Political Personality of Louis Riel in Canada - Essay Example

? Louis Riel Introduction Louis Riel is regarded as the most1 controversial political personality in Canadian history. Riel was born in 1844, in Red River settlement situated in the Northwest Territories. He was born of a white father and an Indian mother, making him a half breed. During his younger days, he attended a priesthood school in Montreal, but he failed to graduate. At the priesthood college, he was able to get general college education, which would help him later in life. In addition, the priesthood college saw him adopt new characters, which made him a radical person. At one point, he attempted taking legal studies, but these attempts failed (Thomas 1887, p. 35-67).1 Despite the failed attempts to study religious studies and legal studies, Riel continued to give his opinion on issues of religion and political reforms. When giving his opinions, Riel appeared to be contended with whatever he said, and he never allowed anyone to oppose his opinions. His discussions were done using a strong command of languages. Riel was talented in catching the attention of his listeners through creating a sense of his importance. One notable thing about Riel was his understanding of dangers associated with engaging in physical wars despite his use of violent speeches. Majority of people living in the Red River knew Riel due to his popularity in engaging in matters of politics and religion (Thomas 1887, p. 35-67).1 Louis Riel and the Red River Rebellion In 1869, the Canadian government signed the Canadian Act of 1869, which introduced a provisional government for the colony in the Red River. This move by the Canadian government was not welcome by many settlers of the Red River. Riel was the fast to oppose the government’s move. Using his religious doctrines and political opinions, he challenged his fellow Half-breeds to stand strong and resist the Canadian authorities. The Half-breeds believed that the government’s move aimed at getting properties out of the Half-breeds living in Canada. The rebellion formed by Riel was done through mobilizing a few Half-breeds and instructing government surveyors to stop their work in the Red River (Lewis 2000, par. 1-25).2 After managing to stop the surveyors from carrying out their job, Riel and his group later seized Fort Garry, which held a company for military supplies and rifles. Later, a meeting for all Half-breeds living in Red River was convened, and people in attendance were convinced to adopt a proposed “bill of rights.” The proposed “bill of right” had fifteen provisions, which addressed the plight of the 2Half-breeds. When closing the convention, Riel proposed the formation of a provisional government, of which he would be the head. All this time, he was acting as the secretary general to a provisional government that believed to be in power after the inception of the rebellion. At one point, Riel warned people in Canadian authorities against intruding territories within the Red River (Lewis 2000, par. 1-25).2 Once the military operations within the seized Fort Garry came to an end, Riel became the master of the territory for close to six months. Settlers living in the Red River were in full support of Riel’s proposals, but his intentions of creating an independent government with him as the head left many settlers with a lot of questions. Many settlers thought that Riel had a strong will in fighting for the rights proposed in the “bill of rights” rather than calling for an independent republic. Furthermore, Riel showed a lot of cruelty when dealing with people who opposed his ideas. He went to the extent of ordering the shooting of such people. At one time, Riel ordered for the shooting of an Orangeman of which it was later discovered that the shooting was motivated by personal differences. The shooting of the Orangeman aroused fellow Orangemen living in Upper Canada. The heightened mood in Upper regions of Canada caused the English government to interfere in the issue (Thomas 1887, p. 35-67).3 The colonial government and the Canadian government came into an agreement to send military officers under the leadership of Colonel Wolsley to the Red River. The main mission was to fight the rebellion under the leadership of Riel and put Canadian authorities in control of the Red River. Before the sending of the military forces, discussions were underway to bring peace in the Red River. The proposed initiative was to make Red River a province of similar recognition just like other Canadian provinces. The Red River was to be known as Manitoba. However, this initiative failed to succeed when military officers under the leadership of Colonel Wolseley were sent to the territory. Their core agenda was to ensure that a new regime was fully introduced, and Riel’s rebellion was eradicated fully (Thomas 1887, p. 35-67).3 At the wake of Colonel Woseley and his military officers, Riel saw it wise to seek a temporary exile since there was no significant opposition over the introduction of a new government in Manitoba. After the taking over of Manitoba by the Canadian government, the Orangemen demanded Riels blood, citing his involvement in the killing of an Orangeman when he was temporarily controlled the territory. The increased demand for Riel’s execution prompted the government to offer Riel with $4000 in order to go out of the country. Later, in 1873, Riel got elected as a representative in the House of Commons from Ottawa, but was to be expelled later. In October of 1873, a warrant of arrest against Riel was issued by the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba. An amnesty was issued later “on conditions of five years banishment and forfeiture of political rights” (Lewis 2000, par. 1-25).4 Following the amnesty, Riel remained calm and opted to move around Canada and the United States. During his travels, he spent much of the money he had been given by the government. In three instances, Riel was confined due to problems related to insanity, but it appeared these confinements were due to his personal requests. Much later, Riel settled down as a school teacher in Montana and 4secured US citizenship (Lewis 2000, par. 1-25). Saskatchewan Rebellion A fresh turn of events emerged when the Metis inhabiting the Great Saskatchewan valley came to their realization that the government was no longer considering them as part of its people. They demanded to have similar recognition to that accorded to insurgents in the Red River. One of their aims was to have a legal claim for properties in soils on which they had settled. However, this community was faced by a challenge of its sparse distribution and political insignificance. As time passed by, the Metis got more impatient; their petitions produced no fruits, and they became determined to apply forceful measures in demanding their rights. At this point, they all agreed to seek the help of Louis Riel who had settled in Montana, United States. In 1884, a delegation of Half-breeds was sent to Montana to woe Riel to offer his assistance in the fight for the rights of Metis living in Saskatchewan Valley. From there on, the Saskatchewan Valley came into place (Flanagan 200, p. 150-175).5 The grievances, which were raised by the Metis, were both economic and social issues. Issues raised included dissatisfaction with land divisions, failure to given patents by the government, inability to acquire second homesteads like the white settlers, and mishandling of petitions raised by the Half-breeds. When Riel returned back to Manitoba to address the issues raised by the Half-breeds, he felt a hero because the Half-breeds had called him back to offer his assistance (Flanagan 200, p. 150-175).5 Riel followed the same procedure he had used in forming the first rebellion; issuing the “bill of rights” to the Half-breeds. Riel took much of his time during winter seasons to spread the message in his “bill of rights.” After obtaining a sizeable number of loyal followers, Riel created a provisional government. Realization of Riel’s operations by the government forced the government to appoint a land commission that would allocate scrip to their legal owners. This did not come along well with Riel because he saw the land commission as a treat to his plan of involving the government in peaceful negotiations on a cash basis. In 1885, Riel managed to gather a group of up to 200 rebels who launched several attacks on government institutions and opposing civilians (Flanagan 200, p. 150-175).5 The Queen versus Riel Following continued attacks by rebels, Riel was arrested and taken to Regina for prosecution. This time round, the government was fully committed in ensuring that Riel’s troublesome characters were brought to an end. Riel’s trial began on July 20, 1885 on charges related to treason. The method used to put Riel into trial was the use of an ancient system of indictment for high treason. Fourteen witnesses were called upon by the prosecution to testify on alleged disturbances that took place under Riel’s leadership. The prosecution presented numerous letters and proclamations from Riel. On the other hand, the defense presented exhibits of petitions filed by the Half-breeds and went unattended to by the government (Riel 1886, p.120-155).6 However, evidence presented by the defense was rejected and termed as irrelevant to the matter at hand, it requested for matters of opinion, and the opening remarks by the defense introduced the issue of insanity. After the rejection, the defense found it necessary to concentrate on the issue of insanity of its client. At this point, the defense brought in five witnesses who included two insanity experts. One of the insanity expert testified that indeed Riel was once confined due to megalomania, which is a form of insanity. His knowledge on Riel’s confinement was as a 6result of the expert’s involvement in treating Riel since he worked in the hospital, which had confined Riel. A thorough cross examination on the expert revealed that he was not certain of Riel’s said insanity (Riel 1886, p.120-155). The court gave Riel a chance to speak before and after the verdict was issued. In his speech, Riel denied that he was insane. He urged the court to set him free on the basis that his actions were as a result of the ill-treatment the Half-breeds were undergoing under the hands of the Dominion government. Riel’s case was judged following the rule in MacNaughten’s case (The Globe 1885, p.2). Riel was found guilty and was sentenced to death. Many people felt that the issue of Riel’s insanity was not dealt with properly because the government failed to bring an insanity expert to the issues raised by the defense insanity expert. The prosecution argued that Riel had a sober mind when issuing 7orders to his rebels, and even if he was insane, the condition was not serious to make him cause trouble with the Canadian authorities (The Globe 1885, p.2). The court’s ruling was appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench and the judicial committee, but all the appeals were dismissed. In addition, several petitions over the death penalty were filed from different parts of Canada and United States. All the petitions were based on Riel’s insanity and increased pressure from the petitioners forced the government to re-examine Riel to confirm for insanity. Three doctors were appointed to do the re-examination and issue a report of their findings. Two experts reported that Riel was sane while one expert reported that he was not of a sober mind; hence, he could not distinguish between right or wrong. However, the report that supported that Riel was insane was regarded as a false testimony, and it was restructured to appear that all the three experts were in agreement that Riel was indeed sane (The Globe 1885, p.8).8 Bibliography Flanagan, Thomas. Riel and the Rebellion: 1885 Reconsidered. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000. Lewis, Thomas. ‘Louis “David’ Riel”, Dictionary of Canadian Biography, 2000. http://www.biographi.ca/009004-119.01-e.php?&id_nbr=5796. Riel, Louis. The Queen vs. Louis Riel. England: Ottawa, 1886. The Globe. ‘The Riel Case.’ 18 November 1885. The Globe. ‘Riel’s Mental State.’ 18 November 1885. Thomas, Rambaut. ‘The Hudson Bay’s Half-breeds and Louis Riel’s Rebellion.’ Political Science Quarterly, 2.1(1887): 35-67. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2139321.pdf?acceptTC=true. Read More