Equity Case 7071
Empower Me to Know My History
RUSSELL, Lorenzo et
al.
·
Choctaw Freedman #1364
·
Enrollment #4541&4542
·
Place of Residence: Grant, Indian Territory
Choctaw Nation
·
Father: RUSSELL, Jim Choctaw Indian (CHOBB#1545)
·
Mother: RUSSELL, Julia Choctaw Freedwoman
CHOF#1363
·
Joe and
Dillard PERRY files BIA Record Group 75, Entry 90C, F-12
·
See CHOF#
1303
I have to repeat why I enjoy researching the history of the
Choctaw and Chickasaw freedmen and not just concentrate on my family’s history
among these tribes. I take the position that if I research the freedmen at
certain points I will discover my own family. The reason I do this is simple,
the blending of families was obvious when I began researching this history and
researching entire history (for me) is more interesting which serves to
maintain my.
As I was going through some names of people associated with
Bettie’s List (Equity Case 7071) I came across the name of Lorenzo Russell who
appeared to have a Choctaw Indian father and freedwoman for a mother. It also
appears both of his parents were alive and possibly had Dawes cards and interview
packets indicates there is a possibility there is more information regarding
any claim Lorenzo had to transfer to the Choctaw by Blood Roll.
 |
| M1186 Chickasaw Freedman #1306 Rear RUSSELL, Lorenzo |
Based on the information provided on the rear of Lorenzo RUSSELL’S
Chickasaw Freedman card number 1306 a Choctaw Indian named Jim Russell is given
as Lorenzo’s father. Who knows if it was
by malice or just the Dawes Commission working with the leaders of the Choctaw
Nation; the pattern of denying people of mixed African-Choctaw ancestry has
done a disservice to the history and legacy of the Five Slave Holding Tribes in
general.
 |
| M1186 Choctaw by Blood #1545 RUSSELL, James (Jim) |
 |
| M1186 Choctaw Freedman #1364 Front RUSSELL, Lorenzo |
 |
| M1301 Choctaw by Blood #1545 p4 RUSSELL, James (Jim) |
This is another example of the complex nature of
relationships and identities that governed the lives of all who lived in Indian
Territory. The fact that in 1904 this couple was married and a Choctaw Indian
was married to a freedwoman for many years prior to this date had implications
the Dawes Commission had to deal with when enrolling this family for land
allotments.
Should the children be enrolled as Choctaw by blood? Would
the children receive three hundred and twenty acres of land as opposed to the
forty freedmen received? Was James’ wife entitled to be enrolled as an
intermarried citizen? For an Indian with children by a white woman the answer
was clear, she and her children would be enrolled as Choctaw citizens by blood.
For whatever reason the attorney for James Russell inquired
about James being and whether HE was entitled to be enrolled as an intermarried
citizen “the same as other intermarried Indians by blood.” The commissioner
caught this statement and clearly must have scratched his head on why such a
question would be a question for discussion.
I suspect the attorney inadvertently used James’ name when
he should have been asking about the intermarried status of James Russell’s
wife. It is later in the file on another page that the name of James’ wife is revealed.
 |
| M1301 Choctaw by Blood #1545 p7 RUSSELL, James (Jim) |
There is nothing contained in this “interview” given by
Julia Russell the wife of James Russell that Commissioner Needles sought to see
if Julia’s children were on the Choctaw by Blood roll nor did he determine if
she wanted to be enrolled as an intermarried Choctaw citizen due to the fact
she was “legally” married to a Choctaw Indian. The commissioner simply rubber
stamped the interview and enrolled Julia initially as a Chickasaw freedmen
until she was later transferred to the Choctaw Freedmen roll.
Two remarkable documents were present in the file of James
Russell; this one with Julia commenting on her parents provided information
about her mother and siblings. The document provided information that Julia’s
mother had been sold to someone in Texas and while there she gave birth to
three other children.
It was this document and that history of being sold along
with the name of her mother that rang familiar to me and my own family history.
Phoebe Jackson and the story of her being sold by a James Lanihee is the same
story of the sister to one of my great great grandfather on my maternal line;
Isom Jackson.
 |
| M1186 Choctaw Freedman #1213 Rear JACKSON, Isom |
 |
| M1186 Choctaw Freedman #1213 Front JACKSON, Isom |
 |
| M1301 Choctaw Freedman #1213 p3 JACKSON, Isom |
Looking at the brother of Julia, Isom Jackson’s Dawes card
you will note Isom’s wife also claimed to have a father of Indian (Chickasaw)
descent and blood. This is a reminder of just how complex the relationships
were during this time and that despite all claims to the contrary there is more
evidence that the Choctaw and Chickasaw men father a large number of children
with their slaves and denied their own children the privileges of citizenship
in the nation of their birth.
To illustrate just how misguided a policy this was by the
tribes with the complicity of the United States government, the other document
in the packet of James Russell is one dealing with the citizenship claims of
another son, Dan Russell.
 |
| M1301 Choctaw by Blood #1545 p2 RUSSELL, James |
·
Naturally the question becomes is this one of
Julia’s sons?
·
Was he enrolled as a citizen by blood or was he
a freedman?
·
Dan and Lorenzo have the same father so they
both should be considered “Choctaws by Blood?”
·
You probably know where I’m going with this but
bear with me…
·
If Dan was mentioned in his father’s Dawes file,
he should have a file of his own, right?
 |
| M1186 Choctaw by Blood #5371 RUSSELL, Dan |
Dan is the son of James Russell, he is also the half-brother
of Lorenzo Russell but because Dan’s mother Molsy was considered a Choctaw Dan
was placed on the Choctaw by Blood roll. Dan received payments in 1893 and was
considered to be one-sixteenth Choctaw Indian.
Lorenzo on the other hand was placed on the freedmen roll,
no mention of his Choctaw blood is provided and despite the marriage between
James and Julia, not one other person in this family was placed on the Choctaw
by Blood roll.
Quite frankly I don’t know how these tribes morally continue
to toe this line of ONLY those who have an ancestor on the “blood” roll have a
right to citizenship when the Dawes Commission clearly ignored the
relationships and genealogy of the thousands of men and women who sought to be
placed on the correct roll for citizenship in the nation of their birth.
As you can see, the story of the Choctaw and Chickasaw
Freedmen is deeply intertwined with the history of the Choctaw and Chickasaw
nations. Their story should be included as a vital part of both nations so a
complete and accurate portrayal of the tribes and its entire people are
presented.
To dismiss the history and presence of the Choctaw and
Chickasaw Freedmen is morally indefensible. The relationships formed by
freedmen and Indian despite the institution of slavery suggests the fear of
blacks within the tribe is totally without merit. Contrary to the popular
belief you have to be “Indian” to be a citizen ignores just how freedmen were
ostracized from the nation of their birth and how subsequent generations sought
to survive in a hostile community that marginalized their lives and relationships.
Why are the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations continuing this legacy?
