Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1988-06-21] British Columbia. Supreme Court Jun 21, 1988

Item Metadata

Download

Media
delgamuukw-1.0019482.pdf
Metadata
JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019482.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0019482-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0019482-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019482-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0019482-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0019482-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0019482-source.json
Full Text
delgamuukw-1.0019482-fulltext.txt
Citation
delgamuukw-1.0019482.ris

Full Text

 7060  Proceedings  1 June 21, 198 8  2 VANCOUVER, B.C.  3  4 THE REGISTRAR: Order in court.  In the Supreme Court of British  5 Columbia this Tuesday the 21st day of June 1988,  6 calling Delgamuukw versus Her Majesty the Queen at  7 bar.  8 I caution the witness you're still under oath.  9 THE COURT:  Mr. Rush.  10 MR. RUSH:  Just before I begin the direct examination, My Lord,  11 I wanted to ask you if you had put your mind to the  12 schedule that we would be following in the fall.  13 THE COURT:  No, I haven't, as a matter of fact.  I'd be glad to  14 do that.  15 MR. RUSH:  I think from our standpoint it would be helpful if  16 Your Lordship could indicate your availability and if  17 we were going to continue on the same schedule we  18 followed in the spring and I guess when we would  19 recommence in the fall.  20 THE COURT:  Well, this year to honour Chief Justice Nemetz the  21 Canadian Judicial Council is having its annual meeting  22 in August, so that's not going to be a problem, and I  23 would think that we would -- the court opens on  24 September the 6th and at the moment I'm not aware of  25 any reason why we wouldn't start on September 6th and  26 go in segments of three weeks on and one week off for  27 as long as necessary.  We're going to finish the  28 evidence of course sometime in October, as I  29 understand it?  30 MR. RUSH:  Well, that was all of our —  31 THE COURT:  That's right.  32 MR. RUSH:  — deep aspirations.  33 THE COURT:  Yes.  But I didn't have any other — I don't have  34 any other difficulties, but counsel may have some  35 problems that they'd like to have considered and I'd  36 be glad to hear from them in that regard, but I don't  37 have anything other than that to suggest at the  38 moment.  Counsel can consider that and speak to me  39 again when you've had a chance to think about it.  If  40 for any reason counsel want to start a week later or  41 something like that that could be accommodated as  42 well.  Once we shut this place down sometimes it's not  43 a bad idea to leave it in that happy state for a  44 while, if there's any reason not to start on the  45 opening day of the fall term.  But failing that, I  46 think I'd tentatively suggest we start on Tuesday the  47 6th, which is the day after Labour Day. 7061  Proceedings  1 MR. RUSH:  All right.  There was one other issue that I spoke to  2 you about before and it was spoken to you in a  3 tentative way because we hadn't, that is the  4 plaintiffs hadn't, clearly put their mind to it and  5 that is the question of reconvening a portion of the  6 court's situs in Smithers.  And you may recall that  7 Your Lordship last summer indicated that you would be  8 open to considering such a proposal and I think about  9 two or three months ago I raised it with you as a  10 possibility and we were going to, the plaintiffs that  11 is, were going to make a proposal to you for hearing a  12 portion of the remaining evidence in Smithers, and  13 I -- although I don't have anything specific to say  14 about that further now, I do want to say that it is  15 our client's wish that a portion of the trial  16 reconvene in Smithers, and I ask you to keep that in  17 mind in terms of your own considerations about  18 scheduling.  19 THE COURT:  All right.  On that same point, it may be too early  20 to talk about it, but I assume counsel are giving some  21 thought also to the question of argument and how it  22 will be presented and when, that is, what sort of a  23 gap will be required, if any, between the completion  24 of the evidence and the argument.  And I don't know  25 what counsel think, if it's a case that might be  26 useful to have some kind of written argument  27 supplemented by oral argument or all written argument  28 or possibly all oral argument too.  I wouldn't  29 preclude that either.  I would be reluctant, tempted  30 but reluctant, to impose any strict time limits on  31 argument, but it may be there should be some  32 reasonable limit I guess is a good word to use to the  33 oral portion of the argument.  I wouldn't think  34 there'd be any limit at all on the written argument,  35 if there is to be a written argument.  36 MR. RUSH:  We, the plaintiffs, have put some thought to the form  37 of the argument.  It's not anything that we've shared  38 with our learned friends and it might be something to  39 do in the summer, but on the question of a period of  40 time at the conclusion of the evidence and the  41 beginning of the argument, I think we certainly have  42 thought that it would be desirable to have some break.  4 3    THE COURT:  Yes.  44 MR. RUSH:  We haven't really considered to what extent there  45 should be a break between the two, but I think it  46 would be certainly desirable from the plaintiffs  47 standpoint that that be done. 7062  Proceedings  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  MR.  THE COURT:  Well, if we finish the evidence in October, we have  time to have a break and then finish the argument by  the end of the year, wouldn't we?  RUSH:  Yes, My Lord.  Yes, we would.  COURT:  Yes.  All right.  I'll leave that with counsel to  bring up again when they think appropriate.  Mr. Goldie?  GOLDIE:  My Lord, in relation to the schedule, I see no  problem about starting the day after Labour Day.  If a  proposition is going to be made that you hear some of  the evidence in Smithers, it may be wise to start a  day after the day after Labour Day, but that's a minor  matter.  However, I wonder if my friends can give us  some indication if Mr. Sterritt, for instance, is the  last lay witness, what would -- what part of the case  or what aspect of the case would be anticipated to be  heard after Mr. Sterritt, and as I understand he's the  last witness before the court adjourns, what -- have  my friends any indication or any sense of what it is  that -- what part of their case we would be dealing  with when the court reconvenes.  MR. RUSH:  Mr. Sterritt will be the last witness before the  conclusion of the -- this session and before the  summer.  We're considering calling one further lay  witness who will be a short witness.  By short I mean  relatively speaking.  COURT:  Yes.  RUSH:  And following that there will be the introduction of  expert testimony and we have not fully decided upon  how many of those -- of the expert opinions and  summaries which we have obtained that we intend to  call by way of oral testimony. We're mindful of the  time constraints and we're mindful of other  considerations bearing on the plaintiffs' funding  position.  And so I can't give my friend a full answer  to this question now, although my friend Mr. Goldie  did correspond with Mr. Grant and I yesterday and  raised the question of which of the witnesses who we  are intending to call as expert witnesses we would be  calling by way of oral testimony and which would be  submitted by way of written report, and this of course  has -- we're going to try to answer that question as  soon as we can.  It's a question of active  consideration for us with a view, My Lord, I can  assure you not of expanding the number of expert  witnesses to be called, but rather to try and pare  down exactly what oral testimony we feel is necessary  THE  MR. 7063  Proceedings  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  THE  COURT  15  16  17  18  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  THE  COURT  32  33  MR.  RUSH:  34  35  36  37  38  THE  COURT  39  MR.  RUSH:  40  THE  COURT  41  42  MR.  GRANT  43  44  THE  COURT  45  46  47  MR.  RUSH:  to be called from the experts.  However, having said that, I should tell Your  Lordship and my friend that we will be calling a good  number of the expert opinion reports as reports and  probably not calling those experts by way of oral  testimony, and I can -- I think I can go so far as to  say at this point that we would be introducing more  reports by way of filing the reports than we will by  calling the expert witnesses, so that may assist to  some degree, but I will try to get to my learned  friends about a specific number and hopefully we'll be  able to indicate shortly just who those people will  be.  :  All right.  Thank you.  While we're on logistics,  perhaps I should just inquire about another subject,  that is, counsel's plans or suggestions about the  completion of the video evidence.  What do counsel  think about that?  I think our thinking on this, My Lord, is that we  would see a further week of court time devoted to the  viewing of the commission evidence, and taking the --  primarily the tact as we took with respect to David  Gunanoot, Fred Johnson and Jessie Sterritt, that is,  to take excerpts of their commission evidence  testimony and ask Your Lordship to view that, and I  presume my learned friends will do the same in respect  of the cross-examination.  That's our current thinking  on it, and I think that it would be possible to view  the balance of the commission evidence within a  further week.  :  All right.  Well, do you still think we can finish  Mr. Sterritt in two weeks?  Well, we -- I think, My Lord, my -- both my learned  friend Mr. Grant and I have different understandings  of how long it was that Your Lordship was prepared to  sit into the month of July.  I understood that you had  indicated your willingness to sit a week into July.  :  Yes.  Mr. Grant said that he thought it was two weeks.  :  No, Mr. Grant for the first time in his life is  wrong.  : Maybe it was just a level of undue pessimism rather  than optimism.  :  Yes.  Yes.  And I would be prepared to dedicate that  first week of July to the completion of that evidence  if that would do it.  Well, my friend Mr. Goldie indicated that he wouldn't 7064  Proceedings  1 be any longer than I would be in direct and I'm taking  2 that as some guide posts.  I hope to be through Mr.  3 Sterritt's evidence by Tuesday of next week and in  4 which case I'm hopeful that we can complete his  5 evidence.  I do not want Mr. Sterritt to be left over  6 until the fall.  I'd like to complete his evidence.  7 MR. GOLDIE:  I take it Mr. Sterritt is going to be called again  8 as an expert?  9 MR. RUSH:  That's right.  10 THE COURT:  All right.  Well, let's —  11 MR. MACAULAY: There's another matter, My Lord, that arises out  12 of the discussion of videos.  There is no problem, but  13 if we are doing excerpts we have to know -- for  14 obvious reasons we have to know a bit ahead of time  15 which witnesses are being chosen and when because we  16 then have to look at the whole video and select the  17 excerpts.  If we're told just the night before that  18 Mr. So-and-so or Mrs. So-and-so will be the next  19 witness, that means we have to sit up all night and I  20 don't think we should be required to do that.  So that  21 it will be necessary to -- either two things are  22 desirable.  First, that we fix the week to be  23 dedicated to video, I don't mean today but we fix it  24 ahead of time, and that the list and sequence be  25 provided for us a few days ahead so that we can get on  26 with the business of going through the whole video and  27 selecting the brief excerpts that we consider ought to  28 be shown to the court.  29 THE COURT:  Well, I'm sure no one will take any issue with what  30 you've said Mr. Macaulay.  I hope that that can be  31 arranged.  If, however, we're going to finish Mr.  32 Sterritt in the two weeks remaining before the end of  33 the month, then if counsel think that the following  34 week should be dedicated to video evidence, it will be  35 necessary for your friends to get at it if they're to  36 comply with the request that you've just made.  37 MR. MACAULAY: Well, the chances of Mr. Sterritt being finished  38 before the end of June are pretty slim I think if the  39 examination in chief goes until next Tuesday.  4 0 THE COURT:  Yes.  That would only leave two days for  41 cross-examination this month and --  42 MR. MACAULAY: I'm certain Mr. Goldie will take those two days.  43 MR. GOLDIE: Oh, you never can tell.  44 THE COURT:  He might finish in another two and that would still  45 leave three days in the first week of July to --  4 6 MR. MACAULAY: Do the video.  47 THE COURT:  — do some videos.  I'll leave that with you lady 7065  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  and gentlemen to work out as best you can.  MR. MACAULAY: What we will have to do is if we come to the night  before and we only get the names, then we'll have to  apply for an adjournment of that particular --  THE COURT:  Yes, I should think so.  MR. MACAULAY: Because it's — we simply can't do it.  THE COURT:  Your friends are on notice Mr. Macaulay.  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Rush?  Thank you.  At the conclusion of yesterday, Mr.  Sterritt, I had asked you to direct your attention to  a document that was Exhibit 384 and which was included  in the document book, the black document book, at tab  9, and I wonder if you would turn to that please and  just take the document from its folder and if you will  please turn to page 3, that is the page with the 3 in  the bottom right-hand corner, and in this document at  page 3, Mr. Sterritt, it says in part:  "For nearly two years, each of these villages have  appointed two representatives to a working  committee on land claims. This committee has  worked towards achievement of two main objectives.  - define external historical territorial  boundaries of member villages,  - develop criteria for negotiating a land claims  settlement with the two senior levels of  government, provincial and federal, on behalf of  the villagers.  This has been entirely a volunteer,  non-remunerative effort."  And that's the end of the passage, and I wonder if  you could tell us, Mr. Sterritt, who was on these  committees that are referred to at this point in the  report?  Yes.  I recall that Richard Benson from Sika Doak,  Glen Vowell, was on, David Milton from Kitsegukla,  Steve Robinson from Gitanmaax, and Peter Williams from  Kitwancool.  I believe Alvin Weget from Kispiox,  Charles Austin from Hagwilget, Roy Morris from  Moricetown.  At this point I don't -- at a later date  Stanley Williams I believe was involved from Kitwanga,  but not at this point.  There was -- it may have been  Willis Morgan from Kitwanga, but I'm not positive  about that.  Are the people that you've mentioned hereditary  chiefs? 7066  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes, they are.  2 Q   Now, I'd like you to look at page 10 of this document,  3 and that's with the 10 in the bottom right-hand corner  4 which I believe is in fact page 9, and the number  5 unfortunately is off at the top of the page.  6 "External Influences", item number "6", mention is  7 made of:  8  9 "The following developments, or development  10 proposals, directly threaten the Gitksan land and  11 resources:".  12  13 And there it's cited:  14  15 "- Northwest Development Plan (Kitimat-Stikine  16 Regional District,  17 - British Columbia Railway, (B.C. Government)  18 - Cancel Timber Permits (Nass River, Bowser Lake)  19 - Rim Forest Sawmill (Application for timber at  20 Shedin Creek next to Indian village of Kisagaas)  21 - CN-Meziadin Project  22 - Kitimat Pipeline  23 - Dree", D-r-e-e, "Proposal for N.W.B.C."  24  25 Yesterday, Mr. Sterritt, you made mention of  26 economic development projects in the Gitksan  27 Wet'suwet'en area.  Did the developments that are  28 referred to here under "External Influences" relate to  29 what you were saying yesterday about development  30 projects?  31 A   Yes.  These are the developments that were occupying  32 the media and announcements by politicians and firms  33 at that time.  34 Q   And by "that time" do you mean in the period up to  35 July of 1977?  36 A   Yes.  37 Q   Now, what happened -- I'm sorry?  38 A   They had been -- various of those projects had been --  39 had occupied a lot of attention in our area from 1973,  40 '74 on, and these were the proposals and plans that  41 were in place at 1977.  42 Q   And in the next sentence on page 10 marked at the  43 bottom, and I'm quoting,  44  45 "All of the above jeopardize any plans the Gitksan  46 have for economic and social development of their  47 people." 7067  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2 Can you say how that -- how that related to the  3 purpose of the submission that this brief contains?  4 A   The Gitksan were not involved in those projects.  They  5 were projects planned by the government and by  6 corporations.  They -- they had potential to do damage  7 to the territories of the Gitksan Wet'suwet'en.  Some  8 of the proposals -- when I say "damage", I mean in  9 terms of logging, in terms of the railway, and further  10 access by other corporations and other development  11 within the territory, the B.C. Railway, and the  12 proposed CN-Meziadin Project which was a railway  13 project as well.  Kitimat Pipeline was going to -- was  14 being proposed.  That would go across Wet'suwet'en  15 territory and had potential negative impacts and  16 the -- all of these, there was no benefit to the  17 Gitksan or the Wet'suwet'en.  There was potential  18 damage to the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en.  19 Some of the projects, in particular the Rim Forest  20 Sawmill, had been expanding at that time and had asked  21 for grants based on the unemployment figures of the  22 area, and much of that was Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en  23 people and yet the sawmill itself and its operations  24 were not benefiting the Gitksan or the Wet'suwet'en  25 directly.  And yet, as I say, the unemployment  26 statistics of our people were being used to justify  27 large grants by government to that particular forest  28 or that operation.  29 Q   Now, you're talking again in the period up to 1977,  30 are you?  31 A   Yes.  Yes, I am.  32 Q   All right.  What became of this request for funding  33 document which is Exhibit 384?  34 A   It was sent to the Office of Native Claims in Ottawa,  35 the federal government.  36 Q   All right.  Now, before I leave this document, I want  37 to ask you if there were certain guide-lines by which  38 this request for funding was prepared or under which  39 it was prepared?  40 A   Yes, there were.  41 Q   And what were they?  42 A   The requirements of the office, or the federal  43 government's policy through the Office of Native  44 Claims was that the -- to have a valid comprehensive  45 claim you could not have a treaty, you could not be in  46 a treaty area or covered by a treaty, required that --  47 that the area -- if you led to negotiations that there 706?  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 would be extinguishment of your land, of your  2 territory, of the hereditary chiefs' territory, and  3 the hereditary chiefs also felt that certain comments  4 had to be made to the federal government.  5 Q   Okay.  Just before you move to the hereditary chiefs,  6 was there any other requirement with respect to the  7 submission of the request for funding?  8 A   The federal government required that there be an  9 authorized group, a representative group, that  10 required that there be an incorporated body --  11 Q   All right.  12 A   -- in order to -- for a representative group, like  13 more than one village, when you have more than one  14 village, there had to be an official incorporated body  15 to make that submission or to receive loan funding at  16 a later date.  That was part of the requirement of the  17 federal government.  18 MR. RUSH:   Okay.  I'm going to ask you to look at tab 2 in the  19 black document book which is a document entitled  20 "Statement of the Federal Government on Aboriginal  21 Claims, August 8, 1973".  22 THE REGISTRAR: August?  23 MR. RUSH:  August 8th, 1973.  24 Is this a document, Mr. Sterritt, that set out  25 the -- some of the criteria that you've just referred  26 to?  If you'll just look at it.  27 MR. GOLDIE: Where does this come from?  28 MR. RUSH:  The federal government.  29 MR. GOLDIE:  It doesn't say so.  30 MR. RUSH:  I'll ask him.  31 THE WITNESS:   Yes, that is the policy.  32 MR. RUSH:  33 Q   All right.  Where does this document come from?  34 A   It comes from the federal government.  35 Q   I just ask you to look at the bottom of the first page  36 and at the bottom of the first page it says:  37  38 "The present statement is concerned with Claims  39 and Proposals for the Settlement of Long-Standing  40 Grievances.  These claims come from groups of  41 Indian people who have not entered into Treaty  42 relationship with the crown.  They find their  43 basis in what is variously described as 'Indian  44 Title', 'Aboriginal Title', 'Original Title',  45 'Native Title' or 'Usufructuary Rights'.  In  46 essence, these claims relate to the loss of  47 traditional use and occupancy of lands in certain 7069  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  parts of Canada where Indian Title was never  extinguished by Treaty or superseded by law."  MR. GOLDIE:  My Lord, I don't quite know what this document is.  It sounds obviously like a government document, but it  starts with page 89 A and goes on to page 89 D.  There's no identification on it.  I wonder if my  friend couldn't produce the document from which this  is taken, otherwise I'm reduced to saying I can't  agree to its production or its use at this time.  MR. RUSH:  Mr. Sterritt has identified the document.  MR. GOLDIE:  Well, he said it comes from the federal government.  That can range all the way from somebody mailing  something under from an MP to something having some  official status, but surely my friend has it within  his power to give me a better identification of it  than that.  COURT:  Well, was it listed on your documents in some  descriptive way Mr. Rush?  RUSH:  No, I have to say that it wasn't, My Lord, and I  thought -- I thought it was and I checked again last  night and it wasn't listed.  MACAULAY: I haven't seen this before.  That doesn't mean  that it may not be from the federal government, but I  don't know what it is.  COURT:  What does "MC 122 Canada" mean?  MACAULAY: I don't know, My Lord.  COURT:  Which —  RUSH:  I can tell Your Lordship that this document I thought  was part of a series of documents dealing with the  Office of Native Claims and I could not find this  document because it seems to -- it seems to be quite  an aged document from even the federal government's  perspective and the document comes from a body of  documents that were kept in the library of the Union  of B.C. Indian Chiefs, and that's why this document  begins at 89 A and is part of a parcel of documents  that were housed in the U.B.C.I.C. library.  MR. MACAULAY: I don't know how this witness can say it comes  from the federal government.  If we knew who the  author was --  MR. RUSH: The author is the Office of Native Claims, and if  that's being refuted, then I need to know that. I  didn't think this was going to be a contested issue.  MR. MACAULAY: We're not at that point at all. We don't know  what it is.  We haven't found it.  THE COURT:  I have some difficulty.  I don't even know if this  THE  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR. 7070  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 is the complete document.  I think it is. It rather  2 ends on a note that could be the end of it, but  3 there's nothing to even confirm that.  Well, can we  4 not proceed on a tentative basis?  5 MR. GOLDIE:  I'm quite prepared to.  I thought my friend would  6 be able to tell me --  7 THE COURT:  Yes.  8 MR. GOLDIE:  -- what it's extracted from.  I don't want to take  9 a position, but I have to say this, that there are  10 statements made in here that I will be submitting are  11 in law wrong, and I'm not prepared to have this  12 document admitted for the truth of the matters therein  13 stated.  14 THE COURT:  Yes.  15 MR. GOLDIE:  But that's beside the point.  If my friend has no  16 other means of identifying it, then I'm content to let  17 him proceed upon his assurance that he will produce  18 the document from which this is taken, if that's -- if  19 it isn't possible, then my degree of co-operation  20 begins to wilt a bit because there are statements in  21 there that I take issue with.  22 THE COURT: Well, I think you should proceed on the rather  23 uncertain tentative basis I mentioned, Mr. Rush.  I  24 think you'll have to make some inquiries as best you  25 can to see if you can satisfy your friends.  No doubt  26 they'll make some inquiries of their own in between  27 and they may find out where this document comes from  28 and what its antecedents really are, but in the  2 9 meantime I think you should go ahead.  30 MR. RUSH:  Well —  31 THE COURT:  It will not, as Mr. Goldie mentions, probably be  32 marked in chief at least as an exhibit other than for  33 identification for the time being.  34 MR. RUSH:  Very well.  I'm content to proceed on that basis.  35 I'll endeavour to take the necessary steps to prove  36 the document --  37 THE COURT:  Thank you.  3 8 MR. RUSH:  39 Q   -- following its origins.  40 Mr. Sterritt, at the bottom of page 1 of the  41 document, that is, after the cover page, and on to the  42 next page, which in this document is marked 89 A and  43 89 B, in that paragraph are there set out the criteria  44 or guide-lines which you've made reference to a moment  45 ago in your testimony?  46 A   Yes.  47 Q   All right.  I'd ask you to look down at the bottom of 7071  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A  A  Q  A  page 89 B, and I'm quoting in the last paragraph:  "The Government is now ready to negotiate with  authorized representatives of these Native peoples  on the basis that where their traditional interest  in the Lands concerned can be established, an  agreed form of compensation or benefit will be  provided to Native peoples in return for their  interest."  Now, you've made reference to authorized bodies or  representatives in your testimony.  I'm not quite sure  how you framed it, but in terms of that paragraph, is  there a guide-line there that you complied with in the  submission of the -- submission that you made in the  summer of 1977?  Yes.  That was a requirement as relayed by the federal  government representative Brian Hartley.  Okay.  Now, the requirement there is for authorized  representatives?  Yes.  And what did you understand that to be?  Either -- in their view, either a band council or if  the -- if the group presenting a comprehensive claim  was more than one village, more than one band, then it  required incorporation.  It required some legal entity  to receive any loan funding which it would qualify for  to conduct research.  Okay.  And I just ask you to look now on the last  page.  Mention is made on the last page of 89 D to the  Commissioner for Land Claims Dr. Lloyd Barber  appointed in 1969.  Do you have knowledge that such an  appointment was made and do you know Dr. Lloyd Barber?  I never did meet him and -- I heard of him subsequent  to this, but not around 1969.  All right.  I'm going to ask that that be marked as  an exhibit for identification.  THE COURT: All right.  The number?  THE REGISTRAR: 614.  What's the title of that again?  MR. RUSH:  It's a "Statement of the Federal Government on  Aboriginal Claims, August 8th 1973".  THE COURT:  614 for identification.  (EXHIBIT 614 FOR IDENTIFICATION: Document entitled  "Statement of the Federal Government on Aboriginal Claims"  MR. RUSH:  A  MR. RUSH: 7072  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  THE  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR. RUSH  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  Q   Mr. Sterritt, would you look please at tab 3, it's the  next tab?  Do you recognize the document that's  contained at tab 3?  A   Yes, I do.  Q   What is that document?  A   That's the "In All Fairness" document that was  released in 1983 by the federal government.  It  related to the native claims policy and comprehensive  claims.  COURT:  Sorry, you said in 1983?  WITNESS:   Yes.  MACAULAY: My Lord, we're just trying to find out what that  is.  Perhaps my friend could show me the document  because it's not in the tab and Mr. Grant suggested  that perhaps we got it separately last week.  RUSH:  Yes, you did.  MACAULAY: Could you show me the document?  We may have  received it.  I haven't -- neither my associate nor I  have seen it.  Mr. Sterritt, I'd like you to direct your attention to  page 11 of this document.  COURT:  What is that word at the top?  RUSH:  "Recent history".  COURT:  "Recent history".  RUSH:  And I'd ask you to look at the middle paragraph which  states:  "A policy statement in 1973 covered two areas of  contention.  The first was concerned with the  government's lawful obligations to Indian  people.  By this was meant the questions arising  from the grievances that Indian people might have  about fulfillment of existing treaties or the  actual administration of lands and other assets  under the various Indian Acts."  It goes on:  "The policy statement acknowledged another factor  that needed to be dealt with.  Because of  historical reasons - continuing use and occupancy  of traditional lands - there were areas in which  Native people clearly still had aboriginal  interests.  Furthermore these interests had not  been dealt with by treaty nor did any specific  legislation exist that took precedence over these  interests.  Since any settlement of claims based 7073  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  on these criteria could include a variety of terms  such as protection of hunting, fishing and  trapping, land title, money, as well as other  rights and benefits, in exchange for a release of  the general and undefined Native title, such  claims came to be called comprehensive claims."  Now, Mr. Sterritt, the reference to a policy  statement in 1973, what did you understand that  reference to be?  MR. GOLDIE:  First, did he ever receive this document "In All  Fairness"?  He hasn't identified it yet.  Now he's  being asked to tell us what he understood it meant.  He hasn't told us he's even paid any attention to it.  The concern that I have is obviously with respect to  using statements taken out of documents which have  been barely identified and at a later point saying  that they have some legal validity.  THE COURT:  Well, of course they wouldn't -- this document  wouldn't be evidence against your client anyway, Mr.  Goldie.  MR. GOLDIE:  I agree with that.  Nor would the previous one even  if it's proven.  :  Well, as matters now stand, the other evidence that  amounts to adoption or something of that kind, I just  don't know, but I rather gathered from what Mr.  Sterritt said he knew it by its title and I thought  had some familiarity with it. It might be useful to  put the form of the question, Mr. Rush, and see if he  does have a memory or did receive it and read it.  Mr. Sterritt, the document entitled "In All Fairness,  A Native Claims Policy", did you receive a copy of  such a document?  I was present in Ottawa when the document was released  by the Honourable John Munro, and I have a copy of it.  Have you read the document?  Yes, I have, a number of times.  The Honourable John Monroe I take it was a minister of  the federal government?  Yes, he was.  Of which department?  Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.  Now, coming back to the question that I posed before  the interjection, the statement of reference to a  policy statement in 1973, which appears on page 11,  what do you understand that to refer to?  THE COURT  MR.  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH: 7074  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 MR. GOLDIE:  I take a formal objection to him being asked the  2 question what did he understand that to refer to.  3 MR. MACAULAY: I have to support that objection, My Lord.  The  4 witness is being asked what Mr. Munro --  5 THE COURT:  No, he's being asked what he understood this  6 reference means. I don't think his answer would be  7 conclusive on what the policy statement of 1973 was,  8 but would his understanding not be admissible to  9 explain possibly his subsequent conduct?  10 MR. MACAULAY: If it's —  11 THE COURT:  For that purpose.  12 MR. MACAULAY: — for that purpose only I would have no  13 objection, but I thought the question, perhaps I  14 misunderstood my friend's question, I thought the  15 question was --  16 THE COURT:  What does this mean?  17 MR. MACAULAY: Yes.  What does it mean?  18 THE COURT:  No, I don't think he can go that far.  He can say  19 what he thought it was.  2 0 MR. RUSH:  21 Q   Would you answer the question Mr. Sterritt, please?  22 A   In 1973 the federal government announced a policy of  23 negotiating comprehensive claims in Canada and they  24 broke that into two categories, that it was for  25 specific --  26 MR. GOLDIE:  Excuse me, is this the witness' understanding of  27 what he read because in 1973 he hadn't embarked upon  28 this particular enterprise?  29 THE COURT:  Just a moment, please.  30 MR. RUSH:  Your Lordship may well recall that the series of  31 questions emerged out of guide-lines that were being  32 followed by Mr. Sterritt and hereditary chiefs in July  33 of 1977 and where those guide-lines came from, and in  34 my submission in terms of the conduct, why they did  35 what they did in July of 1973, this is relative and  36 probative -- relevant and probative, rather, and in my  37 submission, my friends have complained about the fact  38 that they don't know the origin of the document that's  39 contained at tab 2, and in my submission there's a  40 clear reference to it and -- or to a policy which Your  41 Lordship may infer is the policy that's contained at  42 tab 2, and I think a document that is identified as a  43 federal government document and I think that in my  44 submission in terms of the conduct of the hereditary  45 chiefs and Mr. Sterritt, it's "Why did you do what you  46 did?"  That's what this evidence is about, and it  47 didn't come out of the blue, it came out of the 7075  Proceedings  1 context and that's what this is designed to  2 demonstrate.  3 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, if the question is "Why did you do in 1977  4 what you did?", I thought he'd given a pretty complete  5 answer on that point.  The fact of the matter is that  6 he wasn't concerned with this aspect of the -- he  7 wasn't engaged by the hereditary chiefs to do anything  8 in 1973.  9 THE COURT:  Yes.  10 MR. GOLDIE:  And I don't understand what relevance or assistance  11 there is to having anything other than the question  12 "Why did you do what you did in 1977?", and we've had  13 that. He's told us the hereditary chief gave him  14 instructions, he wrote it down, they approved it.  15 What else is relevant?  16 MR. RUSH:  My Lord, the submission that I'm making is that in  17 1973 -- a policy was established in '73 and in fact  18 was extant in 1977, so it is the same policy as  19 occurred in 1973.  And secondly, with regard to  20 context and conduct, my friend yesterday was concerned  21 about documents which were documents which pertained  22 to certain meetings that were held by Mr. -- the  23 hereditary chiefs or Mr. Sterritt, and in my  24 submission here are federal government documents which  25 pertained to the very guide-lines which then led to  26 the hereditary chiefs and the land claims committee in  27 the summer of '77 doing something.  And I say that if  28 there are documents relevant to this subject that  29 they're perfectly admissible along with the  30 explanation of why they did what they did, and in my  31 submission this again develops the historical context  32 precisely for what happened in the summer of 1977 and  33 what happened in November of 1977.  34 THE COURT:  Well, Mr. Rush, I have some — I have some general  35 overriding misgivings about the relevance of the  36 evidence at all.  I'm not sure that it matters what  37 the witness thought or what he did in the presentation  38 of the claim or the preparation of the presentation of  39 the claim, but that's not your friend's objection, so  40 I'm going to assume that there's some relevance.  41 MR. GOLDIE:  I'd just like to point out, My Lord, that the  42 document which was introduced through this witness,  43 Exhibit 384, I shouldn't say introduced through this  44 witness, but --  4 5 THE COURT:  384.  46 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, at tab 9.  4 7 THE COURT:  Yes. 7076  Proceedings  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  GOLDIE:  That is the actual request for funding for research  for land claims.  COURT:  Yes.  GOLDIE:  And Mr. Sterritt has testified, if I understand it  correctly, that he prepared this under the  instructions of the hereditary chiefs.  COURT:  Yes.  GOLDIE:  Now, there isn't one mention in there of federal  government policies or guide-lines or anything else,  and why should it be necessary for us to get into  these other documents, unless he is going to say that  the hereditary chiefs had these other documents before  them?  It's they who were seeking to comply with  guide-lines, it was they who were making the  application.  Mr. Sterritt has told us that he was  simply following their instructions.  What I'm  concerned about is getting off into issues which are  unnecessary to get into and in respect of which this  witness has disqualified himself from giving evidence,  namely, the reasons for the hereditary chiefs doing  things.  RUSH:  Oh, he's never disqualified himself for giving  evidence on that.  COURT:  I think your friend is referring to what happened on  discovery which I'm not privy to.  RUSH:  Yes, he is.  That's exactly what he's referring to.  COURT:  But my problem is simply that I think these  documents are, to the extent they're proven to the  federal government, admissible as possible admissions  by the federal government, if they amount to  admissions, I don't know if they do or not, and to  that extent I think they're admissible.  I'm not  convinced that there's any probative value in that  even in the presentation and preparation of the  presentation of a claim.  This case has to be decided  on legal rights that existed at the date of the  issuance of the writ, if at all, and what the  plaintiffs through their agents did in pursuing other  remedies seems to me to be beside the point.  How does  it advance the plaintiffs' case, Mr. Rush, to have him  show how he tried to comply with requirements in the  pursuance of an alternative remedy?  MR. RUSH:  Well, My Lord, what I say is that this — these  documents show why the hereditary chiefs in the summer  of 1977 sent a brief at all, why did they do what they  did, and that the evidence -- and there is the  necessity for oral evidence to be given on the subject  MR.  THE  MR.  THE 7077  Proceedings  1 of the conduct of the chiefs in instructing a brief to  2 be sent to Ottawa to obtain research funding.  3 THE COURT:  Am I wrong in this, Mr. Rush, that if as a result of  4 these processes the parties came within a hair's  5 breadth of signing a settlement that would have  6 transferred all the claim lands to the plaintiffs  7 absolutely but didn't sign it, it would have no  8 evidentiary force at all, would it, that they prepared  9 claims, they presented them and negotiated, they  10 almost reached a deal, still wouldn't mean anything in  11 the context of this litigation, would it?  12 MR. RUSH:  Well, no, it wouldn't.  But you see, My Lord, in this  13 litigation in terms -- there are two arguments that  14 are advanced here where the element of this evidence  15 is relevant, one is the question of the status of the  16 Tribal Council.  Much has been made in  17 cross-examination about the nature of the Tribal  18 Council.  Is it a body of itself?  19 THE COURT:  Yes.  20 MR. RUSH:  Does it represent the hereditary chiefs?  Does it  21 represent band council?  Now, in my submission an  22 argument will be made by the province here about the  23 status of the Tribal Council.  I think it is relevant  24 for you to know how the Tribal Council came into being  25 and this evidence is directed at the origins of the  26 formal association of the Tribal Council, and in my  27 submission you'll hear my submission that it's traced  28 back to the requirement in these documents.  29 That's the first point.  The second point is that  30 the province has amended their statement of defence to  31 raise an issue of acquiescence and laches, and the  32 question is -- the question that Your Lordship may  33 have is, in the face of the Calder decision, why is it  34 that the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs  35 didn't bring their action in 1973?  Why didn't they  36 bring it in 1975?  What were they doing?  And this  37 evidence tells you what they were doing, what they  38 decided to do as the best course of action for them at  39 that time.  And for that reason it's relevant, and  40 this is where I say that on the question of the  41 historical foundation for the conduct of the  42 hereditary chiefs that it goes back to documents and  43 events that came from the federal government and why  44 they chose at that time to take that course of action.  45 And I say, My Lord, that it is highly relevant on the  46 question of what the hereditary chiefs did from 1977  47 onward, from 1973 onward. 707?  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Proceedings  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  THE COURT: All right.  Thank you.  Anything further Mr. Goldie  or Mr. Macaulay?  MR. GOLDIE:  Well, I had understood the witness to give all that  he could say from his own knowledge on these matters  and my objection remains that he is not at liberty to  say what influenced those who instructed him.  He said  "I was told to do this.  I was employed to do this.",  and there's been a fairly careful sequence of events  that he's followed.  He's stated that he embarked upon  the business of preparing for this litigation a long  time ago and there's been no challenge to that.  My  objection is simply getting us into documents which  inevitably extend the cross-examination into matters  which I don't think have any relevance.  THE COURT:  Mr. Macaulay?  MR. MACAULAY: I have no submission to make on this document.  This document is a federal document, we know where it  came from and its date, and we have evidence as to its  author, unlike the other one which I don't know  anything about.  What relevance it has is a mute  point.  THE COURT: All right.  Well, I think there is some logical or  intellectual force in what Mr. Goldie says, but I'm  not satisfied that it would be safe to exclude  evidence of the kind that I'm hearing now, or which  Mr. Rush wants me to hear, although I'm not sure that  it is going to be very helpful at the end of the day,  but it may be and for that reason I will allow you to  proceed Mr. Rush.  When I say I'm not sure it will be helpful, I'm  saying that I have a sense that putting the documents  in may be as far -- well, putting the documents in and  having Mr. Sterritt say what he did from the time he  became interested in this matter is about as far as  the evidence will likely carry me, so I'll leave it to  you to proceed, as I'm authorized to do, with those  views in mind.  You may go ahead.  MR.  RUSH:  Q  A  Now, I had asked you Mr. Sterritt concerning the  statement on page 11 of the "In All Fairness"  document, what did you understand the policy statement  in 1973 to refer to?  The Office of Native Claims had conducted a review of  the number of claimants in Canada that could negotiate  at any given time.  The policy prior to that had been  six claimant groups across Canada would be eligible to  negotiate and one -- of those six, one in British 7079  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Q  14  15  A  16  THE  COURT  17  MR.  RUSH:  18  THE  COURT  19  MR.  RUSH:  20  THE  COURT  21  22  MR.  RUSH:  23  Q  24  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  32  A  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  Q  45  46  47  A  Columbia.  The review that was conducted considered  more claimant groups coming to the table, which in  British Columbia would have possibly increased to two  and would have qualified the Gitksan Wet'suwet'en to  negotiate.  When this policy -- when this document was  released, it was obvious that the policy was carried  on as before.  There would only be six claimant groups  in Canada, one of which would continue in B.C..  There  was no opportunity for the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en to  negotiate their comprehensive claim, their aboriginal  title and rights, with the federal government of  Canada.  Now, you're talking about the document of 1983, are  you?  Yes, I am.  :  I'm sorry, do we know this document is 1983?  '83.  Yes.  :  It doesn't say so anywhere, does it?  I think it does.  :  Does it?  Well, you don't need to show me where.  I'm just going to write 1983 on it.  Now, Mr. Sterritt, my question to you was in the last  answer were you referring to the document "In All  Fairness"?  Yes, I am.  All right.  Now, my question is to direct your mind  back to 1977 and in terms of the policy that was in  place at that time what did you understand that policy  document to be that guided what you did in the summer  of 1977?  The document of 1977 -- pardon me, the policy that  guided the document that we developed in the summer of  1977 basically set out some criteria, the criteria  I've already stated, that there must not have been a  treaty in the area, that certain historical  considerations had to be given, that if negotiations  were undertaken from the perspective of the federal  government there would be an extinguishment of the  aboriginal title of the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en  territories, which the hereditary chiefs disagreed  with.  That was the position of the federal  government, and that there must be an authorized body.  Was that -- was that the policy as stated in the  statement of the federal government on aboriginal  claims dated August 8th, 1973?  Yes. 7080  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   Now, in the document that's in front of you, which is  2 the "In All Fairness" document, on the page 13, which  3 is obliterated at the bottom, under the heading "The  4 1973 Policy Implemented", the second to last paragraph  5 states:  6  7 "The Office of Native Claims was established in  8 1974 to represent the Minister of Indian Affairs  9 and Northern Development and the federal  10 government for the purposes of settling  11 comprehensive claims and specific claims through  12 the negotiation of agreements."  13  14 Was that your understanding in 1974 or perhaps --  15 I'm sorry, in 1977?  16 A   Yes.  17 Q  18  19 "Comprehensive claims submitted to ONC are  20 carefully analyzed in terms of both their  21 historical accuracy and legal merit, the latter  22 being done by the Department of Justice.  Claimant  23 groups are required to provide as much information  24 and documentation as possible in support of their  25 claim."  26  27 Was that your understanding in 1977?  2 8 A   Yes, it was.  29 Q   And I'd just ask you to turn to page 14 at this first  30 full paragraph.  31  32 "Funding for researching, developing and  33 negotiating Native claims is provided by other  34 sections of the Department in the form of  35 contributions and loans.  Where the grounds of a  36 claim have still to be established, contributions  37 may be made to help with the process.  Loans are  38 made to claimants whose claims are accepted for  39 negotiation for the purpose of further developing  40 their positions and the actual conduct of  41 negotiations.  Once the claim is settled, these  42 loans are repayable as a first charge against  43 monetary compensation that may be granted."  44  45 Now, Mr. Sterritt, in 1977 — in July of 1977 was  46 that your understanding?  4 7 A   Yes, it was. 7081  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  MR.  THE  THE  THE  MR.  THE  THE  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  GOLDIE:  I'm sorry, in July '77 he had an understanding  stated in a 1983 document?  Was that the question?  RUSH:  Mr. Goldie, in the 1983 document reference is made to  a 1973 policy which had been implemented, I presume,  through the periods from 1973 to 1983, and I presume  that was the policy there and I'm asking the witness  if that was in fact his understanding at that time,  and I think that's a perfectly logical and relevant  question.  I think that's what he's been saying was he  understood in 1977 that the passages that were read to  him were the policy that was in force at that time,  that is, in 1977.  WITNESS:   They were mentioned on that page as well as being  one of the Gitksan groups, Gitksan-Carrier Tribal  Council on page 13.  My Lord, may this document be marked as the next  exhibit, please?  COURT:  Yes.  REGISTRAR: Exhibit 615, tab 3.  (EXHIBIT 615:  Tab 3 of Volume 1, document entitled  "In All Fairness, a Native Claims Policy".)  THE COURT  THE  MR. RUSH  COURT: Are you finished with this document, Mr.  RUSH:  Yes, My Lord.  COURT:  All right.  That's tab —  REGISTRAR: Tab 3.  Rush?  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  It was tab 4, was it not?  No, it was tab 3.  Tab 3. Mr. Rush, I understand there's  emergency downstairs.  I wonder if this  convenient time to take the adjournment?  Yes.  Thank you.  Thank you.  a minor  would be  REGISTRAR: Order in court.  Court will recess.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR THE MORNING RECESS)  I hereby certify the foregoing to  be a true and accurate transcript  of the proceedings herein to the  best of my skill and ability.  Tanita French, Official Reporter  -h2 N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.) 7082  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED AT 11:30 A.M.)  2  3 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Ready to proceed, my lord.  4 THE COURT:  Mr. Macaulay.  5 MR. MACAULAY:  My lord, we have finally got a copy of the  6 document "IN ALL FAIRNESS," which we had not seen  7 before.  It's a 1981 document, actually.  It was  8 published in Ottawa in 1981 under the authority of the  9 Honourable John C. Munro, then the Minister of Indian  10 Affairs and Northern Development.  11 THE COURT:  1981?  12 MR. MACAULAY:  1981.  13 THE COURT:  Thank you.  14 MR. MACAULAY:  In both languages.  15 THE COURT:  Oh, I'm glad to hear that.  Thank you.  Mr. Rush.  16 MR. RUSH:  17 Q   Thank you.  Mr. Sterritt, after the submission of July  18 of 1977 had been sent, what next happened in relation  19 to the work that you were doing as Director of the  20 Office of Land Claims?  21 A   Continued the meetings with the hereditary chiefs to  22 do a map of the external boundaries of the Gitksan  23 territories.  The -- there was a meeting in -- later  24 in the summer of 1977, when the hereditary chiefs  25 reviewed some of the work that had been going on for  26 the last couple of years in the communities to do the  27 external boundary, to come up with a -- a  28 generalized -- a general external boundary for the  29 Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en -- or the Gitksan territories.  30 The Wet'suwet'en, as I mentioned, were making --  31 having other considerations at that point.  32 Q   All right.  Now, was there a meeting in Kispiox in  33 November, on November the 7th, 1977, with hereditary  34 chiefs in which a presentation was made to the  35 Honourable Hugh Faulkner?  36 A   Yes.  Yes, there was.  37 Q   Okay.  And how did that come about?  38 A   The hereditary chiefs felt quite strongly that the  39 minister should come to their territories to receive  40 the map and a declaration, and finally the date that  41 was agreed upon was November 7th, 1977, and the  42 Minister of Indian Affairs, Hugh Faulkner, and his  43 parliamentary secretary, Iona Campagnola, flew to  44 Kispiox by helicopter to receive the map and the  45 declaration.  46 Q   Okay.  Would you turn to tab 4 of the black document  47 book that's in front of you, please?  There are two 7083  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 photographs on page 1, a document marked page 1.  That  2 is to say, there are two colour photocopies of  3 photographs on the page marked 1 in tab 4.  Do you  4 recognize the top photograph?  5 A   Yes, I do.  Those are houses west of the community  6 hall in Kispiox, and the top photograph are students  7 standing outside the -- the school area at the fence  8 waiting for the minister to arrive.  9 Q   Were you present at that time?  10 A   Yes, I was standing outside of the hall.  11 Q   Okay.  And the second photograph on that page?  12 A   That's a photograph inside the community hall.  The  13 Minister of Indian Affairs, Hugh Faulkner, is the tall  14 figure in the right hand.  Not the far right hand,  15 but —  16 MR. GOLDIE:  With the turtle-neck sweater?  17 THE WITNESS:  With the turtle-neck sweater, yes.  And beside him  18 is Gitludahl in the very immediate corner, Gitludahl,  19 Moses Morrison.  And next to him is Gwagl'lo, Ernie  20 Hyzimes.  Next to him is Luus, Jeff Harris Sr.  Next  21 to him is Lelt, Fred Johnson, who is on commission  22 this week -- or last week.  Behind the minister is  23 Iona Campagnola and then William Blackwater Sr.,  24 Baskyelaxha.  And the lady looking towards William  25 Blackwater is Miluulak, Alice Jeffery.  And the -- the  26 slogan that you see there is a slogan that was phrased  27 by Antgulilbix, Mary Johnson, "Peace, Truth,  28 Humility," which was the basis of 'miixk'aax or down,  29 which was floated at this -- eagle down -- which was  30 floated at this meeting.  31 Q   This meeting occurred in what hall?  32 A   The Kispiox Community Hall in Kispiox.  33 Q   About how many people were present?  34 A  About 300 people.  35 Q   Okay.  You mentioned Iona Campagnola.  Did she -- was  36 she a -- was she related in some way to the government  37 of the day?  38 A   She was the Member of Parliament for the Skeena riding  39 at the time and the parliamentary secretary for the  40 Minister of Indian Affairs.  41 MR. RUSH:  I propose marking that one page as an exhibit, my  42 lord.  43 THE COURT:  615.  44 THE REGISTRAR:  616, my lord.  4 5 THE COURT:  Thank you.  46 THE REGISTRAR:  Tab 4.  47 7084  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (EXHIBIT 616 - Tab 4, Colour Photocopies of Two  2 Photos)  3 MR. RUSH:  4 Q   Please go to tab 5, Mr. Sterritt, and the first  5 photograph.  Who is that in the foreground?  Is that  6 again the Minister of Indian Affairs, Mr. Faulkner?  7 A   Yes, it is.  And there are two hereditary chiefs on  8 either side of him.  The hereditary chief on the  9 left -- you see part of him -- is Gwagl'lo, Ernest  10 Hyzimes, and on the right is Ts'aa'uulst, David  11 Milton.  And then the -- the young man in the Am  12 Halayt and the blanket is Robert Sabastian.  He's  13 Wet'suwet'en.  And he conducted the -- the Halayt, the  14 Sim Halayt dance at the ceremony.  15 Q   All right.  And in the bottom photograph do you  16 recognize other hereditary chiefs or other people that  17 are in the photograph?  18 A   Yes.  In addition to Miluulak, who is the lady facing  19 us, Alice Jeffery, Wadii, Ray Jones, is the gentleman  20 in the checked sports coat talking to her.  21 Immediately behind Miluulak is Gisdaywa, Alfred  22 Joseph.  And there are other hereditary chiefs in the  23 background that I can't recognize because of the  24 darkness, but up on the landing is Dii Hadix, Fred  25 Wale, from the House of Gwoimt.  26 Q   Now, what is his name again, please?  27 A   Dii Hadix.  28 MR. RUSH:  Can we have the spelling of that, please?  29 THE TRANSLATOR:  D-i-i —  30 THE COURT:  Thanks.  31 THE TRANSLATOR:  He doesn't need it.  32 MR. RUSH:  Pardon me?  33 THE COURT:  We need it for the record.  I don't need it.  34 MR. RUSH:  May that be marked as the next exhibit, please?  35 THE COURT:  Yes, 617.  36 THE REGISTRAR:  617, tab 5.  37  38 (EXHIBIT 617 - Tab 5, Colour Photocopies of Two  39 Photos)  40  41 MR. RUSH:  42 Q   If you'll turn to the next exhibit, Mr. Sterritt.  43 Excuse me, the next tab.  Some colour photocopies are  44 contained here.  Do you recognize the people that are  45 depicted in the top photograph?  46 A   Yes, I do.  This is as the minister entered the hall.  47 The hereditary chiefs lined each side of the doorway 7085  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 and into the hall.  And the hereditary chief on the  2 left is Gyet'mskaniist, Willie Simms.  The next  3 hereditary chief is Smogelgem, Leonard George.  The  4 next hereditary chief is Max Lax Lex, Johnny David.  5 Q   That's the shorter man standing between the two taller  6 ones?  7 A   Yes, it is.  8 Q   Yes.  9 A   The next two are hereditary chiefs, and I've -- I've  10 forgotten their names at this point.  They're  11 Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs.  But the third from  12 Johnny David is Peter Alfred.  13 Q   And is his name Kanoots?  14 A   Yes.  15 Q   All right.  Do you recognize any other hereditary  16 chiefs in that photo?  17 A   No.  The — I — no, I don't.  18 Q   All right.  Now, in the bottom photo on that page,  19 page number 3.  20 A   The gentleman -- the hereditary chief facing the  21 camera is Gitludahl, Moses Morrison, my uncle.  Next  22 to him is Delgamuukw, Albert Tait.  You can see a  23 white-haired gentleman probably sitting down.  That is  24 Lelt, Fred Johnson.  25 Q   It looks like Alice Jeffery again there; is that  26 right?  27 A   That's Alice Jeffery, yes.  2 8 Q   And behind her?  29 A   I don't recognize that gentleman from that picture.  30 The next person is a Kitwancool hereditary chief.  Bob  31 Bright later became Niislaganoos.  And I can't make  32 out from the picture the next hereditary chief.  33 MR. RUSH:  May that be marked as an exhibit, please?  34 THE COURT:  Yes, 618.  35 THE REGISTRAR:  618, tab 6.  36  37 (EXHIBIT 618 - Tab 6, Colour Photocopies of Two  38 Photos)  39  4 0    MR. RUSH:  41 Q   If you'll turn to tab 7, Mr. Sterritt?  I just ask you  42 if you recognize any of the individuals that are shown  43 in the top photograph of exhibit number -- excuse  44 me — tab 7?  45 A   Yes, sitting at the table is Gisdaywa, Alfred Joseph.  46 The leading gentleman, the leading hereditary chief is  47 Chuck Austin, Charles Austin.  Behind him is 7086  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Gyet'mskaniist, Willie Simms.  Behind him is  2 Smogelgem, Leonard George.  Behind him is Max Lax Lex,  3 Johnny David.  Behind with glasses is Luus, Jeff  4 Harris.  And I can't make out the face of the chief  5 who is looking downwards.  6 THE COURT:  Who is the one on the extreme right?  7 THE WITNESS:  Charles Austin.  8 MR. RUSH:  9 Q   And in the bottom of the two photographs do you  10 recognize individuals there?  11 A   Yes, on the left is Tsibasaa, Stanley Wilson.  Moving  12 to the right in the picture is -- the next chief is  13 Gwagl'lo, Ernest Hyzimes.  In front of him in the  14 white blanket is Ts'aa'uulst, David Milton.  And they  15 are conducting the Sim Halayt as it goes around the  16 auditorium, and the young gentleman dancing is Robert  17 Sabastian.  And I don't recognize the back of the Am  18 Halayt in the right-hand corner of the picture.  19 Q   It appears that the person you identified as David  20 Milton is holding something in his left hand.  What is  21 that?  22 A   He's drumming.  And Ernest Hyzimes, Gwagl'lo, is  23 singing.  They're both singing, but David Milton is  2 4 drumming.  25 MR. RUSH:  All right.  May that be the next exhibit, please?  26 THE COURT:  Yes, 619.  27 THE REGISTRAR:  619, tab 7.  28  29 (EXHIBIT 619 - Tab 7,  Colour Photocopies of Two  30 Photos)  31  32 MR. RUSH:  33 Q   Please refer to tab 8, Mr. Sterritt.  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   Just before you do, there appears to be cups and bowls  36 and cutlery on the table.  Was there food served at  37 this presentation?  38 A   Yes, this was a feast.  It was put on by the  39 hereditary chiefs.  40 Q   Now, if you'll turn to tab 8, please.  Can you  41 identify the figure standing there?  42 A   Yes, Baskyelaxha, Billy Blackwater, is there reading  43 the declaration to the Minister of Indian Affairs, and  44 he is at the -- he has the talking stick.  That's the  45 carved figure, carved pole on the -- on that corner of  46 the picture there.  47 Q   It seems to be in the foreground -- 7087  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   -- just next to the podium there.  All right.  Are you  3 able to recognize any of the individuals in the  4 background?  5 A   No, I can't.  6 Q   All right.  And the second of the two photographs on  7 that page, the lower of the two, can you identify the  8 person in the foreground?  9 A   The person on the immediate right sitting facing away  10 is Dinii, Alvin Weget, and he spoke at this -- as one  11 of the hereditary chiefs who spoke.  The hereditary  12 chief facing the camera and standing up with the  13 talking stick in his hand is Wii Yagaa deets', Eli  14 Turner.  And to his -- to the right or to the left of  15 him in the picture is Gitludahl, Moses Morrison.  And  16 then the face right beside Gitludahl, Moses Morrison,  17 is Delgamuukw, Albert Tait.  18 Q   All right.  Eli Turner is holding the talking stick.  19 He is a hereditary chief?  20 A   Yes, he is.  21 Q   And were there other hereditary chiefs who spoke at  22 that meeting apart from Baskyelaxha and Eli Turner and  23 Dinii, Alvin Weget?  24 A   Yes, there were.  Kliiyem lax haa, Martha Brown.  25 Johnny David, Max Lax Lex.  Either Alfred Joseph or  26 Charles Austin from Hagwilget.  Jeffery Morgan, Axti  27 hix, from Kitwanga.  I don't recall the name of the  28 chief.  It may have been -- no, I don't recall the  29 name of the chief from Kitsegukla.  And I don't recall  30 the name of the chief from Gyetemgaldoo from -- or his  31 representative from Gitanmaax.  32 Q   Now, was there a presentation made at this meeting?  33 A   Yes, William Blackwater, Baskyelaxha, presented a map  34 of the external boundaries of the Gitksan and the  35 Wet'suwet'en territories.  It was a -- a map as a  36 result of the work to that time.  It was not -- it was  37 a -- it was not to be the final map.  It was an effort  38 to represent the external boundaries.  It was a first  39 attempt.  And he presented that map, he read a  40 declaration and then presented the declaration to the  41 Minister of Indian Affairs.  42 MR. RUSH:  May I mark this now, my lord, as the next exhibit --  4 3    THE COURT:  Yes.  44    MR. RUSH:  — the photographs?  4 5    THE COURT:  62 0.  46    THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 620.  47 70?  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (EXHIBIT 620 -  Tab 8, Colour Photocopies of Two  2 Photos)  3  4 THE COURT:  62 0 is tab 8.  5 THE REGISTRAR:  Is tab 8.  6 MR. RUSH:  Yes.  7 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you.  8 MR. RUSH:  9 Q   I'd like to now ask you to produce to the witness  10 Exhibit 113.  11 Now, I'm showing you a document which is exhibited  12 as 113, and it's described as the Territories of the  13 Gitksan and Carrier Indians, Presentation to the  14 Government of Canada, the Honourable Hugh Faulkner,  15 Minister of Indian Affairs, Kispiox, B.C., November 7,  16 1977.  Now, was this the map that was presented to the  17 Honourable Hugh Faulkner during the meeting that you  18 have just identified?  19 A   This is a copy of the map.  The -- the map -- apart  20 from this being a copy, this is the map, yes.  21 Q   Okay.  I had two questions for you.  This is a copy of  22 what was presented to the Honourable Hugh Faulkner?  23 A   Yes, it is.  24 Q   Okay.  The map that was presented to the minister, was  25 there one of that map, one original or two originals,  26 or one copy of that map?  27 A   There was two maps made.  The minister, between the  28 time he let Kispiox and got to Vancouver, lost the  29 first one, and we sent him the second one.  It was --  30 the second one was identical.  That would be a copy of  31 this.  32 Q   Okay.  All right.  Okay.  Mr. Sterritt, the map  33 that -- the photocopy of the map that's Exhibit 113,  34 can you just describe how this map was prepared, if  35 you know?  36 A   The boundary that appears here was a result of a -- of  37 a number of meetings.  38 Q   The boundary that you're referring to, is that the  39 parallel double line that goes around the land area  40 shown on the photocopy?  41 A   Yes, it is.  42 Q   All right.  Yes.  43 A   There was a series of meetings in which portions of  44 the boundary were reviewed with hereditary chiefs, and  45 then there was a meeting --  46 Q   Were these meetings of hereditary chiefs?  47 A   Yes, they were meetings of hereditary chiefs. 7089  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   Yes.  2 A  And they were directing me.  And then there was a  3 meeting where the Gitksan hereditary chiefs approved  4 the boundary under the -- under the limitations that I  5 have already described:  that it was a first and a  6 best -- first effort at that time.  And then later the  7 Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs decided to be a part of  8 the presentation and -- and -- and be part of the  9 Gitksan hereditary chiefs who would do this  10 presentation, and I had a separate meeting with the  11 Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs in Moricetown at which  12 time they described the outer boundary of their  13 territory.  14 Q   All right.  Do you recall who was present during  15 the -- well, firstly I should say approximately how  16 many Gitksan hereditary chiefs participated in  17 describing to you the external boundary that's shown  18 on this map, Exhibit 113?  19 A   In the smaller sessions when we did portions of the  20 boundary there was in the neighbourhood of 12 because  21 we went to different communities.  22 Q   Is that 12 in each community?  23 A   Yes, 8 to 12 hereditary chiefs in each community.  24 Q   Yes.  25 A   The meeting where the boundary was reviewed for all of  26 the communities there was about 50 hereditary chiefs.  27 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, are you talking now about the  28 Wet'suwet'en or are you talking --  29 THE WITNESS:  I'm not talking Wet'suwet'en yet.  Then after that  30 there was a meeting with Wet'suwet'en hereditary  31 chiefs in Moricetown.  32 MR. RUSH:  33 Q   About what time was that?  34 A  About October, towards the end of October.  Pardon me.  35 It could have been early October.  Sometime in  36 October.  37 Q   Of 1977?  38 A   Of 1977.  39 Q   All right.  And who among the Wet'suwet'en hereditary  40 chiefs did you meet with?  41 A  Woos, Roy Morris.  Max Lax Lex, Johnny David.  Satsan,  42 David Dennis.  43 Q   If you'll just -- my lord, Woos is 82 on the  44 Plaintiffs' list.  And I think you said Satsan?  45 A   Yes.  46 Q   And my recollection is, my lord, that that's  47 S-a-t-s-a-n.  Yes, go ahead. 7090  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Samooh, Moses David.  2 Q   That's 57 on the Plaintiffs' list, my lord.  3 A   Charles Austin.  Johnny Mack, Klo um khun.  4 Q   That's 36.  5 A   Tsibasaa, Mary George.  6 THE REGISTRAR:  1597.  7 THE WITNESS:  Misaloos, Victor Jim.  That's all I recall at this  8 time.  9 MR. RUSH:  10 Q   About how many hereditary chiefs of the Wet'suwet'en  11 were present at that time; do you remember?  12 A   Fifteen.  13 Q   Now, the Territories of the Gitksan and Carrier  14 Indians map that's Exhibit 113, did that include the  15 territories of the Kitwancool-Gitksan hereditary  16 chiefs?  17 A   Yes, it did.  18 Q   And can you say why?  19 A   There was some uncertainty leading up to the meeting  20 whether the Kitwancool would combine their  21 comprehensive claim along with the other Gitksan  22 villages.  And they were having meetings.  They held  23 meetings at the time about this and decided that they  24 would continue on their own, but in the meantime the  25 map had been prepared and submitted, and so the  26 Kitwancool territory is included in that.  27 Q   Okay.  Now, I just want to direct your attention to  28 handwritten at the bottom, "Prepared by N.J. Sterritt  29 November 1977."  Did you write that on there?  30 A   It looks like my printing, yes.  31 Q   And what was intended by the use of the word "Prepared  32 by"?  33 A   I'm not clear on your question.  34 Q   Well, when you say -- if that was your printing, is  35 that -- is that so?  Was that -- what was meant by the  36 words "Prepared by"?  37 A   To demonstrate that this map had been prepared by me  38 on the instructions of the hereditary chiefs.  39 Q   Okay.  Now, when you say "Prepared by," what do you  40 mean by that?  41 A   Drafted, drawn based on the meetings that I had  42 participated in with the hereditary chiefs.  43 Q   Okay.  Now, was this map intended to be a final  44 depiction of the territories of the Gitksan and  45 Carrier?  46 A   No, it was not.  47 Q   To your knowledge, prior to the presentation to the 7091  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Minister of Indian Affairs of this map, Exhibit 113,  had there ever been a map setting out the territories  of the Gitksan and Carrier Indians prepared?  A   Not to my knowledge.  Q   Now, if I can just set that aside, my lord.  I'm  finished with that.  Mr. Sterritt, I want to direct  you, please, to tab 10 in the document book.  Please  refer to that.  Do you recognize that document?  A   Yes, I do.  Q   What is it?  A   It's the -- it's a copy of the Gitksan -- Gitksan-  Carrier Declaration that was read to the minister by  William Blackwater on November 7th, 1977, and  presented to him.  Q   Okay.  And what was the purpose of presenting this  Gitksan-Carrier Declaration to the minister at that  time?  A   The hereditary chiefs had their own statements to make  and chose their representatives from each village to  make those statements, but they also felt that a  strong statement should be left with the minister, a  declaration, and this was the purpose of this  declaration.  To?  To the minister.  I'm sorry, this was the purpose of this declaration.  To do what?  To make that strong statement, to -- to have their  statement in front of the Government of Canada and  British Columbia.  All right.  My lord, this is already exhibited as  Exhibit 340.  COURT:  Oh, is it.  340?  RUSH:  Yes.  COURT:  Thank you.  Not in this form, is it?  RUSH:  Well, you have -- I have provided the only copy that  I have, which is a coloured copy.  COURT:  All right.  RUSH:  And we have photocopies.  I don't know the form that  it was presented in.  COURT:  That's all right.  RUSH:  I presume that a photocopy of the document has been  earlier exhibited.  COURT:  All right.  RUSH:  Q   Now, Mr. Sterritt, at the bottom of the declaration it  says, and I'm quoting in part:  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  Q  A  Q  A  MR. RUSH: 7092  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2 "Today, the Governments of Canada and British  3 Columbia undertake a bold new journey to  4 negotiate with the Gitksan and Carrier  5 People."  6  7 I'm just going to ask you just to pause there before I  8 finish the quote.  What was meant by that, if you  9 know?  10 A   The hereditary chiefs felt that through the  11 development of the -- of their negotiating position  12 and through political efforts that they could initiate  13 negotiations with the Province and with Canada and  14 Canada -- the Government of Canada at that time had --  15 had a policy of negotiation.  16 Q   Okay.  Now, I just wish to carry on, and I'm quoting:  17  18 "During this journey, we will fulfill the  19 hopes and aspirations of our ancestors and  20 the needs of future generations."  21  22 And then in a new paragraph, I'm still quoting:  23  24 "Let us begin negotiations."  25  26 A new paragraph:  27  28 "Recognize our Sovereignty, recognize our  29 rights, so that we may fully recognize  30 yours."  31  32 Now, were there negotiations with either the  33 Government of Canada or the Government of British  34 Columbia that followed this declaration?  35 A   No, there were not, not for the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en.  36 Q   Were there any meetings with representatives of either  37 of the governments?  38 A   Yes, there was.  The -- their representative, the  39 negotiator for British Columbia, was Brian Hartley at  40 the time, and on this day, as well as at least on two  41 occasions subsequent to this, there were meetings with  42 Brian Hartley to discuss the -- what, from the Federal  43 Government's perspective, negotiations would involve.  44 MR. GOLDIE:  Excuse me, is Mr. Hartley for B.C. or for the  45 Federal Government?  4 6    THE WITNESS:  Pardon me.  He was the Federal Government  47 negotiator for -- in British Columbia. 7093  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  2 THE WITNESS:  And during that time the hereditary chiefs and  3 members of the Tribal Council met with Brian Hartley,  4 and he outlined his experiences in other areas to  5 them, and they had questions about the nature of  6 negotiations and -- and the process that was being  7 undertaken by the Federal Government in terms of other  8 tribal groups not getting into what was happening but  9 what the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en could accept -- or could  10 expect.  11 MR. RUSH:  12 Q   Okay.  Were those meetings with Mr. Hartley what could  13 be described as negotiation meetings?  14 A   No, they couldn't.  They were --  15 Q   Was there any negotiations after that time, after  16 those meetings with Mr. Hartley?  17 A   No, there were not.  18 Q   Now, just before I leave the document, Exhibit 340,  19 Mr. Sterritt, were there meetings at which you  20 attended where the hereditary chiefs contributed to  21 the preparation of this declaration?  22 A   Yes.  The hereditary chiefs were quite concerned with  23 what the statements would make -- what the declaration  24 would say, and they contributed to the paragraphs.  25 They made comments.  For example, "This is written on  26 our totem poles."  That was a direct conclusion by a  27 representative from Gitwangak, Willis Morgan, and he  28 discussed that.  Other hereditary chiefs felt that  29 these -- they reviewed the statement and made  30 comments.  And it was a meeting of about 10 to 12  31 hereditary chiefs and members of the Tribal Council,  32 who were also hereditary chiefs.  33 Q   In the document as well it indicates that the -- it  34 makes reference to British Columbia in the second --  35 third to last paragraph.  That's the large paragraph.  36 In the last line it says:  37  38 "These negotiations require mutual and  39 positive participation by the Federal  4 0 Government and the Provincial Government."  41  42 Were there any negotiations with the Provincial  43 Government?  44 A   No, there were not.  45 Q   After this meeting of November the 7th, 1977, what  46 tasks, if any, did the Land Claims Office take up?  47 A   The Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Land Claims Office began to 7094  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 set up a document centre, a library.  A librarian was  2 hired to carry out that task.  The hereditary chiefs  3 set up an advisory committee of hereditary chiefs to  4 provide direction to the office and to assist with  5 communications in the village -- villages.  6 Q   What do you mean by that?  7 A   They would meet with -- with groups of hereditary  8 chiefs in the community and receive direction from  9 them to bring forward to the Land Claims Office.  They  10 would help to set up meetings in the community, and  11 they would relay information that was coming to them  12 from -- through the office that might come from the  13 Federal Government, Provincial Government or whatever.  14 They also brought in a lawyer to do a workshop on  15 negotiations.  16 Q   Just before you get to that, can you tell us who of  17 the hereditary chiefs were on this committee?  18 A   From Glen Vowell it was Richard Benson.  From  19 Gitanmaax it was James Morrison and in another  20 capacity, in a more general capacity, Spookw, Steve  21 Robinson.  From Moricetown it was Roy Morris.  From  22 Hagwilget it was Chuck Austin.  From Kitsegukla it was  23 David Milton.  Peter Williams was a member of that  24 committee.  His name is Guu gwihl gyoo.  He is a  25 member of a Fireweed House in Kitsegukla.  And in  26 Kispiox there was different points, but it was either  27 Wii elaast, Jimmie Angus, or Alvin Weget, Dinii.  28 Kitwanga I don't recall.  29 Q   You mentioned the librarian.  How long was the  30 librarian working?  31 A   It was a full-time job for several months and then a  32 part-time job for about a year.  33 Q   And you mentioned as well that a lawyer was consulted  34 to give a workshop on negotiations?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   Was this -- what period of time are you referring to?  37 A   In the period following the presentation, so it would  38 be sometime in 1978.  This lawyer assisted in -- in  39 framing kind of what was necessary to negotiate from a  40 negotiating perspective.  He had negotiating skills,  41 and the hereditary chiefs wanted to sit down and see  42 what that would require.  And then he also conducted a  43 workshop.  44 Q   Who was that?  Who was the lawyer?  45 A   His name was John Baigent or is John Baigent.  He is a  4 6 Vancouver lawyer.  47 Q   Was there any interviewing done of hereditary chiefs 7095  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 at this time in 1978 or did that come later?  2 A   That came later.  The hereditary chiefs were  3 recommending at the time that detailed work had to be  4 done on the territories, that the external boundaries  5 had to be defined more precisely as well as the  6 internal boundaries.  We did not have the resources at  7 the time.  I did talk to some individuals, and I also  8 carried out in a spare-time manner quite casually some  9 research, some -- I took notes of information that  10 people were handing on to me, but it wasn't a rigorous  11 interview process at the time.  12 Q   All right.  Were you involved with respect to a study  13 on the fishery?  14 A   Yes, I was.  15 Q   And what was your role there?  16 A  Well, I was -- as the Director of Land Claims, the --  17 a fish-management study was developed and a biologist  18 was hired.  The hereditary chiefs provided direction  19 to that study, and I directly oversaw the -- the  20 biologist that we hired to -- to frame the study and  21 to carry it out.  22 Q   Who was the biologist?  23 A   That was Mike Morrell.  24 Q   And can you recall about when the study began?  25 A   1979.  26 Q   And how long did it take?  27 A   Five years.  It was -- when we framed the study, we  28 had in mind that it would take four to five years.  2 9 Q   All right.  Now, during that same time were you  30 involved in any negotiations regarding matters related  31 to the fishery?  32 A   Yes.  While the 23 charges had been laid against  33 Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en persons in 1977 during the  34 summer, we immediately made representation to the  35 Department of Fisheries and Oceans that we were  36 wasting our time in court, that what we should be  37 doing is sitting around a round table and discussing  38 these matters and negotiating them.  39 Q   Was this something you were directly involved in?  40 A   Yes, the hereditary chiefs directed me to do that.  I  41 was -- I participated in that.  Lawyers had been hired  42 to fight these cases, and I assisted in that as well.  43 Q   All right.  In the period to 1981 was there any field  44 trip that you made to do research of the Gitksan or  45 Wet'suwet'en territories?  46 A   In 1979, in my spare time, I took a trip to Kisagaas,  47 and at that time Henry Wright, Haspaiyts; Txaaxwok, 7096  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 James Morrison --  2 Q   Was he Txaaxwok at the time?  3 A   No, he wasn't.  4 Q   That's the name he currently holds?  5 A   I think his name at the time was Ax K'oo'pil.  6 Q   Ax K'oo'pil?  7 A   Yes.  Wagal wii, David Green.  O'yee, Joshua McLean.  8 That was a long week-end, and they were at Kisagaas,  9 and I went out, and we did some work then.  10 Q   You're talking about the village of Kisagaas?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   All right.  Did you make any field trips or undertake  13 any field trips in 1980 that you recall?  14 A   I think in 1980 I did a — a field trip with Gwis  15 gyen, Stanley Williams.  16 Q   Yes.  All right.  Now, before I leave the subject, Mr.  17 Sterritt, was there anyone else working in the Land  18 Claims Office with you?  19 A   Yes, in 1978 Kathleen Nelson was a secretary in the  20 office, and then in 1979 Gary Patsey worked with me.  21 And during that period we also developed a training  22 programme of Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en persons.  We  23 wanted -- one of the things that we wanted was that  24 our own people would benefit by this experience and  25 that they would conduct research, and so we developed  26 a training programme for six of our people, and they  27 were hired, and that training programme was  2 8 implemented.  Mike Morrell was on at the time.  29 Q   This is the biologist?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   All right.  32 A   So by about 19 -- by the end of 1979 there was eight  33 or nine employees in the Land Claims Office.  34 Q   Okay.  Did that vary in the years thereafter?  35 A   Yes, it did.  36 Q   According to what?  37 A  According to the -- the research that we were doing  38 and the resources we had available to do the research.  39 Q   All right.  Now, dealing with your own role as  40 Director of the Land Claims Office of the Tribal  41 Council, how long did you hold that position?  42 A   I held that position until the spring of 1981.  43 Q   And what did you do in the spring of 1981?  44 A   I resigned from the position and went to work for the  45 Thaltan Tribal Council.  46 Q   And why did you resign from the position?  47 A  A personality difference developed between me and the 7097  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 president of the Tribal Council, and I felt it was  2 better that I resign and -- and go do something else  3 for a while.  4 Q   All right.  How long did you work with the Thaltan  5 Tribal Council?  6 A   Until the fall of 1981.  7 Q   All right.  In what capacity did you work there?  8 A   I was the -- I was an administrator/facilitator.  I  9 helped to set up an office that they were establishing  10 in Dease Lake, and I worked with the three communities  11 of Telegraph Creek, Iskut and Dease Lake, the Thaltan  12 communities.  13 Q   And what period of time was it that you worked in --  14 with the Thaltan Tribal Council?  15 A   From May of 1981 to the end of October of 1981.  16 Q   All right.  And what happened in October of 1981?  17 A  Well, in October or November of 1981 the annual  18 convention was held, the annual meeting, and I ran for  19 the office of president and became president.  20 Q   You ran -- this is president of the Tribal Council?  21 A   Yes.  22 Q   And were you elected as president of the Tribal  23 Council at that meeting?  24 A   Yes, I was.  25 Q   All right.  Now, the responsibility then for land  26 claims research that was being done by the Tribal  27 Council, who did that fall to when you were elected as  28 president?  29 A   Gary Patsey became the Director of Land Claims when I  30 resigned in the spring, and he continued to be  31 director and --  32 Q   After your election as president?  33 A   Yes, he did.  34 Q   Okay.  Now, did your role with regard to the Tribal  35 Council change with your election as president?  36 A   Yes, it did.  37 Q   In what way?  38 A   I became much more involved politically.  I carried on  39 duties on three levels.  My -- the major level was  40 political, and to a lesser extent administrative, and  41 to a much lesser extent research.  42 Q   And when you say research, what was the nature of your  43 role as a researcher in the period after 1981 when you  44 became president?  45 A   I, in my spare time, kept notes.  Hereditary chiefs  46 would come to talk to me.  I would take notes of --  47 and when they talked to me, they talked about places 709?  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  MR. RUSH:  that they owned.  They talked about mountains, creeks,  lakes, boundaries, and I would keep notes of that.  And that -- I would do that in a feast, if I  encountered a hereditary chief on the street or  wherever.  But my major role at that time was as a --  the president of the Tribal Council.  It was  political.  All right.  And in respect of that political role --  I'm about to move into politics, my lord, and that  always takes a good deal of time.  You might want to  break here.  :  I don't think we'll get through that very quickly.  All right.  Two o'clock.  Thank you.  THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court will adjourn until 2:00.  (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 12:27 P.M.)  I hereby certify the foregoing to be  a true and accurate transcript of the  proceedings herein to the best of my  skill and ability.  Leanna Smith  Official Reporter  United Reporting Service Ltd. 7099  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2 xh2 N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  3 (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT)  4  5 THE REGISTRAR: Order in court.  All rise.  Calling Delgamuukw  6 versus Her Majesty the Queen at bar, My Lord.  7 THE COURT:  Mr. Rush.  8 MR. RUSH:  9 Q   After you became president in November of 1981, Mr.  10 Sterritt, what was one of your first tasks after that?  11 A   That was the point that the Constitution was being  12 repatriated to Canada and a number of native leaders  13 from British Columbia and other areas called were  14 aware of the results of the election that week-end and  15 asked me to come to Ottawa along with them because of  16 the seriousness of the exclusion of aboriginal title  17 and rights from the Canadian Constitution.  And I  18 talked to some of the executive of the Tribal Council  19 and a couple of the hereditary chiefs and left on the  2 0 Sunday or Monday to go to Ottawa to lobby to have some  21 inclusion in the Canadian or -- in the Canadian  22 Constitution some provision for aboriginal title and  23 rights, the aboriginal concerns about the Constitution  24 being repatriated in that way.  25 Q   And were you involved over the next few years as  26 president of the Gitksan Wet'suwet'en or  27 Gitksan-Carrier, as it was then known, Tribal Council,  28 in respect of the Constitution and aboriginal title?  29 A   Yes.  By the late fall of 1982 I became heavily  30 involved and was one of the provincial spokesmen on  31 the Constitution and one of the national spokesmen on  32 the Constitution and involved in setting up the first  33 minister's conferences from -- on behalf of the  34 Assembly of First Nation with other leaders to deal  35 with the discussions at the table and the preparation  36 for those discussions.  37 Q   All right.  I'm going to return to that in a few  38 moments or a little later, but I wanted to ask you in  39 terms of what was going on locally, did the research  40 of the land claim continue after 1981 or 1982 and so  41 on?  42 A   Yes, it did.  Gary Patsey was the director.  I did  43 some research myself in my spare time.  There was  44 research being done by Alfred Joseph and Leonard  45 George on the territories.  46 Q   And what type of research were they doing?  47 A  Alfred found that it was necessary to go to the field 7100  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 with hereditary chiefs.  Alfred had a good grasp of  2 the Wet'suwet'en language and found that it was  3 necessary to go to the field and to conduct research  4 in the field with hereditary chiefs.  5 Q   Were you involved in doing field work at this time  6 yourself?  7 A   On a casual basis I did some research.  In 1982 I did  8 a helicopter reconnaissance trip with Gwis Gyen,  9 Stanley Williams, and Ts'iiwa, Arthur Matthews Senior,  10 to some of the Kitwanga territories.  11 Q   Were you involved in 1983 with any field trips?  12 A   Yes.  In 1983 I conducted a -- in May I conducted a  13 field trip by helicopter with Delgamuukw, Albert Tait;  14 Niist, David Blackwater; and Wii Seeks, Pete Muldoe.  15 And it was not a very satisfactory field trip simply  16 because it was storming all day.  We -- it ended up  17 raining after we took off and we couldn't do much on  18 that trip.  We did a little bit of work, but not much.  19 Q   Were there other field trips in the summer of 1983  2 0 that you were involved with?  21 A   Yes.  Towards the end of June of 1983 Simgitgiigeenix,  22 Robert Jackson Senior; Wagal Wii, David Green; Glen  23 Williams and myself, participated in a field trip.  We  24 went from Hazelton to an area near Ts'ahaas, that's  25 French Peak, and it's an area quite close to where we  26 took the trip last week, but in any event, it's  27 near -- it's between the Gitksan territories and the  28 Babine Lake.  29 Q   By the trip last week you mean to say the view that  30 was conducted?  31 A   The view, yes.  32 MR. RUSH:   Now, if I may just ask you to pause there.  You gave  33 a name, Mr. Sterritt, that I think was not one that  34 had previously been given or that I had heard before.  35 THE COURT:  French Peak?  3 6 MR. RUSH:  37 Q   I think that's it.  38 A   Yeah, Ts'ahaas.  39 THE TRANSLATOR:   Ts'ahaas, T-s, stop, a-h-a —  40 THE WITNESS:   Ts'ahaas.  41 THE TRANSLATOR: — h-a-a-s.  42 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, T-s-a-h-a —  43 THE TRANSLATOR:   T-s-a-h-a-a-s.  4 4 MR. RUSH:  45 Q   Okay.  Were there other trips that you made as field  46 trips in that summer of '83?  47 A  Well, basically that field trip covered some of the 7101  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Gitanmaax territories, some of the Kisagaas  2 territories, and then the next day we -- another set  3 of informants, hereditary chiefs, went along with Glen  4 Williams and I and we went then to land on Bas, which  5 is the mountain right at Bear Lake.  6 Q   Is that B-a-s?  7 A   Yes.  That's the Connolly Range.  We landed there and  8 then we continued on up to east of Maxhla Lax uut,  9 that's Moose Valley, and then along Tutade Lake and  10 over to the Skeena River at Foster Peak and then we  11 flew from there back to Hazelton.  12 Q   All right.  And were there any others that summer?  13 A   Yes, there was another trip either on the next day or  14 within a couple of days where we flew to the mountain  15 Mount Stevens north of Slamgeese Lake and then to the  16 head of the Skeena River at Gal Tsap Hasii Yeeks,  17 which is Jackson Flats on the map, and to the very  18 head of the Skeena.  We then went west to the head of  19 the Nass River and then came on down Xsi Txemsem, the  20 Nass River, and back to Gitanmaax.  We stopped --  21 there was a couple of stops on the way.  22 And then later in the summer in July or August --  23 Q   That same summer?  24 A   Yes.  Of 1983, a field trip was made to the Kitsegukla  25 territories with Gwagl'lo, Ernie --  26 Q   Gwagl'lo?  27 A   Yes.  Ernie Hyzims and Ts'aa'uulst, David Milton.  28 MR. GOLDIE:  Can you give the names of the people in the Jackson  29 Flats?  3 0    MR. RUSH:  31 Q   In terms of your trip to Jackson Flats who were you  32 with at that time?  33 A  With Nii Kyap, David Gunanoot and Txaaxwok, James  34 Morrison.  35 Q   Were you with -- was Glen Williams with you at that  3 6 time?  37 A   Yes, he was.  38 Q   All right.  Those were -- were those the field trips  39 that you took in 1983 that you recall?  40 A  We took one more trip that summer, it was probably  41 earlier.  We used an airplane and we flew from  42 Smithers to Fort Babine and then over to Takla.  The  43 people who were on that trip were Gisdaywa, Alfred  44 Joseph; Nii Kyap, David Gunanoot; Wagal Wii, David  45 Green, and Glen Williams.  46 Q   Now, I understand in subsequent years you took field  47 trips; is that right? 7102  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   Now, I'm not going to ask you to go into those just at  3 the moment, but I do want to ask you why it was felt  4 necessary to do the field trips at that time, and here  5 I'm just talking about the summer of 1983?  6 A   The hereditary chiefs had felt that the best way to  7 map the territories would be to go to the features.  8 The -- I agreed with that because the difficulty with  9 sitting down with a map and the hereditary chief  10 compounded a number of problems.  It was difficult to  11 be sure or clear that the mountain that you were  12 identifying, naming and locating, was in that  13 location.  It was difficult to be sure that the name  14 that was given was for a peak within the mountain  15 range or all of the range.  The scale of the maps, the  16 hereditary chief had a difficult time relating to the  17 distances that were on the map in front of them.  You  18 could -- with a sweep of your finger you could travel  19 50 miles, and yet for the chief it didn't seem very  20 far, and he might actually be describing one creek  21 that was one mile or two miles from another creek and  22 yet he couldn't relate to that so it was difficult to  23 obtain what was being said.  24 I did have familiarity with the territories so  25 sometimes I could narrow that down, but what that map  26 process contributed was an accumulation of  27 information, but not necessarily accurately located.  28 It was evident from my perspective, and obviously  29 maybe more so from the hereditary chiefs perspective,  30 that we should go out and try to identify the features  31 right on the ground.  32 Q   And you had done some of that earlier I think you  33 testified in '79, '80 and '82, and you did more of  34 those field trips in 1983 by helicopter?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   All right.  In respect of the land claims office at  37 the Tribal Council, was there a cartographer who was  38 employed up to 1983 to do mapping work?  39 A   Yes.  Marvin George was hired in the fall of 1983 and  40 a young lady did some work for us prior to that.  She  41 was hired by Gary Patsey. I don't recall her name at  42 this time.  43 Q   What year was that, please?  44 A   That was in 1983 and prior to 1983.  45 Q   Prior to 1983 had there been a cartographer in the  46 employ of the land claims office or the Tribal  47 Council? 7103  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Only as we required work to be done, not in the --  2 there was no cartographer in the lands claims office.  3 We had some small projects.  We would give them out to  4 this individual and they would be returned --  5 Q   All right.  6 A   -- as mapped.  7 Q   All right.  Now, in the fall of 1983 you say that  8 Marvin George was hired; is that correct?  9 A   Yes.  10 Q   And was this on a full-time basis?  11 A   Yes, it was.  12 Q   Okay. And did you work with him?  13 A   Yes.  As Marvin got into the work I turned over a lot  14 of my -- the information that I'd acquired over a  15 period of time to him, and he began to transfer that  16 information onto maps.  17 Q   Now, this court case was started on October the 23rd,  18 1984.  Did you become involved directly in doing  19 research in respect of the court case in 1984?  20 A   Yes, I did.  The -- under instructions from the  21 lawyers I was asked to begin to pull this information  22 to do research and put together a set of maps that  23 would depict the external boundary of the territories  24 and also to depict the internal boundaries in a -- in  25 a more accurate way.  26 Q   Now, was there a meeting in 1984 of the hereditary  27 chiefs at which instructions were given to proceed  28 with the litigation?  29 A   Yes, there was.  30 Q   About what time was that?  31 A   I think that was in July of 1984.  32 Q   Okay.  There was a meeting of the chiefs at which this  33 occurred?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   Now, were there pressures that you know of that  36 precipitated the commencement of the court case, these  37 are pressures external to the area of the Gitksan and  38 Wet'suwet'en territories?  39 A   Yes, there were.  40 Q   What types of pressures were involved?  41 A   The chiefs were very concerned about some of the  42 developments that were going on on the trap lines.  43 There was a -- the province was developing a policy  44 and making changes to the trap line administration in  45 the province that were of concern to the hereditary  46 chiefs.  There was a so-called "use it or lose it"  47 policy that developed. 7104  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   Were you involved in respect of that policy directly?  2 A   Yes, I was.  3 Q   I'll come to that in a moment.  What other factors  4 were --  5 A   On the fishery there was increased enforcement by the  6 Department of Fisheries and Oceans.  There was an  7 increasing level of concern and a very much increased  8 level of enforcement by the Department of Fisheries  9 and Oceans.  Regulations were being changed to -- in a  10 way that was impacting more and more on the Gitksan  11 and Wet'suwet'en fishermen and hereditary chiefs and  12 that was a great concern.  The -- there was also the  13 concerns on the logging.  The West Skeena proposal,  14 which was south of Kitwanga on the west side of the  15 Skeena, there was talk of either building a bridge  16 across the Skeena or to run up the west side of the  17 Skeena from Terrace and the hereditary chiefs in  18 Kitwanga were very concerned about that and did not  19 want to see that happen.  There were similar  20 developments in other areas in terms of logging and  21 the logging in general in the way that it was  22 proceeding.  23 Q   And other concerns?  24 A   The Kemano Completion Project by ALCAN was -- had been  25 developing and a tremendous public relations programme  26 by ALCAN had been initiated in British Columbia and in  27 particular phone surveys in our area were taking place  28 that concerned the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs and  29 the Gitksan hereditary chiefs because of the potential  30 impacts right down the Morice, Bulkley and Skeena  31 River.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  Excuse me.  Excuse me, My Lord, I think it clear  33 that the evidence about the chiefs is admissible for  34 the purpose of explaining conduct and it doesn't need  35 anything more.  The witness is going into substantive  36 matters that is purely hearsay.  I didn't object  37 earlier because the listings of concerns is presumably  38 to explain the conduct of, I gather, for the first  39 time of accelerating a lawsuit.  40 MR. RUSH:  My Lord, the listing here as my friend has described  41 it is intended to lead to the involvement of Mr.  42 Sterritt and the things that he did directly, and I  43 will point -- endeavour to point out the relevance of  44 the listing by his own direct involvement which I  45 intend to lead him to in a moment.  46 THE COURT:  Well, what — where does it lead me?  Mr. Sterritt  47 may have done any number of things and he might have 7105  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 done them exceedingly well, as I'm sure he did, or he  2 may have done them badly, but how does it matter?  The  3 plaintiffs may have had no reason to start the lawsuit  4 at all or they may have had the best reason in the  5 world.  Surely those are pure facts aren't they?  6 MR. RUSH:  Well, yes and no, but in our submission the relevance  7 of this is to demonstrate that within the Gitksan and  8 Wet'suwet'en territories there were economic events  9 and development proposals that were made that involved  10 firstly the hereditary chiefs responding in order to  11 protect their ownership and jurisdiction and title and  12 that led to the involvement on behalf -- on their  13 behalf, by Mr. Sterritt and the Tribal Council.  And I  14 think it is relevant to Your Lordship to see the array  15 of areas in which there were major incursions or  16 threats to their ownership and jurisdiction and what  17 they endeavoured to do about it.  18 Again, I think it goes back to a point I made in  19 argument this morning on the issue of the  20 negotiations.  Why did the hereditary chiefs become  21 involved at that time?  What did they do after that?  22 And in my submission this is relevant on the question  23 of the arguments that have been made earlier and with  24 regard to acquiesence and laches and with regard to  25 the defence that's been raised.  I think it's quite  26 material to know -- for Your Lordship to know, that  27 the hereditary chiefs were actively involved at a time  28 of intense application of pressure coming from  29 government sources and I think what I was -- the  30 evidence that I was going to lead from Mr. Sterritt  31 pertained to this issue.  And I think it's relevant  32 for Your Lordship to know precisely what involvement  33 he had.  34 Now, there is another reason and that is that in  35 respect of the cross-examination which has occurred on  36 many previous occasions with respect to the hereditary  37 chiefs, evidence has been led about the band council  38 resolutions which have been passed in respect of  39 ensuring that the matrilineal inheritance system was  40 complied with.  The suggestion I suppose there was,  41 that I'm sure my friends will argue, is that this was  42 an involvement on the part of the band council as  43 opposed to the hereditary chiefs.  Mr. Sterritt  44 himself was involved in some of this and can give  45 explanation as to what was going on there.  46 In terms of the trap line system itself, My Lord,  47 this is a period of flux, of considerable change, 7106  Proceedings  1 motivated by changes in policy from the Department of  2 Fish and Wildlife, and efforts were taken by the  3 hereditary chiefs to try and do something on an  4 individual basis as well as on a collective basis in  5 the form of going to the trap line.  And you have  6 heard evidence with regard to blanket trap lines and  7 what evidence Mr. Sterritt will lead was evidence that  8 is directed at the efforts by the hereditary chiefs to  9 do something about devising a means by which to  10 protect their territories through the use of a blanket  11 trap line.  Similarily, with regard to fishing and  12 concerns about logging and concerns about economic  13 development that occurred around the proposal to  14 expand the hydro-electric facility at Kemano.  15 Now, in my submission these are all relevant in  16 terms both of the participation of Mr. Sterritt and  17 the Tribal Council, but in terms of the response of  18 the hereditary chiefs to these threats that they saw  19 to their territory.  20 THE COURT:  Well, my present view is that it doesn't matter how  21 concerned the chiefs were about the threat to their  22 territories, that threat could have been real or it  23 could have been fanciful. I don't think that would  24 matter.  They were entitled to bring a lawsuit and  25 they brought it and they don't have to give reasons  26 for bringing the lawsuit, nor are their reasons  27 particularly relevant. It wouldn't matter if they  28 didn't have any reasons at all.  I tend to think that  29 these matters are of no significance.  I sense that  30 there may be some relevance in the activities that Mr.  31 Sterritt busied himself about because they reflect  32 upon the state of his knowledge and his immediate  33 association with the problems that arise in the  34 preparation of a lawsuit of this kind, and I think for  35 that reason I have to allow you to proceed, Mr. Rush,  36 because there may be some area there that will be of  37 assistance possibly in deciding what weight to give to  38 Mr. Sterritt's evidence.  I don't use that term in  39 connection with credibility, but in the opportunities  40 that he's had to familiarize himself with these  41 various matters.  42 But I don't think it matters why they brought the  43 lawsuit.  As I said, I don't think they had to have a  44 reason.  They could bring it anyway.  45 MR. GOLDIE:  Your Lordship will bear in mind that this was  46 introduced for the purpose of demonstrating why the  47 lawsuit was accelerated, and my objection was taken to 7107  Proceedings  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  what is the purpose of particularizing that, if the  concerns are set out, if that's relevant?  THE COURT: Yes.  MR. GOLDIE:  But to go beyond that and to get into what was done  by the witness in response to the instructions of the  hereditary chiefs arising out of their concerns which  led them to accelerate the lawsuit seems to me to be  once or twice removed.  THE COURT:  I don't think it matters why they accelerated the  lawsuit.  The question of laches depends upon the  factors that existed between whenever the claim arose  and the time the lawsuit was brought and the fact that  they advanced the date that might otherwise have been  the date of the writ, it doesn't matter it seems to  me.  I don't think I can stop you, Mr. Rush, but I  have to say I don't think it matters why they brought  the lawsuit.  MR. RUSH:  Well, I'm content to change the focus here, My Lord.  The intent here was to demonstrate Mr. Sterritt's  personal involvement as the director first of the land  claims committee and then as the president, and if  it -- there were a number of events and occurrences  which happened within the territory in which he had  familiarity and I think it bears on the -- it bears on  the response taken by the hereditary chiefs and by the  Tribal Council.  THE COURT:  I think you may proceed.  I think that the — I  think that the responses of the chiefs may have some  relevance, I'm not convinced of that, but it may have,  and so I think you can proceed.  I really think I'm  getting more detail than I need on these issues, but  I'll have to leave that to counsel.  MR. RUSH:  All right.  I'll govern myself according to Your  Lordship's comments.  Okay.  THE COURT  MR RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Mr. Sterritt, I first want to direct your mind to the  question of trapping.  When you were the director of  the land claims committee of the Tribal Council were  you presented with requests from hereditary chiefs to  deal with problems pertaining to their trap lines?  Yes, I was.  And what was the nature of the requests and what did  you do?  Well, I'll give you a couple of examples.  Jeff Harris  Senior, Luus, came to me and the logging company was  going to log an area of concern to him.  And he came 710?  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 to my office and he wanted to blockade that and this  2 was in 1978.  He wanted to blockade that initiative.  3 He's an elder. He was very concerned.  And he brought  4 that to me and asked what could be done, what kinds of  5 things could be done.  The other person, a hereditary  6 chief, Jeffery Morgan, Wallace Morgan, from Kitwanga,  7 Axtii hix, he brought a similar concern.  He drew a  8 small map and came to me and in his own way he tried  9 to describe his territory on a piece of paper and he  10 was concerned about the logging.  11 And another situation that often -- those are the  12 types of things that came to my attention.  Another  13 type of situation that I encountered was that where  14 hereditary chiefs would come to me was if -- if for  15 some reason or another the wrong person was registered  16 on the trap line, and it appeared that either they  17 might lose the trap line or someone in the wrong line  18 would end up with the registered trap line, they came  19 to me to get that situation resolved.  20 Q   And what -- what did you do on their behalf?  21 A   I contacted the Department of Indian Affairs.  I may  22 have advised them with something that they could do on  23 their own.  I phoned or wrote the Fish and Wildlife  24 Department and advised them that the trap line,  25 possibly through the law of Amnigwootxw, might be in  26 the wrong hands and should be -- there were other  27 persons who were properly in line for that.  And I  28 contacted the Department of Indian Affairs, I  29 contacted the Fish and Wildlife Department, and I  30 followed up with the hereditary chief on that.  31 Q   All right.  I want you, if you will please, to look at  32 the black document book in front of you at tab 12, and  33 can you identify the letter dated February 22nd, 1979,  34 from a Mr. V.M. Robinson?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   And can you state briefly what it is that Mr. Robinson  37 was corresponding to you about?  38 A   Yes.  The son or sons of Wii'mugluxsw, Jonathan  39 Johnson, ended up with the trap line registration,  40 being the trap line holders of the territory of  41 Wii'mugluxsw.  Gertie Morrison from the house of  42 Xsaxgyoo, and Wii'mugluxsw, was concerned about the  43 fact that they continued to be on there and that it  44 should go to the wolf clan.  Jonathan Johnson's sons  45 were in the frog clan and she wanted it to be returned  46 to the wolf clan and she wanted other persons added to  47 it who properly should be there. 7109  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   All right.  If you wouldn't mind, would you look at  2 page 2 of this document please, and in the second to  3 last paragraph it says "Mr. Guillon".  Do you know a  4 Mr. Guillon?  5 A  Well, this Mr. Guillon would be Frank Guillon from  6 the -- who was the conservation officer stationed at  7 Hazelton for sometime, and he dealt with some of these  8 concerns on behalf of the province.  9 Q   All right.  It says here:  10  11 "Mr. Guillon indicated that a Band Council  12 Resolution was required before the changes as  13 requested by Mrs. Morrison could be processed  14 since there is no mechanism in the present system  15 to accommodate her wish."  16  17 Do you know if this was a practise of Mr. Guillon  18 to require such band council resolution?  19 A   Yes, it was.  20 Q   Now, did you respond to this letter, Mr. Sterritt?  21 A   Yes.  On -- following that letter I wrote a letter to  22 the chief councillor in Kispiox and pointed out the  23 problems and what -- made some recommendations about  24 what the band council could do to resolve the problem  25 on behalf of Gertie Morrison and her family.  26 Q   All right.  And I note that the letter was copied to  27 Victor Robinson, Frank Guillon, Gertie Morrison and  28 George Wilson?  29 A   Yes.  30 Q   All right.  And who was it that initiated your  31 involvement in this?  32 A   Gertie Morrison, who's my aunt, had talked to me.  She  33 had first brought this to my attention and at that  34 time I suggested that she talk to Victor Robinson,  35 that she did and he came to me and then that was how  36 the initial issue began to be dealt with.  37 Q   I notice in the opening paragraph of Mr. Robinson's  38 letter of February 22nd, 1979, he refers to "our  39 telecon".  Is that a telephone conversation that you  4 0 had with him?  41 A   Yes.  Gertie had gone to Victor and then he phoned me.  42 Q   Now, there's another letter that I'd like to direct  43 you to which is dated January 26, 1981 that you  44 directed to the chief councillor at Kispiox.  Now, can  45 you comment on this letter?  46 A   It's about two years later and nothing has -- it  47 appears that nothing has developed and so George 7110  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Wilson, who was Wii'mugluxsw, he's now deceased, who  2 was the successor to Jonathan Johnson, had come to me  3 and as I understand it when he came to see me Gertie  4 and others had talked to him about following up on the  5 initiative two years earlier.  6 Q   All right.  Do you know what the outcome of these  7 letters was?  8 A   Not long after that George Wilson passed away, and Art  9 Wilson is now Wii'mugluxsw and I believe that trap  10 line area, the hereditary area, is now in the name of  11 Art Wilson.  12 MR. RUSH:   All right.  Can this series of correspondence be  13 marked, My Lord?  Perhaps it can be marked A, B and C  14 of the next exhibit number?  15 THE COURT:  Any objection?  16 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, the last document, My Lord, of January 26,  17 1981, of course is a document that -- of the kind that  18 my friend has objected to on many an occasion, that is  19 to say, it is not either sent to or notice given to  20 the defendant.  I'm prepared to let it in, but I note  21 My Lord that it's the sort of thing that my friend has  22 taken objection to on previous occasions.  23 THE COURT:  Well, they can't be, except the letter from the  24 Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, which I  25 suppose is evidence against the crown, is it?  26 MR. MACAULAY: The letter on this letterhead of the Department of  27 Indian Affairs is actually signed by a hereditary  28 chief.  29 THE COURT:  But he was employed by the department, was he not?  3 0 MR. MACAULAY: He was at the time.  Yes.  31 THE COURT:  And he wrote the letter in that capacity, did he  32 not?  33 MR. RUSH:  Yes.  34 MR. MACAULAY:  He wrote the letter in his capacity as an advisor  35 at that time.  36 THE COURT:  Well, I wouldn't —  37 MR. MACAULAY: I don't know what his duties were at that time.  38 THE COURT:  Well, I think that letter can certainly be marked,  39 and what's the next number?  40 THE REGISTRAR: 621, My Lord.  41 THE COURT:  So that will be 621 A.  The letters that Mr.  42 Sterritt wrote it seems to me can be admissible only  43 for the fact that these words and thoughts were  44 conveyed by his letter to or were intended to be  45 conveyed to the recipients, but not to prove the truth  46 of any facts stated in them, but they may be marked  47 similarily -- 7111  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  RUSH:  My Lord —  COURT:  — As B and C.  RUSH:  Yes.  REGISTRAR: Can I have the date of the second letter?  GOLDIE:  I wasn't objecting to the letter of May the 24th,  1979, My Lord, because a copy of that went to an  employee of the provincial government, Mr. Frank  Guillon, the conservation officer.  COURT:  Oh, yes.  GOLDIE:  But I -- the third one falls into the category, if  it falls into anything.  COURT: Well, I'm going to mark them 621 A, B and C. The  use that can be made of them is a matter that we do  not need to hear argument about at this time.  (EXHIBIT 621 A:  Tab 12 of Volume 1, letter dated  February 22, 1979 from V.M. Robinson to N.J. Sterritt)  (EXHIBIT 621 B: Tab 12 of Volume 1, letter dated May  24, 1979 from N.J. Sterritt to George Muldoe)  (EXHIBIT 621 C: Tab 12 of Volume 1, letter dated  January 26, 1979 from N.J. Sterritt to George Muldoe)  REGISTRAR: May I have the date of the third letter?  Is it  January 26th?  RUSH:  That's correct.  GOLDIE:  Yes.  REGISTRAR: Thank you.  RUSH:  Q   Mr. Sterritt, is the correspondence that you became  involved in sending on behalf of the hereditary chief  in this case involving the trap line of Jonathan  Johnson, is that typical of the sort of involvement  that you had regarding trap lines?  A   Yes, it is.  Q   Now, in this correspondence, Mr. Sterritt, what --  from your knowledge of what Mr. Robinson wrote to you  about and your response, what was the nature of the  problem that was involved here?  A   The nature of this problem was one of an inheritance,  the European system of inheritance versus the Gitksan  where the --  GOLDIE:  Well, I object to this characterization.  It's  clear from the documents themselves what the  difficulty is.  It's not a question of anything versus  anything at all.  So far as the province is concerned,  1  MR.  2  THE  3  MR.  4  THE  5  MR.  6  7  8  9  THE  10  MR.  11  12  THE  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  THE  26  27  MR.  28  MR.  29  THE  30  MR.  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  MR.  45  46  47 7112  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 they said "Get us a band council resolution.", and  2 that's the end of the problem.  3 MR. RUSH:  Well, that might be my friend's interpretation.  With  4 respect, it's my submission that documents don't speak  5 for themselves.  6 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, in that case Mr. Sterritt is expressing an  7 opinion and with all respect he has not been qualified  8 to express any opinions on these trap line matters.  9 MR. RUSH:  Mr. Sterritt is a person who wrote a letter.  He had  10 something in his mind when he wrote the letter.  He  11 was asked to write it to become involved.  In terms of  12 his understanding at the time he became involved, it  13 seems to me quite evident that he's entitled to say  14 what was in his mind when he wrote the letter and  15 what --  16 THE COURT:  What is the evidence?  His unexpressed thoughts  17 aren't evidence surely.  18 MR. RUSH:  Well, no, not his unexpressed thoughts, and I'm not  19 asking him to state his unexpressed thoughts, I'm  20 asking him to summarize what the issue was that  21 appeared from this correspondence.  I mean, in my  22 friend's mind obviously it was a question of a B.C.R.  23 so he has in his mind what it is important for him.  24 In terms of Mr. Sterritt there was something in his  25 mind and I think that I'm entitled to ask the witness  26 about what was in his mind as he saw the problem drawn  27 between I guess it was Mr. Morrison and another person  28 who was going to be registered on this trap line.  29 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, My Lord, if anything is to be made of Exhibit  30 621 A, B and C, they will be made in argument based  31 upon what was said and done in 1979, and the documents  32 are in my submission perfectly clear and I take  33 exception to Mr. Sterritt characterizing them in a way  34 that is not supported by the documents.  And in my  35 submission he has no grounds for characterizing a  36 problem which is stated by somebody -- by other people  37 who are not witnesses and who are not present.  38 THE COURT:  I'm of the view that what Mr. Sterritt had in his  39 mind is of no assistance.  What he said in his letters  40 and which is conveyed to other parties is evidence,  41 but what he had in his mind that he did not convey  42 surely is of no evidentiary value.  I think that Mr.  43 Sterritt may say in this general -- in connection with  44 this general subject matter what his involvement with  45 the trap line problem was generally, but I don't think  46 it can be related to these particular exhibits.  I  47 think he can give general evidence about the trap line 7113  Proceedings  1 difficulties, if I can call them that, or problems,  2 but I do not think he can add to the evidentiary  3 value, if any, of these three documents by reference  4 to matters that he had in his mind which were not  5 stated.  I think you're free to examine Mr. Sterritt  6 generally about trap lines without relation to these  7 documents.  8 MR. RUSH:  9 Q   Thank you, My Lord.  10 Mr. Sterritt, in respect to problems which emerged  11 with regard to trap lines of hereditary chiefs, can  12 you express to His Lordship what the nature of those  13 problems were as they were expressed to you and as you  14 became involved on behalf of hereditary chiefs?  15 A   One of the problems was a problem of inheritance.  A  16 person who passed on, the province would pass -- would  17 pass that on or transfer the trap line to a son or a  18 daughter of the deceased, which was a violation of  19 Gitksan law and that was one of the problems.  We  20 encountered that quite frequently and the people, the  21 hereditary chiefs and members of the families of the  22 houses, brought that problem to me quite frequently.  23 There are other examples like this one of that nature.  24 Q   Now, to your knowledge did some of the bands pass band  25 council resolutions dealing with hereditary chiefs'  26 territories and trap lines?  27 A   Yes, they did, and there were also B.C.R.'s that were  28 passed by hereditary chiefs.  29 Q   Are these band council resolutions, B.C.R.'s?  30 A   They're on the B.C.R. format of the band council, on  31 their formation, and they were prepared in the band  32 office.  And the hereditary chiefs who were  33 knowledgeable of whom the trap line should be passed  34 on to, made their recommendation or supported who the  35 territory should be transferred to and signed that  36 form accordingly.  37 Q   Now, Mr. Sterritt, I want to ask you about the blanket  38 trap line. Were you involved in respect of the  39 proposal regarding the blanket trap line?  40 A   Yes, I was.  41 Q   And when did this proposal for such a trap line take  42 shape?  43 A   The advisory committee to the hereditary chiefs to the  44 land claims office met in 1978 and recommended that a  45 blanket trap line proposal be done to -- or develop.  46 Q   And what is meant by a blanket trap line?  What does  47 that term mean? 7114  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A  Well, it had two meanings for the hereditary chiefs,  2 one was that rather than individual registrations  3 there would be a single registration that covered all  4 the hereditary territories of the Gitksan and  5 Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs.  That was one -- the  6 one meaning.  The other significance that the  7 hereditary chiefs saw in it was that it would be a  8 joining of their blankets and their crests to cover  9 and protect the Gitksan Wet'suwet'en territories.  10 They saw that had major significance for them.  11 Q   Was there a -- something that happened in terms of the  12 administration of the provincial government trap line  13 system which led to your involvement and the  14 hereditary chief involvement in the blanket trap line  15 idea?  16 A   The province reviewed their trap line administration  17 and regulations and they developed what was called a  18 "use it or lose it" policy.  What that meant for the  19 Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en is that if you were not using  20 your trap line the province would turn it over to  21 someone else who would.  And in conversation with the  22 province or representatives of the province that meant  23 it could be anyone from anywhere in B.C..  The  24 hereditary chiefs were very concerned and wanted  25 something done about that.  26 Q   All right.  Would you turn please to tab 13 in the  27 document book.  Now, can you identify this document?  28 Just peruse the document, please?  Is this a document  29 entitled "Attendance of Trapping and Hunting Grounds  30 Meeting John Field Gymnasium, March 1, 1979"?  31 A   Yes, that is a list of the persons who attended a  32 meeting at John Field and some of the points that were  33 raised.  34 Q   And on the second page there is a motion that is  35 evident there?  36 A   Yes, that's -- that's the motion to develop the  37 blanket trap line concept.  38 Q   All right.  And I'd like you to scan the list of  39 people that are identified there.  Can you identify  40 the people here listed as hereditary chiefs?  41 A   Yes, I can.  Well, I can run through the whole list or  42 I can give some examples.  43 Q   Perhaps just if you can look through and identify if  44 there are any that aren't hereditary chiefs that you  4 5 know?  46 A  Ardity Wilson, the very last name; Annie Mowatt, about  47 four up, five up; there's Geraldine McDougall, I 7115  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  A  Q  A  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  Q  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  THE  THE  THE  THE  mentioned her yesterday from the house of Spookw.  She's not -- she's actually from the house of  Mediik'mgyet.  Doris Michelle, another one; Jean  Harris, Herb Greene, Rhod Wilson, in the middle column  coming up from the bottom.  Are these Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en people?  Both.  You're identifying people now that you cannot say are  hereditary chiefs; is that right?  Yes.  Yes.  Okay.  Dorian Harris, Al Mason, Judy Robinson.  Pretty well  all the rest are hereditary chiefs.  Did you -- the name Frank Lindsay.  Do you know that  name?  Oh, yes, he's not a hereditary chief.  Is he a Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en person?  No, he's not.  :  Where's his name?  It's about six down in the middle column.  : Oh, yes.  MR.  Apart from those people that you've mentioned, are the  rest hereditary chiefs of the Gitksan and  Wet'suwet'en?  A   Yes.  RUSH:   All right.  Can this be an exhibit, please?  REGISTRAR: Is there a date on it?  RUSH:  Yes. March 1st, 1979.  COURT:  I think it's already in, but there wouldn't be any  harm in marking it again.  I think we had it once  before somewhere, but I may be wrong.  REGISTRAR: There's been meetings, but I don't — not a  trapping and hunting meeting I don't recall.  COURT:  Well, I'm having deja vu, but I think I've seen this  before.  REGISTRAR: 622.  COURT: 622.  Thank you.  REGISTRAR: It's tab 13.  (EXHIBIT 622: Tab 13 of Volume 1, document entitled  "Attendance at Trapping & Hunting Grounds Meeting,  John Field Gymnasium, March 1, 1979)  RUSH:  Q   Now, following that meeting, Mr. Sterritt, what was  your involvement with regard to this blanket trap line 7116  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  question?  A  We didn't have much in the way of resources so we had  to get some personnel.  About a year or a year and a  half later we were able to hire James Morrison to go  out and conduct a survey in the communities to  determine from a broader group of people their  response to a -- to the idea and what it is they would  like to do.  Q   All right.  I'd just ask you to look at tab 14.  Can  you identify this document?  A   Yes.  It's a summary of people that James Morrison  talked to and filled out a survey that he took around.  RUSH:   Can that be an exhibit, please?  GOLDIE:  Excuse me, could my friend tell me if this is on  his list of documents?  RUSH:  No, I sent a letter to you over a week and a half ago  expressing that -- in that letter that these were  documents that we'd be making reference to.  You asked  for the documents and I sent them to you.  GOLDIE:  I think my friend adopted the rubric may or may not  refer to.  Anyway, I have not seen it and I wondered  if it was on the list of documents.  COURT:  Are you objecting to it, Mr. Goldie?  GOLDIE:  No.  REGISTRAR: 623 at tab 14.  COURT:  I must say I'm terribly disappointed.  GOLDIE:  I hope my example will bear a little fruit later  on.  COURT:  I wrote a long judgment one time about the  admissibilities of this sort of thing. I won't say  what I decided inasmuch as there's no objection.  623?  REGISTRAR:  Yes, My Lord.  COURT:  It was about itchy trousers.  RUSH:  Is that an expert's opinion on itchy trousers or a  survey?  COURT:  It was a survey about the B.C. Hydro bus drivers  whether they thought their trousers were itchy or not.  They did a survey on this kind of thing. I don' think  it's a reported decision.  This will be Exhibit 623.  REGISTRAR: 623, tab 14.  (EXHIBIT 623: Tab 14 of Volume 1, document entitled  "Summary of Survey on Traplines, dated "Spring 1982")  RUSH:  Q   Mr. Sterritt, after this survey or perhaps during the  time that it was being conducted by Mr. James  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  MR.  14  MR.  15  16  MR.  17  18  19  20  MR.  21  22  23  THE  24  MR.  25  THE  26  THE  27  MR.  28  29  THE  30  31  32  THE  33  THE  34  MR.  35  36  THE  37  38  39  40  THE  41  42  43  44  45  MR.  46  47 7117  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Morrison, what was your involvement with the blanket  2 trap line?  3 A   I was -- as I mentioned earlier, I was present at this  4 time. I was very -- later on in the summer I was quite  5 busy on other matters, the Constitution towards the  6 end, but there were three -- I believe three more  7 meetings at which I attended at least one of them if  8 not all of them.  I don't remember that, but at those  9 meetings further details were brought to the  10 hereditary chiefs and a response was given and we  11 continued to work on this.  At a later date we hired  12 Ken Muldoe, the present Delgamuukw, to meet with  13 individuals and also Ralph Michell, the present Wii  14 Seeks to do further work on this as well.  15 Q   All right.  Would you please refer to the document at  16 tab 15.  Can you identify this document?  17 A   Yes.  Arising out of the meetings I phoned Frank  18 Guillon and wanted to know which territories he was  19 concerned about in terms of re-registration and he  20 indicated at that time that he was prepared to  21 re-register lines according to the hereditary system  22 and with band input.  23 Q   He indicates in the next paragraph, I'm quoting:  24  25 "To eliminate delays in re-registration, I will  26 require a B.C.R. indicating who the new holder is  27 to be."  28  29 What did you understand him to be requiring or  30 from whom did you understanding the B.C.R. to be  31 required?  32 A   From the band council, but the hereditary chiefs  33 preferred to sign the -- that document themselves and  34 to forward it on.  35 MR. RUSH:   All right.  May that be an exhibit, My Lord?  36 THE REGISTRAR: What is it, a letter?  37 MR. RUSH:  It's a letter from Mr. Guillon.  38 THE COURT:  Yes, and the attached list.  No objection?  39 MR. RUSH:  July 15th, 1983.  40 THE COURT:  Exhibit 624.  41  42 (EXHIBIT 624: Tab 15 of Volume 1, letter from Frank E.  43 Guillon to N.J. Sterritt dated July 15, 1983)  44  45 MR. GOLDIE:  With the attached list?  46 THE COURT:  Yes, with the attached list.  Can we take the  47 afternoon adjournment now, Mr. Rush? 711?  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  2 THE REGISTRAR: Order in court.  Court will recess.  3  4 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR THE AFTERNOON RECESS)  5  6 I hereby certify the foregoing to  7 be a true and accurate transcript  8 of the proceedings herein to the  9 best of my skill and ability.  10  11  12 Tanita S. French  13 Official Reporter  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 7119  N.J. Sterritt (for Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3 (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED AT 3:18 P.M.)  4  5 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  6 THE COURT:  Mr. Rush.  7 MR. RUSH:  8 Q   Thank you.  Mr. Sterritt, would you please turn to tab  9 16?  Did you receive a copy of this letter from Mr.  10 Frank Lindsay, the band manager of the Gitanmaax Band  11 Council?  12 A   Yes, I did.  13 Q   Dated August 9th, 1983?  14 A   Yes.  15 MR. GOLDIE:  My lord, just a question of clarification.  Is the  16 Frank Lindsay who is the band manager in tab 16 the  17 Frank Lindsay that Mr. Sterritt identified in tab 13  18 as not being a member of the Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en  19 people?  20 THE WITNESS:  Yes, it is.  21 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you.  22 MR. RUSH:  23 Q   Well, I'll ask the questions.  Okay?  24 A   Okay.  25 MR. RUSH:  That's right.  26 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you.  2 7 MR. RUSH:  28 Q   Mr. Sterritt, the Frank Guillon that you have  29 previously made mention of as the district  30 conservation officer is -- the name of Frank Guillon  31 is on this letter.  It's copied, the letter, to him in  32 Hazelton.  To your knowledge, is that -- was that the  33 position held by Mr. Guillon at that time, district  34 conservation officer?  35 A   Yes.  36 MR. RUSH:  Can this be an exhibit, please?  37 THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 625, tab 16.  38  39 (EXHIBIT 625 - Tab 16, Letter dated August 9, 1983,  40 from F. Lindsay - Band Manager)  41  42 MR. RUSH:  43 Q   Please look at tab 17, Mr. Sterritt.  This is a letter  44 dated August the 22nd, 1983, from a Mr. — well, I  45 won't attempt his name there -- the regional manager  46 of the Skeena Region of the Ministry of Environment to  47 the Gitksan-Carrier Tribal Council.  Did you receive 7120  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  this letter?  A   Yes, I did.  It's signed by Mike Whately.  MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  THE COURT:  Winkley?  THE WITNESS:  Whately.  THE COURT:  Thank you.  MR. RUSH:  Q   On page 2 of the letter it's indicated that the  ministry was revising its trapline administration  through several methods, and then it sets out:  MR.  "1,  all trapline boundaries are being redrawn on  maps at a scale of 1" = 126,720 and will  become the legal designation of a trapline,  each trapline will be assigned a number, and,  fur traders will be required by law to record  the assigned trapline number when furs are  sold through their operation."  A  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  As a result of receiving this letter, Mr. Sterritt,  what did you do?  There were -- we set up meetings in three communities  within the Tribal Council area and brought these  matters to the attention of the hereditary chiefs as  well as the initiatives that we had been undertaking  in terms of the blanket trapline.  All right.  Can the August 22nd letter be marked as  an exhibit, please?  :  Yes.  THE REGISTRAR:  626, tab 17.  RUSH:  Q  A  Q  A  Q  (EXHIBIT 626 - Tab 17, Letter dated August 22, 1983,  from M. Whately)  Thank you.  Now, I want to direct your attention to  the document at tab 18.  Can you identify this  document, Mr. Sterritt?  It's a document of the date  of September the 16th, 1983, "TRAP-LINES and HUNTING  GROUNDS BACK-GROUND INFORMATION."  Yes, it was prepared by me.  All right.  And do you know whether or not this  document was given to a representative of the  Provincial Government?  I do not know.  All right.  Would you look at the document at tab 19,  please?  Can you identify this document? 7121  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 A   Yes.  By this time one of the things that we are doing  2 is working out how a blanket trapline registry could  3 be implemented on behalf of the hereditary chiefs, and  4 we developed a form that would transfer the house-  5 owned trapline over to the Tribal Council on an  6 interim basis.  7 Q   And what happened with this form?  8 A   It was taken to a meeting, and it was circulated  9 amongst the hereditary chiefs.  10 Q   And were these signed in your presence?  11 A   Some of them were, and other members of the Tribal  12 Council went around to individuals and had them  13 signed.  14 Q   All right.  And were these returned back to you?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   All right.  And when you received these back, did you  17 do anything with them?  18 A  We -- we held a meeting with the -- with some  19 representatives of the Ministry of the Environment,  20 Barry Saunders and Rick Marshall, and we presented a  21 brief to them.  22 MR. RUSH:  All right.  Just before we come to that, could this  23 document be marked, my lord?  24 THE REGISTRAR:  What is it?  25 MR. RUSH:  It is a "Sample Only" transfer of an interest in  26 registered trapline to the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal  27 Council dated April 5, 1984.  28 MR. GOLDIE:  I am not going to object, my lord.  I point out  29 that there is at least one of these executed forms in  30 evidence already.  31 MR. RUSH:  That's correct.  32 THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  This will be 627 then.  33 MR. RUSH:  Thank you.  34 THE REGISTRAR:  627, tab 19.  35  36 (EXHIBIT 627 - Tab 19, Sample Only Transfer of  37 Interest in Registered Trapline dated April 5, 1984)  38  3 9 MR. RUSH:  40 Q   If you'll look at tab 20, please, Mr. Sterritt, a memo  41 dated October the 5th, 1984.  This is a memo from  42 yourself to Tiger, Marven, Peter Grant and Don,  43 October 5th, 1984, re the blanket trapline.  It  44 indicates that you met with a Mr. Rick Marshall and a  45 Mr. Barry Saunders on September the 27th to discuss  46 progress on the traplines.  Did such a meeting occur?  47 A   Yes. 7122  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Q   Who did you meet with?  Who accompanied you in the  2 meeting with Mr. Marshall and Mr. Saunders?  3 A   Ralph Michell at least was with me, as I recall.  4 Q   And was there a discussion about the implementation of  5 the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en blanket trapline proposal?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   Okay.  Would you just review this memo?  You attribute  8 to Mr. Saunders that the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en blanket  9 could be given a "false game management unit" number.  10 Is that in fact what you said to Mr. Saunders?  11 A   That's what Mr. Saunders said to us.  12 Q   All right.  13 A   He was quite supportive of the idea, and that was one  14 of the recommendations or considerations that he had  15 at that time.  16 Q   Okay.  In the next paragraph it says:  17  18 "We agreed that it might work as follows:  19  20 1)  outline of our territory would be outer  21 limits of false GMU.  22 2)  areas not included in the blanket would  23 be:  24  25 a)  non-Indian traplines  26 b)  Indian traplines not assigned to the  27 blanket  28 c)  private property  29  30 3)  Trapline would be registered to the  31 directorate, who will administer the  32 blanket on behalf of the hereditary  33 chiefs.  34 4)  Possible subdivision of area in future  35 by clan or village, but not at this  3 6 time."  37  38 Now, was that an agreement that had been worked  39 out between Mr. Michell and yourself and Mr. Marshall  4 0 and Mr. Saunders?  41 A   That was the nature of the discussion at that time.  42 That was our understanding at that time.  43 Q   And then it indicates further that Mr. Saunders and  44 Mr. Marshall asked that a map of the territory showing  45 areas excluded as above be prepared, a list of all  46 trapline holders, and make sure our registrations  47 correspond to B.C. Fish and Wildlife trapline 7123  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  ]  3  A  4  Q  5  6  A  7  MR.  RUSH:  8  MR.  GOLDIE  9  10  MR.  RUSH:  11  MR.  GOLDIE  12  13  MR.  RUSH:  14  MR.  GOLDIE  15  16  17  18  MR.  RUSH:  19  20  THE  COURT:  21  THE  regist:  22  MR.  RUSH:  23  24  25  1  26  27  MR.  RUSH:  28  THE  COURT:  29  30  MR.  RUSH:  31  32  THE  COURT:  33  34  MR.  RUSH:  35  THE  COURT:  36  37  38  MR.  RUSH:  39  Q  40  41  42  A  43  Q  44  A  45  Q  46  A  47  Q  registrations.  To your knowledge, were those the  matters asked of you by Saunders and Marshall?  Yes.  Now, to your knowledge, was this memo sent to Mr.  Saunders or Mr. Marshall?  I don't recall.  All right.  :  Well, it ought to be marked, my lord.  It's been  examined on at some length.  My friend has no objection?  :  Well, I have the objection that it isn't proof of  the contents as against this Defendant.  Well, for that reason I didn't seek to mark it.  :  Well, I'm asking that it be marked because an  examination has been conducted with respect to it.  It  just -- it's admissible, but its admissibility is  limited.  I'm not going to argue about it.  I'm happy to have  it marked.  All right.  628.  RAR:  62 8, tab 20.  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 628 - Tab 20, Memo from N. Sterritt dated  October 5, 1984)  Mr. Sterritt, would you refer to tab 21, please?  I'm sorry, there's another document in that tab.  I  take it you're not referring to that.  I don't know what the document is.  It's not in my  tab.  It relates to the Carrier-Sekanni Tribal Council in  Prince George.  Oh, that should be in 21, my lord.  In 21.  Oh, all right.  It was in 20 in mine.  Oh,  I'm sorry.  I have an extra copy, that's all.  I'll  give it back to Mr. Rush.  I guess that's a point we wanted to make twice over.  Thank you.  Please refer to tab 21, Mr. Sterritt.  Yes.  All right.  Have you seen this document?  Yes, I have.  Did you receive a copy of it?  Yes, Edward John from Prince George sent it on to me.  Okay.  And was the trapline policy "use it or lose it" 7124  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  THE  known to you?  A   Yes, and this was an expression of it.  Q   What did you understand the "use it or lose it" policy  to be?  A   That if in the opinion of the Department of Fish and  Wildlife a Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en person were not  using their hereditary territory that the --  GOLDIE:  Well, my lord, the policy is stated in the  document.  Why is it necessary for Mr. Sterritt to  misstate it?  RUSH:  There is a big presumption that the Provincial  Government always correctly states its own policy.  GOLDIE:  Well —  RUSH:  But —  GOLDIE:  I won't defend that presumption, but when the  witness is asked what his understanding is of a  statement which is printed in black and white, surely  we don't need to waste our time over that.  RUSH:  Well —  COURT:  Well, this is the old problem of the unlimited use  of the hearsay rule.  He couldn't in chief say what  Mr. John told him; similarly, he couldn't say what Mr.  John told him by letter as proof of the truth of  what's stated.  But he can say as a result of that he  believes something -- what some policy was, if such is  the case.  I'm not sure that he's saying that, but he  might say, well, this is what they said the policy  was, but I didn't take that to mean that that was the  whole policy, it also included some refinement or some  further connected part, in which event if his state of  mind is relevant, he can give that evidence.  But are  we on that track, or are we just having Mr. Sterritt  read the document and tell us what he thinks we should  understand it to mean or --  MR. RUSH:  Well, this is a policy, presumably, that impacted in  the area of concern of Mr. Edward John.  My question  was in respect of the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en was  there such a policy and what did he understand it to  be and was it the same policy, and in my submission  there's nothing offensive about that.  I think he can say what he understood the government  policy was on use or lose, if I can call it that.  THE COURT  MR  RUSH:  Q  Mr. Sterritt, the reference is made in the November  30th, 1984, letter to Mr. Edward John from Mr. Kenneth  N. Child of the Ministry of Environment to a trapline  policy as "use it or lose it."  Was such a policy in 7125  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  force by the Ministry of Environment in the Gitksan  and Wet'suwet'en territories?  A   Yes.  It was to be applied generally, and the -- if  the traplines were, in the minds of the Fish and  Wildlife Department, not being used, some other person  could be assigned that area, and it meant further non-  Gitksan or Wet'suwet'en people to deal with within our  territory.  It was of great concern to the hereditary  chiefs.  MR. RUSH:  May that be marked as an exhibit?  THE COURT:  62 9.  (EXHIBIT 629 - Tab 21, Letter dated November 30, 1984,  re Trapline Policy)  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  MR.  at Exhibit 22, please, Mr. Sterritt.  This  you received from Mr. Saunders?  And —  RUSH:  Q   Please look  is a letter  A   Yes, it is.  RUSH:  All right.  REGISTRAR:  Date?  RUSH:  Q   December the 4th, 1984.  And had there been a meeting between yourself and  Mr. Saunders and Mr. Marshall concerning the  implementation of the proposed blanket trapline?  Yes, I've already referred to that earlier.  May this be an exhibit, please?  Yes, 630.  A  MR. RUSH:  THE COURT  THE REGISTRAR:  630, tab 22.  RUSH:  Q  A  A  (EXHIBIT 630 - Tab 22, Letter dated December 4, 1984,  from Mr. Saunders)  Please refer to tab 23, Mr. Sterritt.  This is a  document, in quotes, "'THE GITKSAN-WET'SUWET'EN  BLANKET TRAPLINE PROPOSAL' submitted to the Department  of Fish and Wildlife on February 19, 1985 at  Hagwilget, B.C."  Can you identify this document as  one that you know?  Yes, that's the document that was presented on that  date.  All right.  Was this at a meeting with representatives  from the Department of Fish and Wildlife?  Yes, Barry Saunders, the regional director from Prince  George.  Rick Marshall I think was also there.  There 7126  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 was at least -- there was the three of them.  2 Q   All right.  And this document was presented to them?  3 A   Yes, it was.  4 Q   Would you look at page 2, please, and would you look  5 at the background that's stated there under the  6 heading "Background" on pages 2 and 3?  7 A   Yes.  8 Q   Now, is the background that's stated there, so far as  9 you are aware, accurate?  10 A   Yes, it is.  11 Q   Okay.  Now, if you'll just turn, please, to page 5,  12 and this is a page with the heading "Gitksan-  13 Wet'suwet'en Blanket Trapline Proposal."  I wonder,  14 would you review that page, please, Mr. Sterritt?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   Does that accurately set out the terms of the blanket  17 trapline proposal?  18 A   Yes.  19 Q   And would you please turn to the next page, the page  20 containing the heading "Policy on traplines registered  21 by non-Indians."  Is that policy on traplines  22 registered by non-Indians a part of the proposal that  2 3 you knew?  24 A   Yes, it is.  25 Q   Okay.  And does that accurately state that policy as  26 proposed by the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council?  27 A   Yes, it does.  28 Q   Now, Mr. Sterritt, just looking at Appendix A and  2 9 Appendix B -- reference is made to Appendix A and B on  30 page 2 in these words:  31  32 "In 1984 documents were prepared to implement  33 the Blanket Trapline."  34  35 Is it your understanding that that was the purpose of  36 Appendix A and B that are set out in blank form to  37 this document?  38 A   Yes, it is.  39 Q   All right.  Now, if you'll just turn to page 2 again  40 and read the opening paragraphs there.  41 A   Yes.  42 MR. RUSH:  Now, the opening paragraphs just preceding the word  43 "Background," so far as you are aware are those  44 accurate?  45 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, how can he be asked to give that answer, my  46 lord?  He's not qualified to give that.  47 THE COURT:  Is it necessary that he answer that question, Mr. 7127  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 Rush?  2 MR. RUSH:  No, it's not necessary.  I think it's been answered  3 before.  But just to answer my friend's objection, I  4 see no reason for the absence of his qualifications  5 than it is -- than in respect of any other hereditary  6 chief that's been asked questions of a similar kind.  7 THE COURT:  Well, the last paragraph before "Background," for  8 example, is clearly ambiguous.  9 MR. RUSH:  If it is, my lord, then almost every hereditary chief  10 that's given evidence has given evidence of that kind.  11 It's in the nature of the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en  12 system.  13 THE COURT:  Well, that may be.  I just know that there's always  14 difficulty with this kind of a problem.  It's the  15 problem of wrapping things up in a nice package and  16 tying a ribbon on it and sort of dropping it in  17 evidence as a statement -- as a matter of fact when  18 it's at best a question of mixed fact and opinion.  19 MR. RUSH:  My lord, I don't intend to press this.  In my  20 submission, the evidence has been given on that  21 subject already --  22 THE COURT:  All right.  23 MR. RUSH:  -- at some length by other hereditary chiefs.  24 THE COURT:  All right.  25 MR. RUSH:  But I say that Mr. Sterritt is as competent as any of  2 6 them to give this evidence.  27 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, we can debate that later.  28 MR. RUSH:  May I have this marked as an exhibit?  29 THE COURT:  No objection?  30 MR. GOLDIE:  No.  31 THE COURT:  All right.  631  32 THE REGISTRAR:  631, tab 23.  33  34 (EXHIBIT 631 - Tab 23, "The Blanket Trapline Proposal"  35 dated February 19, 1985)  36  37 MR. RUSH:  38 Q   Now, Mr. Sterritt, would you please turn to page 24 --  39 excuse me -- tab 24?  Have you seen this letter  40 before, Mr. Sterritt?  41 A   Yes, I have.  42 Q   And it's a letter from Mr. J.H.C. Walker, Director of  43 Wildlife Branch of the Ministry of Environment, to Mr.  44 Ralph Michell of July 9th, 1985.  Mr. Michell, was he  45 a member of the Gitksan-Wet'suwet'en Tribal Council  46 Association in July 9th of 1985?  47 A   Yes, and an employee of the Tribal Council at that 712?  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  THE  THE  MR.  A  Q  A  Q  A  time.  Did he have a special task in respect of the blanket  trapline?  Yes,  What was that?  It was his responsibility to follow through on this  proposal, and hold meetings, and carry out  correspondence, and develop some of the proposals that  are in -- that we've already talked about here.  Is Mr. Ralph Michell a hereditary chief?  Yes, his name is Wii Seeks.  And when Pete Muldoe  became Gitludahl, Ralph Michell became -- held the  name Wii Seeks.  I think the evidence is that the name Wii Seeks passed  in December of 1985.  Did Mr. Michell hold a  hereditary chief's name prior to that time?  Yes, his name at that time was Aa'lagat.  Again, please?  Aa'lagat.  Aa'lagat.  And you were present at the Tribal Council  at this time, Mr. Sterritt?  Yes, I was.  The letter came to your attention, did it?  Yes, Ralph Michell.  Can this be an exhibit, please?  Yes, 632.  632.  REGISTRAR:  Aa'lagat is 1562 on the word list.  COURT:  Pardon?  REGISTRAR:  Aa'lagat.  COURT:  Thank you.  (EXHIBIT 632 - Letter dated July 9, 1985, from J.  Walker to R. Michell)  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  RUSH:  COURT:  RUSH:  RUSH  Q  Please look to tab 25, Mr. Sterritt.  Is this a letter  that you directed to Mr. D. Steventon of the Ministry  of Environment in July the 11th, 1985?  A   Yes, it is.  Q   And it says at the beginning of this, Mr. Sterritt:  "It has come to my attention that you have  been writing to members of the Gitksan-  Wet 'suwet 'en Tribal Council with respect to  a proposed new trapline administration  program." 7129  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2 What did that refer to?  3 A   It was the -- the assignment of trapline numbers,  4 quoted numbers.  It was the re -- redefinition of  5 trapline boundaries through a -- on the 1 to 126,500  6 scale maps, a redefinition of the boundaries, and also  7 the requirement of -- of the -- the number being  8 assigned in order to -- for royalties to be paid to  9 the Province.  The -- it was the redefinition of their  10 trapline programme that was of great concern to the  11 Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en.  12 Q   At the bottom of the page you say -- you quote their  13 proposal and then you go on in the last sentence:  14  15 "For that reason, we are opposed to the  16 implementation of your management plan until  17 our lawsuit against the Province of British  18 Columbia is resolved."  19  20 To your knowledge, did the management plan proceed or  21 cease at that point?  22 A   The plan proceeded, although we were effective in --  23 we made a trip to Victoria to meet with Barry Saunders  24 and other persons, James Morrison; Ken Muldoe,  25 Delgamuukw; myself; Alfred Joseph, Gisdaywa.  And the  26 Province was requiring that you register one acre of  27 land by a lake and you had to put a number, a tag on  28 your cabin, and we would not accept that.  We went,  29 and as I recall, the Province drew back on that, but  30 other than that, they proceeded on the other fronts.  31 Q   There were discussions prior to the summer of 1985  32 with representatives of the Ministry of the  33 Environment regarding the trapline proposal.  Did  34 these discussions result in the implementation of the  35 proposal?  36 A   No, they did not.  37 Q   What happened to the proposal?  38 A   The Province's -- the Province rejected the proposal,  39 could not accept several parts of it, and that was the  40 end of that -- of the proposal at that point.  41 THE COURT:  Are you tendering this letter, Mr. Grant — Mr.  42 Rush?  43 MR. MACAULAY:  My lord, I notice the letter refers to an  44 attached list, which isn't attached.  Is that the same  45 list as we find at tab 23, Exhibit 631?  46 THE COURT:  I don't — there is a reference to —  47 MR. MACAULAY:  In the first paragraph there is a reference to 7130  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  2  THE  3  MR.  4  THE  5  MR.  6  7  MR.  8  9  MR.  10  THE  11  12  MR.  13  MR.  14  15  THE  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  MR.  27  28  29  30  31  MR.  32  33  34  MR.  35  36  MR.  37  THE  38  39  40  MR.  41  THE  42  MR.  43  44  THE  45  46  47  MR.  the —  COURT:  Oh, yes.  MACAULAY:  — list of trappers.  COURT:  I don't know if Mr. Rush can answer that or not.  RUSH:  I can't answer that.  This is the document that I  have.  MACAULAY:  Well, that's not the document; it's part of the  document.  RUSH:  Excuse me.  This is the document that I have.  COURT:  This is all that Mr. Rush has at the moment, I  gather.  RUSH:  That's right.  MACAULAY:  Well, I suggest that perhaps the rest of it be  produced and marked.  COURT:  I notice also in the third last paragraph:  "We enclose for your information, our maps  which encompass the claims of all the  Indian trappers within the Gitksan and  Wet'suwet'en territories."  There's only one attached to mine.  This document may  be marked as the next exhibit, 633, but it's obviously  incomplete, and the balance of the document should be  brought forward, if you can identify it, and --  RUSH:  Well, as I said, my lord, this is the document that I  have.  This is the document that was listed on the  Plaintiffs' list.  This is all of the document that  I've had.  I'm happy to ask Mr. Sterritt about his  knowledge concerning the other --  MACAULAY:  It makes no difference what counsel happens to  have in the courtroom at the moment.  That's not the  point.  RUSH:  Well, I don't have another document in my files at my  office.  This is the document that I have.  MACAULAY:  I'm sure it is.  COURT:  I take it that what Mr. Macaulay is saying is  that -- I'm not sure that he's objecting to this being  marked.  MACAULAY:  No.  COURT:  You're not?  MACAULAY:  I'm not objecting.  I'm saying what ought to be  marked is the whole document.  COURT:  Well, inasmuch as there's no objection, I'm going to  mark it as 633, and presumably the Province has the  original?  GOLDIE:  That's a reasonable assumption, my lord.  The 7131  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  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  document itself is not familiar to me.  THE COURT:  Yes.  MR. GOLDIE:  I'll make some inquiries about it.  THE COURT:  Well, it's incomplete in its present form, and I'll  be grateful if counsel could do what they can to see  that the balance of the document is brought forward  and attached to the exhibit.  MR. GOLDIE:  I'm sure it's not listed in our documents.  It was  marked without prejudice, but I assume that's now been  waived.  THE COURT:  Yes, it's out of the way now.  All right.  Thank  you.  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  MR.  MR.  MR.  (EXHIBIT 633  Steventon)  Letter dated July 11, 1985, to D.  RUSH:  Q  A  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  COURT  RUSH:  Q  Mr. Sterritt, on the face of this document it  indicates that a list of Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en  trappers was attached.  To your knowledge, was such a  list attached to this document?  I believe that it was, yes.  Okay.  :  And a number of maps?  My lord, I'm going to come to that, if I can.  :  All right.  If I can just --  :  Yes.  Go ahead.  is  Was that the list?  If  The list that it refers to there, what list is that,  do you know?  A   It's one of two lists, but I believe it's the list  that we saw earlier in the document.  Q   All right.  I just want to take you back to -- I'll  just take you back to Exhibit 624 at tab 15.  There  a list attached there of trappers  A   I thought I saw another one in here.  RUSH:  There is another one.  That's my first question  you'll turn to tab 23, there is a list that is  attached --  GOLDIE:  Appendix C.  RUSH:  Q   -- as Appendix C and appendix -- yes, Appendix C.  And there is also a list entitled "Wet'suwet'en  Trappers."  Appendix C is Gitksan trappers and the  Wet'suwet'en trappers.  Can you recall if that was the  list that was appended? 7132  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1  A  2  THE  COURT  3  MR.  RUSH:  4  Q  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  A  13  14  Q  15  A  16  Q  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  33  34  35  Q  36  37  A  38  39  MR.  RUSH:  40  THE  COURT  41  42  MR.  RUSH:  43  THE  COURT  44  45  THE  REGIS1  46  47  I believe that's the list.  :  That's Exhibit 624?  That's Exhibit 631, my lord.  And that is the blanket  trapline proposal that was submitted to the Department  of Fish and Wildlife on February the 19th, 1985.  Now, Mr. Sterritt, reference is made on page 2 --  well, firstly, before we go to the reference on page  2, appended to this copy is a photocopy of what  appears to be a map with a number of numbers on it.  Can you recognize what this map is?  That's a copy of the trapline registration maps used  by the Ministry of the Environment.  All right.  And that's -- that's what it is.  All right.  Now, in page 2 it says:  "You refer to maps of trapping territories.  The Tribal Council has drafted maps of our  aboriginal territory and these maps are  joined with reference to the hereditary  Chiefs.  We enclose for your information,  our maps which encompass the claims of all  the Indian trappers within the Gitksan and  Wet'suwet'en territories."  Was such a map included within this letter, to your  knowledge?  As I recall, it was, yes.  Do you know what it was?  It would have been -- it would not have been that.  That would have been sent as an example, but maps done  by the -- by the Tribal Council of the territory of  the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en.  Was this just one map or was it a number of maps, to  your knowledge?  Well, the plural is used there.  I'm going back three  years in trying to recall.  I can't tell you.  All right.  :  Do you want to adjourn, Mr. Rush, or is there  something else you want to do this afternoon?  No, I think that's fine, my lord.  :  All right.  Thank you.  Ten o'clock tomorrow  morning.  PRAR:  Order in court.  This court will adjourn until  10:00 a.m. 7133  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  1 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED UNTIL 10:00 A.M., JUNE 22,  2 1988)  3  4 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  5 a true and accurate transcript of the  6 proceedings herein to the best of my  7 skill and ability.  8  9  10 Leanna Smith  11 Official Reporter  12 United Reporting Service Ltd.  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 7134  N.J. Sterritt (For Plfs.)  In chief by Mr. Rush  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

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.1-0019482/manifest

Comment

Related Items