Chapter 14.
Congressional Document
This
document says it all, really. (291) (292). In this document, we see a lot about
why the attempts to create a “Western Catawba Tribe” failed. While
today, we have state recognized Siouan tribes in the Carolinas and in Virginia,
here in Oklahoma we have nothing and silence. Why? This document pretty much
says it all. I have transcribed it. This document has earned the right to be
the last section of the book. It is well worth the wait. There are probably
typos. My keyboard doesn’t always type the letters I ask it to do.
The Catawba Tribe of
Indians, 54th Congress, 2nd session, Doc. 144, February 23rd, 1897
February 23rd, 1897 –
ordered to be printed as Senate Document for use of committee on Indian
Affairs. Mr. Pettigrew presented the following memorial on behalf of the
individuals formerly comprising and belonging to the Catawba Tribe of Indians,
and accompanying papers. Department of the Interior, Washington, Feb. 1, 1897.
Sir, I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of
your communication of 23 ultimo, with the following papers:
A memorial on behalf of the individuals formerly comprising and belonging
to the Catawba Tribe of Indians.
In response thereto, I transmit herewith copy of a
communication of 29th instant from Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to whom the
matter was referred.
I return herewith the memorial of the Catawbas, and
transmit herewith copies of the Correspondence referred to in the Commissioners
letter, which contains, it is stated, a full and complete testimony of those
Indians as described from the files and records of his office and other
sources, with his views concerning the policy to be adopted regarding them.
Very respectfully,
D. R. Francis, secretary.
The Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs
Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Affairs,
January 29th, 1897
Sir,
I am in receipt, by Department reference, of * * * * * a memorial in behalf of
individuals formerly comprising and belonging to the Catawba Tribe of Indians, with
request of the inquiries contained in said memorial be answered and information
concerning the statements therein and the appended memorandum be furnished.,
the memorial submitted by Senator Pettigrew is signed by James Bain, and George
E. Williamson, Secretary of the Catawba Indian Association, and they ask on
behalf of the individuals formerly comprising
and belonging to the Catawba Tribe of Indians to
be informed “as to the status of the tribal lands of the Catawba Indians
formerly occupied by the Catawba Tribe of Indians in the Carolinas, and to
secure anything that may be due them as accruing from said lands, and also to
receive any further relief, help, or benefits they may be found, upon careful
examination of the facts in their case, be entitled to receive in write,
justice or equity from the United States or otherwise in the matter of new
homes in the West or their lands in the East.”
In answer to this memorial, I respectfully enclose
herewith a copy of a letter from this office, dated January 16, 1896, addressed
to Honorable H. M. Teller, United States Senate, also a copy of a letter from
this office dated March 28th, 1896, addressed to R. V. Belt, esquire, in this
city. These letters give a full and complete history of these Indians, as
disclosed from the files and records of this office, concerning the policy that
should be adopted respecting them.
The communication of Senator Pettigrew and the
disclosures referred to therein a herewith returned.
Very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
D. M. Browning, Commissioner
The Secretary of the Interior
MEMORIAL
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress Assembled;
Your petitioners come representing that they are the
representatives of the individuals and their descendants who were formerly the
members of the Catawba Tribe of Indians that owned and occupied lands in the
states of North Carolina and South Carolina; that in pursuance of the policy of
the United States to remove all the Indian Tribes to new homes to be provided
for them west of the Mississippi River, Congress passed
an act July 29,1848, appropriating $5,000 for the removal of the Catawba Indians,
with their own consent, to the west of the Mississippi River, and for settling
and subsisting them one year in new homes first to be obtained for them (9
stat. L., 264); that nothing was accomplished under this act; that the
provisions and appropriations thereof were reenacted in the act of July 31,
1854 (10 stat. L., 316); that some efforts were made to secure for the Catawbas
new homes among the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians in the Indian Territory,
and under the encouragement of hopeful results, and of the laws of Congress on
the subject, many of the Catawba Indians left their lands and homes in the
Carolinas and journeyed at their own expense to the country west of the
Mississippi River, hoping and expecting to be there furnished with and located
there and subsisted for one year upon new homes; that the
Department of the Interior has so far failed to accomplish anything towards
securing for the Catawbas such new homes or in doing anything in their behalf
as was contemplated and expected under the provisions of the law referred to;
that the Catawbas reached the states and territories bordering on the then
Indian Territory, where they expected to be settled in new homes, but have been
left stranded in that territory and in the neighboring states, where they
have had to seek a livelihood s best they could, without any land upon which
they could build homes for themselves and families; that they are in great
need, and are very anxious to be given lands, homes, or allotments of any of
the lands that now are or may hereafter become available for that purpose in
the Indian Territory or n Oklahoma Territory; that they desire to be informed as
to the status of the tribal lands of the Catawba Indians formerly occupied by
the Catawba Tribe of Indians in the Carolinas, and to secure anything that may
be due them as accruing them from said lands; and also to receive any other or
further relief, help, or benefits they may be found, upon careful investigation
of the facts in their case, be entitled to receive in right, justice or equity,
from the United States or otherwise in the matter of new homes in the West or
as to their lands in the East; and they pray that all these as the facts may
warrant, demand and require.
And your petitioners will ever pray.
Fort Smith, Arkansas, December, 7, 1896
James Bain, President of Catawba Indian Association
Geo. E. Williamson, Secretary of Catawba Indian
Association
CATAWBA INDIANS
The present location and number of those Catawba
Indians who went West, expecting to be located on lands west of the Mississippi
River by the Department of the Interior are as follows, as furnished by James
Bain, president of the Catawba Indian Association at Fort Smith, Arkansas:
Greenwood,
Ark.,44; Barber, Ark, 42; Crow, Ark., 13; Oak Bower, Ark., 3; Enterprise, Ark.,
6; Fort Smith, Ark., 17; Total Ark., 125.
Checotah, I. T., 17; Texanna, I. T., 15; Jackson, I.
T., 15; Star, I. T., 34; Panther, I. T., 22; Oak Lodge, I. T., 10; Redland, I.
T., 4; Rainville, I. T., 2; Indianola, I. T., 3; Center, I. T., 4; Ward, I. T.,
Sacred Heart, I. T., 4; Steigler, I. T., 2; total 132.
Grand
total, 257.
Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Affairs,
Washington, January 16th, 1896
Sir,
I am in receipt of your letter of January 9, 1896,
enclosing one from P. H. Head, a Catawba Indian, of
Sanford, Colorado, submitting a petition purporting to have been signed by
himself and 25 others, embracing six families, who claim to have once
resided in South Carolina but are no longer “recognized” by said state, and asking to be united with the Ute Indians now living in
the Uintah Reservation, and to be recognized by the Government as members of
said Ute Tribe receiving and enjoying in common with them all rights and
privileges at the protection of the government. Mr. Head, in his letter,
intimates that this petition will be followed by one signed by the Ute Indians
in Utah.
You asked that the matter might receive my attention,
and advise given as to what steps are necessary to have this change made.
In reply, I have
to say that it is the policy of the government to abolish the tribal
relationship of the Indians as fast as possible, and to settle each Indian upon
a separate tract of land that he can call his own, to the end that he may
become self-supporting and independent of government bounty. It would not be in
keeping with this policy, I think, to gather up people who happen to have more
or less Indian blood in their veins and are living among the Whites, separate
and apart from Indian communities, and incorporate them into a tribe and place
them upon an Indian Reservation.
The General Allotment Act of 1887 wisely provided for
Indains who were not living upon any reservation at the date of passage of said
act, or for whose tribe no longer no reservation had been created, by allowing
them to apply for and secure to themselves lands upon the public domain.
To
answer your question directly as to what steps would be necessary to have these
people united to the Indian Tribe occupying the Uintah Reservation in Utah, I
should say that where there are no specific Treaty stipulations with any given
tribe touching such matters, as to the case with these Ute Indians, the usual
course perused is to obtain he consent of the tribe to which an Indian desires
adoption and then to have such adoption approved by this office and the
Secretary of the Interior; any such consent must be procured under the eye of
the agent and should bear his certificate to the effect that the action of the
Indians in adopting such Indian represented the wishes of the tribe and was
taken in open council. This briefly would be the proper course to peruse in
order to obtain adoption into an Indian Tribe.
The petition, with Mr. Head's letter, is herewith,
respectfully returned.
Very respectfully,
D. M. Browning, Commissioner
Hon. H. M. Teller, United States Senate
Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Affairs,
Washington, March 28, 1896
Sir;
I am in receipt of your letter of February 22nd,
transmitting in pamphlet form a “Petition and Memorial in the matter of claims
and demands of the Catawba Indian Association of the United States.” published
at Fort Smith, Ark., giving the proceedings of a conventions of Catawba Indians
held in that city April 15, 1895, called for the purpose of considering the
condition, status and welfare of all Catawba, and all non-Reservation Indians,
and to take action in procuring and allotment of land under the forth section
of the General Allotment Act of Feb. 8, 1887 (24 Stat. L., p. 388), as amended
by the Act of Feb 28., 1891 (26 Stat. L., p. 795).
This memorial purports to come from the Catawba
Indians comprising, they allege, “All persons of Catawba Indian descent, and
their descendants, including all persona who have intermarried with Catawba
Indians, and all persons of mixed Catawba and White Blood and descent, residing
in any of the states or territories of the United States or in the Indian
Territory;” claiming further that the United States has never made any
provisions for them in giving them a grantor title to large tracts of the public
domain as it has done for the Cherokees, Creeks, and other tribes, only giving
them a small tract of land in South Carolina, although belonging to the same
groups of Indians as the Cherokee and Creeks; the United States of America has
made no provisions whatever to occupy and use any part of the public domain
belonging to the United States, except the aforesaid small tract of land in
South Carolina, unless it be to take allotments under the aforesaid section 4
of the Act of 1887, as amended by the act of 1891, and asking for such
Executive action or congressional legislation as may be necessary to secure
equal rights with other Indians to share in the public domain belonging to the
United States.
In your letter, transmitting this petition and
memorial, you state that you are requested to ascertain (one) whether or not
the Catawba have any tribal lands in the states of North or South Carolina to
which the tribal title has not been ceded or extinguished; (two) whether there is any reason why these individual Indians may
not take up lands in severalty on the public domain as provided in said section
four of The Act of 1887.
You suggest that arrangements might be made
whereby they could take land in severalty within the Kiowa and Comanche and
Wichita Reservations, Oklahoma Territory, when the unallotted lands of said
reservation shall be opened to public settlement, or between the time
of the ratification of their agreements, and the issue of the president’s
proclamation opening the same to settlement, or even before the ratification of
said agreement, etc.
In reply I have to state that the Catawba Indians are
a division of North American Indians, which included in the last century
twenty-eight confederated tribes. A few of these were in North Carolina, but
most of them were in South Carolina. The principle tribe in the later state was
the “Katawba.” and their chief on in the
former was the “Woccon”. The few survivors of this people are on the Catawba
Reservation in York County, S. C. They do not belong to the Muscogeean
linguistic stock, of North American Indians, as intimated in the Memorial, but
to the Siouan stock, while the Cherokees belong to the Iroquoian stock.
In a publication entitled Statistics of South Carolina
by Robert, Mills, published in 1826, in Charleston, South Carolina, by Hurlbut
and Lloyd, pages 104-129, is given a history of the Indians or aboriginal of
the country, to the effect that South Carolina, when first settled by the
English, was settled with numerous tribes of Indians whose settlements extended
from the ocean to the mountains. From documents extant in the secretary of
state's office, and other sources that might be relied on, Mr. Mills concluded
that the number of these different nations or tribes exceeded twenty-eight. The
Westoes and Savannahs were the two most potent tribes. A right to the soil of
the country was grounded upon the acknowledged truth of this doctrine, that the
earth was made for man, and was intended by the creator of all things to be
improved for the benefit of mankind. These wild lands
therefore, were not recognized as the separate property of the few savages who
hunted over them, but belonged to the common stock of mankind. This doctrine is
agreeable to the judicial determination of the courts of South Carolina with
respect to the rights in land derived solely from uninterrupted possession for
a term formerly of five, now (1826) of ten years.
But most of the first settlers of Carolina, not
satisfied to rest their right of soil upon the law of nature and their government,
made private purchases from the Indians, and the government (state) itself
entered into treaties with the aborigines. The first public deed of conveyance
by the Indians found on record is dated March 10, 1675.
In giving a description of the names, location, and
number of Indian tribes in Carolina about the year 1700 he gives the following
on page 108:
“The Catawbas, Sugaree on Sugar Creek, Lancaster
District, occupied the country above Camden on each side of the river of the
same name, a small remnant of this tribe of Indians still occupies a tract of
country, laid off 15 miles square, lying partly in York and partly in Lancaster
districts, on both sides of the river.”
Speaking of the population, he states (p. 114):
“The Catawbas are now reduced, from habits
of indolence and inebriation, to very few; their numbers do not exceed 110 of
every age. In 1700, (some years after the
first settlement of Carolina) they mustered 1,500 fighting men. This would give
the population of the nation at that time between 8,000 and 10,000 souls. About
the year 1743 the Catawbas could only bring 400 warriors into the field,
composed partly of refugees from various smaller tribes, who, about this time,
were obliged by the state of affairs to associate with them, on account of
their reduced numbers. Among them were the Wateree, Chowan, Congaree, Nachee,
Yamasee, and Coosah Indians. At present not 50 men can be counted in the list
of their warriors.
The remains of their nation now occupy an area of 15
square miles, laid out on both sides of the Catawba River., and include parts
of York and Lancaster districts. This tract embraces a body of fine lands,
timbered with oak, etc. These lands are almost all leased out to White settlers
for 99 years, renewable at the rate of $15-20 per annum for each plantation of
about 300 acres. The annual income from these lands is estimated to amount to
about $5,000. This sum, prudently managed, would suffice to support the whole
nation, now comprised of about 30 families, comfortably. Yet these wretched
Indians live is a state of abject poverty, the consequences of their indolence
and dissipated habits. They ???? for their rent before it is due, and the $10
or $20 dollars received are frequently spent in a debauch; poverty, beggary,
and misery follow for a year.
The Catawba have two villages, one on each side of the
river. The largest is Newtown, situated directly on the river bank. To the
other, which is upon the opposite side, they have given no name, but it is
generally called Turkeyhead. King's Bottom” is a very rich tract of land which
the Indians have had sense enough to reserve for their children.
The first settlement was made in this district by
emigrants from Pennsylvania around the year 1745, was called “The Waxhaws”,
from the name of the creek on which the principle settlements were located
(then supposed to be within the bounds of North Carolina). These settlements
were made in the neighborhood of the Catawbas, then a powerful and warlike
tribe of Indians., whose chief town was situated on the west side of Sugar
Creek (more properly “Sugawee,” that being the ancient Indian name), just
opposite the mouth of Little Sugar Creek. The sight of this ancient town is now
in York district and under cultivation in the plantation of Mr. Alderson, but
not a vestige of it is to be seen.
About the year 1750 the early settlers of
the Waxhaws became in a great measure rid of their powerful and dangerous
neighbors, the Indians, as the small pox broke out among them and carried off,
from the best information, three-fourths of the whole tribe.
Shortly afterwards they leased out most of their lands on Sugar Creek to some
of the emigrants and removed and settled in the towns where they now reside.”
In the description of the county of York, he states:
“This section of the of the country was settled about
the year 1760, principly from Pennsylvania and Virginia. Its name may be placed
to York, in Pennsylvania, from whence some of the first settlers came.
There are no other settlements, as villages, in the
district, except the Indian settlement on Catawba River. These Indians have two
towns. The most important is called Newtown, situated immediately on the river;
the other is on the opposite side, and is called Turkeyhead. The Indian lands
occupy an extent of country on both sides of the river equal to 180 square
miles or 115,200 square acres. [NOTE: not my mistake – it does say “square
acres. An acre is a measurement of area, not length, so the word “square” is
redundant, confusing, and misleading]. Most of this has been disposed by them
to the whites in leases for ninety-nine years, renewable. The rent of each
plantation is from ten to twenty dollars per annum . . . The Catawba Nation
could, at the first settlement of the state; muster 1,500 fighting men. At
present their warriors do not exceed 30. For your information I include a
sketch of a portion of a map of South Carolina and North Carolina, showing the
aforesaid Reservation of 180 square miles.
Schoolcraft, in his History of the Indian Tribes of
the United States, volume 3, page 293, has an article on “Carolina Manuscript
Respecting the Origin of the Catawba”. In this paper he states that [note: this history is incorrect]:
“The Catawba are a Canadian Tribe. The Connewangos
were their heredity enemies, and with the aid of the French, were likely at
last, to overwhelm them. The Catawba, judging correctly of their perilous
condition, determined on a removal to the vicinity of the English settlements.
They set out from their ancient homes about the year 1650, crossed the St.
Lawrence, probably around Detroit, and bore for the headwaters of the Kentucky
River. The Connewangos all the time kept in full pursuit. The fugitives,
embarrassed with their women and children, saw that their enemies would
overtake them, chose a position near the source of the Kentucky and there
awaited the onset of their more powerful adversaries. Turning therefore, upon
their pursuers, with the energy desperation sometimes inspires, they gave them
a terrible overthrow. This little nation, after their great victory, without
proper regard to policy, divided into two bands. The one remained on the
Kentucky, which was called by the hunters the Catawba, and were in time
absorbed into the great families of the Chickasaws and Choctaws. The other band
settled in Botetourt County, Virginia., upon a stream afterwards called Catawba
Creek. They remained there but a few years, their hunters pressing on to the
South, discovered the Catawba River, in South Carolina (Eswa Tavora), and the
entire Virginia band (about 1660) came in a body to affect a permanent
settlement upon that stream.
[NOTE: this
whole story has no basis in fact whatsoever. Spanish explorers discovered
Siouan speaking tribesmen in the Carolinas in the 1540s and again in the
1560/70s.]
“In the year 1735 the nation had in reservation only
30 acres of their large and fertile territory, not a foot of which was in
cultivation. In the history of South Carolina, Ramsey solemnly evokes to the
people of South Carolina to cherish this small remnant of a noble race, always
the friends of the Carolinians, and ready to peril all for their safety. They
never have shed a drop of American blood, nor stolen property to the value of a
cent. They have lost everything but their honesty. Hagler or Haigler was a
great man, and the nation still speak of him with great feeling. They have
never looked up since his death.”
Hagler or Haigler was succeeded by King Prow or Frow
in 1765, who reigned but a short time. On his death, General New River, who had
gained a splendid victory on New River in Virginia over the Northern Indians,
was called to rule over them., they having determined, in imitation of their
white brethren, to repudiate royalty. He was succeeded by General Scott,
grandson of King Hagler or Haigler, and afterwards by Colonel Ayers.
In an appendix to the laws of the Colonial and state
governments relating to Indians and Indian affairs, from 1633 to 1831,
inclusive, published in Washington City in 1832 by Thompson and Homans, is
given the “Proceedings of the Congress and the Confederation relating to
Indians and Indian Affairs.”
On page 15 of said Appendix, under the date of
November 2, 1782, appears the following, viz:
“The Committee, consisting of Mr. Duane, Mr. Ramsey,
and Mr. Wharton, to whom was referred a letter of the first, from the Secretary
of War, report;
“That they have had a conference with the two deputies
of the Catawba Nation of Indians; that their mission respects certain tracts of
land reserved for their use in the state of South Carolina, which they wish may
be so secured to their tribe as not to be intruded into by force, nor alienated
even with their own consent; whereupon,
“Resolved, that it be recommended to the legislature
of the State of South Carolina to take such measures for the satisfaction and
security of the said tribe as the said legislature shall, in their wisdom,
think fit.”
In Brevard's Digest of the Laws of South Carolina,
vol. 1, title 96, Indians, among other things appears the following, adopted in
1808, viz.:
“Sec. 8. Whereas it is expedient that the Catawba
Indians should have the power to grant and make leases for life, for lives, as
well as for a term of years, of the lands vested in them by the laws of this
state.
“Sec. 9. Be it therefore enacted, that from and immediately
after the passing of this act, it shall and may be lawful for the Catawba
Indians to grant and make to any person or persons any lease or leases, for
life or lives or term of years of any of the lands vested in them by the laws
of this state: provided that no lease shall exceed the term of 99 years or
three lives in being.
“ Sec. 10. And be it further enacted, that the
governor for the time being shall be authorized and is hereby required to
appoint five fit and proper persons to superintend the leasing of the lands of
the Catawba Indians in manner aforesaid. And no lease of the lands of the
aforesaid Catawba Indians hereafter to be made, whether for life or lives or
term of years, shall be healed or deemed as valid and good in law unless the same
be witnessed by a majority of the said superintendents at the time of making
thereof, and signed and sealed by at least four of the headmen or chiefs of
said Catawba Indians: Provided, that an annual rent be reserved as a
compensation for such lease.
“Sec. 11. And be it enacted, That the said
superintendent shall be commissioned for the purpose aforesaid, for seven
years, which commission shall be recorded in the office of Secretary of State,
and an office copy thereof shall be taken and received as good evidence in any
court of law or equity within this state as the original would be if produced
in any case within it might be necessary to produce such original commission.
“Sec. 12. And it be further enacted, that all acts and
claims of acts or resolutions repugnant hereto be, and the same are hereby
repealed.
Sec. 13. Whereas many inconveniences have been
experienced by the leases of the Catawba Indians, as well as by the Indians
themselves,, under the operation of an act passed in the year of our Lord 1808,
which act ordains that two shall at any time be made for such lease, or any
part thereof, for more than three years rent in advance, and that no payments
shall be deemed or held to be valid unless the same be made conformably to this
act, and receipts therefor given by such of the chiefs of the nation as usually
transact their affairs, and by a majority of the said superintendents.
“Sec. 14. And it be further enacted, that no payments
shall be hereafter made for such lease, or any part thereof, for more than
seven years in advance, and that no payment shall be held or deemed valid;
unless receipt therefor be given and attested by one of the said
superintendents.
“Sec. 15. And it be further enacted, that a lease for
three years or 99 years of the said Catawba lands shall be, and the same is
hereby, declared to be a qualification equivalent to a free hold in all cases
where a free hold is not required by the constitution of this state or of the
United States.
In 1815 an act was passed by the legislature of South
Carolina entitled “An Act to Authorize and Empower the Superintendent of the
Catawba Indians to Institute Actions for Trespass on Their Lands, and For Other
Purposes Therein Mentioned.”
“Whereas certain persons now hold possession of the
lands belonging to the Catawba Indians, without obtaining a lease for the same
from the headmen or chiefs of the nation, agreeable to the act of assembly
passed the 15th day of December, 1808, empowering the said Indians to lease the
lands vested in then, and there is no power or authority in any person or
persons to institute an action or actions at law to put such persons as hold
their lands without a lease out of the possession thereof: For remedy whereof,
be it enacted by the honorable Senate and House of Representatives, now met and
setting in general assembly, and by te authority of the same, that from and
immediately after the passing of this act, the superintendent now appointed, or
that may be hereafter appointed, by the governor of the state, or a majority of
them shall be, and are hereby authorized and empowered, in their own names or
in the names of a majority of them, as agents, to commence and prosecute, an
action or actions of trespass to try titles to the lands claimed by and vested
in the said Indians, that is now or may hereafter be held in possession by any
person or persons, without a lease from the headmen or chief of said nation of
Indians, in pursuance of the act of the general assembly aforesaid, and also in
like manner an action or actions of quare clausum fregit, for trespass
committed on said lands; and also actions for injuries done to the personal
property of said Indians; and the damage recovered in the actions to try
titles, or in any actions to quare clausum fregit, or action for injury done to
the personal property of said Indians, shall be collected by the said
superintendent for the benefit of said Indians.
“And it be enacted by the authority aforesaid, that
the said superintendents, or a majority of them, shall have power I the same
manner, as they are authorized to bring actions, to make distress for
arrearages of rent now due, or that may hereafter become due, or bring an
action or actions to recover the same in any court having jurisdiction.
“And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid,
that this shall be deemed and taken as a public act, and judicially noticed as
such without special pleading, and liberally construed for carrying the
purposes aforesaid into effect.”
“Catawba Indians – For the removal of the
Catawba Tribe of Indians now in the limits of the State of North Carolina to
the Indian Country west of the Mississippi, with the consent of said tribe,
under the direction of the President of the United States, a sum not exceeding
$5,000: provided no portion of this sum shall be expended for the purpose of
removing said Indians until the President shall first obtain a home for them.
Amongst some of the tribes west of the Mississippi River, with their consent,
and without any charge upon the government.”
In a letter dated November 13th, 1848, John C. Mullay,
a clerk in this office, forwarded a letter, dated Oct. 6, 1848, from one George
T. Mason, enclosing a request by the Chief of the Catawbas, a memorial of said
tribe of Indians at Quallatown, Haywood County, N. C., dated Oct. 4, 1848, on
file in this office (misc. M., 280), addressed to the President, signed by
William Morrison, chief, and following heads of each Catawba family, viz.,
Phillip Kegg, Lewis Stevens, John Heart, John Scott, Franklin Kenty, Antony
George, David Harris, Thomas Stevens, John Harris, Jesse Harris, Nancey George,
Sally Harris, Polly Redhead, Patsey George, Harriet Stevens, Betsy Heart,
Cynthia Kegg, Patsy George, Jr., Mary Ayres, Margaret Ayres, Betsey Ayres,
Susan Kegg, Eliza Kanty, Frankie Brown, Jinny Joe, Jenny Ayres, Rachel Brown,
Easther Scott, Katy Joe, Sally Redhead, William George, Peggy Kanty, Rosa
Ayres, Becky George, Polly Harris, Elizabeth Brown, Polly Harris [same name is
listed twice], Mary Joe, Allen Harris, Mary Harris and James Kegg, comprising
42 persons, all of whom signed by mark, in the presence of Abram Sellers,
George T. Mason., and John T. Gibson, requesting the appointment of a reliable
and trustworthy business man to superintend their removal west.
In transmitting said memorial Mr.
Mullay speaks of him, after several personal interviews held with said chiefs,
as an intelligent, respectable Catawba, and of the preference of his people to
a home with the Chickasaw Indians West, who, he stated, had at one time given
the Catawba an invitation to settle among them.
In this annual report of this office for the year 1849
(Doc. 5, p. 949), it is stated that –
“The department has not yet succeeded in finding a suitable home
west of the Mississippi for the Catawba Indians residing in North Carolina.
They prefer a residence among the Chickasaws, to whom application was made to
receive them, but to which there has been no
final answer. Proper efforts will be made carry out, next season, if
practicable, the Law of July 29th, 1848, providing for their removal.”
Agent A.M. M. Upshaw was instructed, Nov. 6, 1848
(Chickasaw Letter Book C., p. 32), to ascertain whether or not the Chickasaw
Nation would receive the Catawba on the terms prescribed by the law.
In said instructions it was intimidated that the
Department knew very little about the Catawbas, or of their origins, or of
their language and customs, or how they got from their home in South Carolina
to Haywood County, in North Carolina. They were believed however, to be a quiet
and well-disposed people, numbering in all about 80 souls. From their location
and supposed former alliances with the Cherokees, the impression was
established that they would prefer a residence with the Cherokees, and steps
were taken to ascertain whether or not they would receive the Catawbas on the
terms prescribed. Information was subsequently obtained that they would
probably object to going to the Cherokees, and expressed a preference to take
homes with the Chickasaws. Agent Upshaw responded, on the 8th of January, 1849,
that the Chickasaws would probably receive the Catawbas, but that their council
must first act on the subject. (Chickasaw U. 55) It does not appear however,
that the Chickasaw Council ever took action on the case.
Subsequently, it appears that the Choctaw Council
passed an act entitled “An Act Naturalizing Certain Persons Therein” which was
approved November 3rd, 1893, (Choctaw Laws, 1869, p. 124) as follows, viz.:
Sec. 11. Be it enacted by the general counsel of the Choctaw
Nation assembled, that William Morrison, Thomas Morrison, Sarah Jane Morrison,
Molly Redhead, Betsey Heart, Rebeccah Heart, Phillip Keggo, and the infant
child of Phillip Keggo, Rosey Ayres, Betsey Ayers, Julian Ayres, Mary Ayres,
Sophonia Ayres, and Sally Ayres be, and they are hereby declared, naturalized
citizens of the Choctaw Nation, invested with all the rights, privileges, and
immunities of Naturalized citizens of the same.”
Although there is nothing in the act to show the
nationality of these persons, you will see by a comparison of the names
attached to the aforementioned memorial of the Catawbas, that they are the same
persons. This opinion is corroborated by a subsequent Act of said council,
approved November 12, 1856 (Choctaw Laws, 1869, p. 153) entitled, “An Act
Giving Greater privileges to the Catawbas hereby naturalized).”
Sec. 18. Be it enacted by the General Counsel of the
Choctaw Nation Assembled, that the Catawbas who were made citizens of this
nation by a special act of Session XX, section11, of 1853, between the Choctaws
and the government of the United States.”
The Hon. James L. Orr, of Anderson, S. C., and
Representatives in Congress, having called the attention of this office to the
fact that a remnant of the Catawba Tribe of Indians numbering about 70 persons
residing within his state, expressed a desire to become affiliated with the
Choctaw people; that they possessed a small reservation in South Carolina that
they were willing to sell, and that the proceeds in connection with a
contemplated appropriation for their benefit of the legislature of the state,
would supply them with a fund amounting, as was presumed, , to about $5,000
sufficient, if properly applied,, to enable them to make the improvements
necessary to a successful commencement of cultivating the soil, and of other
pursuits incident to civilized life. This office instructed C. W. Dean,
Superintendent of Indian Affairs, in a letter addressed to him at Ft. Smith,
Arkansas, dated January 6, 1857 to direct agent D. H. Cooper to lay the subject
before the Choctaw nation in council assembled or otherwise, as he might deem
most judicious, inviting attention to the generosity and hospitality of the
Choctaws manifested in the reception and kind treatment of a small party of their
fellow Catawbas, then living among the Choctaws which had inspired them with
confidence in that people, and with an anxious desire the same privileges with
their brethren who had gone before them in the same enterprise.
He was advised that in the Indians appropriations act
approved July 31st 1854, (10 stat. 1, p. 316), the following item appears, viz.
–
“For the reappropriation for expenses of the removal
of the Catawba Indians to the west of the Mississippi River, and of settling,
and subsisting them one year in their new homes, provided that a home shall
first be obtained for them, and that they shall be removed only with their own
consent to receive this small band of Catawba’s, and, and would permit them to
reside within the limits of their territory.
Superintendent Dean reported on this matter March 20,
1857, as follows:
“It is the opinion of Agent Cooper, in which opinion I
concur, that nothing can be effected as to the procurement of homes for these
Indians among the Choctaws until the next session of the general counsel of the
nation, and I believe it does not again convene until next Autumn.”
“I was in hope, indeed, from inquiry, was almost
satisfied – that the act of the Choctaw Counsel passed at the Choctaw Counsel
passed at the session of 1853, conferring the privilege of citizenship upon
certain Catawba Indians that emigrated and were permitted to settle in the
Choctaw Country in that year, was made general and comprehensive in its terms,
so as to include all the Catawba Indians that might be disposed to cast their
lot with them, as there seemed at the time to be an understanding that the
greater portion, if not all the residue of the tribe was desirous of emigrating
to the Choctaw Country.; but I have recently procured a copy of the act of 1853
(a transcript of which is in file in the Indian Bureau), and perceive it is
limited and specific in its terms, including only those that emigrated in that
year.
I am further inclined in the belief that the Choctaws
were disappointed that the Catawbas that emigrated at the time mentioned were
unable to turn over to the treasury of the nation a certain sum of money that
it was supposed that they were to receive from the United States for their
removal and temporary subsistence, but which amount, instead of being paid into
the treasury of the Choctaws, reverted instead to the surplus fund of the
treasury of the united States. As thee Catawbas were invested with the full
privileges of the citizens of the Choctaw Nation and became equal participants
in the distribution of their annuities, etc., it seems not unreasonable that
any fund set apart for the use of these Catawba’s should have become a portion
of the common stock for common good, and such, I learn, was the general
expectation of all parties when the act of 1853 was passed.
Agent Cooper gives it as his opinion that on
assembling of the National Council of the Choctaws and Chickasaws, on the
payment of a reasonable sum thereof by the United States or by the State of
South Carolina.
Under these circumstances, and as from the tenor of
your letter of January 6, the exact provision that may be made for the removal
and settlement of the Catawbas of South Carolina appears as yet to be
indefinite. And unascertained. I beg permission to suggest that the interim that
must occur before further action can be had with the tribes be occupied in
adjusting definitely and with precision what amount will be under control of
the department so secure the purposes indicated, so that a proposition
determinant in its character may be ready to be laid before the tribes whose
cooperation is asked in the premises.
“From Agent Cooper's letter to me on the subject, I
beg leave to offer the following extant, and to ask for it the consideration of
the department:
“I have but little doubt the remnant of the
Catawba Indians can be accommodated in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Country, upon
the payment by the United States or the State of South Carolina, of a
reasonable consideration to the Choctaws and Chickasaws, both of which tribes
have an interest direct in all sums of money that might be realized from the
use or sale of the country embraced within their boundaries.
No action appears to have been taken by the
government or any of the Indians on the question of their removal to the
Choctaw or any other Indian Country until 1872 when Hon.
J. C. Harper, of the House of Representatives from Georgia, brought to the
attention of this office the question of the removal of certain Indians in
North Carolina and Georgia. Presuming they were Cherokee, this office requested
him on the 13th of June, 1872, to furnish a list of the names and ages of said
Indians. In reporting the names, Mr. Joseph McDowell, of Fairmount, Georgia,
under date of October 1872 (Misc. M., 229), stated that the Indians referred to,
and asking relief of the government, were Catawba Indians, and 84 in number,
viz:
Those italicized desired permission of the president
to settle in the Indian Territory, all of whom Mr. McDowell states were good
and loyal people, and that if any Indian deserved assistance from the
government these Indians did: that their grandfathers on both sides the
government in the War for Independence, and that their names were on the muster
rolls in the War Department.
William
Guy, of Granville County, Georgia, and Simon Jeffers, of Belleville Virginia,
Catawba Indians, served five years in the Army and were honorably discharged,
and these 84 persons were their descendants.
‘1.
Buckner Guy, 80; 2. Lucinda Anderson, his daughter, wife of Wm. Anderson, a
Cherokee, 60; 3. Polly Guy, 50; 4. James Guy, 55; 5. Clark Guy, 53; 6. Judy or
Judith Guy, 48; 7. Silvey Guy 48; 31; 8. Elizabeth Guy, 20; 9. George Guy, 19;
10. Amanda Anderson, 23; 11. Nathaniel Anderson, 23; 12. Mary Anderson, 21; 13.
Eliza Anderson, 21; 14. Nancy Anderson, 19; 15. Corneilia Anderson, 18; 16.
William Washington Guy, 30; 17. Albert A. Guy, 28; 18. Amanda Guy, 26; 19.
Joseph M. Guy, 24; 20. Caroline T. Guy, 22; 21. Martha Guy, 25; 22. Alexander
Guy, 21; 23. Sarah Guy, 18; 24. Geraldine Guy, 12; 25. George Guy, 11; 26.
Henrietta Guy, 9; 26. Tennessee Guy, 7; 28. Ann Guy, 14; 29. Rosa Guy, 12; 30.
McClelland Guy, 8; 31. U. S. Grant Guy or Wolford Grant Guy, 7; 32. Louisa Guy,
8; 33. John Guy, 6; 34. Johnson Guy, 11; 35. William Guy, 6; 36. Katy Guy, 2; 37. Peter Guy, 40; 38. Tabatha
Steward, 50; 39. Viney Guy, 48; 40. Ann Gijeon, 46; 41. Katharine Guy, 45; 42.
Rachel Guy, 43; 43. June Bingham, married a White man; 41; 44. George Guy, 28;
45. Thomas Guy, 14; 46. John Guy, 12; 47. Henrietta Guy, 8; 48. Mary Guy, 23;
49. Newton Guy, 16; 50. Croline Guy, 14; 51. William Guy, 12; 52. Ann Guy 10;
53. Daniel Guy, 35; 54. Mary Guy, 45; 55. Charles Guy, 18; 56. George Guy, 16;
57. Adaline Guy, 14; 58. Brag Guy, 12; 59. Judy Guy, daughter of Simon Jeffers; 80; 60. Edmond Guy, 80; 61. Willis Guy, 61;
62. Mahala Guy, 56; 63. George W. Guy, 36; 64. Mary S. Guy, 33; 65. Andrew T.
Guy, 31; 66. Martha Bingham, married a White man; 29; 67. Amanda M. McDowell,
married a White man, 27; 68. Joshua R. Guy, 25; 69. Amanda T. Guy; White wife
of Joshua R. Guy, 24; 70. Erastus M. Guy, 3; 71. Mary C. Guy, White wife of A.
T. Guy, 28; 72. Henry H, Guy, 4; 73. Emma F. Guy, 2; 74. Ruth M. Guy, 21; 75.
Sarah A. Guy; 19; 76. Isaac H. Guy, 17; 77. Millard F. Guy, 16; 78. Lilly R. Guy;
12; 79. Samuel H. McDowell, son of Amanda M,. # 67, 5; 80. Eli H. H. J.
McDowell, son of Amanda M., # 67, 1; 81. Elizabeth Guy, wife of G. W. Guy,
White, 30; 82. Laurado Guy; 4; 83. Caly Lee Guy, 2; 84. Charles Bingham, son of
Martha # 66, 3.
As these Indians were Catawba's and not Cherokees, Mr.
McDowell was informed Oct. 22, 1872, that they could not receive any of the
benefits arising from the Cherokee removal fund of 1848.
A schedule of seventy persons very similar to the
forgoing list, each containing many of the same names was forwarded to the
office by Mr. McDowell, Oct. 19, 1869 (Misc. M. 805), but for the same reasons,
no relief could be granted them at that time more than in 1872.
Another interval of 15 years or more lapsed before the
subject was again presented to the department.
On the 21st of November, 1887, James Kegg,
of Whittier North Carolina, in addressing the Secretary of the interior (No.
31383), made the following statement, viz.:
Many years ago, his people, the Catawba
Indians, leased the land they owned in South Carolina and became a wondering
tribe, without homes for their wives and children. They made application he
states, to the Cherokees of North Carolina, for homes upon their land and made
over to them all their leased lands in South Carolina in consideration of their
adoption into their tribe; that about 500 were so adopted and have been
identified as such; that some 300 of them were removed west under the Cherokee
Treaty of New Echota, made December 29th, 1835, leaving a few living among the
Cherokees as Cherokee citizens and a small portion remaining in South Carolina
“upon a section of land which they owned and was not leased out for a term of
years, upon which they now reside.” Those Catawbas remaining in South Carolina,
Mr. Kegg states, had no interest whatever in the lands which were leased out by
those who became Cherokees by adoption, and he wished to ascertain whether or
not the United States gave its consent to the Catawbas to lease out their lands
to the State of South Carolina or to her citizens, and if so, upon what terms
and the length of term said leases ran.
Without endorsing the statements herein made by Mr.
Kegg. He was informed on the 7th of April, 1888, that the Catawba Indians held
their lands in South Carolina under agreements or arrangements made with that
state over which the Federal Government had no control or jurisdiction. He was
then cited to the laws of South Carolina, a set forth I Brevard's Digest, vol
1., titled “Indians”, and to the volume in colonial law herein cited, and for
further information respecting the history and previous status of the lands and
leases he was referring to the Secretary of State of the State of South
Carolina.
There have been frequent communications from and
concerning the Catawba Indians since 1888, but none involving of furnishing any
new facts of information concerning the history or status of these Indians or
their lands.
The last communication on the subject was a letter
dated Jan 9th, 1896, from Senator H. M. Teller, including one from P. H. Head
(who had been furnished a copy of office letter to Senator Teller dated Feb.13,
1890, giving the status given the status of their lands in South Carolina as
above set forth), a Catawba Indian, of Sanford, Colo., submitting a petition
purporting to have been signed by himself and 25 others, embracing six
families, Catawba Indians, who claim to have once resided in South Carolina,
but who are no longer recognized by said state, and ask to be united with the
Indians now living on the Uintah Reservation in Utah, and to be recognized by
the government as members of the Ute Tribe, receiving and enjoying in common
with them all the rights and privileges of Utes and the protection of the
government. In said letter Mr. Head intimated that this petition would be
followed by another signed by the said Ute Indians, which however, has not yet
been received in this office.
Senator Teller, in submitting said petition, requested
that it receive due attention and that he be advised as to what steps were
necessary to have such change effected.
He was informed on the 16th of January,
1896, on the return of said petition, that it was now the policy of the
government to abolish the tribal relations of the Indians as fast as possible,
and to settle each Indian upon a separate tract of land that he can call his
own to the end that we may become self-supporting and independent of government
bounty. It would not be in keeping with that policy to gather up people who
happen to have more or less people who happen to have Indian blood in their
veins and were living among the Whites separate and apart from Indian
communities and incorporate them into a tribe and place them upon an Indian
Reservation. A copy of the General Allotment Act
of 1887, and the Amendatory Act of 1891, with a copy of the rules and
regulations indicating the manner of procedure to obtain an allotment of lands
upon the public domain under the fourth section of said act were sent to said
petitioners for the information as the said section wisely provided for Indians
who were not living upon any reservation at the date of the passage of said
act, or for whose tribe no reservation of land had been created by allowing
them to apply for and to secure to themselves land upon the public domain
whether surveyed or unservayed.
With respect to incorporation into the Ute Tribe of
Indians occupying the Uintah Reservation, Senator Teller was advised that where
there are no specific treaty stipulations given with any given tribe touching
such matters, as is the case with the Ute Indians, the usual course to pursue
is to obtain the consent of the tribe into which an Indian desires adoption,
and then have such adoption approved by this office and the Secretary of the
Interior. Any such consent must be procured under the eye of the agent and
should bear his certificate to the effect that the action of the Indians in
adopting such Indian represented the wishes of the tribe and was taken in open
council. This, briefly, would be the proper course to pursue in order to obtain
adoption into an Indian tribe.
Having furnished tis full and complete history of the
Catawbas, as far as the same is disclosed is disclosed from the files and
records of this office and other sources, you will see just what lands these
Indians held and now hold in South Carolina. I know of no land that they own in
their tribal capacity as Catawbas in North Carolina. I know of no reason why
these individual Indians may not take up lands in severalty under the fourth
section of the act of 1887 aforesaid. I do not think it
would be practicable or wise to ask the President to withhold from public
settlement the lands ceded by the Kiowa and Comanche Indians by their last
agreement, when that agreement is ratified by Congress, until such Indians had
first taken allotments thereon. They should conform to the act of 1887,
as all the other Indians in like condition have to do.
Your attention is particularly invited to the views of
this office in office letter of January 16th, 1896, herein referred to with
respect to the policy that should be adopted respecting the Catawba Indians.
This memorial is herewith returned.
Very respectfully,
D. M. Browning
Commissioners
R. V. Belt, Esq.
1314 Tenth Street NW, City
It’s odd
they mentioned the Comanche/Kiowa lands. No one ever mentioned anything about
that to me before. I can’t help but recall my great grandpa leased land from the
Kiowa Agency for cattle raising at the of the end of the 19th & beginning of the 20th century
(293). I have previously found a document at "Oklahoma Historical Society" stating my great-grandpa leased that land from the Kiowa. I have copy somewhere . . . I'll find it and place it in the sources listed below. Per IPP, they also lived in either Leflore Co or Sequoyah County in E Ok –
Leflore County is where some Catawba settled (294). Later my family moved to
the Chickasaw Nation. The my great aunt's family leased lands from Benton Colbert. He descended from a well known and respected Chickasaw family. This is also found in IPP records. Some Catawba were also said to have settled in the Chickasaw Nation (295).
Family story says my great-grandparents started to sign up for Dawes Rolls (or Guion-Miller? I forget), but they got upset at
something and they never signed up. (296). So were not on the accepted or the rejected rolls. Some on the rejected Cherokee rolls were mixed-Catawban, not mixed-Cherokee. They weren't rejected because they were not Native American, but rather because they were not Cherokee. Was the above document what upset my great grandparents (Josephine Brown-Richey, 1854-1932 and Jeffrey Hoten Richey, 1851-1926)? I'll never know. But there sure are a lot of coincidences.
I have
spent years trying to discover who our ancestors were, always thinking they
were Cherokee. But my research has lead me more towards the Catawba than the
Cherokee. I didn’t expect that.
Lastly I'd like to reassert a paragraph, a direct quote from the above document -- we didn't have a chance:
I have to say that it is the policy of the government to abolish the tribal relationship of the Indians as fast as possible, and to settle each Indian upon a separate tract of land that he can call his own, to the end that he may become self-supporting and independent of government bounty. It would not be in keeping with this policy, I think, to gather up people who happen to have more or less Indian blood in their veins and are living among the Whites, separate and apart from Indian communities, and incorporate them into a tribe and place them upon an Indian Reservation.
Lastly I'd like to reassert a paragraph, a direct quote from the above document -- we didn't have a chance:
I have to say that it is the policy of the government to abolish the tribal relationship of the Indians as fast as possible, and to settle each Indian upon a separate tract of land that he can call his own, to the end that he may become self-supporting and independent of government bounty. It would not be in keeping with this policy, I think, to gather up people who happen to have more or less Indian blood in their veins and are living among the Whites, separate and apart from Indian communities, and incorporate them into a tribe and place them upon an Indian Reservation.
References:
291. Congressional Document; The
Catawba Tribe of Indians, 54th Congress, 2nd session, Doc. 144, February 23rd,
1897
292.
http://vancehawkins.blogspot.com/2013/01/54th-congress-2nd-session-senate.html
; Also from the book., “Finding Our Indian Blood”; Vance Hawkins; © 2013 Bluewater Publishing
293. Below is a copy of a 3x5 card I found at the Oklahoma Historical Society building diagonally across the street from the State Capitol Building on NE 23rd Street just a mile or so northeast of downtown Oklahoma City. The Jeffrey H. Richey mentioned (b. 1851 Ar- d. 1926 Ok) is my great-grandpa. We visited Jeff Richey and Josephine Brown-Richey's (b. 1854 Ar- d. 1932 Ok) graves often when I was a child, on memorial day. They are my great-grandparents. We have Native blood from both the Richey's and Brown's. The Richey's go back to Joseph Richey who married Sarah Wayland. These Wayland's attended Stoney Creek Primitive Baptist Church before the left Virginia for Arkansas in 1815. It is believed Nevil Wayland Sr's. (born in Ireland) wife was a Gibson and a Saponi Indian. Our Wayland's were surrounded by Gibson's both in southwestern Virginia and Arkansas.
294. Indian Pioneer Papers; https://digital.libraries.ou.edu/whc/pioneer/
; “The Indian-Pioneer Papers oral history collection spans from 1861 to 1936.
It includes typescripts of interviews conducted during the 1930s by government
workers with thousands of Oklahomans regarding the settlement of Oklahoma and
Indian territories, as well as the condition and conduct of life there.
Consisting of approximately 80,000 entries, the index to this collection may be
accessed via personal name, place name, or subject.” Interview is also found in
my book, “Finding Our Indian Blood”. © 2013, Bluewater Publishing.
295. “The Catawba Indians, People
of the River”; Douglas Summers Brown; © 1966 and publication by University of
South Carolina Press
296. “Finding Our Indian Blood”,
Vance Hawkins, © Bluewater Publishing, 2013
Addendum -- Photo of Jonathan Wayland (first cousin to my ancestor direct Sarah Ann Wayland (1819-1857). Since we know his grandpa Nevil Wayland Sr. was born in Ireland, most parts of him that don't look Irish -- are American. :)
Here is a 1909-1910 school photo of a one room school house in rural Oklahoma. I share it because a name is mapped to a face. Again, click on the image to enlarge it. The two Richey boys are grandma's brothers.
Grandma was the daughter of Jeff & Josey I mentioned above. I am only showing photos of ancestors whose photos map a face to a name. From the photo above, I have blown up the photo of Jeff Jr.
and his brother, Otho Richey. He died in a great flu epidemic of 1917-1918. His parents are buried next to him.
The last photo mapping a name to a face is dad, A. O. Hawkins (1915-1992)
