African-Native American Heritage Month Molsie Butler

 African-Native American Heritage Month

Molsie BUTLER

Choctaw Freedwoman Card #1083

 It has been demonstrated by a preponderance of information and evidence that the Chickasaw Nation, the Choctaw Nation and the Dawes Commission as well as the Department of the Interior processed the claims of people with African-Native American ancestry in a racially biased way. As a result of their decisions thousands of descendants of this particular class of “freedmen” were denied recognition as citizens and more importantly the generational wealth of receiving three hundred and twenty acres of land that was given to people who arguably had less Chickasaw and Choctaw blood but were deemed acceptable because they didn’t’ have an ancestor of African descent.

South McAlester Capital March 24, 1904, p3c5

You have seen one case after the other presented during “Native American Heritage Month” attesting to this practice which left the descendants of these people ignored and ostracized from the community of their ancestors birth and not one of the citizens in those two nations has had the courage to come forward and say; this is wrong, we must correct this.

 If there was any doubt that this was the practice of the Dawes Commission or that the commissioners were confined to this practice my colleague Angela Walton-Raji and I have gone to great lengths to shine a light on this subject that “equal justice under law” for the descendants of the people who comprise what is known as Equity Case 7071; Bettie Ligon vs the Choctaw Nation, the Chickasaw Nation and the Department of the Interior which was filed on April 13, 1907 remains as one of the “most important lawsuits” in Indian Territory to this day!

M-1186 Choctaw by Blood Denied#D-638

When the Dawes Commission used every trick in the book; from claiming they didn’t declare their desire to be placed on the blood rolls, to there was no evidence the ancestor or parent that was the basis for their claim to be placed on the “citizen by blood” roll, in some cases the response of the commission was “even it was their parent as claimed they could not locate the individual on any earlier roll” we see a pattern of deceit or as one attorney put it, “an abuse of intelligence” to think these petitioners did not have a rightful claim to be recognized as a citizen of the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation. 

The case of Molsie Butler is one of those foundational cases demonstrating how African-Native Americans were rejected as “citizens by blood” by the Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations with the full co-operation of the Dawes Commission. Remarkably at one point the evidence of Molsie Butler’s lineal ancestry was convincing enough for the United States Court for the Central District of the Indian Territory in 1897 “reversed the decision of the Commission and admitted to Choctaw citizenship Molsie Butler, Roger and Bessie Butler.” However, the court “reformed” the judgment and struck the names of Roger and Bessie from citizenship because they were not on the original 1896 application for citizenship. Molsie had two other children born since that filing and the three were enlisted as “citizens in the Choctaw Nation.” 

What is so remarkable about this particular case is there was an affidavit entered on the record that the mother and father of Molsie Butler nee Foster were “duly and lawfully married” and astonishingly they were married in January of 1866, several months before the signing of the Fort Smith Treaty of 1866.

M-1301 Choctaw by Blood Denied #D-638

Aleck Foster the “recognized” Choctaw citizen died in 1870 which highlights another pattern and practice of the Dawes Commission. If the father of “African-Choctaw” or African-Chickasaw” children was deceased at the time of the Dawes Land Allotment application, his children were not admitted as citizens. 

It was only in cases like the children of Jesse and Dora McGee in the Chickasaw Nation or Morris and Lucy Impson in the Choctaw Nation that the father was alive and fought to have his children enrolled on the blood rolls. 

The idea that children were admitted recognized and received three-hundred and twenty acres of land based on the “clan” of the mother was pure fiction. The evidence is overwhelming that the children of “white” women and a “recognized” male were admitted based on their father. 

The Dawes Commissioners would probably site the fact that a couple were “married according to Chickasaw or Choctaw law” was also fiction because as we see in the case of Joe N. Love, his parents were not married. His mother was a white woman and though the father Robert Howard Love, accepted Joe as his son, it did not remove the taint of “illegitimate” from Joe and it didn’t prevent Joe N. Love from being placed on the Chickasaw by Blood Roll, unlike what happened to Molsie Butler.

M-1186 Chickasaw by Blood #1717

As Native American Heritage month comes to a close, the history and detrimental actions of the Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations has to be fully told and include the chapter where they shamefully removed thousands of people from their community based on the so called “race” (African descent) of their mother. The citizens of these two nations can remedy that error and bring their people home!

African-Native American Heritage Month "Our Ancestors Were Telling the Truth"

Originally Published Thursday, September 21, 2017

The DNA of Our Ancestors Proves They Were Telling the Truth

Equity Case 7071

Bettie Ligon et al. v Douglas H. Johnson et al.,

Green McCurtain et al. & James R. Garfield Secretary of the Interior

Daily Ardmoreite April 14, 1907 p6c5

One of the biggest questions I have about the lawsuit concerning 1500 to 2,000 women, children and men who sought a transfer from the Chickasaw or Choctaw Freedmen rolls to the Chickasaw or Choctaw by Blood roll is who are the living descendants?

During their lifetime the claimants on Equity Case 7071 never succeeded in their effort to be recognized as citizens based on their ancestry and genealogy related to the Chickasaw and Choctaw Indians. During that time they were denied this recognition based generally on having a mother that was considered a slaver or former slave. It didn’t matter if their father was a recognized citizen or considered a Chickasaw or Choctaw Indian they were to be denied solely because they were seen as someone of African descent.

However it is a new day and the descendants of these children, women and men may never be recognized and accepted as Native American or Chickasaw or Choctaw Indians but the historical record should reflect the truth of their ancestry and the truth of their struggle to be recognized and accepted as Chickasaw or Choctaw Indians.

The science of DNA was not invented in 1907 but the science of today has the possibility of bringing truth to the lie that denied our ancestor’s their rightful place in the nation of their birth. It is through their descendants and our ability to have our DNA tested we are able to bring some much needed and long overdue attention to this issue that has festered for more than one hundred years. 

I will be posting the Dawes Cards and other documents that provide the initial records that the claimants on Equity Case 7071 left us to direct our research on their claims as Chickasaw or Choctaw Indians. For the record I don’t know if everyone listed on Equity Case 7071 has a legitimate claim to Chickasaw or Choctaw ancestry but we have an opportunity to set the record straight on those that do.

The most expedient way to do this is to have the descendants of these men and women have their DNA tested for Native American DNA. The other and equally important aspect of this list is the people who descend from the people on this list should conduct the research that would connect you to your ancestor on “Bettie’s List.”

I have been tested by 23andMe as well as Ancestry and both have determine I have Native American DNA (ancestry) with about a 4% indicating my Native American ancestor was probably 4 or 5 generations before me.  I have discovered at least two other people who have done the research on their ancestors and performed the DNA test indicates we have ancestry in common. Once I compared our ancestors I was able to locate our common ancestor as Thomas LOVE an intermarried white who had two "Chickasaw" wives. 

Chickasaw Freedman Card #391 (rear) Lydia JACKSON

This individual has research that indicates his ancestor claimed to be the child of Benjamin LOVE. My great grandmother Bettie claimed her father was Robert Howard LOVE the half-brother of Thomas. They had different mothers but the same father who was Thomas LOVE our common ancestor. Clearly, we didn’t get our Native American DNA from Thomas but both his wives possessed some degree of Native American blood. This may not be the only source of our Native American DNA but it does provide some convincing evidence that both of our ancestors were telling the truth about who their father was.

Choctaw Freedman Card #106 (rear) Bettie LIGON

African-Native American Heritage Month Choctaw & Chickasaw Freedmen Leaders

Originally Published Thursday, February 17, 2011

Black (Indian) History Month: Choctaw and Chickasaw Freedmen Leaders

It has always been curious to me who the leaders of the Choctaw and Chickasaw freedmen community were and how they developed as leaders. Fortunately there are a few documents that illustrate their activities following emancipation from the two “nations” but I’m certain there is much more to learn.



1890 Chickasaw Nation Census


One document that I strongly feel gives us insight about the men and women who became proactive about their lives and the lives of their children was Senate Executive Document 82; 40th Congress, 2nd Session. One of the important aspects of this document has to do with the date, July 24, 1868.

This date is important because the leaders of the Choctaw and Chickasaw freedmen realized that the two year limit for the nations to adopt the former slaves and their descendants was drawing near and the freedmen had not been adopted as citizens in the nation of their birth.

Clearly in the beginning the majority of leaders were men and it will take a more comprehensive study of freedmen life and culture to discover the women who contributed to the political and economic welfare of the Choctaw and Chickasaw freedmen.

Much of my research is dedicated to discovering the “Voices of Indian Territory” so that their life and legacy is preserved while telling "THEIR STORY" with "THEIR WORDS."

Senate Executive Document 82 provides a window into the thoughts, efforts and desires of the men and women who only two years earlier had been enslaved; yet they were not considered worthy of citizenship in the land of their birth and they certainly were not citizens of the United States.

Senate Executive Document 82; 40th Congress, 2nd Session p4

Another important aspects of this remarkable document is the identification of numerous leaders who signed on to this petition as they voiced their concerns to the United States Congress. One of the surprising facts that this petition to Congress provides is the desire by a group of freedmen to accept their portion of the $300,000 and relocate somewhere outside of the Choctaw and Chickasaw nations. They were willing to relocate because the Choctaws, Chickasaws and the United States government all failed to secure the same treaty terms that were provided the Seminole, Cherokee and Creek freedmen.

Watson BROWN Choctaw Freedman card #1205

However it is no surprise the United States or the tribes failed to pay the former slaves this money. The Choctaw freedmen were allowed to languish for another twenty years in the Choctaw Nation without rights as citizens. The Chickasaw freedmen would endure forty years of denial as citizens in the nation of their birth when they finally became citizens of the United States in 1907.

Chickasaw Freedman card # 218

It would be remiss of me to discover this document with the names of the early leaders in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Freedmen communities and not attempt to locate additional information on each of them, if possible!

Isom FLINT Choctaw Freedman card #1159

I was aware of at least four record groups that might shed some light on these men and give me an idea of who they were and how they came to be leaders in their community. The first record group was the Civil War Pension files, the second record group would be the 1885 Choctaw Freedmen census, the 1890 Chickasaw Nation Census and finally the Dawes Allotment records.

Isaac ALEXANDER Civil War Pension File Courtesy of Angela Walton-Raji

Unfortunately most of the men were deceased by the time of the Dawes Allotment process but I was able to locate a sizable number of records for some of these men. Among this early group of leaders were many men who served in the Unites States Colored Troops and fought for their freedom as well as their families back in Indian Territory.

Excerpt from Dawes Jacket Bynum COLBERT Choctaw Freedmen card #1477

Byington (Bynum) COLBERT, Isaac ALEXANDER stand out as men who served their country and their people as they courageously fought the Confederate forces in Indian Territory and the United States.

King BLUE, and Henry CRITTENDON would distinguish themselves as a leaders in their communities as they advocated for the education of freedmen children. Henry CRITTENDON was instrumental in establishing the Oakhill Academy Valiant.

Henry CRITTENDON

Nathan COCHRAN, Bart FRANKLIN and Dick BRASHEARS were impressive leaders in their communities as well. It was the efforts of Dick BRASHEARS and James LADD that caused them to be charged with “intent to disturb the peace and tranquility of the United States in the month of November 1869.” gathering.

After being cleared of the charges BRASHEARS, LADD, J. KEARNEY and another Civil War hero Thomas BLACKWATER called for another meeting at Skullyville in January of 1870.

Damaged headstone Thomas BLACKWATER USCT
Photo by Terry Ligon © 2011

We owe a great deal to these brave men, without their strong shoulders we could not stand as tall today. We need to preserve their legacy by locating their resting places, and maintain them in the manner befitting their contribution to Black (Indian) History.

African-Native American Heritage Month "White Indians"

Originally Published Saturday, December 3, 2011

"White Indians?"

The term to many people could very well be offensive but I suggest it may be part of the reason we see so much resistance from today’s citizens of the Five Slave Holding Tribes for the inclusion of freedmen descendants based on the Treaty of 1866.

Indian Chieftain Dec.2, 1897 p2c3

In an article found in “The Indian Chieftain” a newspaper, published ostensibly as the mouthpiece for the Cherokee Nation is where I discovered an interesting article taken from a Washington D.C. paper called the Globe Democrat. There was no title for the article that would indicate the topic, so if you weren’t paying attention you more than likely would have missed it. 

It is amazing, almost one hundred and fifteen years ago the issues of race (blood) and benefits (advantages) were the issue of the day; just as we see today with the Cherokee Freedmen seeking to enforce the Treaty of 1866 and their citizenship in the nation.

This article discussing the “blue eyed, fair-haired little Indians receiving living, clothing and education at the cost of the government” again appears to be a repeat of history.

Was it not a few years ago the Cherokee Nation had millions of dollars frozen by the United States Congress because the leaders would not admit the descendants of former slaves as citizens according to the Treaty of 1866?

This article sheds some much needed light on a situation that seems to be a problem that all of the Five Slave Holding Tribes have, “thin blood” Indians reaping  the rewards as “Indians” based on their ancestry.

Today we see the effects of “squaw men” on the Five Slave Holding Tribes and I am reminded again of the Storyteller Conference I attended a few years ago. During the conference I was struck by how many speakers would preface their remarks by saying something about their “white” ancestor as if to deflect possible comments on their legitimacy as an Indian. 

I still have not figured out why they found it necessary to go there other than some deep seated insecurity on what is an Indian? When you put the article in perspective of what we see in the Five Slave Holding Tribes today it could open some uncomfortable wounds. 

While there is a concerted effort to prevent “freedmen descendants” from being considered as citizens of the nations, the question of “blood quantum” or having an ancestor on the “Dawes Blood Roll” is used as the determinant factor.

Yet as anyone who takes the time to research will find, the issue of a baseline blood quantum could cause a removal process that would make the various nations lose a large portion of their population. 

Heaven forbid the tribes begin to establish citizenship by way of DNA testing!  I can hear Bob Marley singing now; “exodus…movement of the people!”

This article demonstrates, once again, how race is a political construct and can be used in various ways to include and especially to exclude people when it comes to gaining benefits and advantages based on that “race.” 

Unfortunately in the case of the former slaves and even those former slaves that were the children of Indian men, no amount of Indian blood was or is sufficient to be considered Native American.

Could it be the author of this article had some insight into the future when it came to describing the “fancied superiority of race” and the “privileges” it would have provided those with “white blood” in their veins?

Is it true that over the one hundred and fourteen years since this article was written have the descendants of the “squaw men” benefitted from the government programs that earmarked programs for Native Americans?

Is it true that the leading men and women, who now receive educational entitlement funds, owe it to their “white ancestors” who were given access to programs solely based on a minute trace of Indian blood?

This article states “on technical grounds, all this may be correct, but in equity it seems to hold elements of unfairness both to the real Indians and the white citizens of the United States…”

As usual the one group left out of the equation is the former slaves of these tribes and their descendants. When they discuss equity and fairness it is the freedmen and their descendants that seem to always be missing in the analysis. 

It would appear the major factor as to why; seems to come down to the construction and perception of race?

Amazingly in 1897, the author suggest and it may be the major reason we see the problems between the tribes and freedmen descendants today; “congress should at an early date indicate by statute what degree of blood shall constitute an Indian.”

It was and is clear, freedmen were fighting to maintain their citizenship from day one and those mixed blood freedmen of the Five Slave Holding Tribes were never truly considered to be Indian or have Indian blood. 

Here we are more than one hundred and fourteen years later with very little progress…

Sarah Grant, Lydia Jackson "A Riddle, Wrapped in a Mystery, Inside DNA"

Originally Published Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Bettie's List-Lydia JACKSON Chickasaw Freedwoman # 391

This article has been updated and includes additional new information since first published in 2010

   The Dawes Commission handicapped the former slaves in Indian Territory known as freedmen from the beginning by not properly conducting AND recording their interviews for land allotments and citizenship in the tribes of their birth. For the most part, the majority of the people who were placed on the Freedman roll and sought a transfer will discover their jackets are nothing more than a summarization of the oral interview taken at the time. In order to establish their rights as “Citizens by blood” at the time of the Dawes enrollment process, the vital information that would substantiate their testimony was left out to the oral interviews that were sent to the Department of the Interior for review.

 

   Lydia Jackson was a woman involved in the Equity Case #7071 lawsuit that involved approximately two thousand people who sought a transfer from the Choctaw and/or Chickasaw Freedmen rolls. In 1907 they sued the two tribes along with the Department of the Interior for twenty million dollars which was calculated to be the value of land they should have received had they been declared "citizens by blood" because they had father's who were recognized citizens of the Chickasaw or Choctaw Nation.

   Ben LOVE was a recognized citizens of the Chickasaw Nation and named as the father of Lydia JACKSON who was born about 1842, according to the information on Lydia's Dawes card #391. Lydia was the daughter of Sarah Grant, an enslaved woman that gave her age as seventy-four when she applied for citizenship and a land allotment in September of 1898. 

   Sarah's oral interview doesn't provide any information on how and when she came west, but her age suggests she more than likely was part of the numerous slaves brought to Indian Territory with Benjamin Love.

 Don Martini: Who was Who Among Southern Indians a genealogical notebook 1698-1907 pp399-401

  
   Lydia Jackson the focus of this story and the woman attempting to gain rights as a Chickasaw citizen for herself and five children, fathered by Calvin Jackson, a non-citizen has a file that is part of the Joe and Dillard Perry, "Petition to Transfer Files." There are at least three files contained in this database that apply to Lydia Jackson, Chickasaw Freedman Card # 391; and her children Frank Chickasaw Freedmen Card # 394, Josie Chickasaw Freedman Card # 392, John Chickasaw Freedman Card # 393, Jenny Davidson Chickasaw Freedman Card # 390 and Dora Johnson on card #395. 

   Sarah GRANT, Chickasaw Freedman Card # 200; the mother of Lydia Jackson has the summarization of her interview by the Dawes Commission and aside from her age and who enslaved her, tells the commissioner, "My husband is dead. My children are all married and have families." 

   Interestingly, it is Jennie Davidson, a daughter of Lydia that provides the lion's share of the information about this family, their connection to one another and who enslaved her mother Lydia; Ben Love. Jennie provides the names of her siblings, their ages and members of their family's, spouses and children if any. The document that has that information was created in 1898, at the time of the Dawes enrollment process. 

   There was an even more interesting letter in Jennie Davidson's file that has to be mentioned. The letter is dated January 3, 1906; from Muskogee, Indian Territory. Addressed to Jennie Davidson who was living in Ardmore, Indian Territory; the commission acknowledges the receipt of a letter from Jennie, about a month earlier, on December 11, 1905. The letter sent by Jennie was an application seeking a transfer from the freedman roll to the roll of citizens by blood. Remember, Jennie's mother Lydia, was the daughter of a recognized Chickasaw citizen, Benjamin Love.

   The twist to this particular story, one that detrimentally affected hundreds of other people with similar circumstances was "an opinion" by the Assistant Attorney General for the Department of the Interior on November 11, 1905, "that were no application for enrollment as citizens by blood of the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nationhood been made prior to December 25, 1902, there was no authority for the reception of applications for their enrollment as citizens by blood of said nations." The commissioners letter closed with the advice it would not be necessary to "forward additional evidence in this matter at this time."

   Clearly, Jennie, Lydia and Sarah demonstrated a great deal of courage in seeking the truth about their "lineal descent" and fought to have the record corrected. Sadly, Sarah past away before any resolution could be obtained and the descendants of these brave women have a lot to be proud of, but the truth has yet to be realized.

  

   There is one more aspect of this story that must be told. Recall that on Sarah's Dawes card, she identifies Tom Grant as her enslaver. Looking at the Love family, lo and behold, Tom Grant was married to one of Ben Love's daughters, Mary Jane. 

   Two things come to mind with this information. Ben Love had access to Sarah and very well had the power and ability to impregnate her and be the father of Lydia in 1842? When I first came across this story it intrigued me because it was part of Equity Case #7071, which my Great Grandmother, Bettie Ligon was the lead litigant.

   It's funny thing about "lineal descent" and DNA, on the surface, I read this story and read about Jennie Davidson, Lydia Jackson and the rest but didn't make the connection until I was contacted by one of Lydia's descendants. It appears we share some DNA and then it hit me. Benjamin Love, the father of Sarah Grant and Bettie Ligon's father Robert Howard Love are brothers, their father was Thomas Love. Without the DNA tie, there is no genealogical evidence of any other connection. 

Don Martini: Who was Who Among Southern Indians a genealogical notebook 1698-1907 pp399-401

Photo Courtesy of Frank Overton Collection
Lydia Jackson seated front row center

AFRICAN-NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH ALL BONA FIDE CHOCTAW CITIZENS

"All Bona Fide Choctaw Citizens"

During the past several months the chief of the Choctaw Nation proclaimed a willingness to consider and take before “his people” the possibility of admitting Choctaw Freedmen descendants into the nation as citizens. The fact that the freedmen descendants are not citizens today based on their adoption in 1883-1885 and subsequent removal approximately one-hundred years later in 1983-85 demonstrates how history has a way of shinning a light on the misdeeds of well intention people. 

The Choctaw Freedmen and their descendants were “all bona fide Choctaw citizens” based on the nation living up to the Treaty of 1866 when they granted citizenship to their formerly enslaved population and their descendants. That treaty is still referred to today when it is convenient for the Five Slave Holding Tribes especially the Choctaws but for some reason they can’t seem to wrap their head around the idea of admitting African and African-Native people who have a history, heritage and legal basis to be considered “citizens” in the nation of their ancestor’s birth. 

Let the record reflect what is certainly an inarguable point of view; the Choctaw Freedmen Descendants should have never been removed from the roll of citizens in the first place! 

Their connection to the Choctaw Nation as enslaved people, as citizens and in numerous cases Choctaw by blood have a right to be card carrying Choctaws and it should not take another act of Congress to correct this “continuing wrong” by the Choctaw Nation with the apparent full approval of the United States Congress and the Department of the Interior. 

The tax dollars that continue to flow to this tribe and the others should be held for the use of Choctaw Freedmen Descendants, who so richly deserve to receive funds that will assist in building up their communities, educate their children and put an end to the discrimination of African and African-Native people who had a legal right to citizenship.