POST 1901 CENSUS PROJECT
Open the door to Canada's Historic Census
TOWN HALL MEETINGS |
|
This page contains the presentation of Candy-Lea Chickite to the Town Hall meeting held at Vancouver. Candy-Lea traveled from Campbell River to attend both sessions of these meeting. Environics Town Hall Meeting Vancouver, BC, January 30, 2002 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on an issue that is extremely important - not only to me personally, but to genealogical, historical and, in particular, Native communities throughout Canada. By now you’ve probably heard many different views on why the census records of 1906, 1911, and later should be made public. Many of the people that you have heard from may be searching for family information, but not everyone interested in the historic census records are genealogists. My presentation addresses the view that I believe nearly every Native person in British Columbia would take, if they knew of this matter. In my opinion, if the historic census records from 1906 and 1911 were released, they could be the tools that help Native people in Canada establish an identity, define their ancestral territories, and repair some of the damage and destruction caused by past Governments… I will attempt to tell you how. I have been involved in family history research for 12 years. For me it’s been fairly easy to trace progenitor’s names, ancestral villages and migration routes. I’ve found connections that stretch the Atlantic to numerous places all across Europe. However, my children’s paternal roots are firmly entrenched in British Columbia’s soil and have been since time immemorial. They are members of the Cape Mudge First Nation on Quadra Island, and tracing their roots has not been easy. For Native people there is one issue that literally touches everyone, identity. The government now defines who and what an “Indian” is and requires documentation to establish this. Without proof of this kind, granting of Indian Status and/or present day membership in a band may be denied. As traditional Native societies were based on oral histories, documentation can be hard to find. For many years, Native children were removed from their homes and sent to residential schools where they were to learn the English language and a “civilized” way of life. Children were forbidden to speak their languages and were punished if they were caught speaking it. As a result many Native people lost their Native languages altogether, thereby losing the names of ancestors… Can you imagine not knowing what your Grandparents names were? That is the situation faced by numerous First Nations’ families today. Historically, Native people knew who they were, where they were from. They even had mechanisms in place to refute claims of ancestral and tribal lineage in their bighouse’s if necessary. Their language, culture and legends preserved their identities. Presently, it is the non-Native governmental and judicial systems that force us to provide proof at every turn. Unfortunately the language, culture and legends are not as well preserved, due to non-Native governments prohibiting them from being practiced. The historic census records can offer Native people peace and joy by being the key instrument in re-uniting a family from 1911 on paper, with a family huddled around it in 2003. The release of these records can truly repatriate some of the discriminatory practices of past Governments. The creation of Indian Reserves began in the late 1870’s and it is through previously released census records that some people have documented ancestral ties to a First Nation. There are probably hundreds of Bands and Tribal Councils involved in litigation and in treaty negotiations that rely on census documents to prove occupancy of traditional territories. I have personally been in the Courtroom when documentation in the way of census records was submitted as evidence. By demonstrating how many people occupied land that right now may be in the middle of an oil field, the headwaters of a river earmarked for a mega-hydro project, a downtown core, or a major development, census records have proven claims of land stolen out from under Native people. Sometimes I wonder if this is one of the reasons the records are being withheld. Even though the recording of vital statistics began in British Columbia in 1872, the only persons excluded from registration under the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act of 1872 were Chinese and Natives. This was changed by an amendment in 1897 that stated that the Act would apply to all races including Natives. However, the Act was amended in 1899 to once again exclude Natives from provincial registration. It wasn’t until 1917 that Indian Agents were authorized to once more register the vital statistics of Native peoples, supposedly by submitting registrations monthly. I can tell you from my own research that Indian Agents already had a heavy workload and another responsibility was not entertained with enthusiasm. As a result, registration of marriages and deaths for Native people was “hit and miss” at best. Documents written by Indian Agents often contain tabulated forms of vital statistics, such as, “there were 2 births and 5 deaths in the Agency last month.” It is unusual to find names associated with these events, unless it was a prominent person or there were other circumstances that made the event noteworthy. On the north end of Vancouver Island, registration of births didn’t take place until 1940. Ultimately, this means that people who were born and died just over 60 years ago in our traditional area, were never recorded as ever being born. Historic census records detail the entire household’s occupants and the ages given at the time of enumeration. This will give a clearer picture as to when births, marriages and deaths occurred. The 1911 census record may be the only shred of evidence acknowledging the very existence of some Native peoples’ lives. Non-Native families have bibles, emigration papers, ship’s manifests, birth, marriage and death certificates, land deeds, newspaper accounts and hosts of other avenues open to them to solicit evidence from. Other than a brief mention in documents produced by the Indian Agents of the day, and again I remind you that the chances are very slim, the historic census records are one of the rare documents created that detail the inhabitants of n entire Native village. Other than historic census records, I can’t think of one other document on EARTH that could possibly illustrate that Kwak-sees-tah-la was the father of Kwin-kwa-lis or that Ya-kna-kwas was the father of Na-gi-li-tsum-ka. Luckily, the Indian Agent was often the one who enumerated the Reserves in our territory, so there is a greater chance for accuracy! His familiarity with the people makes it more likely the names are pretty close to being as phonetically correct as he interpreted them. The enumerator of Indian Reserves had a monumental task just arriving at his destination in our territory. He had tides, weather, and rapids to contend with. Hopefully when he arrived at the village site, his subjects were home, and not off to a gathering some miles away, or engaged in activities such as fishing or hunting in a remote area. I think that by the time he got there, the very last thing on the enumerator’s mind was issuing a promise of confidentiality. While I can’t speak about other dialects, I know for a fact that there is no way to translate the word “confidential” in the Le’kwala language. When I asked an Elder fluent in his language, the only way he could come up with a loose translation went something like this: E’suns Wehtl NEEKLA, Khuns GWEE-Hyee-Das Lakh-ha GYA-Dukwh. “I’m not going to tell anyone.” Seriously now, do you think the Indian Agent said this to every one of his respondents? Non-Native family stories are passed down generation to generation, with usually no thought in actually having to prove them. I know of one Native family’s story that the name of their tribe was different than what new age historians interviewing present day residents have recorded. They struggled for years trying to tell people that the historians were wrong. Along comes the 1881 Census and what do you know? The enumerator quoted the tribe’s name as the way the family story has portrayed it for over a hundred years. What treasures abound in the 1911 census? In 1901 census enumerators were given detailed instructions about recording the racial origin of Native people. Here is a brief quotation: “Persons of mixed white and red blood -- commonly known as “breeds” -- will be described by addition of the initial letters “f.b.” for French breed, “e.b.” for English breed, “s.b.” for Scotch breed and “i.b.” for Irish breed. For example: “Cree f.b.” denotes that the person is racially a mixture of Cree and French; and “Chippewa s.b.” denotes that the person is Chippewa and Scotch.” This certainly left no doubt in the enumerator’s mind in how to record the racial origin. However, in 1911 the enumerator was instructed that, “A person whose father is English but whose mother is Scotch, Irish, French or other race will be ranked as English.” However, “In the case of Indians the origin is traced through the mother, and names of their tribes should be given, as “Chippewa,” “Cree,” etc.” I found it interesting that in 1911 these instructions appear to negate any white man from fathering a child of a Native woman. In EVERY culture, women’s identities are generally much harder to trace than those of their male counterpart. I know of one historian who could only turn to historic census records to accurately portray how many women were living in a district on Vancouver Island. As women had no voting rights, weren’t listed in directories, and generally were considered extensions of their husbands, nothing but the census documented their important presence and involvement in the expansion of the West. So incredibly, the 1911 census may possess some benefits for Native women’s descendants, by recording their female ancestor’s tribes’ names The 1901 census shows us that the people in our area were still known by their Native names at that time. While there was the occasional Johnny or William, I’d estimate about 99% of the people in the Laichkwiltach territory were recorded by their traditional name. Elders are instrumental in census research, as their knowledge is needed in deciphering these names. By 1940 most Native people’s names were changed to an anglicized version or completely changed, by an Indian agent or other persons of authority. The most popular explanation by the non-Native is that it would be easier for English speaking people to pronounce them. Native people will tell you that their names were changed to displace them from their ancestry, culture and their land. I actually had a person confront me, and declare that changing someone’s name is not that big of a deal, and told me that it happened to thousands of immigrants. While that may be true, those people chose to leave their homeland, and there is likely to be a record of their family name in their place of origin – possibly for hundreds of years. That is quite the opposite for many Native people whose names were given to them in sacred traditional ceremonies and who had their names changed at the whim of the Indian Agent, and Native people have been here for hundreds of years… It is critically important to have access to the 1911 records. If the names are recorded as being Native, we must take advantage of the Elders still here to translate the meanings. The clock is ticking away our last threads to the language, and all that it holds. On the other hand, if the names are recorded as English, then it will make proof of descent much more apparent and possible for people who have, up to now, been unable to bridge the language barrier. For several months in 2001, I was a Field Supervisor for Statistics Canada, working on the Census. I was responsible for close to 1600 dwellings on Vancouver Island, Campbell Island and the Queen Charlotte Islands. While most of my duties were supervisory, I did actually take part in enumeration, as I wanted to experience what my team experienced each time they entered a respondent’s home. In nearly every instance where I performed enumeration duties, I explained to people that even though their questionnaires were confidential, the only reason I desperately wanted the job was because it was my hope that these records would be made public after 92 years. I told them I wanted their great grandchildren to be able to see what their ancestor’s life was like 92 years before, and as a genealogist, I wanted to be sure that every person in my territory was accounted for. All of a sudden, the sentiment of most of my respondents changed from the census being another bureaucratic waste of time and energy, to now being a tangible piece of evidence of having lived in a particular moment in time, possibly to become a family heirloom! I was especially proud of the people I enumerated, because while 20% of the off-Reserve population in Canada receives the “long form” questionnaire, every dwelling on-Reserve receives the “long form”. That means that my respondents filled out the long form in every single case, and what a tale it will tell in 92 years, listing other family members, tribal and religious affiliation, education, language, health, housing and employment details. While I admit that this is by no means a scientifically controlled survey, consider the following: I estimate I enumerated about 60 people, and of these I personally knew about 20 of the respondents. Not one person ever refused to complete their Census questionnaire with me, even after knowing my ulterior motive. What this all tells me is that the promise of confidentiality in the short term is a great thing, but even after saying there was a chance that in 92 years the confidentiality ceases, it made no difference… In the next census, go ahead, tell them that in 92 years their descendants WILL have the opportunity to look at the census, then see how willing the respondent, and accurate the information becomes! My enumerators reported time and time again that the main complaint their respondents had with the census was “Why do they want this information from me? The government knows everything about me already! They have it in their computers!” This sentiment is a common one, voiced by Native and non-Native people alike. Most of us here know that Statistics Canada does not have the authority to tap into government databanks for the purposes of the census. But many respondents think they do. If the public believes that the information is just a keystroke away, then confidentiality is not an issue that they worry about every night! I’m not aware of any outcry about the release of other censuses. The Expert Panel on Access to Historical Census Records has already suggested that the records in question be released. The Chief Statistician is the only one who is casting nfavorable light on Statistics Canada by taking the position he has in preventing the release of these records. I understand that he has been asked to produce proof of the promise of “perpetual confidentiality” but has not, to my knowledge, done so. This alone should constitute the release of the 1906 and 1911 census records. There have been many promises made to Native people that have been reneged on. However, I believe the promise of confidentiality is one promise that was never issued, in ANY form, to Native people enumerated in the historic census records. Additionally, I am absolutely positive that those same Native people would demand that their names be made available to their descendants, their Clans, their Nation and the rest of the world. For the descendants of Tah-too-kwi-na, Kwaw-kwaw-tahk, Mah-kwaw-la-gleese, Oh-mis-kin-nis and all the others gone before; for the ancestors of every Native person in British Columbia and, yes, even Canada, the historic census records can, should, and must be released to the public. The identities and existence of many Native people, past and present, depend on it. |
Post 1901 Census Project Site Sponsored by:
Everything for The Family Historian!
1-800-361-5168 Bookstore Website
Copyright © GlobalGenealogy.com Inc. 1995-2009
