Red River Colony
|Red River Colony|
Selkirk's land grant
|Capital||Upper Fort Garry|
|July 15 1870|
The Red River Colony (or Selkirk Settlement) was a colonization project set up in 1811 by Thomas Douglas, 5th Earl of Selkirk, on 300,000 square kilometres (120,000 sq mi) of land. This land was granted to him by the Hudson's Bay Company, which is referred to as the Selkirk Concession, which included the portions of Rupert's Land, or the watershed of Hudson Bay, bounded on the north by the line of 52° N latitude roughly from the Assiniboine River east to Lake Winnipegosis. It then formed a line of 52° 30′ N latitude from Lake Winnipegosis to Lake Winnipeg, and by the Winnipeg River, Lake of the Woods and Rainy River.
On the west of the Selkirk Concession, it is roughly formed by the current boundary between Saskatchewan and Manitoba. These covered portions consist of present-day southern Manitoba, northern Minnesota, and eastern North Dakota, in addition to small parts of eastern Saskatchewan, northwestern Ontario, and northeastern South Dakota.  
Growing up in Scotland in the wake of the Jacobite rising of 1745, Lord Selkirk was constantly troubled by the plight of his Scottish kin.  Selkirk was influenced by humanitarian luminaries such as William Wilberforce and, following the forced displacement of Scottish farmers that took place during the Highland Clearances, decided that emigration was the only viable option to improve the livelihood of the Scottish people.  Upon inheriting his father's title in 1799, Selkirk focused the majority of his time and resources on establishing a Scottish colony in North America. 
Selkirk became interested in the Red River region after reading Alexander MacKenzie's Voyages in 1801; however, Selkirk was prevented from settling the region in 1802 when the Hudson's Bay Company raised concerns that the proposed colony would interfere with the running of the company.  During the first decade of the nineteenth century Selkirk established two unsuccessful agricultural colonies in British North America but continued to pursue the settlement of the Red River region. 
By 1807, Selkirk acknowledged that an alliance with either the Hudson's Bay or North West Company, the dominant fur trading companies at the time, was essential to the establishment of a colony at Red River.  By 1811, the Hudson's Bay Company had reconsidered Selkirk's proposal and granted Selkirk 300,000 km2 (116,000 sq mi), an area five times the size of Scotland, to establish an agricultural settlement in the region of Red River. Supplies of "produce, such as flour, beef, pork and butter..." would be affordable to manufacture in this colony, and would reduce the costly shipments from Britain. 
The grant was also pending the annual provision of 200 men to the company and Selkirk's assurance that the colony would remain out of the fur trade.  Selkirk, who once mocked the fur trade for rarely grossing more than £200,000 and only having 3 ships employed in its service, gladly agreed to the terms.:  Selkirk referred to this new territory as the District of Assiniboia.  At the time of the concession, Red River was the only Hudson Bay Colony that had been established within the company's 610,000-hectare (1.5-million-acre) territory. 
There is continuing debate as to whether Selkirk forced the concession of Assiniboia through a controlling interest of Hudson's Bay stock.  The argument against Selkirk claims that he received the concession by controlling the shares in the company.  Historians seeking to defend this claim have argued that although Selkirk did buy a considerable number of Hudson's Bay shares between 1811 and 1812, Selkirk received his initial grant in 1811. 
The early settlement of the Red River region was marked by a long series of crises and ecological disasters and within the first decade of settling the region it had already suffered renewed warfare, epidemics, prairie fires and a flood.  Perhaps the most significant ecological disaster was the rapid depletion of the bison population. A vital food source, bison numbers had been dwindling since the 1760s due to overhunting by colonial inhabitants of the prairies. 
In July 1811, Miles Macdonell sailed from Yarmouth, England to the Hudson's Bay post at York Factory with 36 primarily Irish and Scottish settlers.  Due to persuasive efforts of the North West Company, only 18 settlers actually arrived at Red River in August 1812.  As the planting season had ended before the settlers could complete the construction of Fort Douglas, they were forced to hunt bison for food and were completely unprepared for the arrival of 120 additional settlers in October.  More settlers were scheduled to arrive in 1813, but due to a fever outbreak on their ship, they did not arrive until June 21, 1814.  Dogged by poor harvests and a growing population, Macdonell, now governor of Red River, issued the Pemmican Proclamation in January 1814 to prevent the export of pemmican from the colony.  In doing so, Macdonell undermined the security of Red River and plunged the colony into a conflict with the North West Company that would not end until 1821.
The Pemmican War that was initiated by Macdonell's proclamation was only the tail end of a much larger conflict between the Hudson's Bay Company and its fur trade rivals, both English and French, in Montreal.  The conflict dates back to King Charles II's generous grant of Rupert's Land to members of the English nobility in 1670.  Cause for conflict arose from the inability of either the Montreal traders or the Hudson's Bay Company to gain a monopoly over the North American fur trade.  Between 1800 and 1821, the conflict between Hudson's Bay and Montreal, at that point represented by the predominantly Scottish North West Company, intensified.  The conflict reached its peak in 1801 and witnessed both companies expending more resources on out-competing each other than were expended on the exploration of new fur grounds.  Between 1803–1804, Hudson's Bay morale had plummeted in the face of fierce Northwest competition and forced the two companies into negotiations but neither side could come to terms.  Negotiations broke down again in 1805 and despite employing more aggressive agents and the provision of incentive programs, the Hudson's Bay Company was ready to abandon the fur trade in 1809.  The Nor'Westers ability to make region-wide plans based on first-hand knowledge in addition to their ability to react quickly to changing circumstances provided the North West Company with a decisive advantage prior to 1810.  After 1810, the combination of new management within the Hudson's Bay Company and the approval of a company-sponsored colony at Red River put the North West Company on the defensive.  The establishment of a Hudson's Bay colony in the Red River region denied the Nor'Westers access to vital supplies and restricted the company's ability to expand westwards.  Additionally, the establishment of an agricultural colony made the Hudson's Bay company nondependent on the profitable fur trade, a factor that the Nor'Westers simply could not compete with.  Moreover, by establishing an agricultural colony, the Hudson's Bay Company gained a decisive advantage over the North West Company by virtue of a viable fallback economy as well as a readily available food source during economic slumps.  Much of this new-found confidence hinged on the Selkirk's success at Red River and resulted in the colony becoming the central focus of seven years of inter-company warfare. 
Red River first came under attack from the North West Company in the summer of 1815.  Convinced that Macdonell's proclamation was a deliberate attempt to block Northwest trade, the company destroyed Fort Douglas and burned down all of the surrounding buildings.   The fort was later rebuilt but the engagement resulted in the capture of approximately 150 settlers including Macdonell.  He was replaced by Robert Semple who took over as governor the following winter and reinforced the colony's 45 survivors with 84 additional settlers. In 1815, the North West Company once again entered into negotiations with the Hudson's Bay Company under the threat of invasion of Northwest territory.  Negotiations were headed by Selkirk himself and he promptly threw out all of the Nor'Wester proposals.  The following year Semple and twenty other settlers were killed in the Battle of Seven Oaks and the settlement was abandoned once again.  The imminent arrival of Selkirk in 1817, who had been en route to the colony prior to the incident at Seven Oaks, prompted the settlers to return to the colony shortly after.  Travelling with a force of approximately 100 soldiers from the recently disbanded Swiss and German Regiment de Meuron, Selkirk captured Fort William, the North West Company headquarters, and captured several key agents including William McGillivray, Kenneth McKenzie and John McLoughlin.   Although the arrival and subsequent settlement of Selkirk's private army finally broke the back of the North West Company, Selkirk spent much of his remaining years, and the majority of his fortune, defending his actions at Fort William.   When Selkirk arrived at Red River in 1817, the stability of the colony dramatically improved, especially after the removal of all Indigenous claims to the land. Selkirk achieved this by signing a treaty between the Red River colonists and the local Cree, Assiniboine and Ojibwa.  Between 1817 and 1820, Selkirk committed all of his available resources to the betterment of his colonial venture and ironically it was Selkirk's death in the spring of 1820 that ultimately ended Northwest aggression against his beloved colony. 
The Hudson's Bay Company and its rivals, the North West Company were forced to merge in 1821 by the British government. With the end of the fur trade inspired conflicts on the plains, the Red River settlement was able to grow. The agricultural products, primarily wheat, began to rise in yearly yields. Flour production rose from over 9,100 kilograms (20,000 lb) annually from 1823 to 1829 to over 14,000 kg (30,000 lb) in the early 1830s.  The supply of flour reached over 23,000 kg (50,000 lb) by the mid-1830s, rapidly deflating the price the HBC paid the farmers for the product. Numbering over 1,000 by 1827, the farmers began to complain about the deflating rates they received and lack of markets for their goods. 
In 1841, James Sinclair guided 200 settlers from the Red River Colony west in an attempt to retain the Columbia District for Britain. The party crossed the Rockies into the Columbia Valley, near present-day Radium Hot Springs, British Columbia; then travelled south. Despite such efforts, Britain eventually ceded all claim to land south of the 49th parallel of latitude west of the Rockies to the United States as a resolution to the Oregon boundary dispute.
The position of many women in the Red River Colony was determined within the Hudson Bay Company's 1670 Charter; this document gave legislative and judicial powers in Rupert's Land to the company. It is stated within the Charter that the legal status of women is as dependents of a male authority, which included fathers, husbands or brothers.  Although women's agency was limited through the inclusion of British laws, it was also empowered by these same laws.
For example, Maria Thomas, a 16-year-old Anglo-Cree Métis domestic servant, took her English Reverent employer to court for repeatedly raping her and subjecting her to illegal abortions.  Thomas, in her testimony, used the laws in place to challenge her assaulter's actions. She suggested that British laws for British citizens abroad were not cohesive with his behaviour.  She won the case; however, Reverent Owen Corbett was freed shortly after by a group of settler men. The courts did not challenge this, fearing insurrection, which demonstrates the weakness of colonial power despite the laws. 
In the establishing years of the English Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) and the Scottish North West Company (NWC), male settlers were likely to have a First Nations or Metis spouse. Though only encouraged by the NWC for trade relations, it was a common practice among both companies due to the European colonial policy that only allowed white males to settle in the territory.  When white women did eventually join the settlement, racial tensions were heightened due to the race and gender narrative they brought with them from Europe.  The European ideology that women were to authorize and maintain white domestic spaces allowed for domesticity to create exclusion between themselves and the non-white women who lived in the colony.  In being a part of upholding British morality, European men also had thoughts in regard to the differences between white and Indigenous women. Alexander Ross, an author who lived in Red River for a number of years, states in his book that a friend had often said that white women were graceful and that Indigenous women were exempt from this due to their bashfulness. 
This section may be too long and excessively detailed. (June 2020)
First Nations and Europeans engaged in a complex set of relationships that took place in a cultural, social, and political "middle ground" of the Great Lakes of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries with the expansion of colonialism. The fur trade proper is merely a selected moment of time from a fuller spectrum of exchange that was embedded in particular social relations. 
The fur trade was based on a complex set of relationships between two very different groups who held jagged worldviews. Various women belonging to the tribes of Ojibway, the Cree, and Chipewayan who were part of forming this relationship created a unique situation for Indigenous women. They became women who could walk between both distinct worlds. They became women who provided leadership in these spaces. They became an integral part of their culture economically as they used their femininity to operate under settler patriarchal law and took part in the fur trade. These women acted as allies of the whites and in certain circumstances permitted individual women to gain positions as an influence within settler society and act as social brokers between the two groups. Indigenous women took up their responsibilities and became active agents in the development of Indigenous and settler relations with the thought of their cultures survival and generations ahead in their heart. 
To the First Nations women these marital alliances created a reciprocal bond which formed economical relationships with traders for their communities. Adopting settlers into their kinship circle confirmed the expected equitable privileges such as free access to posts and provisions. Although it is evident that settlers did not understand the depth of these relationships and would often violate previous negotiations as well as their marital wives. It is important to recognize how the lives of many walking in these opposing two worlds was unsparing. Indigenous women involved in these relationships were often abused by their settler spouses. 
First Nation women came from a society that was organized to maintain the balance between men and women. In regard to marital relationships, women had the authority to institute a divorce if her marriage proved unsatisfactory. Within the fur trade society, traders would often place their wives with another man in the practice known as “turning off” in an attempt to provide a temporary “protector” due to long separations between. Many women tried to resist but there was little that could be done as marriage under common law, in the New World, robbed women of their rights and created conditions for men to act tyrannically. 
These laws arose with the formation of the government for the new world. The men reverted to England for their new model. The European tradition of the Catholic Church placed women in the role of property. British laws are traditionally based on the all sufficiently of man rights, and society operating under this form of patriarchy exist for women only if she is a man’s object for keeping. A woman’s very being or legal existence, Indigenous or non-Indigenous, was upended during marriage or consolidated into that of the husband under who she performs everything. 
By the end of the eighteenth century fur traders had built a nefarious trafficking of First Nations Women. Fur traders would often seize women by force for the reimbursement of trade debts, and then sold them to other settler men for large sums of money. In one instance, the Chipewyan began leaving their women behind when they came to trade. In 1792, when Hudson’s Bay traders appeared on Lake Athabasca, the Chipewyan hoped to secure their support and drive out their rivals, the North-Western Company who had continuously assaulted the fathers and husbands for trying to release their women. The Chipewyan were eventually able to release their women during the summer months while the fur traders were away. Many First Nations women were welcomed back into their communities after their treatment by the whites as unwilling objects of transaction. Reinforced with experience, whites were no longer seen as a desirable husband. 
With the broken relationship between fur traders and First Nations with the outright abuse of First Nations women along with the fact that marriage alliances were no longer a significant factor in trade relations from the settler perspective, led to a decline in “the practice of fur traders taking an Indian wife”. One of the significant factors which changed the trader’s attitude towards First Nations women was that they were no longer seen as an object that could walk in between two worlds for their economic gain. By the turn of the century, a group of mixed-blood women, metis, had emerged as a product of these previous relationships. In this context, metis women were created as a tool to perpetuate the social and economic agenda of the settler state. Fur traders now preferred metis women as their object of choice. In this way, First Nations women were replaced in fur trade society by metis women. 
The mixed ethnicity of indigenous and European peoples at the Red River Colony, known as Metis, were not always referred to by that name in the beginning years of their existence. Augustus Chetlain, an author who lived in the colony, wrote in his book that they were often called "Brules, Metifs, or half-breeds, the bastard sons of Indian concubines". 
The culture and lifestyle of the Metis community living in Red River were not only present at the colony. Metis people had a long-lasting tradition of a semi-annual, commercial, buffalo hunt that took place throughout the prairies starting in the mid-1700s with the western fur trade.  The Hudson Bay Company's journals and a number of witnesses to these events stated that the united caravan was commonly known as a brigade.  These brigades did not just focus on buffalo hunting but were used by buffalo hunters to trade and freight during this time.  Women were fundamental in both actively participating in the brigade hunts or trade, as well as the bringing together of people prior to the excursion. By studying the social network of the Trottier Brigade, a community of people from the White Horse Plains in Red River, it is notable that biologically related women brought the majority of the men together. 
Throughout the time that Metis people were a part of the Red River community they developed into several different identities, rather than just the common depiction of the bison-hunting French Catholic Metis. Metis identity, at that time as it is today, was diverse and complex due to the different livelihoods and practices followed.  Metis who chose not to live on prairies and hunt buffalo for the winter remained on lakes such as Manitoba, Winnipegosis, and Winnipeg to ice fish.  Over the course of the first half of the 19th century, up to forty households had developed on the lakeshore of Lake Manitoba. Fishing and trading had become year round practices and the Metis families involved would trade with HBC and ‘Freemen’- traders that did not work at the post. 
Christianity played a vital role in shaping the community within the colony, especially for the Metis people. In the early 19th century, considerations were made by the Committee in London to open schools run by the Clergymen to benefit, in their opinion, from instruction in religion and civilization.  Although these schools took in all children of the colony, mixed-ancestry children were a large focus due to them being tied to the fur trading post by their European fathers.  John Halkett, a Committee member, wanted Metis families of retired HBC employees to be brought to Red River (from other nearby posts) to be put under the authority of the Roman Catholic Mission or Church Missionary Society.  This plan was largely related to keeping retired Metis employees from continuing trade with the Indigenous peoples; however, its effect led to Christianity being a prominent part of culture for the Metis community. The Chaplain of the Hudson Bay Company, John West, was also interested in the religious educating of Metis children. According to his book, he wrote to the Governor submitting a plan to gather up a number of children to care for and educate. He stated that he created this plan when he saw these children being raised in a way he deemed ignorant and idle. 
The Church Missionary Society provided financial assistance in 1820 to Revd John West, chaplain to the Hudson's Bay Company, towards the education of some Native American children, including James Settee  and Henry Budd of the Cree nation, both of whom were later ordained as priests. In 1822, the CMS appointed Revd West to head the mission in the Red River Colony.  He was succeeded in 1823 by the Revd David Jones who was joined by the Revd W and Mrs Cockran in 1825.  The mission expanded and by 1850, the missionaries were active throughout the colony and were travelling to Fort Simpson on the Mackenzie River. 
US expansionists became heavily interested in the economic potential Red River land possessed. The ideal soil, climate and socio-economic potential of the area convinced Americans that they needed to make this land American territory.  The result ended up being an annexation proposal of Red River in 1870, in order to convert it into land that Americans could use for economic purposes. Due to the Red River Resistance, the American annexationists hoped to take advantage of the disruption caused by these political conflicts and present themselves in the forefront as the ideal leaders of the Red River land. The annexation was led by Minnesota senator Alexander Ramsey, and was backed by Zachariah Chandler and Jacob M. Howard- who were both senators of Michigan and represented Detroit merchants. They all shared the same economic vision for the annexation: Ramsey believed that the Red River valley would serve as an important commercial adjunct for his state, while Chandler and Howard believed that annexing the Red River would benefit their Great Lakes Trade.  These Americans hoped to colonise the land as their own, and tried to assert their dominance by destabilising the British efforts at colonization of the Red River and thus preventing the establishment of Canadian sovereignty in the area. A notable example would be James W. Taylor: he was an American special agent and Winnipeg consul who used his political power to shape the destiny of the valley, as well as attempting to remove the British influence on the valley.  The Canadian government, however, did not allow these attempts at US expansionism to succeed.
The proposal was met with a lot of resistance from the Red River people as they were given the chance to address their grievances about the potential loss of land and becoming part of an American expansion and colonization through a proclamation by the Governor-General of the dominion. Americans who supported annexation by the US tried to depict themselves as favorable figures in the eyes of the Métis by associating themselves with Louis Riel. The Resistance was an unarmed conflict started by the Métis because Canada was attempting to claim possession of Rupert's Land without any concern for the grievances of the Métis. However, the main American intention behind their decision to support Riel and the Resistance was an attempt to sway the Métis in favour of the annexation by the US.  One of their tools was the New Nation newspaper which elicited rhetoric that advocated annexation by the US because it embodied the popular Manifest Destiny ideology. This was meant to help the cause of annexation, the idea being that their support of the Red River Resistance would encourage local resistance against Britain and Canada, and help swing local opinion in favour of independence – then ultimately America would step in to offer the protection of the United States government to the Red River Métis and assert themselves as the new leaders and Red River would become American land.  They ultimately wanted to create a situation where the Red River could become American territory by allying with the discontented Métis Nation.
However, this aggressive propaganda ultimately backfired upon the proposal of annexation. It created even more hostility towards the annexation party, and the United States. This great emphasis on materialism never seemed appealing to the Red River people. The Americans became too acquisitive because they were eager to create a political union. This ultimately caused the annexation of the North West to fail, despite it being almost within reach.  All this ultimately benefited the Red River Resistance. As a result, the Metis were able to successfully defy Canadian expansion into Rupert's Land. 
This political chaos, in a sense, became pivotal for Red River because it allowed for the success of the Métis in their rebellion. The Canadian government were forced to develop the negotiations that allowed for the Métis demands were legally entrenched in the Manitoba Act that eventually led to the creation of province of Manitoba.  The political disputes put the Métis on a platform to voice their disapproval of Americans ignoring their concerns over these land disputes. They had legitimate claims to the land and they stated that they were the "descendants of the lords of the soil.".  Also, under Louis Riel's leadership, the Metis rebels were able to capture Fort Garry – a fortified post of the Hudson's Bay Company. This would lead Riel into becoming the leader of the provisional government, and he composed and sent a list of rights to Ottawa.  The demands mainly consisted of the Métis wanting Red River to be entered into the Canadian confederation as a province, security for their land claims, making English and French the official languages of the colony, as well as financial support for the Red River population.  Riel hoped to accomplish a sense of equality for the Métis; he wanted to present them as a civilized people that were deserving of the same rights of any British subject.  The rebellion became a pivotal moment in acquiring land rights and a political voice for the Métis, who were constantly disregarded for their Aboriginal status.
The aftermath of the rebellion caused the Métis to no longer be considered as Canadian Aboriginals – they became regarded as their own social group, and were distinct from other Aboriginal groups. In order to pacify the Métis resistance further, the Canadian government gave them generous land grants in 1869–70 that was carefully structured to be given in severalty, rather than in common.  Red River was now developing its own provincial government that had a political voice and political implications upon Canadian federal government. This rebellion also led to the Métis emerging as a unique, acknowledged group within Canada, and ultimately, the disappearance of the Aboriginal rights paradigm in the public view of Red River.  The rebellion was successful in a sense that it allowed the Métis to have a political voice, but it impacted the perception of how other Aboriginals would be viewed in Red River.
Once the rebellion ended, Riel and several of his comrades fled to the United States in 1870 because British soldiers and colonial irregulars (often Scottish settlers) desired to exact revenge in reaction to several incidents, particularly the execution of Thomas Scott.  Riel, however later returned to Canada in 1885 to help lead the North West Rebellion. This caused him to face trial in a Canadian court, and eventually to being executed by the Canadian government in Regina. His death served as a political statement that outlined the relationship between French-English majorities and non-white minorities and what would happen if the latter chose to defy Canadian sovereignty.  The Canadian government was starting to punish the rebels for their defiance, but the rebellion is still considered a success in the sense that the Metis were still able to acquire the land rights they hoped to achieve, as well as no longer being ignored when it came to federal matters.
The Red River rebellion needed to be finally be put to rest. In order to accomplish this, the Canadian government, which was predominantly led by English conservatives, initiated the Manitoba Act in 1870. They believed that this act would accomplish two purposes: this would be able to crush the rebellion, while at the same time, appeasing the French demands of increasing French influence in Canada because the act would create a Western province that was constitutionally supportive of French Canadian language and culture.  This was the first steps towards the creation of the present-day province of Manitoba. The Act was given royal assent on May 12, 1870, and the commencement of Manitoba with a provincial status came to fruition on July 15, 1870. After the passage of the Manitoba Act, the Métis Provisional government was disbanded.  There was an assimilation of the Métis people and the English settlers, and the Aboriginal influence was further distanced from Red River.
Through the Act, the Red River colony was now christened as Manitoba: a new Canadian province that was self-governed, and that had its own rights and responsibilities.  It was no longer being viewed as a territory and was now officially part of the Canadian confederation. Provincial status was accelerated by Louis Riel's rebellion. Riel wanted to secure Red River for the Canadians against the Americans' colonization projects and sentiments of their Manifest Destiny ideologies.  The early Manitoba provincial government initially struggled to be effective. Everything around it felt rushed because the Manitoba Act was mostly created to prevent another Red River Rebellion. Many of the government officials were inexperienced – especially the three delegates who went to Ottawa to negotiate union terms. None of them had experience with diplomacy or the creation of new governments.  Due to the hurried nature of the creation of this province, the officials of this new government presented themselves as overwhelmed and unprepared, and this shows that Manitoba was essentially created to re-stabilize political unrest within Canada.
Manitoba experienced conflicting interests between French and English Canadians. A quarter-century after the implementation of the Manitoba Act, the province was considered to be the land of promise and key to Canada's future. Thousands of Ontarians were migrating to the prairies, but the French Canadians did not agree with the optimism behind the fertility of Manitoba's land, and they thought that the province was a threat to their national identity.  Through such conflicts, Red River, now known as Manitoba, was experiencing a wave of settlers from all across Ontario, who would change and mold the identity of the colony. The Manitoba government also tried to ensure that the new province would continuously evolve into something prosperous by only allowing immigrants with special qualities  since they wanted to immediately establish stable agricultural communities.
|August 1812 – June 1815||Miles MacDonell|
|June 1815 – June 1816||Robert Semple|
|August 1816 – June 1822||Alexander Macdonnell|
|June 1822 – June 1823||Andrew Bulger|
|June 1823 – June 1825||Robert Parker Pelly|
|June 1825 – June 1833||Donald McKenzie|
|June 1833 – June 1839||Alexander Christie|
|June 1839 – June 1844||Duncan Finlayson|
|June 1844 – June 1846||Alexander Christie|
|June 1846 – June 1847||John Folliott Crofton|
|June 1847 – June 1848||John T. Griffiths|
|June 1848 – June 1855||William Bletterman Caldwell|
|June 1855 – September 1859||Francis Godschall Johnson|
|September 1859 – July 1870||William MacTavish|
- "Red River Colony". The Canadian Encyclopedia.
- Morris, Alexander (1880) The Treaties of Canada with the Indians of Manitoba and the North-West Territories Including the Negotiations on Which They Were Based, and Other Information Relating Thereto, Chapter I
- Carter 1968.
- Ross 1856, pp. 16–18.
- Davies 1966.
- Gibson, James R. Farming the Frontier, The Agricultural Opening of the Oregon Country, 1786–1846. Vancouver, B.C.: University of British Columbia Press. 1985, pp. 10–13.
- Baker, Robert (1999). "Creating Order in the Wilderness: Transplanting the English Law to Rupert's Land, 1835–51". Law and History Review. 17 (2): 209–246. doi: 10.2307/744011. JSTOR 744011.
- Daschuk 2013.
- Gluek, Alvin (1958). "Industrial Experiments in the Wilderness: A sidelight on the Business History of the Hudson's Bay Company". The Business History Review. 32 (4): 423–433. doi: 10.2307/3111662. JSTOR 3111662.
- R. Douglas Francis, Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith. "Origins: Canadian History to Confederation", 4th ed. (Toronto: Harcourt Canada ltd., 2000), at pp. 434–5.
- Friesen, Gerald (2010). The Canadian Prairies: A History. Canada: University of Toronto Press. p. 80. ISBN 978-0-8020-6648-0.
- Dawson, Kenneth (1970). "Preliminary Investigation of Fort William in Northwestern Ontario". Historical Archaeology. doi: 10.1007/BF03373385.
- FitzGerald, Sharron A. (June 2007). "Hybrid identities in Canada's Red River Colony". The Canadian Geographer. 51 (2): 186–201. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0064.2007.00173.x.
- FitzGerald, Sharron A.; Muszynski, Alicja (November 2007). "Negotiating Female Morality: place, ideology and agency in the Red River Colony". Women's History Review. 16 (5): 661–680. doi: 10.1080/09612020701447624.
- Ross, Alexander. The Red River Settlement: Its Rise, Progress, and Present State: With Some Account of Native Races and Its General History, to the Present Day. London: Smith, Elder and Co., 1856: 200
- Kirk, Sylvia Van (1984). "The Role of Native Women in the Fur Trade Society of Western Canada, 1670-1830". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 7 (3): 9–13. doi: 10.2307/3346234. JSTOR 3346234.
- Van Kirk, Sylvia (20 April 2006). "'Women in Between': Indian Women in Fur Trade Society in Western Canada". Historical Papers. 12 (1): 30–46. doi: 10.7202/030819ar.
- Roesch Wagner, Sally (2001). Sisters in Spirit: Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Influence on Early American Feminists. Native Voices Books.[ page needed]
- Chetlain, Augustus L. The Red River Colony. New York: New York, 1878: 50
- Macdougall, Brenda; St-Onge, Nicole (2013). "Rooted in Mobility: Metis Buffalo-Hunting Brigades". Manitoba History. 71 (1): 21–32.
- St-Onge, Nicole J. M. (1992). "Variations in Red River: The Traders and Freemen Metis of Saint-Laurent, Manitoba". Canadian Ethnic Studies. 24 (2): 1–21.
- Bradford, Tolly. "Conservative Visions of Christianity and Community in Early Red River, c1800-1821." Manitoba History 71, no. 1 (2013): 36
- West, John. The Substance of a Journal During a Residence at the Red River Colony, British North America: and frequent excursions among the North-west American Indians, in the years 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823. London: L.B Seeley, 1824: 12
- "The Church Missionary Gleaner, March 1857". Missionary Work Around the Winnepegoosis Lake, Rupert's Land. Adam Matthew Digital. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
- "The Church Missionary Atlas (Canada)". Adam Matthew Digital. 1896. pp. 220–226. Retrieved 19 October 2015.
- "The Church Missionary Gleaner, June 1860". Voyage from Red River to Fort Simpson, Mackenzie River. Adam Matthew Digital. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
- Warner 1953. sfn error: no target: CITEREFWarner1953 ( help)
- Nute, Grace Lee. "New Light on Red River Valley History." Minnesota History Bulletin, Vol. 5, No. 8 (Nov., 1924), pg 568.
- Gluek 1955.
- Brown, Jennifer. "Métis, Halfbreeds, and Other Real People: Challenging Cultures and Categories". The History Teacher. 27, 1. November 1993. Pg. 20.
- Flanagan, Thomas. "Louis Riel and the Dispersion of American Metis pg. 179"
- Ens 1994.
- Bruyneel 2010.
- Flanagan, Thomas. "Louis Riel and the Dispersion of American Metis." Pg. 184
- Donnelly 1957.
- Silver, AI. "French Canada and the Prairie Frontier, 1870–1890". University of Toronto Press, April 18, 2008. Pg. 27.
- Governors of the Red River Settlement, Manitoba Historical Society
- Bruyneel, F. Donald (2010), "Exiled, Executed, Exalted: Louis Riel, "Homo Sacer" and the Production of Canadian Sovereignty", Canadian Journal of Political Science, Ottawa: Canadian Political Science Association, 43 (3): 711–732, doi: 10.1017/s0008423910000612
- Carter, George (1968), "Lord Selkirk and Red River Colony", Montana: The Magazine of Western History, Helena, MO: Montana Historical Society, 18 (1): 60–69
- Daschuk, James (2013). Clearing the Plains: Disease, Politics of Starvation and the Loss of Aboriginal Life. Canada: University of Regina Press. ISBN 978-0-88977-340-0.CS1 maint: ref=harv ( link)
- Davies, K. G. (1966), "From Competition to Union", Minnesota History, St. Paul, VA: Minnesota Historical Society Press, 23 (1): 166–177CS1 maint: ref=harv ( link)
- Donald, F. Donald (1953), "Drang Nach Norden: The United States and the Riel Rebellion", The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 39 (4): 693–712, doi: 10.2307/1895395, JSTOR 1895395
- Donnelly, M. S. (1957), "Parliamentary Government in Manitoba", The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, Montreal: Canadian Economics Association, 23 (1): 20–32, doi: 10.2307/138726, JSTOR 138726
- Ens, Gerard (1994), "Prologue to the Red River Resistance: Pre-liminal Politics and the Triumph of Riel" (PDF), Journal of the Canadian Historical Association, Ottawa: Canadian Historical Association, 5 (1): 111–123, doi: 10.7202/031075ar
- Gluek, Alvin C. (1955), "The Riel Rebellion and Canadian‐American Relations", Canadian Historical Review, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 36 (3): 199–221, doi: 10.3138/chr-036-03-02
- Ross, Alexander (1856), The Red River Settlement, London: Smith, Elder & Co
- The Journal of the Bishop of Montreal, during a Visit to the Church Missionary Society's North-West America Mission, by George Jehoshaphat Mountain, an early account of religious life in the Red River Colony.