Not true per example of first three paragraphs of:
<
Department of Attorney General, Toronto
Adhesions to Treaty Number Nine
Copy of an Order In Council Schedule "C"
James Bay Treaty - Treaty No. 9 - November 6, 1905

SIR, --- Since the treaties known as the Robinson Treaties were signed in the autumn of the year 1850, no cession of the Indian title to lands lying within the defined limits of the province of Ontario had been obtained. By these treaties the Ojibeway Indians gave up their right and title to a large tract of country lying between the height of land and Lakes Huron and Superior. In 1873, by the Northwest Angle Treaty (Treaty No. 3), the Saulteaux Indians ceded a large tract east of Manitoba, part of which now falls within the boundaries of the province of Ontario. The first-mentioned treaty was made by the old province of Canada, the second by the Dominion.

Increasing settlement, activity in mining and railway construction in that large section of the province of Ontario north of the height of land and south of the Albany river rendered it advisable to extinguish the Indian title. The undersigned were, therefore, appointed by Order of His Excellency in Council on June 29, 1905, as commissioners to negotiate a treaty with the Indians inhabiting the unceded tract. This comprised about 90,000 square miles of the provincial lands drained by the Albany and Moose river systems.

When the question first came to be discussed, it was seen that it would be difficult to separate the Indians who came from their hunting grounds on both sides of the Albany river to trade at the posts of the Hudson's Bay Company, and to treat only with that portion which came from the southern or Ontario side. As the cession of the Indian title in that portion of the Northwest Territories which lies to the north of the Albany river would have to be consummated at no very distant date, it was thought advisable to make the negotiations with Indians whose hunting grounds were in Ontario serve as the occasion for dealing upon the same terms with all the Indians trading at Albany river posts, and to add to the community of interest which for trade purposes exists amongst these Indians a like responsibility for treaty obligations. We were, therefore, given power by Order of His Excellency in Council of July 6, 1905, to admit to treaty any Indian whose hunting grounds cover portions of the Northwest Territories lying between the Albany river, the district of Keewatin and Hudson bay, and to set aside reserves in that territory.
>
Note words "gave up their right and title" and "ceded", I interpret that as legalise for not that they had ownership of said lands but just in case they did.
Read carefully second pragraph.
In third paragraph note that the subject was 'hunting grounds' and not ownership.

So how can lawyers say otherwise with an honest face?