that was not registered under the  government — the provincial government registry  system?  Well, I'm not sure what the —  Okay. Can you recollect from this letter whether or  not she was being —  She was not living on a reserve, an Indian reserve.  Correct.  That's my understanding as well, but —  But I think there was a subdivision in Telkwa.  Which resulted in her being removed from the land in  which she was living; is that not right?  Well, I think somebody applied to buy the land.  My  vague recollection is that somebody applied to buy the  lot on which she was living and that would entail her  movement away from that particular lot.  Because she had no evidence of ownership of that lot;  isn't that right?  Yes. That's right.  And this letter is a letter in which you make  representations on her behalf to assist for her to  find a replacement parcel of land with the help of  some people in Telkwa?  Right.  Uh-huh.  And do you know — do you have any knowledge at all  concerning the parcel of land on which she was  residing prior to the time that the subdivision was 250  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  Q  MR. RUSH:  MR,  created? Do you know where that parcel of land was  located?  No, I don't.  Do you recall if it was located close to the river,  that is, the Bulkley River?  I think when I went to see her that it was when the  whole of Telkwa was — you know, it's a very small  community.  It's fairly close to the river.  Yes.  Okay.  All right.  I'll just take a few  moments to determine if I have any further questions,  Mr. Boys.  It looks like I'm just about through, and  if you give me a moment I can tell you if I can  confirm that.  Maybe we'll just take a few moments  break.  (BRIEF RECESS TAKEN)  RUSH:  Q  I guess we can proceed and try to finish off, Mr.  Boys.  During the time that you were the Indian  Commissioner for B.C. the allotment of the B.C.  Special Vote funds was changed to be distributed on a  per capita basis to the Indian bands in the province;  is that right?  A  Yes.  I don't recollect exactly when that took place,  but —  Q  It was sometime during the time that you were Indian  Affairs —  A  It would have been at the end of my term of office I  think.  Q  My instructions are that it occurred in 1965, in March  1965.  Does that accord with your knowledge?  A  I think it was proposed, but I don't think that it  actually took place until later.  Q  During the time that you were the Indian Commissioner  for B.C., was the amount of the Special Vote allotment  increased from the $100,000 amount that it was at that  time?  A  Yes, I think it was increased eventually to 300,000.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  Those are my questions.  Thank you very  much, Mr. Boys.  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I have no questions in re-examination.  Thank  you. 251  J.V. Boys (for Defendants)  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  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 3:40 P.M.)  I hereby certify the foregoing to  be a true and accurate transcript  of the proceedings herein to the  best/of myy skilliand ability.  ttlUAcDyU-Vlr/-   TaJhita S.  French  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.1-0018524/manifest

Comment

Related Items