Establishing a
Claim
Another question that had to be decided by
the Commission was the kind and amount of evidence necessary to establish
the claim of a Mississippi Choctaw. In making proof of Indian blood
the physical features of the claimant were considered, sometimes to the
practical exclusion of all other evidence. Coal-black negroes were
sometimes dismissed by the Commission with the remark that the law was
intended for Indians and not for negroes.
But evidence other than physical features was
usually required to establish Indian blood. This evidence was furnished
by the affidavits of one or more persons who knew the claimant, and could
testify to his Indian ancestry. The most difficult matter, however, to
make proof of was the fact that the claimant or his ancestor had conformed
to the 14th article of the treaty of 1830.
A few old Choctaws remembered Judge Ward, the
Indian Agent, and remembered going before him to make application for their
Mississippi homes in 1830 and 1831, but in most instances the making of
this application was purely a matter of tradition, and in some families
the tradition had died out: In many instances the imagination was doubtless
exercised more than the memory in furnishing evidence on this point.
The Commission was liberal with the claimants in admitting evidence of
this fact, and permitted parol, heresay, custom, tradition, or even evidence
of an opportunity for making such application, or position wherein such
application was probable. The Supplemental Treaty in 1902 almost entirely
eliminated this requisite to enrollment as Mississippi Choctaws.
The
Case of Riddle, et al vs. Choctaw and
Chickasaw Tribes
The proceedings of the Commission were in their nature like the proceedings
of a regular civil court. Each claimant was regarded as a party plaintiff,
and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations as parties defendant. Upon the filing
of a claim, legal notice had to be given the defendant tribes, and one
of the assignments of error made by the “Citizenship Court” in the test
case of Riddle et al. vs. Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes of Indians was the
failure of the claimants to give the proper notice of the institution of
de novo proceedings in the United States Court to the Chickasaw Tribe of
Indians, one of the joint defendants.
Reference has already been made to the many
complications arising from the conflicting claims of the persistent Court
Claimants. To undo this mischief and to cure the defects, to bring order
out of chaos, Congress created in 1902 what is known as the “Citizenship
Court.” This court consisted of three judges whose duty it should be to
settle the legality of the conflicting Indian claims. This court organized
in January, 1903, at South McAlester, Indian Territory, and began its work
at once. The test case above referred to consumed its time for the first
few months, and was intended to determine the status of the many court
claimants who after having been turned down by the Commission had been
reinstated by the United States Court. The decision of the Citizenship
Court in this case invalidated all that had been done by the United States
Court, holding that said court had no jurisdiction over citizenship claims
instituted de novo, and that its jurisdiction was limited in these matters
merely to a review of the action of the Commission. There were other assignments
of error in the opinion, chief of which was the lack of proper process
or notice already referred to.
The effect of this decision was to open up
anew all the old claims turned down by the Commission that had been carried
to the United States Courts. This new court was granted jurisdiction to
hear these claims and to determine the justice of them, its determination
to be final. Great dissatisfaction was felt because of the court’s opinion—those
who had been reinstated by the United States Court had the greatest grievance,
but there was general dissatisfaction that these old matters were to be
reopened. Some of the best lawyers questioned the constitutionality of
the law creating the court, and others thought that the court had exceeded
its jurisdiction in its decision. These lawyers preferred to ignore this
court completely, fearing that to appear with their causes in this court
would Waive their rights to question either the regularity of the court
or its decision in the test case. Nevertheless, this court kept grinding
away, day after day, establishing the claims of some, dismissing the claims
of others. The court claimant found himself in an awkward dilemma. If he
filed his claim with this court and lost, its decision was final and he
was precluded from questioning the court or its decision in any tribunal;
but there was no other tribunal to consider his claims, and this court
was created for only twelve months, and if his claim was not decided within
that time no further provision was made for its consideration.
But the “Citizenship Court” won. Its actions
were ratified by Congress and a further lease of time given it in which
to complete its work.
To Page 6
Back
Return to Menu
Copyright 2001 - All Rights
Reserved
Ellen
Pack
