DOCSLIB.ORG

2014.07 Choctaw Resistance to Removal From

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2014.07 Choctaw Resistance to Removal From BISKINIK | July 2014 11 Choctaw resistance to removal from ancient homeland Last month Editor’s Note: This articles of the When labor and military service, forced to pay taxes began a four-part treaty were treaty to the state, that their children would be Iti Fabvssa series month’s Iti Fabvssa is read and negotiations destitute, and that the Choctaw people would examining ways the part two in a four-part translated to failed and be utterly destroyed. Choctaw people installment. the Choctaw Iti Fabussa Choctaws After this speech, out of fear, coercion, and resisted Removal assembly, the quickly left false hope that Article 14 of the treaty would and the Trail of Tears. In this month’s Iti United States the council be honored, and without the final draft of the Fabvssa the focus is on Choctaw resistance to Commissioners immediately asked a grounds, the U.S. commissioners became treaty even having been read to them, or the Dancing Rabbit Creek Treaty, an Choctaw man named Killihota to speak to desperate. On September 24, they ap- translated, the Choctaw leaders still present agreement ceding the last part of the those present. Killihota stood up from the proached Choctaw Chief Greenwood LeFlore signed the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, Choctaw homeland to the United States Choctaw council, gave an obviously exagger- to help them find a way to get the treaty against the unanimous wishes of the government, and for many families, set the ated account of the lands to the west, and approved. LeFlore agreed, on the condition Choctaw people. Violence and turmoil stage for the Trail of Tears and Removal to spoke in favor of Removing to Indian that several alterations be made to the treaty, erupted at the council grounds. Indian Territory. Territory. When he finished, an elder including adding a provision Choctaw Note –The above account of treaty Between 1801 and 1825, the Choctaw Choctaw woman sitting at the center of the people, who so desired, be given land negotiations is excerpted from Halbert 1902. Nation ceded 34,000 square miles of land to Choctaw council stood up with a butcher allotments in Mississippi and become joint the United States through a series of seven knife, and told Killihota that if she were to citizens of the Choctaw Nation and the treaties. Despite the solemn assurance given cut his chest open with that knife, she would United States (Article 14). by treaty negotiator Andrew Jackson in 1820 expose two hearts. By this, of course, she was The following day, the new treaty docu- that the United States would never again accusing him of having divided loyalties. ment was read and translated to the Choctaw seek Choctaw lands, just ten years later a Choctaw opposition to the proposed treaty people who remained at the council ground. commission formed by Andrew Jackson was overwhelming. When a vote was taken at As the stipulations were being read, the himself (by then president of the United the end of the day, Killihota was the only Choctaw group talked loudly among them- States) entered Choctaw Nation. The purpose Choctaw in the 60-plus member council that selves, indicating they had no intention of of this commission was to negotiate not just was in favor of the treaty. signing it. Later that day, the Commissioners a land cession treaty, but a treaty that would The following day, a Choctaw committee attempted to negotiate the Treaty with only transfer all of the remaining 17,000 square formally told the Commissioners that there Greenwood LeFlore’s district. Even within miles of the Choctaw homeland in Missis- would be no negotiations on Removal. One LeFlore’s own district, where the pro-Re- sippi to the United States and set up Choctaw of the Commissioners, Major Eaton, then moval Chief had a great deal of influence, the Removal to the west. The Choctaw people arose and in no uncertain terms, told the treaty was voted down by a two-thirds major- resisted this treaty and, by extension, Choctaw representatives that if they refused, ity. Those who voted against it then went Removal itself, in the form of three over- the state of Mississippi would seize their home, believing that negotiations were whelming “no” votes, hundreds of walk-outs, lands, that the United States military concluded. and a butcher knife. outnumbering the Choctaw by 100 or 1,000 On September 27, the Commissioners The United States commissioners Major to 1 would move in and destroy any resis- again met with the Choctaw representatives John H. Eaton and Colonel John Coffee tance, that all remaining Choctaw land would who remained on the Council grounds. The arranged to meet with Choctaw leaders and be taken by force, and that the Choctaw who Choctaw leaders announced to the Commis- several thousand Choctaw citizens at a place survived would be moved to the west. sion that it was their unanimous decision to in the Choctaw homeland called Chukfi After this speech, the second U.S. Commis- reject the proposed treaty. ahihla bok “Dancing Rabbit Creek” in sioner, Colonel Coffee, sickened by the Thereafter, Major Eaton again addressed mid-September 1830 to discuss the treaty. threats, indicated that he would have no part the remaining Choctaws, telling them that if On September 22, after some days of in such negotiations. Many Choctaws had a the treaty was rejected, the United States preparations and talks, the assembled similar view, and left the council grounds would cease to have any relations with the Choctaw council requested that the Commis- over the next several days. In their minds, Choctaw government. Lands obtained by the sion formally present the terms of the leaving the council grounds was a strong Choctaw Nation through previous treaties proposed treaty to an assembled body of statement declining the treaty. There would would be given away to other Tribes, Choctaw leaders and citizens. After the be no agreement. Choctaws would be forced into conscripted .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE PATH of EDUCATION AMONG the MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAW Stark
    FROM POVERTY TO PROSPERITY: THE PATH OF EDUCATION AMONG THE MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAW Stark D. Harbour A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of History in the College of Arts & Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Malinda Maynor Lowery Keith S. Richotte William Sturkey © 2019 Stark D. Harbour ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Stark D. Harbour: From Poverty to Prosperity: The Path of Education among the Mississippi Choctaw (Under the direction of Malinda Maynor Lowery) The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians knew early in their post-recognition existence that education was the key to future success for the tribe. From 1945 to 1963, the MBCI methodically built the framework for an autonomous school district that would provide students with a comprehensive curriculum that addressed tribal needs. The crowning achievement of this project was a high school that kept tribal members in the community for their secondary education. This analysis traces the creation of Choctaw Central High School from conception to completion and highlights the contributions of tribal leaders in making the project a major tribal success. Tribal Chairmen like Emmet York and Philip Martin helped develop a progressive school curriculum and the capital necessary to fund the school as an independent entity. Choctaw Central High School serves as a prime example of Choctaw self-determination and shrewd diplomacy to advance tribal education and the MBCI’s external image. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: FROM POVERTY TO PROSPERITY ..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Accessions: 2001-2002
    The Primary Source Volume 24 | Issue 2 Article 8 2002 Accessions: 2001-2002 Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/theprimarysource Part of the Archival Science Commons Recommended Citation (2002) "Accessions: 2001-2002," The Primary Source: Vol. 24 : Iss. 2 , Article 8. DOI: 10.18785/ps.2402.08 Available at: https://aquila.usm.edu/theprimarysource/vol24/iss2/8 This Column is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in The rP imary Source by an authorized editor of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Preservation Assistance Grants The National Endowment for the Humanities, Division of Preservation and Access, is in its fourth year of awarding small grants, of up to $5000, to help libraries, archives, museums and historical organizations · enhance their capacity to preserve their humanities collections. Applicants may request support for general preservation assessments or consultations with preservation professionals to develop a specific plan for addressing an identified problem. Institutions may also apply for funding to attend prese1vation training workshops and to purchase basic preservation supplies, equipment, and storage furniture. The deadline for the 2003 Preservation Assistance Grants is approaching. Applications are due by May 15, 2003. For more information and updates on the guidelines, see the NEH website http://www.neh.gov/grants/guidelines/presassistance.html 2002-03 NEH Preservation Assistance Grant Recipients Announced In 2000 the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) began awarding these small preservation grants to libraries, archives, museums, and historical organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Greg O'brien “Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chief
    Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chiefs Confront a Changing World By: Greg O'Brien “Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chiefs Confront a Changing World,” Mississippi History Now (March 2001) Made available courtesy of Mississippi Historical Society: http://mshistory.k12.ms.us/ ***Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from the Mississippi Historical Society. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures may be missing from this format of the document.*** Article: One of Mississippi's and the United States' most inhumane actions was the forced removal of American Indians from the South to lands west of the Mississippi River in the early 1800s. Removal occurred because of an incessant demand for Indian lands. Demands for Indian land resulted from Anglo-American population growth in the South, the expansion of the short-staple cotton industry after Eli Whitney's cotton gin became widely available in the 1790s, the discovery of gold and other minerals on some Indian land, and simple racism. It did not help Indians that the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 provided lands to the west to which the United States could banish them, or that by 1815 there was no longer a viable European ally in the area who could counteract American demands. Indian Removal Act The Mississippi Legislature passed a resolution that went into effect in January 1830 extending its jurisdiction over Choctaw and Chickasaw territories within the state. Many Indians opposed this move and appealed to the United States government for assistance. Others accepted this new state of affairs and sought the best terms possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Slaves and Slaveholders in the Choctaw Nation: 1830-1866
    SLAVES AND SLAVEHOLDERS IN THE CHOCTAW NATION: 1830-1866 Jeffrey L. Fortney , Jr., B.A. Thesis Prepared for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS May 2009 APPROVED: D. Harland Haglen, Major Professor Randolph Campbell, Committee Member F. Todd Smith, Committee Member Richard McCaslin, Chair of the Department of History Michael Monticino, Interim Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies Fortney Jr., Jeffrey L. Slaves and Slaveholders in the Choctaw Nation: 1830-1866. Master of Arts (History), May 2009, 71 pp., 5 tables, 4 figures, bibliography, 46 titles. Racial slavery was a critical element in the cultural development of the Choctaws and was a derivative of the peculiar institution in southern states. The idea of genial and hospitable slave owners can no more be conclusively demonstrated for the Choctaws than for the antebellum South. The participation of Choctaws in the Civil War and formal alliance with the Confederacy was dominantly influenced by the slaveholding and a connection with southern identity, but was also influenced by financial concerns and an inability to remain neutral than a protection of the peculiar institution. Had the Civil War not taken place, the rate of Choctaw slave ownership possibly would have reached the level of southern states and the Choctaws would be considered part of the South. Copyright 2009 by Jeffrey L. Fortney, Jr. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Struggle Against Choctaw
    “WE ARE CLAY PEOPLE”: THE STRUGGLE AGAINST CHOCTAW COMMUNAL DISSOLUTION, 1801-1861 By Gary Coleman Cheek Jr. A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Department of History Mississippi State, Mississippi May 2010 Copyright by Gary Coleman Cheek Jr. 2010 “WE ARE CLAY PEOPLE”: THE STRUGGLE AGAINST CHOCTAW COMMUNAL DISSOLUTION, 1801-1861 By Gary Coleman Cheek Jr. Approved: _________________________________ _________________________________ Anne Marshall Alan I. Marcus Assistant Professor of History Chair and Professor of History (Director of Dissertation) (Committee Member) _________________________________ _________________________________ Evan Peacock Jason K. Phillips Associate Professor of Anthropology Associate Professor of History (Committee Member) (Committee Member) _________________________________ _________________________________ Peter C. Messer Gary L. Myers Associate Professor of History Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of History (Committee Member) Name: Gary Coleman Cheek Jr. Date of Degree: May 1, 2010 Institution: Mississippi State University Major Field: History (Native America) Major Professor: Dr. Anne Marshall Title of Study: “WE ARE CLAY PEOPLE”: THE STRUGGLE AGAINST CHOCTAW COMMUNAL DISSOLUTION, 1801-1861 Pages in Study: 359 Candidate for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Acculturation has become an integral part of scholarship about Native Americans in the Southeast. Recent studies have focused on trade the eighteenth century and Choctaw entry into the American market economy during the beginning of the nineteenth century. This study analyzes acculturation from 1801 to 1861, carrying the story about cultural change and persistence through the Removal era and to the American Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan the UNIVERSITY of OKLAHOMA
    ' 59-13,911 BAIRD, William David, 19 39- PETER PITCHLYNN: CHOCTAW DELEGATE. The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1969 History, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE PETER PITCHLYNN: CHOCTAW DELEGATE A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY \ V BY W. DAVID BAIRD Norman, Oklahoma 1968 PETER PITCHLYNN: CHOCTAW DELEGATE APPROVED BY .-^ /CÉÂJL^i,.' T" DISSERTATION COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As no dissertation is completely the inspiration or work of its author, I should like to express my appre­ ciation to some of those who have aided me in my study. Very special thanks go to Professor A. M. Gibson, my director in this work, who was generous in guidance and gentle in criticism. If the manuscript has merit, it is largely because of his direction. I also want to thank Professors Donald J. Berthrong, Gilbert C. Fite, and Walter Rundell, Jr., for taking the time from their busy schedules to read the manuscript and offer helpful sug­ gestions for its improvement. Not only have the comments of these gentlemen aided materially, but their instruction, counsel and example over the last several years have inspired me to imitate them. I would be remiss not to extend thanks also to Mrs. Relia Looney at the Oklahoma Historical Society, to Mrs. Marie King at the Gilcrease Museum, and to lyLr. Jack Haley at the University of Oklahoma Library for their assistance during my visits to those institutions. Fur­ thermore, the research could not have been completed without the hospitality of Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Background & Analysis
    CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS G ENERAL F EATURES Location Greenwood is the county seat of Leflore County, Mississippi and is located at the eastern edge of the Mississippi Delta, approximately 96 miles north of Jackson, Mississippi and 130 miles south of Memphis, Tennessee. Natural Features The city has a total area of 9.5 square miles, of which 9.2 square miles is land and 0.3 square miles of it is water (3.15%). Greenwood is located where the Tallahatchie and Yalobusha rivers join to form the Yazoo River. In fact, Greenwood is one of the few places in the world where you can stand between two rivers, the Yazoo and the Tallahatchie Rivers, flowing in the opposite direction. The flood plain of the Mississippi River has long been an area rich in vegetation and wildlife, feeding off the Mississippi and its numerous tributaries. Long before Europeans migrated to America, the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indian nations settled in the Delta's marsh and swampland. In 1830, the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek was signed by Choctaw Chief Greenwood Leflore, opening the swampland to European settlers. Picture: Greenwood's Grand Boulevard once named one of America's ten most beautiful streets by the U.S. Chambers of Commerce and the Garden Clubs of America. History The first settlement on the banks of the Yazoo River was a trading post founded by John Williams in 1830 and known as Williams Landing. The settlement quickly blossomed, and in 1844 was incorporated as “Greenwood,” named after Chief Greenwood Leflore. Growing into a strong cotton market, the key to the city’s success was based on its strategic location in the heart of the Delta, on the easternmost point of the alluvial plain and astride the Tallahatchie River and the Yazoo River.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty of Dancing Erabbit Creek Mobilty
    Treaty Of Dancing Erabbit Creek Traditionalistic Rich misuse journalistically. Judson overworks creepingly while choreic Al allies pugilistically or melodramatising groundlessly. Fabio remains unswept: she factor her inductances garrotting too continently? Cultural isolation of the white people secured and english language is the beginning. Delegation to conduct a treaty dancing erabbit creek was to assert immunity is betty white settlers and minor changes to the bill. Groceries for your opponents from its own wife to the president jefferson deemed it. North to be a treaty of creek indians and the house. Moon last indian school, independent state or another the story. Underbrush so much of dancing erabbit creek are rare book and the legislation. Agree to answer the treaty dancing erabbit set forth in early choctaw holdings and families of the land in eastern cultures in natchez, popular with past that the expedition. Regulated buying of treaty and marketing their ancestral homelands in your highly and flourish. Policies required to and of dancing erabbit failed to it. Schools on brainly peers for at gunpoint, as a particular tribe represented the relocation on. Headdresses or rainy, and state or clans; they are not? Hitting it is the poor to the provisions of time? Significantly from users and the use theatrical and families of my heart any questions about the west. Inherent and emmett york, and admit the founder of the states. Territory following the point of dancing rabbit creek was actually this browser for the deceased by the colonial southeast, witnessed the federally recognized in the advent of treaty? Rich land and naming their claims allowed to eke out against those who was established the settlers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Trail of Tears Song: the New Jaw Bone
    ITI FABVSSA A Trail of Tears song: The New Jaw Bone The Trail of Tears defined a generation of Choctaw ancestors profoundly. Last month, we featured the Wheelock Academy play from the 1930’s that commemorated the centennial of the start of removals from the Homelands. This month, we are featuring a poem written by a Choctaw person during their journey from the Homelands to Indian Territory along the Trail of Tears and Death. This poem, written as a song, expresses the hardships of the trail and sentiments towards leaders of the day. While the author is anonymous, a letter that accompanied the poem stated that the author was in Peter Pitchlynn’s moving party and that he likely attended the Choctaw Academy in Kentucky, a Choctaw Nation-funded boy’s boarding school. Throughout the poem, the writer references the route that they traveled. Starting their journey in early winter of 1831, a party from the Northeastern District of Choctaw country traveled by land to Memphis. The group continued from Memphis on the Brandywine steamship down the Mississippi River. Upon arrival at the Arkansas Post, they disembarked and waited for six weeks at the post until the river was navigable again. With thin clothes and no shoes, these Choctaws suffered through a blizzard with little shelter, blankets, clothing, or food. Once the water levels rose, the group departed again by boat and arrived at Little Rock. After camping there for one day, they sailed up the Arkansas River on the Reindeer steamship. Since the river water levels were too low, the party was forced to stop 90 miles below Fort Smith.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire in the Name Of
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EAU CLAIRE IN THE NAME OF CIVILIZATION: JACKSON, FORSYTH AND THE INDIAN REMOVAL ACT OF 1830 DAVE NEWBURG SENIOR THESIS HISTORY 489: RESEARCH SEMINAR PROFESSOR KATE LANG DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY NOVEMBER 10, 2006 Copyright for this work is owned by the author. This digital version is published by McIntyre Library, University of Wisconsin Eau Claire with the consent of the author. ABSTRACT The intent of this paper is to discuss Andrew Jackson‟s controversial actions and policies affecting Native Americans, most notably the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This act required all Native American tribes east of the Mississippi river to move west into designated frontier territories. The native migration would allow the white Americans to possess new farmlands to increase the union‟s crop output. White settlers supported the act unanimously due to the promise of state improvement, but many natives would claim that the act was either a great shame or a declaration of war. This paper will examine Jackson‟s rise to the presidency and how Jackson‟s stance on the Native American issue increased his popularity amongst southern whites. This paper will also examine the correspondence of Fort Armstrong Indian Agent, Thomas Forsyth. The content of these letters help to provide a rationale for the Jackson‟s course of action. Although it is unknown if Jackson ever met Forsyth, the information contained in Forsyth‟s correspondence reflect contemporary concern with the “Indian problem.” Confrontations from forcibly removed tribes and conflicts such as the Black Hawk War and the Second Seminole War will be addressed as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi Dancing Rabbit Creek Treaty Site
    Form 10-300 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (July 1969) NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Mississippi COUNTY- NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Noxubee INVENTORY - NOMINATION FORM FOR NPS USE ONLY ENTRY NUMBER (Type all entries — complete applicable sections) .1. NAME Dancing Rabbit Creek Treaty Site AN D- OR HISTORI C: 12, LOCATION J 3. C L A 5 SI M LA HUN . ————————————————— ~~ ———————————; ——— ".—— — ^ • ;^ '^^. '^'m CATEGORY ACCESSIBLE OWNERSHIP STATUS (Check One) TO THE PUBLIC rj District Q Building S Public Public Acquisition: f_J Occupied Yes: Q Restricted [?J Site Q Structure O Private | | In Process 53 Unoccupied J3J3 Unrestricted D Object Q Both ( | Being Considered l_l Preservation work in progress D No PRESENT USE (Check One or More as Appropriate) \ | Agricultural | | Government | 1 Park [^J Transportation I | Comments |~| Commercial LT] Industrial Q Private Residence JT] Other (Spec/fy; Q Educational CD Military Qi Reiiaious Some recent | I Entertainment 1 1 Museum [^i scientific Choctaw burials 1:4, OWNER OF PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: 1STAT H-s State of Mississippi - Mississippi Pairk System CO STREET AND NUMBER: en H- Robert E. Lee Building, Lamar Street CO (A Cl TY OR TOWN: STATE: CODE H- Jackson Mississippi 39205I 28 TJ•u JO ^OCATiONO^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION H- COURTHOUSE, REGISTRY OF DEEDS, ETC: n X 0 0 c Noxubee County Courthouse 7 STREET AND NUMBER: H c -< cr (D CITY OR TOWN: STATE CODE (D Macon Mississippi 39341 28 «,::;:**|:il!j*:fe^ TITLE OF SURVEY: ENTR Tl DATE OF SURVEY: Q Federal <M| o ^j State Q County Q] Loca 1 '7 XI DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS: UMBE z j TJ t/i c (~ STREET AND NUMBER: cn rn O 5 r~Z CITY OR TOWN: STATE: « i -< 0 > H m (Check One) Q Excellent Good D Q Deteriorated [""] Ruins f~| Unexposed CONDITION (Check One; (Check One) Altered Q Unaltered Moved g£] Original Site DESCRI BE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (»' known; PHYSICAL APPEARANCE *^L** * *M The treaty site was originally largely covered with pine and oak trees.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi Department of Archives and History
    Form 10-300 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (July 1969) NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Mississippi COUNTY: NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Carroll INVENTORY - NOMINATION FORM FOR NPS USE ONLY ENTRY NUMBER (Type all entries — complete applicable sections) Malmaison AND/OR HISTORIC: Malmaison ^j^ii^^li^jiji-^i:^ I -4:;. : .?>• : . ^ x ' : : :. ': . : ; . ; .'. -^$i^i^$S$ ...... , „ ^^y-/ pf<«\ ,. -^>^-— %& ——— i ST ^j~-=!--- ACCESSIBLE CATEGORY OWNERSH.P (Check One) TO THE PUBLIC CD District Q Building CD Public Public Acquisition: D Occupied Yes: 3JJT] Site Q Structure 02 Private D ln Process L^J,rY Unoccupiedii • j CD' — ' Restricted CD Object D Both 23 Bcin 9 Con siaereasidered r—i — jID p reservotion• worki LCD-J Unrestricted in progress Ufl PRESENT USE (Check One or More as Appropriate) C2C Agricultural | | Government | | Park CD Transportation CD Comments CD Commercial CD Industrial Q Private Residence PI Other CSoecify) CD Educational CD Mi itary | [ Religious CD Entertainment CD Museum | | Scientific ... ........_....... I ;i;;:|;ii^|:||i|;;;:P;|&P e.RT r.; . ; ;..... ' , : . ' . :i ' . • ' :: . ;: • '• •' . •; . "••:'. :• ' MM Si:::iilililllP ^ OWNER'S NAME: STATE: Mr. Claude Shook STREET AND NUMBER: Mississippi CITY OR TOWN: STATE: CODE Charleston Mississippi 23 P-ili|i!l|fl!^ . ... : : ••••Y;;: COURTHOUSE, REGISTRY OF DEEDS. ETC: Carroll County Courthouse COUNTY: STREET AND NUMBER: Carroll CITY OR TOWN: STATE CODE Carrollton Mississippi 23 |i,;;;;:^f::^|?;|p;Nf^||fN; IN ixi&TJNG SURVEYS . ' ; • • '• : TITLE OF SURVEY: NUMBERENTRY Historic American Buildings Survey ^ Tl DATE OF SURVEY: TQO£ J7~| Federal O CD State CD County Q Loca 73 DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS: C- Z Division of Prints and Photographs Co C STREET AND NUMBER: ~" ~* £--- — t/i m O Library of Congress z CITY OR TOWN: STATE: CQDE I r Washington .
    [Show full text]