Did Louis Riel Deserve His Fate

Riel was tried and found guilty for many of his actions going against the country. Before being put on trial for treason, he was tried once before for the murder of Thomas Scott. However, his response to this was to flee the country. Riel returned in 1884 when the Metis felt that they needed a leader who could get the government to pay attention to their petitions. Once he returned to Canada, he immediately began to conspire against the government.

This led the government to view Louis Riel as a national criminal. As a result, Manitoba was established as a province from the Red River settlement, the Manitoba Act was enacted and Riel fled into exile within U.S borders after the execution of Thomas Scott. Overall, he attempted to take a stand against a bureaucracy that threatened the Métis way of life, only to have to escape in fear of being executed.

Louis Riel should have remained innocent because the government is to blame. Riel made peaceful attempts to improve the Metis' social status and prompt the Canadian government of their presence. Riel wrote many letters of concern to the government which were completely

Instead, Robert Ford was convicted of murder and sentenced to hang in 1883. He was later pardoned by the Governor of Missouri and died nine years later in a bar fight in Colorado.

In this letter, he disapproved of the reduction of his royal powers and personal wealth, which affected his lifestyle and authority. He denounced the Revolution, National Assembly, and its constitution. Copies of the letter circulated in public and revealed to people that “Louis had lied to the French” when he swore an oath “before God and the nation to uphold the constitution” (102). Not only did he leave behind his people but his flight would have led to a civil war between revolutionaries and loyalists aided by foreigners. On top of that, deputies of the National Assembly dealt with the aftermath of a missing king: paranoid Parisians suspecting a conspiracy, people storming the palace, and palace servants being accused of treason. This added to the “profound sense of desertion and betrayal” by a king that people saw as a “good father” (222). Out of disgust, they denounced Louis: calling him all sorts of names, took down portraits of him, and covered “in black the word royal” on signs, buildings, and other public places (110). The “myth of the kingship had been shattered” because nobody knew what to do with Louis at this time (104, 108). Some wanted exile or imprisonment whereas others suggested reinstating him as only a figurehead, and some thought about a “republic without a king” (108). Either way, they no longer

It is often debated whether or not the reign of King Louis XIV had a positive or negative effect on France. Although there were improvements during his reign in transportation, culture, and national defense, there were far more negative aspects. He depleted the national treasury with his liberal spending on personal luxuries and massive monuments. His extreme fear of the loss of power led to poor decision making, which caused the court to be of lower quality. King Louis XIV’s disastrous rule brought about a series of effects that influenced the French Revolution in the following century.

On the morning of January 21, 1793, an innocent man was executed in front of his entire country, by means of the guillotine. That man was King Louis XVI. King Louis XVI, who was married to Queen Marie Antoinette, was the King of France during the beginning stages of the French Revolution. Which took place throughout 1788, and up until King Louis XVI was charged with treason, in 1792. Before the French Revolution really started, France was divided by a strict class system and there were three estates. The third estate were restless and angry with the government. To do something about their complaints, they soon created the National Assembly at the Tennis Court Oath and the well known, violent, events of the French Revolution soon came to being. King Louis XVI was innocent of committing treason against France, because he showed throughout his rulership of the country

Riel was determined to protect the rights of everyone in the settlement. When the Canadian Party was armed and prepared to attack, he imprisoned them by force. The belligerent Thomas Scott was executed by a majority vote. Then Riel decided to negotiate with the Canadian government, which at first refused to recognize him. Undaunted, the provisional government drafted a proposal for the creation of the province of Manitoba. Unfortunately, the leader of the Canadian Party escaped and reached Ottawa first, spreading prejudicial news of the execution and creating outrage. The delegates from Red River had a hard time getting recognition from Macdonald's government, but eventually their case was heard and agreed upon. The Manitoba Act was created granting land rights, as well as making two official languages and education systems. Overall, the Red River Rebellion was a success, but they could've used more peaceful means when dealing with the Canadian Party, especially since they didn't act beforehand. The Red River Rebellion did not end all of the Metis problems though.

“I am more convinced everyday that without a single exception I did right. And I have always believed that, as I have acted honestly, the time will come when the people of Canada will see and acknowledge it.”- Louis Riel. We believe that Louis Riel is innocent of treason. Also, 92% of the class believes that Louis Riel is innocent. Mr.Riel is an ambitious, daring, well educated, political leader, who is a proud leader of the Metis. First, he was protecting the Metis rights. Secondly, he was threatened by racism and the Canadian Party. Finally, he negotiated with the Canadian government to create Manitoba. As you see, Louis Riel is innocent of treason.

Louis Riel was one of the most controversial figures in Canadian history, and even to this day – more than a century after his execution – he continues to be remembered. Many believed him to be a villain; others saw him as a hero. So who was he really? Born in St. Boniface at the Red River Settlement of Canada (present-day Winnipeg, Manitoba) on October 22, 1844, Louis Riel hoped one day to follow his father’s footsteps and become a great Métis leader just like him. Eventually, Riel was seen as a hero to the French-speaking Métis. In the Canadian West, however, most people regarded him as a villain due to his execution in 1885. Nevertheless, Louis Riel was not really a villain by heart; only a flawed man who made many mistakes in his life.

In November 1780 he was thankfully freed during a prisoner exchange. In that same year, Laurens was called upon by Congress as a special minister to France in that year of december.

"We must cherish our inheritance. We must preserve our nationality for the youth of our future. The story should be written down to pass on." (Louis Riel, 1884). Louis Riel, a man of great nature and abiding love for his western Métis heritage, is proven to be one of the most revolutionary men looked upon in the chronicles of the Dominion of Canada. In spite of this, he remains as one of the most controversial and cryptic figures throughout the course of Canadian history. A period of revolution lasting from the 1870’s to the late 1880’s was condemned with constant revolts justified as an intervening year for those involved. Louis Riel is regarded as a hero by preserving the civil liberties and identities of the Métis and leading two

During the French revolution, French citizens went against absolute monarchy and the feudal system that was antiquated. They were influenced by Enlightenment ideas such as inalienable rights and popular sovereignty. Louis XVI was the ruler at the time; he believed that his power was given to him by God, thus making him think his ruling was right despite people’s opinion. The citizens of France especially the 3rd estate disliked the king for treating them poorly. Eventually the Jacobins convicted Louis XVI to death by a guillotine for treason after finding a large iron box holding Louis XVI’s secret correspondence with foreign monarchs. The beheading of King Louis XVI was justified because he took people’s rights away and made people follow his inadequate rules and biased judgments based on status. Furthermore, if he were to be left alive it would have posed a threat to the security and stability of France.

In Chester Brown’s “Louis Riel: A Comic-Strip Biography” and in Sarah Ovcjak’s “The Facebook Profile of Louis Riel,” the authors attempt to criticize historical representations by presenting the history of Louis Riel in conflicting lights. Both authors allow Louis Riel to have a voice in their respective works; however, Ovcjak’s Facebook profile allows Riel’s character to speak in the first person perspective narrating his own life, while the story within Brown’s graphic novel unfolds through a third person frame narrative. Ovcjak’s first person narrator uses emotional dialogue and images to clarify Louis Riel’s character. Brown’s frame narrative uses flat dialogue, imagery and extensive notes to present a more impartial understanding of Louis Riel that is rooted in a subjective framing viewpoint. These techniques help shape each author’s arguments about the subject they are describing. Despite these differences, the works reveal the significance of perspective and objectivity, alluding to their importance for historical veracity. Reading Ovcjak's “The Facebook Profile of Louis Riel” against Chester Brown's “Louis Riel: A Comic-Strip Biography” articulates Brown’s argument of presenting Louis Riel in the graphic novel context as a means to demonstrate the importance of looking at history from different perspectives. The implication of reading these creative works as historical documents identifies a need for an authoritative and objective historical lens that is often

Louis XIV had a passion for glory and used it to fight four wars because he was motivated by personal and dynastic considerations.