Indigenous communities in Canada can trace doll making back many generations. The main differences between them are the materials used, including fur, wood, leather or dried materials. Colonial settlers brought dolls with them from china, cloth and leather. Canadian retailers such as Eaton’s sold imported and locally made dolls from 1900 to 1994, and other retailers continue to sell dolls today.The Canadian doll industry blossomed during the early 1910s and into the 1930s. It competed with toy companies in the United States, as well as others around the world. During this time, companies such as the Dominion Toy Company, Commercial Toy and the Bisco Doll Company closed for various competitive reasons. The longest-lasting domestic manufacturer was The Reliable Toy Company, which eventually ended production in the 1990s. New materials to make dolls, such as plastic and vinyl, appeared between the 1930s and 1950s. These are still used now to make dolls, for toys or for art. Visit the Flickr album now!
This article contains historical language and content that some may consider offensive, such as language used to refer to racial, ethnic and cultural groups. Please see our historical language advisory for more information.
By Jasmine Charette
I have always been interested in the concept of identity in the Canadian context. I enjoy learning about how people tie themselves to identities to connect with their community, or sever those same ties for the benefit of being seen another way. However, this was not always done in fairness or voluntarily. A striking example of this is the enfranchisement of First Nations peoples.
What is enfranchisement?
Enfranchisement meant losing legal identity as an “Indian” in the eyes of the government to become a full Canadian citizen, with all the rights and privileges attached. This process was enshrined in the Indian Act of 1876, which consolidated several pieces of colonial legislation in force at the time.
Enfranchisement could be sought by a First Nations person, as long as certain requirements were met, including age, gender and competency in either English or French. Someone outside the band, such as a priest or Indian agent, needed to determine the person’s fitness for becoming enfranchised. Some records show individuals, in their own words or the correspondence of an Indian agent, wanting to enfranchise for the benefits of land titles and band monies. The loss of legal status meant they were no longer subject to the Indian Act.
Many people were enfranchised against their will, some because of employment as lawyers, doctors or clergy. Others were enfranchised because of serving in the First or Second World War, attending university, or simply because an Indian agent thought they were “civilized” enough. Eventually, compulsory enfranchisement expanded to include any First Nations woman who married a non-Status individual (see below for 1985 changes to the Indian Act).
What does this mean for First Nations peoples?
The Indian Act was and is still seen in many ways as restrictive for First Nations individuals. The loss of identity brought repercussions such as becoming ineligible for social services, the loss of hunting and land rights, and for many, becoming both physically and intangibly distant from their homes and cultures. There are examples in the record of Councils of Chiefs refusing the Enfranchisement of individuals because they do not believe the Franchise Act applies to them, noting a fear that lands may be sold off and the community would be lost.
For some, enfranchisement was a direct trespass on previous agreements. A petition from the Mohawk members of the Five Confederated Nations (now Six Nations of the Grand River) notes that a treaty with the British stated the British would never try to make those Indigenous persons British subjects. Enfranchisement involved breaking that promise.
Was it only individuals?
One case exists of an entire band being enfranchised: Michel Band in northern Alberta. An Order-in-Council enfranchised all eligible members of the Michel Band as of March 31, 1958.
This enfranchisement order split the reserve lands among enfranchised individuals, dissolving the band entirely. Only three years later, compulsory enfranchisement was repealed, and some members of the historic Michel Band are still seeking to regain band status today.
Why is this relevant today?
When the Indian Act’s enfranchisement sections were repealed in 1985, they were replaced with what we now know as Indian Status. It became impossible to give up one’s Status, and many who were enfranchised regained Status through various provisions of the 1985 repeal, and subsequent amendments to the Indian Act. The gender-based discrimination in the Act was changed, and Status was returned to people who lost it by marrying a non-Status individual or because of the “double mother” rule of 1951 (Status was lost at age 21 if both the paternal grandmother and the mother had acquired Status through marriage).
Do you have a question about enfranchisement?
Reference Services is available to answer your queries and to help you navigate archival and published materials, including records on enfranchisement. Ask Us a Question; we are always glad to help!
- Enfranchisement: Indigenous Foundations, University of British Columbia
- Enfranchisement: The Canadian Encyclopedia
- An Act to amend and consolidate the laws respecting Indians, 1876
- Indian Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. I-5)
- Changes to the Indian Act: important changes to Canada’s Indian Act resulting from the passage of Bill C-31, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1985
- “Last ones standing: Michel Band seeks to regain status as a band under Indian Act,” CBC News, August 4, 2017
This blog is part of a series related to the Indigenous Documentary Heritage Initiatives. Learn how Library and Archives Canada (LAC) increases access to First Nations, Inuit and Métis Nation collections and supports communities in the preservation of Indigenous language recordings.
Jasmine Charette is a reference archivist in the Reference Services Division of the Public Services Branch at Library and Archives Canada.
By Valerie Casbourn
Library and Archives Canada (LAC) holds records related to the French colonial period in early Canada, and some of these records are available online. Included are records about the French cod fishery in the Atlantic region and the French colony of Plaisance in Newfoundland (1662–1713).
During the 17th century, the cod fishery in Newfoundland became increasingly important to the European fishing industry. France was one of several European countries competing for a share of this fishery, and in 1662, the French established a garrison town at Plaisance, on the western side of Newfoundland’s Avalon Peninsula. The French wanted to secure their merchant fishing fleet’s access to the fishery and their share of the European market for cod.
The site of Plaisance was chosen for its proximity to rich fishing grounds, its sheltered and relatively ice-free harbour, and its strategic location. Eventually, the colony of Plaisance grew to have a small permanent population, with military fortifications, and served as a base for the French Atlantic cod fishery.The French and English established colonies along the southeastern coast of Newfoundland, which encroached on the Indigenous territory of the Beothuk and the Mi’kmaq. The French had little recorded interaction with the Beothuk, who withdrew from the coast and its resources to avoid contact with the European fishermen and colonists. Before the arrival of the colonies the Mi’kmaq navigated the waters between Cape Breton and Newfoundland by canoe. They established friendly relations with the French, becoming important trading partners and military allies.
The colony of Plaisance encountered many difficulties, particularly during its first few decades. Its population was small and poorly supplied, and its early governors were ineffective. However, in the 1690s, the colony became stronger, and the French administration highly valued the Atlantic fishery.
The economy of Plaisance was largely based on the cod fishery. The colony’s small permanent population with its “habitants-pêcheurs” was bolstered each year with the arrival of a large seasonal workforce on the merchant fleet from French ports. All worked intensely to catch and preserve cod during the summer months. The residents of Plaisance relied on the merchant fleet to bring extra labourers, food and manufactured goods, and to ship their dried catch back to Europe to be sold.
During this period, there was ongoing conflict between the French and the English, as well as between the Mi’kmaq and the English. In the 1690s and early 1700s, both the French and the Mi’kmaq conducted raids, sometimes jointly, on English settlements on the Avalon Peninsula. The War of the Spanish Succession culminated in the Treaty of Utrecht, signed in 1713, in which France ceded its claim to Newfoundland to England. The English took over the settlement of Plaisance, changing its name to Placentia. Most of the French colonists moved south to the colony of Ile Royale (now Cape Breton). There they established themselves in the new French settlement of Louisbourg and continued their work in the French cod fishery. The French also retained the right to fish off the coasts of Newfoundland and to process their catch along stretches of the shoreline, known as the French Shore.
Records at Library and Archives Canada
LAC holds records related to the colony of Plaisance, among other topics, in the Fonds des Colonies (MG1). This fonds includes copies and transcriptions of selected records related to the French colonial period in early Canada. The records are in French, and the original documents are held at the Archives nationales d’outre-mer in Aix-en-Provence, France. The Fonds des Colonies consists of records including correspondence, reports, journals, instructions, records of fortifications and commerce, civil registers, and notary documents.
Many records in the Fonds des Colonies have been digitized and are available directly on the LAC website. Use LAC’s Collection Search to search for records about the colony of Plaisance. Try keyword searches, such as “MG1 Plaisance” or “MG1 pêche” (without quotation marks), and use the drop-down menu to search “Archives.” Including “MG1” will limit your search results to records in the Fonds des Colonies; you can search more broadly by not including it. Because the original records are in French, try using French keywords such as “pêche” (fishing), “Terre-Neuve” (Newfoundland), or “morue” (cod).
- Censuses. Finding Aid 300: Newfoundland and Labrador (1671 to 1945)
- The Jesuit Relations and the History of New France
- New France Archives
- Osher Map Library
Valerie Casbourn is an archivist based in Halifax with Regional Services at Library and Archives Canada.
Today, the verb form of “park” has a different meaning: a driver stops a vehicle and leaves it temporarily in a “parking lot” or on the side of the road.If you live in a large urban setting, parking is easier said than done, and consumes many commuters’ time! It sometimes seems that there are more vehicles than parking spots in a city. Visit the Flickr album now!
By Alison Harding-Hlady
We are often asked why our book conservators and librarians don’t wear gloves when handling rare or fragile books. This question is understandable given the iconic imagery in film and television of rare book curators wearing gleaming white gloves to hand over priceless artifacts. But the answer is very simple: it is better for the books!
It’s true that protective gloves are needed to handle some archival material, such as art or photographs. When it comes to rare books, however, the industry standard has always been to use clean, dry, bare hands. Guides published by the British Library and Library of Congress don’t just recommend using bare hands to handle collection material—they actually warn against using gloves. Wearing gloves while handling books can do more harm than good!
Have you ever tried to read a book or do anything requiring fine motor control while wearing a pair of gloves? It’s impossible! Gloves reduce the control necessary to manipulate a book or turn pages and make an accidental drop, page rip, or other damage much more likely. When a conservator performs a detailed and exacting repair, it is essential that they can feel the paper and work with as much dexterity as possible.
Gloves aren’t always clean and they can transfer lint or dirt to a book. They can also make your hands hot and the thin cotton gloves normally used are no barrier against sweat. Book bindings and pages are sturdy and meant to be handled. And rare books have been handled by many people in the centuries before becoming part of the library collection. With care and caution, rare books can be handled by many more people for centuries to come!
This is not to say, of course, that precautions should not be taken when handling rare books. Hands should be clean, dry, and free of lotion or other products. Proper bookstands or supports should always be used and the books should be handled as little as possible and always with great care. Pages should be turned slowly and the book should never be forced open past where the spine or binding comfortably opens. Should gloves ever be worn? Occasionally. If there is original artwork or photographs, if the binding has elements of metal or another unusual material, or if there is evidence of a contaminant like mould, then a pair of gloves might make sense. However, in general it is standard practice at LAC and in similar institutions around the world to not wear gloves when working with this precious, beautiful and fascinating part of our collection.
Alison Harding-Hlady is the senior cataloguing librarian responsible for rare books and special collections in the Published Heritage branch at Library and Archives Canada.