Canada is widely regarded as a liberal, multicultural nation that prides itself on a history of peace and tolerance. Oftentimes set up in contrast to the United States, Canada’s history of colonialism has been popularly imagined as a gentler, necessary, inevitable, and even benevolent version of expansion and subjugation of Indigenous populations. In recent decades scholars in the social sciences and humanities have challenged the rhetoric of Canada as a consistently benevolent and peaceful nation. They have pointed to the discontinuity between Canada’s rosy image, drawn from foundational nation-building myths of benevolence, and the deeply rooted colonial narratives of necessity and inevitability that underpin those nation-building myths. This discontinuity manifests itself in far reaching patterns of social and economic disparity between Indigenous and settler populations over time across the nation. This reality is acutely seen in the Canadian West, as Canada’s historic frontier. This thesis re-problematises narratives of Canadian nation-building from a regional perspective. It is argued that positioning the West as the frontier peripheral to Canadian ‘civilisation’ is part of a broader settler colonial logic that sees the contemporary manifestation of disparity between Indigenous and settler populations as emanating from uniquely backward, peripheral places in Canada, rather than challenging the fundamental benevolence of the Canadian nation. Through a close reading of two trials pertaining to an instance of multiple perpetrator sexual assault that occurred in Saskatchewan in 2003, I demonstrate how the complex web of interlocking systems of domination that oppress and privilege in trials do not emanate from the backwardness of the place in which they occurred, but are rather indicative of broader societal processes and power relations indicative of settler colonialism. This thesis argues there is a conflation between western Canadian identity, and settler identity, owing to the foundational nation-building myths in which the West became Canadian. In moving forward, this thesis proposes an acknowledgment of the settler colonial nature of westward expansion and suggests practicing openness to considering different ways westward expansion might have been understood and experienced. Key to this process is learning to listen, learning to hear, learning to believe, and learning to see oneself implicated in the stories of those who experienced westward expansion differently from how it is popularly constructed in settler society. I begin here by proposing the complainant’s voice in the trial be heard, and be believed. Her voice and her silence provides insight into understanding the oppressive power of settler-colonialism.

In September 1905, Frederick W.G. Haultain, Premier of the North-West Territories, was not asked to form the first government of either Saskatchewan or Alberta. Many considered his treatment scandalous, especially since Haultain had distinguished himself during the Territorial period. As the Territorial governments first leader, Haultain worked tirelessly to provide the region with the services the residences of the other provinces took for granted. Despite these achievements, Haultain was not a good strategic thinker. After 1905, Haultain formed the Provincial Rights Party and served as the first leader of the opposition in Saskatchewan. Haultain retired from politics in 1912 after failing to secure a majority in three successive elections. Haultains reputation as an elder statesman developed after his death in 1941. Many scholars have blamed Liberal politicians for Haultains marginalization. In reality, by 1905 Haultain had undermined his own base of support by making poor political choices that alienated his supporters. In seeking provincehood for the North-West Territories, Haultain unwisely alienated his Cabinet colleagues whose support was essential to maintaining the Assemblys confidence in the government. He also failed to build the Provincial Rights Party into a serious alternative to the Liberals because he lacked some important political skills. Haultain failed to enlist any talented individuals to serve along side him in the Assembly. Most importantly, Haultain failed to realize that it was practically impossible to form a government without the support of rural Saskatchewan, and took many positions that alienated farmers. His failure to support reciprocity in 1911 ultimately destroyed his already damaged reputation.

In September 1905, Frederick W.G. Haultain, Premier of the North-West Territories, was not asked to form the first government of either Saskatchewan or Alberta. Many considered his treatment scandalous, especially since Haultain had distinguished himself during the Territorial period. As the Territorial governments first leader, Haultain worked tirelessly to provide the region with the services the residences of the other provinces took for granted. Despite these achievements, Haultain was not a good strategic thinker. After 1905, Haultain formed the Provincial Rights Party and served as the first leader of the opposition in Saskatchewan. Haultain retired from politics in 1912 after failing to secure a majority in three successive elections. Haultains reputation as an elder statesman developed after his death in 1941. Many scholars have blamed Liberal politicians for Haultains marginalization. In reality, by 1905 Haultain had undermined his own base of support by making poor political choices that alienated his supporters. In seeking provincehood for the North-West Territories, Haultain unwisely alienated his Cabinet colleagues whose support was essential to maintaining the Assemblys confidence in the government. He also failed to build the Provincial Rights Party into a serious alternative to the Liberals because he lacked some important political skills. Haultain failed to enlist any talented individuals to serve along side him in the Assembly. Most importantly, Haultain failed to realize that it was practically impossible to form a government without the support of rural Saskatchewan, and took many positions that alienated farmers. His failure to support reciprocity in 1911 ultimately destroyed his already damaged reputation.