Conflicting Ideas of Canada's Past
He has been called a prophet, a traitor, a martyr, a visionary and a madman, but whatever one thinks of him, Louis Riel, remains one of the most controversial figures in Canadian history. Does this man who has continued to haunt Canadian history for more than a century after his execution, deserve all of those descriptions? After reading three different interpretations of the rebellions, it is still difficult to decide which is closer to the truth. All three authors retold the Metis history and although they differ on crucial issues, there was agreement on the basic facts. The primary difference amongst the three authors was whether the Canadian and Manitoban governments acted in good faith in carrying out the terms of the Manitoba Act, whether John A. MacDonald purposely deceived the Metis as to what Canada's intentions were with respect to the Canada-Metis Agreement and to what extent were there deceptions in the administration of the Metis land grants. How these three !historians attempt to encapsulate Riel's life, accomplishments, and mistakes is very different. How they attempt to separate fact from fiction and decide whether Riel was justified in his actions against the government is written from three very different
Stanley's approach to the rebellions was one of balanced praise and condemnation for both government and the Metis actions. He believed the primitive people(p. 407 of the "frontier" were bewildered and frustrated by change and were unable to accept these changes or make adjustments to new circumstances therefore they fought against change. He attributed the erratic courses of events to a feeling likely to be encountered in all primitive peoples who "felt that the country was theirs"10 "The cryptic telegram of which he made himself the interpreter, became the evidence for the Metis people, of the government's refusal to deal with the Metis, the exact opposite of its intended meaning." 20 1G.F.G. Stanley, The Birth of Western Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, The execution of Scott caused huge problems for the government and they couldn't turn a blind eye to them. On one side they had the protestant people clamoring for Riel's head, and the other side people defending him for standing up to the government. MacDonald realized they couldn't excuse the execution nor could he grant amnesty to those involved in the execution. "Since the key people of the provisional government couldn't be given amnesty, there wouldn't be a Metis person to lead the government of the new province. The government would have to place their own people into key government positions."3 This political move made the Metis people very suspicious of their new white neighbors and suspicious of the actions of the Canadian government. Stanley believes that it was this suspiciousness and sullenness that caused the Metis to seek out new lands in Saskatchewan... not malice on the part of the government. Unfortunately, what the Metis soon discovered was that their! Order, but the rest was excusable. Any other errors the government may have committed were honest
Some common words found in the essay are:
Manitoba Act, Saskatchewan Metis, West Rebellion, River Rebellion, Canadian Government, Canada Metis, Saskatchewan Riel, Pacific Railway, Canada-Metis Agreement, Western Canada, manitoba act, provisional government, canada metis, western canada, rebellion 1885, red river, metis people, rebellion 1885 reconsidered, riel rebellion, 1885 reconsidered, red river rebellion, stanley believes, riel rebellion 1885, birth western canada, laurier university press,
Approximate Word count = 2640
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
