of maintaining a Canadian presence in the region and ensuring good relations with the Indigenous population. Indeed, Dunn claims that when the NWMP marched across the southern prairies in 1874 (known today as the Long March), the force “eff ectively established law and order” in the region. He also suggests that one of the main reasons that the Mounties were successful was that they were essentially working in a wilderness with little white settlement. But Dunn’s argument begs the question as to whether the police were able to operate in the Prairie West because they were accepted by the Indian population and did not meet any resistance to their presence. Did the Mounties really exercise mastery over the Indians? And was the policeIndian relationship before 1885 undermined by Indian Aff airs policies that went against the spirit and intent of the treaties? Th ere are bound to be quibbles in a book of this size. Dunn, for example, suggests that the Canadian government initiated the treaties when in fact it was the Cree who forced Ottawa to negotiate Treaty 6 with them in 1876. And his use of “squaw” in discussing policeIndian sexual relationships is unacceptable. Dunn also off ers little nuance in examining the participation of Indians in the NorthWest Rebellion— they are largely rebels in his eyes. Still, the book is a good reference work. Th e time line, detailed index, and contemporary photographs are welcome additions to mounted police history. Dunn is to be thanked for pulling all the material together in one source.

中文翻译：

---

Ältester: Herman DW Friesen, 变革时代的门诺派领袖布鲁斯 L. 冈瑟

保持加拿大在该地区的存在并确保与原住民的良好关系。事实上，邓恩声称，当 NWMP 于 1874 年穿越南部大草原（今天称为长征）时，这支部队在该地区“有效地建立了法律和秩序”。他还表示，骑警成功的主要原因之一是他们基本上是在几乎没有白人定居点的荒野中工作。但邓恩的论点回避了一个问题，即警察是否能够在草原西部开展行动，因为他们被印度人民接受并且没有遇到任何阻力。骑警真的控制了印第安人吗？1885 年之前的印度警察关系是否被违反条约精神和意图的印度事务政策破坏了？在这种大小的书中，肯定会有一些狡辩。例如，邓恩建议加拿大政府发起这些条约，而实际上是克里人在 1876 年强迫渥太华与他们谈判第 6 条约。他在讨论警察印度性关系时使用“squaw”是不可接受的。邓恩在考察印第安人参与西北叛乱时也没有提供细微差别——他们在他眼中主要是叛乱者。尽管如此，这本书仍然是一本很好的参考书。时间线、详细索引和当代照片是骑警历史的受欢迎的补充。