top of page

Mica Bay Pt. 5: Métis Displacement

Writer's picture: Ontario Métis FactsOntario Métis Facts

Following their exclusion from the 1850 Robinson-Huron Treaty and despite Treaty Commissioner Robinson’s recognition that the Métis were in “free and full possession” of their lands, the Sault Ste. Marie Métis Community’s families found themselves without government-recognized title and were forced to relocate from their River Lot homes.



Over the next decade, town sites at Sault Ste. Marie were opened to Ontario settlers. As a result, by 1861, Sault Ste. Marie was swamped by people of British origin and Protestant religions—contrasting significantly with Alexander Vidal’s 1846 pre-treaty survey, which enumerated a population almost entirely of Roman Catholic Métis.


Métis displacement from their River Lots ran deep, disrupting their way of life at Sault Ste. Marie.


The 1861 census showed that only Stephen Jollineau, Louis Miraux (Miron), and Xavier Biron’s families had retained their Métis River Lots—each of which had been significantly reduced in size.


This reduction in the remaining River Lots’ size meant that Métis lands no longer ran from the riverfront to the “hill,” reducing customary pastureland, hay fields for livestock, and other communal lands.


Most of the once-vibrant Sault Ste. Marie Métis River Lots community was ultimately forced to relocate to surrounding settlements. 


As a result of this history, in its landmark unanimous decision in R. v. Powley, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that:


“A more realistic interpretation of Sault Ste Marie for the purposes of considering the Métis identity and existence should encompass the surrounding environs of the town site proper… it would seem more reasonable to find the existence of the Métis on the fringes of the geographical boundaries of Sault Ste Marie.”


Despite this deep and continued displacement, the Sault Ste. Marie Métis Community has never lost its deep sense of community or way of life and continues to address the legacy of the Crown’s failure to protect its River Lot homes.


See Our Sources!

96 views

Related Posts

bottom of page