Royal Proclamation of 1763 "And whereas it is just and reasonable and essential to Our Interest and the Security of Our Colonies, that the several Nations or Tribes of Indians with whom We are connected, and who live under Our Protection should not be molested or disturbed"

In February 1779 Brant traveled to Montreal to meet with Frederick Haldimand, the military commander and Governor of Quebec. Haldimand commissioned Brant as Captain of the Northern Confederated Indians. He also promised provisions, but no pay, for his Volunteers.

The Haldimand Pledge of 1779 (Treaty, Ratified Pledge) reads in part "Some of the Mohawks of the Villages of Canojaharie, Tikondarago, and Aughugo, whose settlements than had been on account of their steady attachment to the King's service and the interests of Government ruined" ... "the same should be restored at the expense of the Government, to the state they were in before the wars broke out, and said promise appearing to me just, I do hereby ratify the same."

With Whom We Are Connected

Royal Proclamation makes a distinction between "Nations or Tribes of Indians with Whom we are Connected," and those who "Live under Our Protection."

These are different political and legal relationships.

• Connected = Nation-to-Nation, with military or trade relations. (see attachment)
  
• Protection = Crown Jurisdiction over Individuals and territories.

The Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 (Transaction) reads "Whereas His Majesty having been pleased to direct that in consideration of the early attachment to his cause manifested by the Mohawk Indians, and of the loss of their settlement which they thereby sustained– that a convenient tract of land under his protection should be chosen as a safe and comfortable retreat for them and others of the Five Nations, who have either lost their settlements within the Territory of the American States, or wish to retire from them to the British — I have at the earnest desire of many of these His Majesty’s faithful Allies purchased a tract of land from the Indians situated between the Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron and I do hereby in His Majesty’s name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation and such others of the Five Nation Indians as wish to settle in that quarter to take possession of and settle upon the Banks of the River commonly called Ouse or Grand River, running into Lake Erie, allotting to them for that purpose six miles deep from each side of the river beginning at Lake Erie and extending in that proportion to the head of the said river, which them and their posterity are to enjoy for ever."

The Mark of Honor - UE (Unity of the Empire, Provision)

On November 9, 1789 in Council at Quebec City, he gave particular recognition to the "First Loyalists" by differentiating them from other Loyalist and settlers as defined below: Late Loyalist, Treasury Loyalist, Simcoe Loyalist, Associated Loyalist/Incorporated Loyalist, Regular British and German soldiers.

The Dorchester Resolution, approved by the Council

“His Lordship intimated to the Council (at Quebec) that it remained a Question, upon the late Regulation for the Disposition of the Waste Lands of the Crown, whether the Boards, constituted for that purpose were authorized to make Locations to the Sons of Loyalists, on their coming to full Age and that it was his wish to put a Mark of Honor upon the families who had adhered to the Unity of the Empire, and joined the Royal Standard in America before the Treaty of Separation in the year 1783.”

1) Defined the UE Loyalists as those who had adhered to the Unity of Empire and joined the Royal Standard in America. [publicly showed support for the British]

2) Put a Mark of Honour upon the Families of the UE Loyalists.

3) Approved the granting by the Land Boards of 200 acres of land to the sons and daughters of the UE Loyalists.

Accompanying the resolution to be laid before King George III in London was the following:

"N.B. Those Loyalists who have adhered to the Unity of the Empire, and joined the Royal Standard (in America) before the Treaty of Separation in the year 1783, and all their children and their descendants by either sex, are to be distinguished by the following Capitals, affixed to their names: U.E. - Alluding to their principle The Unity of the Empire."

In the covering letter, Lord Dorchester explained: "Care had been taken to reward the spirit of loyalty and industry, to extend and transmit it to future generations." Today, descendants of those "First Loyalists" are entitled to use these initials.

Significant in Loyalist history was the Proclamation expressed by Lord Dorchester, Sir Guy Carleton, on November 9th, 1789:

“His Lordship intimated to the Council (at Quebec) that it remained a Question, upon the late Regulation for the Disposition of the Waste Lands of the Crown, whether the Boards, constituted for that purpose were authorized to make Locations to the Sons of Loyalists, on their coming to full Age and that it was his wish to put a Mark of Honor upon the families who had adhered to the Unity of the Empire, and joined the Royal Standard in America before the Treaty of Separation in the year 1783.”

This constitutes the first use of the expression “Unity of the Empire” and thus the qualification of “United Empire” together with the term “Loyalist”.

The Simcoe Proclamation of 1796

"WHEREAS is appears by the minutes of the Council of the late Province of Quebec, dated Monday the ninth day of November 1789, to have been the desire of his Excellency Lord Dorchester the Governor-General "To put a mark of honor upon the families who had adhered to the Unity of the Empire, and joined the Royal Standard in America before the treaty of separation in the year 1783, and for that purpose it was then Ordered, by his Excellency in Council, that the several Land Boards (should) take course for preserving a registry of the names of all the persons falling under the description aforementioned, to the end that their posterity might be discriminated from (the then) future settlers in the parish registers and rolls of the militia of their respective district, and other public remembrances of the Province, as proper objects, by their persevering in the fidelity and conduct so honorable to their ancestors, for distinguished benefits and privileges;" but as such registry has not been generally made; and as it is still necessary to ascertain the persons and families upon the lands now about to be confirmed to them, without the incidental expenses attending such grants: Know KNOW YE, that I have thought proper, by and with the advice and consent of the executive council, to direct all persons, claiming to be confirmed by deed under the seal of the province of their several possessions, who adhered to the unity of the empire and joined the royal standard in America, before the treaty of separation in the year 1783, to ascertain the same oath before the magistrates in the michaelmas quarter-sessions assembled, now next ensuing date of the proclamation, in such manner and form, as the magistrates are directed to receive the same; and all persons will take notice that if they neglect to ascertain, according to the mode above set forth, their claims to receive deeds without fee, they will not be considered as entitled, in this respect, to the benefit of having adhered to the unity of the empire and joined the royal standard in America before the treaty of separation in the year 1783."

On January 4, 1791 Lord Dorchester had appointed a committee of five members of the Executive Council of the Province of Quebec to inquire into the claims of the Indians settled at the Grand River and Bay of Quinte for lands assigned them and "pointed out the expediency of ascertaining the nature and extent of these claims, to give full effect to any Promises, and to gratify any reasonable expectations, in which the faith of Government might be concerned, in such a way as would best answer the end of making a permanent provision for the persons interested and their descendants and securing their comfort and tranquility.

On December 24th,1791 The Committee having considered the whole are humbly of opinion that as the faith of Government is pledged to the Mohawk chiefs for the two tracts mentioned above, every precaution ought to be taken to preserve them in the quiet possession and property of them and the Committee submit that an Act of the provincial Legislature, or a grant under the Great Seal of the Province be made in favour of the principal chiefs on behalf of their nation, or persons in trust for them for ever.

"On the subject of Joseph Brandt's [sic] letter respecting the lands on the Grand River I am to observe, that without doubt the Indians are entitled to the full accomplishment of Governor Haldimand's promise to them without any diminution, and it shall be carried into execution accordingly" ... "As to the nature of the deed it should be framed in every respect according to their own wishes, so as to secure the true interest of themselves and their posterity forever in the most effectual manner. It will be very desirable that they should consider this matter fully among themselves, and bring forward the heads of the deed they wish to receive. You will be pleased to recommend this measure to Captain Brandt, and to acquaint him with His Lordship's sentiments in general."

While this letter came from Motz, it clearly references the position of Lord Dorchester regarding the Six Nations' land issues. A government committee was struck to investigate the claims of the Six Nations, and its report, dated 24 December 1791, stated, "as the faith of Government is pledged to the Mohawk Chiefs" ... "every precaution ought to be taken to preserve them, in the quiet possession and property of them and the Committee submit, that an Act of the provincial Legislature, or a grant under the great seal of the province be made in favor of the principal Chiefs, on behalf of their Nation, or persons in trust for them, for ever."'

Echoing Dorchester's sentiments, this committee recognized that if the honour of the Crown was to be upheld, Haldimand's Proclamation had to be confirmed.

1812 GOVERNOR’S INSTRUCTION

On May 1, 1812, the Crown’s duly authorized representative, the Governor-General of Upper Canada issued instruction further regulating the alienation of Indian lands in the then Province of Upper Canada by requiring: (a) that the person administering the government in Upper Canada requisition any Indian lands wanted for public service and identify those lands with a sketch; (b) that all purchases by the Crown be made at a public council according to the ancient usages and customs of the Indians to whom the lands belonged, with proper interpreters present and without the presence of liquor; (c) that the Governor or two persons commissioned by him, the Superintendent of Indian Affairs, two or three members of his Department and at least one military officer be present at the public council; (d) that there be a proper explanation to the Indians of the nature and extent of the proposed disposition and the proceeds to be paid therefore; and (e) that deeds of conveyance and descriptive plans of the lands so conveyed be attached to the deed and be executed in public by the Principle Indian Chiefs and the Superintendent of the Indian Department or his appointee, and duly witnessed.

Frank Oliver Minister of the Interior, HOC (April 5, 1909)

"'It is the policy of the Canadian Government, as I understand it, to recognize its relations with the Six Nations Indians of the Grand River as being on a different footing from those with any of the other Indians of Canada. The Six Nations Indians of the Grand River came to Canada under special treaty as allies of Britain, and the policy of the Canadian government is to deal with them having that fact always in view. It is no part of the intention of the Department to make any official action except through recognized tribal authority of the Six Nations."

Frank Oliver Minister of the Interior, HOC (May 11, 1914)

"But there are bands of the Six Nations Indians located on the Grand River in Ontario who, I maintain, are in a different legal position from any other Indian bands who are native to the country ... and were given lands under a special treaty, not as subjects of Great Britain, but as allies of Great Britain, and I maintain that the holding of these Six Nations Indians on the Grand River is of such a kind that this parliament has no right to interfere with it. I admit that parliament has the power to interfere with the rights of Indians under treaty made with this government. But I say that this parliament has no right to interfere with a treaty made between the imperial government and the Six Nations Indians."

United Kingdom Parliament (March 6, 1922)

Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCK asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs "whether, seeing that in the year 1784 a formal Treaty was entered into between the British Government and the Six-Nations Tribe, that the validity of the Treaty has been repeatedly recognised, and that even so recently as 1909 (1914) the Canadian Government still held that this Treaty was operative..."

Mr. CHURCHILL "...the reference is to the Haldimand Treaty of 1784, the question which has arisen is whether the Six-Nations Indians, occupying the lands set apart by that document, are amenable to certain Canadian legislation."

Jason Delaney, CD Lieutenant Directorate of History and Heritage (April 5, 2014)

On January 17, 1918 "...the Military Service Act was amended by order in council to allow exemptions for Indians on the grounds of their limited citizenship rights as well as previous treaty agreements. The Government of Canada responded to a large representation of protest from many aboriginal councils from across Canada." ... "In For King and Konoto: Canadian Indians and the First World War, by Timothy Winegard, there is mention of the Six Nations Council writing to the King in October 1917 protesting that Indians were "Allies of the Crown" and therefore not subject to mandatory service by the government of Canada..."

Mr. Matthew Green, House of Commons (February 16, 2021)

"...Currently 900 unsettled first nation land claims that are historically based on the racist doctrine of discovery and the British colonial legal fiction called Terra Nullius, which effectively erased a millennia of indigenous inhabitations of these lands pre-European contract?

While I am no expert in the Robinson-Huron Treaty for incidents of clear and intentional treaties by the Crown, such as the Haldimand Treaty of October 25, 1784, for the purpose of this debate, I would like to remind members of the House who may not know or may have forgotten the text of this treaty, which states: (Haldimand Proclamtion of 1784, read into the record)"