Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1988-01-11] British Columbia. Supreme Court Jan 11, 1988

Item Metadata

Download

Media
delgamuukw-1.0019313.pdf
Metadata
JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019313.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0019313-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0019313-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019313-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0019313-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0019313-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0019313-source.json
Full Text
delgamuukw-1.0019313-fulltext.txt
Citation
delgamuukw-1.0019313.ris

Full Text

 2460  Vancouver, B.C.  January 8, 1988  (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT)  THE REGISTRAR:  In the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Monday  the 11th day of January 1988, calling the matter of  Delgamuukw against Her Majesty the Queen, my lord.  Before you start, Mr. Goldie, may I inquire of  counsel if this blue book I have called the Further  Amended Trial Record is the current?  RUSH:   Yes.  COURT:  And it has the pleadings as they presently stand?  GOLDIE:  Yes.  RUSH:   Yes, I believe that's the case, my lord.  COURT:  Thank you.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 THE COURT  10  11  12 MR.  13 THE  14 MR.  15 MR.  16 THE  17 THE  18 MR.  19  20  21  22  23 THE  2 4 MR.  25  26  27  28  29  30 THE  31 MR.  32  33  34  35  36  37  38 THE  3 9 MR.  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  You are still under oath, Mr. Joseph.  REGISTRAR:  RUSH:   Before my learned friend begins, my lord, I just  want to point out to you is that it is obvious that  Mr. Grant is not here today.  Miss Mandell will be  with me today and as well my articling student Mr.  Paul Tetro is with us today as well.  COURT:  Welcome.  RUSH:   I have two matters which I would like to deal with  prior to the recommencement of Mr. Goldie's  cross-examination and they deal with matters to  which we made reference last day.  One is the filing  of the commission evidence of Lucy Bazil Verigin.  You have an original copy.  COURT:  Yes.  RUSH:   And in line with the practice that we have already  adopted, I would like to file the commission  evidence as the next exhibit in the proceedings and  then I will file as sub-exhibits or exhibits under a  letter heading the exhibits that were filed in the  commission proceedings.  So if I may, I would like  this to be the next exhibit.  COURT:  Any problem with that, gentlemen?  RUSH:   I should say there is perhaps more than one  qualification to this.  It is understood I think in  filing this that all proper objections taken by both  sides would be the subject matter or could be the  subject matter of subsequent discussion before your  lordship or indeed possibly at the time that certain  passages are referred to that the -- both sides  would be entitled to raise the objections raised in  the commission.  And secondly, Mr. Mackenzie who 2461  1 attended for the provincial defendant advises me  2 that there were some transcription errors which he  3 thinks that Mr. Grant who attended for the  4 plaintiffs may well agree with and I don't have any  5 dispute with that.  And that would be sorted out  6 when both he and Mr. Mackenzie are present.  So  7 subject to that, I would like to file these.  COURT:  All right.  If there is no objection.  GOLDIE:  As my friend has said Mr. Mackenzie attended at the  commission. And it was my understanding from the  discussion on Friday that some of the issues raised  during the commission were going to be dealt with  when the documents were tendered. It appears now  that they will not be having regard to Mr. Grant's  absence and we will simply await a future time to  deal with those be issues.  COURT:  All right.  Mr. Macaulay?  MACAULAY:  We made some objections during the course of the  taking of that evidence and I take it we will be  entitled to maintain those objections before your  lordship at an appropriate time?  COURT:  Yes.  All right.  Well, then, to put it crudely  perhaps, all objections noted in the transcript  remain at large and counsel are free to speak to the  question of typographical or transcription errors as  they may be advised.  GOLDIE:  I am going to ask Mr. Mackenzie to state his  understanding.  COURT:  Yes.  30 MR. MACKENZIE:  Thank you, my lord.  Mr. Rush in expressing the  31 qualifications referred to these transcription  32 questions.  He also said that all proper objections  33 taken by both parties during the commissions will  34 stand.  Well, my lord, in addition to that, of  35 course, all the evidence at the commission is  36 subject to further objection by the parties in  37 argument.  And we reserve that right whether  38 objections were taken at the time in the commission  39 or not.  It is still subject to those objections.  40 THE COURT:  You are talking about objections to relevance, for  41 example, or hearsay and things of that kind?  42 MR. MACKENZIE:  Yes, my lord.  43 THE COURT:  What do you say about that, Mr. Rush?  44 MR. RUSH:   Well, there has been a general caveat, I think, by  45 both sides from the beginning that each side  46 reserves the right to make objections not raised in  47 the commission proceedings themselves and at the  8 THE  9 MR.  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17 THE  18 MR.  19  20  21  22 THE  23  24  25  26  2 7 MR.  28  2 9 THE 2462  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  9  10  11  12  13 MR.  14 THE  15  16  17 MR.  18  19  2 0 THE  21  22 MR.  2 3 MR.  24 THE  25  2 6 MR.  27 THE  2 8 MR.  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  3 6 MR.  37  38  39  4 0 THE  41  42 MR.  43  44 THE  4 5 MR.  4 6 THE  4 7 MR.  same time there were specific objections raised --  COURT:  Right.  RUSH:   -- which were the subject matter of some discussions  in the proceedings.  I don't really have any  difficulty with what Mr. Mackenzie said.  COURT:  All right, Mr. Macaulay.  MACAULAY:  We are in agreement I think about our rights.  COURT:  Well, the commission evidence then will be Exhibit  99, I think.  (EXHIBIT 99:  Commission Evidence)  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT:  Thank you very much.  And may I inquire whether the evidence which is the  subject of this transcript was also memorialized on  a disk?  Memorialized on a disk, that is to say was it  contained within one of the reporters' disks or do  you mean on a video tape?  No, I mean on a disk that I understand the reporters  are preparing sometimes.  RUSH:   Yes, I think so.  MACAULAY:  It was.  COURT: All right. So if I speak to the friendly reporters  I can probably obtain a disk of this evidence?  RUSH:   Yes.  COURT:  All right.  MACKENZIE:  There is one more thing, my lord.  Some of the  exhibits on that commission were marked for  identification merely because Mr. Grant had not  received acceptable copies.  And I would like to  have that stated as well.  We will be providing  original documents to Mr. Grant and those can be put  in and marked as proper exhibits with the  identification designation removed.  RUSH: I should say that Mr. Mackenzie has provided, as of  today, certain original exhibits and as they become  available I have no problem inserting them into the  proper place.  COURT:  All right.  And what is your suggestion about  exhibits to the commission evidence, Mr. Rush?  RUSH: That they be numbered by a letter designation, 99A,  B and C and so on.  COURT:  Do you know how many there are?  RUSH:   There are 12.  COURT:  All right.  RUSH:   And I have those exhibits which were introduced in 2463  1  2  1  3  THE  COURT:  1  4  5  MR.  RUSH:   1  6  7  8  9  ]  10  11  THE  COURT:  12  MR.  RUSH:  13  THE  COURT:  14  MR.  RUSH:  15  16  ]  17  18  THE  COURT:  1  19  20  21  ]  22  23  1  24  25  MR.  RUSH:  26  MR.  MACAULAY  27  1  28  29  30  1  31  1  32  THE  COURT:  33  34  MR.  MACAULAY  35  36  THE  COURT:  37  38  39  40  41  42  MR.  RUSH:   ]  43  44  45  THE  COURT:  46  MR.  RUSH:  47  the commission proceedings here.  Do you wish me to  go through them now or do you simply wish me to --  Unless counsel think you should, I don't think  that's necessary.  Well, I have an exhibit list which identifies  several of the exhibits for identification.  And  this list enumerates the 12 exhibits in sequence.  And perhaps I will just file these and have these  marked Exhibit A through whatever the 12th letter  is .  Yes, Exhibit A to the power of 12?  Yes.  Thank you.  And as Mr. Mackenzie has indicated, I will tender  the originals as they have become available and as  Mr. Grant has had a chance himself of observing  them.  Well, I think that I will ask Madam Registrar in the  course of the next few days to go through those and  see if she can identify them from the list that has  been given and confer with counsel some time to see  if they are agreed on what the proper designation of  each document should be by its distinctive letter so  that we will all be ad idem on that question.  Thank you.  If there is objection to the copies because they  weren't very good copies or for whatever reason, the  Registrar ought to be told of that now so that those  are not marked.  I take it that the documents that  ought to be marked are the ones that Mr. Mackenzie  will be producing in due course.  I think we can substitute if we find any need to do  that.  :  So your lordship's direction is that the  inadequate copies be marked pro tern?  For the time being, yes.  But I am not going to have  them marked until Madam Registrar goes through them  and picks out which ones appear to relate to the  list that's been give to her.  And if you all agree,  they will be marked with a distinctive letter  subject to substitution.  Now, my lord the other matters that I want to  address is a question of the exhibits that are  contained within the tabs of Exhibit 62.  Yes.  And I spoke to Mr. Goldie about this last week.  During the course of the examination of Mr. Joseph, 2464  THE  MR.  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  THE  8 MR.  9 MR.  10 THE  11 MR.  12  13  14 THE COURT  15  16  17 MR  18 THE  19 MR.  2 0 MR.  21  22  23  24 THE  2 5 MR.  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39 THE  4 0 MR.  41  42  43 THE  44  45  46  47  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  I did not separately mark the individual tab  exhibits and I think they should be.  And I would  like to go through and have those marked now.  Yes.  The document book itself, of course, is marked as  Exhibit 2 and I would like to have --  62?  62.  Excuse me, 62.  For identification.  And I would like to have the chart of the House of  Gisdaywa, that is the genealogy chart marked as  62-A.  Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Goldie will interrupt if there  is any disagreement with what you are suggesting,  Mr. Rush.  Thank you.  Both pages will be 62, right?  Yes.  Excuse me.  I think I should say this, my lord, I  am quite happy to have these marked.  I think the  fewer documents for identification we have the  better.  Yes.  But there are a number of these documents which  cannot be accepted as truth of the matters  contained.  They are documents which have been  spoken to by the witness.  They are marked -- as far  as I'm concerned they are marked because they are in  existence.  And the genealogy chart is one of them.  Presumably the person who created that chart is  going to be called as a witness and we should not be  precluded from challenging anything that is found on  that chart through that witness.  But I repeat, it  seems to me to be a waist of time to reserve matters  for identification when the witness has given  exstensive evidence with respect to it and some  parts of it are proven by him.  Yes.  But we will come to several like that so that they  cannot be regarded as having proven the truth of  everything that is found in them.  Well, is it your -- are you content, Mr. Rush, to  have these documents marked Exhibit 62A to the power  of 18 being the number of tabs in the book as  exhibits of the trial, but not necessarily as proof  of the truth of the facts stated in them? 2465  1  MR.  RUSH:  2  3  4  5  THE  COURT:  6  MR.  RUSH:  7  8  9  10  11  12  MR.  GOLDIE  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  THE  COURT:  20  MR.  GOLDIE  21  22  THE  COURT:  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  25  THE  COURT:  26  MR.  RUSH:  27  28  29  THE  COURT:  30  31  MR.  RUSH:  32  THE  COURT:  33  34  35  36  37  MR.  GOLDIE  38  39  40  THE  COURT:  41  MR.  GOLDIE  42  43  44  45  THE  COURT:  46  MR.  GOLDIE  Well, I think that what Mr. Goldie said was, with  respect to the genealogy chart, some of it was  proved by the witness from his direct knowledge and  some of it couldn't be.  Yes.  But on that qualification, I couldn't agree with  that because I don't think that applies to all the  documents.  He has proved many of the documents in  here.  And I didn't understand my friend to be  saying that his qualification applied to every  aspect of the genealogy chart.  No, I am just -- of course as far as I'm concerned,  the problems of admissibility ought to be reduced  and we should be talking about the weight to be  given the document.  But we are now talking about  admissibility.  And all I am saying is the genealogy  chart I am content to have it marked as an exhibit,  but by that act --  Yes.  -- it doesn't -- it isn't conclusive of the matters  therein.  They are not conclusive.  And I don't have anything to say about that.  Perhaps I should just go through these, my lord.  All right, go ahead.  And the reason for that is because I don't believe  everything has been proven.  Tabulation 2 of Exhibit  62.  I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to call them 62-1  to relate to the tabs?  That is fine as well, my lord.  So we will have 62-1 and 62-2.  (EXHIBIT 62-1:  (EXHIBIT 62-2:  Genealogy Chart of Gisdaywa)  Seating Chart for Gidsaywa)  47  I do want to point out, my lord, that we raise no  objection to the admissibility of the photographs  which extend from 5 to 17 inclusive.  Yes.  Because we were told they came from the Provincial  Archives of British Columbia or that they were  personal photographs of which the witness had  personal knowledge.  Yes.  I wouldn't make that statement but for the concern  that was expressed about our title documents on 2466  1  2  THE  COURT:  3  MR.  RUSH:  4  5  THE  COURT:  6  MR.  RUSH:  7  8  9  THE  COURT:  10  11  12  MR.  RUSH:  13  14  15  16  THE  COURT:  17  MR.  RUSH:  18  19  THE  COURT:  20  MR.  RUSH:  21  MR.  GOLDIE  22  23  THE  COURT:  24  MR.  RUSH:  25  26  27  28  MR.  RUSH:  29  THE  COURT:  30  MR.  RUSH:  31  THE  COURT:  32  33  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  THE  COURT:  36  MR.  RUSH:  37  38  39  40  MR.  RUSH:  41  THE  COURT:  42  MR.  RUSH:  43  44  45  46  MR.  RUSH:  47  Friday.  All right.  The tab at tab 3 which is the map of the territory  of Gisdaywa dated May 12, '87.  That will be 62-3.  62-3.  (EXHIBIT 62-3:  Map, dated May 12, 1987 )  Now, in that tab I also have a map of the territory  of Madeek.  I don't recall at the moment where it  came in.  That tabulation -- the Madeek territory should be at  the end in tab 18.  And in fact, the tab 18 which  contains the Madeek territory was identified as  Exhibit 65 for identification.  Yes.  And I am happy to have that marked as an exhibit if  my friends don't object to that.  As Exhibit 65?  Yes.  It is already in as 65 for identification and on  the same basis that we have been talking about.  It will become 65.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 65:  Map)  Now, my lord, tab 4 would become Exhibit 62-4.  That's the picture of Mr. and Mrs. George?  Yes.  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 62-4:  Photograph)  Tab 62-5.  That's a picture of two totem poles?  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 62-5:  Photograph)  And tab 6, 62-6.  This is Hagwilget?  Smoke houses at Hagwilget and poles.  (EXHIBIT 62-6:  Photograph)  And tab 7 pole at Hagwilget, House of Kaiyexweniits.  (EXHIBIT 62-7:  Photograph) 2467  1  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  4  5  6  7  THE  COURT:  8  9  MR.  GOLDIE  10  11  THE  COURT:  12  13  14  15  MR.  RUSH:  16  THE  COURT:  17  18  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  THE  COURT:  21  MR.  RUSH:  22  THE  COURT:  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  25  26  27  28  THE  COURT:  29  30  31  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  34  THE  COURT:  35  MR.  RUSH:  36  37  38  39  MR.  RUSH:  40  41  42  43  44  THE  COURT:  45  MR.  RUSH:  46  THE  COURT:  47  MR.  RUSH:  Tab 8.  Now, this is a photograph which I had  understood was only marked for identification.  It  matters little because it was marked in Lucy Bazil's  commission as I think Exhibit 5.  Perhaps for  convenience it could be marked 62-8.  Yes.  What are the names of the two gentlemen shown  there?  One is Peter Alfred and the other is either Peter  Jim or George Naziel depending on which witness.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 62-  Photograph)  And Exhibit 9 or tab 9 as Exhibit 62-9, pole.  Can anyone tell me just quickly by recollection what  this is a representation of?  A pole where, does  anybody remember?  This is a Moricetown pole.  Moricetown?  Yes.  And which House?  My lord, this wasn't put to the witness.  And this  is one of those, given what my friend said, that he  was prepared to allow these to go in.  I intend to  put this to the witness and if it can be marked for  identification reserving that number.  All right.  (EXHIBIT 62-9 FOR IDENTIFICATION:  Photograph)  And then the photograph of Thomas George and Bill  Nye.  Yes.  That is Exhibit 62-10.  (EXHIBIT 62-10:  Photograph)  Now, my lord, the photograph that is contained at  62-11 was identified, but in my book of documents I  have in that tab two other photographs which are  Exhibit 63 and 64 and they may not be in yours.  They are loose.  Oh, wait a minute, I have 64.  There should be a 63.  I don't have 63.  It could be that this is separate.  You have it as a 246?  THE  MR.  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 THE  8 MR.  9  10  11  12 MR.  13  14 THE  15  16  17  18 MR. RUSH  19  20  21  22 MR  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  RUSH:  COURT:  23  24 THE  25  26  2 7 MR.  28  29  30  31 MR.  32  33  34  35  3 6 MR.  37  38  39  40  41  42  43 THE  44  4 5 MR.  46  47  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  RUSH:  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  separate document.  Yes.  These were identifications of the Hagwilget rock  made by Mr. Joseph.  But in any event, the  photograph of the man holding a -- the line of a  fish net is -- has been identified.  That is the Hagwilget Canyon; is that correct?  That's correct.  That's Exhibit 62-11.  (EXHIBIT 62-11:  Photograph)  Now, this is the pulling of the headstone rope which  is 62-12.  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 62-12:  Photograph)  And the sled itself is 62-13.  (EXHIBIT 62-13:  Photograph)  The drawing of Bill Nye, Chief Medeek, is Exhibit  62-14.  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 62-14:  Photograph)  The photograph of Madeek Exhibit 62-15.  (EXHIBIT 62-15:  Photograph)  The photograph of the pole being carved by Mr.  Joseph in the photograph is Exhibit 62-16.  (EXHIBIT 62-16:  Photograph)  Now, Exhibit 62-17 is a photograph that -- of a  number of Wet'suwet'en chiefs that was not put to  Mr. Joseph, that on the basis that it came from the  archives, if my friend is content to have that filed  I will have it filed.  But otherwise I can't really  say that it is something that Mr. Joseph addressed  his evidence to.  Well, according to what Mr. Goldie said it will be  Exhibit 62-17.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 62-17:  Photograph) 2469  1  2 MR. RUSH:  3  4  5  6  7  9 THE COURT:  10  11  12 MR. GOLDIE:  13  14 THE COURT:  15 MR. GOLDIE:  16  17  18 THE COURT:  19 MR. RUSH:  2 0 THE COURT:  21  22 MR. RUSH:  23  24 THE  2 5 MR.  2 6 THE  27  28  2 9 MR.  30  31  32  33  34 THE  35 MR.  36 THE  MR.  THE  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT:  And then the map is Exhibit 65 of Madeek.  The  genealogy was not entered as an exhibit, I believe.  No, it was not entered as an exhibit in Mr. Alfred  Joseph's testimony.  But it was in the testimony of  Lucy Bazil and they are contained among the exhibits  that were previously referred to by me as exhibits  from her commission.  Well, we don't need to mark it as 62-18 because it  is already Exhibit 65, but I will keep it  conveniently within the envelope of Exhibit 62-18.  I think, my lord, that 65 as originally tendered  and marked was just the map.  That's right.  And the genealogy was under tab 18.  My friend  tells us that that was marked as an exhibit on Lucy  Bazil's examination.  All right.  So can it also be 62-18 then --  I don't think it should be.  -- as a document?  You don't think it should, Mr.  Rush?  Well, I don't have any difficulty with it, sure, it  will appear twice.  That's fine.  62-18.  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 62-18:  Genealogy of Madeek)  MACAULAY:  I understand my friend to be saying that the  genealogy and the Madeek genealogy in this book is  the same as the one.  There are no differences  between this one and the one marked on Lucy Bazil's  examination.  COURT:  I gather not.  RUSH:   I can't give him that assurance, I don't know.  COURT:  Somebody will prepare them some time.  37 MR. RUSH:   I believe they are the same, my lord.  38 THE COURT:  I don't think it matters terrribly if they are  39 marked twice.  40 MR. MACAULAY:  It is not a question of it being marked twice,  41 but if they are indeed different documents we are  42 going to have -- a year from now or eight months  43 from now, we are going to have some confusion.  44 THE COURT:  Well, one of them is 62-18 and the other one is the  45 exhibit on Lucy Bazil's commission evidence.  And if  46 someone compares them and tells us we will  47 re-arrange the numbers. 2470  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT:  MR. GOLDIE:  THE COURT:  MR. GOLDIE:  9 THE COURT  10  11  12  13  14 MR  15 THE  16  17 MR.  18 THE  19 MR.  20  21 THE  22  2 3 MR.  24 THE  2 5 MR.  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  That's all that I have, my lord.  Thank you.  Mr. Goldie.  My lord, on Friday the Exhibit Number 98 was  reserved for a copy of the report of the Special  Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons.  Yes.  Published by the King's Printer in 1927 and I have  copies of that now.  I tender that as Exhibit 98.  Yes, thank you.  (EXHIBIT 98:  Report of the Special Joint  Committee of the Senate and House of Commons)  I am not going to read that at this time, my lord.  Nor am I.  I take it the cover is a matter of  convenience, is it?  The true cover is inside.  Yes, all right.  What is on the front is just a matter of  convenience to preserve it.  The first document is appendix.  I am sorry, to the  j ournals.  Yes.  Thank you.  And the page number that I read I think was Roman  XVII.  And before I leave that, I should have  directed your lordship's attention to page Roman X.  This will be, of course, developed before your  lordship at much greater length, but halfway down  the page just following the letter of the Minister  of Justice.  And I can say to your lordship that  this part of the report is partly historical.  And  the Minister of Justice was referring to an Order in  Council of Canada number 751 of 1914 which is set  out at Roman page VIII.  The report of the committee  which I bring to your lordship's attention now in  relation to the questions that were put to Mr.  Joseph is in the third paragraph following the  letter of Mr. Doherty and it reads as follows:  "Having given full and careful conversation  to all that was adduced before your  committee, it is the unanimous opinion of  the members thereof that the petitioners  have not established any claim to the lands  of British Columbia based on aboriginal or  other title and that is the position taken  by the government in 1914 as evidenced by 2471  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  CROSS-EXAM  15  Q  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  MR.  RUSH:  39  THE  COURT:  40  MR.  GOLDIE  41  THE  COURT:  42  MR.  GOLDIE  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  Q  the Order in Council and Mr. Doherty's  letter above quoted afforded the  Indians full opportunity to put their claim  to the test.  As they have declined to do  so, it is the further opinion of your  committee that the matter should now be  regarded as finally closed."  That is the background of the word "finality" and  the extract at page Roman XVII that I referred to on  Friday.  Alfred Joseph, previously sworn:  EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDIE:  Now, Mr. Joseph, if we could go back to the subject  that we were discussing on Friday.  And broadly  speaking, we were talking about your  responsibilities as chief councillor at the  Hagwilget Band and what had been accomplished in the  past 20 years when you were chief councillor.  I  think you told his lordship in answer to a question  that at the present time some 200 of 400 band  members live on the reserve.  Is my recollection  correct?  Yes.  Now, there are advantages, as I understand it, to  you and your people to living on the reserve.  Am I  correct that, for instance, there are no taxes on  your houses or the property on which your houses  stand?  Yeah, there is some advantage.  There is no income tax, for instance, payable on  income earned by a band member on the reserve?  Yes.  And there are no provincial sales taxes exigibles in  respect to transactions which take place on the  reserve.  Maybe the word "exigible" can be explained.  Payables.  There are no payables.  Everybody knows what that means.  In other words, if a transaction is completed on the  reserve nobody pays provincial sales tax, am I right  on that?  Yes.  Does that extend to electric light? 2472  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  A  6  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  15  A  16  17  Q  18  19  20  21  A  22 THE  COURT:  23  A  2 4 MR.  GOLDIE  25  Q  26  27  28  A  29  30  Q  31  32  A  33  Q  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  40  Q  41  42  A  43  Q  44  45  A  46  Q  47  A  Yes, I think it does.  Not withstanding some of those advantages, some 200  members of the band live off the reserve.  Can you  tell his lordship why that would be so?  You mean the people that are off the reserve pay  taxes?  No, I am sorry, I will reframe my question.  You  have told his lordship that some 200 live off the  reserve?  Yes.  Is that because they are following occupations  outside the reserve or from which it is not  convenient -- or in respect of which it is not  convenient to live on the reserve?  Yes, they are following places where they work and  get better wages off the reserve.  Yes.  Primarily it would be because the benefits  from being off the reserve in the way of wages and  other matters outweigh the advantages of living on  the reserve, would that be a fair way of putting it?  Yes.  This is called the Hagwilget Reserve, is it?  Yes.  Now, the occupations, and I am now talking about the  people who do live on the reserve, what are the  principal occupations of those people?  Mostly sawmill, logging and building, carpenters on  reserve.  And the logging would take place -- the actual  logging takes place off the reserve?  Yes.  And sawmilling they would -- those who work in the  sawmills would not work on a sawmill on the reserve,  they are off the reserve; is that right?  Yes.  And do any of them engage in trucking?  Some at other reserves, but not on our reserve.  There used to be some people trucking.  Is the main source of income related to the forest  industry then, sawmilling and logging?  Yes.  Now, turning to another aspect, Mr. Joseph, have you  voted in provincial elections?  Yes.  And in federal elections?  Yes. 1  Q  2  3  4  A  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  A  12  Q  13  14  15  16  A  17  18  Q  19  A  20  Q  21  A  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  28  A  2 9 MR.  GOLDIE  30  31  32  33  34  35  3 6 MR.  RUSH:  37 MR.  GOLDIE  38  Q  39  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  Q  2473  And the franchise, that is the right to vote in  provincial elections and federal elections, extends  to all adults on the reserve; is that right?  Yes.  What about elections for the school trustees of the  high school in Hazelton?  I don't mean trustees of  that school, but trustees of the district in which  that school is found?  Yes, we vote.  For the trustees?  Yes.  My understanding is that the reserve has its own  school for the primary grades and that high school  people on that reserve attend a provincial high  school in Hazelton; is that correct?  Yes, they attend high school.  I think there is an  agreement with the federal government on that.  There is some contribution?  Yes.  By the federal government?  Yes.  The high school itself is a school that is open to  all students in the district, whether they are  people from a reserve or whether they are members of  your band who live off of the reserve or whether  they are people -- non-Indians who live in Hazelton  or whatever and it is open to all?  Yes.  Am I right in my understanding that your band  applied for registration under the Small Business  Enterprises Legislation of British Columbia.  And I  will just get the documents I wish to refer to in a  minute.  It is not quite clear, but this is in the  upper right-hand corner, my lord, is a number of  the -- this defendant's documents.  Is that 1825?  I think it is.  It is document number 1825.  Mr. Joseph, can I ask you to turn to the page that  is marked Application for Registration and tell me  if the signature on the top of the third page is  yours?  Yes.  And that is an application that is dated February 5,  1985 and it was verified by taking an affidavit  before Mr. Brown who was a lawyer in Hazelton?  Yes.  Can you tell his lordship what the purpose of that 2474  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.  application was?  A    I signed quite a number of documents and that  may have been the one for a sawmill.  Q    Yes, I was going to suggest to you that the  application was to obtain the benefit of a  provincial program called the Small Business  Enterprise Program which had the purpose of  assisting those who wanted to set up a small  sawmill?  Yes.  A portable.  A  RUSH:  GOLDIE  Q  A  Q  MR.  THE  MR.  A portable sawmill, I am sorry?  Yes.  And that appears from the second page of the  application where it is stated that:  "The timber  processing facility is a portable sawmill."  That  portable sawmill is, as its name implies, a small  sawmill that can be moved from one setting to  another for the purposes of sawing logs practically  on site?  Yes.  And the timber for that sawmill would come from off  the reserve?  Yes.  So that in order to carry out the program that you  had in mind when this application was made, the band  would seek rights to timber somewhere in the  Hazelton Kispiox area?  Yes.  My lord, I would like to tender the document in its  entirety which consists of a certificate of  registration, an internal memorandum, the  application itself which consists of one, two,  three, four pages.  The last page requires  information with respect to the ownership of  something called J.A.D. Sawmills Limited.  That was  the name of the company that you were going to use,  is it?  Yes.  But that company was to be owned by the Hagwilget  Band Council?  Yes.  Thank you.  I tender that, my lord, as Exhibit 99.  REGISTRAR:  100.  GOLDIE:  Yes, 100.  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  GOLDIE 2475  MR.  9  10  11 MR.  12  13 MR.  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  2 3 MR.  24  25  2 6 MR.  2 7 MR.  28  29  3 0 MR.  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  GOLDIE:  Q  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  Q  A  Q  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  Q  A  (EXHIBIT 100:  Registration, Internal Memorandum  and Application)  In addition to activities which you've described  which included what you mentioned on Friday and the  business activity that we have just discussed now,  the bands apply for and obtain the right to use wood  lots or does the Hagwilget Band -- has it ever  sought to use wood lots outside the reserve?  Well, I wonder if that question could be clarified,  there were two there.  You are quite right.  I will put it this way.  Has the Hagwilget Band, to  your knowledge, applied to the provincial government  for the right to use forest resources as a wood lot?  Yes, I think they have.  And have they -- is the Band Council engaged in any  other -- I will call them commercial activities,  other than the sawmill and the right to use wood  lots?  I will put it this way, any commercial  activities outside the forest industry?  Well, I want to just clarify this.  The commercial  activity referred to in the sawmill was an  application for registration.  Yes.  And I don't think it has been determined whether or  not there has been any actual activity under that  registration or anything else.  I didn't mean to suggest that there was actual  sawmilling or actual logging, I am just talking  about attempts or examples of the band seeking to  engage or engaging in commercial activities.  Are  there any other examples which come to your mind,  Mr. Joseph, of commercial activities by the Band  Council?  Yes, the size of the village and the location is  very -- is right in the middle of the surrounding  settlements.  And the way the village is, there is a  canyon running right through it and a highway.  And  then there is the B.C. Hydro right-of-way.  And it  is a very small village and we don't have timber of  any sort.  We don't have gravel, no resources of any  kind.  So we try different projects.  Like we made  an application through the D.I.A. to start up a  bowling alley.  And we have had studies done and we 2476  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 MR.  42  4 3 MR.  44  4 5 MR. RUSH:  4 6 THE COURT:  47        A  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  applied for funding.  But at first we have to do a  feasibility study which took some time to do.  We  had this consulting group, I think Cuso and they  have done a study for us.  And they recommended that  the bowling alley be set up on the reserve because  it was a sport that all ages could be involved in.  So we have occasion and we don't know, it didn't go  anywhere.  We worked on it for quite a while.  And  things like that we have tried.  And there is a bit of ranching going on, but  there again, there is hardly any land to do a  project like that.  So I think the people that are  engaged in raising beef have to really -- they have  to buy their hay from off the reserve to feed their  cattle, so I don't know how they are doing right now  because I have been off council since last summer.  But there is a -- we at the Band Council have always  encouraged anyone to start a business, but it is  quite a lengthy process when you apply for money or  for funding.  And we have seen other -- we have  watched other reserves when they tried some project.  And we don't duplicate any other reserve's projects.  So it is very -- we try things that is needed in the  area and yet we just haven't gotten anywhere.  We  applied for recreation facilities on the reserve and  that is -- that one is going ahead as far as funding  goes on the reserve.  But other than that, there  isn't too much that we can try on the reserve  because of the size of the village and the way --  where it is situated it is mostly that the canyon  takes up most of our reserve.  Yes, the reserve that was set aside is on both sides  of Hagwilget Canyon?  It is called Hagwilget, but yet we are told by the  D.I.A. that we are only using the east bank of the  Hagwilget Canyon.  And the west bank is to be --  Gitanmaax.  Is to be reserved for Gitksan?  Yes.  I just want to point out that he mentioned Gitanmaax  which is another band.  Well, my understanding is that it is a Gitksan  Band.  Yes.  Which side do you get, east side?  East, yes. 2477  1 MR.  GOLDIE  2  Q  3  4  5  A  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Q  13  14  15  16  A  17  Q  18  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  34  35  36  37  38  39 THE  COURT:  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  A  47  You mentioned recreation, Mr. Joseph.  Does the Band  Council support sports activities of an organized  nature like Softball?  Yes, they are into Softball.  And they sponsor  tournaments in Softball, basketball and sometimes  hockey.  We don't have a -- we don't have the  population to support some of these, but one of the  chief councillors that is in now organized all of  these things and he uses other village facilities to  put up these tournaments.  Yes, these are -- just taking Softball, for one  instance, there is an exstensive league  organization, is there not, that includes both  Indian and non-Indian teams?  Yes.  And at one time you mentioned in your evidence  carving at Ksan.  That's the localality down on the  river, the Skeena and Bulkley Rivers.  And there is  preserved or there is stored in a museum setting a  number of the valuable things of both the Gitksan  and the Wet'suwet'en people?  Yes.  Is that supported by the band counsel?  Yes.  Is that part of what I will call the revitalization  or recreation of interest in cultural matters that  has gone on there for some time?  Yes.  And the Band Council supports that?  Yes.  Now, I want to go to another subject.  And that is a  map that was produced by Mr. Grant on Thursday in  response to my request in June for the map that was  on the wall at the Feast in Moricetown with the  Carrier-Sekani, what we have been calling the All  Clan or Moricetown Feast.  I wonder if I could have  this put up.  Mr. Goldie, could I interrupt you to deal with a  matter if you are leaving this subject.  Could I ask  you, please, Mr. Joseph, Mr. Goldie asked you about  commercial activities on and off the reserve.  Do  some residents, members of the band resident on the  reserve leave for part of the year to go fishing,  for example, and then come back?  Not -- they used to go -- have commercial fishermen,  but they haven't -- none of our members are -- 247?  1 THE COURT:  2  A  3  THE  COURT:  4  MR.  GOLDIE  5  Q  6  7  8  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  A  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  MR.  GOLDIE  32  33  THE  COURT:  34  35  36  37  MR.  GOLDIE  38  Q  39  40  41  A  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  Q  47  But not at the present time?  No, not at the present.  All right.  Thank you.  Sorry,  Mr. Goldie.  I was going to ask this, are any of the 200 members  of the band who live off the reserve, do any of them  live in Prince Rupert and engage in commercial  fishing as a full-time occupation?  No.  Now, I am asking Miss Sigurdson to put up the map  that was produced by my friend on Thursday.  And I  am going to ask you, Mr. Joseph, to have a look at  this and to tell us if that was a map that was up on  the wall at the Feast Hall in Moricetown on the  occasion of the All Clan Feast with the  Carrier-Sekani in April of '86.  Do you recognize  that as such?  Yes.  Is that a map that was prepared on behalf of the  Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council which purports  to show the degree of the overlap of the  Carrier-Sekani claim?  Yes.  That's what it was for, was it?  Yes.  All right.  And indeed does it show with the  heavy -- the heavy dark line, does it show your  understanding of what their claim was in relation to  the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en territory at that time?  Yes.  I am going to ask that that be marked as an  exhibit, my lord. That will be Exhibit 101.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 101:  Map)  Now, that map shows House territories or House  boundaries, I should say, for the Wet'suwet'en but  not for the Gitksan, am I right on that?  Yes.  Although there is a very substantial overlap in the  northeast part of the Gitksan territory and that  effects Gitksan people, does it not?  Yes.  Was the Gitksan overlap with Gitksan territories  discussed at the Moricetown Feast at all? 1  A  2  Q  3  A  4  Q  5  6  A  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  A  13  14  15  16  Q  17  A  18  Q  19  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  40  A  41  Q  42  43  44  A  45  Q  46  47  2479  No.  Just the Wet'suwet'en?  Yes.  And the Wet'suwet'en is in the southern part of the  claim area?  Yes.  All right, thank you.  But that map that is now  Exhibit 101 depicts the extent of the land that was  being argued about in 1986?  You mean at the All Clan Feast in Moricetown?  Yes, that's right.  There was no argument, we just took our -- our  chiefs just said where -- we say in our language  their land, Yin Tah, that's the only thing that they  talked about.  We just pointed it out to them.  I am sorry, who pointed out?  Our hereditary chiefs.  Yes.  And indeed I think you told us this before  that there was no argument --  No.  -- at the meeting?  No.  But the meeting was because the Carrier-Sekani  claimed the territory overlapping your own which is  shown on that map?  Yes.  Now, when I say "claimed", do you understand what I  mean when I say comprehensive claim in terms of  claims made to the federal government?  Yes.  And indeed the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council  had made a comprehensive claim when it presented a  map to the Minister of Northern and Indian Affairs  in 1977; is that right?  Yes.  Now, the Carrier-Sekani had made a comprehensive  claim.  And it was your understanding that in that  claim they were claiming the territory which  overlapped as shown on that map?  Yes.  Now, a comprehensive claim, am I right in my  understanding, is a claim that is based upon  aboriginal title?  Yes.  And it is intended to encompass or to take into  account lands which were the traditional lands used  by the people who are making the claim? 2480  1 MR.  RUSH:  2  3  4 MR.  GOLDIE  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Q  12  A  13  14  15  Q  16  17  A  18  Q  19  A  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  A  33  34  Q  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A  Are you asking his understanding about the  Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en claim or the Carrier-Sekani  claim?  I am just talking about a general category of  comprehensive claim is made to the federal  government.  And Mr. Joseph has confirmed my  understanding that that is a claim based upon  aboriginal title and that the Carrier-Sekani had  made such a claim and that the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  Tribal Council had also made such a claim.  I am right in that, am I not, Mr. Joseph?  Well, Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council made a  comprehensive claim, but I am not too sure what the  Sekani-Carrier made if it was a comprehensive claim.  I see.  You are not sure if it fell into the same  category?  Yes.  As the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en claim?  Yes.  But you did understand that the claim that included  the overlap territories was a claim made by the  Carrier-Sekani based on aboriginal title?  You  understood that, did you not?  The Sekani-Carrier made -- when was that?  Well, it was your understanding.  And I am now  talking about at the time of the Feast in Moricetown  in 1986 that the claim made by the Carrier-Sekani to  the land shown on that overlap map, that that claim  was based on their traditional use.  They claim to  have used the territory in the traditional sense,  what I called a few minutes ago aboriginal title.  I don't know if I -- I never heard them say that  they used our territory.  But it was your understanding that the overlap came  about because they were claiming those territories?  Yes.  And their claim was to exclusive use as was the  claim of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council or  the hereditary chiefs of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en?  I just know that they made a claim, but I don't know  about the exclusive use part of it.  Well, your claim is exclusive use, isn't it?  Yes.  Were you aware that the federal government had  accepted the Carrier-Sekani comprehensive claim for  negotiation?  Yes, I think I heard of it. 2481  1  Q  2  3  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  THE  COURT:  8  9  MR.  GOLDIE  10  Q  11  12  A  13  Q  14  A  15  Q  16  17  A  18  Q  19  20  21  22  A  23  24  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  THE  COURT:  35  MR.  GOLDIE  36  THE  COURT:  37  38  39  A  40  THE  COURT:  41  42  A  43  THE  COURT:  44  MR.  GOLDIE  45  46  47  And of course you are aware that the federal  government had accepted the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  Tribal Council comprehensive claim for negotiation?  Yes, that was accepted before the Sekani-Carrier.  Yes, a long time before?  Yes.  When you say "long time", I wonder if you can be any  more conclusive than that.  Let me see if I can.  When was the -- when was the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  comprehensive claim accepted for negotiation?  I know the application was made in 1977.  Yes.  But I can't recall when it was accepted.  I see.  All we can say at this time is that it was  before the Carrier-Sekani claim?  Yes.  Now, to your recollection, was that the only map  that was up on the wall of the Feast Hall at  Moricetown in April 1986 on the occasion of this All  Clan Feast?  Yes, I think that was the only one.  We had so many  people in such a small hall that sometimes you can't  see what's up against the wall there.  But you remember --  Yes.  -- that this map --  Yes.  -- was up on the wall?  Yes.  And it had been placed there by the hosts?  Yes.  Now, I want to show you another map --  Are you leaving this one, Mr. Goldie?  Yes.  Could I just have a look at this first, please.  Yes, all right, thank you.  Could I just ask -- the  hosts at Moricetown were the Wet'suwet'en?  Yes.  Thank you.  And the map then was prepared by or for  the Wet'suwet'en?  Yes.  Thank you.  Now, I want to show you another map and there is a  copy of it under tab 4 of the first one of those  binders in front of you, Mr. Joseph.  Yes, just pull  that out, please.  My lord, this was marked as 1  2  3  4  MR.  RUSH:  5  THE  COURT:  6  MR.  GOLDIE  7  8  9  Q  10  11  12  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  A  20  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  A  30  31  Q  32  33  A  34  Q  35  A  36  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  44  A  45  MR.  RUSH:  46  MR.  GOLDIE  47  2482  Exhibit 5 on the examination for discovery of Mr.  Sterritt and is document 1324 of the provincial's  list.  Which document?  Where did it come from, please?  It is under tab 4 of your book of documents, my  lord.  It will be the first book.  If we can have  the other -- these maps were all a substantial size.  We will put one up on the board there, Mr. Joseph,  so that you don't have to wrestle with it yourself.  Now, this map, Mr. Joseph, again is one that  purports to show the claim area and it is headed  Traditional Boundaries of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  Territories.  Have you ever seen that map before?  Yes.  In its original form was it coloured?  Was there a  colourcoding or has it always been like that as far  as your knowledge goes?  I seen smaller maps that were colourcoded, but not  that size.  But not that size.  What is before you, of course,  is just a single colour, but it has on it a coding  which identifies the clan, village and the chiefs  and that accords with your recollection of what you  saw?  Yes.  Now, can you tell me when you first saw that  particular map?  I have seen so many of them in different sizes that  I don't recall the exact date.  No.  Do you have any recollection of that being on  the walls at the Moricetown Feast in April 1986?  No.  Was it produced or used at the Feast in 1987?  Yes, I think it was.  But I don't remember whether  there was a map on the wall in Burns Lake.  But your recollection is that that map was available  or used?  Yes.  Or could be seen by people at Burns Lake?  Yes.  And that map was produced by the plaintiffs in this  action?  Yes.  What do you mean by that?  Well, when I say "produced" I mean manufactured or  drawn. 2483  1 THE  MR.  9  10 MR.  11  12  13 MR.  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33 MR.  34 MR.  35  36  37 THE  38 THE  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  COURT:  GOLDIE:  Q  A  Q  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  Prepared.  Prepared.  And that's what you understood me to mean?  Yes.  And your answer is, yes, it was prepared by the  plaintiffs.  And without examining it in detail, Mr.  Joseph, is it -- have corrections been made in that  map to the boundaries or -- and I deal first with  the external boundaries.  Well, wouldn't it be fair to the witness to ask who  prepared the map and whether he knows if the person  who prepared it made corrections?  All right.  Who prepared the map, Mr. Marvin George?  Yes.  And did he prepare the previous map?  Yes.  And behind you is Exhibit 5 in these proceedings  which was tendered by the plaintiffs on the opening  day.  And it is called External Boundaries of the  Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Territories and that is too the  work of Mr. Marvin George?  Yes, I think it is.  And I don't -- this may be an unfair question in the  sense that you haven't had an opportunity to compare  the two maps closely, but from your own knowledge,  were there changes made in the external boundaries  between the map that was marked as Exhibit 5 at the  beginning of this trial and the map that I have just  shown you which is marked as Exhibit 5 on Mr.  Sterritt's examination for discovery?  Maybe if I  put these side-by-side that would assist.  Shouldn't he be allowed to compare those two maps?  Yes, I am going to suggest, my lord, if we took the  morning break the witness might have that  opportunity.  Yes, all right.  Thank you.  REGISTRAR:  Order in court, court is adjourned.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR MORNING RECESS)  I hereby certify the foregoing  transcript to be true and accurate  to the best of my skill and  ability.  LISA REID, OFFICIAL REPORTER  UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD. 2484  THE  MR.  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19 THE  2 0 MR.  21  22  23  24  25  2 6 THE  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT)  REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  GOLDIE:  Q   Mr. Joseph, the question that I left you with at the  time of the adjournment was whether, to your  knowledge, there were any differences between the  map that has been marked here in the trial as  Exhibit 5, and the map that I produced to you a few  minutes ago which I identified as being marked as  Exhibit 5 in Mr. Sterritt's examination for  discovery.  And without going into any detail, do  you perceive or see any differences?  A   That one there has the boundary at the south shore of  Chapman Lake.  Q   Yes.  "That one" being the map that has just been  produced?  A   Yes.  COURT:  Exhibit 101.  It isn't marked yet.  GOLDIE:  I haven't tendered it yet, but perhaps just as a  matter of convenience I'm going to tender that map  as Exhibit 102 then, and it is the map that is  marked as Exhibit 5 in Mr. Sterritt's examination  for discovery and it is entitled "Traditional  Boundaries of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Territories".  COURT:  Yes.  (EXHIBIT 102: Map entitled "Traditional Boundaries of  the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Territories")  GOLDIE:  Q   And Mr. Joseph, now coming back to you, I think you  said that Exhibit 102 had the boundary and you were  making reference to Chapman Lake?  A   Yes.  That one has it on the south shore of Chapman  Lake and this is the height of land south of the  lake.  Q   All right.  In other words, the Exhibit 102 has the  Gitksan territory extending to the south shore of  Chapman Lake, whereas Exhibit 5 is on the height of  land somewhat to the east of Chapman Lake?  A   It's -- it would be the height of land and south of  Chapman Lake towards Smithers or east.  Q   Towards Smithers, right?  A   Yeah.  Q   In other words, there is a boundary change, and I'll  put it this way, in favour of the Carrier-Sekani? 2485  1 A   The word Carrier-Sekani -- we had the word Carrier in  2 our territory -- in our claim at first, but then  3 it -- there was too many claims coming out with  4 Carrier, but there were, like I said, the Babine Wuu  5 'an wet'en, the boundary we're talking about, we  6 didn't mean too much in the past between the  7 Wet'suwet'en and the Wuu 'an wet'en because they --  8 the boundary at Chapman Lake is both wolf clan,  9 Gitdumden, on both sides.  And the same on other  10 territories, there's -- like the -- some of the  11 people from Hagwilget were living in Babine, yet  12 they trapped in the 24 mile area with Smogelgem.  13 Smogelgem's nephews were from Babine, so they came  14 from Babine and trapped with him on his territory.  15 And it's been like that through all along the  16 boundaries and there wasn't too much problems with  17 boundaries in the past with our people.  They've --  18 they participated in the feasts and all -- in  19 everything.  Whenever they were -- they call, they  20 came to Moricetown, or Moricetown or Hagwilget went  21 to Babine for feasts, and it's always been like  22 that.  But it's since the coming of the D.I.A. and  23 Fish and Wildlife that we start talking boundaries  24 and trap lines.  It was all shared with different  25 people.  It was the same thing in the east, Burns  26 Lake area, it was shared with the people Stellaco  27 through intermarriage and they all knew where the  28 boundaries were and there was no -- no -- not too  29 much disputes about that.  30 Q   Well, if I have followed you correctly, you're saying  31 that with respect to the Wet'suwet'en and the Babine  32 people, boundaries were not a problem because they  33 shared territory?  34 A   Yes.  35 MR. RUSH:  Through intermarriage I think he said.  36 MR. GOLDIE:  37 Q   Well, I didn't understand him to put it on that basis.  38 He said there was intermarriage, wasn't there?  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   But the sharing didn't depend on intermarriage, it was  41 because the two peoples were closely related  42 generally; isn't that right?  43 A   Yes.  44 MR. GOLDIE:   Now —  45 THE COURT:  You're tendering that map as Exhibit 102?  46 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, I tendered that, My Lord, as Exhibit 102.  47 THE COURT:  No objection, Mr. Rush? 2486  1 MR.  2 THE  3 MR.  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11 THE  12  13  14  15 MR.  16 THE  17 THE  18 THE  19 THE  2 0 MR.  21  22  23  24  25  26  2 7 MR.  28  2 9 MR.  30 THE  31  32 MR.  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  RUSH: No.  COURT:  Yes.  Thank you.  GOLDIE:  Now, I want to ask you a few questions about the  feast at Burns Lake.  We were furnished with notes  on September the 3rd that you made and on Thursday  of this -- of last week with notes that a number of  other people had made and I'm not going to question  you, but I'm going to ask you to identify, if you  can, who made the other notes.  But first I'll ask  you to --  COURT:  Mr. Goldie, there was a word mentioned in the last  long answer of the witness which I'm not sure Madam  Reporter would have recognized.  It's -- is it Wuu  'an wet'en?  RUSH: Wuu 'an wet'en?  WITNESS:   Wuu 'an wet'en.  COURT:  Did you get that word Madam Reporter?  REPORTER:  Yes.  COURT:  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  GOLDIE:  Q   Perhaps you can confirm what that word is used to  describe?  A  Wuu 'an wet'en is what we described for the Babine and  Old Fort people.  Q   The Carrier people at those two places?  A   Yes.  GOLDIE:   Yes.  Thank you.  Now, in showing you these notes,  the first stapled set starts off --  RUSH: Can you show me, please?  COURT:  Mr. Goldie, Mr. Rush wants to see what you're  putting to the witness.  GOLDIE:  Q   Yes, I'm sorry.  It's the notes that you gave me in  the same order that you gave me.  Now, the first batch of notes is headed "Meeting",  abbreviated to "Mtng on traditional...", and I think  that's abbreviation for territories, "...tties",  dated April 4th, 1987.  Can you recognize whose handwriting or whose those  notes are?  A   No, I can't.  Sort of look like printing.  Q   Yes, it looks like printing.  It's not Mr. Sterritt's  is it?  A   Kind of look like it.  Q   Well, all right.  I'll just make a note.  But let me  ask you to confirm, please, the meeting at Burns  Lake was with respect to traditional territories, 2487  1 and at that members of the Carrier-Sekani described  2 their traditional territories?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   And now those -- there seems to be a change of  5 printing -- well, first I should ask you this.  Can  6 you confirm for me that that meeting took place on  7 April the 4th, 5th and continued on the 6th?  8 A   Yes.  9 THE COURT:  Of 1987 was it?  10 MR. GOLDIE:  Of 1987.  11 THE COURT: Yes.  Thank you.  12 MR. GOLDIE:  13 Q   I'm going to show you a second batch which is on  14 longer paper, and it's got "C/S All Clan Feast,  15 Saturday, April 4, '87", and it starts off with the  16 words "E.J. a lot of work".  17 Do you recognize that writing?  Is it that of Mr.  18 Victor Jim?  19 A   I'm not too sure.  20 MR. GOLDIE:   All right. Well, I won't ask you any questions on  21 that.  But there is a reference in one of these that  22 I just want to ask you a question about.  It is in  23 the batch that is on the short paper and it's about  24 six pages from the end of that batch.  Now, I don't  25 know whether you can recognize that handwriting.  26 MR. RUSH: Which handwriting?  27 MR. GOLDIE:  The writing at the top of that page which begins  28 with the words "What we're saying here is all...".  29 MR. RUSH: Is that the page that appears to have the number 18 at  30 the top?  31 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, it does.  I'm not — yes, it does.  32 THE COURT:  It does.  33 MR. GOLDIE:  It's the short page with the — I don't know  34 whether the 18 has come through.  35 THE COURT:  Is it on the top left or top right?  36 MR. GOLDIE:  Right in the centre.  37 MR. RUSH: Top middle.  38 THE COURT:  No, it didn't come through at all.  That's 18 is it?  39 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, let me —  40 THE COURT:  I just made it page 18.  41 MR. GOLDIE:  — hand up that.  42 THE COURT:  I have the page.  43 MR. GOLDIE:  Does Your Lordship have the page?  44 THE COURT:  "What we're saying here is all on tapes."?  45 MR. GOLDIE:  46 Q   Yes.  Now, the question, Mr. Joseph, is this:  What  47 that sentence appears to be saying is "What we're 1  2  3  4  A  5  Q  1  6  7  8  A  9  10  Q  11  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  A  17  Q  18  19  20  A  21  Q  22  23  24  25  A  26  27  28  Q  29  30  31  A  32  MR.  GOLDIE  33  34  35  MR.  RUSH:  36  THE  WITNES  37  MR.  GOLDIE  38  Q  39  A  40  MR.  GOLDIE  41  42  THE  COURT:  43  MR.  RUSH:  44  45  46  THE  COURT:  47  MR.  GOLDIE  2488  saying here is all on tapes and video, not all for  ourselves."  And my first question to you is, do you  recognize the writing?  No, I don't.  My second question is to your recollection was the  meeting at Burns Lake recorded on video or on tapes  or both?  I did see some cameras on the stage, but who -- who  owned it or was in charge I don't know.  All right.  I ask you that because Mr. Rush has  advised us that there are no tapes and videos in the  possession of the plaintiffs and that's so as far  as --  Yes.  -- you know?  Yes.  Now, at that meeting there was considerable discussion  of the overlap in respect of the Gitksan was there  not?  Yes, there was quite a bit.  And there were some fairly strong statements made by  members of the Carrier-Sekani about the -- that the  Babine Lake is not for the Gitksan of Hazelton.  Do  you remember that?  I heard parts of it because I don't speak the Gitksan  language and it was mostly in Gitksan on their  territory.  Do you mean that the Carrier-Sekani people who were  talking about the Babine Lake territory were  speaking in Gitksan?  Yes.  :   I see.  But they were saying that the people from  Hazelton were not entitled to that territory, to  your understanding?  He said he didn't understand.  S:   I didn't understand what they were talking about.  I see.  So you have no knowledge of that discussion?  No.  :   I'm going to ask, My Lord, that those two sets of  notes be marked for identification.  All right.  I think that would be the only way they could be  marked since they weren't identified by this  witness.  Yes.  Exhibit 103A and B, short and long.  :  103A being the short one, and 103B being on long 13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  A  18  Q  19  A  20  Q  21  A  2489  1 paper.  2 THE COURT:  Yes.  3  4 (EXHIBIT 103A FOR IDENTIFICATION: Short document  5 containing handwritten notes)  6  7 (EXHIBIT 103B FOR IDENTIFICATION: Long document  8 containing handwritten notes)  9  10 MR. GOLDIE:  11 Q   There's a reference in the notes to "Paddy Leon".  12 Who's he please?  Paddy Leon is a chief from the Topley Landing.  That's the Carrier-Sekani?  Yes.  Is he a hereditary chief?  Yes.  And he spoke at the Burns Lake meeting?  Yes.  Did he talk about his territory?  Yes.  22 MR. GOLDIE:   I am going to show you a bundle of notes that we  23 were sent together with some photographs.  24 MR. RUSH: Could you just show me what it is that you're  25 showing --  26 MR. GOLDIE:  Beg your pardon?  27 MR. RUSH: Could you show me what you're showing --  28 MR. GOLDIE:  Oh, I'm sorry, it's your letter of September the  29 3rd.  I guess it's Mr. Grant's letter of September  30 the 3rd.  31 MR. RUSH: That's fine.  Thank you.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  33 Q   Are those in your handwriting, those notes?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   And do you have a recollection of taking the  36 photographs, the copies of which are attached to  37 those notes?  38 A   Yes.  39 MR. GOLDIE:   Do you have the originals of those photographs, or  4 0 did you give them to Mr. Grant?  41 MR. RUSH: He gave them to me.  42 MR. GOLDIE:  Are they available here?  4 3 MR. RUSH: Yes.  44 MR. GOLDIE:  May I see them, please?  45 THE COURT:  These are notes of the same meeting?  46 MR. GOLDIE:  Same meeting, yes, My Lord.  I'm going to tender  47 those as Exhibit 104. 2490  1 MR. RUSH: Okay.  And I just ask you to disregard my handwritten  2 notes.  3 THE COURT: Yes.  It will be Exhibit 104.  4  5 (EXHIBIT 104:  Alfred Joseph's handwritten notes of  6 Burns Lake meeting)  7  8 MR. GOLDIE:  Right.  Thank you.  9 MR. RUSH: And I'm just showing to Mr. Goldie the originals of  10 the photocopies of the photographs which he was  11 provided.  12 THE COURT:  Thank you.  13 MR. GOLDIE:  I'd like to retain these for a few minutes, please?  14 MR. RUSH: That's fine, but if you want to put them in —  15 MR. GOLDIE:  No, I'll decide on that in a minute.  I'm going to  16 tender the notes as Exhibit 104.  17 THE COURT:  Yes.  18 MR. GOLDIE:  19 Q   Those are Mr. Joseph's notes.  I want you to explain  20 for me please the last page which is under the  heading "April the 6th".  The first three lines are  in the Wet'suwet'en language?  Yes.  Would you tell His Lordship what those three lines  say?  They were talking of names of lakes and rivers and I  was trying to get some of the names of them and they  sounded familiar because some of our -- some places  in our area had the same name, so that's why I wrote  them down.  So those are simply your --  Yes.  -- understanding of what the speaker was saying --  Yes.  -- of place names?  Yes.  All right.  I won't go beyond that, but is the next  paragraph, the first line, the same thing?  Yes.  And the next line the same thing?  Yes.  Then you record in English "They are uneasy.  History  at" -- something -- "Lake."  What's the something  lake?  Well, that's -- that's what these -- I thought these  words meant.  I see.  Oh, I see.  That is a translation then of the  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  28  29  30  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  44  45  A  46  47  Q 1  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  A  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  A   '  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  40  41  Q  42  43  44  A  4 5 MR.  GOLDIE  4 6 THE  COURT:  4 7 MR.  GOLDIE  2491  first name?  Yes.  But what was the lake that was being referred to?  I think they were talking about Sustut.  That's S-u-s-t-u-t?  Yes.  But what you wrote down is, and I quote, "History  at..." and then it looks like "B-l-a-" —  something -- "Lake"?  That's the Bear Lake.  Bear Lake.  Right.  Thank you.  Now, that's an overlap of Gitksan territory is it  not?  Yes.  So at least at some point some of the discussion about  the Gitksan was conducted in Wet'suwet'en language  or Carrier language?  Well, no, it was mostly in Gitksan.  I see.  Well, you have some understanding of Gitksan?  Yes, some.  All right.  And in fact I believe Mrs. Joseph is  Gitksan is she not?  Yes.  Yes.  Well, you had enough understanding then to  appreciate that the speakers, the Carrier speakers,  were saying that so far as the Gitksan of Hazelton  were concerned, Babine Lake and Bear Lake was not in  their territory?  Not in whose, like the -- you mean the Gitksan's  territory?  That's right.  Weren't the Carrier-Sekani people  saying that the Bear Lake and Babine Lake territory  was Carrier-Sekani and not --  Yes.  -- Gitksan?  Yes.  Yes.  Thank you.  At the same time though they -- they admitted that  they are -- they said that their -- their houses  originated in the Gitksan is what I understood.  see.  But they were saying that on the basis of  traditional use that territory at Bear Lake and  Babine was not Hazelton Gitksan?  think that's what they were saying.  Thank you.  Where's Bear Lake please? 2492  1 Q   Can you point to Bear Lake on any of these maps Mr.  2 Joseph?  Maybe it's a little clearer on the other  3 map there?  4 A   There's Babine Lake.  5 THE COURT:  Well, it's in the north-east area?  6 THE WITNESS:   Yes.  7 THE COURT:  That's good enough.  Thank you.  North of Babine  8 Lake?  9 THE WITNESS:   Yes.  North-east of Babine Lake.  10 THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.  :   And you told us that the -- well, I'll leave that  matter as far as the Burns Lake is concerned.  I want to ask you some questions about  evidence that you gave in response to questions from  Mr. Rush about spiritual matters and the transcript  reference is at page 2172 of Volume 34.  And you  told my friend what certain words meant and at line  46 on page 2174 you stated that the word  "H-u-d-a-g-g-h-i" -- how's that pronounced Mr.  Mitchell?  LL: Hudagghi.  Hudagghi?  Yes.  You say that "means someone way -- who is higher up.",  and later "It is the spiritual power believed in  today by the Wet'suwet'en."  Do you remember giving  that evidence?  Yes.  Well, the question that was put to you by Mr. Rush at  page 2173, "Is Hudagghi the spiritual power that is  believed today by the Wet'suwet'en?"  And the answer  was "Yes."  Now, many of the Wet'suwet'en people attend church  of the Roman Catholic faith regularly?  Yes.  Is Hudagghi part of their worship in that church?  Yes.  Or is it outside the church?  It's -- it's still used in the church.  Is it the same -- is it a word that has the same  meaning as God?  Yes.  And it is in fact then, or I shouldn't say -- is it  then the God as worshipped in the church at  Hagwilget?  Yes.  11 MR.  GOLDIE  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21 MR.  mitche:  22 MR.  GOLDIE  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  32  33  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  A  39  Q  40  A  41  Q  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  A 2493  1 MR. GOLDIE:   Now, 2173 a little later down there is the word  2 "H-a-b-o-'-t-s, which I understand is number 315,  3 and H-o-d-i-'-t is the same word?  4 THE COURT: I'm sorry, H-a-b —  5 MR. GOLDIE:  6 Q   H-a-b-o-'-t-s.  This is line 26 on page 2173, and one  7 line below it, H-o-d-i-'-t, is the same word, stated  8 to be the same word.  And it is described by you as  9 something for the protection of property.  It's a  10 ceremony for the protection of property, Mr. Joseph?  11 A   Could I get that spelling?  12 MR. GOLDIE:   Yes.  Well, perhaps the transcript will help you.  13 MR. RUSH: Perhaps it should be pronounced?  14 MR. GOLDIE:  15 Q   I'm referring you to line 26.  16 A   It's this one.  It's all in one.  17 Q   H-o-d-i-'-t-s-a-t?  18 A   Yes.  19 MR. GOLDIE:   And Mr. Mitchell, is there a number for that?  20 MR. MITCHELL:   No, there isn't.  There's one for Habo'ts'at.  21 It's 315.  22 THE WITNESS:   Yes.  It's the same.  They use it.  It's both the  23 same.  Hodi'ts'at and Habo'ts'at is -- Habo'ts'at  24 means they -- it means a group of people.  25 Hodi'ts'at is speaking of the same thing.  26 MR. GOLDIE:  27 Q   And can you tell me a little more what you mean by a  28 ceremony to protect property?  29 A   It's -- when they use it in that sense it's for people  30 that steal.  They -- if they find something, they  31 know something has been taken without their  32 permission, they let the person know or whoever done  33 it know that they're going to use this ceremony on  34 them.  And that is something that is feared by our  35 people because it -- if you steal something, that's  36 the punishment they put on you.  37 Q   It's a ceremony that occurs after something is stolen?  38 A   Yes.  39 Q   And it is intended to be directed to the person who  40 stole?  41 A   Yes.  42 Q   Does it -- and is it intended to make that person  43 return the property?  44 A   Yes.  It's intended for him to return the property and  45 if he doesn't that person will get -- will be very  46 sick and suffer a lot.  And it's also used in  47 another way.  If you want a young person -- 2494  1 sometimes it happens when the child is not born yet.  2 They go through a ceremony like that.  They want him  3 or her to avenge something that happened to an uncle  4 or an aunt, that -- you go through that ceremony and  5 they do that after the child is born too.  They want  6 that person to be a good hunter, a good runner or a  7 strong person.  They use different things to go  8 through that ceremony.  9 Q   Can you tell His Lordship what kind of property the  10 ceremony would be used for after the property had  11 been stolen, for instance, does it extend the  12 territory?  13 A   On the territory it's -- when they cache their food  14 that means life or death to the person that put it  15 there because they depend -- their time -- their  16 schedule is so rigid that they -- all their  17 movements are on the food that they pack with them.  18 So if they come back to a certain place that food  19 has to be there, but if it's gone that means the  20 whole group may perish, if someone steals that.  So  21 that instead of -- and there's no locks and there's  22 no keys, they just use that, this ceremony, to sort  23 of deter whoever is going to take something for  24 nothing.  The way that we say it is T'se nek' c'el  25 c'ot means a person takes something and doesn't  26 replace it.  He has to -- if he wants to take  27 something he has to replace that item with some  28 other thing.  29 Q   But the ceremony I understood you to say was sometimes  30 used after --  31 A   Yes.  32 Q   -- something is taken?  33 A   Yes, after something is taken.  34 Q   Okay. And my question was what kind of things are  35 taken?  From the example you used a minute ago,  36 there's food?  37 A   Food and clothing.  38 Q   How about territory?  39 A   I never heard of it being used in territory. In the  40 territory the man that owns that territory is always  41 prepared to take action if he catches someone on his  42 territory.  43 Q   All right.  So that ceremony is primarily related to  44 things that you can pick up and walk away with?  45 A   Yeah.  Yeah.  And there's another way that they use  46 that is to protect the person, and it's a ceremony  47 where someone has a dream about you, you being in 2495  1 danger.  2 Q   Yes?  3 A  And to neutralize that they -- I went through the  4 ceremony because when I was about seven, seven years  5 old my grandmother told me that my aunt wanted to  6 see me about something and it was very important.  7 So I went to my aunt and she told me what her dream  8 was.  She said that she dreamt about me and her son  9 going down the Hagwilget Canyon and falling in, and  10 she said "I don't want that to happen to you, so I'm  11 going to put you through a ceremony."  So I -- she  12 took some of bits of our clothes that we took along  13 to her and she just rubbed us -- rubbed all our  14 bodies and our face and legs, and all that time she  15 was talking. She said "This is to ensure that  16 whatever dream I had of you will never come true."  17 So that's one of the ceremonies where they -- we  18 call it -- it's sort of like a sacrifice,  19 Habeghet'segadileh.  20 MR. GOLDIE: Could we have a spelling for that?  21 MR. MITCHELL: Habeghet'segadileh,  22 H-a-b-e-g-h-e-t-'-s-e-g-a-d-i-l-e-h.  23 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, g-a —  24 MR. MITCHELL: — a-d-i-1-e-h.  25 THE WITNESS:   That means that they've burnt — burnt something  on your behalf.  So that's the ceremony that I've  gone through somewhere in 1935 and that is supposed  to happen to all young people, adults too at times,  but that -- when they do that before you do anything  foolish you -- that always comes back to you.  So  that there is danger out there at all times so  you're more careful if you go through a ceremony  like that.  And that ceremony was performed for you when you were  seven?  Seven.  When did you last hear of that ceremony being  performed?  When I talk about it there's others.  Other people at  home say they've gone through the same ceremony.  People of your age?  Yes.  Is it —  Some even younger than myself.  Is it performed today?  Yes.  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34 MR.  GOL]  35  Q  36  37  A  38  Q  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  A  46  Q  47  A 1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  A  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Q  20  21  22  A  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Q  39  A  40  41  42  43  44  45  Q  46  A  47  Q  2496  Very often?  Yes, I think it is.  For every young member of the Wet'suwet'en?  No, not for every young -- people that still  participate in feasts and are living at home all  know about that.  Yes.  Now, what about the ceremony relating to theft?  When did you last hear of that ceremony being  performed?  Theft?  To protect against property being stolen?  That -- that ceremony I've heard of it.  When people  had things missing they said that they would go  through that ceremony, but I think that that's one  part of the ceremony that's been discouraged by the  church.  I don't know whether it's still being  carried out.  I've heard quite a bit about it, but I  don't know if it's been performed.  And at page 2175 you described another ceremony.  At  the top of page 216 -- 2176, line 2, you said  "Waghe'at nii"?  Oh, yes, that's Waghe'at nii.  Yes.  And you've described what -- and you described  in your answer what that is.  They come up with a  breath from deep within?  Yes.  That's sometimes called the gift of breath?  Yes.  And that's a power to tell the future?  That's the power that they use -- that's used when you  are undertaking a -- like if you're going hunting or  you're going travelling or else if you're sick you  happen to end up in the hospital, and they come to  you and say "I have had this feeling about you  because my breath says that you are going to be  fine."  So that has always been -- it was an  everyday thing with my grandparents.  Your grandparents?  Yes.  Mrs. Felix George and her neighbour across the  way, they always talk about it.  If they heard  someone sick or hurt or was going somewhere hunting  they'd come up with that saying that I have my  doubts about this project or this hunt or if it's a  person is sick.  It is also a power to wish for death is it not?  No.  No? 1  A  2  3  Q  4  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  A   '  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Q  29  30  A   '  31  32  Q  33  34  35  36  37  A  38  Q  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  4 3 MR.  GOLDIE  44  4 5 MR.  RUSH: '  4 6 MR.  GOLDIE  4 7 MR.  RUSH:  2497  I've never heard that.  They never wished that on  anyone.  It's not something which is talked about very much  now?  Some -- some of the elders still --  Talk about it?  -- talk about it, yes.  But not the way it was done in your grandmother's day?  No.  Every -- all people talked and used that at that  time.  And at page 2177 you talked about what happens when  people have a bad dream about you and you said that  once you'd heard that on a phone call?  Yes.  What was it you heard, please?  Well, I was carving out of the country and I phoned  home to see how things were.  Then my wife before  hanging up told me that -- to take it -- take things  easy and watch myself.  So I said "Why is that?",  and she said "One of the elders from home has had  this dream about you.", and that he came to her and  said -- asked about me and she told him I was out of  the country.  And he said that to let me know that I  should be careful, that he would do something  knowing that I was out of the country, and he said  that he'd perform a ceremony to protect me, but  still I had to take it easy, which I did.  And did you change the way you behaved as a result of  that phone call?  Well, being away from home and alone I had some plans  which I had to cancel.  I see.  All right.  I won't pursue that.  And at 2178 you said "I had to go through a  ceremony not from the breath power but from a  dream."  And that refers to a ceremony that you went  through?  Yes.  Is it connected with the same thing?  Yes, it's the same thing.  Now, does that ceremony --  Oh, that -- that's -- no, it's the same one.  Yes.  Yes.  :   Would you like to see the transcript so that you  can --  There's another word there that's used --  :  Let's see.  -- at the bottom of 2177. 2498  1 MR. GOLDIE:  2 Q   Yes.  Yes.  His Lordship asked "Have I got that last  3 one spelled correctly, d-z-a-h."  Then it goes on?  4 A   Yes. Yes.  That's the same.  It's Dzah ngiitl te'.  It  5 means I've had a bad dream about you.  6 Q   All right.  Now then, is the ceremony that is referred  7 to later on in that page at line 27 that you went  8 through, is that connected with the same thing?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   Now, is that ceremony performed very often nowadays?  11 A   It -- elders don't, whenever they do something of this  12 nature, don't usually talk about it, but if you're  13 there to witness it you know what is happening, but  14 they don't tell all -- anyone.  15 Q   No.  So if it is performed it's performed by elders  16 and that's not something which is talked about?  17 A   Yes.  18 Q   Now, that reminds me.  Later on you spoke about secret  19 societies.  What is a secret society of the kind  20 that you referred to at page 2180?  21 A  A secret society is a group of medicine persons and  22 they have a membership of so many numbers and as  23 soon as one of them passes on they recruit another  24 one so it's a -- it's a very -- from what I  25 understood peoples is that they didn't -- no one  26 volunteered to get into their society.  They were  27 taken by the group.  28 Q   There are how many groups?  2 9 A   I don't remember how many there was, but there was a  30 number in the Wet'suwet'en.  31 Q   Well, I don't want to pursue the point if it's a  32 concern to you, but are you a member?  33 A   No.  34 Q   Do you know what the societies do?  35 A   They -- the society is a group that have their own  36 songs and they have their own -- they go through  37 their -- they come to feasts, they sing, but they --  38 they're a group, just a group by themselves.  No one  39 else participates in their ceremony, but it is --  40 and they have different whistles and I've heard  41 those whistles, but it's -- like when I first heard  42 it I was carving alone in a carving shed at K'san.  43 Q   Is that what you told us before earlier?  44 A   Yes.  That's the same whistles that they have.  45 Q   Are these secret societies very important to  46 Wet'suwet'en people and their everyday life?  I  47 mean, for instance, in their lives at Hagwilget? 1  A  2  3  4  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  15  16  17  Q  18  19  20  21  22  23  A  24  Q  25  A  2 6 MR.  RUSH  27  28  29  3 0 MR.  GOLD  31  Q  32  33  34  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  40  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  46  47  2499  Well, at one -- at some time earlier it was important,  but it's been getting not -- there's not too many  participants anymore and the church is the one that  discourages any -- any practises like that, but  some -- there are members around, exactly how many I  don't know.  I take it from your answer that they're not -- they're  not a -- they're not as important today as they once  were?  Yes.  And in terms of the ordinary day-to-day life of your  people they're not that important?  I've never -- no, not as strong as it used to be  and -- but the other areas as like for healing and  to protect you there are people around that are  still practising for your protection.  Yes.  But does that have any bearing on the way, for  instance, in which you as chief councillor at  Hagwilget did things for your -- for the people who  lived there?  Do any of these things have any  bearing on the way in which you and your people  governed yourselves --  No.  -- from day-to-day?  No.  Perhaps this should be broken down a bit?  I mean,  you're referring to "any" things. Are you referring  to the secret societies or the other aspects of what  he's describing?  Well, I'm quite happy to do so, but Mr. Joseph said in  response to my question about secret societies, I  believe he said that there are healers who, and  people who, protect you.  They still practise these  things?  Yes.  But my question is including those and the secret  societies, they don't have much to do with the  day-to-day way in which you and your people govern  themselves, am I right in that?  Not at the council level.  No?  No.  Now, from the standpoint of your people, the people  who live at Hagwilget and the people that you know  from having been chief councillor there for 20  years, what is -- which is more important to them, 2500  1 or what is the most important thing from their  2 livelihood, their life with the band or their  3 membership in a house or what?  4 A  Well, at Hagwilget the most important thing are in  5 the -- in our -- in the people's life there is the  6 feast system.  It is very strong in Hagwilget and  7 it's the same with both Wet'suwet'en villages and  8 Moricetown, including Babine, Fort Babine or Fort  9 people.  If they happen to be in an area they always  10 participate in a feast.  So it -- and there are  11 times when there's people coming from Stellaco and  12 Fort Fraser to participate in our feasts.  So there  13 is no boundary as far as feast and the clan system  14 is concerned.  We all come together at one place for  15 a feast and the most important thing there is what's  16 happening in the feast.  And they -- the witnesses  17 are there.  You cannot have a feast with just one  18 clan.  19 Q   No.  20 A   So that is important, where we come from our father's  21 side and that -- the father's side is the one that  22 ties -- ties the two -- two clans together, so  23 there's always a father's side within the four clans  24 so one clan doesn't stand alone.  So that is why  25 this feast system is so important to our people and  26 the songs that they sing and the ceremonies that are  27 carried out and the language, the names.  The names  28 are always in either Wet'suwet'en or Gitksan, so  29 when a young person, no matter how educated they  30 get, they get degrees, they come back to the village  31 and they come into the feast house, they still have  32 something to learn.  33 Q   Yes.  Now, I think you've described that before and  34 you just finished of course describing it now, but I  35 wanted to be clear in my own mind about a certain  36 relationship between the feast system or the  37 villages, the clans, the houses, the bands, to what  38 degree does the feast system become a part of the  39 government of the research?  For instance, all of  40 the decisions that you've had to take with respect  41 to water and sewage and things like that, is that  42 any part of the feast system or is that something  43 which is off to one side and is dealt with by the  44 elected members of the council?  45 A  Well, the times --  46 THE COURT:  Mr. Goldie, I have a feeling that this may take a  47 little time, will it not? 2501  1 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, I — it may.  2 THE COURT:  I think it might be a convenient place to adjourn  3 and you can put the question to the witness again  4 after lunch.  Two o'clock, please.  5 THE REGISTRAR:Order in court. Court is adjourned until two p.m..  6  7 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR LUNCHEON RECESS)  8  9 I hereby certify the foregoing to  10 be a true and accurate transcript  11 of the proceedings herein to the  12 best of my skill and ability.  13  14 Tanita S. French  15 Official Reporter  16 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT)  17  18 THE REGISTRAR:  Recalling Delgamuukw against Her Majesty the  19 Queen.  2 0 THE COURT:  Mr. Goldie.  21 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDIE:  22 Q    Mr. Joseph, at the noon recess I had asked you which  23 was the most important to you and your people and I  24 gave you a series of names, a membership in a house,  25 clan, band.  I don't know whether I mentioned  26 village.  I don't think I mentioned secret society.  27 But in any event, you told me the most important  28 thing was the Feast?  29 A    Yes.  30 Q    And my understanding of the evidence in this case so  31 far is that the Feasts mark great events such as a  32 death, pole raising, the taking of a chiefly name.  33 Have I got -- would you agree with that?  34 A    Yes, there is other kinds of Feasts and that's the  35 Shame.  36 Q    A Shame Feast?  37 A    Yes.  38 Q    Which occurs when a certain event happens?  39 A    Yes.  40 Q    But these are important events?  41 A    Yes.  42 Q    And they are matters of great social importance to  43 the community, are not they?  44 A    Yes.  45 Q    And as you and other witnesses have stated, money  46 must be paid and contributions made in recognition  47 of the importance of the Feast? 2502  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  THE  COURT:  15  A  16  THE  COURT:  17  18  MR.  GOLDIE  19  THE  COURT:  20  MR.  GOLDIE  21  Q  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  A  29  Q  30  31  A  32  33  34  35  36  Q  37  38  A  39  Q  40  41  A  42  43  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  Yes.  And indeed a chiefly name cannot be obtained without  the expenditure -- without the considerable amount  of money on the part of the person seeking the name?  Yes.  Although -- yes, all right.  But earlier today and  on Friday we talked about what I call day-to-day  events such as matters of education, matters of  running water, the sewage lines, the recreational  hall, the office for the Band Council, things of  that order.  Am I right in thinking that Feasts play  no part in those events?  No.  I'm sorry, Feasts play no part in those events?  No.  Or Mr. Goldie is not right when he suggested that to  you?  Well, maybe I can clarify that.  Thank you.  Are you agreeing with me, Mr. Joseph, that when it  comes to those matters that I listed to you and I  gave you the examples of education, provision of  water in the houses, sewage, the support of  recreation -- the provision of recreational  facilities, the support of sports, those were all  the sort of things that go on at the band?  Yes.  And am I correct in my understanding that Feasts  take no -- have no place in those events?  Well, you can't say there is no place for a Feast in  those events because when we talk education we are  thinking of the -- our system as well.  And we try  and educate our children.  They have to also  understand our form of government.  Yes, when you say "our form of government", you are  not talking about the Band Council?  No.  You are not talking about the things the Band  Council does?  Well, that is part of our government too.  But I  mean in the Feast system we have to educate our  young as well.  Yes.  And that part of their education relates to  their traditions as an Indian people?  Yes.  But education in terms of arithmetic, geography, the 2503  1 English language, those are carried out in either  2 the primary school on the reserve or the high school  3 or for those of your people who go to university at  4 whatever institution they attend; is that right?  5 A    Yet you talk of geography.  There again we have to  6 educate our young on what -- on the territory and  7 its use.  8 Q    And that is done at the Feast?  9 A    Yes.  10 Q    And then we have geography in terms of the names of  11 the other provinces of Canada and the location of  12 the river St. Lawrence and things like that, that's  13 what they learn at school?  14 A    Yes.  15 Q    So the sense I have of your evidence so far, and I  16 want you to correct me if I am wrong, is that Feasts  17 and the spiritual matters that you spoke of are  18 important to your people in relation to these great  19 events such as the death, a pole raising, a Shame  20 Feast, the taking of a chiefly name, the location  21 and boundaries of their traditional territories,  22 that's what the Feasts are concerned about?  23 A    Yes.  24 Q    But in terms of the ordinary day-to-day living where  25 people earn their living, how they earn their  26 living, the Feasts have nothing to do with that?  27 A    Well, if it concerns hunting and trapping, our  28 people still hunt and trap.  And at Feasts the  29 elders always talk of the importance getting an  30 education.  And they encourage young people to go to  31 school.  32 Q    Yes.  And, of course, the trapping is done by the  33 registered holders of trap lines, that is to say  34 registered under the Fish and Wildlife Registration  35 system; is that correct?  36 A    Not just the registered holder.  The members of a  37 House all can go out to these territories.  38 Q    And that's known as a company?  39 A    Yes.  40 Q    Yes.  If a chief, and I am talking now about a  41 hereditary chief, but who is a chief in your house,  42 if you wish to remove that name from that particular  43 person, would you have the power to do that?  44 A    Not only -- there again I can't just remove the  45 chief from the House.  It has to come from the  46 people that are in that House who are left to advise  4 7             me. 2504  1 Q    The other chiefs?  2 A    Yes, because of non-participation or absence or the  3 chief request -- want to remove themselves because  4 they can't be there all the time.  5 Q    But on the other hand, if a person is elected as a  6 councillor or chief councillor of the band, they are  7 there until the next election or unless they choose  8 to resign; is that right?  9 A    Yes.  10 Q    And, of course, the election for chief councillor in  11 a band is by all of the members of the band  12 regardless of what Houses they happen to belong to?  13 A    Yes.  14 Q    Now, I want to show you a file of material that we  15 obtained.  16 MR. RUSH:   What's the number on this, please?  17 MR. GOLDIE:  I think it's Canada Document Number 10778.  And I  18 sent this over to my friend on January 7th.  19 MR. RUSH:   Yes.  I just want to point out for the sake of the  20 record, yes, that's true, this was sent over to me  21 January the 7th after Mr. Joseph's cross-examination  22 had commenced.  And after on January the 6th this  23 document had been divulged in a federal government  24 documentary list.  I think it was list number 24 or  25 was it 25.  So that this document was disclosed  26 after the commencement of the cross-examination.  27 And apparently is now being used by the province in  28 its cross-examination of Mr. Joseph.  29 And I just want to point out to your lordship  30 I think I made this submission to you earlier and I  31 don't have very much more to add to it except to say  32 that this puts the plaintiffs' case in a difficult  33 position where we have to respond to documents that  34 in a sense we could not have discussed with the  35 witness prior to his commencing the  36 cross-examination.  And I think it makes it  37 impossible for me really to canvass it with Mr.  38 Joseph.  We are told that this came to light to the  39 federal defendant in the course of their  40 investigations into the trap line files.  But there  41 is a mass of trap line files that are both in the  42 hands of the province and of the federal government.  43 MR. GOLDIE:  And of the tribal council.  44 MR. RUSH:   And as a consequence of that, it seems in my  45 submission that documents that could have been  46 available should have been available.  And I really  47 don't know what the solution to this is except that 2505  1 I wish to say that it makes it impossible for me to  2 really deal with it with Mr. Joseph except on  3 redirect and that isn't by any way a means of  4 understanding the document.  5 THE COURT:  Well, I appreciate the difficulty.  I am reluctant,  6 exceedingly reluctant, to shut out the use of any  7 document that might be useful, even though delivered  8 late as long as some notice has been given.  I have  9 had complaints on both sides about late delivery of  10 documents and I think that the best I can do is to  11 allow the document to be used and to regard its late  12 delivery as a matter that may go to weight.  And  13 also if you wish, Mr. Rush, to have an opportunity  14 to refer to it before re-examining if it is your  15 wish so do.  I think I would be creating a very  16 dangerous precedent if I decide that I am going to  17 cut off the use of documents because of late  18 disclosure if they are relevant.  I hope that the --  19 that the incident of this sort of thing would be  20 rare, but I expect that it will arise on both sides.  21 And I think it dangerous to say, no, I am going to  22 impose an exclusion rule because of a late delivery.  23 I can't, at the moment, predict where the unfairness  24 will lie then.  I think the better fairness will  25 result if I continue on the side of admissibility.  26 You may proceed, Mr. Goldie.  27 MR. GOLDIE:  I am not going to make any submission to your  28 lordship.  I don't accept for the minute the  29 proposition that there is any unfairness.  30 Q    Mr. Joseph, I am putting in your hands a bundle of  31 documents which are photocopies apparently of  32 originals and they are -- appear to be arranged  33 cronologically starting with the last document  34 first.  And they range in time from November 19,  35 1982 to November — September 4, 1984.  And before  36 dealing with them, I am going to ask you if you  37 would once again, please, identify the handwriting  38 of Andrew George as that of your cousin Andrew, the  39 son of Thomas your uncle.  Can you do that for me?  40 A    The signature?  41 Q    Yes.  42 A    Yes, I know it is Andrew's.  43 Q    The next document is not one you can speak to nor  44 the -- but then there is an Application For Use Of  45 Land Within An Indian Reserve.  And I want to refer  46 again to the signature of the applicant Andrew  47 George and the co-applicant Rita George.  Is Rita 2506  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 MR.  32  33  34  35 MR.  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  RUSH:  GOLDIE:  Q  Andrew's wife?  Yes.  Do you recognize the two signatures on the  application form?  Yes.  And then the next one is a typed letter of July 4,  1983 and is that once again Andrew's signature?  Yes.  And then there is a handwritten letter of September  7th or partly printed I should say.  Is that too the  signature of Mr. Andrew George?  Yes.  The next document is not one you can identify or the  one following or the one following that.  And then  we have another copy of the earlier document, the  application which you have seen before.  And then  there is a letter dated March 22, 1984 on the  letterhead of Smithers Indian Friendship Centre.  And that too is Mr. Andrew George's signature?  Yes.  And there is a second copy of that.  And there  appears to be another copy of the application form  or at least part of it.  And then the final is  September 4th addressed to the Broman Lake Band and  that too appears to be Mr. George's signature, is  that your understanding also?  Yes.  I will leave those in front of you.  But turning to  the very first one which is the last of the  series --  You are going to have to identify these each one by  one because I don't know if the sequence that I have  in my bundle here is the same as you are citing, so  if you could just identify them.  I believe it is, but I will do so as I go on.  The first in time is the last document and it is the  handwritten document of November 19, 1982 addressed  to the Department of Indian Affairs at Prince  George.  "Dear Sirs:  I would like to obtain a copy of  map or blueprint of Felix George Indian  Reserve Number 3 which possibly is part of lot  3417 which is located on northeast end of Owen  Lake southerly of Houston, B.C.  I have written and spoke personally at the  meeting with Omineca Band and I was told to 2507  1 be more specific of the location I wish to  2 lease.  And I would like to obtain the map or  3 blueprint to see which part is leased already.  4 The lease is for dwelling purposes or a  5 trapping grounds cabin.  6 We have owned the trapping grounds  7 registration for generations and also Felix  8 George is my grandfather and the other  9 hereditary chief Joseph Nahlochs whom trapped  10 the areas for many years is also my uncle.  11 Thank you, yours Truly, Andrew  12 George."  13  14 Now, I think you told me previously that you were  15 unaware of Andrew's desire -- Mr. Andrew George's  16 desire to lease part of the Felix George Indian  17 Reserve, but I may be wrong in that.  Were you aware  18 in 1982 that he had written in this sense in the  19 letter you see before you?  20 A    Yes, he talked to me about wanting to move to Felix  21 George Reserve and that he had to go through Omineca  22 Band.  And I told him that we were trying to locate  23 Felix George Reserve and that we weren't too  24 successful in that area.  25 Q    And then the next letter is a copy of a letter dated  26 April 6, 1987 addressed to Andrew George and  27 apparently sent by Mr. Brian Shantz, Superintendent  28 of Reserves, Prince George District.  Do you know  29 Mr. Shantz?  30 A    No.  31 Q    Did Mr. George tell you in 1983 that he had received  32 from Mr. Shantz a copy of land available for leasing  33 at Felix George Indian Reserve Number 3?  34 A    I don't recall that.  35 Q    And then going over three documents, the intervening  36 documents are maps of the area in question.  The  37 document headed Application For Use Of Land Within  38 An Indian Reserve, did either Mr. George or his wife  39 inform you that on July 4th that they had applied to  40 lease property within the reserve, namely Lot 3 or  41 an alternative?  42 A    There again I was told that they were trying to get  43 a place, but I never heard of the lease.  44 Q    I see.  And then there is a letter dated July 4,  45 1983 from Mr. George to Mr. Shantz and I won't —  46 enclosing the application and I won't read that.  47 And then a letter of September 7, 1983 from Mr. 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  A  25  Q  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  A  39  40  41  42  Q  43  44  45  46  A  47  Q  2508  George stating that he had not heard from the  Department of Indian and Water Affairs and wishing  to be advised of what was happening.  And then two  documents -- one document over, skipping one, is a  letter of September 26, 1983 to Mr. George from the  Department stating that the department had forwarded  a letter to the Omineca Band Council and suggesting  that Mr. George contact the Band Council directly.  By this time, Mr. George, were you -- or Mr. Joseph,  were you aware, and by this time I mean September  26, '83, that Mr. George's application had been  forwarded to the Band Council?  To the Omineca Band?  Yes.  No, I wasn't.  The next letter is to the Omineca Band by Mr. Shantz  dated September 26th.  I won't read that.  And then  the enclosure that appears to be a copy of the  application.  And going over to the letter on the  letterhead of Smithers Indian Friendship Centre,  March 22, 1984.  What is the Smithers Indian  Friendship Centre?  Is that something which is the  Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council sponsors?  No, I don't think so.  It has got nothing to do with the Tribal Council?  No, they don't sponsor the Friendship Centre.  All right.  Mr. George apparently was at the  Friendship Centre and he is talking again about his  choice and he would like to proceed with the  application.  And the documents that follow that  appear to be all duplicates, except when we a come  to the last one September 4, 1984 which is a letter  to the Broman Lake Band asking that its lease  application be proceeded with.  Is it your  understanding that there was a division of the  Omineca Band and that the Roman Lake Band is an  off-shoot of it?  Yes, there is an area that I have heard of different  bands like Omineca Band and Roman Lake Band, but I  didn't know what is happening there.  They keep  changing and sometimes you hear of Nee tah Bun Band.  If Mr. George leased land in the Felix George Indian  Reserve from the Broman Lake Band, that would be  contrary to the ownership of that territory in the  House of Gisdaywa, would it not?  The lease would be.  Yes.  Because the lease would be granted under the 2509  1 Indian Act -- by a band under the Indian Act of  2 traditional territory or part of a traditional  3 territory?  4 A    Yes.  5 MR. GOLDIE:  Now, I tendered that bundle of documents from the  6 federal list --  7 THE COURT:  Well, only the documents the witness has identified  8 identifying would be admissible, would they not?  MR. GOLDIE:  Unless my friend is content to accept the -- to  remove the documents that are written from the --  are written by the District Superintendent of  Reserves and the Department of Indian and Northern  Affairs.  if he wants those removed, of course it  doesn't affect the substance of the evidence that is  afforded by these letters and the witness' evidence  with respect to them.  But to my mind it removes  connecting documents.  COURT:  What do you say, Mr. Rush?  RUSH:   I think the proper way to proceed is the witness has  identified the signature of Mr. George and those are  the documents that he can attest to and those are  the only ones that are admissible, the other ones  are not.  Well, I will tender, then, as the next exhibit Mr.  Andrew George's letter of November 19, 1982.  This will be Exhibit 105?  REGISTRAR:  Yes.  GOLDIE:  The documents that I am referring to comprise  Exhibit 105, is that what your lordship --  I would think it would be convenient to do it that  way.  It may be that they should be originally  recorded.  Is there any need to do that, Mr. Rush?  Not for my sake, my lord.  Well, the only exhibits are those with the signature  of Andrew George on it and they collectively will be  Exhibit 105.  That's the letter of November 19, 1982, the  application of July 4, 1983, the letter of July 4th,  1983.  I'm sorry?  July 4th, I missed that.  Yes.  The body is typewritten.  The handwritten letter of  September 7, 1983.  The duplicate of the application  dated 4th of July, 1983.  And it appears that the  two maps are attached to that application.  COURT:  Yes.  RUSH:   I thought the two maps were attached to Mr. Shantz's  letter?  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18 THE  19 MR.  20  21  22  23  2 4 MR.  25  2 6 THE  27 THE  2 8 MR.  29  30 THE  31  32  33 MR.  THE  34  35  36  37  38  39  4 0 THE  41 MR.  42  43  44  45 THE  4 6 MR.  47  GOLDIE:  COURT:  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT  MR. GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE 2510  1  MR.  GOLDIE  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  THE  COURT:  4  MR.  GOLDIE  5  THE  COURT:  6  MR.  GOLDIE  7  8  9  THE  COURT:  10  11  12  13  14  15  MR.  GOLDIE  16  Q  17  18  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  21  MR.  GOLDIE  22  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  MR.  GOLDIE  25  MR.  RUSH:  26  MR.  GOLDIE  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  33  Q  34  35  36  37  MR.  RUSH:  38  39  MR.  GOLDIE  40  41  MR.  RUSH:  42  MR.  GOLDIE  43  Q  44  45  46  A  47  Q  No, I think they are part of the application.  The second two?  Yes.  The letter of March 22, 1984.  Yes.  And there are two of those.  And there is another  copy of the lease application and that is an  enclosure to the letter of September 4, 1984.  Yes.  All right, those documents will be Exhibit  105.  (EXHIBIT 105:  Documents containing Andrew  George's Signature)  Mr. Joseph, I suggest that the traditional interest  of the Wet'suwet'en in a House territory was limited  to trapping and hunting, do you agree with that?  I think my friend should explain what he means by  "interest".  The concern.  Well, no, the claim to ownership and  jurisdiction.  That apparently is what you mean by "interest"?  That's right.  Maybe that should be put to the witness.  All right, I will do so.  I suggest to you, Mr. Joseph, that the traditional  claim of the Wet'suwet'en in a traditional territory  is limited to trapping and hunting rights, would you  agree with that?  I don't think it is only trapping and hunting rights  today.  I realize that you have said there is something else  today, but I am suggesting to you that traditionally  the claims of ownership and jurisdiction are limited  to the hunting and trapping rights?  I think my friend should say what he means by  "traditionally".  Well, other than the claim that is made in this  lawsuit.  So anything before 1984?  Let me put it another way.  When your uncle was living in the territory of what  we know in this case as the House of Gisdaywa there  were white ranchers there, weren't there?  Yes.  And I am suggesting to you that the only concern 1  2  3  A  4  5  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  15  A  16  Q  17  A  18  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  A  23  Q  24  25  26  27  28  A  29  30  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  A  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Q  2511  which your uncle had was in respect of trapping and  hunting?  Not the way they -- the elders and others have put  it.  When they talk of their land they also put in  the word Wa ts'a yid'egh.  Yes, and what does that word mean?  That means everything that came from that territory.  Well, I was talking about your uncle.  And is it  your evidence that your uncle was concerned about  everything that came from the territory?  Yes.  Well, when he wanted to farm or ranch he got a piece  of land in the same way as the white ranchers did,  didn't he?  Yes.  He preempted land?  I think most of those living close to their  territory did.  In other words, he applied to the Crown?  Yes.  For property that he could ranch on?  That is what he did I think, yes.  Yes.  And I have not seen anything that relates to  your uncle that suggests that he claimed the right  to farm was a traditional right.  Do you ever recall  him talking about farming or ranching as being part  of the traditional pursuits of the Wet'suwet'en?  Well, they -- they adapted to everything else, so I  don't think you can limit whatever they wanted to  do.  But when it came to trapping, he talked about that  being something which his people had been doing for  a great many years, didn't he?  Yes.  So I am suggesting to you that your uncle didn't  have the same negotiation of ownership and  jurisdiction as you do today?  He always said -- talked about the land as the land  that belonged to the Kaiyexweniits and Wet'suwet'en  and they used it as the demand -- they had to meet  the demands of the trade before and after the coming  of the Europeans.  They have trapped to trade with  other natives before the coming of white man and  then they traded with the white traders that came  in.  So whatever came out of the land they  considered as our resources.  Well, under tab 15 of the second book in front of 2512  1 you there, if I can direct your attention to it,  2 there is a copy of a provincial Order in Council to  3 which is attached -- just the provincial Order in  4 Council.  And it is dated October 24th, 1921.  And  5 it says:  6  7 "That application has been made by the  8 Department of Indian Affairs, at Ottawa, under  9 the provisions of Clause A, Subsection 2 of  10 Section 7 of the "Land Act", for a granting of  11 a Preemption Record to one Thomas George, an  12 Indian of the Hagwilget Band, covering the  13 south-east quarter of Lot Number 3432, Range  14 five, Coast District, containing 160  15 acres.  16 That it has also represented that Thomas  17 George is a young man, twenty-eight years old,  18 and is industrious, intelligent, of good  19 character and a thoroughly deserving  20 Indian.  21 That it is further reported that Thomas  22 George has a wife and three children and owns  23 three cows, two calves, four horses, harness  24 and wagon.  25 That the application is favourably reported  2 6                   upon by the local Government Agency.  27 And to recommend that by virtue of the  28 authority contained in Clause A of Subsection  29 2 of Section 7 of the "Land Act", a Preemption  30 Record of the parcel of land above described  31 be issued to Thomas George."  32  33 And then the next document is a photocopy of a Crown  34 Grant from the Crown to Thomas George of the  35 southeast quarter of Lot 3432, Range five.  And that  36 accords with a your understanding that Mr. George  37 preempted 160 acres of land in the Owen Lake  38 district, am I right in that?  39 A    Well, he applied for land.  I think when reserves  40 were first established where our people were  41 allotted land through counting the population of  42 Wet'suwet'en.  And at the time that the count took  43 place, from what I heard my grandfather say and  44 grandmother, is most of the Wet'suwet'en people were  45 on their hunting territory when the count took  46 place.  47 Q    Most of the pre-recommendations took place on the 2513  1  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  6  7  8  Q  9  A  10  11  12  Q  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  28  29  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  39  40  41 THE  COURT:  42 MR.  GOLDIE  43  Q  44  45  46  47  hunting territories?  No, when reserves were first established.  I see.  They -- the count that took place before the  reserves were established by counting the number of  people in Hagwilget, Moricetown, but most of the  hunters were out hunting at the time.  I see.  I understand you now, yes.  So they said that when reserves were given out they  didn't have enough to cover all the people,  Wet'suwet'en people.  Yes.  And that's why some of them sought to --  Yes.  -- preempt land?  Yes.  But the activity that was carried on was, in the  case of your uncle, a farming activity, wasn't it?  Yes.  And the fact -- did he own cows and horses and  wagons when you knew him?  Yes.  None of those things are -- were owned or used by  the Wet'suwet'en traditionally, were they?  They were -- after they were introduced they were  still being used the same as they would any furs.  Yes, we may have not understood each other.  My  point is that until the white man introduced cattle  and horses and wagons, those things formed no part  of the traditional Wet'suwet'en activity?  No.  Now, not only did your uncle preempt land, but he  sold it to somebody who wasn't a Wet'suwet'en, isn't  that so?  It may have happened, I am not too sure.  Well, I want you to look at the next document which  in my book is a very poor photocopy of a Deed of  Land.  Well, the next document I want to refer you  to, Mr. Joseph, is over the page and it is headed  This Indenture.  And I am sorry it is such a poor  copy.  September 2, 1937?  Yes, my lord.  And it is between Thomas George and Evelyn Sagor and  the legal description coincides with that of the  Crown Grant.  And the consideration is $300.  Would  that date 1937 be about when your uncle moved into  town? 2514  1  A  2  Q  3  A  4  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  A  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  A  20  Q  21  22  23  24  A  25  26  Q  27  28  29  3 0 MR.  RUSH:  31  32 MR.  GOLDIE  33  Q  34  35  A  36  37  38  39  40  Q  41  42  43  44  A  45  46  Q  47  I think he moved in before that.  And do you know why he did?  From what I know is that he wanted his children in  school.  And the school being not on the reserve but where,  in Houston or Telkwa?  Telkwa, yes.  He is described as being from the Village of Telkwa,  isn't he?  Yes.  And do you recognize his signature at the bottom of  the page there?  Yes, I can see Thomas George.  But you can recognize his handwriting, do you?  Yes, I think it is.  And would it be in accordance with what you claim to  be the ownership and jurisdiction of this land for  your uncle sold that to a stranger?  What was the question again?  I say would it be in accordance with the claim that  you are making here of ownership and jurisdiction  over this land for your uncle to have sold that land  to a stranger for $300?  No, I don't think it would be in accordance with  what is happening today.  No.  It would be, however, in accordance with  Wet'suwet'en law if Wet'suwet'en law was concerned  only with trapping and hunting, would you agree with  that?  I think you should reframe that question, that is  not exactly clear.  Well, I don't know how to make it any clearer.  Can  you answer my question, Mr. Joseph?  I don't think it is only trapping and hunting.  As I  have said before, anything that came from the land  was used by the Wet'suwet'en people to trade with  other nations.  It wasn't only just from hunting and  trapping.  But your uncle was giving to somebody else the right  to take the produce of that land and use it as he or  she thought fit, isn't that the result of selling  his land to a third party?  Well, I think whatever he did he done -- he taken  his family into consideration.  He had taken his family into consideration and also  he would take into account Wet'suwet'en law, would 1  2  A  3  4  5  Q  6  7  A  8  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  23  Q  24  A  25  Q  26  27  A  28  Q  29  30  A  31  Q  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  A  37  38  39  Q  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Q  2515  he not?  He may have had something to do with Wet'suwet'en  law.  He may have had the use for that $300  elsewhere in Wet'suwet'en law.  Well, whatever he did, he gave up forever the right  to go back on that land and use it, didn't he?  I don't think it is forever when you sell something.  You can get it back some other way like --  I suppose it can be bought back?  Yes.  Yes.  But your uncle, however, was very vigorous in  his belief that the trap line was the traditional  trap line of his family?  Yes, the whole territory, not only the trap line.  Well, did he ever say to you whenever -- well, I  should ask you this question first.  What was the  last time you visited the territory with him?  Some time in the fifties.  Did he ever suggest to you that the homestead that  he had on that 160 acres belonged to Gisdaywa?  Whenever he referred to Owen Lake area he said that  was our territory.  The Owen Lake area?  Yes.  Which was the area that was part of his trap line at  the time?  Owen Lake and other lakes around it.  Yes, I agree.  Now, Mr. Joseph, to your knowledge,  have other Wet'suwet'en preempted lands?  I have heard of other preemptions, yes.  Johnny David, for instance?  Yes, I think he talked of preempting.  And do you know whereabouts he preempted land?  No.  How about Round Lake Tommy?  Well, if you are living on a piece of land and you  are chased off it, how else could you get it back  without going to jail?  That may be a very good explanation, but the fact is  some of these people, two that I have just named  you --  Yes.  -- to your knowledge preempted land?  Yes.  Now, was Johnny David had a hereditary chief?  Yes.  And how about Round Lake Tommy? 2516  1  A  2  Q  3  4  5  6  7  8  A  9  10  11  MR.  GOLDIE  12  13  14  15  THE  COURT:  16  17  MR.  GOLDIE  18  19  20  21  THE  COURT:  22  MR.  GOLDIE  23  24  25  THE  COURT:  26  MR.  GOLDIE  27  28  29  30  31  THE  COURT:  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  MR.  GOLDIE  34  35  MR.  RUSH:  36  MR.  GOLDIE  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  COURT:  Yes.  Were you aware that your cousin claimed -- no, I  won't pursue that.  Am I correct in my understanding  that ordinarily under Wet'suwet'en law that users of  land are not supposed to talk about it?  And when I  say "users of land", I mean the House owners of land  are not supposed to talk about it to outsiders?  Well, I can't say they can't talk about it.  They  have to inform someone of where their territory is  if that person is on or near the territory.  Yes.  Before I go on with that, I am going to  tender as an exhibit the documents under tab 15, but  I am going to ask your lordship just to reserve a  number so that I can obtain better copies.  Well, should we resolve now which ones are being  admitted?  Well, I am going to tender them all, my lord.  The  Order in Council, the Crown Grant and the Deed of  Land for Mr. George to Sagor that they will be  tendered under different provisions.  Yes.  The Deed of Land is tendered because the signature  is recognized and also because of the provisions of  the "Land Act".  Yes.  And if my friend requires it I will obtain  certified copies of the Order in Council and the  Crown Grant and those two are admissible under  provisions of both the Evidence Act and the Land  Act.  Mr. Rush?  Where are these documents from?  I think they are all from the Registrar of Land  Titles in Prince Rupert.  They are not in one of the archives?  The Order in Council may be, but so far as I'm  aware the repository of the Bill of Sale, the Deed  of Land and the Crown Grant are both in the  Registrar's office in Prince Rupert.  And any  document which is in the Registrar's office when  furnished by the Registrar is receivable in all  courts of the province as proof of the facts set out  and the certificate or the contents or records.  That is section 308 of the Land Title Act.  I  believe it is a section that my friend has utilized  in other proceedings.  What are you saying, Mr. Rush? 2517  1 MR.  2 THE  3  4  5  6  7  RUSH:  COURT:  MR. GOLDIE:  9  10 THE  11  12  13 MR.  14 THE  15 MR.  16  17  18 THE  19 MR.  2 0 THE  21 MR.  22  23 THE  24  2 5 MR.  2 6 THE  2 7 MR.  28  29  30 THE  31 MR.  32 THE  33 MR.  34  35  36 THE  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  GOLDIE  COURT:  I don't take a position.  All right.  Well, those documents then can be  Exhibit 106.  And you are going to furnish better  copies?  Yes, I am.  I just ask that the numbers be  reserved.  (EXHIBIT 106:  Tab 15 Documents)  I am going to take the afternoon adjournment, but  before we do that is it possible to determine where  this land is?  Yes, it is, my lord.  I don't really have to know with any speficity.  Does your lordship remember, so long ago as it was,  THE  that I asked Mr. Joseph if he could identify George  Lake?  Yes.  And the preempted land touches that lake.  So it is not in the Felix George Reserve?  No, it is just to the southeast of it.  The Felix  George Reserve is Lot 3417 and this --  That is close enough.  I want to make sure.  It is  in the land claimed as the territory of Gisdaywa?  Yes, it is.  But is not in the Felix George Indian Reserve?  No.  If your lordship would look at the surveyor's  drawing attached to the Crown -- it is attached to  the —  Yes.  It is the second document in.  Yes.  The darkened spot is the preempted land.  And that  lake in the lower right-hand corner is George Lake  and 3417 is off to the left and above.  Yes.  All right.  This is quite sufficient for my  purposes.  May we take the afternoon adjournment.  REGISTRAR:  Order in court, court is adjourned briefly.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR AFTERNOON RECESS)  I hereby certify the foregoing  transcript to be true and accurate  to the best of my skill and  ability. 2518  1 LISA REID, OFFICIAL REPORTER  2 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  3 xh2 Alfred Joseph (for Plfs.)  4  5 (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED PURSUANT TO AFTERNOON BREAK)  6  7 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  8 THE COURT:  Mr. Goldie.  9 MR. GOLDIE:  10 Q   Mr. Joseph, I'd asked you a question and then I went  11 onto another subject and I'll go back to my first  12 question, and that was that users of land are not  13 supposed to talk about it to outsiders, and you  14 pointed out to me that the owners had to talk about  15 land because that's what they did in the feasts.  16 But I am taking this from some notes of an interview  17 you had with a Mr. Daly that Mr. Rush supplied me  18 with, and the distinction that was made there  19 referred to users of land rather than the owners of  2 0 land, and the example that you gave regarded the  21 boundaries at -- of Emma Michell's land at Sam  22 Goosly Lake?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   This was in the course of -- you were preparing  25 boundary information for the court action?  26 A   Yes.  27 Q   And you were told by Emma Michell that she did not  28 know the land in detail because she'd grown up on  29 her father's land?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   And she referred you to Pat Namox who was living on  32 the land although not the owner of the land; is that  33 right?  34 A   I think it was John Namox.  35 Q   John Namox.  In any event, when you went to him he  36 told you he didn't know anything about it and  37 referred you to Emma?  38 A   Yes.  39 Q   And when you told him that you were there because Emma  40 Michell had referred you to him, he then told you  41 what he knew about the boundaries?  42 A   Yes.  43 Q   And in both of the cases of Emma Michell and John  44 Namox they were aware that you were seeking this  45 information for the purposes of the court action?  46 A   Yes.  47 MR. RUSH:  It doesn't explain the accounting in the notes. 2519  1 THE COURT:  2  3  4 MR. GOLDIE  5  6  7 MR  9 MR.  10  11  12  13 THE  14  15  16  17  18  19  2 0 MR.  21 THE  22 MR.  23  24  25  2 6 THE  2 7 MR.  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Well, I'm not even aware of that, Mr. Rush, because  I haven't seen the notes and unless Mr. Goldie's  going to tender them.  Well, I hadn't intended to, but if I misstated  something and misled the witness, I'd be glad to be  corrected.  RUSH: Just that you understated what the conclusion was in  the notes.  That's all.  GOLDIE: Well, if I've understated something that will turn  out to be the last time I hope.  But if there's  something that I've misled the witness on -- but I'm  content with his --  COURT:  Well, I may have missed something because I haven't  really got any evidence out of it all.  He was told  by Emma to go and see John Namox and he sent him  back to see Emma, and then eventually they both told  him what their boundaries were and both knew what  the -- what he was seeking the information for, but  that's all I've got.  GOLDIE:  Well, that's —  COURT:  Maybe there's something more than that.  GOLDIE:  No, the point is that the information with respect  to those boundaries was given to the witness by  virtue of the fact that he was collecting  information for the court action.  Yes.  Right.  And that would be so, would it Mr. Joseph, in respect  of all of the informants that you obtained  information from and which you've given evidence  about here, that they were all aware of the fact  that you were collecting this for the purposes of  the lawsuit?  A   Yes.  When you say "outsiders" can't talk of  territories --  Q   I meant -- I meant, and I'm sorry if I've misstated my  understanding of these notes.  My understanding is  that ordinarily users do not speak to outsiders  about the territories, the boundaries of  territories, that they are on?  A   It's outsiders, but other Wet'suwet'en --  Q   They're able to talk?  A   No.  They -- the other Wet'suwet'en -- when you said  "outsiders" I thought you meant a foreigner, but  they are very reluctant to talk to other  Wet'suwet'en about their territory.  That's -- each  clan have their own -- own territories like, but  COURT:  GOLDII  Q 2520  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  COURT:  GOLDIE  Q  A  Q  A  like I as a Gitdumden had to seek permission from  Emma to talk about her territory like.  Q   Otherwise John Namox wouldn't have talked to you?  A   No.  GOLDIE:   Yes.  All right.  COURT:  So the reluctance is to talk to other Wet'suwet'ens  or anyone?  WITNESS:   Yes.  GOLDIE:  Now, there's been a reference to clans, and I want  to show you a photocopy -- or a reproduction, a  coloured reproduction in the original colours of a  map that was marked on Mr. Sterritt's examination  for discovery, Exhibit 11, and I just have the two  of these.  Perhaps Madam Registrar if you'd hand it  up to His Lordship and then I'll ask my friend if I  can use this one.  Thank you.  Have you ever seen a map like that Mr. Joseph?  Yes.  Can you tell His Lordship what you know about that?  It's one that -- like the wolf clan had one green I  think it was, fireweed is red, frog is a lighter  green or blue, and the small frog clan is light  green.  And that is to -- there for -- I think this  is one of the first ones made of our territory, and  the Gitksan colours I think were the same as the  Wet'suwet'en in this.  Q   In this particular map?  A   Yes.  Q   Yes.  Well, there is a wolf clan in both the  Wet'suwet'en and the Gitksan?  A   Yes.  Q   You say one of the early ones, you mean after the --  before the court case?  A   Yes.  Q   After the time that you presented the claim to the  Federal Minister, the comprehensive claim, in 1977?  A   I don't recall whether that one was coloured.  I think  it was -- the first one was just the one colour.  I'm not sure.  Q   And do you know who produced this?  A   I think Neil — Neil Sterritt did.  Q   Neil Sterritt?  A   Yes.  Q   Is -- are the clans of more importance in the  Wet'suwet'en community than in the Gitksan community 2521  or are you able to make any comparison?  A   No, they're just as important in the Gitksan as in the  Wet'suwet'en.  MR. GOLDIE:   All right.  Well, I — this would be tendered on  Mr. Sterritt's discovery, but I'm going to ask that  it be received now and marked, My Lord.  Any objection?  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 THE  8 MR.  THE  9  10  11  12  13  14 THE COURT  15  16 THE  COURT  RUSH: No.  COURT:  Yes  Exhibit 107,  (EXHIBIT 107: Coloured map marked Exhibit 11 on Neil  Sterritt's exam for discovery)  Joseph, is the small frog clan  17 THE  18 THE  19 THE  2 0 THE  21 THE  22 THE  23 THE  24 THE  25 THE  2 6 THE  27 THE  2 8 THE  2 9 THE  3 0 MR.  31  32  33  34 THE  35 MR.  36 THE  37 MR.  38  39  4 0 THE  41 THE  42 THE  4 3 MR.  44 THE  4 5 MR.  4 6 THE  47 THE  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  WITNESS  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  REGISTRAR:  May I ask please, Mr.  a Wet'suwet'en clan --  :   Yes.  -- or both?  :   Yes.  Just Wet'suwet'en?  :   I think it's just Wet'suwet'en.  Yes.  Do the Wet'suwet'en also have a fireweed clan?  :   Yes.  And wolf clan?  :   Yes.  And frog?  :   Yes.  But no eagle?  :   Eagle, I think  Yes.  All right.  My Lord, that concludes  there are some documents  the binders.  Tab 1 has been marked.  You're looking at Volume 1 now?  Yes, I am, My Lord.  Yes.  Tab 2 has been marked for identification and I won't  deal with it further at this point.  Tab 3 has been marked.  Just for identification?  it's Gitksan.  Thank you.  my cross-examination, but  that I have to deal with in  It's  COURT: Oh, I'm sorry, I've got Tab  GOLDIE: Yes.  COURT:  That's 83.  Yes.  GOLDIE: Tab 4 is —  COURT:  I don't think it's marked.  I'm sorry.  REGISTRAR:  It's 84 2522  MR. GOLDIE:  THE  MR.  THE  THE  MR.  8 THE  9 MR.  10 THE  11  12  13 MR.  14  15 THE  16  17 MR.  18 THE  19 MR.  20  21 THE  22 MR.  23 THE  2 4 MR.  25 THE  2 6 MR.  27 THE  2 8 MR.  2 9 THE  3 0 MR.  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  3 8 THE COURT  39  4 0 MR  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  COURT:  GOLDIE:  41 THE  42 MR.  43 THE  44  45  46  47  GOLDIE  COURT:  RUSH:  COURT:  ck.  I'm  s.  What have  statement of  atement of  rier-Sekani  ck of Tab 2.  I think that's the one that I've just tendered  no, I'm sorry, it's Exhibit 102.  It is?  All right.  Tab 5 has been marked.  Just a moment, please.  Yes.  Is that one 210?  Tab 5 was Exhibit 79.  I'm sorry, yes .  Tab 6.  I'm sorry, Mr. Goldie, I have to go ba  looking at the wrong side of these tab  you got for Tab 3?  Tab 3 is Exhibit 83. It should be the  claim and affidavit.  All right.  That map is part of the st  claim is it?  Yes, it is .  All right.  That explains it.  You say "that map", the map of the Car  and C territory?  The map that's in the pocket at the ba  Oh, yes it is.  All right.  Yes.  Tab 4 is Exhibit 102,  Yes.  Tab  Yes.  Tab  Yes.  Tab 7, My Lord, is an extract from Mr  response on discovery in his capacity  and it -- it was put in to I think ide  and I would ask leave to file with tha  accompanied that affidavit.  The first  response was sworn to by Mr. George Na  Mr. Joseph filed the second one and th  relates to the map that was --  All right.  Well, you're seeking to --  tendering Tab 7 as the next exhibit?  Yes, I am.  Any objection, Mr. Rush?  No.  All right.  That will be Exhibit 108.  5 is Exhibit 79.  6 is Exhibit  Joseph's  as the Madeek  ntify a map  t the map that  interrogatory  ziel and then  e extract  you're  (EXHIBIT 108: Volume 1, Tab 7, Extract from Mr.  Joseph's response on discovery) 2523  1 THE COURT:  Now, you said something about a map?  2 MR. GOLDIE: Now, yes.  Your Lordship will see that question --  3 or 6 --  4 THE COURT:  Yes.  5 MR. GOLDIE: No, it doesn't, but the answer to the question says  6 "schedule B attached to these answers", and those  7 are the boundaries of the territory of Madeek and  8 that I wish to file with that and I will do so  tomorrow morning.  COURT:  All right.  And that will be part then of exhibit —  GOLDIE: Part of that exhibit.  COURT:  — Exhibit 108.  Yes.  GOLDIE: And Tab 8 is Exhibit 82.  Tab 9 is the overlay from  Exhibit 24 A over the -- a photograph of part of my  friend's territorial boundaries, Exhibit 5.  I would  think it would be a matter of convenience if that  was marked, but if my friend is objecting to it I'll  take it out.  RUSH:  What are you marking here, just the overlay?  GOLDIE: No -- well, both the -- what is the blue ink base  from Exhibit 5, and the overlay is from Exhibit 24  A.  COURT:  There was a question the other day, as I recall it,  that Mr. Rush hadn't had a chance to compare the  boundaries of the trap lines as shown in the blue  ink overlay.  GOLDIE: I think that may be the case.  COURT:  And I doubt if he's in any better position to deal  with that now, but we'll let Mr. Rush --  GOLDIE:  I'm content to leave it.  Tab 10, there are a  variety in there and I think they are --  COURT:  The number — that's Exhibit 86 and there's 86 A.  GOLDIE: A, B -- well, B and C are reversed.  COURT:  I don't have a C.  I don't have a C or a D.  GOLDIE: Well, C is the map of Andrew George's trap line.  COURT:  Oh, yes.  I have it.  Yes, that's C.  You're quite  right.  GOLDIE: And —  COURT:  And B is the application?  GOLDIE: Yes.  I don't -- I don't think I need to go any  further than saying that there are no documents to  be taken out under that tab that I'm aware of.  COURT:  That can also be marked.  GOLDIE: Under the Tab 11 the document -- the only document  45 that my friend objected to was D., the return of the  46 registered trap line holder of William Boucher  47 and —  9  10 THE  11 MR.  12 THE  13 MR.  14  15  16  17  18  19 MR.  2 0 MR.  21  22  23 THE  24  25  26  27  28  29  3 0 MR.  31  32 THE  33 MR.  34 THE  35 MR.  36 THE  37  3 8 MR.  39 THE  4 0 MR.  41  42  43 THE  4 4 MR.  MR.  THE 2524  1  THE  COURT:  2  3  MR.  GOLDIE  4  THE  COURT:  5  6  MR.  GOLDIE  7  8  9  10  THE  COURT:  11  MR.  GOLDIE  12  THE  COURT:  13  14  MR.  GOLDIE  15  16  17  THE  COURT:  18  MR.  GOLDIE  19  20  21  22  23  24  THE  COURT:  25  MR.  GOLDIE  26  27  THE  COURT:  28  MR.  RUSH:  29  30  31  32  THE  COURT:  33  MR.  GOLDIE  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  36  37  MR.  GOLDIE  38  THE  COURT:  39  MR.  RUSH:  40  THE  COURT:  41  MR.  RUSH:  42  THE  COURT:  43  MR.  GOLDIE  44  THE  COURT:  45  MR.  GOLDIE  46  THE  COURT:  47  MR.  RUSH:  Well, I'm taking that at the moment as not being  proven.  : That's right. And I was going to take it out.  Well, you're welcome to do that if you wish.  I'll  give you back your copy, Mr. Goldie.  : Yes.  I'm just doing this in order to take out  documents that shouldn't be in Your Lordship's  book -- oh, no that stays in.  It's the return  signed by Mr. Boucher.  Oh, yes.  I'm sorry.  What does it look like?  : That's what comes out.  Oh, yes, I'm sorry.  I see nothing under Tab 12 that  comes out.  :  Under Tab 13 is unnecessary because Mr. Joseph has  brought the house list up-to-date so that can come  out of Your Lordship's book.  All right.  Tab 13's out.  :   Under Tab 14 there are two documents there that I  have a question mark about.  One is the will of Matt  Michell and the other's the trap line map, and I  wrote my friend to say that the trap line map is the  same as Exhibit 24 A, so I think that takes care of  that.  24 A.  : C under Tab 14 is just a photograph of part of 24 A,  which has been proven.  All right.  I'm sorry, I had a different listing here.  I  understood there were one, two, three, four  documents under your Tab 14 and the first one was  marked Exhibit 90.  Yes.  : Yes.  The second one in line was not exhibited.  Your  Lordship made a ruling that it was not to be  included.  : That's the will.  No.  No.  There's another document.  There's another page.  B.C. Game Department.  : It's just the reverse of the application.  Oh, is it?  : Yes.  Well, if your friend is satisfied --  Do you have that? 1  MR.  GOLDIE  2  MR.  RUSH:  3  4  THE  COURT:  5  THE  regist:  6  MR.  GOLDIE  7  THE  COURT:  8  9  10  11  MR.  RUSH:  12  13  THE  COURT:  14  15  MR.  GOLDIE  16  MR.  RUSH:  17  THE  COURT:  18  MR.  RUSH:  19  20  MR.  GOLDIE  21  MR.  RUSH:  22  MR.  GOLDIE  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  THE  COURT:  25  MR.  RUSH:  26  MR.  GOLDIE  27  MR.  RUSH:  28  THE  COURT:  29  MR.  GOLDIE  30  THE  COURT:  31  MR.  GOLDIE  32  MR.  RUSH:  33  MR.  GOLDIE  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  MR.  GOLDIE  36  37  THE  COURT:  38  MR.  GOLDIE  39  THE  COURT:  40  MR.  GOLDIE  41  THE  COURT:  42  MR.  GOLDIE  43  44  THE  COURT:  45  MR.  GOLDIE  46  THE  COURT:  47  MR.  GOLDIE  2525  : No.  I think this was --  It could be the court's copy there.  An original may  have been --  Well, unless Madam Registrar has the original?  ^AR: I don't have the original.  : Not of that one.  I notice it has Mathias Michell's signature on it.  I don't have it as being marked, maybe because it  was the back.  If that was explained I don't  remember.  Well, my note here was that it wasn't exhibited and  I've been writing that on --  Well, can you satisfy your friend Mr. Goldie that  that's the back of Exhibit 90?  : Well, I believe I can, My Lord.  If it is I don't have a problem with it.  All right. I will leave it for the moment.  And then the will was not exhibited.  You ruled that  not to be.  : Well, yes.  I now have the original.  Fine.  All right.  That's the application.  : So the application is 90 B.  Yes.  Yes.  I thought the map was 90 B?  : All right.  I'm happy to --  It's just been -- I thought it was marked.  I think I have a note 90 B as well.  : On the map?  Yes.  : All right.  And then the application was 90 A.  : Yes.  And the will was to come out.  : Well, I would like to -- I'd like to leave the will  in there for identification.  All right.  : I may tender other evidence with respect to that.  Yes.  : Might that be 90 C for identification?  90 C, yes, for identification.  Yes.  : Yes.  Now, under Tab 15 those documents have now  been marked.  Yes.  : At tab —  That whole document is 106?  : Yes, that's correct.  Tab 16 is -- there are two 2526  1  2  THE  COURT  3  MR.  GOLDI  4  THE  COURT  5  MR.  GOLDI  6  7  8  9  10  THE  COURT  11  MR.  GOLDI  12  MR.  RUSH:  13  14  15  16  17  18  THE  COURT  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  21  22  THE  COURT  23  24  MR.  GOLDI  25  26  27  THE  COURT  28  MR.  GOLDI  29  THE  COURT  30  31  MR.  GOLDI  32  33  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  MR.  GOLDI  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  THE  COURT  45  MR.  RUSH:  46  47  documents.  Those have been marked.  :  Yes.  It's 93 A and B.  C: Seventeen, there have been --  :  I don't think the first two documents were.  C: The first two documents were -- we didn't take any  further step on them because my friend wanted to be  satisfied they were archival.  I've written him a  letter on that and I'll await his response.  The  balance of the --  :  All right.  C: -- documents I believe are proven.  Except for one question that I had to ask about the  application for registration of a trap line.  I had  agreed that the application, the original  application should be filed, and I was told that  they didn't have the original and it wasn't in the  file.  :  That's right.  This is the application for registration of a trap  line.  It's the third -- well, it's -- yes, it's the  third page along.  :  Yes.  I don't have that marked yet, Mr. Goldie.  I  remember there was some talk about the original.  C: My understanding is that that is part of the  archival material, but I -- this is not a provincial  document and I can't do anything further than that.  :  Well, I don't have it marked as an exhibit yet.  C: I'd like to then mark it as for identification.  : Yes.  All right.  That will be 94 D for  identification.  C: Yes.  And Tab 18 I didn't put to the witness.  It is  a letter from Mr. Andrew George and I'm content at  this time to take it out.  Which one is that?  C: Tab 18.  Tab 19 is — I didn't tender, My Lord.  That is evidence before the Royal Commission on  Indian Affairs.  It is an extract from an archival  document dated May 20th, 1914, and at sometime the  whole document is going to have to be filed.  It  is -- either tender this excerpt now, or reserve the  number to file the entire transcript of evidence,  which is quite a bulky document, but it's got to go  in sometime.  :  Any objection, Mr. Rush?  I think the proper course here is to have the whole  document filed and I agree that a number should be  reserved and the whole document should go in. 2527  1  THE  COURT:  2  MR.  GOLDIE  3  THE  COURT:  4  MR.  GOLDIE  5  THE  COURT:  6  MR.  GOLDIE  7  8  THE  COURT:  9  MR.  GOLDIE  10  THE  COURT:  11  MR.  GOLDIE  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  THE  COURT:  19  MR.  GOLDIE  20  THE  COURT:  21  MR.  GOLDIE  22  THE  COURT:  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  THE  COURT:  25  26  27  28  29  THE  COURT:  30  MR.  GOLDIE  31  32  33  34  35  36  MR.  RUSH:  37  THE  COURT:  38  MR.  GOLDIE  39  40  41  THE  COURT:  42  43  MR.  GOLDIE  44  THE  COURT:  45  MR.  RUSH:  46  MR.  GOLDIE  47  THE  COURT:  All right.  Exhibit 110.  : The affidavit --  I'm sorry.  Well, then should I take it out of this?  : Yes.  It can be taken out of this.  All right.  I'm sorry, I'll make a note.  : The evidence before the Royal Commission on Indian  Affairs relating to the Stuart Lake Agency.  This won't just be May 20th, 1914?  : No, it won't be.  Yes.  All right.  That number is reserved at 110.  : The next is one that I did not refer to.  It is part  of the interrogatory response of Lucy Namox and the  question that is extracted, questions 47, 48 and 49  when she identifies Felix George as chief of her  house who gave evidence before the Royal Commission,  I would ask that that stay in this collection and be  marked as an exhibit.  This is the response of?  : Of a plaintiff.  Of a plaintiff.  : Yes.  Any objection, Mr. Rush?  No.  It will be Exhibit 111.  (EXHIBIT 111: Excerpt of interrogatory response of  Lucy Namox, questions 47, 48 and 49)  All right.  : The -- under Tab 21 what was marked was Mr. Thomas  George's letter of September 7th, 1945, and what was  not marked was Mr. Bryant's letter and Mr.  Mallinson's letter.  I ask that those be marked for  identification as part of the 88 B and 88 C for  identification.  Now, I don't have the Mallinson letter.  I only have one of the documents.  : Well, at the bottom of the Bryant letter it has been  photocopied on the same sheet of paper.  It's a  letter from Mr. Mallinson.  I see.  Yes.  All right.  The top document, Mr.  Bryant's letter, will be 88 B. Is it 88 B?  : Yes.  Then the bottom one will be 88 C.  That's for identification.  : For identification.  Yes. 252?  1  MR.  RUSH:  2  3  THE  COURT:  4  MR.  GOLDIE  5  6  7  8  9  10  THE  COURT:  11  12  13  14  15  MR.  GOLDIE  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  THE  COURT:  23  MR.  RUSH:  24  MR.  GOLDIE  25  THE  COURT:  26  MR.  RUSH:  27  THE  COURT:  28  29  30  31  MR.  GOLDIE  32  33  34  35  36  37  THE  COURT:  38  MR.  GOLDIE  39  40  41  42  43  44  THE  COURT:  45  46  MR.  GOLDIE  47  Because I think I objected to those and Your Lordship  found with me on that objection.  All right.  : Under Tab 22 there is a map of the Gisdaywa  territory which is dated May the 22nd, 19 -- I'm  sorry, dated May 12th, 1987, but it is different in  the outline of the territory than the one that has  been marked as part of Exhibit 62 and I would like  this one marked.  Mark it as 112.  (EXHIBIT 112: Map of the Gisdaywa territory dated May  12, 1987, Tab 22)  : Yes.  Under Tab 23 is a map to which I referred in  my examination of Mr. Joseph.  It is the map that  was presented to the government of Canada on  November 7th, 1977, and the witness I believe stated  that he was there and was able to identify this as a  copy of the map.  I neglected to tender it at the  time and I do so now.  All right.  That will be Exhibit 113.  That's marked, isn't it?  : I thought it was but I was told it wasn't.  I don't have it marked.  It wasn't marked.  It was shown to the witness.  That will be — all right.  It will be Exhibit 113.  (EXHIBIT 113: Tab 23, Map presented November 7, 1977)  : Yes.  Under Tab 24 are two letters, one of Mr.  Ditchburn of the 25th of April 1923, the second of  Mr. Ditchburn of October 21st, 1931, and then  there's a third, Mr. Felix George's letter to Mr.  Ditchburn of December 12th, 1931.  I think all three  were objected to.  Yes.  : And I ask that a number be reserved for each of them  A, B, and C, as I intend to submit that, and I have  written to my friend about the archival source of  these, and after he's had an opportunity of checking  that I will submit that they should be marked under  our agreement.  All right.  They'll be reserved as Exhibit 114 A, B  and C for identification.  : Thank you.  The next document which was part of --  well, Exhibit 25, the next one is Exhibit 80, 2529  1 they're under Tab 25.  2 THE COURT:  I don't have anything under Tab 25.  3 MR. GOLDIE: It was taken out, My Lord, and not put into your  4 book.  It was tendered before Your Lordship was  5 given a book.  It's Order in Council, 911, on July  6 26th, 1923.  7 THE COURT:  Thank you.  8 MR. GOLDIE: And the balance of the tabs have all been marked  9 with the exception of the trap line document of  10 Bardon which is 96 for identification and I will  11 write to my friend about that.  12 THE COURT:  Thank you.  13 MR. GOLDIE: I will ask my friend -- my friend produced the  14 original photographs that accompanied the notes the  15 witness made of the feast at Burns Lake in April  16 1987.  Having looked at the original photographs I'm  17 going to ask him to furnish a copy to be marked as  18 part of those notes.  19 THE COURT:  Do you recall what number the notes were?  20 MR. GOLDIE: 104 My Lord.  21 THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  And so you want the photographs —  22 how many photographs?  23 MR. GOLDIE: There is —  24 MR. RUSH:  Eight.  No, there's nine.  25 MR. GOLDIE: Nine, yes.  26 THE COURT:  All right.  To be furnished, and they will be 104 A,  27 or such other sequential letters as may be required.  2 8             All right.  29 MR. GOLDIE: That -- subject to omissions, errors and otherwise,  30 that completes my cross-examination.  31 THE COURT:  Thank you.  Miss Koenigsberg.  32  33 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. KOENIGSBERG:  34 Q   Mr. Joseph, I'll be brief, but no matter how fast I  35 try to go, we will not finish in the next ten  36 minutes.  37 I'd like to ask you first some questions about  38 fishing sites, and you've given us evidence way back  39 in June in Smithers about two of your fishing sites  40 near Moricetown, and I believe your evidence was  41 along the lines that they were on the north side of  42 the canyon up river from the Moricetown Bridge?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   Do you recall that?  45 A   Yes.  46 Q   And I also recall that your evidence was that members  47 of your house use those fishing sites and  members of 1  2  A  3  Q  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  A  9  Q  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  17  18  A  19  20  Q  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Q  32  33  A  34  Q  35  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  2530  your clan use those fishing sites; is that correct?  Yes.  And when asked which members specifically used it, you  gave the name Roy Morris.  I believe his chief's name  is Woos?  Yeah, Woos.  Woos.  And Peter Alfred, Kanoots?  When he was alive.  Yes.  Yes.  And their children?  Yes.  But you did not give any names from your house.  Those  two persons and their children would not be members  of your house; is that correct?  No.  Are there any particular members of your house, that  is, the House of Gisdaywa, that use the fishing  sites of Gisdaywa?  My uncle himself, Gisdaywa, used the fishing site when  he was alive.  That's Thomas George?  Yes.  Since he died, has no member of the House of Gisdaywa  used those particular sites?  Well, the -- I've had not too many members of Kaiyex  weniits living there.  The one that I recall who  used -- who lived at Moricetown is no longer alive  either, so the only living member of Kaiyex weniits  that lived in Moricetown is passed on.  So right now  I don't recall any Kaiyex weniits members living  around Moricetown.  All right.  So your evidence is that no members of the  House of Gisdaywa any longer live in Moricetown?  Yes.  And no members, as far as you know, are using those  particular fishing sites?  No.  And so when you said that you got your fish now from  Roy Morris?  Yes.  The reason you don't get fish from members of your  house is because none of them are fishing there; is  that correct?  The reason I don't get any fish?  I believe your evidence was that you got your fish  from Roy Morris?  Yes.  And I take it that the reason you don't get fish from 1  2  3  A  4  Q  5  A  6  Q  7  A  8  Q  9  A  10  Q  11  12  13  14  A  15  16  Q  17  18  A  19  Q  20  A  21  22  Q  23  A  24  25  26  Q  27  28  A  29  Q  30  A  31  Q  32  33  34  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  Q  41  42  43  A  44  Q  45  46  A  47  Q  2531  other members of your house is because they are not  fishing at those fishing sites?  No.  I'm not correct?  Well, none of my members are living there today.  And you don't get any fish --  No.  -- from members of your house?  No.  Now, members of the House of Gisdaywa have from time  to time applied for and received food fish permits  from the Department of Fisheries; isn't that  correct?  Not -- not lately.  I don't -- I never. We haven't got  any fish permits lately.  All right.  But you know that in the past members of  your house have?  When you say "past" --  The last five years?  No, none of -- I don't think any of our members  applied for permits.  All right.  Like in Hagwilget right now we -- we don't see any use  of getting permits because you can't get fish at  Hagwilget.  Well, on behalf of the Hagwilget band you have  applied --  No.  -- for a permit have you not?  No.  No.  I want to show you two documents.  I'll just put them  in front of you and perhaps you can tell me, the  copies are not very good, but do -- is that your  signature?  Yes.  And is it an Indian food fish licence application for  the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for the  Hagwilget band members?  Yes.  It's more than five years ago so --  Well, I guess you're right.  It's for 1982 and we're  now in 1988.  And you did apply in 1982 on behalf of  the Hagwilget members for a food fish licence?  Yes.  For two seasons in fact.  We have two licence  applications here?  Yes.  For the spring or May season to expire June 11 and one 2532  1 for July.  I believe you applied in July and that  2 would be until November?  3 A   Yes.  4 MS. KOENIGSBERG:   Could we have those marked as the next  5 exhibit, next two exhibits, the first one dated May  6 25th '82 is document number 5136.  7 THE COURT:  That will be Exhibit 115 and the other 115 — 115 A  8 rather, and the other 115 B.  9  10 (EXHIBIT 115 A: Indian food fish licence application  11 beginning May of 1982)  12  13 (EXHIBIT 115 B: Indian food fish licence application  14 beginning July of 1982)  15  16 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  17 Q   Thank you.  Now, is there a person in your house by  18 the name of J.B. Tom?  19 A   Yes.  2 0 Q   And might he also be known as Joseph Tom?  21 A   No.  22 Q   No.  Just J.B. Tom.  And he's the grandson of Mary  23 Michell?  Is there a grandson of Mary Michell named  24 Joseph Tom in your house?  25 A   Oh, yes.  There's Joseph Tom.  Yes, it's Joe junior.  26 Q   I see.  To your knowledge has he applied for a food  27 fish licence?  28 A   No, I don't -- he may have applied in Moricetown, but  2 9 I don't know.  30 Q   All right.  But would it be fair to say if members of  31 your house had applied in Moricetown, you might not  32 know about it?  33 A   No.  34 Q   You would not know?  35 A   I would not know.  No.  36 Q   You have been a member of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  37 Tribal Council?  38 A   Yes.  39 Q   And when were you -- when did you first become a  4 0 member?  41 A   Of the Tribal Council I think about '77.  42 Q   All right.  And you're aware of an enterprise known as  43 the Northern Native Fishing Corporation?  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   And that's formed by three tribal councils including  46 the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council?  47 A   Yes. 2533  1 Q   And one of the purposes of that corporation is to hold  2 fishing vessels and for the purposes of commercial  3 fishing at the coast; is that correct?  4 A   Yes.  5 Q   Were you aware that in 1982, 79 salmon fishing vessels  6 were owned and operated by persons covered by the  7 jurisdiction of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal  8 Council?  9 A   19 —  10 Q   1982, 79 of the fishing vessels of that corporation  11 belonged to Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en people?  12 A   Yeah, I think I heard something about it.  13 MS. KOENIGSBERG:   Okay.  And I understand 21 herring gillnet  14 licences through that organization were held in  15 1983?  16 MR. RUSH:  Could we determine the witness' source of  17 information?  18 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  19 Q   Sure.  Let me first ask you if you know about herring  20 gillnet licences being part of that?  21 A   No, I don't.  22 Q   Do you know --  23 A  All I know is it's the sockeye and spring gillnetting.  24 That's all I'm aware of.  25 Q   All right.  You're not aware of the herring gillnet  26 licences?  27 A   No.  28 Q   How do you know about the salmon fishing vessels?  29 A  Well, I -- the members of the Northern Fishing  30 Corporation come to some of our meetings and report  31 of their -- of the meetings that they've been to,  32 but I'm not too much involved in the fishing --  33 commercial fishing part.  34 THE COURT:  Mrs. Koenigsberg, I'm not sure if I've got it right.  35 Are you saying that 79 vessels that are licenced in  36 some way or connected with the Northern Native  37 Fishing Corporation were owned by members of the  38 Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en --  39 MS. KOENIGSBERG: People.  40 THE COURT:  — people?  41 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  42 Q   Is that correct?  43 A   I don't know whether it's just Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en  44 people.  Aren't they three different parts?  45 Q   Yes.  I'm instructed that 79 of -- there are many more  46 vessels --  4 7 A   Oh. 2534  1 Q   -- as part of that organization, and that 79 of them  2 as of 1982 were owned and operated by persons from  3 the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en?  4 A   Could be.  5 Q   It's a fairly large number?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   And can you tell me if you know of any of those who  8 are Wet'suwet'en people?  9 A   There is one or two from Moricetown I think that are  10 involved in commercial fishing.  11 Q   Okay.  You are here to assist us with information  12 about the House of Madeek?  13 A   Yes.  14 THE COURT:  Miss Koenigsberg, if you're going to a new subject  15 perhaps we might --  16 MS. KOENIGSBERG: I'm not, My Lord, and actually this is the  17 last, I hope, short series of questions on this  18 particular topic.  19 THE COURT:  By all means go ahead.  2 0 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  21 Q   You're aware that many members of the House of Madeek  22 have held food fish licences including George  23 Naziel, who was the previous Madeek?  Are you aware  24 of that?  25 A   No.  26 Q   Do you know anything about members of the House of  27 Madeek holding food fish licences?  Do you know any  2 8 of them who do?  29 A   No.  It is handled through the band offices and I'm  30 not involved with Moricetown band offices.  I'm just  31 with Hagwilget band.  32 Q   And likewise you would not -- would you have any  33 information about persons in the House of Madeek  34 holding commercial licences to commercially fish?  35 A   No, I don't -- never heard of any.  36 MS. KOENIGSBERG:   That will be a convenient time for me to  37 stop.  38 THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  We'll adjourn then until tomorrow  39 morning.  Thank you.  40 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  This court stands adjourned  41 until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.  42  4 3 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED TO JANUARY 12, 1988 at 10:00  44 a.m.)  45 I hereby certify the foregoing to  46 be a true and accurate transcript  47 of the proceedings herein to the 2535  best of my skill and ability.  Tanita 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.1-0019313/manifest

Comment

Related Items