Was My Songhees Great-Great-Grandmother Affected by the Indian Act?

 Was My Songhees Great-Great-Grandmother Affected by the Indian Act?

By Tina Winterlik (Zipolita)

Recently, while researching my family history, I came across a record for my second great-grandmother, Theresa Eliza (Songhees) Enos. According to the records, she was born around 1836 and was a Songhees woman from what is now British Columbia. In 1876, she married João (John) Ignacio d'Almada, a Portuguese immigrant, in Nanaimo.

At first glance, it seemed like a simple family history discovery. But the date immediately caught my attention.

1876 was the same year the Canadian government passed the Indian Act.

The Indian Act was not designed to preserve Indigenous cultures or protect Indigenous rights. It was created to control Indigenous peoples and encourage assimilation into Canadian society. One of the ways it did this was through rules that treated Indigenous women differently from Indigenous men.

For generations, if an Indigenous woman married a non-Indigenous man, she could lose her legal Indian status. Meanwhile, an Indigenous man who married a non-Indigenous woman kept his status, and in many cases his wife gained status through marriage.

This was not simply a bureaucratic change. Women lost legal recognition, community ties, rights, and sometimes even the ability to live in their own communities. Their children and grandchildren often became disconnected from their Indigenous identity in the eyes of the government.

As I looked at my ancestor's marriage record, I began to wonder:

Did Theresa lose legal status because she married a Portuguese man?

Were her children treated differently because of that marriage?

How many descendants were affected by laws designed to reduce the number of legally recognized Indigenous people?

These questions are especially relevant today because Indigenous women have spent decades fighting these discriminatory provisions.

One of the most prominent activists was Jeannette Corbiere Lavell, an Anishinaabe woman who challenged the Indian Act after losing her status when she married a non-Indigenous man in 1970. Although her initial court challenge was unsuccessful, her efforts helped build momentum for reforms.

In 1985, Bill C-31 restored status to many women who had lost it through marriage. However, it created another problem known as the "second-generation cut-off."

Under these rules, status could gradually disappear from future generations when descendants married non-status individuals. Critics argue that the second-generation cut-off functions as an "extinction clause" because it reduces the number of people recognized under the Indian Act over time.

Today, Indigenous leaders and activists continue to push for reforms to eliminate the remaining discriminatory effects of these laws.

Looking at my own family tree, I cannot help but wonder how many Indigenous families have similar stories buried in old records.

A marriage certificate from 1876 may seem like a small historical document. Yet behind it lies a much larger story about identity, belonging, family, and the long-term consequences of government policies.

My great-great-grandmother was Songhees. She married a Portuguese man. More than 150 years later, her descendants are still asking questions about how those laws affected our family.

Genealogy is often described as the study of names and dates. But sometimes it reveals something much deeper. Sometimes it reveals history itself.

Questions for Readers

1. Have you discovered Indigenous ancestors in your family tree?
2. Were any of your ancestors affected by the Indian Act or similar laws?
3. How should Canada address the remaining inequalities in status registration?
4. Should Indigenous identity be determined by communities rather than federal legislation?
5. What role can genealogy play in uncovering forgotten histories?

Quick Quiz

1. In what year was the Indian Act passed? a) 1867 b) 1876 c) 1901 d) 1985

2. What happened to many Indigenous women who married non-Indigenous men under the Indian Act? a) Nothing changed b) They gained additional rights c) They could lose their legal status d) They automatically became chiefs

3. What was Bill C-31 designed to address? a) Fishing rights b) Gender discrimination in status registration c) Taxation d) Immigration

4. What is the second-generation cut-off? a) A census rule b) A treaty provision c) A registration rule that can eliminate status over generations d) A land claim process

Answers: 1-b, 2-c, 3-b, 4-c

#Songhees #SongheesNation #IndigenousHistory #FirstNations #IndigenousWomen #IndianAct #BillC31 #SecondGenerationCutOff #Decolonization #FamilyHistory #Genealogy #Ancestry #CanadianHistory #BCHistory #VancouverIslandHistory