The Indian Census Rolls, 1885-1940 ( M595, 692 rolls) contains census rolls that were usually submitted each year by agents or superintendents in charge of Indian reservations, to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, as required by an act of July 4, 1884 (23 Stat. 98). The data on the rolls vary, but usually given are the English and/or Indian name of the person, roll number, age or date of birth, sex, and relationship to head of family.  Only persons who maintained a formal affiliation with a tribe under federal supervision are listed on these census rolls.

Jean Baptiste Charette (1804-1894) was born on the prairies near Pembina, North Dakota, to Jean Baptiste Charette Sr., a French Canadian voyageur from Quebec, and Charlotte Sansregret, an Indigenous woman (of Pembina Band Ojibwe ancestry) who was born in Manitoba.   

He was first enumerated in the census in 1838 at Red River Settlement. Shortly thereafter he married Angelique Petit, daughter of Thomas Petit Thomas and Marguerite Daunais, circa 1839 at Red River Settlement. They were counted on the 1840 Census of the Settlement. By 1850, Jean Baptiste and Angelique were living in the vicinity of Pembina. They were counted on the 1850 census for Pembina County, Minnesota Territory.

Jean Baptiste had a rather large hunting range, going as far west as Wood Mountain and Cypress Hills, Saskatchewan, where he spent several years as a hivernant (over-winterer), living as a hunter and trapper with his growing family and the hunting brigades of these areas who were mostly Pembina Ojibwe/Metis who also had ties to the Turtle Mountains and St. Joseph (Walhalla) and would occasionally return there for birth and baptisms (when possible).

During the Lake Superior Ojibwe Treaty of 1854 at Lake Superior, Jean Baptiste was issued scrip as a Pembina Band member.  J.B. Bottineau testified that: “I think he is the same as John Bte. Charet (sic), who has and is now residing at Saint Joseph, Pembina County, Dakota; a mixed-blood of Pembina band, I think, and over 50 years of age.”  During the 1863 Treaty at the Old Crossing between the Red Lake and Pembina Bands, Jean Baptiste was again issued scrip as a Pembina Band member, issued as Scrip Number 49, February 12, 1873, for 160 acres.

Following the death of his wife Angelique, he married Josephte Monet dit Belhumeur, daughter of Michel Monet dit Belhumeur and Josephte Sauteuse, on 13 Jan 1868 at St.Joseph, North Dakota. Josephte was reputed to be the granddaughter of the first Chief Little Shell, father of the signer of the 1863 Treaty. He later received Treaty annuities in 1871 at Turtle Mountain, under the Little Shell III band members list.
​
He applied for Canadian scrip as a Metis under the North West Half-Breed Commission. In his testimony, he stated his claim as follows: “I lived with my parents at Qu’Appelle River, Fort Ellice, Red River, and at Six Hills for 30 years. I then was married and became a plains buffalo hunter, living on the plains. On the 15th of July, 1870, I was living at Wood Mountain and continued as a resident of the territories until some 3 or 4 years ago where I was living on Plum River about three miles across the line.”

During the 1880 census, he and Josephte were enumerated as living at Pembina, and by 1886 they were living at Turtle Mountain Reservation and were counted on Indian Census rolls for the Band, including the 1892 McCumber half-breed rolls. 

He died on 12 Oct 1894 at Belcourt, North Dakota, and is buried in the old cemetery behind St. Ann’s Catholic Church.

His children included the following individuals:

Alexandre Charette (1841–1930)
Jean Baptiste Charette (1842–1892)
Marguerite Charette (1845–1880)
Marie Anne Charette (1848–1878)
Joseph Charette (1850–????)
William Charette (1852–????)
Adelaide Charette (1852–1932)
Mathias “John” Charette (1855–1937)
Francois Xavier Charette (1857–1958)
Xavier Charette (1859–1860)
Moise Charette (1862–1930)
Eliza Charette (1863–1937)

His descendants today can be found among the Turtle Mountain Band of Ojibwe, Little Shell Band of Chippewa, and in Metis communities in Manitoba, North Dakota, and Montana. 

Notes: Drawing of J.B. Charette comes from Cinq mois chez les Français d'Amérique: voyage au Canada et à la rivière Rouge (Five months among French Americans: trip to Canada and to the Northern Red River) by Henri Félix de Lamothe. Hachette et al. , 1880 - Canada.

Genealogical information by Gail Morin (https://www.amazon.com/Gail-Morin/e/B001K80U1U)

Mathias Charette, also known as John Charette, was born about 1855 in the Cypress Hills, Saskatchewan, to Jean-Baptiste Charette and Angelique Petit-Thomas. His mother passed away and his father later married Josephte Monette, granddaughter of the first Chief Little Shell.

His siblings were brothers: Alexandre Charette, Jean Baptiste Charette, Joseph Charette, William Charette, Francois Xavier Charette, Moise Charette, and Pierre Charette. His sisters were: Marquerite (Charette) Giroux, Marie Anne (Charette) Dupre, Adelaide (Charette) Frederick, and Eliza (Charette) Belgarde.

Mathias’ first wife was Virginie Ritchot, daughter of Joseph Ritchot and Marguerite Martel. Together they had two sons: Louis Victor Charette and Joseph Alfred Charette, who later moved to Montana and started families.

Mathias received scrip under the Manitoba half-breed scrip authority. On his application he stated, “I lived with my parents always on the plains and in red river settlement, and with them at Wood Mountain and Cypress Hills where they lived on the 15th of July, 1870. I now live at St. Joe (Walhalla) the past 6 years. I am told my father had lived at St. Joe before July 15th, 1870…I cannot say when myself.” He listed his occupation as “Hunter”.

He also received 160 acres of land under the provisions of Article 8 of the 1863 Old Crossing Treaty, which allowed half-breed members of the Pembina and Red Lake bands to select land in the Red River Valley as homesteads, but it is not certain what happened to his land there.

After the passing of Virginie, Mathias married Marie Ouellette in Walhalla. He spent the remainder of his life in Walhalla, Olga, Leroy, and at the Turtle Mountain Reservation.
​
Mathias died on November 2, 1937, in Belcourt, North Dakota.

 Marguerite Lafournaise was born on March 1, 1860 at Pembina (Dakota Territory). She was baptized on March 2, 1860 at Assumption Church, daughter of Joseph Lafournaise and Suzanne Vallee. Her Godfather was her uncle Joseph Vallee and her Godmother was Marguerite Ritchot. 

She married Onesime Octave Azure, son of Pierre Azure and Marie Marthe Breland, on January 15, 1882 at St. Claude Mission, in St. John, North Dakota. She and Onesime had one son, Joseph Arthur Azure.
 
When Onesime passed away, Marguerite married Magloire McLeod on April 14, 1888, at St. Claude Mission. Magloire was the son of Antoine McLeod and Marianne Versailles. Marguerite and Magloire had seven children: Elize, Veronica, Joseph, Virginia, St.Vidal, Marie, and Charles.
 
She was enumerated in numerous Indian census for the Turtle Mountain Reservation, Belcourt, North Dakota, and received Indian allotment land under the 1904 revised McCumber Agreement.  Her Indian Name is listed as Waketakamakoquay (Swampy Woman).
 
Her parents Joseph Lafournaise and Suzanne Vallee were both involved in the 1885 Metis resistance before moving to the Turtle Mountain Reservation after the defeat at Batoche.
 
Marguerite died on July 15, 1952 at Belcourt, Rolette County, North Dakota, at age 92. She is buried in the St. Michael Cemetery south of Rolla, North Dakota.

In 1922, Joseph Clement Martell, a thirteen year old boy from Turtle Mountain, was ordered to cut bread at the Fort Totten Boarding school with a band driven cutting machine that was old and lacked safety measures that forced the user to push the bread in by hand. In feeding bread into the machine two of his fingers were caught by the knife and were amputated.  A flurry of correspondence and a lawsuit followed.

It is undeniable that contact with whites seriously undermined the family social standards of most Indigenous communities who had the misfortune of having civilization foisted upon them. Problems such as disease, degradation of women, loss of economics, and other factors erupted quite rapidly when colonizers entered an area.  But just how quickly could a society be destroyed by colonialism?
​
Writing about a community of Paiute living in Owens Valley, California, in 1859, Captain John Davidson was quite impressed by the serenity of their community, the chastity among the Indians, and the lack of venereal and other diseases amongst the people. However, just 3 and 4 years later when the US Army Fort Independence was built to "protect" the Paiute, the economy and morality of the tribe was almost completely disrupted by the intrusion of the white man and the introduction of their strange and immoral “civilization”.[1]

White soldiers began taking advantage of the Indian women, and the Indian women were forced to offer themselves to the whites for food and protection when their own tribesmen were unable to provide for and defend them. By 1862, rampant prostitution and alcohol had severely damaged the social and familial structure and the local economy collapsed. Acts of rape and forced cohabitation, and resulting half-breed children further decimated the tribe’s community. A working, traditional culture was destroyed in less than a decade.[2]

Shockingly, Fort Independence is a California Historic Landmark for its role in ending Indian "hostilities" in the region, allowing European settlers to expand and take the land from the Paiutes.

REFERENCES
[1] Wilke, P.J. and H.W. Lawton (eds.) (1976). The Expedition of Captain J.W. Davidson from Fort Tejon to the Owens Valley in 1859. Ballena Press, Socorro.
[2] Cook, S.F. (1943). The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization. Ibero-Americana 21-24.

Winter has always been a difficult time of the year for indigenous people. Survival was contingent on many things, including having the necessary shelter, food, and the ability to navigate the landscape without expending too much energy in the process.
​
Starting in the early fall, care would be taken to start gathering supplies such as wild rice, dried corn, pemmican, and smoked fish to store for the winter.  Once a good stock was gathered, the group would start to move to the place where they would construct their winter camp – usually in a location known to have plenty of game, near a river or lake surrounded by adequate tree cover.  Once there, female family members would work together to construct the winter wigwam. They cut saplings from the surrounding woods to form the lodge frame, covered them with rush mats and rolled sheets of birch bark sewn together. For additional warmth, a second row of rush mats was frequently placed around the entire lodge overlapping the first row. By working in a very organized manner, the women could construct a comfortable and inviting winter dwelling in a matter of a few hours. 

The winter habitation represented the focus of life for the people. Winter evenings were social and pleasant, with a warm fire and storytelling. The young men would spend the evenings singing songs and playing their drums.  The old women would tell wonderful stories, even acting them out for dramatic effect.  At night, the family slept with their feet toward the fire, removing their moccasins and loosening their other clothing. If the weather was very cold, an old man or woman usually stayed awake throughout the night, smoking their pipe and tending the fire.
​
The core of most winter groups belonged to the same clan, or were intermarried families. Winter settlements composed of several households could numbering about 25 to 30 people, and their camps would usually be located within 100 miles of a nearby trading post. The territory used by each winter hunting group was fairly extensive, but the abundance of food and furs would set limits on the size of the hunting group as well as the extent of the territory exploited. A smaller territory might not be capable of supporting large winter groups. 

The means of travel during winter months was by snowshoe. Without these, it was impossible to travel any distance when snow was deep.  When possible, a dog team and toboggan or sled could be used to travel around. Basic equipment while out winter hunting included a packsack with food and matches, an axe, a rifle, and traps and snares. Even though men would trap together, they always set their traps separately, and each man claims only those animals caught with his own traps.  Traps were usually checked every three to five days.  It was customary to set about 20 to 30 traps per person. Even the women of the winter camp trapped when they could. Although they didn’t leave the immediate area surrounding the village, they would still set a few snares of their own and check them every few days – hoping for a rabbit or two. 
​
Once spring came, it was time to break camp and head out to the maple groves and fishing camps, and the cycle of preparing for the next winter would began again.

Have you ever tried mapping your Metis family?  With a little hard work, research, and some mapping skills, you can trace the geographic range of your family and determine many things about your family, including the various communities they lived in, the places where they hunted and traveled, and perhaps even what tribal nations and bands they were affiliated with.

When examining my ancestors, I was able to trace them to several key places associated with the historic Metis Nation, including places such as:

• Fort Edmonton, Alberta
• Qu'Appelle, Saskatchewan
• Sweet Grass Hills, Montana
• Medicine Lake, Montana
• Batoche, Saskatchewan
• Cypress Hills, Saskatchean
• Wood Mountain, Saskatchewan
• Red River Settlement, Manitoba
• Pembina Area, North Dakota
• Walhalla, North Dakota
• Belcourt, North Dakota (Turtle Mountain Reservation)

See the map below (click for a larger view)

Not surprisingly, the area where my family derives from is entirely within what has been determined to be the official Metis Nation Homeland (see below map)

Have you tried mapping your family yet?

The Anishinaabe used cradleboards as part of the basic care for their infants. In constructing them, a general pattern was followed:
​
A board of cedar wood (or basswood) was cut to about 28 inches or so, a bit wider at the top than at the foot. About 5½ inches from the head end, a bow-shaped frame was inserted, the ends of which protruded beyond the reverse side of the board. The frame was held in position by a small peg of wood which had been inserted through it at right angles to the protruding end and parallel to the board. If desired, the frame was double bent with a dip at the center, creating a U-shape, but this was not always the case.

Historically, the cradle bag for the baby was made out of soft, tanned deer hides on the board. Under this, from baby's waistline up, rabbit (or other) skins were placed. From waistline down, a thick layer of dried swamp moss or rabbit skins was spread. The baby was placed on this. The ends of the deer hide would be tucked tightly around the baby. After this, strips of tanned buckskin were laced over the middle of the baby, beginning at the foot end. During more modern times the leather and hides were replaced by black velvet that could be intricately beaded upon.
​
It is said that a cradleboard will train a baby's back to be straight. They also help the mother to easily carry the baby on her back when traveling, and helped to keep the baby safe. A cradleboard can set flat on the ground or can be propped up against a tree or wall. If the board somehow falls, the frame keeps the baby from being injured. The cradleboard can also be hung up to keep the baby safe from dangers on the ground.

If a baby was premature and too small to be tied to the cradleboard itself, they might be placed in a birch bark container, and then tied to the board. This would last until the baby was finally big enough to be tied to the board itself.
​
Most babies who are cradle boarded like the firm feeling of being swaddled, and will cry to be put into it. 

One of the biggest lies that settler society loves to tell and repeat as often as they can – especially when the subject of Indigenous land rights or resources comes into question – is that historically, the Indigenous people did not believe in land ownership, or simply that “nobody owned the land”.  Nothing could be further from the truth and such thinking has been used to steal Indigenous lands and resources for hundreds of years, and is still a prevailing belief among non-Indigenous people. It is a recurrent theme in movies, school history books, and even in internet memes circulated in Pan-Indian Facebook groups.
​
So what did “ownership” mean from the standpoint of Indigenous culture? First of all, it cannot and should not ever be equated with the European idea of individual ownership with documents, fees, taxes, or metes and bounds, with the right to lease or sell property. Sure, that is the system that was finally forced upon Indigenous people, but traditionally ownership was vested in a particular group (tribe, band, clan, or family) who owned inherent rights to live, use, and harvest certain places, rivers, lakes, and resources through traditional use and ‘tenure’. Land tenure was understood by others and was perpetual. It could be shared and it could be increased or decreased according to changes in climate, shifts in resources, and other variables. Such tenure could only cease when land and harvest rights were abandoned. 

Things like beaver dams could be ‘owned’; sugar camps and maple groves were recognized as belonging to certain families or clans - and no other Indian family would think of making sugar at a place where it infringed on another family’s rights. Cranberry patches, wild rice areas, and hunting territories were regulated by intra-tribal understandings. The same understanding applied to everything on the land, and cumulatively this resulted in large territories that were recognized by the first treaties with the Europeans used to steal these places out from under the original Indigenous owners when they misinterpreted the ceding of certain land uses from the Indigenous people as a cession of complete ownership in totality.
​
This is why the theft of the land and the forced ideas of European land ownership is such an insult and infringement of law in the eyes of Indigenous people.