Taissumani: August 14, 1917 – The First Trial of Sinnisiak

In the summer of 1913 two missionaries, Father Jean-Baptiste Rouvière, an Oblate who had served four years among the Dogrib and Hareskin Indians at Fort Good Hope, and Father Guillaume LeRoux, a man described as highly educated, a gentleman and a philosopher, but given to frequent expressions of hot temper, left the Roman Catholic mission at Fort Norman on the Mackenzie River to go northeast to proselytize among the Inuit of the Arctic coast.

When the priests were never heard from again, and reports began to reach Fort Norman that Inuit had been seen wearing priests’ cassocks, it was feared that the two men had been murdered. Catholic authorities requested that the police investigate. In June of 1915 Inspector Charles Deering (“Denny”) LaNauze, set out to do so. He was accompanied by two constables and an Inuit interpreter, Ilavinik, who was made a special constable for the investigation.

In fact, the two priests had been murdered in November of 1913, only a few months after leaving Fort Norman. An elder of the Copper Inuit, Koeha, described the events for Denny LaNauze. Other Inuit also recounted their version of the events, but with considerable hesitation. They were frightened because John Hornby, another white man who had traveled through their land, had once told them that if they killed a white man, others would return and kill them all.

In the spring of 1916, LaNauze finally arrested the two suspects, Sinnisiak and Uluksuk, without resistance, at Coronation Gulf. Sinnisiak voluntarily gave a statement.

The two Inuit had followed the priests as they headed from Coronation Gulf back inland to their winter camp. Eventually they caught up with them and travelled with them for some distance. Ilagoak (the Inuit name for LeRoux, the volatile priest) was carrying a rifle and the Inuit thought he was angry with them and became convinced that he was going to kill them. When Uluksuk and Sinnisiak tried to talk with each other, LeRoux objected and put his hand over Sinnisiak’s mouth. The priest pushed Sinnisiak, and the man became frightened.

Both Inuit wanted to abandon the priests and turn back but LeRoux would not hear of it. After another altercation between the priest and Sinnisiak, involving more pushing and shoving by the priest, Sinnisiak acted. He stabbed LeRoux, but Uluksuk completed the killing. Kuleavik (Rouvière) ran, whether to get a gun or simply to flee, the Inuit were not certain, but he had handed LeRoux a rifle earlier, which caused the Inuit to mistrust him despite his previous gentle nature. Sinnisiak shot him from behind. Uluksuk stabbed him in the side and Sinnisiak finished the job with an axe. Then the Inuit each ate a piece of LeRoux’s liver. It was apparent that the Inuit had killed the priests because they feared for their own lives.

The trial began on Aug. 14, 1917 in Edmonton. But the Crown had a surprise in store for the defence. They tried only Sinnisiak, and only for the murder of Father Rouvière. It was a trial by a jury of six.

The Crown counsel, McCaul, made it clear in his lengthy introduction that this was no ordinary murder trial, but one intended to extend the reach of Canadian law to the remotest part of the country. But he spoiled his otherwise brilliant address when it became clear that his real purpose was to make the Arctic safe for white men.

Sinnisiak, uncomprehending and dressed in skin clothing, as befitted a show trial, fell asleep during McCaul’s lengthy address. Bizarrely, a tub of ice water had been placed near him, so that he could dip his feet in it whenever he needed to cool off.

The defence argued for acquittal on the grounds that the Inuk knew nothing of the white man’s law and should not be judged by it, and that he had acted in self-defence, thinking he was about to be killed by the priest. Chief Justice Harvey, in his charge to the jury, argued against acquittal. But the unexpected happened. The jury deliberated for little more than an hour, and came back with a verdict of not guilty. Sinnisiak, confused, blurted out, “It is not true. I did kill him.” The trial had lasted four days.

The Crown counsel and the judge were outraged. They felt the jury had been influenced by a sympathetic local press and by public sentiment. McCaul even suggested that some jurors held an anti-Catholic bias and were reluctant to find guilty the killer of a priest.

But the Crown had an ace to play. Sinnisiak had been charged and acquitted only of the murder of Father Rouvière. They now filed charges of murder against both Sinnisiak and Uluksuk jointly for the murder of LeRoux. The Crown also applied before the same judge for a change of venue, claiming there was prejudice in Edmonton against the prosecution. The judge agreed. The new trial would commence on Aug. 22 in Calgary.

(Continued next week.)

Taissumani: A Day in Arctic History recounts a specific event of historic interest, whose anniversary is in the coming week. Kenn Harper is a historian, writer and linguist who lives in Iqaluit. Feedback? Send your comments and questions to kennharper@hotmail.com.