LOUIS RIEL AND NORTH WEST REBELLION

 

PREAMBLE

 

The late 1870s and early 1880s were a time of rapid change in western Canada.  The signing of treaties with Aboriginals, the extermination of the once-great buffalo herds, the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and the influx of thousands of settlers all occurred within a relatively short period of time, and changed the face of the prairie forever.

 

For the native people of the region these years were particularly difficult.  Accustomed to a nomadic or semi-nomadic way of life based on the buffalo hunt, they found it hard to give up the freedom they had known and settle down to a new way of life based on agriculture.  When problems arose, the Aboriginals and the Metis alike found the Canadian government unresponsive to their pleas for help.  The natives discovered that treaty promises of support during the years of change were not always fully carried out, and were incensed as well at the arrogance of some of the Indian agents and farm instructors assigned to ‘help’ them. 

 

The Metis, for their part, were particularly unhappy with their difficulty in getting the government to grant them title to the lands they occupied.  Many of the Caucasian people who lived in the North West could readily sympathize with the natives’ feelings of frustration.  They had grievances of their own – among them the lack of parliamentary representation and responsible government – and a similar lack of success in gaining Ottawa’s attention.  Out of these years of discontent grew the Riel Rebellion of 1885, described by Canadian author Rudy Wiebe as the turning point in Canadian history.

 

KEY PLACES

 

Battles

Duck Lake

Fish Creek

Batoche

Cut Knife Hill

Red Deer Creek

Loon Lake

 

Events

 

Frog Lake

Fort Pitt

Battleford

 

Estimates of Indian and Metis Casualties

 

 

At Fish Creek

Killed                  Wounded

At Batoche

Killed                  Wounded

Dumont’s estimate

5                                  1

13                             2

Middleton’s estimate

11                                18

51                             173

 

Why do these estimates differ so dramatically?

 

 

ROLES

 

  1. Judge
  2. Clerk
  3. Sheriff
  4. 4 Lawyers (two or more each side)
  5. Various jury members
  6. Witnesses (see below)
  7. Louis Riel

 

WITNESSES

 

  1. Father Alexis Andre:   A Prince Albert Priest
  2. Evelina Barnabe: The Woman Riel Jilted
  3. Chief Crowfoot: An Astute First Nations Chief
  4. Superintendent Leif N.F. Crozier: A Mounted Police Officer
  5. Theresa Delany: A Settler from Frog Lake
  6. Gabriel Dumont: Military Leader of the Metis
  7. Madeline Dumont: A Metis Woman
  8. Captain Arthur L. Howard: A Soldier of Fortune
  9. William Henry Jackson: A Champion of the Underdog
  10. Robert Jefferson: A Farm Instructor
  11. Effie Laurie: A Future Journalist
  12. Sir John A. Macdonald: Prime Minister of Canada
  13. Elizabeth McLean: A Sixteen Year Old Hostage
  14. Major-General Frederick Middleton: Commander of the Militia
  15. Charles Nolin: Riel’s Cousin and Opponent
  16. Lieutenant-Colonel William D. Otter: Commander of the Battleford Column
  17. Chief Poundmaker: A Peacemaker
  18. Marguerite Monet Riel: Wife of Louis Riel
  19. Major Samuel Benfield Steele: Commander of the Cavalry and Scouts
  20. Wandering Spirit: War Chief of Big Bear’s Band
  21. William Dillon Otter: Placed in charge of ‘protection’ of Battleford
  22. Alexander Campbell: Sergeant with the 7th Fusiliers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WITNESSES AT THE RETRIAL

 

1.  You should thoroughly familiarize yourself with the life and personality of the person you will be portraying by reading the summary of his or her life.  You should also study any document, drawing, photography, or map (among other things) associated with that person as these may be introduced at the trial as evidence.

 

2.  Prepare ten to twenty questions that the prosecution and defence lawyers might ask you, and briefly outline the answers you would give to each.  The questions should follow a logical line of reasoning designed to reveal your most damaging or most supportive testimony.  One or more questions should involve reference to any exhibits the lawyers might present as evidence or show to help the jury understand your testimony.

 

3.  Write a short paragraph suggesting the attitude and mannerisms which might indicate the personality of your witness.  On the day of retrial you will be expected to role-play this person.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LAWYERS AT THE RETRIAL

 

1.  The teams of prosecution and defence lawyers should find out which of the possible witnesses will be giving testimony, and meet to determine which witnesses each will be examining or cross-examining.  You should thoroughly familiarize yourself with the roles of these witnesses in the rebellion by reading the summaries of their lives.  You should also read any document, drawing, photograph or map (among other things) associated with each person as these might be introduced at the trial as evidence.  You may also wish to read the supplementary material suggested in the prosecution and defence strategies for each witness.

 

2.  Keeping in mind your prosecution or defence strategy, prepare ten to twenty questions to ask each witness, and briefly outline the answers you would expect for each.  The questions should follow a logical line of reasoning designed to bring out the most damaging or most supportive testimony.  One or more questions should involve reference to any exhibits that you decide to present as evidence or show to help the jury understand the witness’ testimony.  It is not always necessary to cross-examine a witness for the other side.  If you do, be sure that your questions have a purpose and that they won’t bring out anything that will damage your case.

 

3.  The chief Crown and defence lawyers should also prepare brief opening statements (outlining their main arguments and how they will be proved) and closing statements (summarizing the evidence presented and attempting to undermine the case presented by the other side).

 

PROSECUTION STRATEGY

 

The job of the lawyers for the prosecution (the Crown counsel) is to show that Louis Riel personally committed treasonable acts at Duck Lake, Fish Creek, and Batoche; that he conspired with Chief Big Bear to commit treason, resulting in the use of violence at Frog Lake, Fort Pitt, Red Deer Creek and Loon Lake; and that he conspired with Chief Poundmaker to commit treason, resulting in the use of force or violence at Battleford and Cut Knife Hill.  The burden of proof rests on you, and in order to gain a conviction you must show beyond a reasonable doubt that Riel was in fact guilty.

 

In your questioning of the witnesses you should bring out details of the extensive suffering, loss of life and damage to property caused by the rebellion, show that Riel had overall responsibility for the uprising, and convince the jury that he must be punished for his treasonable acts.  You should demonstrate that the rebellion was completely unjustified – the Metis grievances were relatively minor, and in any case the government had already responded (or was about to respond) to their complaints.  Riel used these grievances to provoke an uprising in order to advance his private interests.  If the defence tries to prove that Riel was insane at the time of the rebellion, you should do everything possible to prove that he was sane and accountable for his acts.

 

 

LAWYERS AT THE RETRIAL

 

1.  The teams of prosecution and defence lawyers should find out which of the possible witnesses will be giving testimony, and meet to determine which witnesses each will be examining or cross-examining.  You should thoroughly familiarize yourself with the roles of these witnesses in the rebellion by reading the summaries of their lives.  You should also read any document, drawing, photograph or map (among other things) associated with each person as these might be introduced at the trial as evidence.  You may also wish to read the supplementary material suggested in the prosecution and defence strategies for each witness.

 

2.  Keeping in mind your prosecution or defence strategy, prepare ten to twenty questions to ask each witness, and briefly outline the answers you would expect for each.  The questions should follow a logical line of reasoning designed to bring out the most damaging or most supportive testimony.  One or more questions should involve reference to any exhibits that you decide to present as evidence or show to help the jury understand the witness’ testimony.  It is not always necessary to cross-examine a witness for the other side.  If you do, be sure that your questions have a purpose and that they won’t bring out anything that will damage your case.

 

3.  The chief Crown and defence lawyers should also prepare brief opening statements (outlining their main arguments and how they will be proved) and closing statements (summarizing the evidence presented and attempting to undermine the case presented by the other side).

 

DEFENCE STRATEGY

 

The job of the lawyers for the defence (the defence counsel) is to show that Louis Riel) did not commit treasonable acts.  You might also argue along the following lines:

 

The people of the North West had many grievances.  Prior to the rebellion they had exhausted every legal method of protest available to them, without success.  Riel returned to the North West at their request and sent on last, major petition to the government on their behalf.  The government was thus well aware of the problems facing the people; by failing again to take significant action they force the Metis and Aboriginals to rebel.

 

Riel did not intend to overthrow the government of Canada. He simply wished to improve conditions for the people in the North West.  When he saw that stronger methods of protest were needed, he planned to repeat the nearly bloodless tactics he had used in the Red River area in 1869-70.  That is, he planned to set up a provisional government, seize arms and supplies, take hostages, and negotiate a settlement with Ottawa.  Even at Duck Lake, his followers fought only after the police had fired the first shot.  The battles of Duck Lake, Fish Creek and Batoche, and those which involved the natives, were uprisings of a local nature and did not amount to acts of treason.  Riel himself did everything he could to reduce the bloodshed involved and he encouraged Chiefs Big Bear and Poundmaker to do the same.

 

Many people felt that Riel was insane at the time of the rebellion and hence not accountable for his acts.  Riel strongly objected to this argument at his trial in 1885.

ROLE OF THE JUDGE

 

A judge of the Supreme Court is referred to Mr. or Madam Justice _________________.  He or she is addressed in court as “My Lord” or “My Lady.”  As the presiding officer of the court, the judge supervises the trying of a case and makes sure that the accused gets a fair trial.  He must ensure that both sides have a chance to present all their factual evidence and arguments, and that all unreliable opinions or statements are excluded from consideration by the jury.

 

The basic rules of evidence are as follows:

 

Admissible Evidence

 

1.  verbal reports (testimony given by a witness under oath)

2.  written records (eg. diaries, letters, dispatches, petitions)

3.  visual representations (eg. paintings, photographs, maps)

4.  physical remains (eg. weapons, stolen property, clothing)

5.  circumstantial evidence (eg. when goods are stolen and later found in the possession

     of a suspect)

 

Inadmissible Evidence

 

1.  hearsay evidence (evidence based on something the witness has heard someone else

     say, eg. gossip or a rumour); a witness can testify only about something he or she has

     seen or experienced

2.  prejudiced or biased opinions

3.  personal opinion (unless the witness is an expert on a particular subject)

4.  irrelevant statements

5.  illegally obtained evidence (eg. induced confession)

 

The judge must also rule on such matters as leading questions.  Leading questions are questions asked in such a way as to suggest a particular answer.  They are not permitted in direct examination.  For example:

 

INCORRECT                                                CORRECT

 

Were you at Duck Lake on March 26? Where were you on March 26?

 

Did you see Louis Rile order his men             Who appeared to be leading the

to fire on the police at Duck Lake?                  Metis at Duck Lake?

 

Leading questions are permitted in cross-examination.  A lawyer may ask such questions in order to show up any errors or contradictions in a witness’ testimony. 

 

The judge also instructs the jury on points of law which relate to the case at hand.  If the jury finds the accused guilty, the judge passes on the sentence of the court upon him or her.

 

If the student judge needs help or advice during the trial, he/she may ask the teacher to approach the bench for a conference.  If the lawyers get out of hand, he may ask them to approach the bench.

ROLE OF THE JURY

 

The members of the jury listen to the evidence presented to them and make a decision as to the guilt or innocence of the accused.  They must decide which pieces of the admissible evidence can be believed and which are more important than others; they must then determine if the weight of the evidence is enough to find the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

The members of the jury should not allow themselves to be influenced in a case by anything other than the evidence presented to them in court.  They should therefore no expose themselves to newspaper, radio, or television accounts of the case or discuss it with anyone outside the court.

 

The foreman/woman of the jury announces the verdict to the court.  Ina criminal trial the verdict of the jury must be unanimous.  If even one member disagrees with the others the jury is “hung” and the judge may call for a retrial with a new jury or adjourn the trail.  Ina mock trial a majority decision is acceptable.

 

Members of the student jury may with to may make notes during the trial.  This is not always permitted during the actual trial.