The Numbered Treaties and the Liberal Order Framework

One of the most important ideologies prevalent within government circles during the late nineteenth century and into the twentieth was liberalism, a complex idea that manifested itself in various western countries in a variety of ways. In Canada, because of its dominance during the time the Numbered Treaties were negotiated, liberalism influenced not only non-Native government officials’ understanding of the treaties themselves, but also how they were to be implemented. Space does not allow for a full discussion of liberalism, but an examination of some of its principal characteristics will demonstrate the presence of this ideology within the texts of the Numbered Treaties, and an examination of their implementation by non-Native agents will demonstrate how the liberal order framework that developed from the ideology came to pervade non-Native interpretations of the treaties. It must be pointed out, however, that there were other ideologies and views at work that limited liberalism’s power; thus the liberal order framework in Canada had to be adaptive and at times even ambiguous in its application. Liberalism, to quote Ian McKay, is “a project of rule,” and, therefore, encompasses a broad spectrum of ideas, attitudes, and beliefs. McKay also argues that, in its essence, liberalism emphasizes individualism, property, and the rule of law.1 Individualism as an idea was the belief that every individual had the right to choose his own course of action, providing he did not “harm” others in doing so. Liberals believed that all individuals had the right to as much freedom as possible, from the state and from others, and that all individuals should possess those freedoms in equal measure. Thus, equality of individuals was also an important idea in liberalism. In reality, each individual having ultimate freedom was impractical, as freedom for one could mean less freedom for another.2 Thus, a balance had to be struck between individuals, and between individuals and the state. One way to maintain the balance was to ensure that no group was given more, or different, freedoms or protections than another. To liberals, guaranteeing a specific group protection from oppression was meaningless, as all individuals, including those within that group, would have the freedoms they needed already. If individuals were free, then they could not be oppressed.3 If the sanctity of individualism is applied to the Numbered Treaties, then they pose problems to the liberal state, as they could be interpreted as documents that give more freedom to one group within society, that is the signatory First Nations, than non-Natives. Consider the provisions for hunting and fishing rights, in which

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.