"...there not only would be no harm, but ultimate benefit - to the settling community by gratifying them, in keeping that portion out of market for the present, and allowing them the use of it - which of course can be done without either resurrendering it to them, or in any way altering the terms of the treaty."
The Copway Road amendment became official on September 27, 1855 and the land described in the amendment became part of the Saugeen Reserve. The 9 1/2 mile measurement was taken from the new location of the NW position of the western boundary, reestablishing Lot 25/26 (Main Street) the NE corner of the reserve. All the arguments about the survey being done wrong and the eastern boundary positioned wrong and the October, 1855 draft map being the original map is deception. The Saugeen Reserve boundary is laid out exactly as described by Treaty 72 by way of the Copway Road amendment.
Perhaps some of you have difficulty visualizing what the text of the treaty means and how it is illustrated on a map. The same way I tested the terms of the treaty with the Copway Road Amendment, I can also test whether INAC/Saugeen Band's claim meets all terms of the treaty without altering them "in any way." This is the true test as to whether their claim can be proven, not the existence of notations on copies of working draft maps. For this experiment, I used the October 12th, 1855 draft map. The map INAC/Saugeen Band rely on as their main evidence.
The terms of the treaty are being followed to what the amendment has asked in both panel number one and panel number two. It is the next instruction where things begin to go off course for the Saugeen claim.
After the amendment, the aforesaid western boundary no longer runs entirely in a due north direction, but soon changes to a north to west direction. This changes the NW position of the western boundary and where the 9 1/2 mile measurement begins. The location has changed, the treaty instruction has not. For the INAC/Saugeen Band claim to be true, the treaty instruction measurement from the NW position of the amended western boundary to midpoint Lot 31 (NE < Ind. Res. notation) would need to be "about 11 miles." This alters the terms of the treaty from "about 9 1/2 miles" to "about 11 miles" as can be seen in panel three. Measuring 9 1/2 miles from the amended NW position of the western boundary, ends at Lot 25/26 (Main Street); the same location the Saugeen Reserve NE corner ends now.
INAC/Saugeen Band claim that the Saugeen Reserve includes the beach from Lot 25/26 (Main Street) to midpoint Lot 31. In order for this to be true, the eastern boundary would have to take a north to east direction from the True north line, meaning it would no longer be parallel to the western boundary. This would also be an alteration to the terms of the treaty.
Alternately, if the eastern boundary were to remain on the True north line from Lot 25/26 (Main Street) to midpoint Lot 31 it would be in the water of Lake Huron. This, also, would be an alteration to the terms of the treaty from "all that block of land" to include water as a boundary of the block of land that is the Saugeen Reserve.
The following illustration shows the deviation from the True north line the eastern boundary would have to take to allow land to exist between Lot 25/26 (Main Street) and midpoint Lot 31.
The line in red is the true representation of the eastern boundary that exists on the draft map and from lot 25/26 (Main Street) to midpoint Lot 31 the eastern boundary is in the water of Lake Huron. To allow for land to exist between Lot 25/26 (Main Street) and midpoint Lot 31, it is obvious the True North line deviates in a north to east direction. I show the deviation below without darkening the eastern boundary extension line that is in the water.
INAC/Saugeen Band will not accept that the NE < Ind. Res. notation has no bearing on where the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve is located. The eastern boundary running parallel to the western boundary is what initially determined the NE corner of the Saugeen Reserve at Lot 25/26 (Main Street). The measurement from the amended NW position of the western boundary along the shoreline to Lot 25/26 (Main Street) equaling 9 1/2 miles is what allowed compliance with all of the treaty instructions. Once the NW position of the western boundary was shifted to Copway Road, the NE < Ind. Res. notation no longer had any relevance. Absolutely none. It is simply a notation on a draft map, nothing more; a reference notation conceived from the original treaty instruction found to be mathematically impossible. Not a final boundary position.
Testing whether a boundary line alters the terms of the treaty is the ultimate proof. The INAC/Saugeen claim fails the test by altering treaty terms in two instances:
1.) Violating the 9 1/2 mile shoreline measurement stated in the treaty to 11 miles.
2.) Deviation of the True north line of the eastern boundary is in violation of the treaty term which describes the eastern boundary running parallel to the western boundary.
The 1856 final map submitted to and accepted by Indian Affairs passes the test. It does not violate the treaty instructions in any way and represents the outline of the Saugeen Reserve the way we know it today.
