Open Collections

Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts

[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1989-01-24] British Columbia. Supreme Court Jan 24, 1989

Item Metadata


JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019519.json
JSON-LD: delgamuukw-1.0019519-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): delgamuukw-1.0019519-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: delgamuukw-1.0019519-rdf.json
Turtle: delgamuukw-1.0019519-turtle.txt
N-Triples: delgamuukw-1.0019519-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: delgamuukw-1.0019519-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 11161  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Vancouver, B.C.  2 January 24, 1989  3  4 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  In the Supreme Court of British  5 Columbia, Vancouver, this Tuesday, January 24, 1989.  6 Calling Delgamuukw versus Her Majesty the Queen at  7 bar.  I caution the witness you're still under oath.  8 MR. GRANT:  My lord, before my friend commences, Ms. Mandell  9 requested that I raise a matter.  Apparently,  10 herself -- she and Mr. Willms -- there's a difference  11 as to requirement for production of certain documents  12 of Dr. Rigsby, who you may recall is the second  13 linguist who by agreement between counsel last  14 September is not required to be called back from  15 Australia.  And she requested that I contact Mr.  16 Willms, which I did this morning, and this matter  17 should be -- I think both counsel believe it probably  18 has to be dealt with by your lordship.  I would ask  19 that it be dealt with -- she's unavailable today, but  20 I ask that it could be dealt with at some time either  21 a little earlier than Miss Harris or at the end of  22 some time this week at your lordship's convenience.  23 Mr. Willms advised me that any time was convenient to  24 him, and Ms. Mandell said that any time other than  25 today.  She has a personal matter and she's  26 unavailable today.  27 THE COURT:  How long do counsel think it will take?  28 MR. GRANT:  I think it — I would estimate — I don't think it  29 would take longer than 15, 20 minutes.  30 THE COURT:  All right.  Well, would it be convenient to counsel  31 here now if we fixed four o'clock tomorrow afternoon  32 to do it?  33 MR. GRANT:  That's perfectly satisfactory.  And I think Ms.  34 Mandell will speak to it.  Mr. Willms said Mr. Goldie  35 or Ms. Sigurdson may speak to it from their side.  3 6 THE COURT  37 MR. GRANT  3 8    THE COURT  Well, four o'clock tomorrow afternoon.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Mr. Goldie.  39 MR. GOLDIE:  My lord, I wonder if I might hand up a second  40 volume.  Might that be put before the witness.  Mrs.  41 Harris, yesterday --  42 THE COURT:  Should we call this 860A?  43 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, that would be fine, my lord.  There are tabs  44 in it.  45 THE COURT:  Tab numbers.  46 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  47 THE COURT:  860A. 11162  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  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 REGISTRAR:  Thank you.  MR. GRANT:  That's the whole volume, my lord?  MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  THE COURT:  Yes.  But without a tab number it won't be an  exhibit.  MR. GRANT:  Right.  (EXHIBIT 860A - A.G.B.C CROSS-EXAM BOOK II - HEATHER  HARRIS)  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. GOLDIE:  Q   Yesterday you may recall we discussed Mr. Hyzims?  Yes.  And you told me that you had an interview with him,  and I have been unable to find any record of your  interview with Mr. Hyzims.  It was in yesterday's binder.  I beg your pardon?  It was in the binder yesterday, the rough genealogy.  Oh, that was the record of your interview?  That's correct.  I see.  Because I didn't understand that that was what  you were referring to.  What we did do was search  through the documents again, or at least as best we  could, and we did find a record of an interview Mr.  Hyzims had with Don Ryan.  Now, if you'd look under  tab 17, you'll find we have reproduced there from the  notes that were sent to us all that was found under a  file marked "Haakasxw."  That first page has got our  numbers on it, but that was what was in there.  Now,  that -- the B, blue volume 3, I brought these  documents up, our collection of the documents, and the  blue volume refers to these five, and the white  volumes are these three, but it's all the notes that  were sent to us in the week of January 9th.  This is  what we found under this.  Now, the page B173, if  you'd look at the lower right-hand corner and turn to  that.  A   I assume this is it.  It doesn't have a number on it.  MR. GOLDIE:  No, keep on.  There is — right at the lower  right-hand corner there are some B numbers, which we  have put on it.  THE COURT:  We have 2 and 4 and a page in between without a  number on it.  MR. GOLDIE:  Q   Well, that's part of 2.  A   I see.  I'm sorry. 11163  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   Yes.  And then -- it may be 3, but in any event it's  2 followed by 4, 5, and then there's a draft genealogy,  3 and then there's 173.  4 A   Yes, I see.  5 Q   Do you have that?  6 A   Yes, I do.  7 Q   That's in your handwriting?  8 A   Yes, it is.  9 Q   And it records what Mr. Don Ryan told you Mr. Ernie  10 Hyzims told him?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   Now, the third item, there's a name and then, "Selma  13 Milton (adopted by Ernie)."  If that was the case,  14 Selma Milton being Evelyn Johnson's daughter, wouldn't  15 that put all of the children of Selma and Vernon  16 Milton, who are shown as being in the House of  17 Duubisxw, into Mr. Hyzims' house, Gwagl'lo?  18 A   Not necessarily.  As I think I've said a few times  19 before, at the time of an adoption it's determined by  20 the chiefs concerned, those from the house that the  21 woman is from and the house she's going to, whether  22 the children go with her or not.  23 Q   All right.  And if, however, she alone was adopted,  24 that would put her into the House of Gwagl'lo?  25 A   Yes.  26 Q   And that would substantiate what Mr. Hyzims claimed in  27 the -- in the list of house membership that he filed  28 with the response to his interrogatory?  29 A   Concerning Selma Milton, yes.  30 Q   Yes.  Did you accept the proposition that Mr. Hyzims  31 stated to Mr. Ryan that Selma Milton had been adopted  32 by Mr. Hyzims?  33 A   I didn't get a chance to confirm it.  34 Q   So you didn't use it?  35 A   That's correct.  36 Q   But you had before you as confirmation, did you not,  37 the affidavit he swore that his house membership  38 included Selma Milton?  39 A   I don't know if I had time to really deal with those.  40 Some of those house members lists from the affidavits  41 were given to me, but by that time I wasn't doing too  42 much further in actual genealogical research.  I was  43 busy writing the report at that time, I believe.  44 Q   I see.  Of course, if Mr. Hyzims had adopted Evelyn  45 Johnson, that would put her into the House of  46 Gwagl'lo, wouldn't it?  47 A   That's correct. 11164  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   Was that ever suggested to you?  2 A   Not that I remember.  3 Q   My lord, I'd like to ask that the documents under --  4 by the way, what relationship has that page got to the  5 House of Haakasxw, which is -- we found it under?  6 A   Haakasxw.  These names belong to different houses, I  7 believe, but the first person -- no, I'm -- Larry  8 Pierre.  I -- it may be misfiled.  I'm not certain.  9 Larry Pierre.  10 Q   It doesn't really have anything to do with that house,  11 does it?  12 A  Maybe it doesn't because Ernest and Alec Brown are  13 from Gwagl'lo.  Roddy Sampare is too.  It probably  14 shouldn't have been under Gwagl'lo.  15 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  And this would appear — well, all right.  16 But we'll -- if I may, since they're altogether in  17 Mrs. Harris' material, I'd ask that the entire -- that  18 all that is under tab 17 be Exhibit 860A-17.  19 MR. GRANT:  My lord, my only concern is that the witness have an  20 opportunity just to look at those to ensure that these  21 were the materials out of her files -- she hasn't had  22 a chance to look at this tab other than this one  23 page -- before they be marked.  I think she should  24 have the opportunity.  25 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, certainly.  That's why I brought these  2 6 volumes up here.  27 THE COURT:  Well, she can look at it and satisfy herself that  28 they are her files.  29 MR. GOLDIE:  In point of fact, except with respect to the  30 responses to the interrogatories, which are in there,  31 they appear all to be in Mrs. Harris' handwriting.  32 But does your lordship wish to order that marked now?  33 THE COURT:  Well, she's looking at the documents.  We'll just  34 make sure that there's nothing in that regard.  35 THE WITNESS:  Mr. Goldie, did you say these were in the Haakasxw  36 file?  37 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  38 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Well —  39 THE COURT:  At the moment we're not concerned with whether  40 they're correctly filed or misfiled.  41 THE WITNESS:  Okay.  42 THE COURT:  The question is really whether they're your  4 3 documents.  44 THE WITNESS:  Yes, yes, they seem to be my documents, but the  45 filing is questionable.  46 THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  That will be 860A-17.  47 11165  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 (EXHIBIT 860A-17 - DOCUMENTS EXTRACTED FROM FILE OF  2 HEATHER HARRIS)  3  4 MR. GRANT:  My lord, of course, I think the last two appear to  5 be portions of interrogatory answers, which were --  6 they may be in her files, but, of course, they aren't  7 her documents.  I thinks that's what --  8 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, I'm not suggesting they are.  9 THE COURT:  They're just documents that were in her file.  10 MR. GRANT:  Yes.  11 MR. GOLDIE:  12 Q   And to which she had access, of course.  All right.  13 Thank you.  14 Now, yesterday we were also talking about  15 Antgulilbix, but I am -- I am going to, in the  16 interests of time, skip over a good part of that.  Our  17 continuing examination of the material you sent us has  18 answered a number of questions that I had, but I do  19 have a couple, and I want to refer to page 93 of your  20 report.  Now, footnote 5 on that page is the English  21 equivalent of certain Gitksan kinship terms and  22 constitutes the answer you gave to a question on your  23 Rule 28 questionnaire; is that right?  24 A   Yes.  25 Q   And would you agree with me that in a society where  26 the same word covers a number of relationships it is  27 necessary to go beyond the terms, the Gitksan terms  28 that are found on page 93 and 94?  29 A   I believe I've said that here, yes.  30 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes, you have.  And indeed you have to, I suggest,  31 go beyond even the terms that are used in page 14,  32 which I think you said -- not page 14, but --  33 THE COURT:  94.  34 MR. GOLDIE:  35 Q   The English terms which genealogists use to express  36 kinship relationships?  37 A   That's correct.  38 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Page 16.  39 MR. GOLDIE:  16, yes.  Thank you.  The terms that are set out on  40 page 60.  41 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, 60 or 16?  42 MR. GOLDIE:  43 Q   16, my lord  44 A   Yes, that's correct.  45 Q   Yes.  And, for instance, if I may take you back to  46 page 93, the word "nox" means both mother, natural  47 mother, adopted mother, stepmother, and the woman who 11166  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 raises you as if she were your mother, as well as  2 mother's sister and father's wife.  And the word  3 ts'iits, t-s-i-i-t-s, means a variety of female  4 relatives.  You really have to have something more  5 than the advise that somebody was another person's  6 sister if you are to get the biological connection  7 correct; isn't that right?  8 A   That's correct.  9 Q   Yes.  And, in effect, when somebody states that so and  10 so is my sister, you have to ask the rather indelicate  11 question, "Did she come from the same womb as you"?  12 A   That may be indelicate in your culture, but it's not  13 in Gitksan, and my common way to deal with that is  14 when someone says "sister," because that term could be  15 used so broadly, I say same mother, same father, and  16 if they confirm same mother, same father, then I know  17 that that's what they're referring to.  18 Q   The word "mother" in the Gitksan language covers both  19 natural mother and adopted mother, doesn't it?  20 A   Yes.  21 Q   So how did you make sure that they were talking about  22 one as opposed to the other?  23 A   Because people take the meaning of words from the  24 context as well, and if I say, "Is she your real  25 mother," which would be commonly the way I'd put it,  26 someone would tell me yes or they'd say, "No, she just  27 raised me."  And if I say, "Is she your real sister,  28 same mother, same father," it became very clear what I  29 meant.  And, of course, many of these relationships  30 were confirmed by other people discussing the same  31 person.  32 Q   Yes.  Now, that is -- that is a relatively simple way  33 of assuring yourself that you are distinguishing a  34 biological connection as opposed to a connection that  35 the custom of the society equates to the biological  36 connection?  37 A   Through the kinship terminology?  38 Q   Yes.  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   And that may be satisfactory or reasonably  41 satisfactory with respect to the speaker's generation?  42 A   It -- it works with every generation because you're  43 breaking it down --  44 Q   Well —  45 A   -- constantly breaking it down.  46 Q   Yes.  47 A   If I'm discussing -- if someone says, "She's my 11167  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 grandmother," and they're talking about house members,  2 I would go -- I would assume that the most likely  3 relationship would be mother's mother, and I would --  4 I would ask that.  5 Q   Once you get beyond the speaker's generation or the  6 speaker's -- even the generation preceding that of the  7 speaker, aren't you confronted with the problem that  8 an adopted person enjoys the same perquisites and is  9 regarded in the same light as a natural born or a  10 person biologically in the lineage?  11 A   That doesn't detract from people knowing who is the  12 real child of whom.  13 Q   That may not, except in the second and third  14 generation removed because there is no word that  15 distinguishes an adopted grandmother or a person who  16 is a grandmother but who is adopted in the lineage, is  17 there?  18 A   There is just the same as there is in English.  It's  19 no different.  20 Q   Well, I don't see it in your vocabulary here.  21 A  Well, you have to use two words just like you do in  22 English.  Adopted mother or -- I mean adopted  23 daughter.  24 Q   In your vocabulary the word in the grandmother's  25 generation does not distinguish between a natural  26 mother -- I'm sorry -- does not distinguish a natural  27 mother from a mother who raised you?  28 A   The English side of this list of kinship terms on 93  29 to 95 was determined by one of the questions --  30 Q   That's correct.  31 A   -- on the interrogatories.  32 Q   Yes.  33 A   It's not an exhaustive list, and you note at the top  34 it says, "Some Gitksan kinship terms..."  35 Q   Yes.  36 A   So —  37 Q   These are essentially the same meanings as Miss  38 Kasakoff has in her thesis; is that not correct?  39 A   I haven't compared the two in detail.  40 Q   Well, perhaps you'd be good enough to look under tab  41 11 of the white book.  Do you recognize that as Dr.  42 Kasakoffs thesis?  43 A   Yes, I do.  44 Q   And is there not a substantial vocabulary beginning at  45 page 132?  46 A   Yes, there is.  47 Q   Yes.  And that was contributed to by Dr. Rigsby? 1116?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Yes, that's what it says.  2 Q   Yes.  And aren't the -- aren't the words there and  3 some of the definitions virtually the same as you have  4 provided us?  5 A  Well, it would take me quite a while to determine  6 that, but I would assume that they would be.  But I  7 haven't --  8 Q   But you didn't use that as a source?  9 A   No, I got mine all from original sources.  10 Q   Who was your source?  11 A   I worked with the linguists that were working for the  12 Tribal Council, and I asked other informants as well.  13 Q   Well, the linguist is Susan Marsden?  14 A   No.  I'm sorry, I mean the translators.  15 Q   All right.  16 A   That was Fern Stevens and Sadie Howard.  And we had a  17 group of people that discussed -- quite a large group  18 of people discussed these terms.  I remember Neil  19 Sterritt Sr. was there.  Gee, I'm sorry, I can't  20 remember who was there.  It was quite a large group.  21 Q   All right.  I'm going to take one further example, and  22 I'm going to refer you to tab 10 of the white book,  23 which are extracts from the evidence of Mrs. Mary  24 Johnson.  Now, Mrs. Johnson was being asked about the  25 genealogy.  26 A  Which page is this, please?  27 Q   657.  It's about the fifth page in.  Or, actually,  28 eighth page in.  Have you got it now?  2 9 A   Yes, I do.  30 Q   She was being asked about the genealogy that you  31 prepared.  Do you see at the top of the page, line 1,  32 Mr. Grant's question:  33  34 "Q    It's on page 6 of the genealogy, My Lord.  35 And she was the mother of Fred White?  36 A    Yes.  37 Q    Who held Tsibasaa,"  38  39 and so on.  40  41 "Q    Is there anyone else that you would refer  42 to as your grandmother?  43 A   An elderly lady that -- she's my great-  44 great-grandmother, another great-great-  45 grandmother --  46 Q    Yes?  47 A    -- from Kitwanga.  She married a chief in 11169  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Kitwanga."  2  3 I suggest to you that there isn't any way that there  4 is a distinction between the -- whether that  5 grandmother was adopted in the lineage or was born  6 into the lineage?  7 A   From the information there, you're absolutely right.  8 Q   Yes.  And she would refer to that person in exactly  9 the same terms whether the connection was biological  10 or adopted?  11 A   Not necessarily.  It depends if she has more complete  12 information about that person.  She isn't asked for  13 more detailed information.  14 Q   There might not be any information because that person  15 would enjoy all of the standing that a natural-born  16 person in the lineage would?  17 A  Well, that may not be the reason that the  18 differentiation wasn't made.  It would be mostly  19 because of the passage of time.  20 Q   Yes.  21 A   But it's distinctly possible.  22 Q   And then line 26 Mrs. Johnson was asked:  23  24 "Q    Do you recall a man whose English name was  25 Alexander Mowatt and he held the chief name  26 Gyetm galdoo, which is number 23 on the  27 list of plaintiffs' names.  Do you remember  2 8 that man, Alexander Mowatt?  29 A    From which tribe?  30 Q    His chief name was Gyetm galdoo from the  31 Frog tribe?  32 A    No.  33 Q    Let me ask you this question.  Do you  34 remember a relative of yours who was  35 married to him whose chief name -- it's  36 number 22...was Ax dii wii gaa'wsxw."  37  38 And she repeated the name.  39  40 "Q    Yes.  41 A    Yes.  42 Q    Now, how would you refer to her?  43 A    She is my grandmother, that's her chief  44 name...She is my grandmother's cousin's  45 sister."  46  47 Now, that was a fairly precise identification, wasn't 11170  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 it?  2 A   No, not in genealogical terms.  3 Q   Well, I was going to say a fairly precise  4 identification in the terms that Mrs. Johnson was  5 using?  6 A  At that time.  7 Q   Yes.  8 A   But I spent many hours with Mrs. Johnson, and when  9 trying to determine the precise relationship, I would  10 break it down to the basic kinship terms and ask real  11 mother, real sister, etcetera.  12 Q   And —  13 A   I didn't go by vague information like this.  14 Q   And I'm suggesting to you that she might have no  15 information which would distinguish real mother from  16 adopted mother at that level.  17 A   That could be correct.  18 Q   Yes.  And at the next page she goes on, Mr. Grant's  19 question:  20  21 "Q    Thank you.  Do your remember her?  22 A    Yes, I've seen her.  That's another  23 grandmother too.  24 Q    And these were cousins of your mother?  25 A    Yes.  26 Q    But they would refer to each other as  27 sisters?  28 A    Yeah, yeah, and they were cousins to my  2 9 grandmother."  30  31 So that's another term that you would have to chase  32 down as far as you were able to?  33 A  Absolutely every one has to be chased down.  34 Q   Yes.  And any one of those cousins who called each  35 other sisters could have been adopted?  36 A   I suppose that's a possibility.  37 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  Now, I'm going to leave, as I say, some of  38 these questions with respect to Antgulilbix.  I want  39 to go on to one other aspect, however.  Could you have  40 the genealogy chart of Antgulilbix before you.  It's  41 tab --  42 THE REGISTRAR:  853, tab 1.  43 MR. GOLDIE:  44 Q   You confirmed the correction on page 1 that Mrs.  45 Johnson had made in her evidence, and that was that  46 Stewart Forsythe had been adopted by her and not by  47 one of her parents? 11171  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  A  2  3  4  5  6  7  Q  8  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  14  A  15  THE  COURT:  16  17  MR.  GOLDIE  18  THE  COURT:  19  MR.  GOLDIE  20  THE  COURT:  21  MR.  GOLDIE  22  Q  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  33  i  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  i  44  Q  45  46  47  A  It was never intended to mean that.  This isn't a  correction; it's just a different way of putting the  same thing.  As I mentioned earlier, it was intended  to denote that Mary Johnson adopted Stewart Forsythe  in a position more like a brother because they're of a  similar age, not like a child.  Well, the -- you said in your evidence when you were  asked how it came that you depicted on your chart what  you had depicted, you said that Mary Johnson herself  had used words that imported both brother and son?  I don't believe I said that.  I see.  All right.  Well, I'll check the note that I  have.  Um hum.  My note is that he was adopted by Mary Johnson, she  calls him a brother.  :  Yes.  That's all I've got.  :  But it was Mary Johnson who adopted her --  Oh, yes.  -- adopted him?  Yes.  Yes.  So the chart should be as Mary Johnson corrected  it in the stand, with the line, the dashed line --  It doesn't make any difference.  Well, excuse me.  -- and the dashed line should have  been, as she suggested it should have been, extending  the line that shows Brenda, Colette and Joanne as  having been adopted by Mary?  You're trying to put something into these symbols that  isn't there.  When I show -- if I had shown Stanley  Wilson as having adopted one of the people in the  house, and that would indicate the way you're  intimating, that he's adopting this person as a son.  The adoptions are not as a son, as a daughter, as a  particular relationship when you're talking about  adoption into a house; they are just adoptions into  the house.  In some cases people would refer to an  adoption and they might not even say a specific person  adopted this person, they might say the house adopted  this person, and this is just a convenient way to  diagram it.  Well, are you suggesting that it has no significance  so far as the inheritance of chiefly titles is  concerned?  Did I say anything like that?  I didn't, did I? 11172  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   I say are you suggesting that when a house adopts it  2 that's all it has done?  Isn't it of some importance  3 for the person adopted and for the house to know where  4 that person is in the lineage?  5 A   It doesn't work like that.  6 Q   Well, Mrs. Harris, let's just look at your diagram  7 again.  Is it not correct that if Stewart Forsythe was  8 Mrs. Johnson's son, adopted son, that he would be a  9 candidate for the inheritance of the title Tsibasaa?  10 A   You're reading something into them that is not there.  11 Stewart Forsythe --  12 Q   What is -- all right.  Go ahead.  13 A   Stewart Forsythe was adopted into the House of  14 Tsibasaa.  His position in that house is not defined  15 in precise relationship to one other member of the  16 house.  Mary Johnson was the person who initiated the  17 adoption into the house of Stewart Forsythe, and she  18 refers to him in the manner of a brother, but that  19 does not indicate in any way, shape or form that he is  20 a likely candidate to inherit the name, and it is an  21 absolute impossibility that that would occur.  22 Q   Yes.  Although he holds a chief's name, a minor name?  23 A  A minor chief's name.  And that's just to indicate the  24 respect in which he's held and the fact that he has  25 been a long standing friend and because a close -- I  26 believe he has contributed to the funeral feasts of  27 relatives of Mary Johnson's who have died, and so in  28 honour and respect they gave him a position to sit in  29 the feast hall.  30 Q   Well, she explained that he was a friend of her cousin  31 and he contributed to the latter's funeral feast, and  32 that's why he was adopted?  33 A   Right.  34 Q   Yes.  35 A   Right.  But he will never inherit, nor does the fact  36 that Mary adopted him indicate that.  37 Q   Let's assume for the sake of argument that Stewart  38 Forsythe or somebody bearing the chief's name that he  39 has was the natural son of Mary Johnson.  Would he not  40 be the preferred heir of the name Tsibasaa?  41 A   Yes, he would be.  42 Q   That's all that I was asking you to confirm.  43 A   But the one has nothing to do with the other.  44 Q   But if he was the brother, if he was the natural  45 brother of Mary Johnson, he would not be the preferred  46 heir of Tsibasaa?  47 A   He could be. 11173  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   In the absence of any other relationship?  2 A  As I say, there is no precise rules of inheritance.  3 Q   I thought there were.  4 A   I have never proclaimed that, never.  The --  5 Q   Preferences?  6 A   There are preferences, right.  7 Q   Yes.  Well, that's what I'm talking about.  8 A   Preferences, not rules.  9 Q   All right.  And when was your husband named Stanley  10 Wilson's heir?  11 A   Informally about two years before it was announced at  12 the feast that my husband put up on I believe it was  13 January 4th of 1987.  14 Q   All right.  Now, in your responses to your  15 questionnaire you say your husband was not born in a  16 chiefly lineage but was raised by a woman in such a  17 lineage.  Who was that?  18 A   Harriet Gawa, G-a-w-a.  19 Q   So in effect that is an adoption --  2 0 A   No.  21 Q   — by Harriet?  22 A   No.  Well, again, you're using an English word that  23 doesn't fit Gitksan terminology.  David was  24 Sihlguxhlxwst by Harriet, but he was not  25 Ts'imilguudit.  He was born in the House of Tsibasaa.  26 Q   You have used two -- you have distinguished two  27 different types of adoption.  28 A   No, I haven't.  I've distinguished two Gitksan  29 meanings for an English word that is vague in Gitksan  3 0 terms.  31 Q   Right.  32 A  And that's a very different thing.  33 Q   And with all of the vagueness that you want to  34 attribute to it --  35 A   To the English word.  36 Q   -- your husband was, in the English word, adopted  37 according to one of the terms you have used in your  38 discussion under the heading "Adoption" in your  39 report; isn't that correct?  40 A   You -- you -- I don't want any intimation that there  41 is vagueness involved in the Gitksan definition of the  42 words Ts'imilguudit and Sihlguxhlxwst.  There is  43 nothing vague about that whatsoever.  It's the English  44 word that's the problem, which you persist on using  45 when talking about two completely different kinds of  46 things about which there is no confusion whatsoever by  4 7 anybody. 11174  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  Q  2  A  3  Q  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  9  10  11  A  12  Q  13  A  14  THE COURT  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  MR. GOLDI  23  Q  24  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  Q  31  A  32  Q  33  A  34  Q  35  A  36  Q  37  38  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44  45  46  47  I'm not suggesting there is.  Well, it seems that because you keep bringing it up.  I am putting it to you that by having been raised by  Harriet Gawa, doesn't that constitute the "S" word  relationship?  Yes, that's correct.  Thank you.  And so far as the vocabulary is concerned,  whether it's the "S" word or the "T" word, the word  for adopted brother or adopted sister is exactly the  same?  What?  No.  No, no, no, no.  All right.  Would you turn to page 94, please?  Oh, okay.  Now --  :  I think that we're getting close to an argumentative  approach in this cross-examination, and I think it  should be avoided.  You'll have to forgive counsel,  Miss Harris, if they don't always put the questions as  precisely as you might wish.  You're entitled to have  it explained, but I don't think we should be getting  into arguments, and we're getting very close to that.  I think you should avoid it.  r:  Mrs. Harris, all I want you to do for me is on page  94, or by reference to anything else that you have,  tell me if there is a distinction in the Gitksan  language between a person who is raised by another  woman, not his mother, or a person who is adopted into  a house?  Absolutely.  Would you tell me what the distinction is, please?  Just as it is in English, as I explained before.  Is it on page 94?  No.  I see.  I explained this was not an exhaustive list.  I understand that.  We have on page 94 your statement  that the word -- the Gitksan word for adopted brother  is the same as the word for brother?  Right.  Yes.  Now --  As it is in English.  -- is there any distinction in the word "adopted"?  I -- I have said this -- I don't know how many times I  have to say this.  You have to use more than one word,  just as you do in English.  If a person -- if you have  an adopted brother or a natural brother, you call them  brother, and you have to use more than one word to 11175  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  1  2  3  Q  4  5  A  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  A  13  Q  14  A   '  15  Q  16  i  17  i  18  A  19  Q  20  21  A  22  Q  23  24  A  25  MR. GOLDIE  26  MR. GRANT:  27  MR. GOLDIE  28  MR. GRANT:  29  MR. GOLDIE  30  Q  31  ]  32  33  ]  34  A  35  Q  1  36  A  37  Q  38  39  A   '  40  Q  41  A   '  42  43  44  45  46  Q  47  distinguish them.  It's exactly the same in Gitksan.  You have to say adopted brother.  In the conversations that are had does Leonard Gawa  refer to your husband as brother?  Sometimes.  Yes.  And he uses the same word whether it is  referring to your husband or whether he's referring  to -- I don't believe he has a natural brother, does  he?  Yes, he does, Gordon Johnson.  Does he use the same word when he's talking about him?  Only at some times.  I see.  All right.  Thank you.  When it doesn't matter.  Now, there is one adoption out, which is shown as  Cheryl Stewart, and she went to the House of  Gitludahl?  Yes.  And that was because the population of that house was  on the decline; is that right?  Yes.  And that is one of the houses in which in fact all of  the living members are adopted?  That's correct.  :  And —  Which name did you ask about?  :  Cheryl Stewart.  Thank you.  Now, one other question about this.  Both Mary  McKenzie and Mary Johnson has told the Court that they  are princesses.  Now, what do you understand that  means?  That who are princesses?  Mary McKenzie and Mary Johnson.  That they were when they were young.  Well, I think the question was put to Mary Johnson are  you, and she said yes?  Well —  Would you tell me what the distinction is?  When they refer to a princess, they are usually  referring to -- you wouldn't call the chief themselves  a princess.  That would be the, in the case of a  woman, the chief's children or other close relatives.  For a man it would be his nieces.  Well, the appellation was princess, which is female,  is it not? 11176  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Right.  2 Q   All right.  Are you telling me that Mary Johnson was a  3 princess but ceased to be when she became a chief?  I  4 mean, I'm not --  5 A   Just as a --  6 Q   She succeeded to the chief's name?  7 A   Sure.  8 Q   So she no longer needs the name princess?  9 A   It's like becoming queen.  10 Q   Right.  Now, the definition of a person who is a  11 princess, forgetting about having become a chief, what  12 defines a princess?  13 A   It's usually the relationship between that person and  14 the -- that young person and the current chief.  15 Q   Well, doesn't it require more than that?  Isn't there  16 a relationship that requires four grandfathers who are  17 chiefs?  18 A   Not that I've ever heard.  19 MR. GOLDIE:  I see.  Well, I'm reading from Dr. Kasakoff's  20 thesis at page 24, if you'd like to follow me.  It's  21 under tab 11.  22 MR. GRANT:  Page 24?  23 MR. GOLDIE:  24 Q   Well, begins at the bottom of page 23, the last  25 paragraph.  26  27 "Informants mentioned one restriction on  28 marriage on which all agreed.  One could not  29 marry a member of one's own phratry.  30 Marriage within the phratry is called  31 g'aats, incest, and results in ostracism."  32  33 Now, apart from the terminology, you would agree with  34 that?  And by terminology I mean the use of the word  35 phratry.  36 A   Yes.  37 Q  38 "Informants mentioned positive marriage  39 preferences, but rarely agreed unanimously.  40 The one most stressed and on which there was  41 the most agreement, was for marriage to a  42 person of equal status."  43  44 And you have said that, have you not?  45 A   Not precisely, but I have said that it is one of the  46 preferences, for people of an equal status to marry.  47 Q 11177  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 "Chiefs must marry chiefs and commoners  2 commoners, since chiefs must have four  3 'grandfathers' who are chiefs -"  4  5 the word "grandfathers" is in quotation marks,  6  7 "mother's father, mother's mother's brother,  8 father's mother's brother, and father's  9 father.  This forms a 'royal line.'"  10  11 Isn't that what Mary McKenzie and Mary Johnson were  12 referring to?  13 A   I've never heard it precisely put this way, except for  14 by Dr. Kasakoff and possibly Dr. Adams, but what --  15 the way the Gitksan would put it is that your parents  16 would have to be of high rank to be a princess.  17 Q   Now, when Dr. Kasakoff there refers to commoners,  18 that's the distinction between -- I think it was Mr.  19 Sterritt in his evidence before the Penner Commission  20 used the phrase Simgiget and Laxgiget?  21 A   Yes.  22 Q   And a commoner is what, one without a name?  23 A   No, it's people without chiefs' names.  They could  24 have other names, but not chiefs' names.  25 Q   Oh, yes.  Thank you.  But the society is such that a  26 person without a chief's name can be adopted and given  27 a chief's name; isn't that right?  28 A  Adopted into the house or adopted from --  29 Q   Yes.  30 A   -- or raised by a woman?  31 Q   Any one of those?  32 A   It's -- yes, that's true, either one of them.  33 Q   That's how you described your husband, as having been  34 raised by a woman with a chiefly name?  35 A   Yes.  36 Q   Yes.  All right.  Are you familiar with a paper by Mr.  37 Ruyle, R-u-y-1-e, in the publication "Current  38 Anthropology" for December 1973?  And if you'd turn to  39 tab 12, you'll find it there.  40 A   No, I've never seen this.  41 Q   Well, would you look at page 608, please?  He suggests  42 three separate periods.  And this is in column two, my  43 lord, and the penultimate paragraph on that column  44 beginning with the words, "I shall distinguish."  Do  45 you see that?  46 A   Is he referring to West Coast society generally here  47 or specifically to Gitksan? 1117?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 MR. GOLDIE:   Well, he is referring, I think, to the West  2 Coast -- Northwest Coast.  I'm just asking you to look  3 at that, and I'm going to ask you to agree with me  4 with what is obvious, that he distinguishes between  5 three periods, "...a precontact period (up to about  6 1785), characterized by intensive intergroup trade,  7 slave raiding, and social classes; (2) a fur trade  8 period (1785 to about 1860), characterized by  9 continuation of aboriginal social structure with a  10 possible intensification of trade and stratification;  11 and (3) an acculturation period (after about 1860),  12 characterized by depopulation, beginning of white  13 settlement, domination by Euro-American economy, and  14 the disappearance of classes while rank remained."  Do  15 you accept that as being a reasonable grouping or a  16 reasonable characterization of historic periods?  17 MR. GRANT:  With respect to which group, my lord?  18 MR. GOLDIE:  19 Q   I'm now talking about the Gitksan.  20 A   No, I really wouldn't.  21 Q   What is precontact for you?  22 A  When -- well, there is two ways I believe that  23 precontact can be used, which -- precontact can refer  24 to the period during which there were no -- no  25 influences from Europeans, such as trade goods or  26 epidemics, and then it can also be used to refer to  27 the period in which -- before which the Gitksan  28 actually came into contact with Europeans.  So it can  29 be used in two ways as to be discerned.  30 Q   Give me your usage for both.  Before the Gitksan came  31 into contact with trade goods, which was, as I  32 understand, your first period?  33 A   This is kind of difficult too because it is suspected  34 that there were small amounts of trade goods that  35 possibly infiltrated into the area from -- over from  36 Alaska and across the Bering Strait possibly at very  37 early dates, but that -- these would be of very small  38 significance to the culture because the amounts would  39 be very small.  But I would say where trade goods  40 become -- I mean, this is kind of out of my -- my  41 area.  42 Q   Well, I —  43 A   But —  44 Q   The reason I'm asking you this is that you make a  45 reference to contact in your report.  46 A   Yes.  47 Q   And perhaps we can get to it directly.  What is the 11179  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 date you're referring to in your report when you talk  2 about contact?  3 A   I'm not sure of the exact reference in my report.  As  4 I say, I use it in two different manners, but I think  5 most commonly I talk about actual contact, which would  6 be, I believe, in the 1860s.  7 Q   18 —  8 A   -- 60s.  When I'm referring to actual contact.  But,  9 as I say, there is other references where I'm  10 referring to the period before which the epidemics  11 struck and trade goods became common from the coast.  12 Q   Well, the -- even taking your date of 1860, the  13 Gitksan society was characterized by three classes,  14 the chiefs, commoners, and slaves; is that not  15 correct?  16 A   The Gitksan were not as highly stratified as some  17 other West Coast societies.  And certainly slaves were  18 a distinct class, but "classes" I don't think is an  19 appropriate word.  There is an argument in -- over  20 whether rank or class should be applied to West Coast  21 societies, and I believe that rank is more appropriate  22 for Gitksan society because the -- the only difference  23 between the -- the -- the commoner and the chief is  24 that the chiefs may be the -- the children of the  25 older sisters and the commoners may be the children of  26 younger sisters in the same family, so there isn't a  27 real clear distinction.  So the Gitksan terminology of  28 Simgiget and Laxgiget is more appropriate because it  29 just distinguishes between those who have come to take  30 chiefs' names and those who don't have chiefs' names.  31 So a person who was Laxgiget can become Simgiget and  32 that's —  33 Q   Yes, we're well aware of that.  Thank you.  My  34 question to you was that there were three classes in  35 the Gitksan society before contact?  3 6 A  And my answer was no.  37 Q   I'm suggesting to you that there were slaves in that  38 society.  39 A  Which I agreed.  40 Q   Yes.  So there were chiefs, commoners, and slaves?  41 A   There were Simgiget, Laxgiget, and slaves, I would  42 agree.  43 Q   Right.  And the translation of those two is chiefs and  44 commoners?  45 A   Yes, but they're ranks, not classes.  That's where I  46 would disagree with you.  47 Q   All right.  And today there are two ranks, chiefs and 11180  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 commoners?  2 A   Yes.  3 Q   The slave category having disappeared?  4 A   Yes.  5 MR. GOLDIE:  And if you'd look at page 618 —  6 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, but in that classification on chiefs and  7 commoners today, do you refer to just head chiefs?  8 THE WITNESS:  No, not just house chiefs, but other people with  9 high ranking names as well.  10 THE COURT:  So chiefs include all those with high ranking names?  11 THE WITNESS:  That's correct.  12 MR. GOLDIE:  13 Q   If you'd look at page 618, there is a comment on this  14 paper by Mr. Adams or Professor Adams, who says in the  15 first paragraph:  16  17 "My wife, Alice Kasakoff, and I have carried  18 out fieldwork recently among the Gitksan (an  19 inland group of Tsimshian) which fully  20 substantiates the principal ethnographic  21 interpretations of Ruyle:  slaves were held  22 aboriginally for their economic value; a  23 system of classes existed based upon  24 differing rights to resources; and the  25 religious system was utilized by the chiefs  26 as a means of social control."  27  28 So far as your knowledge goes, would you agree with  29 that statement of precontact Gitksan society?  30 A   No.  31 Q   In what respect would you differ?  32 A  Again, as I said, I believe that was a system of rank,  33 not class.  34 Q   In precontact society?  35 A   Yes, that's correct.  36 Q   The abolition of slavery was of course attributable to  37 the contact of the white man; is that correct?  38 A   I suppose so.  39 Q   Well, it was -- it was an important result of the  40 acculturation process, wasn't it?  41 A   Yes, I would agree.  42 Q   And acculturation, which is a process that describes  43 the effect of one culture on another, so far as the  44 acculturation process of the Gitksan, that started  45 with the earlier of the contact periods, didn't it?  46 A   You could interpret it that way, but I don't know if I  47 would because I believe in early contact situations, 11181  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 such as when trade goods become available to members  2 of a culture that haven't seen them before, that they  3 integrate those goods into their own culture and use  4 them in a manner dictated by their culture.  It  5 doesn't change their culture.  They integrate what  6 they receive into their culture, and actual  7 acculturation I think takes place at a later date.  8 Q   Well, you talk about receiving trade goods.  There was  9 a trade in trade goods, wasn't there?  10 A   Yes.  11 Q   Yes.  So there was an activity created by the desire  12 for trade goods?  13 A   Trade had always existed.  It didn't -- wasn't created  14 by European trade goods.  15 Q   The activity was stimulated, would you agree with  16 that, by the desire to acquire the trade goods of the  17 white man?  18 A   I can't make a judgment on that.  19 Q   I see.  That's not within anything you've read?  20 A   Or heard.  21 Q   Now, in your report you make some statements that I'd  22 like you to assist me with.  At page 28, in the first  23 paragraph, you say:  24  25 "In many cases all the relationships among  26 House members are known either by all House  27 members or by elders.  In other cases no one  28 person can name all the relationships  29 precisely but the elders do, in fact, know  30 relationships without articulating them."  31  32 And in the second paragraph, about six lines down, you  33 say, and I quote:  34  35 "They know they are related but they have  36 forgotten how because the two sisters who  37 were the ancestors of the two branches of  38 the family died long ago.  This information  39 is not remembered by living House members  40 because it is not essential to the  41 functioning of the House,"  42  43 and so on.  44 Now, I have suggested to you earlier that beyond  45 three generations it is impossible to determine any  46 biological relationship, and we discussed that a few  47 minutes ago.  You have some reservations about that 11182  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 proposition?  2 A   Yes, I do.  3 Q   But you admit it can be the case?  4 A   Oh, absolutely.  5 Q   Yes.  In fact, beyond three generations the Gitksan  6 themselves do not see the need to remember?  7 A   They don't see the need, but at times they do, they do  8 know.  It's not because of a specific need but because  9 of specific circumstances.  10 Q   That's what you're saying in the two excerpts that I  11 read to you?  12 A  What am I saying?  13 Q   That they do not know the relationship, but they are  14 able to assume it.  15 A   No, no, that's not what I'm saying.  16 Q   Well, you say:  17  18 "This information is not remembered by living  19 House members because it is not essential to  20 the functioning of the House."  21  22 A   I'm talking about some specific relationships.  23 Q   Yes.  Well —  24 A   Not all.  25 Q   --I'm suggesting to you that beyond three generations  26 the Gitksan do not see the need to remember.  27 A  And I agree with that.  2 8 Q   All right.  2 9 A   But I say that at times they do remember.  30 Q   And that was what Dr. Kasakoff reported in her thesis,  31 is it not?  32 A   I believe she made a statement even more extreme.  33 Where is it?  What page is that?  34 Q   At page 21 of her thesis, where she says, and I quote,  35 in the second paragraph:  36  37 "Houses are divided into lineages.  The  38 Gitksan trace relationships back only to the  39 grandmother.  People whose mother's mother  40 was the same are in the same lineage.  41 Beyond this, people acknowledge that they  42 are related but they do not know exactly  43 how."  44  45 That was what she reported from her observations, and  46 that's what you're talking about in your report, are  47 you not? 11183  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  THE COURT  No, I patently disagree with what she says there.  And at page 153 --  Of Kasakoff again?  Of her report.  Of her thesis I should say.  151 did you say?  53.  Oh, okay.  She says:  "Within the House, fading away is bridged by  ideas of reincarnation."  There is a concept of reincarnation among the Gitksan?  That's correct.  And the concept is that the fourth generation is  reincarnated in the child?  No, that's not correct.  What is it?  Reincarnations are generally considered to be within  the house, but certainly they are outside of the house  to other relatives as well.  And there's no -- nothing  that determines exactly which generation is  reincarnated into which.  That's what you've been told?  Yes.  And she apparently was told something different?  That's correct.  Or maybe she's assumed that.  I don't  know.  not necessary -- it's not limited  house?  You say that it's  to the members of a  THE WITNESS:  That's correct.  MR. GOLDIE:  Q   Well, at the bottom of that page she said:  "The system has been described to me in terms  of 'steps.'  Relatives can be either one  step away or two steps away."  A  Which —  MR. GOLDIE:  "When a relationship" --  THE COURT:  Just a moment, Mr. Goldie.  At the very bottom of  the page.  THE WITNESS:  What system is she referring to?  The system of  reincarnation or -- I don't know what she's talking  about here. 11184  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 MR. GOLDIE:  2 Q   No, the relationship.  3 A  Which relationships?  4 MR. GRANT:  As I recall, this is one of the appendices.  I'm  5 just --  6 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, this is one of her references, and that's why  7 I'm referring to it.  8 THE COURT:  Well, the previous paragraph certainly deals with  9 relationships.  10 THE WITNESS:  Oh, okay.  Go ahead.  11 MR. GOLDIE:  12 Q   When you read this, what did you understand her to be  13 talking about?  14 A   Just go ahead.  I just had to read a little bit more  15 of it to understand what part we were reading, that's  16 all.  17 Q  18 "The system has been described to me in terms  19 of 'steps.'  Relatives can be either one  20 step away or two steps away.  When a  21 relationship is three steps away people are  22 no longer relatives.  Relationships which  23 are one step away are those formed by a  24 marriage one ascending generation,"  25  26 and then there's a Gitksan word,  27  28 "and father's brother's children.  Their  29 children are two steps away.  30 The cycle of generations is three  31 generations long.  It consists of ego's  32 generation..."  33  34 That's the speaker's generation, is it not?  35 A   Yes, that's right.  36 Q  37 "...the generation consecutive to it, and a  38 grand-generation.  People more than three  39 generations away from each other, or who are  40 linked by a tie made more than three  41 generations ago, are not considered to be  42 related if the tie was affinal."  43  44 That is to say, what we would say, in-law; is that  45 right?  4 6 A   That's what the word means.  47 Q   Yes. 11185  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 "Within the lineage they are not considered  2 to be close relatives and the nature of the  3 tie which united them is forgotten.  This  4 means that one has to have a grandparent in  5 common to be related."  6  7 Do you agree with that?  8 A   No.  9 Q  10 "Each person is a member of a five generation  11 span made up of ego's generation in the  12 middle and two three generation cycles, one  13 from grandparent to grandson begun by his  14 grandparents and one from himself to his  15 grandchildren."  16  17 Do you agree with that?  18 A   I can't disagree with it strongly enough.  19 Q   Based on what you've been told?  20 A   Yes, which was far more intensive research than what  21 Adams and Kasakoff did.  22 Q   Well, that's your opinion?  23 A  Well, the length of the time of the research then.  I  24 can safely say that.  25 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  What was the length of time of the research?  26 THE COURT:  Whose?  Hers or —  27 THE WITNESS:  Of theirs?  28 MR. GOLDIE:  29 Q   Of theirs, since that's what you're talking about.  30 A   Thirteen months.  31 Q   Yes.  32 A   The fieldwork.  33 Q   And there were two people?  34 A   Yes.  35 Q   Yes.  So that's what we would call 26 person months?  36 A   I don't know if it ever says that Kasakoff did  37 fieldwork.  It says Adams did.  38 Q   Well, you don't know then?  39 A   No, I know Adams did fieldwork, but not Kasakoff.  40 Q   But you don't know about Dr. Kasakoff?  41 A   She says she relies on his research.  It says that, I  42 believe, at the beginning of her report.  43 Q   Would you consider attending a potlatch as fieldwork?  44 A   Sure.  45 Q   Yes.  Did she not attend potlatches?  46 A   I believe they went to two, but I've been to fifty.  47 Q   Yes.  Now, I'd like to be clear about one other thing. 11186  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Taking the genealogy of Gitludahl, which you've told  2 us the present members are all adopted?  3 A   That's correct.  4 Q   And I think you've told us that they would all refer  5 to one another as if they were biologically connected?  6 A   No, I didn't say that.  7 Q   I see.  But would you say that or do you disagree?  8 A   They could at times.  In a feasting situation they  9 might.  10 Q   And Cheryl, who was adopted out of the House of  11 Antgulilbix, her daughters' children will be in the  12 House of Gitludahl?  13 A   If that's the arrangement that's made between the  14 chiefs concerned.  15 Q   Isn't that what your chart shows?  16 A   Yes.  17 Q   And their grandfather is, therefore, Moses Morrison?  18 A   No, they wouldn't -- they wouldn't say that.  19 Q   Would they -- would they recall who their natural  20 grandfather was?  21 A   Yes, certainly they would.  22 Q   Why would they not refer to Moses Morrison as their  23 grandfather?  24 A   The children of Cheryl?  25 Q   Well, Moses Morrison was the last surviving member of  26 the House of Gitludahl, and a number of people were  27 adopted into that house?  2 8 A   Right.  29 Q   And in the lineage which you have depicted, Cheryl  30 Stewart's children are the granddaughters of Moses  31 Morrison?  32 A  Again, we're -- it's -- I wouldn't apply the word  33 lineage to what's being depicted there.  Those are the  34 adopted house members, and it's just diagrammatically  35 convenient to make it appear as a lineage, but the  36 people would not refer to themselves as a lineage.  37 They would see themselves as the adopted members of  38 the house, the people using the names of the house.  39 Q   But at a certain point in the future that distinction  40 will be lost, won't it?  41 A   I don't know if that's true because Mary Johnson has  42 related to me how the House of Gitludahl became  43 extinct of original members at some time in the  44 distant past.  This kind of information is often  45 preserved.  46 Q   Well, does that mean that Moses Morrison was not  47 really Gitludahl because at some distant time in the 11187  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 past --  2 A   No.  3 Q   -- it had become extinct?  4 A   No, that's not true.  But he was not of the original  5 biological members that had existed in the past.  6 Q   Now, in your report, if I understand it correctly, you  7 suggest that adoptions were not common and in some way  8 are related to the stress arising out of  9 acculturation?  10 A   I don't believe I said that.  11 Q   Well, perhaps you didn't say it but I'm --  12 A   I said adoptions were not common, but the second part  13 of it I didn't say.  Oh, if you're referring to  14 epidemics when you say acculturation --  15 Q   Well, isn't -- don't anthropologists include disease  16 in that word?  17 A   Not that I know of.  18 Q   I see.  19 A   They would call that the effects of contact, but they  20 wouldn't call it epidemic acculturation.  21 Q   No, it's part of the process resulting from  22 acculturation; isn't that right?  23 A   No, it's the other way around.  Acculturation might  24 result from the effects of epidemics.  25 Q   Now, I'm referring to page 77.  In the first paragraph  26 you say:  27  28 "The most significant ts'imilguudit are those  29 which are undertaken to increase the  30 population of a House with dangerously  31 declining numbers."  32  33 And then you say:  34  35 "It seems that when a House population  36 declines to around 25, its members begin to  37 worry about extinction."  38  39 And then page 70 -- and you say that's not connected  40 in any way, shape or form then with the contact of the  41 white man?  42 A   No, I didn't say that.  43 Q   That 25 number, that's known as Birdsell's magic  44 number, is it?  45 A   It may be.  I'm sorry, I don't -- I'm not familiar  46 with Birdsell.  47 Q   Well, isn't he the man who propounded the theory that 11188  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  3  A  4  5  6  Q  7  8  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  A  15  Q  16  ]  17  A   I  18  Q  1  19  A  20  Q  21  22  A  23  Q  24  A  25  MR. GOLDIE  26  MR. GRANT:  27  MR. GOLDIE  28  Q  29  30  31  32  A  33  Q  34  A  35  Q  36  37  38  39  A  40  Q  41  A  42  43  44  45  46  47  that was the minimum number that a hunter-gatherer  group required?  I don't recall if he was the one that propounded it.  I've read that theory in other places, but I don't  know if he was the one that first propounded it.  All right.  That number which you say is the danger  number, that could have been reached in precontact  times just as easily as it could be reached in post-  contact times; isn't that correct?  That's correct.  And indeed the adaawks to which you have referred  support the proposition that there was a considerable  amount of warfare in precontact times?  Yes, that's true.  And one of them indicates that the entire family of  Miluulak was wiped out.  And that would --  Miluulak?  Miluulak, yes.  Yes, that was post-contact.  Wasn't that prior -- in what sense are you using  contact now?  In the more distant sense in that --  The more distant sense.  Yes.  All right.  Yeah.  :  We've found in your material under tab 13 --  Of the white book?  Of the white book.  This is taken from the blue  volume.  I forget which it is, but it's blue volume 2,  our page B129, and this is exactly what is found from  the document.  This is Miluulak file, Mr. Grant.  That's your handwriting on the page, is it not?  Yes.  You were speculating there that if there was a  25-year-old male Miluulak in Kispiox in 1881, the  split may have been early.  Now, what split are you  referring to?  This page is from the Barbeau Beynon adaawk.  Yes.  And I thought I had a wonderful piece of genealogical  information here, but I couldn't determine these  precise relationships.  I couldn't confirm them with  living people.  And what I'm referring to when I say  split is that half of Miluulak's House came down to  Kispiox and half remained at Kisgegas, and for a  period of time two -- the two halves of the house were 11189  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 using the chief's name Miluulak.  2 Q   The next page, which is B131 and 132, you had -- you  3 had that typed out or did you type that out?  4 A   I had it typed out.  5 Q   Yes.  This is your summary of the entire adaawk, of  6 which the last page you retained in your file?  7 A   Yes, I guess it is.  8 Q   Well, under tab 14 I believe I have placed the adaawk  9 to which you were referring.  10 A   Yes.  11 Q   There are actually two adaawks, but isn't the --  12 separated by a pink page.  But the first one is the  13 adaawk which you summarized?  14 A   Yes.  15 Q   And then the second one, would you look at that,  16 please?  Is that one with which you are familiar?  17 A   I have read it.  I can't remember the precise contents  18 of it.  19 Q   Is it -- from your point of view, is it telling the  20 same story?  21 A   I'd have to read it to be sure.  22 Q   All right.  23 A   I believe it is but --  24 Q   The second one relates how the raiding -- and I refer  25 to page 4.  26 A   Page -- oh, page 4.  There's so many numbers here.  27 Q   At the top of the page Mr. Beynon, who is recounting  28 this, or not recounting, he is recording this, says:  29  30 "They prepared themselves to go out on a  31 raid.  They were accompanied by the young  32 woman who was to guide them."  33  34 And then they stated who the raiding party was to  35 consist of.  And about half way down the road they  36 say:  37  38 "When the raiders got near to where the white  39 people lived they saw,"  40  41 and he's inserted the word "cart."  Those brackets  42 indicate his insertions, do they not?  4 3 A   I don't know.  44 Q   I see.  But you accept that this is the way in which  45 these adaawks are preserved as part of the records of  46 Mr. Beynon and the Barbeau Beynon records?  47 A   Yes. 11190  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Q   He says:  "...they saw a [cart] road made by the white  man.  It was the first time that they had  seen a road.  They also,"  then somebody has scratched out "marveled" and put,  "observed the cutting of trees with a saw, "  and so on and so forth.  And then they discuss this, and they proceed to a  fort, which he has identified as Fort St. James. And  then over the page, second complete paragraph:  "This was the first time that they had seen a  white man's dog.  The Gitksan dog's ears  stand up, the white man's, hang down.  So  then they decided that they should adopt as  a crest the white man's dog's head with  drooping ears.  They called this 'Ansem'  Midaw - White-man's-dog' (Mr. Ross' dog).  They asked among themselves, 'Who will take  this as a crest?'"  And then it recites the crest that -- who would take  the crest of the white man's dog.  And then there was  the crest of the Palissade around the fort, and that  became the crest of Meluleq.  And then it goes on to  talk about that at some length.  And you didn't examine that one for the purposes  of your genealogy, I take it?  A   No, I didn't.  MR. GOLDIE:  All right.  You accept the statements that are made  in those recounts of adaawks as statements of fact?  MR. GRANT:  Well, my lord, there is many, many adaawks, and this  witness has said that she has read the first one, and  I think in fairness to the witness she should have an  opportunity to read the second one.  And also I think  the question is unfair if my friend is referring to  all of the Beynon adaawk, of which this witness  indicates she's read 400.  And I don't know if that's  all of them, but possibly she at the break could read  that adaawk.  THE COURT: All right. We'll take the morning adjournment and  the witness can read this one, if she wants, and Mr.  Goldie can consider whether to pursue the question in 11191  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 that form or in some different form.  Thank you.  2 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court will recess.  3  4 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 11:20 A.M.)  5  6 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  7 a true and accurate transcript of the  8 proceedings herein to the best of my  9 skill and ability.  10  11  12    13 Leanna Smith  14 Official Reporter  15 United Reporting Service Ltd.  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 11192  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  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 (PROCEEDINGS RECOMMENCED AFTER A SHORT RECESS)  35  36 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  37 THE COURT:  Mr. Goldie.  38 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you, My Lord.  39 Q   Mrs. Harris, have you had the opportunity of reading  40 the second adaawk under Tab 14 of Exhibit 860A?  41 A Yes, I have.  42 Q Just to take a precise example, at pages five and six.  43 A Of the second one?  44 Q Of the second one, there is a discussion about the  45 taking of crests as a result of the people from  46 Kisgegas going over to Fort St. James and tracking  47 down the Tsetsaut at that time.  Did you accept that, 11193  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 for instance?  2 A   I didn't use this information.  3 Q   I appreciate that, but I am asking you -- Mr. Grant  4 wanted me to be specific about my questions.  I wanted  5 to ask you if you accept that statement and that  6 adaawk as a statement of fact.  If you feel that you  7 are not competent to answer that question, please say  8 so.  9 A   I feel comfortable to say I assume that most of it is  10 true, but I haven't tried to confirm -- some of them I  11 am personally familiar with, but I haven't tried to  12 confirm all of them.  13 Q   Well, in the information from the adaawks that you did  14 use.  15 A   Genealogical information?  16 Q   Yes.  17 A   I didn't use any genealogical information.  18 Q   I am not talking about these adaawks, but you have  19 told His Lordship that you have read something like  20 400 adaawks?  21 A   Yes, but I didn't use genealogical information from  22 adaawks.  23 Q   I see.  What did you use it for?  24 A   For principles for patterns, such as marriage patterns  25 and traditional marriage patterns and residence  26 patterns and things of this nature.  27 Q   In terms of your report, these are matters that you  28 would -- that you comment on in respect of the social  29 structure of the Gitksan?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   You were not using the adaawks for your genealogies?  32 A   No.  Most of them are much too far back to be  33 confirmed.  34 Q   Yes.  All right.  Now, the -- turning back to tab 13  35 in the exhibit book and the typed portion there.  36 THE COURT:  13 of?  37 MR. GOLDIE:  38 Q   13 of 860A.  The first page of which is the copy of  39 page 7 of the adaawk, first adaawk, which was in Mrs.  40 Harris's notes, and then the second page is what she  41 had typed -- am I stating that correctly?  42 A   Yes.  43 Q   Paragraph 5, and you -- in the fourth line you say:  44  45 "Mr. Ross was at the Fort then (1825-1827)"  46  47    THE COURT:  Where are you reading? 11194  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 MR. GOLDIE:  Paragraph of the typed material under tab 13.  2 First page is the adaawk.  3 THE COURT:  Yes.  4 MR. GOLDIE:  Second page is headed.  5 THE COURT:  Oh, yes.  I'm sorry.  In the middle paragraph?  6 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  7 Q   Now, that date, of course, is a white man's date and  8 is not found in the adaawk.  Did you obtain that from  9 some other records?  10 A   I would like to make it clear that I didn't use this  11 information, that I discarded it.  12 Q   All right.  I accept that.  13 A  All of this section, it was trying to interpret what  14 was found on this page B129, but I didn't utilize any  15 of it.  16 Q   No, you tried.  17 A   Yes, and gave it up.  18 Q   You tried to work out a descent using that information  19 and it didn't fit.  Is that a fair way of putting it?  20 A   I couldn't confirm any of it, because it was vague and  21 I couldn't confirm that they were actual Niist, like  22 the old chief's sister's daughter and so on, I  23 couldn't confirm any of that, so I had to disregard  24 it.  25 Q   Had to abandon it.  26 THE COURT:  You couldn't confirm it for genealogical purposes?  27 THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's right.  28 MR. GOLDIE:  29 Q   But in the course of doing that you went to the  30 trouble of finding out when there was a factor by the  31 name of Ross at the Fort?  32 A   Yes, I did.  33 Q   And that was -- where did you get that information?  34 A   I'm sorry, I don't remember.  35 Q   Did you go to the extent of determining when the Fort  36 at Bear Lake was established?  37 A   I don't believe so.  38 Q   Well, I am going to show you -- this isn't in the --  39 THE COURT:  Before you do that, Mr. Goldie, could I ask, I got a  40 date here, 1825, 1827, yet you told me a moment ago  41 that you called contact in your report or referred to  42 contact in your report, says the 1860's.  43 THE WITNESS:  I was -- explained earlier how there was the --  44 when I said contact, I mean that was when the  45 Europeans came into the territory of the Gitksan.  46 This was -- this incident occurred on the borders of  47 the Gitksan territory, as I understand it. 11195  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 THE COURT:  I see.  This may have related to Fort St. James?  2 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  3 THE COURT:  This earlier contact?  4 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  5 THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.  6 MR. GRANT:  Fort St. James is outside of the claimed territory,  7 My Lord.  8 THE COURT:  Yes.  9 MR. GOLDIE:  10 Q   I am going to show you, from the material that you  11 sent us, a page which isn't in the exhibit book.  And  12 does this represent the descent line that you finally  13 abandoned because you couldn't confirm it?  14 A   That's correct.  15 Q   Yes.  And in that you have the words:  16  17 "Mr. Ross was in Fort in (1825-1827)"  18  19 And you obtained that.  And then over on the  20 left-hand side you have:  21  22 "After 1808".  23  24 Now, what was -- I appreciate that this was -- you  25 were setting up a hypothesis and seeking to verify it,  26 but what does the significance of 1808 --  27 A   I don't remember.  This was a very long time -- very  28 early in my research I was trying to work on this and  2 9 gave it up.  30 Q   Would you -- wasn't 1808 the establishment of one of  31 the Forts on the boundaries of the present land claims  32 area?  33 A   I have no idea.  34 MR. GOLDIE:   The — My Lord, I wonder if we could go back and  35 have a couple of these matters marked.  Under tab 10  36 is the collection of pages from the evidence of Mary  37 Johnson, and I don't think it's necessary to mark  38 that.  3 9 THE COURT:  No.  40 MR. GOLDIE:  But under tab 11 is the Kasakoff thesis, which Mrs.  41 Harris has listed as part of her references.  I would  42 ask that that be marked.  43 THE REGISTRAR:  Spell Kasakoff.  44 MR. GOLDIE: K-a-s-a-k-o-f-f.  45 THE COURT:  Yes, 860A-11.  46  47 (EXHIBIT 860A-11 - TAB 11 - ACCEPTED 11196  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  3  MR.  GRANT:  4  5  6  7  THE  COURT:  8  MR.  GRANT:  9  THE  COURT:  10  MR.  GOLDIE  11  THE  COURT:  12  MR.  GOLDIE  13  THE  COURT:  14  MR.  GOLDIE  15  THE  COURT:  16  MR.  GOLDIE  17  18  19  THE  COURT:  20  21  22  23  24  MR.  GOLDIE  25  26  27  28  THE  COURT:  29  30  31  32  33  MR.  GRANT:  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  MR.  GOLDIE  UNPUBLISHED THESIS OF DR. KASAKOFF)  That's, as I understand, is put in as an unpublished  thesis.  As I understand, it is put in as one of the  references of this witness, not necessarily for the  truth of all the contents.  None of these things can prove that.  Yes.  This —  This is unpublished, is it?  :  Yes, it is.  And then under tab 12.  Was it defended or accepted?  :  It was accepted, My Lord.  Accepted but unpublished?  :  Yes.  All right.  Thank you.  Is that 12?  :  Tab 12 is the article by Ruyle, R-U-Y-L-E, to which  is appended comments, one of which I referred to, that  of Adams on page 618, and I ask that that be marked.  Yes.  860A-12.  (EXHIBIT NO. 860A-12  RUYLE WITH COMMENTS)  TAB 12  ARTICLE BY DR.  :  And then under tab 13 are extracts from Mrs.  Harris's working papers consisting of page seven of an  adaawk and typed pages summarizing that adaawk created  by the witness.  868-13.  (EXHIBIT 860A-13 - TAB 13 - EXTRACT FROM  WORKING PAPERS - H. HARRIS)  My Lord, with respect to that, I reviewed -- I had a  copy made at the same time duplicating what was sent  to my learned friends, and attached to the -- the  first page was loose, it appears.  The second and  third pages, 131 and 132, my friend's numbers were  attached, and attached as well was the handwritten  notation that my friend has put to the witness.  Now,  the witness has indicated that she didn't use this,  but I think that in fairness that that page should  form part of that -- it is part of that document.  It  was one handwritten page not included in the binder,  but it all was -- this would have been how it would  have been in the file.  It would have been stapled  together.  :  I do not have any knowledge of what was stapled 11197  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 together.  The document that I put to the witness I  2 had a minute ago, and I agree that it follows the  3 documents that I put in.  I don't care one way or the  4 other.  The witness said that she didn't -- it is just  5 a hypothesis of --  6 THE COURT:  Well, Mr. Grant would be able to put it in in  7 re-examination anyway, so if you want to make it part  8 of 860A-13, you may do so, Mr. Grant.  9 MR. GRANT:  I'll consider it, My Lord.  10 THE COURT:  All right.  11 MR. GOLDIE:  12 Q   Then under Tab 14 are, firstly, an adaawk dealing with  13 Miluulak, which Mrs. Harris said that she wanted to  14 read, but you accept that as one of Beynon's adaawks,  15 do you?  16 A   Yes, I do.  17 Q   When I say Beynon's adaawks, you understand I am  18 talking about something which he has recorded?  19 A   Yes.  20 MR. GOLDIE:   And then following the pink sheet is the complete  21 recording of an adaawk of which -- I'm sorry, I got  22 that the other way around.  The first one is the one  23 that -- page seven is found in Mrs. Harris's material.  24 THE COURT:  Do we know who prepared it?  25 MR. GOLDIE:  This is Mr. Beynon.  26 THE COURT:  This is also Beynon.  27 MR. GOLDIE:  Both are Beynon, and I questioned Mrs. Harris about  28 the second.  So I suggest that they both be marked  2 9              under the same tab.  30 THE COURT:  860A-14.  31  32 (EXHIBIT NO. 860A-14 - TAB 14 - ADAAWKS -  33 MILUULAK)  34  35 MR. GOLDIE:  And I assume Mr. Grant wants the same reserved,  36 that it's not necessarily truth of the matters  37 contained.  38 MR. GRANT:  We are in a bit of a different situation.  I think  39 as I -- only it's my recollection that these would be  40 archival documents, because there was a special  41 archive of these documents in the National Museum --  42 THE COURT:  All right.  That only goes to admissibility though.  43 MR. GOLDIE:  If my friend is suggesting that all archival  44 documents speak to the truth of the matters contained  45 therein, I am prepared to consider that.  46 MR. GRANT:  I am certainly not, My Lord, going to get myself  47 into that at this stage.  Mr. Goldie and Mr. Rush have 1119?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 been engaged in very interesting correspondence on  2 that matter for a long period of time.  3 MR. GOLDIE:  I don't know what the reference to archival has to  4 do with what we are talking about now.  The witness  5 has identified their source, and she's stated that she  6 has read Beynon's adaawks.  7 THE COURT:  All right.  8 MR. GOLDIE:  That, I think, is sufficient to the — and her —  9 those adaawks are part of her references.  10 Q   Under tab 15 is an article which I will come to in a  11 couple of minutes, but that is one of your references,  12 is it not, Wirsing's article?  13 A   Yes.  14  15 (EXHIBIT NO. 860A-15 - TAB 15 - ARTICLE BY DR.  16 WIRSING)  17  18 Q   And it is an article referred to -- do you recall the  19 source of that, Mrs. --  20 A   Current Anthropology.  21 Q   Yes.  And that — the title of that is The Health of  22 Traditional Societies and the Effects of  23 Acculturation, and he is talking about the impact of  24 disease on primitive societies as part of the process  25 of acculturation?  26 A   Yes.  27 Q   And your reference -- I should say that your --  28 your -- in your report you suggest that before contact  29 the Gitksan was relatively disease free?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   And the citation that you have in that report of my --  32 if my memory is correct, is to page 304 of Wirsing's  33 report, column two, the last complete paragraph  34 beginning with the words:  35  36 "Unacculturated traditional societies in their  37 constituent local groups tend to be  38 geographically isolated from modern society  39 and from each other."  40  41 And then skipping the next sentence, the next two  42 sentences -- no, I'll skip the next sentence.  Then  43 the next sentence reads:  44  45 "In the past, only indigenous populations of  46 the Americas were long isolated from the rest  47 of the world.  The available evidence suggests 11199  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 that they were once free of many diseases  2 common to Africa and Europe - malaria, yellow  3 fever, smallpox, measles, and tuberculosis.  4 During the last three centuries, however, all  5 indigenous groups have experienced some form  6 of direct or indirect contact with few ideas,  7 products, and representatives of modern  8 society."  9  10 Q   And that was the reference that you had in mind?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   And the -- one of the critics of Mr. -- one of the  13 critics whose comments -- or one of the referees, I  14 should say, whose comments are attached to that  15 article was of the view that tuberculosis was present  16 in the Americas before the white man.  Did you read  17 that?  18 A   I don't remember.  19 Q   Well, in any event, it's not too important because  20 tuberculosis does not seem to have created an epidemic  21 in your terms?  22 A   No.  23 Q   Mr. Wirsing's statement, of course, was not with  24 respect to the Gitksan's area.  He was making a  25 general statement about the Americas?  26 A   That's correct.  27 Q   Yes.  All right.  Now, I want to pick up again the  28 question of the pre-contact situation with respect to  29 the Gitksan.  At page seven of your report, the second  30 sentence in the first complete paragraph you stated  31 that it was your opinion that the elders say that  32 before contact the ideal family size was considered to  33 be four children, and these children would often be  34 spaced over 20 years or more.  Now, in what sense were  35 you using the word "contact" there?  36 A   I believe that that was so both -- in both of the  37 senses that I have used it.  38 Q   Prior to any contact, in the sense of trade goods,  39 using that as a shorthand expression for the first  40 date that you referred to, and the later date, which I  41 think you put around the 1860's, when there was the  42 first settlement or introduction of white man into the  43 area?  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   All right.  Now -- and I think in your oral evidence  46 you suggested that this spacing reflected the problem  47 of small children on long marches? 11200  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   Such a concept would militate against any voluntary  3 increase in birth rate, so long as the people were  4 engaging in those marches, wouldn't it?  5 A   It would not make it absolutely impossible, but it  6 would be a good reason not to have children spaced  7 closely together.  8 Q   Yes.  Is it your evidence, and I think I asked you  9 before, that the Gitksan were hunter gatherers moving  10 from place to place in search of food?  11 A   Hunter gatherers is an anthropological classification  12 that can be applied to the Gitksan, although their  13 situation was quite unique, in that they did spend  14 most of the year living in one location, which most  15 hunter gatherers did not have the luxury of, but they  16 did at times travel great distances, that's true.  17 Q   The food came to their doorstep?  18 A   Yes, a considerable amount of it, but of course not  19 all of it.  20 Q   Yes.  Now, on the same page, if I understand you  21 correctly, the increase in the birth rate between 1920  22 and 1960 is due to the abandonment of social -- sexual  23 abstinence practises?  24 A   I wouldn't say that it's entirely due to that, no, but  25 certainly that would help to make it easier to  26 increase the birth rate.  27 Q   And your informant with respect to that and with  28 respect to the suggestion that certain women were also  29 sometimes assigned to have more children than usual  30 was Mrs. Ryan?  31 A   Oh, many, many people have talked to me about the --  32 the practise of sexual abstinence, but when I was  33 talking about increasing the -- that women were  34 assigned to increase the birth rate, I was referring  35 to Mrs. Ryan.  36 Q   I see.  Right.  Now, another reason, of course, for  37 the increase in the population would be decreased  38 infant mortality?  39 A   No, I would say in that period that infant mortality  40 was extremely high, and that it was in spite of it,  41 not because of it.  42 Q   Well, the infant mortality, if I follow your  43 statements correctly, was extremely high before  44 contact?  45 A   No, I haven't said that, that I --  46 Q   Well, you say that four children per family was  47 considered to be the ideal size? 11201  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   And you have stated elsewhere that the population was  3 stable?  4 A   Yes.  5 Q   Well, four children per family does not imply a stable  6 population, does it?  7 A   That doesn't -- that doesn't follow from that that the  8 infant mortality rate was high.  People die as adults  9 as well.  10 Q   Well, just one step at a time.  Four children per  11 family does not imply a stable population, does it?  12 A   It doesn't imply a volatile population necessarily  13 either.  14 Q   Well, no, I don't suggest a volatile population, I  15 suggest --  16 A   Something in between.  17 Q   I suggest an expanding population.  18 A   Yes.  19 Q   Right.  And if the pre-contact population was stable  20 and the average family was four, that implies that two  21 died in childhood, does it not?  22 A   No.  23 Q   That two didn't reach the productive pool of adults?  24 A   You might say that.  25 Q   Yes.  The environment that you postulate may have been  26 free of European disease, but you are not suggesting  27 that it wasn't free of disease and the effect of war?  28 A   That's correct.  29 Q   And at page 78, I believe it is, you refer to Price,  30 also who thought that the Gitksan lived in an  31 environment nearly disease free.  He was referring to  32 North America as a whole, was he not?  33 A   That's correct.  34 Q   And North America as a whole during the ice age?  35 A  After -- he -- I believe he is referring to after  36 North America was populated.  37 Q   I see.  38 A   He refers to the crossing from Asia during the ice  39 age, I believe.  40 Q   Yes.  41 A   He's referring to the period after that time.  42 Q   Immediately after?  43 A   I don't believe he is referring to immediately after,  44 but thereafter.  45 Q   All right.  But in any rate you say whatever he  46 thought about the situation in North America following  47 the migration, that you find that to be confirmed by 11202  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 elders who describe the superb health, vitality and  2 extreme longevity of their recent predecessors.  When  3 you say recent predecessors, about the furthest we  4 could take that back, in terms of their recollection  5 of an elderly person, is somebody who himself was  6 elderly, say 80 years ago?  7 A   Yes, I am including people --  8 Q   That would be about as far as we could get when you  9 talk about recent predecessors of elderly people?  10 A   Yes.  11 Q   And if that person himself who is elderly in 1908, and  12 I am using that as an example of somebody who would be  13 elderly now, if that person himself was, say, 90, that  14 would take us back to about 1818, if we go back --  15 A   I think you said 1808.  Did you mean 1908?  16 Q   Let me state the assumptions which I hope are  17 favourable to your proposition.  If you were talking  18 to a person today who was 80 years of age?  19 A   Uh-huh.  20 Q   He would have been born in 1908?  21 A   Yes, right.  22 Q   And he would -- he would have, say, a recollection of  23 people in the first 10 years of his life of people who  24 were themselves elderly?  25 A   Yes.  26 Q   That first period would be from 1908 to 1918?  27 A   Yes.  28 Q   Right.  Now, if you take somebody who is 90 in 1908,  29 you are back to around 1818, aren't you?  30 A   Yes.  31 Q   I am stretching things out about as far as I can.  32 A  Many elders proclaim that some of their relatives who  33 lived into their lifetime were much older than 90,  34 well beyond 100.  35 Q   Yes, I appreciate that.  But I am talking about an  36 average.  37 A   Sure.  38 Q   And I am talking about an average older person.  39 A   Yes.  40 Q   But we -- about as far back as we can get with the --  41 maybe the odd exception which you referred to is about  42 1818?  43 A   Okay.  44 Q   That was some 12 years after Simon Fraser built a  45 trading post in the east end of Fraser Lake, isn't it,  4 6 or do you know?  47 A   I forget the date. 11203  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   And only about eight years before James Douglas  2 established Fort Connelly at the north end of Bear  3 Lake?  4 A   Could be.  5 Q   And Bear Lake, I understand, is within the present  6 land claims area?  7 A   Yes, I believe it is.  8 Q   Well, wouldn't the superb health, vitality and extreme  9 longevity of the recent predecessors of the people of  10 whom you speak, the bulk of their lifetime would have  11 been spent in the post-contact period, post-contact  12 being the introduction of goods and trade?  13 A   Yes.  14 Q   Now, wouldn't adequate medical attention assist both  15 in reducing infant mortality and improving the  16 longevity of the stock?  17 A   Yes.  18 Q   And in fact you're familiar with the Wrinch Memorial  19 Hospital in Hazelton?  20 A   Yes.  21 Q   Do you know when it was founded?  22 A   No.  23 Q   1901?  Would you agree with that?  24 A   I couldn't disagree.  25 Q   I'm sorry, 1904.  26 A   I don't know that.  That sounds appropriate.  27 Q   Were you aware that Dr. Wrinch himself went to Kispiox  28 in 1901 and practised medicine there?  In your  29 material you have a table from Duff.  It's under Tab  30 35, My Lord.  31 THE COURT:  Tab 35 of?  32 MR. GOLDIE:  Mrs. Harris's exhibit book number 1.  33 THE REGISTRAR:  853?  34 THE COURT:  It's Exhibit 855.  35 MR. GRANT:  That tab is Exhibit 855.  36 MR. GOLDIE:  It's a separate exhibit, but it's in the — Mrs.  37 Harris has it in front of her.  Let His Lordship take  38 this one.  39 Q   And you have it before you, Mrs. Harris?  4 0 A   Yes, I do.  41 Q   Mr. Duff has broken down the estimate of population,  42 and he assigns an estimate to the Tsimshian, and in  43 1835 he estimates 8,500, 1885, 4,550, and the low year  44 of 3,550 in 1895.  And the Gitksan would be part of  45 that Tsimshian number?  46 A   Yes, they would.  47 Q   If you can go back to my white exhibit book, you will 11204  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  3  4  5  6  A  7  Q  8  9  MR.  GRANT:  10  MR.  GOLDIE  11  MR.  GRANT:  12  MR.  GOLDIE  13  MR.  GRANT:  14  MR.  GOLDIE  15  Q  16  17  18  A  19  Q  20  A  21  Q  22  23  A  24  Q  25  26  A  27  Q  28  29  30  31  A  32  Q  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  A  41  42  Q  43  A  44  Q  45  A  46  Q  47  A  find under tab 16 an extract from another one of your  references.  The Gitksan Potlatch, Population Flux,  Resource Ownership and Reciprocity by John W. Adams  with contributions of statistical data by Alice  Kasakoff.  That's a published text, isn't it?  Yes, it is.  And I would like to refer you to page eight, which is  the fifth page under.  This is the 1969 publication?  :  I don't believe so.  '73, isn't it?  1973?  :  Yes.  Thank you.  And there Dr. Adams has provided a breakdown of  population figures by the Gitksan villages.  You see  that, do you?  Yes.  Are you familiar with that table?  Yes, I have seen it.  Yes.  Doesn't that indicate to you that the low point  for the Gitksan was 1901?  Yes.  Which suggests, as you would expect, a lag between the  coast and the interior Tsimshian?  Yes, I agree with that.  Yes.  Now, with respect to this document, which is  only in part shown here, you would agree with me that  Dr. Adams is recognized as an anthropologist who has  specialized in the Gitksan?  Yes, I would.  And I have inserted in his -- in the preface the -- a  statement of his work and who he had his work reviewed  by and who he consulted, both with respect to  criticism and seeking advice, and if you look on page  Roman VIII, you will see amongst the -- in the last  paragraph on this first column, you will see that he  consulted, amongst others, Marius Barbeau, Phillip  Drucker, who is one of your references; am I correct?  Being one of my references doesn't mean I agree with  him.  It's just works that I referred to.  No, that's --  To make that clear.  Yes.  Wilson Duff, you refer to him?  Yes.  Violet Garfield?  Yes. 11205  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   And then three lines from the bottom, Derek Smith.  2 That was a professor of yours at Carleton?  3 A   That's correct.  4 Q   I don't believe that you had the opportunity to  5 consult any of these people.  You simply have used  6 some of their works as references?  7 A   That's correct.  8 Q   Now, at page 65 of your report you say at the top of  9 the page:  10  11 "With European Canadian contact, the Gitksan  12 encountered a period of unprecedented  13 disruption, the resulting population declined  14 making it more difficult to chose heirs at  15 birth."  16  17 And I think in your evidence in chief you referred  18 to Wilson Duff's paper in support of that conclusion?  19 A   I don't recall.  20 Q   In any event, you relied upon Wilson Duff, that table  21 that he produced, to support your suggestion that  22 there had been an unprecedented population decline?  23 A   Yes.  24 Q   And it would appear that this process was reversed in  25 1901?  26 A   I guess the reversal began, then, according to the  27 statistics in Adams.  28 Q   You question those?  29 A   No, I don't.  30 Q   No.  Would you agree with me, then, that amalgamations  31 have been taking place in a period of increasing  32 population?  33 A   Yes, I would.  34 Q   And amalgamations are mentioned in the adaawks?  You  35 state in your report?  36 A   Yes, they are.  37 Q   So this would indicate that -- they existed in  38 pre-contact times?  39 A   Yes, that's correct.  40 Q   And therefore they would represent a mechanism that  41 existed before any disease attributable to the  42 European presence?  43 A   That's correct.  44 Q   Yes.  And a mechanism which was able to respond to war  45 or natural -- the natural accident of births which  46 might result in a House having the misfortune of all  4 7 men? 11206  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Yes, that's correct.  2 Q   Yes.  Or to slave raids?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   Or to the economic pressures resulting from any of  5 these?  6 A   I don't know what you mean by that.  7 Q   I mean by that, as a House diminishes in number, its  8 ability to defend its resources is reduced.  That's  9 what I mean by economic pressure.  10 A   Yes, that's true.  11 Q   Now, let me put this proposition to you.  If a society  12 is said to have adopted the notion that a group called  13 in this case House is perpetual, and that there is no  14 mechanism for redistribution of the resources of that  15 group, then there has to be a mechanism acknowledged  16 that allows for a redistribution of people?  17 A   That would be so if there was no mechanism for  18 redistribution of the resources, but there was a  19 mechanism for redistribution, and that was what's most  20 commonly used with population imbalance.  21 Q   Are you talking about amalgamations?  22 A   No, I am not.  I am talking about the fact that people  23 have privileged access to the resources of their  24 spouse's territory, their father's territory, other  25 Houses to whom they might be related, such as their  26 mother's father and so on, and that in cases where a  27 population has -- or a House has too many people and  28 not enough resources, that those people could access  29 those other -- some of those people could access some  30 of those other territories.  31 Q   That gives rise to such things as strategic marriages  32 and adoptions?  33 A   That's not what I am referring to.  34 Q   Well, I thought you were referring to the means by  35 which people gained access to resources.  36 A   I am referring to one specific way that this is dealt  37 with, which I believe Mr. Adams overlooked.  38 Q   Well, the -- I want to be sure that I understand what  39 you are talking about.  If I followed you correctly,  40 you said there are means by which people gain access  41 to resources which are in the name of other groups?  42 A   Yes, that's correct.  43 Q   All right.  And I give you as an example a strategic  44 marriage, that is to say a marriage which will give  45 the husband's line the access to his -- the resources  46 of his wife's House during his lifetime.  47 A   Yes, that's correct. 11207  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   Yes.  And there is a name for that, isn't there?  2 A   I'm not sure what you are referring to.  3 Q   All right.  And another example that I gave to you was  4 adoption.  5 A   Yes, okay, I could agree with that.  6 Q   Now, in fact don't we have one of those examples in  7 the case of one of the Houses that we discussed  8 yesterday, Haluus?  Doesn't the adoption of -- if I  9 could have chart 23, please.  You will recall that the  10 original line became extinct with the death of Dick  11 Lattie, and he adopted Fanny Muldoe, who married  12 Stanley Williams?  13 A   Yes.  14 Q   And the adopted son of Fanny Muldoe became Haluus.  15 Didn't that give Mr. Stanley Williams access to the  16 resources of the House of Haluus?  17 A   It doesn't automatically grant it.  It makes it more  18 likely that he would be given privileged access.  19 Q   Well, I thought that was a present day example of  20 precisely what you were talking about.  21 A   Of what I just said.  22 Q   Yes.  Access to resources by --  23 A   Privileged access.  It's not automatic.  It's with  24 permission.  25 Q   Well, I thought that the father of the -- of the chief  26 had access to the chief's House territory, even though  27 the father, of course, was not in the same House.  28 A   The father of the chief has access to --  29 Q   To the chief -- the resources of the chief's House.  30 A   This would be very likely.  31 Q   Yes.  32 A   But again it's a privileged access.  33 THE COURT:  Well, isn't it a two-way privileged access?  34 THE WITNESS:  That's correct.  35 THE COURT:  Haluus would have privileged access to the resources  36 of Gwis gyen and vice versa?  37 THE WITNESS:   That's correct?  38 MR. GOLDIE:  Yes.  39 Q   But I go back to my original question to you, and that  40 is that if the society that we are discussing has  41 adopted the notion that the group is perpetual, and  42 that is -- that is an assumption of the Gitksan?  43 A   That's correct.  44 Q   Yes.  Then -- and there is, I suggest to you, that  45 what we are talking about is not a mechanism for the  46 redistribution of resources from one House to another  47 House, it is a mechanism through adoptions or a 1120?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 marriage that provides for the redistribution of  2 people.  Do you follow me?  3 A   No.  4 Q   All right.  Now, you told us that your charts record  5 1,550 marriages.  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   And you wrote these down for us in response to a  8 question in your rule 28 questionnaire.  Intra-village  9 marriage, 400, inter-village marriages, 280.  Do you  10 recall —  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   Now, if I subtract 680 from 1,550, is this -- are you  13 telling us that 870 marriages were outside all of the  14 villages?  15 A   Can I -- which tab is this?  16 Q   You are looking for your --  17 A   Oh, it's at the back of my report, isn't it?  18 Q   Yes.  19 A  Which page is it?  20 Q   I don't have a page.  I am just referring to the  21 responses to your rule 28 questionnaire.  22 A   I'm sorry.  I would like to see it, please.  23 Q   Yes.  Page 33, question 53.  The question that was put  24 to you, Mrs. Harris, was question 52 A:  25  26 "Q   What are the total number of marriages  27 disclosed by your genealogical research?"  28 A  Approximately 1,550.  This figure counts a  29 marriage between two Gitksan people once,  30 even though the marriages were recorded  31 twice on the genealogies, once for each  32 spouse's genealogy."  33  34 Now, if I may just pause there.  You say a marriage  35 between two Gitksan people.  You have included a  36 marriage between a Gitksan and a non-Gitksan?  37 A   Yes.  I'm sorry, that's not precisely correct.  I just  38 meant to indicate that when they were both Gitksan  39 that I didn't count the marriage twice, because they  40 would be represented on two --  41 Q   I understand.  But you counted marriages to  42 non-Gitksan?  43 A   Yes, that's correct.  4 4 Q   And then D:  45  46 "Q   Of the total number of marriages, how  47 many were intra-village? 11209  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A  Approximately 400."  2  3 That is to say a marriage between two people who  4 ordinarily reside in the same village?  5 A   No, it was between two people whose village of origin,  6 in other words, the -- their House was from that  7 village.  8 Q   Yes.  Village of origin?  9 A   Yes, because I don't know where every Gitksan person  10 actually resides.  11 Q   And then E:  12  13 "Q   How many occurred between persons of  14 different Gitksan villages?"  15  16 That's again villages of origin?  17 A   Yes, it is.  18 Q   And your answer was:  19  2 0 "A  Approximately 2 8 0."  21  22 A   Yes, that's correct.  23 Q   And if I add those two numbers together, it comes to  24 680, and if I subtract that from 1,550, does that mean  25 that there were 870 marriages which occurred outside  26 the villages of origin of the marriage partners?  27 A   No.  It means that there are some marriages that I  28 don't know where the spouse came from or what village  29 or what nation.  30 Q   I see.  Is that in fact the complete explanation for  31 the difference between 680 and 1,550, that you don't  32 know where the spouse came from?  33 A   No, there is a further list there in -- of marriages  34 with other groups of people.  35 Q   All right.  Then the question was:  36  37 "Q   How many occurred between Gitksan persons  38 and persons of Nisga'a?"  39  4 0 And you said:  41  42 "A  Approximately 55."  43  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   Coast Tsimshian, you said 45.  46 MR. GRANT:  Approximately 45.  47 MR. GOLDIE: 11210  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   These are all approximate numbers?  2 A   Yes.  3 Q   Wet'suwet'en, approximately 86; Sekani, 23; other  4 Indian people, 45; non-Indian, 200.  If I add those  5 up, it's 454.  So would it be fair to say that if I  6 add 400 for intra-village, 280 for inter-village and  7 454 for marriages with Gitksan and non-Gitksan, I get  8 1,134, and would the difference between that and 1,550  9 be truly where you were unaware of the origin of the  10 marriage partner?  11 A   Yes.  12 Q   Either who they were, in terms of their classification  13 or their place of origin?  14 A   Yes.  Some of them could be Gitksan, but I didn't know  15 their House, and the correlation between spouses  16 wouldn't be complete on the genealogies, because this  17 work was never computerized, was entirely done from  18 memory.  So if someone told me this lady married  19 Charlie Smith, and I couldn't remember what House  20 Charlie Smith came from, the correlation may not be  21 there, and that's where there is a gap.  And some as  22 well could have been from other places.  23 Q   Yes.  Whatever the case may be, however, the largest  24 number of -- the largest group of non-Gitksan  25 marriages is with white people?  26 A   That's correct.  27 THE COURT:  I'm sorry?  28 MR. GOLDIE:  I beg your pardon, My Lord.  29 THE COURT:  You say the largest group is?  30 MR. GOLDIE:  Is with white people.  That's the approximately  31 200.  32 THE COURT:  The largest of the non-village?  33 MR. GOLDIE:  Of the non — the largest of the group of  34 non-Gitksan marriages.  35 THE COURT:  Yes.  This is with whites?  36 MR. GOLDIE:  With white people, yes.  37 Q   Now, I am going to refer to your evidence in chief at  38 page 16 -- volume 169, page 10775 at lines 33 to 47,  39 and I think you were -- and this was going through the  40 documents which were tendered in support of your  41 methodology, and more exactly I think you were  42 discussing the documents under tab 10 of Exhibit 854.  43 Do you have that in front of you?  44 A   I have the tab 10.  45 Q   Yes.  All right.  I am just -- I am referring to that  46 so that it may refresh your recollection.  Then at tab  47 33 -- 11211  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  COURT:  Sorry.  Exhibit 854?  GOLDIE:  Maybe I have the wrong number, My Lord.  I am  looking at the -- 854 is her report.  COURT:  Is it?  GOLDIE:  And the tabs 3 to —  REGISTRAR:  Tabs 5 to 35 are 852.  GOLDIE:  Is 852, and I am referring to tab 10 in that one.  COURT:  Madam Registrar, what exhibit number is this  plaintiffs' book?  GOLDIE:  I think its got several numbers in it now, My Lord.  COURT:  It doesn't have a -- so you are asking about her  report, then, are you?  GOLDIE:  No, it's -- I have referred her to the evidence in  chief.  COURT:  All right.  You mean 852, tab 10, do you?  GOLDIE:  Yes.  GRANT:  I don't think his binder -- it was marked as a  binder separate, because everything was marked  individually in it.  So it's different numbers in  different tabs.  COURT:  Yes.  GOLDIE:  Q   And at line 33 or line 29 you were referred to the  fourth page under tab 10.  It's a page that has  previous name information, English name "Edward  Sexsmith" at the top.  Do you see that?  1  THE  2  MR.  3  4  THE  5  MR.  6  THE  7  MR.  8  THE  9  10  MR.  11  THE  12  13  MR.  14  15  THE  16  MR.  17  MR.  18  19  20  21  THE  22  MR.  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  A  Yes, I do.  Q  And Mr. Grant asked you  Q   Fourth page.  You have a d,  Edward Sexsmith at the top.  date of birth 1833, approx.?,  and then date of death approx.?.  Now do  you recall where you would get that type of  information?  A   Let's see.  Edward Sexsmith.  Frequent --  oh, yes.  Martha Brown would, and other  elderly informants would remember  approximately when relatives died that had  died when they were very young before there  were many records available.  And they  would -- I would ask them how -- how old  was this person when they died to get this  rough approximate date, because obviously  1833 is pre-contact."  Just pausing there.  Again are you using contact in  the sense of the 1860's in that response? 11212  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Certainly.  It would have been more precise for me to  2 say -- this is before there were records, of which I  3 believe you corrected me.  4 Q   Yes.  And you go on, and at line four you say:  5  6 "A  And there were no written records so that  7 was the best I could do for people who were  8 born in those very early years before  9 contact.  That's why it says approximate,  10 because these are rough guesses.  These  11 people were born before records.  12 Q  When you say 1833 were pre-records you are  13 saying there are no cencus records?  14 A   No Europeans in the area whatsoever."  15  16 By area do you mean the land claims area?  17 A   No, I meant there was no Europeans in Kispiox writing  18 down people's ages.  19 MR. GOLDIE:   All right.  Thank you.  My Lord, would this be a  2 0 convenient time?  21 THE COURT:  Yes, thank you.  22 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  23  24 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED FOR LUNCHEON RECESS)  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33 I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO  34 BE A TRUE AND ACCURATE TRANSCRIPT  35 OF THE PROCEEDINGS HEREIN TO THE  36 BEST OF MY SKILL AND ABILITY.  37  3 8    3 9 LORI OXLEY  4 0 OFFICIAL REPORTER  41 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  42  43  44  45  46  47 11213  Certification  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  3 6 (PROCEEDINGS RECONVENED AT 2:00 P.M.)  37  38 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  39 THE COURT:  Mr. Goldie.  40 MR. GOLDIE:  Thank you, my lord.  Madam Registrar reminds me  41 that I did not mark tab 16, which are excerpts from  42 Mr. Adams' publication and containing the table which  43 the witness accepted on page 8, and I tender that as  44 an exhibit.  4 5    THE COURT:  Thank you.  46    MR. GOLDIE:  That would be 860A-16 then?  4 7    THE COURT:  Yes. 11214  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1    THE REGISTRAR:  Yes.  2  3 (EXHIBIT 860A-16 - TAB 16 - EXCERPTS FROM WORK OF JOHN W.  4 ADAMS (1973)  5  6 MR. GOLDIE:  7 Q   Thank you.  Mrs. Harris, at page 107 of your report we  8 find Appendix B, Interviewees List, and that is  9 introduced by this sentence:  10  11 "The following persons were interviewed for  12 the purpose of obtaining genealogical  13 information."  14  15 And I think you've told us that you did not personally  16 interview all these people?  17 A   Over 90 per cent of them.  18 Q   I understood you to say that you had interviewed about  19 a hundred.  20 A   No, that's not correct.  200 would be correct.  21 Q   I see.  There are 228 names?  22 A   Yes, then it's probably over 200.  There's very few on  23 the list I didn't personally interview.  24 Q   Oh, all right.  In your response to the Rule 28  25 application you answered this question:  26  27 "Please identify all persons interviewed by  28 you or on your behalf for the research  29 giving rise to the report."  30  31 And you stated:  32  33 "As near as I can recall, the following were  34 interviewed by me or on my behalf for the  35 purposes of this research."  36 And then there followed the list which we now find at  37 page 107?  38 A   Yes.  39 Q   Have you a list there of the people who were  40 interviewed by others than yourself?  41 A   No, but I could pick them out.  42 Q   I perhaps may ask you to do that in a minute.  Who  43 else interviewed on your behalf?  44 A   Neil Sterritt and Don Ryan.  45 Q   Anybody else?  46 A   Let's see.  There -- at the time this list was made  47 that was all. 11215  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   All what?  2 A   That interviewed on my behalf.  3 Q   Oh, yes.  4 A  And there were -- there was some information  5 contributed at a later date by Sadie Howard and Alice  6 Sampson.  7 Q   Alice?  8 A   Sampson.  9 MR. GOLDIE:  At page 105 —  10 THE COURT:  Sorry, information contributed from interviews they  11 conducted or from their own information?  12 THE WITNESS:  From interviews they conducted and from their own  13 information.  14 MR. GOLDIE:  15 Q   What kind of information did they provide?  16 A  Alice Sampson added some additional names on to her  17 own house genealogy, such as children's names, and  18 Sadie Howard added similar kinds of information.  19 Sadie's may have been a little more in depth.  There  20 were some older people as well whose names she then  21 added.  22 Q   Page 105, that page is blank except for the names of  23 five villages and a title "Neil Sterritt Name Lists."  24 What was supposed to follow?  25 A   Nothing.  26 Q   Nothing?  27 A   That was it.  It was just called "Neil Sterritt Name  28 Lists."  That's what we saw when Mr. Grant was  29 demonstrating methodology, and at the tail end of it  30 there was names from feasts.  That's all that was  31 referring to.  32 Q   I see.  Well now, we have made a count of the material  33 that has been provided to us as contained in those  34 seven volumes there, and by that count we can only  35 find you having conducted interviews with about 120  36 people.  37 A   Because there weren't --  38 Q   128.  I beg your pardon.  39 A  Well, that's because the information -- if I had an  4 0 interview with someone who just had a small amount of  41 information, it would just be recorded on the copy of  42 the genealogy that I was working on.  43 Q   But -- and that would leave -- apart from what we have  44 given us, it leaves about a hundred to be identified  45 as those with whom you had interviews.  You would have  46 no problem in identifying those 100 people?  47 A   Out of this?  No, I don't know what you're saying. 11216  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   Well, Mrs. Harris, from the material that's been  2 provided us we can identify only 128 people that you  3 interviewed.  4 A   Right.  5 Q   Now, you tell me that your other interviews would be  6 recorded on genealogies without any attribution --  7 A   Some of them.  8 Q   — to take that?  9 A   Some of them.  And as has been noted before, there was  10 a five or six month period where I wasn't saving  11 interview notes as well.  12 Q   We included in the 128 any indication on a draft  13 genealogy of who your informant was --  14 A   Right.  15 Q   -- and assumed that you had interviewed that  16 informant, but we still are unable to find anything  17 which indicated you interviewed a hundred people.  18 A  Well, that doesn't mean it didn't occur, does it?  19 Q   It didn't occur with a number of them?  20 A  What didn't occur?  21 Q   Personal interviews by you.  22 A  As I say, if you'd like me to pick them out, I'll do  23 that, because it's a very limited number from this  24 list.  25 Q   All right.  Do so.  26 A   Okay.  Let's see.  I'll say the ones I didn't  27 interview personally because the majority are the ones  28 I did interview personally.  29 Q   I'd like you to do it in the most expeditious way  30 possible.  31 A   Yes, that will be the way.  Martha Haimadim, that  32 was -- Neil Sterritt interviewed in the hospital in  33 Terrace.  34 THE COURT:  I'm sorry, are you doing it in any particular order?  35 THE WITNESS:  I'm starting on the first page, 107, and I'm  36 starting at the -- on the left-hand side column all  37 the way down first, and then the right-hand column  38 I'll do.  39 THE COURT:  All right.  40 THE WITNESS:  Okay.  Martha Haimadim.  Edith McDougall.  That  41 was from a house meeting I didn't attend, although I  42 have talked to her at other times.  Sam Morrison, the  43 very last one on page 107.  44 MR. GOLDIE:  45 Q   Yes.  46 A   That was also from Neil's notes.  Magnus Turner, I  47 didn't interview him personally either. 11217  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  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  Q   That's page 2?  A   Yes.  Q   Column which?  A   Page 108, the first column, about the seventh name  down.  Thank you.  Mary Jack.  How about  Q  A  Q  A  all right.  Sorry.  Go ahead.  Halfway down that first column on page 108.  I didn't  interview her personally, or Joe Bob.  Yes.  William Charlie and Roy Morris.  Yes.  Larry Wright, I didn't interview him personally.  Yes.  Billy Morrison, I didn't interview him personally  either.  Yes.  Freddy Howard.  I should tell you that we have found an interview note  of yours with Larry Wright.  I don't recall the interview.  I see.  Well --  There were many hundreds though, as you can see.  Yes.  All I'm saying is we found an interview note  with your initials on it.  Maybe I did.  These are the ones that I positively  can't remember the specific interview, so I may be  including some that I actually did but forgot.  All right.  I don't remember interviewing Murphy George.  Alex  Jack, Annie Louie were also ones I didn't interview  personally.  THE COURT:  I'm lost.  I haven't found Murphy George.  THE WITNESS:  Oh, sorry, the three of them are together in the  second column on page 108, right in the middle.  MR. GOLDIE:  Q   Murphy George, Alex Jack and Annie Louie?  A   Yes.  THE COURT:  Thank you.  THE WITNESS:  Maggie Smart, just a few down from that, I didn't  interview her personally that I remember.  I don't  remember interviewing Evelyn Johnson, nearly at the  bottom of the second column on page 108.  MR. GOLDIE:  Q   She's the lady that we were talking about earlier this  morning who holds the --  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A  Q  A 1121?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Duubisxw.  2 Q   -- the name Duubisxw?  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   Yes.  5 A   Roy Harris.  I don't remember interviewing Roy Harris.  6 Sorry, that's the first name on page 109.  7 Q   Yes.  8 A   Cora Crosby, I don't remember whether I talked to her  9 on the phone or whether Norma --  10 Q   She's mentioned in one of your notes, but we have it  11 marked as questionable as to whether there's a  12 interview.  13 A   Yeah, I didn't -- I don't remember meeting her  14 personally, and I can't remember that I talked to her  15 on the phone or whether her niece obtained the  16 information for me.  Johnny Moore I didn't interview  17 personally.  18 Q   Johnny Moore?  19 A   Yeah, halfway down the first --  20 Q   Yes.  21 A   -- column on page 109.  Ellen Spence, Port Simpson,  22 farther down that same first column.  I didn't  23 interview her personally.  Her daughter obtained the  24 information for me.  25 Q   Yes.  26 A   Trudy Rowland.  We corresponded by mail, not in  27 person.  I think Sarah Benson's name is repeated twice  28 on this list.  I'm not sure.  I thought I saw it  29 before.  Yes, it is.  That's the same Sarah Benson.  30 Madeline French, that was from Neil's interview notes  31 as well.  Yes, all the rest I interviewed personally,  32 a few by phone and most of them in meetings mostly in  33 their homes.  Some in my office, but mostly in their  34 homes.  35 Q   And that's how many people?  36 A   I don't know.  I didn't keep track.  These are just  37 ones I could recall from memory at a later date.  38 There may have been others that I've forgotten.  I  39 didn't go through my files to check all of my notes,  40 so you may have noticed ones that aren't even on the  41 list because I just did this from memory.  42 Q   All we did, Mrs. Harris, is take the names on this  43 list and go through this material here --  44 A   Right.  45 Q   -- to ascertain who interviewed them and how many  4 6 times they were interviewed.  47 A  Well, you couldn't ascertain that from the files, how 11219  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 many times.  That's not clearly recorded there.  2 Q   Well, perhaps I should go a little further before you  3 disagree with me.  According to our search of your  4 information, the five most important informants by  5 virtue of the number of references is first Mr.  6 Sterritt.  Would you agree with that?  7 A   No.  8 Q   We find 114 bits of material which are identifiable as  9 his.  Are you in a position to dispute that?  10 A   No, I'm not, but I don't agree with what you deem as  11 the significance of it.  12 Q   And the second one is Mary Johnson?  13 A   That I would agree with.  14 Q   Yes.  We find her referred to 58 times.  Any comment  15 on that?  16 A  Well, it's just that counting up references in the  17 files would not indicate the significance of the -- of  18 the -- the importance of the information from the  19 informant.  20 Q   Yes.  The significance may be a matter of argument.  21 But Olive Ryan, 18 times?  22 A   I'd say she was an important informant.  23 Q   Thomas Wright?  24 A   I'd say he was --  25 Q   Twelve times.  26 A   -- fairly important.  27 Q   Albert Tait?  2 8 A   Yes, he was important.  29 Q   Ten times.  Mary McKenzie, nine times?  30 A   She was important.  31 Q   You agree with me that four of those are important.  32 Wouldn't you agree with me that Mr. Sterritt was an  33 important informant?  34 A   The information provided by Mr. Sterritt, if it was  35 about people who I could easily contact directly, was  36 either already known to me -- in many cases he would  37 just -- if he had that type of information, he would  38 give it to me, and it would be either already known to  39 me or it would have been checked by me.  Where it was  40 significant was with people that it was not easy for  41 me to contact who lived far away, which most of the  42 names that I named that was the case.  They were  43 people who lived in Iskut and places like that.  44 Q   And in your Rule 28 examination or questionnaire you  45 said that Mary Johnson, Olive Mulwain, and Martha  46 Brown were especially knowledgeable people in nearly  47 everyone's family tree.  That's correct, is it? 11220  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Yes.  2 Q   And you relied upon what they told you about houses  3 other than their own?  4 A   Yes, I did.  5 Q   And to the extent that you relied upon Mr. Sterritt's  6 notes, they, of course, covered a great many houses  7 other than his own?  8 A   Yes, that's true.  9 Q   Now, of course, am I not correct that you had to rely  10 upon Mr. Sterritt's notes because some of these people  11 would have died by the time that -- for instance, I  12 think you told me that Martha Haimadim, you had to  13 rely upon his notes because he interviewed her in the  14 hospital, and she died not long after that interview;  15 isn't that correct?  16 A   I don't know what you mean by had to rely on his  17 notes.  18 Q   Well, you didn't interview her personally?  19 A   Right.  20 Q   And one of the reasons why is that she wasn't  21 around --  22 A   Right.  23 Q   -- for a good part of the time?  24 Are there any others in that category, who died  25 before you were able to interview them and on whose  26 notes you relied for the purposes of your genealogy?  27 A   That Mr. Sterritt or someone else interviewed?  28 Q   Yes.  2 9 A   Not that I remember.  30 Q   All right.  One of your informants, as I noted the  31 other day, was Mr. Solomon Marsden, who is a member of  32 the Kitwancool?  33 A   Yes.  34 Q   There are no Kitwancool genealogies in the material  35 you've submitted to the Court?  36 A   Yes.  37 Q   Although -- do you consider the Kitwancool Gitksan?  38 A   Yes, I do.  39 Q   And we have found from the Spookw genealogy, have we  40 not, much evidence of intermarriage, in that case with  41 Carrier people or Wet'suwet'en?  42 A   Between Spookw and the Wet'suwet'en?  43 Q   In the House of Spookw --  44 A   Yes.  45 Q   -- in the genealogy there is much evidence of  46 intermarriages?  47 A   Yes. 11221  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 Q   And you would expect that at a boundary between two  2 peoples?  3 A   Not necessarily, but it would make sense.  4 Q   Wouldn't you expect to find that the Kitwancool and  5 the Nass River people had intermarried to a  6 considerable extent?  7 A   I wouldn't expect it, but I wouldn't say it was  8 unlikely either.  But I don't particularly have that  9 expectation.  10 Q   Well, didn't Barbeau report that at one time the  11 Kitwancool was half Stikine?  12 A   I don't know.  13 Q   Well, you don't know then?  14 A   If Barbeau said that?  No, I don't.  15 Q   Your answer is that you don't know Barbeau stated  16 that?  17 A   No, that's what I'm saying.  I don't know if he said  18 that.  19 Q   Would you be surprised by that statement?  20 A   No, but I'd want to know what he meant --  21 Q   Yes.  22 A   -- because it doesn't -- it isn't clear in itself.  23 Q   Would it not have been a more accurate picture of the  24 genealogy of the Gitksan peoples if you had included  25 the Kitwancool?  26 A   If I was proclaiming to make complete genealogies of  27 all of the Gitksan.  28 Q   Well, you made many statements about the Gitksan --  2 9 A   Right.  30 Q   -- haven't you?  31 A   I feel that all villages except Kitwancool is a fair  32 sample.  It's far more representative than Adams and  33 Kasakoff.  34 Q   Well, that's your opinion?  35 A  Well, if you want to be statistical, they relied --  36 Kasakoff relied only on three of the eastern villages.  37 Q   Yes.  38 A  And I've relied on all except Kitwancool, as I say, so  39 I think it's more representative.  40 Q   And her sample of marriages compares favourably with  41 yours if you just take into account the three villages  42 that she took as representative?  43 A   I'm not sure if I know what you mean.  44 Q   Well, how many marriages did she have in all?  45 A   1,200 and something, I believe.  I forget.  46 Q   And your genealogies contain one more generation of  47 marriages, her work being done in 1965? 11222  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   Oh, you're saying one generation.  2 Q   Subsequent to hers you have included?  3 A   I suppose you could say that.  4 Q   Well —  5 A  What is a generation, you see, is what I'm getting at.  6 Q   Well, it's another level of marriages, isn't it?  7 A  Well —  8 Q   It's all the marriages that have occurred since 1965?  9 A   Okay.  If you want to call that a generation, then  10 I'll accept the statement.  I just wanted to be clear.  11 Q   All right.  In your responses to the questions that --  12 in the Rule 28 questionnaire, you were asked at  13 question 49 on page 31 this question:  14  15 "Are you aware of any instances of witchcraft  16 being practised by the Gitksan?"  17  18 And you answered, and I quote:  19  20 "This is not relevant to my report or my  21 research."  22  23 In what respect is it not relevant?  24 A   I think a more appropriate question is in what respect  25 is it relevant because I don't --  26 Q   No, I'm asking -- you answered the question by saying  27 it is not relevant, and I'm asking you in what respect  28 is it not relevant?  29 A   Because I don't see any way that it affects marriage  30 patterns, inheritance, things of this nature.  31 Q   Well, are you not aware that some anthropologists  32 believe that marriages have been affected by  33 witchcraft?  34 A   I believe Adams says that, and I've seen no evidence  35 of it.  36 Q   Well, it's not a question of irrelevancy then.  37 A   It is to me.  38 Q   It's a question of whether you observed it; isn't that  39 correct?  40 A  Well, it's irrelevant to my report.  I'm not --  41 Q   The correct answer, surely, Mrs. Harris, is that  42 you're not aware of any instances?  43 A   That's another answer.  I believe I gave the correct  44 answer.  45 Q   All right.  Is that your evidence today, that you're  46 not aware of any instances of witchcraft being  47 practised by the Gitksan -- 11223  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   No.  2 Q   -- today or at any time in the past?  3 A   No, that's not.  4 Q   Well, what is your evidence?  5 A   The Gitksan say that witchcraft is practised.  I don't  6 know the details of it.  I don't know -- I certainly  7 don't know how it affects anything that I'm concerned  8 with in my report, and that's why I say it's not  9 relevant.  I haven't studied the area, but I have  10 heard references to it, but not in regards to  11 inheritance or marriage or anything that I wrote  12 about.  13 Q   Despite the fact that at least one anthropologist has  14 suggested that it has affected the things that you're  15 talking about?  16 A   One anthropologist.  17 Q   Well, that's all that's needed, isn't it?  18 A   I just don't agree with that proposition.  I have no  19 evidence of it.  20 Q   You don't agree because you've been unable to unearth  21 any evidence that links what you have heard --  22 A   No, that's not —  23 Q   -- with marriage or inheritance?  24 A   You're intimating that I looked for it, and I didn't  25 look for it is what I'm saying.  26 Q   I'm not intimating anything.  The question you were  27 asked was, "Are you aware of any instances," and you  28 said, "Not relevant."  Now you're telling us you were  29 aware but you don't think it affected inheritance or  30 marriage?  31 A   Right, that would be a fair statement.  32 MR. GOLDIE:  All right.  Now, in your January 1987 report you  33 said at page 5, and I don't think this particular part  34 is in your present report -- do you have a copy?  I'm  35 referring to Chapter 1, Methodology, Research Methods.  36 Now, in your present report, page 5 of your present  37 report, the third paragraph, you say:  38  39 "I began the genealogical research in a  40 position which is fairly unique and somewhat  41 enviable to anthropologists.  In addition to  42 my formal training in anthropology, I am a  43 member of the community I study.  I live in  44 Kispiox Village and I am a House member."  45  46 Now, in your January report you said on page 5:  47 11224  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 "I began the genealogical research in a  2 position which is fairly unique and somewhat  3 enviable to anthropologists.  In addition to  4 my formal training in anthropology, I am a  5 member of the community I study.  I am a  6 member of the House of 'Niist.  I have a  7 minor chief's name and a seat in the feast  8 hall.  As a House member in my own right and  9 especially as the wife of a chief, I am  10 heavily involved in the feast system.  As  11 well, I have learned a considerable amount  12 about Gitksan society from witnessing the  13 rise in power of my husband, Xhlex, who  14 holds a councillor's position and is heir to  15 his head chief, Tsibasaa.  Such involvement  16 in the society diminished for me,"  17  18 and I want to emphasize the part I'm now reading,  19  20 "Such involvement in the society diminished  21 for me one of the anthropologist's biggest  22 problems which is rapport with the people  23 under study."  24  25 MR. GRANT:  My lord, it's on page 7 of her present report, that  26 last sentence my friend referred to.  In fact, the  27 entire thing is in pages between 5 and 7, but there's  28 additional information there.  29 MR. GOLDIE:  30 Q   You're referring there to what is known as participant  31 observation?  32 A   Yes, I am.  33 Q   And there's a lot of literature on participant  34 observation, is there not?  35 A   There probably is.  I'm not familiar with it in  36 detail.  37 Q   I beg your pardon?  38 A   I'm not familiar with it in detail.  I'm certain there  39 is.  40 Q   You're not familiar with any of the -- with any of the  41 literature on participant observation and the  42 particular difficulties inherent in reporting on a  43 society that you're observing?  44 A   I don't believe I said that.  I said I can't quote  45 authors and references, but I've read a lot of it,  46 particularly in graduate school and the methodology  47 course. 11225  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  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  Q   Well, there are courses that are devoted to that very  thing, aren't there?  A  And I took some.  Q   Yes.  Field researchers, by some of the people that  have written in this field, are urged to get close to  the subject being studied; is that correct?  A   In anthropology, yes.  Q   And you suggest you have succeeded in a way few else  have?  A   Yes.  GOLDIE:  Is this sentence -- maybe Mr. Grant can be of  assistance to me again.  Is this sentence found in  your present report, and I quote:  "Being a community member has afforded me  opportunities for participant observation,  the favoured anthropological methodology not  usually available to outside observers"?  GRANT:  What page is that on?  WITNESS:  I don't remember.  GOLDIE:  It's on page 6 of the January report.  That  sentence which I've just read to you is omitted from  your present report?  MR.  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  MR.  THE  THE  MR.  MR.  No, it's on page 7.  No, it's not.  :  It's restated maybe.  The last word on page 7.  Page 7 and the top of page  COURT:  GRANT:  WITNESS:  COURT:  GRANT:  GOLDIE:  Q   The words "not usually available" I think are missing;  isn't that right?  A   I guess.  Q   The words "not usually available to outside  observers"?  A   I guess that is.  Yes, it is not in the second  version.  Q   When you omitted those words, did you intend to  withdraw the suggestion that you were in a position  that other anthropologists have not been in?  A   No, I didn't intend to change the meaning.  Q   All right.  Now, the rapport that you speak of,  doesn't that carry with it a dilemma if you, as a  professional, are called upon to report something in  the name of science which you received in your  capacity as a confidant of the member of the community  that you're studying? 11226  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A  What was the question?  2 Q   Well, let me put it in more general terms instead of  3 addressing it to you.  Isn't it a recognized dilemma  4 for participant observers who are anthropologists that  5 in the name of their science they may be called upon  6 to report something which they received from a member  7 of the community and which was given to them by the  8 member of the community in the assumed capacity of a  9 friend or a confidant?  10 A   You're saying in the name of science they have to  11 report what was given to them in confidence by the  12 informant?  Is that what you're saying?  13 Q   Well, that's a dilemma that is referred to a good deal  14 in the literature, isn't it?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   Now, if, for instance, and I am now addressing this to  17 you rather than in the abstract, if, for instance, you  18 reported that there existed today secret societies  19 amongst the Gitksan and proceeded to identify who  20 belonged to each and how membership was intended to  21 control the commoners, that would be regarded as, if  22 not a breach of confidence, it would disturb the  23 rapport you have in the community, would it not?  24 A   I suppose it would.  25 Q   Well, how about another example.  If you were to  26 report that the principal focus of interest in the  27 Gitksan community today was the land claim and that  28 the principal reason for maintaining the feast system  29 was to validate claims to territory for which  30 compensation was expected, you would jeopardize your  31 relationships in the community, would you not?  32 A   I don't know.  I've never heard anybody say such a  33 thing.  34 Q   Hasn't that been stated by an anthropologist?  35 A   By Adams.  36 Q   But if you stated that, would that not disturb the  37 rapport that you have set up within the community?  38 A   I don't know because it -- the situation hasn't  39 occurred.  40 Q   That's because you don't believe that the statement  41 that I just made to you --  42 A   Yes.  43 Q   -- has any basis in fact?  44 A   Yeah, that's correct.  45 Q   Yes.  But would you agree with me that you would not  46 knowingly jeopardize the rapport that you have  47 achieved in your adopted community? 11227  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   I'm afraid that I have risked that at times because  2 some of the things I've put on the genealogies are  3 things that people don't like to be publicly known,  4 but I wanted to report honestly what people had told  5 me, and there are things on those genealogies that  6 people are embarrassed about.  7 Q   But in your statement about the community you would  8 not want to jeopardize that rapport, would you?  9 A   I'm saying that I already have risked that, I've been  10 willing to risk that.  11 Q   You say you risked it.  Has it been jeopardized?  12 A   I don't think it has, but I certainly have risked it.  13 Q   And I suggest to you that one of the reasons why it  14 has not been jeopardized is that what you have done is  15 in support of the land claim.  Everybody was aware of  16 that, weren't they?  17 A   It -- it -- I suppose it is in support of the land  18 claim, but it is what I honestly felt was  19 representative of the society I looked at.  20 Q   Yes.  But my question was that your informants and the  21 community were all aware of the fact that what you  22 were doing was in support of the land claim?  23 A   No, we didn't even talk about land claims.  We just  24 talked about genealogies.  And, as I say, they were  25 just started for academic purposes, as far as I knew,  26 at the beginning, just for the information's sake.  27 Q   We've seen yesterday from the notes that Art Wilson  28 took that there was a discussion of the court case?  29 A  At a later date, yes.  30 Q   Yes.  31 A   Yes.  And certainly in -- in most of the interviews  32 that I just did one on one, we didn't really talk  33 about land claims.  I -- I -- actually, at some  34 interviews I had done that, and people were not  35 concerned one way or the other about that but just  36 wanted to have the information about the houses  37 recorded for the sake of having the information  38 recorded.  39 Q   Did you not identify the purpose of your interviews?  40 A  As I say, I did at some interviews, and people didn't  41 seem particularly concerned, and thereafter I found  42 that instead of going into a long speech about land  43 claims, what I would do is just say this is the  44 research that the Tribal Council is doing, and people  45 could be more or less aware of precisely what it would  46 be used for.  47 Q   Am I not correct in my present understanding that you 11228  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1  2  A  3  Q  4  A  5  Q  6  7  A  8  Q  9  10  A  11  Q  12  13  14  i  15  A   '  16  17  18  Q  19  A  20  21  22  Q  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  A  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  Q  40  41  A  42  Q  43  A  44    I  MR. GOLDIE  45  46  47  are now fully a member of your adopted community?  Yes, I would say so.  Your permanent home is at Kispiox?  Yes, it is.  You have stated that you participate fully in the  feast system?  That's true.  And you assist your husband in his upward progress as  a chief?  Yes.  And I suggest to you that you would not knowingly  jeopardize the relationships which you have  established in the community of Kispiox or the larger  Gitksan community?  Within reason.  I mean, I -- I do jeopardize my  position by being outspoken on issues, and I believe I  have to be honest --  Yes.  -- in all things, and I'm not just referring to my  work here, but in all things, even though it does  upset people.  Yes.  I'm not suggesting for a minute that you have in  any way been dishonest in the reporting on your charts  of the information that you have received.  I am  suggesting that you're not going to willingly  jeopardize your rapport with the community in which  you live by the expression of opinions which run  contrary to the received opinions in the community.  No, I don't agree because some of the things that I've  put into the report, some people in the community  were -- were surprised.  Some of the younger people  were surprised to learn that the preferred marriage is  with one's father's house.  The older people generally  knew that, and some of the young people did, but some  others were shocked, and I assume that's due to the  influence of western culture, but I'm not afraid to  confront them with what I believe is the traditional  practice.  You explained it in terms of the influence of western  culture --  Yes.  -- when you were responding to that shock?  Yes.  :  My lord, yesterday I asked my friend -- I made a  formal request for the production of any drafts and  comments on drafts, and my friend made some  observations at that time, but he -- I'd ask him if 11229  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 he's in a position to make any further comments.  2 MR. GRANT:  No, I'm not, my lord.  3 MR. GOLDIE:  4 Q   I want -- there's one question of a general character  5 I want to put to you, Mrs. Harris, and that is is that  6 page in your handwriting?  7 A   Yes, it is.  8 Q   At the top of the page can you tell me what -- it  9 looks like a D, colon, and then a name, and then what  10 is it, TXT?  11 A   That's a code for the word processing so they can find  12 that document again.  13 Q   A code for the word processing.  14 A   They -- they code each document that they type for me  15 with a name so they can look up in a book to find it  16 again.  17 Q   Was that code in the material that we've been supplied  18 with?  19 A  Are you asking me?  20 MR. GOLDIE:  Well —  21 MR. GRANT:  I can possibly assist on this.  I think the code my  22 friend refers to is when a document is word processed,  23 that is, a handwritten document in this case my friend  24 has shown, it's word processed to be typed.  The word  25 processor would have a code so they can search for the  26 document, whether it's a letter or anything like that.  27 And that appears to be something that was put on by  28 the word processor, which presumably suggests that  29 that particular document that my friend has was word  30 processed.  31 MR. GOLDIE:  Well —  32 MR. GRANT:  But unless that document -- unless there is a typed  33 version of that document in the file to which my  34 friend refers, then -- then there's no -- I produced  35 all of the files of this witness so -- relating to  36 these matters.  I don't know what would have happened  37 to it.  38 MR. GOLDIE:  39 Q   Well, I just want to make sure.  I'm going to show you  40 another document.  Is that the same character at the  41 top?  42 A   Yes, it is.  43 Q   Just clarify this for me, please.  Did you hand this  44 document to the Tribal Council word processor for  45 typing?  46 A   Yes, I did.  47 Q   And then it was given back to you? 11230  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  1 A   This was or the typed --  2 Q   Yes, this one.  3 A   Yes.  4 Q   And also a typed one?  Would that be the case?  5 A   Yes, should be.  It should be in the files.  6 Q   And did you do that with a number of documents?  7 A  With those name lists, with quite a few of them.  Some  8 of them may have remained handwritten, but many of  9 them were typed.  10 Q   Well then, the code that you speak of is that  11 somewhere the word processor said every document that  12 I get of this character I'm going to code as TXT, and  13 that would tell you at any one time how many of -- how  14 many of the documents, present and past name holders,  15 you have?  16 A   I have no idea how they coded them.  I didn't pay any  17 attention to that.  18 Q   Well —  19 A   It was just for their purposes.  20 Q   I should say to you that the present and past name  21 holders appear either to be handwritten or on a  22 printed form in handwriting, and I'm going to show you  23 tab 10 of the material in the book.  We're not talking  24 about that, are we?  25 A   No, those were never sent to the word processor.  I  26 abandoned those after a short while.  27 Q   Well, just tell me then what documents were sent to  28 the word processor?  29 A   Just those name lists from -- from my files.  Is that  30 what you're referring to?  And then there was some  31 other bits and pieces.  Like if I collect an adaawk, I  32 would usually get that typed, but most of my stuff was  33 handwritten.  34 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, we've seen the latter, but I can't call to  35 mind quickly the former.  In any event, I would like  36 to reserve, my lord, the opportunity of coming back if  37 I find that there is something in my -- in the files  38 that I need further clarification on with respect to  39 this.  4 0 THE COURT:  All right.  41 MR. GOLDIE:  Otherwise —  42 THE COURT:  Well, subject to it being convenient, which may have  43 to be weighed against other circumstances.  44 MR. GOLDIE:  I appreciate that, but I thought I had an extra day  45 in hand when I started yesterday.  4 6 THE COURT:  Yes.  All right.  Thank you, Mr. Goldie.  47 MR. GRANT:  I'll leave it, my lord. 11231  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Mr. Goldie  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 THE COURT:  Miss Koenigsberg.  2 MR. GRANT:  Just to clarify, is my friend suggesting that he  3 may, after Miss Koenigsberg, do further cross-  4 examination or is it only for clarification of these  5 documents?  6 MR. GOLDIE:  Well, that's all at the present time, but I started  7 a day early, and I haven't finished my examination of  8 what you sent me, and if I find something which I  9 consider to be important and significant, I may make a  10 submission that would allow me to come back.  11 THE COURT  12 MR. GRANT  13 THE COURT  You may always apply in that regard.  Okay.  I just wanted to be clear.  Yes.  Miss Koenigsberg.  14  15 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. KOENIGSBERG:  16 Q   Mrs. Harris, first I'd like to canvass with you some  17 further information on the topic of adoptions and  18 their relationship to the social structure as you've  19 covered it.  You've already told us, and I just want  20 to put it in as accurate a context as I can, your --  21 it's footnote 7 to page 95, where you list those  22 houses which were unilineally related kin, and that's  23 in your report.  And my note is that of that original  24 list of ten there, the ones which you now say fall  25 into that category are Dawamuxw, Hanamuxw, Amagyet,  26 Gwagl'lo, and I'll deal with the fifth one, which I  27 had made a note of, Delgamuukw, but those are the five  28 that remain in that category?  29 A   Yes.  30 Q   And did I understand you correctly that those houses  31 would be all of the houses that -- for which there are  32 genealogies which do not have adoptions?  33 A  Among the --  34 Q   I'm speaking now, of course, of what I will call the  35 "T" word adoptions.  36 A   Right.  The -- these groups represent unilineally  37 related kin --  38 Q   Yes.  39 A   -- with no adoptions into that unilineal group.  That  40 would be a much more precise way to put it.  41 Q   All right.  Delgamuukw, of course, has two  42 adoptions --  43 A  Which ones are you --  44 Q   -- in the houses today?  45 A  Which ones are you referring to?  46 Q   Lottie Harris and Danny Lavasseur are shown on your  47 genealogy in the House of Delgamuukw as adopted. 11232  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 A   I'm sorry, I forgot about Danny Lavasseur and Lottie  2 Harris.  I'm referring here to a unilineal kin group,  3 and with the exception of Danny Lavasseur, all of the  4 members of the House of Delgamuukw are a unilineal kin  5 group descended from Lottie Harris.  6 Q   But, strictly speaking, we would have to take  7 Delgamuukw out of the category if we wanted to say  8 that this was the category of houses in which there  9 are no adoptions?  10 A   Because I forgot about Danny Lavasseur.  This is just  11 referring to -- unilineal kin groups is what it's  12 referring to.  13 Q   Yes.  But it is fair to say that aside from whether  14 we're talking about unilineal kin group -- related kin  15 groups constituting a house or there being a variety  16 of kin groups constituting a house, there are four  17 houses out of the genealogies that you have produced  18 in which no adoptions are shown?  19 A   There are four genealogies of which all living members  20 are unilineally kin.  21 Q   Yes.  22 A   That's all I'm saying there.  23 Q   Yes.  But is it also true that those four houses are  24 the only houses in which adoptions are not shown --  25 A   No.  26 Q    -- in other words, all other houses show an adoption?  27 A   No, that's not true.  28 Q   Are there other houses?  29 A   There may be.  30 Q   I have counted, and those are the only four that I can  31 come up with where I don't see an adoption.  32 A  Well, that may be so.  I'd have to look at all the  33 genealogies again.  34 Q   If you accept my observation of your genealogies, and  35 I'm now speaking of the 45 genealogies which make up  36 the two volumes that you produced this week in the  37 courtroom, if I'm correct, that's four out of 45 that  38 do not have the incidence of adoption in them at least  39 once?  40 A   If you are correct.  41 Q   Okay.  And just so we don't get into difficulty,  42 because I would like to go from that to a conclusion  43 of yours, perhaps at the break -- well, it would take  44 you a long time.  45 A  Much longer than a break.  46 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Perhaps you could check that and see if you're  47 going to disagree.  You can check it overnight.  Is 11233  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 that acceptable?  2 MR. GRANT:  I'll provide them to her, my lord.  3 THE COURT:  You're asking the witness to look at all the  4 genealogies and tell you whether there are four or  5 more than four which do not show any adoptions?  6 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  That's correct.  7 MR. GRANT:  I'd just like some clarification.  Is my friend now  8 talking amongst living members, because the witness  9 can explain that, or amongst all members on all  10 lineages shown, like anywhere on the lineage.  11 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Anywhere on the lineage.  12 MR. GRANT:  Anywhere on the chart.  Okay.  13 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  14 Q   Now, just putting that aside, you have defined and  15 discussed adoption.  The first place you do it is on  16 page 3 of your report, and you say in the second full  17 paragraph:  18  19 "The genealogies indicate that adoption into  20 a House,"  21  22 and there you're referring to what I will call the "T"  23 adoption as opposed to what one could call the "S"  24 adoption.  25 A   Right.  26 Q  27 " not common and that adoption is always  28 of individuals, not of groups."  29  30 And those are two conclusions that you have come to as  31 a result of looking at your genealogical charts; is  32 that fair?  33 A   Yes.  I believe I further defined what I meant by not  34 common in a footnote at some point.  35 Q   I believe you did mention that.  I did look, and I  36 couldn't find at least a definition that would tell  3 7 me --  38 A  What I meant.  39 Q   -- what you meant, except, and I can't remember the  40 page, but at one point you say that -- in a different  41 context that you are referring in a different context  42 to houses all of whose members are adopted, being  43 extensive adoption.  44 A   No, that's not what I'm referring to.  I believe -- I  45 can't remember where it is either, but I thought it  46 was in a footnote that I had defined not common as --  47 oh, I'm sorry, maybe it's in my interrogatories. 11234  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 Q   Yes, I looked at your interrogatories.  I couldn't  2 find it.  3 A   Because I can remember exactly what I said --  4 Q   Well —  5 A   -- which was that --  6 Q   Yes.  Go ahead.  7 A   I believe it was that -- I'm sorry, maybe -- no, I'll  8 just leave it.  If I can, I'll look for it.  9 Q   If my numbers are correct that 41 houses out of 45  10 indicate an incidence at least once of adoption, it  11 would not be an accurate statement in that sense to  12 say that adoptions were not common; would you agree  13 with me?  14 A   No, I don't agree.  I mean adoptions of significance.  15 The adoption of a man can be significant if the person  16 attains a high name, but in other cases it can have  17 very little significance in that it is just an  18 adoption of convenience for that person giving him a  19 place in the feast, but of course a man's descendants  20 would not be included as members of the house, so that  21 kind of adoption would not have great significance to  22 the composition of the house, and I certainly just  23 mean ones that are significant, are not common.  24 Q   Okay.  Would it be fair to say that we would have to  25 have a list of what you considered to be significant  2 6 adoptions and how we would determine which were  27 significant from non-significant before we could  28 calculate or determine on a reasonable basis whether  29 adoptions were common or not?  30 A   Yes, I suppose.  31 Q   Okay.  And there is no such information in this report  32 at this time, is there?  33 A   Not that I remember.  34 Q   If we look at the genealogical charts themselves, we  35 can determine the number of adoptions which you have  36 recorded?  37 A   Yes.  38 Q   And we can determine the number of houses which have  39 had adoptions in them?  40 A   Yes.  41 Q   And we could determine the number of adoptions per  42 house --  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   -- that you have recorded?  4 5 A   Um hum.  46 Q   But you tell me that if we did any of those things, it  47 might not affect your statement as to its commonality, 11235  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 adoption that is?  2 A   Right.  3 Q   Because there -- we might not agree on which adoptions  4 that you've charted count in the sense of being  5 significant?  6 A   Yes.  7 Q   And so you must have a meaning of what the word  8 "common" adoption means in relation to the social  9 structure?  10 A   Yes.  11 Q   What is that?  12 A  What I'm referring to here is I don't believe that  13 adoptions are common in the manner that Adams refers  14 to them.  15 Q   How is that?  16 A  Adams refers to large groups of people being shifted  17 back and forth between houses, and he infers that this  18 was a frequent occurrence and that people, Gitksan  19 people adjust house populations to resources by  20 shifting groups of people in and out of houses --  21 Q   Okay.  22 A   -- and I don't agree with that.  23 Q   Let's deal with that.  Where in Adams does he say  24 that —  25 A   I believe --  26 Q   -- do you recall?  27 A   -- that it's inferred in several places.  I don't have  2 8 Adams in front of me.  29 Q   Okay.  I'll tell you that I believe you made not that  30 precise answer, but you said something similar to it  31 in answer to one of your interrogatories, and I have  32 read -- I won't say I've read all of Adams, but I  33 certainly have read all of the Adams which you have  34 referred to, and I could not find a place where he  35 said that large groups of people shift back and forth  36 between houses in relation to adoptions in that way.  37 Now, you have just said "inferred," that you would  38 infer it from something else he said?  39 A   That's not an exact quote, but certainly the inference  40 is there, and that's his main thesis.  That's the main  41 thesis of the book.  42 Q   If that's so, would you agree with me that it might be  43 that he would call or put into the category of  44 adoptions -- some or all of the amalgamations or  45 mergers that you might refer to as amalgamations or  46 mergers he might have called adoptions?  47 A   I have no idea. 11236  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  1 Q   Would that be possible; do you think?  2 A   I don't know.  3 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Well, if he made the observation that there  4 were a large group of people, being probably more than  5 three in relation to a house, going from one house to  6 another house, and if he saw that happen four or five  7 times within a 20 or 30 year period, that he might say  8 that there was a shifting of population back and forth  9 in relation to resources?  10 MR. GRANT:  My lord, my objection is this, is that this witness  11 is now being asked to interpret what Adams meant by  12 something that he said, and yet we're not even sure  13 exactly what he said.  I think there's two grounds of  14 objection.  I mean, who knows.  Professor Adams  15 probably knows what he meant by what he said, and I  16 think the quote should be put to the witness.  17 THE COURT:  Well, we're into it because of an attempt by counsel  18 to determine what the witness meant on page 3 by the  19 statement that adoptions into a house of the kind she  20 mentioned is not common, and I think that it was the  21 witness that brought Adams into this discussion, but  22 I'm not sure about that.  I think it was.  23 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I can assure your lordship it was.  24 THE COURT:  Well, you might —  25 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  But —  26 THE COURT:  You might consider the situation in light of your  27 friend's objection, Miss Koenigsberg, and we can start  28 over again, if necessary, or carry on after a short  2 9 adjournment.  30 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  Court will recess.  31  32 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 3:03 P.M.)  33  34  35  36 I hereby certify the foregoing to be  37 a true and accurate transcript of the  38 proceedings herein to the best of my  39 skill and ability.  40  41  42  43 Leanna Smith  44 Official Reporter  45 United Reporting Service Ltd.  46  47 11237  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koenigsberg  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 11237  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 (PROCEEDINGS RECOMMENCED AFTER A BRIEF RECESS)  2  3 THE REGISTRAR:  Order in court.  4 THE COURT:  Miss Koenigsberg.  5 Q   Mrs. Harris, I am sure everyone will breathe a sigh of  6 relief when I say I am sure at this moment I don't  7 want to enter into a debate about what Mr. Adams meant  8 or didn't mean, and we may or may not come back to it.  9 Let's try and go at this issue in another way.  10 Are all the reasons that you say that how adoption  11 contributes or affects the social structure set out in  12 the part of your report entitled adoption beginning at  13 page 73, and more specifically on page 75 beginning in  14 the last full paragraph?  15 MR. GRANT:  You are referring specifically to Ts'imilguudit at  16 this stage?  17 MS. KOENIGSBERG:   Yes.  I don't want to talk about the 'S'  18 word, only the 'T' word.  19 THE COURT:  Well, I'm sorry, you are asking the witness that  20 this chapter six, starting at page 73 --  21 MS. KOENGISBERG:  Yes.  22 THE COURT:  You are asking her if it contains all of the reasons  2 3 why what?  24 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  25 Q   All the reasons why or how adoption impacts on or  26 contributes to the social structure of the Gitksan.  27 A   I believe these are the -- gee, it's hard to make such  28 an expansive statement.  I believe these are the main  29 reasons why it's significant, but I would not like to  30 say that they are absolutely all of the possible  31 impacts that it has.  32 Q   Okay.  I am confining my question at least in this  33 regard.  In relation to affecting the social  34 structure, not all the reasons that one -- that a  35 Gitksan person in a House might have for adopting  36 somebody else, but rather for affecting the social  37 structure.  Are those reasons set out beginning on the  38 bottom of page 75, where you begin with, "There seem  39 to be two main purposes for Gitksan 'T' adoptions."  4 0 A   Ts'imilguudit.  41 Q   You pause there.  If I can summarize and see if you  42 agree.  There are strategic adoptions or adoptions for  43 the purposes of bolstering declining numbers in a  44 House, and that's the major one, I take it, from what  45 I have read in your report.  And the second is to  46 accommodate the needs of the individual adoptee, as in  47 a non-Gitksan person who marries a Gitksan person and 1123?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 who wishes to participate in the community, would need  2 to be adopted in order to participate in the feast?  3 A   Yes, that's correct.  4 Q   Or a non -- doesn't have to be a white person.  Any  5 non-Gitksan person?  6 A   That's correct.  7 Q   Right.  And you only go on to discuss as though it  8 would have very little -- it would be a rare  9 occurrence and not very significant, other kinds --  10 other reasons for it, such as honourary membership in  11 a House or something like that, but are those two  12 reasons, bolstering declining population and  13 accommodating the needs of an individual adoptee, the  14 two major affects of adoption on the social structure?  15 A   Those are the two major reasons for adoptions.  16 Q   That affect the social structure?  17 A   For the adoptions that affect the social structure.  18 Q   Yes.  19 A   Yes.  20 Q   Are there any others that you would say are  21 significant?  22 A  Any other reasons that adoption affects the social  23 structure?  24 Q   Yes -- no.  Yes.  Sorry.  25 A  Well, certainly there is reasons that would go hand in  26 hand with -- the reasons why it's desirable to bolster  27 the population of a House, there are many underlying  28 reasons for that.  29 Q   Yes.  30 A   The -- I am trying to think of the appropriate word.  31 The preserving of the House as a perpetual unit is one  32 of the reasons why it's desirable to maintain a House  33 population.  The protection of the House property.  34 Q   Yes.  I am sorry, we are at cross purposes with our  35 sentences.  I mean accepting that bolstering the  36 population of a House and thus preserving it is one  37 reason, and that reason has a significant impact on  38 the social structure, so I would count that once.  39 Another reason for adoptions, which you have  40 discussed, which would also have an impact on the  41 social structure, are adoptions to accommodate the  42 needs of individual adoptees?  43 A   Yes.  44 Q   Okay.  Are there any other reasons for adoptions which  45 in your view would significantly impact on the social  46 structure, or do those two cover the broadest amount  47 of impact? 11239  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 A   I believe that the majority of adoptions fall in one  2 or the other of those categories.  3 Q   Yes.  Now, you have attempted to record adoptions on  4 the genealogies as exhaustively as anything else that  5 you have recorded on the genealogies.  Is that fair?  6 A   Yes, I have.  7 Q   And that is because they are a significant part of  8 Gitksan society in relation to kinship structures?  9 A   Yes, most of them are.  10 Q   And if I wanted to determine for any reason the actual  11 number of adoptions that occurred in the Gitksan  12 society, as you have defined it by your genealogies, I  13 would count the number shown on your genealogies?  14 A   That should -- that would include -- should include  15 all or the most that I had ever heard of.  16 Q   I can tell you I tried it, and there are a number of  17 anomalies I would like to ask you about.  We may or  18 may not need to look at the genealogies to confirm my  19 observations.  I have a fairly lengthy list of  20 adoptions which are shown as adoptions out of a House  21 on the genealogies, but nowhere on the genealogy do I  22 find a correspondence for an adoption in.  But you did  23 purport to show all adoptions in as well as all  24 adoptions out, isn't that right?  25 A   That shouldn't occur.  26 THE COURT:  You say they should balance —  27 THE WITNESS:   Maybe not precisely, but it should be the other  28 way around, if there is an imbalance.  I sometimes  29 might know that a person was adopted into a House, but  30 if I had fairly incomplete information, it might be  31 that I wouldn't know what House they were adopted out  32 of.  That's much more likely to occur than the other  33 way around.  34 MS. KOENGISBERG:  35 Q   Okay.  I don't know if I could calculate it the other  36 way around, but I certainly took a shot at trying to  37 calculate it this way.  If we looked, for instance, at  38 the genealogy of Hanamuxw, we would see that Carmen  39 Ryan Fernandez was adopted out.  That's 853-24.  40 A   I believe that was to Haakxw.  41 Q   And you show it there as being adopted out, if the  42 name in the brackets means that's the House on Haiwas,  43 but when I look at Haiwas --  44 A   Haiwas.  If that says that, that's a typing mistake.  45 There is no connection between --  46 MR. GRANT:  Possibly that genealogy can be shown to the witness.  47 THE WITNESS:   That certainly sounds like a typing mistake, 11240  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 because I have never heard of that before.  2 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  3 Q   It's A'alayst.  4 A  A'alayst.  Okay.  So if we look at Lelt.  5 Q   Where would we find Carmen Ryan?  Where should we find  6 him?  7 A   Her.  She should be shown with her mother, Phillipa,  8 on the Lelt genealogy.  9 Q   Okay.  I don't know if we looked at Lelt.  We couldn't  10 find it any other way.  11 THE COURT:  I am sorry, which names are you talking about here?  12 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I am sorry.  On page one, My Lord, of Hanamuxw  13 on the lower right quadrant under Phillipa Ryan there  14 is a Carmen Ryan Fernandez, and under it has the name  15 A'alayst, and we should, we are told, find Carmen Ryan  16 Fernandez on Lelt's, because Eelast -- is that  17 A'alayst or Eelast?  18 A   That's different.  19 Q   That's completely another different one?  20 A   This is A'alayst, not Eelast.  21 MR. GRANT:  And those two persons are on -- shown on page three  22 of Exhibit 853-26, the Lelt genealogy.  23 THE WITNESS:   I haven't meant to confuse you here.  What it is  24 is A'alayst and Lelt were once separate Houses that  25 have amalgamated recently, and that's why the name  26 A'alayst is shown there, but you don't have a  27 genealogy that is entitled A'alayst.  2 8 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  29 Q   Just for future reference --  30 A   That may have occurred in some of your other cases.  31 Q   And we can just go through the list and you can tell  32 me.  But if A'alayst -- how would you know that  33 A'alayst amalgamated recently with Lelt, but was once  34 a separate House?  35 A   How would I know?  36 Q   Yes.  37 A   Because I have been told that by informants, and not  38 just exactly in that statement, but that way as well  39 as people telling me that these are the names that  40 belong to that House.  So the reason I've referred to  41 A'alayst here instead of Lelt is that the name that  42 Phillipa was given, and I'm not sure if Carmen has a  43 name, I can't remember, it should have been recorded,  44 would be names that had belonged to A'alayst.  45 Q   Now, tell me why is it that you wouldn't have put Lelt  46 there but rather would put A'alayst?  47 A   Because that was the way the information was given to 11241  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 me, that this was the name that belonged to A'alayst's  2 House, even though A'alayst and Lelt have become one  3 unit in recent years.  4 Q   So the name in brackets is not necessarily the name of  5 a House into which the person has been adopted, but  6 rather the name they hold?  7 A   No.  It is the name of the House, because it's fair to  8 call -- to -- sometimes when Houses are amalgamated  9 they may be referred to by either one of the names.  10 Usually they are referred to by the highest ranked of  11 the two, or if it's three, whatever it is that is  12 amalgamated.  But people might specifically say she  13 was adopted into the House of A'alayst, because that  14 was an A'alayst name she was given, but they would  15 still be referring to the same group of closely  16 related Houses that were amalgamated.  17 Q   While we are still on that subject, for further  18 elucidation for me at least, when you have a  19 designation of a name which has actually been subsumed  20 into another House, and you are now telling me that  21 A'alayst -- that it would be -- you will receive the  22 information that this person, Carmen Ryan Fernandez,  23 had been adopted into the House of A'alayst and holds  24 a name in that House.  Would that be an example where  25 the House is somehow still visible, if I can put it  26 that way, within Lelt?  27 A   Yes, I think that's a fair way to put it.  28 Q   On Lelt on page three it shows Phillipa Ryan as being  29 adopted, but it doesn't show Carmen Fernandez as being  30 adopted.  31 A   I can't remember precisely what the information was,  32 but if Phillipa was adopted out of the House of  33 Hanamuxw before Carmen was born, and it was determined  34 by the chiefs involved at that time that her children  35 would go with her, which in this kind of a case of a  36 House, meaning A'alayst that's nearly extinct, that  37 would usually be the case and that would be the reason  38 why it was done.  That would commonly be the case.  39 Then Carmen shouldn't have been represented on  40 Hanamuxw at all.  The genealogy should stop with her  41 mother who was adopted out in her line, and Phillipa  42 should -- or Carmen should be represented as she is on  43 the Lelt/A'alayst genealogy.  If both Phillipa and  44 Carmen were adopted out, both given names and both  45 contributed to the feast at the time they were adopted  46 together, then it should be represented the way it is.  47 And I don't remember the exact circumstances, or if I 11242  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 was even told the details, but this is -- this is an  2 oversight in the consistency of my system of  3 representation.  4 Q   So we should assume from the Lelt genealogy that  5 Phillipa Ryan and her daughter Carmen were adopted  6 together?  7 A   No, that's the way it is represented on the Hanamuxw  8 genealogy.  That's the way it appears on that one, but  9 on the Lelt it looks as if Phillipa was adopted and  10 Carmen was possibly born after, or was very small at  11 the time, and it wasn't necessary to -- for her to  12 feast separately from her mother.  13 Q   Okay.  By the way, would it be fair to say that this  14 particular adoption of Phillipa Ryan and her daughter,  15 either before or after Phillipa joined the House of  16 Lelt, is that a significant adoption?  17 A   Yes, I would say it was.  18 Q   The next one —  19 THE COURT:  Sorry.  Why is this a significant adoption?  20 THE WITNESS:  Because it's an attempt to re-populate a House  21 that's nearly extinct.  In the future Phillipa may  22 have very many descendants and fill up the Houses.  23 THE COURT:  If that is the case, wouldn't Carmen be a natural  24 first start?  25 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  2 6 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  27 Q   And if I were counting adoptions which were  28 significant, I would count Carmen as adopted into the  29 House of Lelt, wouldn't I?  30 A   I'm -- I'm not sure, because as I say, I don't recall  31 if they were adopted separately or together.  Probably  32 together would be more likely, but since Carmen is not  33 even that old at this point in time, and I don't know  34 how many years ago this took place, it would probably  35 be so that there was just one adoption.  But I'm  36 sorry, I can't remember the details.  37 xxx   Q   One adoption of two people?  38 A   Or it was before she was born, Carmen was born,  39 possibly, I'm not sure of the date.  Small children go  40 with their mother's and it's not deemed necessary to  41 adopt them separately.  42 Q   Sandra Forsythe I have as adopted out of Wii K'aax,  43 which is 853-41.  44 THE COURT:  Are we finished?  45 THE WITNESS:  We need Lelt for that one as well.  46 THE COURT:  What number please?  47 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Don't put away Lelt, My Lord, if you haven't 11243  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 yet  2 THE COURT  3 MR. GRANT  4 THE COURT  All right.  41, My Lord, is Wii K'aax.  Thank you.  5 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  6 Q   Sorry, I can't read the page number that she's shown  7 as coming out of the House of Wii K'aax.  Perhaps you  8 can find it faster than I can.  9 A   I can't remember offhand what page that one was on.  10 MR. GRANT:  What's the name of her?  11 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Sandra Forsythe.  12 THE COURT:  She's on page 21.  13 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Thank you.  14 THE COURT:  Oh, wait a minute.  That may not be 21.  No, it's a  15 23, I think.  16 THE WITNESS:  24, I believe.  17 THE COURT:  Yes, I think that's right, 24.  18 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  19 Q   She is shown as adopted out, and we should find her on  20 Lelt.  21 A  We do find her on Lelt, but I'm afraid she's  22 represented as Sandra Forsythe on Wii K'aax and Sandra  23 Gunanoot on Lelt.  This is just an oversight on my  24 part, but you can see her mother's maiden name was  25 Gunanoot, and it may be that --  26 Q   What page are we on?  27 A   4.  Page 4.  It says Sandra Gunanoot adopted in.  28 Q   Okay.  But it shows her as coming from Luutkudziiwus?  29 A   Okay.  I'm sorry, that was -- that's a mistake.  30 Sandra Forsythe from Wii K'aax.  I'm sorry, Wii K'aax  31 and Luutkudziiwus are close marriage partners, and it  32 was just a glitch in my memory when I was recording  33 that, because the two --  34 Q   So Sandra Gunanoot is Sandra Forsythe?  35 A   That's correct.  36 Q   And she is the one shown as adopted?  37 A   Yes, that's correct.  38 Q   But it shouldn't say Luutkudziiwus?  39 A   No, it should say Wii K'aax.  40 Q   It should say Wii K'aax.  And Sandra Forsythe on page  41 24 of Wii K'aax, she's not shown with her name Loolak.  42 Is that because she would have received that name in  43 Lelt?  44 A   Yes, that's where -- the way my system works.  I don't  45 put the name that she received in the House which she  46 was adopted to.  At least that shows on the other  47 genealogy. 11244  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 MR. GRANT:  Possibly, My Lord, on the exhibit that Luutkudziiwus  2 could be amended to reflect what the witness has  3 explained.  4 THE COURT:  Yes, I have done that.  5 MR. GRANT:  Under — on page 4 of the Lelt genealogy.  6 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  For the next one we are going to need three  7 genealogies.  8 THE COURT:  Before you leave this, this was also to try and  9 ensure the continued population of the House of Lelt,  10 was it?  11 THE WITNESS:   That's correct.  12 MS. KOENGISBERG:  13 Q   And so in your terms that would be a significant  14 adoption?  15 A   Yes.  16 Q   We need Wii K'aax, we need Spookw and we need  17 Guuhadak/Yagosip, and they are 41 for Wii K'aax,  18 Spookw is 35, and Guuhadak/Yagosip is 12.  This is  19 just a problem of identification, I think.  20 Q   It's Emma Green that we are looking for, and I believe  21 she is on -- here she is.  She is on page 21 of Wii  22 K'aax.  23 MR. GRANT:  Who are we talking about?  I'm sorry.  24 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Emma Green.  25 Q   It shows her --  2 6 A   Not on my page 21.  21 have we got?  27 Q   Yes.  28 THE COURT:  On page 12 of Wii K'aax?  29 THE WITNESS:  Oh, we may have had a —  30 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  I'm sorry, mine goes 21, 27, and so the page  31 before is 25.  32 MR. GRANT:  It's probably 26.  33 THE WITNESS:  Here it is.  It's probably supposed to be a 6, but  34 its been cut-off by the photocopier.  35 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  36 Q   Yes, Emma Green.  Shown as married to Art Hilback with  37 a large number of children, and she shows as being  38 adopted out to Spookw.  On Spookw there is a Emma  39 Hilback, but not shown as being married.  40 A  Which page is that?  41 Q   I'm sorry, it's on Spookw which is 35.  42 A  Mine only goes up to 34.  43 Q   Actually if you look on page 2.  44 A   Oh, yes.  45 Q   You show her -- the person being adopted by Frank  46 Clarke and Mary Clarke by the name of Emma Hilback  47 holding the name Biiyoon, but not shown as being 11245  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  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  married or having children.  A   Yes.  Q   Should she be shown as being married there?  A  Married, yes, but not the children, because it was  just Emma that was adopted, not all of her children,  but it would be consistent with my system which would  show her, her husband but not the children, because  they don't go with her.  Q   Is it fair to say that one of the reasons why it might  be important to show a person as married when they are  married, is that at least in some sense you have  determined some House preferences for your marriage  patterns by looking at the genealogies and determining  who is married in whose House?  A   Yes, this was a marriage with a non-Indian, but that  wasn't why it was left off.  Q   Even so, we count it as a non-Indian one?  A   Yes.  THE COURT:  But if the purpose is to ensure the population of  the House, why wouldn't the children be adopted?  THE WITNESS:   No, I'm not saying that was the purpose in this  case.  MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Q   What was the purpose?  A   I'm not -- I wasn't party to the details of that  adoption.  Q   So is it fair to say it could be that it was for that  purpose, but that you can't say?  A   That's a possibility, although it's a large House, so  it may not be so --  Q   Now, I don't know if this an anomaly -- in fact, if we  look at the Guuhadak/Yagosip genealogy, we find Emma  Hilback on page 2.  MR. GRANT:  Just to be clear, My Lord, if you look at the Spookw  genealogy, page one and two, and you look at the  Guuhadak genealogy, there is a comparison that Your  Lordship can make.  It's obvious from the document  itself.  COURT:  Whereabouts in Wii K'aax?  GRANT:  Guuhadak.  THE  MR.  MS.  THE  MR.  THE  MS.  THE  KOENIGSBERG:  is 12.  Guuhadak/Yagosip, and the number of that one  COURT  GRANT  COURT  On page 12?  Tab 2.  I can't find page 12 on Guuhadak.  KOENIGSBERG:  COURT:  Okay.  It's page 2, tab 12. 11246  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  2 Q   And we see Emma Hilback still not married, and on page  3 2 of Guuhadak/Yagosip.  4 A   It's not just Emma, as you can see, that's represented  5 twice.  6 Q   That's right.  7 A   This -- when we look back to page one, the group of  8 people, Louisa Lugak and her children over to Frank  9 Clarke, these people were originally members of  10 Guuhadak's House, and to be consistent within my  11 system, they should be represented there.  And at a  12 time when Spookw's House is a fairly long time back,  13 several decades back, was low in population, we see  14 this huge Spookw genealogy, but the majority of those  15 people are young people, and they were low in  16 population, and because of the close relationship  17 between Guuhadak and Spookw, both Edward and Frank  18 Clarke took Spookw's name.  And I don't believe this  19 representation is consistent with my system of  20 representing this kind of thing as it could be.  This  21 group of people certainly should be on Guuhadak's, but  22 I think it would have been a better representation to  23 show Edward and Frank Clarke in Spookw's House, as we  24 have shown Steve Robinson.  25 Q   That is having no known biological relationship?  26 A   Yes, because these people, as far as I know, that are  27 represented on the first page of Spookw are members --  28 they were born members of Yagosip's House, and this  29 is -- as you can see, this was -- this was something  30 that was a bit confusing to get straight, because you  31 have to go to the -- both the biological origins of  32 the person, or if they were the descendants of adopted  33 people from previous generations, you have to go to  34 the origin of the person, but in the cases where there  35 was a seriously declining population, you get  36 something that seems like a glaring inconsistency when  37 you get Edward and Frank Clarke having both held  38 Guuhadak and Spookw, which are names from different  39 Houses.  And so it's an obvious oversight to have  40 represented the whole group on both genealogies.  41 And this little group of people from Frank Clarke to  42 Louisa Lugak and Mary Simpson, they should be  43 represented on Guuhadak, but I don't believe that they  44 should be represented as a biological unit on Spookw,  45 but that Edward and Frank Clarke should be represented  46 the way Steve Robinson has, as individuals who went  47 into Spookw and took that name. 11247  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 And then when you come to the adoptions, I can't  2 remember if the two adopted people there, Sara Wright  3 and Emma Hilback who both took the same name, I can't  4 recall if that's a Guuhadak name or a Spookw name, but  5 who owns the name should be represented on their  6 genealogy and not the other.  7 Q   Okay.  Let me see if I can understand.  8 A   This is a fairly serious glitch in the system of  9 representation.  Three people or four people at least  10 have been represented on a genealogy they shouldn't be  11 on.  12 Q   And by that you mean Edward Clarke, Frank Clarke, Sara  13 Wright and Emma Hilback?  14 A   No.  I mean Louisa Lugak, Mary Simpson, George  15 Simpson, and then there was an unnamed sister.  Those  16 people should not have been represented on Spookw as  17 far as I can discern.  18 Q   As far as you know, if we look at Spookw -- first let  19 me back up so we all are going to follow along the  20 same steps.  All of the persons on the  21 Guuhadak/Yagosip first two pages of the genealogy are  22 represented on the first two pages of a Spookw  23 genealogy?  24 A   Yes.  25 Q   And you pass Steve Robinson in Spookw and not on  26 Guuhadak, but I think you have already agreed that he  27 is -- he considers himself to be a member of the House  28 of Guuhadak, and he could be on this genealogy.  29 A   He is on this genealogy, I believe.  30 Q   He is just not on the first two pages?  31 A   He is on page 5.  32 THE COURT:  Have I got it right, that all the people on pages  33 one and two of Guuhadak/Yagosip are on the Spookw?  34 MS. KOENGISBERG:  Yes.  35 THE COURT:  Whereabouts?  36 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  First two pages, My Lord.  They are exactly  37 the same, except for Steven Robinson on the first  38 page.  3 9 THE COURT:  Yes.  40 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Who appears in a different place in Guuhadak.  41 And if you go over to the second page of Guuhadak, and  42 if you just held up Spookw, you will see that the line  43 just continues, so that that first -- what has been  44 explained to be erroneously connected group of people  45 on Spookw are on Guuhadak/Yagosip.  46 MR. GRANT:  Well, wait.  Wait.  Wait.  With respect, I don't —  47 I think Ms. Koenigsberg probably inadvertently 1124?  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 misspoke on this, because Edward Clarke and Frank  2 Clarke and the adopted ones that are on Spookw should  3 stay -- according to the evidence the witness has  4 explained, they should be on Spookw.  What she  5 referred to as Louisa Lugak -- those first names, My  6 Lord, Louisa Lugak, Mary Simpson, George Simpson and  7 that other daughter should not appear on Spookw.  8 That's what the witness has explained.  So that some  9 of these that are on both should be on both, others  10 should not.  That's what she has explained.  11 THE WITNESS:  The reason such a thing can occur is that as well  12 as having the knowledge of the biological relationship  13 between people and who is adopted into what House,  14 these confusing bits become clearer if you know which  15 names belong to which House, and that's why we  16 haven't -- I'm not positive -- I believe Biiyoon is a  17 Spookw name, but as I say, I can't remember, so in the  18 case of that adoption I can't recall whether Emma  19 Hilback and Sara Wright were supposed to be on Spookw  2 0 or Guuhadak.  21 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  Okay.  22 THE COURT:  Tell me how Emma Hilback gets on Spookw's genealogy,  23 if she was adopted out of one of the other Houses into  24 one of the other Houses.  25 THE WITNESS:  The name she was give -- she was given a name by  26 Frank Clarke, I believe, but considering the fact that  27 Frank Clarke had names from two different Houses, this  28 is where the confusion came in.  But if I knew whether  29 Biiyoon was Spookw's name or Yagosip's name, then I  30 would know which one she should be on and which one  31 she should be eliminated from, because she should not  32 be represented twice, other than on her original  33 House.  She shouldn't be represented three times.  34 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  35 Q   There is one other issue here that confuses me, at  36 least one other one, and that is why Guuhadak and  37 Yagosip or the Guuhadak/Yagosip House, as it now is  38 constituted, being totally within the House of Spookw,  39 also is represented by you as a separate House.  We  40 have, of course, numerous examples of Houses which are  41 what we could call visible, that is you can determine  42 the persons who belong to a House that used to be, but  43 now are within another House, A'alayst, Lelt, but in  44 this one we have a separate House, even though all the  45 members of that separate House are members of another  46 House.  Why is that?  47 A  Who says they are members of another House? 11249  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 Q   Well, your genealogies do, don't they?  2 A   No, not that I know of.  3 Q   I'm sorry.  The first two pages should have said --  4 the first two pages of Guuhadak/Yagosip, which look  5 like they were related, why is that completely in  6 Spookw?  7 A   That was a mistake.  I said that.  8 Q   All right.  I'm sorry, I took something else from what  9 you said.  10 A   Okay.  No, Louisa Lugak, Mary Simpson, George Simpson  11 should not -- that was a mistake.  They should not be  12 on Spookw genealogy.  13 Q   All right.  14 THE COURT:  So you say they should or they shouldn't?  15 THE WITNESS:   They shouldn't be.  16 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  17 Q   So we should take Louisa Lugak and her descendants --  18 A   That's correct.  19 Q   -- off.  2 0 THE COURT:  Off Spookw?  21 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  And it would be more appropriate to show  22 Edward and Clarke -- Edward Clarke and Frank Clarke as  23 Steve Robinson as shown, or they could have been  24 indicated as being adopted, but I didn't know who  25 adopted them into Spookw, the circumstances of them  26 becoming members of the House, other than the fact  27 that they were originally from Guuhadak.  2 8 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  29 Q   So we should take it from what we are looking at here  30 that Guuhadak -- I mean that -- sorry, that Edward  31 Clarke and Frank Clarke were at one time in a separate  32 House of Guuhadak?  33 A   They were born in the House of Guuhadak.  34 Q   And how do we know that, or how do you know that?  35 A   That was the information given to me.  36 Q   All right.  And if they belong in Spookw, they had to  37 have been adopted in?  38 A   Yes, it would be fair to say that.  39 Q   And if they were adopted in, would that be a  40 significant adoption?  41 A   Yes, it would be.  42 Q   Because that would have been at the time to bolster a  43 declining population?  44 A  Adoptions of women are usually seen in that light.  45 Q   As this taking a chief's name?  46 A   This is a -- I suppose you could put it that way, but  47 the greatest significance is that they are -- I don't 11250  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 know how to put this.  Because obviously men don't  2 produce descendants for their own House.  3 Q   Unless they adopt them.  4 A   That could be true, but ordinarily they don't produce  5 descendants for their own House, but they are -- the  6 significance of a man being adopted and taking a high  7 name, is that he is holding up the House and  8 protecting the House and its property.  9 Q   Or is it fair to say is adopted in to take the chief's  10 name and allow the House to survive?  11 A   Yes, I believe that was the circumstance with both  12 Edward and Frank Clarke.  13 Q   Okay.  So we should show, then, with a dotted line on  14 Spookw?  15 A   Except I didn't know who adopted them.  That's why it  16 isn't indicated that way.  17 Q   And they should be, you say, like Steven Robinson,  18 shown without any known affiliation or recent --  19 A   To the other members.  That is correct.  20 Q   Okay.  21 A  And that's -- that's what's also meant to be indicated  22 by Steven Robinson just floating there unconnected, is  23 that he -- you might want to say he was adopted into  24 the House, but I don't know by whom, and I don't think  25 it was even precisely worded that way, but the intent  26 was the same as what's ordinarily called an adoption.  27 He was brought into the House, I think, would be the  28 way they would put it themselves.  29 Q    Okay.  I have one last question before we break, if I  30 may.  In that description of Steven Robinson, it would  31 be fair to count Steven Robinson, for instance, as a  32 significant adoption into the House of Spookw, whether  33 we know his relationships or not, because of the  34 reason that he is there; is that fair?  35 A   I don't understand the part of the question where you  36 say because of his relationships.  37 Q   He's there in order to assist the House in surviving?  38 A   Yes, that's correct.  39 Q   And he has no known biological reason to be there?  40 A   Right.  He is there not by reason of biological links,  41 that is correct.  42 THE COURT:  I didn't understand him to be adopted.  Was he  43 adopted?  44 THE WITNESS:  Well, as I say, adoption is probably not the way  45 it would be put by Steven and by the other chiefs.  46 They would say he was brought into the House, but they  47 might not use the word adopted. 11251  H. Harris (for Plaintiffs)  Cross-exam by Ms. Koengisberg  1 THE COURT:  He was given the name.  2 THE WITNESS: That would be an appropriate way to put it too, but  3 it has the same function as what we are ordinarily  4 calling adoption here.  5 MS. KOENIGSBERG:  6 Q   And in fairness is it adoption by another name?  7 A  Adoption --  8 Q   By another name.  It looks and walks and talks like  9 every other adoption you have described.  10 A   That is correct, that's what I am trying to say.  11 That's right.  It's just that adoption usually refers  12 to when one specific person, like Mary Johnson took in  13 Stewart Forsythe, it's very convenient to diagram that  14 kind of thing, but as I say, I believe the -- with  15 Steven Robinson and possibly with Frank and Edward  16 Clarke it was a situation where the entire Wilnadaahl  17 made the decision.  There wasn't one specific person  18 from the House of Spookw who took in Steve Robinson  19 that I know of.  20 THE COURT:  If he and his wife had children, which I understand  21 they didn't.  22 THE WITNESS:  Who?  23 THE COURT:  Steve Robinson.  24 THE WITNESS:  They have children.  25 THE COURT:  I see.  They are not in the House of Spookw?  26 THE WITNESS:   No, they would be in his wife's House.  27 THE COURT:  That's Nika Teen then?  28 THE WITNESS:  Yes.  29 THE COURT:  Yes.  I see.  All right.  I may have said to counsel  30 that I had an engagement at lunchtime tomorrow, and I  31 was wrong in that.  It is Thursday.  So if that causes  32 difficulty, I apologize.  As far as I know we can sit  33 regular hours tomorrow.  And we unfortunately have a  34 matter to look after at 4 o'clock tomorrow afternoon.  35 All right.  Thank you.  3 6 (PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED AT 4:00 P.M.)  37  38 I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO  39 BE A TRUE AND ACCURATE TRANSCRIPT  40 OF THE PROCEEDINGS HEREIN TO THE  41 BEST OF MY SKILL AND ABILITY.  42  4 3 LORI OXLEY  44 OFFICIAL REPORTER  45 UNITED REPORTING SERVICE LTD.  46  47


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



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"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items