DOCSLIB.ORG

Editorials J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Editorials J Chronicles of Oklahoma Volume 6, No. 1 March, 1928 Editorials J. Y. Bryce 1 Early Post Offices In Oklahoma Grant Foreman 4 Fort Arbuckle W. B. Morrison 26 Ranching On the Cheyenne-Arapaho Reservation E. E. Dale 35 The Work Of the Early Choctaw Legislature W. J. Fessler 60 Five Hundred Million Dollars Chas. N. Gould 69 Matt Duhr’s Letter Mrs. A. E. Perry 75 Colonel Forbis LeFlore, Pioneer Statesman Sketch of B. N. O. Walker Mrs. C. C. Conlan 89 Necrology 94 Minutes Annual Meeting Oklahoma Historical Society 99 EDITORIAL Page 1 We have in the office of the Oklahoma Historical Society the original manuscript of an article prepared September 29, 1927, by Wm. H. Murray, formerly of Tishomingo, Oklahoma, now of Colonia Murray, El Palmar, El Gran Chaco, Bolivia, S. A. This story has to do with the birth of Oklahoma, and gives some very important accounts of the Sequoyah convention relative to the members of the convention, held in Muskogee the year 1905. Mr. Murray also gives the history of the Constitutional convention, held in Guthrie, specializing with reference to the important laws, and prominent men who were more or less responsible for the constitution as adopted. This article will be published in a future number of Chronicles; and the original copy, which is written in Mr. Murray’s own hand, will be preserved in the files of the society. The article as prepared by Mr. Murray, is written on both sides of the paper for the reason, he says, to save postage necessary to so long a voyage. J. Y. B. Honorable R. L. Williams, of the United States District Court, living in Muskogee, Oklahoma, is very anxious to have biographical sketches of members of the Constitutional Convention, along with that of similar sketches of other prominent men and women of the State and the territories prior to state-hood. Judge Williams is giving considerable attention to this matter in order to preserve for future years the history of our state. We suggest that you send to Judge R. L. Williams the necessary data concerning these characters indicated above, living or dead, so this matter can be properly attended to before it is lost. The state owes this much to the men who have done so much to make this country what it is; we also owe this much to the state and the future generations. These men are passing away, as you will see by referring to the list, as they appear in this copy of Chronicles and others that have been published, under the heading Necrology. J. Y. B. Page 2 AN APPRECIATION In this number of Chronicles appear some very interesting articles by prominent men of the State, men who are conversant with the past history of our country and people. The contributions as furnished by them are worth your time; especially is this true if you are interested in the men, women and events as they have had to do with the building of a great commonwealth. In the main the information given in these articles are made possible after considerable research and painstaking on the part of the contributors, which carries with it weariness of the flesh, expenditure of time and money, more or less seclusion from family and friends, in a word, a very strenuous life, in return for which they get not a red cent; on their part it is a labor of love. After you have read the articles, provided they meet your approval, and I am sure they will, drop them a card expressing your appreciation—it will do them good. They belong to that number of Oklahomans who are trying to make the magazine what it should be. We are doing our best to improve the material with each succeeding issue, endeavoring to make it a scholarly periodical, suitable for use as a text book in our schools and universities. The management takes this method of thanking the following named persons for their interest in getting valuable information ready for our columns: Mr. and Mrs. Grant Foreman, of Muskogee; Doctor W. B. Morrison, Southeastern State Teachers’ College; Doctor E. E. Dale, History Teacher, State University; and Prof. M. L. Wardell, of Oklahoma University. These with others have matter in the present number, and material for use in future issues, for all of which we are very thankful. J. Y. B. NEW QUARTERS It may be a matter of interest to the readers of Chronicles for us to say, editorially, that in the near future the Page 3 library of the Historical Society and the museum, will be given new quarters; the library on the second floor and the museum on the fourth floor of the State Capitol. The papers are to remain in the present quarters of the Society. Pursuant to this contemplated move, a contract has been made with the Steel Fixture Company of Wichita, Kansas, to furnish and install thirty-eight museum cases, two thousand two hundred feet of library shelving and two hundred seventy-five running feet of newspaper stacks. The contract with this company also calls for sufficient grill work to enclose the corridors on the floor mentioned above, thus insuring the quarters against intrusion. The contract price for this work is $10,911.00. It has been suggested when the move has been made, that an entertainment of two or three days’ duration be given, to which all the members of the Historical Society, and friends be invited. The plan is to make this an occasion of merit and worth-whileness, with a program not only entertaining, but instructive as well. It is the purpose of the entertainment committee to have some of the best speakers in the state, with some of the best out of the state, who are available at that time, thereby making it one of the most notable events in the history of the society. Notices as to date and program will be sent out in due time. Begin now to plan for this meeting, and do not let any thing keep you from attending. J. Y. B. EARLY POST OFFICES OF OKLAHOMA Grant Foreman Page 4 The early post offices of the United States are to be found in more than a score of huge volumes in the Post Office Department at Washigton where they were entered according to states in the approximate order in which they were created. In most of the states of the Union it was a comparatively easy matter to group the post offices according to the counties within which they were located. But not so with Oklahoma before Statehood. A number of the early Oklahoma post offices appear on the Post Office Department records as being in Arkansas because Indian Territory was then part of Arkansas Territory. After the somewhat indifinite division of the country among the Indian tribes, for want of county limits the Department located the post offices with reference to the tribal boundaries. As the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations divided their countries into counties, post offices were located with reference to these county lines in lieu of tribal boundaries. There were many other opportunities for confusion; the records of post offices located in Greer County, Texas, were arbitrarily changed to show them in Greer County, Oklahoma, before the sovereignty of that country was determined. For many years it is doubtful if any one understood the geography and divisions of Indian Territory and it is surprising that the clerks in the Post Office Department were able to locate the post offices as well as they did. At best the records are confusing and the task of making a correct transcript of them to show the name, location and beginning of each post office together with the first postmaster has been no slight undertaking. Errors will probably be discovered; the compiler has undertaken to correct some of the more obvious ones of which he found many, such as the location of Fort Sill in the Choctaw Nation; but while having some essential knowledge of early Oklahoma, he has thought it wise not to vary too much from the original, even though he does not correct the location of Pryor's Creek in the Choctaw Nation which he does not pretend to understand. The headings employed are from the original records; rearrangement was used to place the lists in convenient form Page 5 for reference without taking too much liberty with the records and their recitals. The compiler wishes to acknowledge the courtesy of the officials of the Post Office Department in giving him access to the records and an opportunity for a copyist to transcribe them. GRANT FOREMAN January 5, 1928. CHOCTAW NATION Indian Territory Date of Post Office First Postmaster Appointment September 5, Miller Court House J. H. Fowler 1824 September 7, Fort Towson George C. Gooding 1832 (Changed to Doaksville Nov. 11, 1847) Choctaw Agency F. W. Armstrong June 26, 1833 (Changed to Scullyville August 16, 1860) Eagle Town Loring S. Williams July 1, 1834 Fort Coffee James O. Scott April 20, 1835 Spencer Academy William Wilson January 22, 1844 Mayhew Charles F. Stewart February 5, 1845 (Discontinued March 29, 1892) Wheelock Henry K. Copeland March 21, 1845 November 11, Doaksville Joseph R. Berthelet 1847 (Late Fort Towson) November 5, Boggy Depot William R. Guy 1849 (Changed to Council House Feb. 6, 1872) Gaines Creek Henry Harder January 7, 1850 November 19, Armstrong Academy Philip P. Brown 1850 February 14, Luk-fah tah Emilius G. Corder 1853 September 18, Toboxky Gray E. Scales 1857 (Discontinued March 22, 1878) Hochubbee Samuel M.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • University of Oklahoma Libraries Western History Collections Gary
    University of Oklahoma Libraries Western History Collections Gary Anderson Collection Anderson, Gary Clayton (1948–- ). Papers, 1980–2003. 8 feet. History professor. Correspondence (1980–2003) of University of Oklahoma history professor Gary Anderson, and his research notes for his books Kinsmen of Another Kind: Dakota-White Relations in the Upper Mississippi River Valley (1984, a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize) and The Indian Southwest, 1580-1830: Ethnogenesis and Reinvention (1999). The collection also includes court records and research by Anderson for two trials in which he served as an expert witness: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Michigan and Quapaw Tribe v. Blue Tee Corporation. Note: This collection contains photocopied research material collected from other libraries and archives. It is the researcher’s responsibility to obtain permission to publish any of these materials from the institution that owns them. Box 1 Correspondence, 1980-2003 and Book Research Notes Folder: Correspondence 1 Correspondence received by Prof. Anderson, 1980-1981, regarding his fellowship at the Newberry Library and new position at Texas A&M University, academic conferences, journal article submissions and peer review requests. Correspondents include Prof. Paul Prucha at Marquette University, and Paul A. Hutton of the Western Historical Quarterly. 2 Correspondence received by Prof. Anderson, 1982-1983, regarding the early manuscript development and release of Anderson’s first book, Kinsmen of Another Kind; as well as journal article submissions and peer review work. Correspondents include Paul A. Hutton and W. Eugene Hollon. 3 Correspondence received by Prof. Anderson, 1984-1985, regarding the success of his book, as well as journal article submissions and peer review work.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Freedpeople of the Five Slaveholding Tribes
    Anderson 1 “On the Forty Acres that the Government Give Me”1: Independent Freedpeople of the Five Slaveholding Tribes as Landholders, Indigenous Land Allotment Policy, and the Disruption of Racial, Gender, and Class Hierarchies in Jim Crow Oklahoma Keziah Anderson Undergraduate Senior Thesis Department of History Columbia University April 15th, 2020 Seminar Advisor: Professor George Chauncey Second Reader: Professor Celia Naylor 1 Kiziah Love, interview with Jessie R. Ervin, spring 1937, Colbert, OK, in The WPA Oklahoma Slave Narratives, ed. T. Lindsay Baker and Julie Philips Baker (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1996), 262. See Appendix 6 for a full transcript of Kiziah Love’s slave narrative. © 2020 Anderson 2 - Notice - None of the work included in this document may be cited or quoted without express written permission from the author. © 2020 Anderson 3 - Table of Contents - Acknowledgements 4 Introduction 5-15 Chapter 1: “You’ve an Indian Not a Negro”: Racecraft, 15-36 Land Allotment Policy, and Class Inequalities in Post-Allotment and Post-Statehood Oklahoma Racecraft and Land Use in the Pre-Allotment Period 15 Racecraft, Blood Quantum, and Ideology in the Jim Crow South & Indian Territory 18 Racecraft in the Allotment Process: Blood Quanta, One-Drop-of-Blood Rules, and Land Land Allotments, Indigeneity, and Racecraft in Post-Statehood Oklahoma 25 Chapter 2: The Reshaping of Gender in the Post-Allotment and 38-51 Post-Statehood Period: Independent Freedwomen Landowners, the (Re)Establishment of Black Infrastructure, and
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstruction in the Chickasaw Nation
    RECONSTRUCTION IN THE CHICKASAW NATION, 1865-1877 By PARTHENA LOUISE JAMES Bachelor of Arts Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 1963 Submitted to the faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May, 1967 1n«iR~ STArE -ilwtlfflfftf L~S!Ft,A~Yf JAN 10 M 1865-1877 Thesis Approved: .na Dean of the~--- Graduate College 358863 ii PREFACE The Chickasaw Indians have the doubtful honor of being remembered by historians as the smallest and most warlike of the Five Civilized Tribes . Like so many other tribes, they were forced to leave their na­ tive homes and settle in Indian Territory as white c ivilization advanced ac ross the American, continent. Some twenty years after coming to their new lands , the lives of the Chickasaws were again interrupted. The Civil War broke out and the Chickasaws , almost unanimously, joined the Confederate States of Ame rica. They felt a strong sympathy for the Southern cause, since they not only owned Negro slaves which they had purchased wi_th money received from the sale of Southern Chickasaw lands, but also had many friends who joined the Confederate Army at the outbreak of the fighting. Th e purpose of t his thesis is to investigate the effec ts of the post-Civil War reconstruction period on the Chickasaws. The Chickasaws suffered little direc t damage from t he Ci vil War since there was but limited fighting within the Chickasaw Nation and the tribe was spared a division of opinion in choosing sides in the conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedmen in the Indian Territory After the Civil War: the Dual Approaches of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE NANZAN REVIEW OF AMERICAN STUDIES Volume 30 (2008): 91-108 Proceedings of the NASSS 2008 Social Sciences I Freedmen in the Indian Territory after the Civil War: The Dual Approaches of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations IWASAKI YOSHITAKA HANNAN UNIVERSITY, PART-TIME LECTURER Introduction I shall be discussing the tribal membership of “freedmen”, the ex-slaves owned and emancipated by two Native American groups―the Choctaw and the Chickasaw of the so-called “Five Civilized Tribes” living in the Indian Territory, now around the State of Oklahoma―and their descendants, and how these freedmen were―or were not―assimilated into the tribes of their former owners after the American Civil War. In contrast to the other three nations―the Cherokee, the Creek/Muscogee, and the Seminole Nations―who accepted freedmen in their territories as citizens in 1866, the Choctaw and the Chickasaw both refused to grant rights of citizenship to the freedmen in their territories until much later. The Choctaw Nation did not follow suit until 1883, and although the Chickasaw Nation decided to grant their freedmen rights of citizenship in 1873, these were never fully promulgated. The Chickasaw freedmen, then, belonged to neither the Chickasaw Nation nor the United States; they endured a ‘limbo of citizenship’ for over 40 years until 1907, when the Indian Territory was at last incorporated into the United States as the State of Oklahoma. The Choctaw and the Chickasaw legislatures termed the dilemma “The Negro Question.” For their part, the freedmen of the two nations referred to themselves as “slaves without masters”.1 Why did the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations treat their freedmen more severely than the three other nations, and why did the Choctaw and the Chickasaw differ in their policies over the “The Negro Question”, that is, how to treat freedmen? These questions will be considered in my presentation today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mythology of the Oklahoma Indians: a Survey of the Legal Status of Indian Tribes in Oklahoma, 6 Am
    American Indian Law Review Volume 6 | Number 2 1-1-1978 The yM thology of the Oklahoma Indians: A Survey of the Legal Status of Indian Tribes in Oklahoma F. Browning Pipestem G. William Rice Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation F. B. Pipestem & G. W. Rice, The Mythology of the Oklahoma Indians: A Survey of the Legal Status of Indian Tribes in Oklahoma, 6 Am. Indian L. Rev. 259 (1978), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr/vol6/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in American Indian Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE MYTHOLOGY OF THE OKLAHOMA INDIANS: A SURVEY OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF INDIAN TRIBES IN OKLAHOMA F. Browning Pipestem * and G. William Rice *" Perhaps the most basic principle of all Indian law, sup- ported by a host of decisions... is the principle that those powers which are lawfully vested in an Indian tribe are not, in general, delegatedpowers granted by express acts of Con- gress, but rather inherent powers of a limited sovereignty which has never been extinguished.... What is not expressly limited remains within the domain of tribalsovereignty....' Introduction The nature of the federal government's role within the American federal system has changed significantly with the adoption of the "New Federalism" strategy or approach to the delivery of federal programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Pe&&&L RIGHTS and L&RT,JES.:OF Inii&S. A:. , : ,, . -. : ..., ,,'
    i ., _ ..- . .’ ’ I. : .’ ‘. ,,, I CEIAPTEB- 8 . - : ,’ . pE&&&L RIGHTS AND L&RT,JES.:OF INIi&S. ,, a:. , : -. : .., ,,’ (,, . iAi3LE O,i- CoNTENTS : ' " 'i \ . ,. _, _ , .‘ - Pam I Page seqidn 1: I&+@n;-LL ;-L- -2 _-- __-__ -_ _ _ 151 &dion 8 CooUiryd. I’ . ciritelMhip-z;:,‘2-__-1, .-__A _____, _____ 2 _____ 153 & Rejrtricted. mea&&-Cor&ued. &dioni 9._‘. A.; @thtiajr~~~~‘ac&$+$ citizenship- + _ _ _ 153 :. ‘(9) &3b&y lo r&vi or ,sy7d , ..-* .I .- I!,. “, ‘. ’ ” (i) L~e&tiev Gth Idi& tribes-,-- 153 funds-,-~ -_-__ ----_-__--_- 169 ‘. \ ” (9) special statute& ---- :---::--- .153 sediqn 9. The me&in& of “wardship” ________ ii-- __ :-- 169 ’ : , (3) ‘.Ger+al~~ sialutss +bralizing A. <War& as dom#c dependent nations- _ _. 170 - .;.a&j&&:----______________. 154 B. Wards as tribes subject to &ngreaaional . (4) Getieid stat&s ~ naturalizing power--‘--L -A-_m_----_ i-. __-_ ii-- 170 ‘. 1,’ ..,oth& classes of IndiansL _ _ 154 C. Ward8 ‘aa i~ittiduals 8ubj& to Con- gies~~0sipnai~O~~~ .' I. .. B. Jhacitizm; India?&z-;---L _________ 154 \ -I-..------..------- 171 CL ‘E&c.tof citikensh~p~~~~ ______ L-; ____ 156 \ D. Wards as subjeds of federal court juris- seson‘$. &bffrigL~ ------’ --------,----- 2 --_-__--__-_ i57 di&ion-; ____ .___________________ 171 I A. Indian &se&anchivemmt ____________ 157 RL W,ar&& subje&bf administrative power- 171 B~&nstit&nurZ pro&ion of ( In&an F. Wards as benejkiaries of a trust-- __ ___ 172 I voting i-i&is ______ _____ _ __ _ -_ _ __ _ _ 158 G.
    [Show full text]
  • Not Even Past." William Faulkner NOT EVEN PAST
    "The past is never dead. It's not even past." William Faulkner NOT EVEN PAST Search the site ... Black Slaves, Indian Like 2.8K Masters: Slavery, Tweet Emancipation, and Citizenship in the Native American South, by Barbara Krauthamer (2013) by Nakia Parker For decades, scholars peered at the painful and complex topic of American slavery through a purely “black-white” lens—in other words, black slaves who had white masters. The sad reality that some Native Americans, (in particular, the Creek, Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole, or “the Five Tribes”) also participated in chattel and race-based slavery, was rarely acknowledged in the historical annals. Only in the latter part of the 20th century did historians begin to address this oversight. Several groundbreaking studies recognized the momentous repercussions of this practice for Native and African American populations alike during the antebellum era and down to the present day. Barbara Krauthamer, a professor of Native American and African American history at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, adds an exhaustive and compelling contribution to the research in this area. The rst full-length monograph chronicling chattel slavery in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, Krauthamer amply demonstrates how both before and after the era of Indian Removal in the mid-nineteenth century slavery also intersected with issues of race and gender in complicated ways. Krauthamer tracks white commodication and enslavement of Choctaw and Chickasaw bodies starting in the late seventeenth century and its transition to the commodication and enslavement of black bodies by Choctaw and Chickasaw slaveholders in the eighteenth century. In addition, Krauthamer adroitly debunks the myth that the main cause for American Indian participation in chattel slavery stemmed from their desire for European, and later American goods, unable to resist the inescapable forces of the market economy and capitalism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chickasaws a Highly Advanced Tribe Finds a New Home
    The Chickasaws A highly advanced tribe finds a new home By DR . A. M. GIBSON ederal Indian policy during the except for dialectical differences was tact was with the Spanish. During Fnineteenth century was inextrica- identical, and the same was true for 1541, Hernando De Soto and his men bly tied in with Federal land policy. the written language which mission- spent a season with the Chickasaws, Eternally it seemed the national gov- aries developed for these two tribes. imposing on tribal hospitality while ernment was involved in negotiating The historic Chickasaw range ex- resting from their travels. When De land surrender treaties with the Indian tended along the western frontiers of Soto was ready to resume his search tribes to make room for the settlers . At three states, Mississippi, Tennessee, for the fabled Cale, he demanded first these cession treaties provided for and Kentucky. porters and women. This insulted diminution of tribal domain ; later as tribal leaders and they sent warriors the frontier settlements intruded to to attack De Soto's camp, and their This is the third in a series of arti- the very edge of the diminished tribal fierce assault drove the Spaniards cles on the Five Civilized Tribes of ranges, the policy of relocation de- from the Chickasaw country. Oklahoma, written by Dr. A . M. veloped. This was the reason the Gibson, chairman of the depart- national government established the in the European drive for control of Indian country west of Arkansas and ment of history, head of the divi- sion of manuscripts and curator of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, the Missouri .
    [Show full text]
  • THE ARMSTRONGS of INDIAN TERRITORY by Carolyn Thomas Foreman
    THE ARMSTRONGS OF INDIAN TERRITORY By Carolyn Thomas Foreman Frank Crawford Armstrong, born at Skullyville, Indian Terri- tory in 1835, was a son of Frank Wells Armstrong who resided among the Five Civilized Tribes from 1830 until his death in 1839. His mother was Anne M. Willard Armstrong. The young man was edu- cated at the Holy Cross College, Worcester, Massachusetts.+ In 1854 the youth went to Texas and made a trip across the state from Corpus Christi to El Paso with his stepfather, General Persifor Frazer Smith of the United States Army.' Young Armstrong displayed such bravery during an encounter with the Indians on the. journey that he was given an appointment from Texas as lieu- tenant in the Second Dragoons June 7, 1855. He served in Texas, Kansas, and Nebraska until 1857 when he accompanied General Albert Sidney Johnston to Utah.2 Armstrong became a first lieutenant March 9, 1859; was ad- vanced to captain June 6, 1861, and was transferred to the Second Cavalry August 3, 1861. He resigned ten days later and joined the *Biographical data on General Frank C. Armstrong from the records of the College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, Massachusetts, have recently been received by the Editorial Office of the Historical Society through the assistance of Mr. Craig Mathews, of Dalton, Georgia. The biographical material had been graciously copied and sent Mr. Mathews by Father Walter J. Meagher. S.J., Professor of History 31 Holy Cross. Under the date "Jan. 19th, 1845" in the Registration Book of Students of Iloly Cr- office of the Dean of Studies, appears the following entry: "Entered this date, Francis Gough Armstrong, Bon of Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Confederate Cavalry in Indian Territory
    Confederate Cavalry in Indian Territory By: Leslie J. Rodman In the summer of 1861, the Civil War exploded in the west at a place called Wilson’s Creek, opening a vast right flank west of the Mississippi River and creating the need for a Confederate fighting force with which it could be defended. Faced with the dilemma of allocating the limited resources of the Confederacy in the spring of 1861, Jefferson Davis organized administrative and command functions into autonomous geographical departments. One such department was the Trans-Mississippi, which ultimately centralized control over all Confederate territory west of the Mississippi River. 1 By December 31, 1861 the Trans-Mississippi had mustered 41 individual cavalry units totaling 28,693 men into Confederate service. This included sixteen regiments, three battalions, and three independent companies totaling 17,338 men from Texas; five regiments and five battalions totaling 5,145 men from Arkansas; five regiments and two battalions and one independent company totaling 5,460 men from Indian Territory; and one regiment totaling (750) men from Louisiana. 2 Overall, cavalry recruitment held numbers over the infantry in Texas and Arkansas, by approximately 2.4 to 1 and 1.2 to 1 respectively, while the infantry held numbers in Louisiana by a ratio of more than 30 to 1. No Confederate infantry units had been raised in Indian Territory. Department-wide, infantry units 3 held a slim numerical advantage over the cavalry of 1.25 to 1. 1 The Indian Territory as a Defensive Priority Designing an overall strategy for defending the Confederacy posed many dilemmas for Jefferson Davis.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Civilized Tribes of Indians
    University of Oklahoma College of Law University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons American Indian and Alaskan Native Documents in the Congressional Serial Set: 1817-1899 3-24-1896 Five Civilized Tribes of Indians Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/indianserialset Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation S. Doc. No. 182. 54th Cong., 1st Sess. (1896) This Senate Document is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in American Indian and Alaskan Native Documents in the Congressional Serial Set: 1817-1899 by an authorized administrator of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 54'.l'H CONGRESS,} SEN.ATE. Docm,rnNT 1st Session. { No.182. lN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED' STATES. MARCH 24, 1896.-0rdered to be printed.--.• l\fr. BERRY presented the following ARGUMENT MADE BY JUDGE M'KENNON BEFORE THE COMMIT­ TEE ON INDIAN APPAIRS OF · THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA­ TIVES, RELATIVE TO CONDITION OP AFFAIRS IN THE INDIAN TERRITORY, TOGETHER WITH OTHER PAPERS, AND SENATE DOCUMENT NO. 12, REPORT OF THE COMMISSION · APPOINTED TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES OF INDIANS, KNOWN AS THE "DAWES COMMISSION." HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Co:Ml\HTTEE ON lNDIAN AFFAIRS, 'Wednesday, March 11, 1896. The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., there being present: Mr. Sherman (chairman), and Messrs. Curtis, Doolittle, Fischer, Eddy, White, Stewart, Hyde, Maddox, Little, Pendleton, and :F'lynn.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty with Choctaw and Chickasaw, 1866
    TREATY WITH CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW, 1866. Apr. 28, 1866. 14 Stats., 769. Ratified June 28, 1866. Proclaimed July 10, 1866. Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties. Vol. II (Treaties). Compiled and edited by Charles J. Kappler. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1904. Articles of agreement and convention between the United States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations of Indians, made and concluded at the City of Washington the twenty- eight day of April, in the year eighteen hundred and sixty- six, by Dennis N. Cooley, Elijah Sells, and E. S. Parker, special commissioners on the part of the United States, and Alfred Wade, Allen Wright, James Riley, and John Page, commissioners on the part of the Choctaws, and Winchester Colbert, Edmund Pickens, Holmes Colbert, Colbert Carter, and Robert H. Love, commissioners on the part of the Chickasaws. ARTICLE 1. Permanent peace and friendship are hereby established between the United States and said nations; and the Choctaws and Chickasaws do hereby bind themselves respectively to use their influence [*919] and to make every exertion to induce Indians of the plains to maintain peaceful relations with each other, with other Indians, and with the United States. ARTICLE 2. The Choctaws and Chickasaws hereby covenant and agree that henceforth neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in punishment of crime whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, in accordance with laws applicable to all members of the particular nation, shall ever exist in said nations. ARTICLE 3. The Choctaws
    [Show full text]