The Icelandic Canadian - 01.03.2004, Side 22

116
THE ICELANDIC CANADIAN
Vol. 58 #3
son to the smallpox epidemic and had what
Gerrard calls a “stormy” career in politics
as the elected president of the colony. The
move to North Dakota was the first of sev-
eral moves he made around that State. He
went then to several locations in Alberta
and British Columbia before returning to
Winnipeg in 1908. His departure from (3s
might have appeared to Ramsay as an
opportunity to renew his claim to the land
and that might have been the context of the
unsuccessful attempt at repossession that
Monkman reports. Jon Bergvinson took
official possession of the land in 1881, and
his son Bergvin Jonsson obtained the
homestead rights and patent in 1883
(Thompson 35).
Clearly, Ramsay was not satisfied by
the lack of response to his complaints.
Meanwhile, Provencher was dealing with
an accusation of misconduct. In 1878,
Provencher was found guilty on sixteen
counts of fraud, including supplying inferi-
or implements to the Indians, sending ficti-
tious accounts to Ottawa and supplying
poor cattle, wild cattle and unwholesome
provisions to the Indians (McColl; Titley).
By suggesting that the inquiry might have
distracted him I am giving Provencher the
benefit of the doubt. The guilty verdict
indicates Provencher did not always work
on behalf of First Nations peoples.
His successor, James Graham, resumed
Ramsay’s case after Ramsay made his dec-
laration in 1879. On 22 September 1879,
Graham wrote to the Superintendent
General of Indian Affairs that the Indian
f JilMLI >
AUTO LTD.
Your Ford, Mercury,
Lincoln Dealer
Covering the Interlake
L 642-5137 ^
Agent Young had reported Ramsay’s
grievance to him. He states, “one Oloff
Olofson, an Icelander took possession of
and settled upon the lot, refusing to give it
up when requested to do so.” Graham does
not indicate when this request was made.17
He also states that Ramsay sought cash
compensation in the amount of $250 and
notes, “I am enclosing a copy of Ramsay’s
own declaration and also one from Mr
Joseph Monkman. I am informed there are
many others who are well acquainted with
the facts of the case.”
Only a portion of Van Koughnet’s let-
ter to Graham on 1 October is included in
the file; it refers to land “improperly taken
possession of by an Icelander” and
instructs Graham to refer to a letter of 30
May 1877, to Provencher, and to commu-
nicate with John Taylor “with a view to
that gentleman bringing the same under the
notice of the Dominion Land Officer....”
There the fragment ends. Also missing
from the file is the letter Graham wrote to
Taylor. It is difficult to determine to what
Taylor is reacting.
John Taylor’s response of 15 March
1880 to the instructions forwarded by
Graham begins by placing responsibility
for Ramsay’s compensation squarely in the
government’s hands. He continues in a
manner that contradicts and discredits
Ramsay’s version:
I have received your letter of 26th
February last with enclosed copy of a letter
from Mr. Provencher to myself dated 9th
June 1877, which letter never reached me,
and copies of declaration of John Ramsay
and Joseph Monkman, with reference to
improved land and timber for a house
claimed by J. Ramsay and said to have been
illegally appropriated by an Icelander and
which I am requested to have restored to J.
Ramsay.
In reply I have to state for the informa-
tion of the Superintendent General of
Indian Affairs that in July 1875 I was
instructed by the Lieutenant-Governor
Hon. A. Morris that the Indians had no
claim whatever to the lands at Sandy Bar
and White Mud River on the West Shore of
Lake Winnipeg and that they were about
signing a Treaty under the terms of which