What is law? Who defines it? Whose definition rules?
There are a few of the burning questions I had in my mind as I learned about Scrip. For some time, I was hearing this word being thrown around. Scrip would be mentioned when people were talking about the historical disenfranchisement of the Métis. Eventually, as I read the stories in the historical account “The North-West is Our Mother”, I learned what Scrip was.
Scrip was a method used by the Canadian government to extinguish the Indigenous titles of Métis people. Scrip refers to what was essentially a paper certificate that could be redeemed for a plot of land or for cash. Scrip commissioners would travel to Métis communities across the Prairies, where Métis individuals would sign an application to receive their Scrip, in exchange for signing away their right to claim their Indigenous title to the territory.
Scrip was redeemable for land or money, but they would not be able to choose what land they got. It was often an undesirable plot located far away from any sort of personal connection to the individual. Scrip commissioners also turned a blind-eye, even facilitating, speculation and forgery. Applicants often did not understand what they were signing and receiving. The idea that a piece of paper represents land was a foreign concept for many. They would sell their scrip to speculators travelling alongside the commissioners for nearly nothing. Community priests would also offer to ‘manage’ the scrip. People trusted them, and Priests would practically steal it and claim the land or money for themselves.
I struggled to understand Scrip, and I still do not fully understand the process. It was during my effort to understand this system, when I realised that incomprehension might have been the point? This was appearing to be less a system with a set structure; less of a law that could be defined like we define other laws. This was a function of its design, in my opinion, in that perhaps those who created it did so to create an arbitrary mechanism to claim jurisdiction.
If I struggle to understand it, how could someone with no English literacy or familiarity with common law property understand? If this was not a system with a concrete foundation that was understood, shared, and consented to, then what was it?
Can we call this law?
If it was not law, then the Métis have either been unlawfully deprived of their Indigenous title, or their title has continued to live on. From what I have heard from the citizens and leaders of the Métis Nation here in Saskatchewan, I have the impression that people proudly accept the latter proposition. Despite the historic efforts to eliminate the Métis identity, institutional discrimination and crimes, the Métis are still here, strong, and still believe in their right to self-govern…
The last few weeks of my work at MN-S are filled with community. Métis across Canada are gathering this week-end for Back to Batoche. Back to Batoche is an annual festival that commemorates the 1885 Northwest Resistance. The legacy of the 1885 resistance and the Battle of Batoche have been told in plural, conflicting ways. I will remember it as a reminder that people have power when they band together. And so, tens of thousands of people will be together this week-end to celebrate their identity, music. dance, games, family, and joy. I wonder how many nations can say that they gathered nearly all their citizens in one place to celebrate like they will do here. I very much look forward to spending my time working at the festival and connecting with people from all over.