# data[].attributes.headline
7. Expliquer les principales revendications en lien avec le racisme systémique aujourd'hui et identifier les principaux interlocuteurs. 

# data[].attributes.subject
7. Expliquer les principales revendications en lien avec le racisme systémique aujourd'hui et identifier les principaux interlocuteurs. 

# data[].attributes.body
Gill-Couture, J. (2023, 16 mars). Nouvel appel pour que le Québec reconnaisse le racisme systémique. Radio-Canada. Nouvel appel pour que Québec reconnaisse le racisme systémique | Radio-Canada

Les principales revendications en lien avec le racisme systémique aujourd’hui au Québec sont sur la reconnaissance officielle de ce racisme par les institutions, l’adoption du Principe de Joyce pour assurer l’accès équitable aux services sociaux et de santé, et la mise en œuvre de actions concrètes pour corriger le manque d’équité entre les structures. Les interlocuteurs clés sont les organisations autochtones, les groupes de défense des droits humains ainsi que des parlementaires, des institutions professionnelles et le gouvernement provincial, qui est lui au centre des décisions politiques.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
La pétition a été officiellement présentée jeudi au Salon bleu de l'Assemblée nationale par la co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire, Manon Massé.

Les demandes au gouvernement du Québec contenues dans la pétition déposée vont comme suit :

reconnaître l'existence du racisme et de la discrimination systémiques envers les Autochtones, en particulier les femmes et les filles;

mettre en œuvre des actions concrètes pour éradiquer le racisme et la discrimination systémiques ancrés dans nos institutions depuis la colonisation;

adopter immédiatement et sans réserve le Principe de Joyce;

cocréer et mettre en œuvre des services culturellement adaptés et culturellement sécurisants en collaboration avec les Autochtones.

Lancée le 30 novembre dernier, la pétition a finalement été signée par près de 4000 personnes, et le nombre d'alliés ayant témoigné pour la cause a dépassé les attentes, selon Marjolaine Étienne.

" Le soutien des Québécois et Québécoises se fait sentir, c'est maintenant au premier ministre Legault de nous écouter et de devenir un allié des femmes et des filles autochtones. "

- Marjolaine Étienne, présidente de Femmes Autochtones du Québec

En appui au dépôt de la pétition, le chef de Manawan, Sipi Flamand, a expliqué qu'il est important de reconnaître un fait, un enjeu, une réalité afin de pouvoir améliorer les conditions dans la société. Le dépôt de cette pétition, initiée par Femmes Autochtones du Québec, indique au gouvernement de faire le pas vers l'avant s'il veut réellement travailler dans la réconciliation avec les peuples autochtones .

Ce n'est pas la première fois qu'une demande du genre est adressée au gouvernement de François Legault. Les pressions des organisations autochtones se sont accentuées, en particulier depuis le dépôt du rapport de la coroner Géhane Kamel sur le décès tragique de Joyce Echaquan en septembre 2020.

La présence de discrimination systémique au Québec avait également été soulignée dans la Commission d'enquête sur les relations entre les Autochtones et certains services publics en 2019.

Selon les signataires de la pétition, la reconnaissance du racisme systémique par le gouvernement du Québec est essentielle, puisqu'elle permettrait d'aborder les différentes problématiques et de proposer des solutions qui tiennent compte de leurs réelles origines .

" Le racisme systémique est un fait, et tant qu'il ne sera pas reconnu par Québec, toutes les mesures que le gouvernement entreprendra ne permettront que de mettre un bandage sur des problèmes plus profonds. "

- Sipi Flamand, chef de la communauté atikamekw de Manawan

Selon FAQ, la reconnaissance du racisme systémique montrerait aux Premières Nations qu'elles sont entendues, elles qui dénoncent le problème depuis longtemps. Nous avons des femmes autochtones qui viennent nous voir tous les jours pour nous exprimer ce qu'elles vivent en termes de discrimination et de racisme systémique , explique Marjolaine Étienne.

La co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire, Manon Massé, a quant à elle exprimé son malaise personnel face à la situation : Comme pour les questions d'intersectionnalité [...] le fait que la Coalition avenir Québec [CAQ] ne reconnaisse pas le racisme systémique est incompréhensible .

" Personnellement, le racisme systémique, je ne le vis pas, alors ce n'est pas mon rôle de remettre en cause les témoignages de ceux et celles qui en sont victimes... Alors, comment la CAQ peut-elle se donner ce droit? "

- Manon Massé, co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire

Une occasion ratée

De son côté, le chef de l'APNQL, Ghislain Picard, perçoit plusieurs occasions ratées dans la manière dont le gouvernement actuel mène ses politiques autochtones.
Nous vivons avec l'adversité tous les jours, ce qui est arrivé avec Joyce Echaquan en est la preuve, et d'accepter le Principe [de Joyce] serait de lui montrer une forme de respect [...] Et j'ai un doute qu'il existe cette volonté-là au niveau politique, puisque plus on insiste sur un sujet et plus le gouvernement se referme sur ses positions.
M. Picard ajoute par rapport à la reconnaissance du racisme systémique : On devrait plutôt voir, au gouvernement du Québec, une opportunité de se démarquer... En 2019, François Legault a présenté ici, dans cette Chambre, des excuses au nom de l'ensemble des Québécois : était-il sincère, est-ce que ses excuses ont changé quelque chose aujourd'hui?

Bien que le gouvernement ait répété depuis près de cinq ans qu'il ne reconnaîtrait pas l'existence du racisme systémique, M. Picard croit tout de même que la pétition donne une nouvelle chance au gouvernement de changer son fusil d'épaule.

Il demeure cependant réaliste, en raison de la distance qui sépare actuellement le gouvernement et les Premières Nations. À ce stade-ci, même M. Ford, le premier ministre de l'Ontario, est plus ouvert en ce qui a trait aux relations avec les peuples autochtones, et ce, même s'il est habituellement plus à droite.

Selon Manon Massé, la CAQ se défend présentement en disant qu'il s'agit d'une guerre de mots. Elle ne comprend tout simplement pas leur refus de reconnaître l'évidence .

Les autres porte-parole de la pétition ont un discours similaire : on ne sait pas pourquoi ils ne reconnaissent pas le racisme et la discrimination systémique, c'est une question à poser à François Legault et à Ian Lafrenière .

Malgré la série de refus auxquels ils se butent, ils ne comptent pas abandonner la partie, mais ont plutôt l'intention de poursuivre ensemble [leurs luttes] contre le racisme et la discrimination systémique .

Et même si le gouvernement Legault offre le même discours depuis son arrivée au pouvoir, le chef Sipi Flmand lance : Seuls les fous ne changent pas d'avis!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nouvel appel pour que Québec reconnaisse le racisme systémique

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La pétition a été officiellement présentée jeudi au Salon bleu de l'Assemblée nationale par la co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire, Manon Massé.

# data[].attributes.headline
6. Pourquoi la crise d’Oka prend-elle une telle ampleur ? Quelles en sont les racines historiques directes et indirectes?

# data[].attributes.subject
6. Pourquoi la crise d’Oka prend-elle une telle ampleur ? Quelles en sont les racines historiques directes et indirectes?

# data[].attributes.body
La crise d'oka de 1990 était un conflit violent entre le peuple Mohawk et le gouvernement canadien. La principale cause de cette crise est par rapport au territoire. Le gouvernement canadien (la ville d'Oka) voulait faire un agrandissement pour un terrain de golf et construire des maisons de ville sur un sites funéraires ancestraux (EBSCO, s.d.) (référence introuvable, voir commentaires plus bas). Il y a d'autres causes indirectes qui ont amené à cette crise. Par exemple, le peuple Mohawks a essayer de faire reconnaitre leurs droits ancestraux pendant plus de deux siècles et leurs revendications ont été refusés à cause de manque de documents qui ne répondait pas à toutes les critères (EBSCO, s.d.). Ce manque de réponse de leurs demandes a apporté une grande colère qui s'est accumulé au fur et à mesure de ce temps. Alors, leur colère pour la manque de respect et de discrimination ont été un grand impact de l'intensité de cette crise.

Commentaires:

La référence dans le texte doit indiquer le nom de l'auteur, année et page (ou paragraphe).

EBSCO = base de donnée et non auteur ou titre

# data[].attributes.headline
5. En quoi consistait l’émancipation ? Quels étaient ses objectifs réels et les conséquences pour les autochtones ?

# data[].attributes.subject
5. En quoi consistait l’émancipation ? Quels étaient ses objectifs réels et les conséquences pour les autochtones ?

# data[].attributes.headline
4. Quels sont les postulats sur lesquels se fonde la loi sur les Indiens ?

# data[].attributes.subject
4. Quels sont les postulats sur lesquels se fonde la loi sur les Indiens ?

# data[].attributes.body
La loi sur les Indiens se base principalement sur le rapport Bagot, qui recommande la centralisation des affaires indiennes, l'institutionnalisation des enfants des premières nations en pensionnat afin de les tenir loin de leurs culture et l'instauration d'un système d'enregistrement des terres autochtones qui ferme le marché de leurs terres entre eux.

"Indians and lands reserved for the Indians"

(citatons du livre 21 things you may not know about the indian act de Bob Joseph 2018)

Pour indiquer la référence, il faut préciser la page:

Après le texte: (Joseph, 2018, p. ????)

Bibliographie: Joseph, B. (2018). 21 things you may not know about the Indian Act. Pages Two Books.

Noah, Élorah, Felix

# data[].attributes.headline
3. Comment les femmes autochtones étaient doublement pénalisées par les lois ?

# data[].attributes.subject
3. Comment les femmes autochtones étaient doublement pénalisées par les lois ?

# data[].attributes.body
1. Paternalité du gouvernement

Les Autochtones étaient traités comme des enfants et n'avaient pas leur mots à dire sur leur condition. Le ministère des Affaires indiennes controlait tout. Également plusieurs communauté étaient matriarcale et matrilinéaire, ce qui a changé du à la société patriarcale ''Canadienne''.

2. L'émancipation des femmes

Cette loi était pour des Autochtones qui voulaient avoir une citoyenneté québécoise, seulement, les femmes avaient celle-ci dès qu'elle se mariait à un québécois (ou un non-Autochtone). Donc, depuis 1896, si elle se mariait, elle ne pouvait plus faire parti de sa communauté et toutes les choses qui venaient avec ce statut. Malheureusement, cela ne s'appliquait qu'à la femme, l'homme gardait son statut (Lepage, 2019, 29-31).

corinne Rosie

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/fr/article/loi-sur-les-indiens

Lepage, P. (2019). Mythe et réalité sur les peuples Autochtones. Institut tshakapesh.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
La Loi sur les Indiens est la principale loi qui permet au gouvernement fédéral d’administrer le statut d’Indien, les gouvernements locaux des Première…

# data[].attributes.headline
2. Pourquoi l’aspect juridique actuel des revendications autochtones doit préciser le contexte historique du 18e siècle? (Importance de la Proclamation royale de 1763)

# data[].attributes.subject
2. Pourquoi l’aspect juridique actuel des revendications autochtones doit préciser le contexte historique du 18e siècle? (Importance de la Proclamation royale de 1763)

# data[].attributes.headline
1. Comment et pourquoi la nature des relations entre Français et autochtones était-elle différente de celle avec les autres peuples européens ?

# data[].attributes.subject
1. Comment et pourquoi la nature des relations entre Français et autochtones était-elle différente de celle avec les autres peuples européens ?

# data[].attributes.body
Sources:

Jaenen, C. J. (2015). Relations entre les Autochtones et les Français. L’Encyclopédie canadienne. Historica Canada.
Relations entre les Autochtones et les Français | l'Encyclopédie Canadienne ,

Alloprof. (s.d.). Les premiers contacts entre les Autochtones et les Européens.

Les premiers contacts entre les Autochtones et les Européens | Secondaire | Alloprof

Premièrement , les pêcheurs, colons , marchands de fourrures , missionnaire et les agents coloniaux Français faisaient partie des premiers Européens qui ont entretenue des contacts avec les peuples autochtones au Canada et en Amérique du Nord. Les Autochtones commerçaient pour obtenir des biens européens , des liens militaires et plusieurs autres. Ainsi ils ont établi des relations d'interdépendances au début de la période coloniales. De plus, il y avait peu de colons français ce qui nécessitait de coopérer avec les nations autochtones pour survivre, faire du commerce ainsi que simplement circuler sur le territoire suivis de l'évangélisation. Les anglais on une relation d'avantage de colonisation agricole ainsi qu'appropriation des terres ce qui amène des relations conflictuelles , des guerres fréquentes anis que des déplacement forcés. De plus , les espagnols ont eux aussi également le désir de conquêtes et d'extraction de richesse ce qui amène beaucoup de violence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
French fishermen, settlers, fur traders, missionaries and colonial agents were among the earliest Europeans to have sustained contact with ​Indigenous peoples in what is now Canada and North America. The relationship between French and Indigenous people of the Eastern Woodlands in the early colonial period was complex and interdependent. France saw Indigenous nations as allies, and relied on them for survival and fur trade wealth. Indigenous people traded for European goods, established military alliances and hostilities, intermarried, sometimes converted to Christianity, and participated politically in the governance of New France. With the transfer of New France to Britain in 1763, diplomatic relations between the French and Indigenous people in Canada ceased. Naturally, social and economic interaction between the European and Indigenous inhabitants of New France continued.

Initial Encounters

Breton and Norman fishermen came into contact with Algonquian peoples - Mi'kmaq, Maliseet, Passamaquoddy, Abenaki, Innu and others - of the northeast at the beginning of the 16th century, if not earlier. The fishermen moored in natural harbours and bays to seek shelter from storms and to replenish water and food supplies. These first contacts included hostile incidents, as some Indigenous people were kidnapped and taken to France to be paraded at the court and in public on state and religious occasions.

Despite this, there were mutually satisfactory encounters as trade took place. Algonquian people brought furs, hides and fish in exchange for beads, mirrors and other European goods of aesthetic and perhaps spiritual value. Soon the Algonquian exacted goods of more materialistic value, such as needles, knives, kettles or woven cloth, while the French displayed an insatiable desire for well-worn beaver cloaks. The fur trade expanded inland from Tadoussac at the mouth of the Saguenay River and from Trois-Rivières.

In the 16th century, the French, like the English and Spanish, laid claim to lands "not possessed by any other Christian prince" based on the European legal theory of Terra Nullius. This theory argued that uninhabited, or at least uncultivated lands, needed to be brought under Christian dominion. The royal commissions made to Jean-François de La Rocque, Sieur de Roberval for the St. Lawrence region, dated 15 January 1541, and to Troilus de La Roche de Mesgouez for Sable Island in 1598 urged territorial acquisition either by voluntary cession or conquest.

French Settlement and Land Claims

By the early 17th century, as the fur trade expanded, a new policy of pacification emerged. The French chose to settle along the Bay of Fundy marshlands and the St. Lawrence Valley from which the original St. Lawrence Iroquoians had gone by 1580 - causes for the "disappearance" of the St. Lawrence Iroquoians have long been debated, with explanations ranging from warfare and epidemics to simple migration or long-cycle crop rotation. At the time, the French believed no Indigenous peoples were displaced to make way for settlers. This gave the impression of peaceful cohabitation with certain Indigenous peoples, and remained characteristic of Indigenous-French relations up to the fall of Acadia (1710) and of New France (1760), with the notable exception of the Iroquois Wars of the 17th century. Beyondthe Acadian farmlands and the Laurentian seigneurial tract, Indigenous peoples continued to be fully independent, following their traditional lifestyle and customs on their ancestral lands. Royal instructions to Governor Courcelle in 1665 emphasized that "the officers, soldiers and all his other subjects treat the Natives with kindness, justice and fairness, without harm or violence."

Although France claimed sovereignty over a wide area of the St. Lawrence basin and its hinterland the French Crown also recognized that Indigenous peoples were part of independent nations governed by their own laws and customs. They were referred to as allies, not subjects. Consequently, a military tribunal adjudicated legal proceedings involving Indigenous persons and French colonists. Louis XIV's instructions in 1665, observed until the transfer to Britain in 1763, included the provision that "the lands which [Indigenous people] inhabit never be usurped under pretext that they are better or more suited to the French."

Royal instructions in 1716 not only required peaceful relations with the Indigenous peoples in the interests of trade and missions but these also forbade the French from clearing land and settling west of the Montréal region seigneuries. In the pays d'en haut, care was taken to obtain permission from groups living in the area before establishing a trading post, fort, missions or small agricultural community such as Détroit or in the Illinois country. Following a conference with 80 Haudenosaunee delegates at Québec in the autumn of 1748, Governor La Galissonière and Intendant François Bigot reaffirmed that "these Indians claim to be and in effect are independent of all nations, and their lands incontestably belong to them." Nevertheless, France continued to assert its sovereignty and to speak at the international level on behalf of allied Indigenous nations. This sovereignty was exercised against European rivals through the allied nations, not at their expense through the suppression of local customs and independence.

Indigenous political leaders accepted this "protectorate" because it offered external support while permitting them to govern themselves and maintain traditional ways of life. The Mi'kmaq, and later the Abenaki, converted to Catholicism as a confirmation of their alliance and brotherhood with the French and resistance to Anglo-American incursions. When the Mi'kmaq eventually signed a treaty of peace and friendship with British authorities at Halifax in 1752, the Abenaki who had taken refuge in Canada rebuffed the official delegate of the governor in Boston.

Missions and Creation of Réductions

By beginning their apostolic labours in Acadia in 1611 and in Canada in 1615, Catholic missionaries dreamed of a rapid conversion of Indigenous peoples, even wondering if they might be descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Traditional Mi'kmaq and Innu hospitality dictated that the itinerant missionaries be well-received. The missionaries centred their evangelization efforts on the sedentary, horticultural and strategically located Huron-Wendat confederacy ( see Ste. Marie Among the Hurons). Factionalism that arose out of favouritism shown to converts and epidemics that decimated the population virtually brought the mission to a close. On two occasions, the Jesuits were spared execution or exile on charges of witchcraft only by French threats to cut off the trade on which the Wendat had become dependent. Eight Jesuits, including the leader of the Ste. Marie mission, Jean de Brébeuf, were killed in the years leading up to and during the Wendat dispersals. Following the dispersal in 1648-49 by the Haudenosaunee, the missionaries turned to other groups in the Great Lakes basin, including the Iroquois Confederacy, to little effect.

(artwork by Lewis Parker)

Colonial agents were able to exert greater influence over Indigenous people through réductions, or reserves, established within the seigneurial tract of New France. In 1637, the seigneury of Sillery near Québec was designated a réduction for some Innu encamped nearby as well as for all the northern hunters who would take up agriculture under Jesuit tutelage. Although the Innu did not remain long, some Abenaki refugees came to settle, and finally Wendat who escaped from the Haudenosaunee conquest of their territory. Eventually there were reserves near each of the three French bridgeheads of settlement: Lorette near Québec for the Wendat; Bécancour and Saint-François near Trois-Rivières for the Abenaki; Kahnawake near Montréal for the Haudenosaunee and Lac-des-Deux-Montagnes for both Algonquians and Iroquoians ( see Mohawk of the St. Lawrence Valley). This indicated a fundamental difference between the "reserves" of the French colonial period and those of the following British period. The French sought to attract the Indigenous people close to their settlements with the view to having them adopt French agricultural sedentary life. The English, in New England for example, drove Indigenous people off their traditional lands into the hinterland in order to establish agricultural holdings and permanent settlement.

Nevertheless, reserves in Canada were also relocated from time to time at ever greater distances from the principal towns, mostly because of the desire of the missionaries to stem illegal trade and isolate Indigenous converts from the temptations of alcohol, prostitution and gambling. Residents of the Kahnawake reserve, supported by certain Montréal merchants, circumvented colonial trading restrictions with Albany and New York in order to get better prices for their goods, usually furs.

The French designated those Indigenous peoples who settled on reserves under the supervision of Missionaries as " Indiens domiciliés" (resident Indians). It was often on the reserves that canoemen, scouts and warriors were recruited for trade and war. The products of the field and the hunt, as well as the manufacture of canoes, snowshoes and moccasins found a good outlet on the Québec market. At the time of the British Conquest of New France in 1760 ( see Seven Years' War), the "resident Indians" were united in a federation known as the Seven Nations of Canada. It is possible that this political organization, whose membership evolved over the years, dates back to the early days of the French regime at the time when the first reserves were created in the St. Lawrence Valley.

Official French objectives had been to Christianize and francize Indigenous peoples in order to attain their utopian ideal of "one people." The church tried to achieve this objective through itinerant missions, education of an Indigenous élite in France, reserves and boarding schools, but in the end it was clear that Indigenous culture would survive despite these efforts. Indeed, cross-cultural influence was reciprocal; missionaries and fur traders learned ​Indigenous languages and adopted survival techniques.

Commerce and the Métis

The Métis, from the French métisser, meaning to crossbreed, trace their origin to encounters almost exclusively between Indigenous women and Frenchmen. Though contemporary Métis are largely descended from communities around the Red River, intermarriage was common in the early contact period. Beginning with European fishermen and sailors along the Atlantic seaboard, the practice spread into the hinterland as traders and interpreters, later unlicensed coureurs des bois, and finally garrison troops came into contact with hinterland communities. Voyageurs and canoemen travelling to and from the upper country of Canada for the fur trade relied on Indigenous women to make and break camp, cook, carry baggage and serve as mistresses. Many of these unions became long-lasting and were recognized locally as legitimate à la façon du pays (in the custom of the country). Canon law forbade the marriage of Catholics with pagans, so missionaries would often instruct and baptize adults and children in order to regularize such unions. In 1735, Louis XV forbade most mixed marriages; nevertheless, the rise of mixed communities in the Great Lakes basin, particularly along Lake Superior, indicated the prevalence of the practice.

The importance of good relations with Indigenous communities for commerce, missions and military operations was highlighted in the annual transfer of colonial administration from Québec to Montréal. Upon receipt of the royal despatches from Versailles in the late spring, the governor and his officials ascended to Montréal for the summer months, where they met with the officers of the Troupes de la Marine (mostly sons of the colonial elite) posted at the interior forts, representatives of the merchants and traders and Indigenous chieftains and delegations. Responses were drafted to royal orders in the light of these deliberations, new directives were suggested and these were all sent to France by the last vessels in the autumn. The Indigenous voice was an important element in this convoluted form of royal despotism. Another aspect of the dilution of absolutism was the avoidance of the imposition of the harsh aspects of French criminal law on Indigenous defendants. As members of allied nations they would be tried by a military tribunal rather than a royal court. These tribunals simply turned them over to their tribal councils to be dealt with according to their customary practices. It was an early form of parallel justice that promoted good community relations even in interracial cases.

War and Conflict

Warfare was an aspect of Indigenous life in which the French soon became involved. Most Indigenous people in the Eastern Woodlands remained allied with France through to Pontiac's War in 1763, with the exception of the Haudenosaunee, Meskwaki and Dakota. Champlain, by supporting his Algonquian and Wendat trading partners in 1609, earned the long-lasting enmity of the Iroquois. The French were not able to save the Wendat from destruction at the hands of the Haudenosaunee in 1648-49, nor were they able to stop incursions into their own or their western allies' territories until the Peace of Montréal in 1701. The Meskwaki were viewed as hostile from 1712 until their dispersal in 1730. The Dakota also often attacked French trading partners and allies before agreeing to a general peace settlement in 1754.

The escalation of tensions between the French and English over control of the fur trade in North America led to the signing of the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. Under the terms of the treaty, France retained access to Cape Breton Island, the St. Lawrence Islands and fishing rights off Newfoundland but ceded Acadia to the British and recognized British jurisdiction over the northern territory of Rupert's Land and the island of Newfoundland. The Mi'kmaq, and Passamaquoddy, considered themselves to be friends and allies and not subjects of the French Crown, as well as the rightful owners of the territory ceded to the British Crown. The lack of consultation regarding the terms of the treaty, and the lack of compensation provided to the Mi'kmaq, Maliseet and Passamaquoddy upset them greatly.

France spent large sums of money for the annual distribution of the "King's presents" to allied nations. In addition, the Crown issued clothing, weapons and ammunition to Indigenous auxiliaries, paid for their services, and maintained their families when the men were on active duty. These warriors were judged invaluable for guiding, scouting and surprise raiding parties. Their war practices, including scalping and platform torture, were not interfered with as they generally fought alongside the French as independent auxiliaries. The Seven Nations of Canada, as France's allies were known, were not forgotten by the French as the British conquest loomed large. In defeat, the French obtained favourable terms of capitulation, that their allies be treated as soldiers under arms, and that they "be maintained in the Lands they inhabit," enjoy freedom of religion and keep their missionaries. These terms were further reiterated in the Treaty of Oswegatchie, negotiated by Sir William Johnson, at Fort Lévis (near present-day Ogdensburg, New York), on 30 August 1760, and reaffirmed at Kahnawake on 15-16 September 1760.

On 10 February 1763, France and Great Britain signed the Treaty of Paris. The treaty outlined a series of land exchanges in which France handed over their control of New France. Article 4 provided for the transfer of lands in North America east of the Mississippi River to Great Britain. Under the terms of the treaty, Great Britain also gained control of Florida from the Spanish, who took control of New Orleans and the Louisiana territory west of the Mississippi River from the French.

In order to establish jurisdiction in the newly acquired Canadian colonies, on 7 October 1763, King George III and the British Imperial Government issued a Royal Proclamation outlining the management of the colonies. Of particular importance, the proclamation reserved a large tract of unceded territory, not including the lands reserved for the Hudson's Bay Company, east of the Mississippi River as "hunting grounds" for Indigenous peoples. As well, the proclamation established the requirements for the transfer of Indigenous title to the Crown, indicating that the Crown could only purchase Indigenous lands and that such purchases had to be unanimously approved by a council of Indigenous peoples.

The proclamation also provided the terms for the establishment of colonial governments in Québec, West Florida, East Florida and Grenada. The colonies were granted the ability to elect general assemblies under a royally appointed governor and high council, with the power to create laws and ordinances, as well as establish civil and criminal courts specific to the area and in agreement with British and colonial laws.

Slavery in New France

Though settlers and Indigenous people worked, traded and lived together in New France, many settlers enslaved both Indigenous and African peoples as domestic servants. Between 1671 and 1834, there were more than 4,000 enslaved people in New France and the Province of Québec. Two thirds of enslaved people were Indigenous, while the remainder were of African origin. Military officers, merchants and religious officials enslaved these people as domestic servants, rather than agricultural workers, as the economy was not plantation-based as it was in the American south.

In many Indigenous cultures, groups victorious in warfare often absorbed or took captive their defeated rivals. Often, they would exchange these captives for European goods. Though captives came from communities far and wide, all ​enslaved Indigenous people came to be known as Panis, after the name of the Pawnee people. Enslavement in New France was governed by the Code Noir of 1685, and was formally ended with the Emancipation Act of 1833.

Legacy

The relationship between French settlers and the Indigenous people in what became Canada was built on the foundation of commerce, with intermarriage and evangelization seen as methods toward cultural assimilation. Once usurped by the British, French colonial administrators had little contact with Indigenous peoples. However, French-speaking settlers maintained links with Indigenous communities, and continued to intermarry and form economic partnerships.

For an exploration of Indigenous relations after the fall of the French regime, see Indigenous-European Relations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
French fishermen, settlers, fur traders, missionaries and colonial agents were among the earliest Europeans to have sustained contact with ​Indigenous peoples in what is now Canada and North America. The relationship between French and Indigenous people of the Eastern Woodlands in the early colonial period was complex and interdependent.