CONTENTdm
Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts
British Columbia. Supreme Court
In the Supreme Court of British Columbia, between: Delgamuukw, also known as Albert Tait, suing on his own behalf and on behalf of all the members of the House of Delgamuukw, and others, plaintiffs, and Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of British Columbia and the Attorney General of Canada, defendants: proceedings at trial.
application/pdf
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 "...is 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
Trial proceedings
British Columbia
KEB529.5.L3 B757
English
Uukw, Delgam, 1937-
Indigenous peoples--Canada
Oral history
Wet'suwet'en First Nation
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Vancouver : United Reporting Service Ltd.
Images provided for research and reference use only. For permission to publish, copy, or otherwise distribute these images, please contact the Courts of British Columbia: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/
Original Format: University of British Columbia. Library. Law Library.
[Proceedings of the Supreme Court of British Columbia 1989-01-24]
Text