Bounty and Benevolence. A History of Saskatchewan Treaties by Arthur J. Ray, Jim Miller, Frank J. Tough (review)

HUMANITIES 267 diaries, and archives. The book is neatly organized by topic: markets, companies, forest policies, workers, and so forth. Hak writes well enough, but a reader would soon be bored unless using this as a reference source. As such, it is good research material, sometimes exhaustive if not exhausting. Those who are interested in trends, causes, consequences, or theoretical understanding are less likely to find this compendium stimulating. Although the publisher claims that it has as its focal point the concept of market capitalism, the focus is hard to find in the midst of so much detail. True, indeed, the industry operates within market capitalism, but then, what industry doesn=t? The fact that forests and trees in themselves had no market value in the nineteenth century, but became commodities once logged, especially if further transformed into board feet of construction lumber, is not really breathtaking as revelation. In short, there is no theoretical thrust to this account, which would, for example, more fully explore and explain, rather than simply describe, the development of technology, access to United States lumber markets, and shifts in government policies and business strategies. The use of immigrant labour and the industry=s relationship with First Nations are well covered at the descriptive level, and these accounts, especially if put together with similar accounts of the fishing and mining industries of that same period, provide a useful compendium of social history . Hak does mention parallel studies of other industries, but his choice of sources is somewhat idiosyncratic. It seems odd, for example, that several general histories of factory labour by central Canadian writers are included, yet recent studies by Alicja Muszynski and by Diane Newell on the history of labour in the British Columbia fish-processing industry are not. Overall, then, a scholarly empirical contribution to the historical study of the coast. Not an exciting book, but useful as a reference work. (PATRICIA MARCHAK) Arthur J. Ray, Jim Miller, and Frank J. Tough. Bounty and Benevolence. A History of Saskatchewan Treaties McGill-Queen=s University Press. xxxvi, 300. $34.95 Bounty and Benevolence is a careful, detailed analysis of the >numbered treaties= signed from 1874 to 1907 between First Nations peoples and the Canadian government in what is now Saskatchewan. The book examines treaties 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 in depth, as well as earlier precedent-setting treaties. It explores the historical context in which these agreements were signed, the negotiations that preceded them, and the goals of the parties involved. A central feature is the emphasis on practices established in the long-standing relationship with the Hudson=s Bay Company. Thus the book begins with an examination of relations between Aboriginal peoples and the HBC before 1800, outlining the many aspects of that relationship which 268 LETTERS IN CANADA 2000 were reproduced in the treaties: negotiating protocols; annual gifts (annuities); special recognition for chiefs and headmen; and relief for the old, sick, and those in economic difficulty. This analysis of the adoption of HBC practices in treaty-making is one of the most important contributions of the book, facilitating a significantly deepened understanding of Aboriginal expectations in the aftermath of the treaty process. Above all, the people expected an ongoing relationship in which they could raise concerns and renegotiate terms as it became necessary. The book has its roots in a research report produced by Arthur J. Ray, Jim Miller, and Frank J. Tough for Saskatchewan=s Office of the Treaty Commissioner, and serves to bring together academic inquiry and the concerns of treaty research. This is one of its strengths. Treaty research has focused attention on crucial matters such as the gap (often quite broad) between the written version of a treaty and promises made by federal negotiators at treaty talks. Although this problem surfaces repeatedly in research reports, there is less published literature that acknowledges it. The most common discrepancy is the promise made by most federal negotiators that hunting and fishing would continue unchanged, when written treaties stated that the government could make >regulations= limiting these practices . Some negotiators even told the chiefs that they were giving up nothing by signing the treaty, only gaining presents from the Queen...