When Redmen Aren’t Red Men

I’m always grateful when one of our readers send me original Native documents with names.  In this case, hat tip to Yvonne for sending me this information about the Onieda Tribe #88, Improved Order or Redmen, also called the Independent Order of Redmen from Staunton, Va.

Yvonne found this suit at the Virginia archives in the Chancery suits for Augusta Co., VA.

http://www.lva.virginia.gov/chancery/full_case_detail.asp?CFN=015-1897-017#img

redmen chancery

On November 1, 1894, the suit states that a group of men formed an unincorporated voluntary association called the Oneida Tribe #88, who purchased, then leased space in a building to other groups, one of which was suing them.

redmen chancery2redmen chancery3redmen chancery4

First, I found it odd to find Oneida in Virginia, and second, the number 88 threw me.  I read through the first few pages of the document, shown above, and then I decided to see what I could find about this tribe.  What I found was shocking.

The Independent Order of Red Men weren’t Indians at all, although many of their rituals were indeed based on those of Native Americans.  They were white men who formed a fraternal organization by that name.

The Improved Order of Red Men traces its origin to certain secret patriotic societies founded before the American Revolution. They were established to promote Liberty and to defy the tyranny of the English Crown. Among the early groups were: The Sons of Liberty, the Sons of St. Tammany, and later the Society of Red Men.

Their rituals and regalia are modeled after those used by Native Americans. The organization claimed a membership of about half a million in 1935, but has declined to less than 38,000.

On December 16, 1773, a group of men—all members of the Sons of Liberty—met in Boston to protest the tax on tea imposed by England. When their protest went unheeded, they disguised themselves as Mohawk Indians, proceeded to Boston harbor, and dumped overboard 342 chests of English tea. (See Boston Tea Party.)

However, for the next 35 years, each of the original Sons of Liberty and Sons of St. Tamina groups went their own way, under many different names. In 1813, at historic Fort Mifflin, near Philadelphia, several of these groups came together and formed one organization known as the Society of Red Men. The name was changed to the Improved Order of Red Men in Baltimore in 1834. In the late 18th century, social and benevolent Tammany Societies, named after Tamanend, were formed. The most famous of these was New York City’s Society of St. Tammany, which grew into a major political machine known as “Tammany Hall.” Around 1813, a disenchanted group created the philanthropic “Society of Red Men” at Fort Mifflin in Philadelphia. From this, the “Improved Order of Red Men” was later formed as a working man’s drinking group similar to the Odd Fellows fraternal organization.

In 1886, its membership requirements were defined in the same pseudo-Indian phrasing as the rest of the constitution:

“ Sec. 1. No person shall be entitled to adoption into the Order except a free white male of good moral character and standing, of the full age of twenty-one great suns, who believes in the existence of a Great Spirit, the Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and is possessed of some known reputable means of support.”

The restriction to white males remained until 1974 when the “all white” clause was eliminated.

The Order has a three tiered structure. Local units are called “Tribes” and are presided over by a “Sachem” and a board of directors. Local meeting sites are called “Wigwams”. The state level is called the “Reservation” and governed by a “Great Sachem” and “Great Council” or “Board of Chiefs”. The national level is the “Great Council of the United States”. The Great Council consists of the “Great Incohonee” (president), and a “Board of Great Chiefs”, which includes the “Great Senior Sagamore” (first vice-president), “Great Junior Sagamore”, “Great Chief of Records” (secretary), “Great Keeper of the Wampum” and “Prophet” (past president). The headquarters of the Order has been in Waco, Texas, since at least 1979.

So, of your family tells you that your male ancestor was a member of an Indian tribe, it may well be true, but it may not be the kind of tribe you had in mind.

Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improved_Order_of_Red_Men

Posted in Fraternal Organizations, Oneida | 3 Comments

Chief Big Head, Standing Rock, Dakota Territory

big head

A G.W. Scott cabinet card photograph of Chief Big Head, a Sioux Indian, taken between 1880-1890 in North Dakota.

In the records of Indian Chiefs and Visitors to the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, we find a listing for Big Headed, Dakota Chief.  I cannot find any references to Big Headed, but there are two Chief Big Heads that are from the Dakota Territory.  The school was open from 1879 to 1918, so Big Headed or Big Head would have visited or attended during that time.

Chief Big Head, Pahtanka or Nasula-Tanka was born about 1838 and died in 1889.

Big Head, the head chief of the Cut Head band of the Yanktonais, was born in the winter called Wičhapi Okhičamna, the Moving of the Stars and the time of the great smallpox year called Wičahaŋhaŋ.  In this year the stars did not fall to the earth as they did in 1834 and ’37, but the movement of the stars went on in the heavens with flashes and great disturbances all during the night. This is said to have happened in 1830, according to the record of Little Dog, a Huŋkpapȟaya.

Big Head, commonly called Pažipa, was influential in his band. He had good judgment, was kind and truthful. He born in Minnesota.  He had 25 families and lodges in his camp. The Yanktonais lived in the Dakota Territory east of the Missouri River, east to the Misapplies and North to the Apple Creek Valley which they considered their homeland.

Big Head (Pahtanka or Nasula-tanka, which means Big Head or Big Brain), son of a Yanktonais Chief with the same name and his wife Turns Back (ca. 1814), was born about 1838.  The 1858 treaty with the Yanktons (they had agreed to a massive land cession of 11 million acres, nearly 23 percent of the present state of South Dakota) infuriated the Lakotas and Yanktonais. This land cession directly affected the Yanktonais, whose primary bison hunting grounds were east of the Missouri River. At Fort Pierre, Lakotas demanded that the federal government revoke the 1858 treaty and stop the Yankton treaty payments. Further up the river, Upper Yanktonai chief Big Head (father), who had a reserved attitude toward the whites, refused the treaty and to accept treaty annuities.  He, accompanied by eighty warriors, sharply informed Indian Agent Alexander H. Redfield that the Yanktons had no authority to cede these lands, for they belonged to all Sioux.

In 1863, the older Big Head and the Yanktonais were involved in the punishment campaign following the Minnesota Uprising. He survived and was captured at the Massacre of White Stone Hill located near Kulm, North Dakota the following year. Chief Big Head and Chief Two Bears with other survivors were taken to Fort Randall, South Dakota and held prisoner for two years.

On 3 September 1864, they were engaged in the Battle of Whitestone Hill, where General Alfred Sully surrounded a Sioux hunting encampment, containing some 500 lodges, mainly Yanktonais under the leaders Two Bears, Little Soldier, and Big Head and Hunkpapa under their leader Black Moon. Some Santee were also present. Sully attacked the Sioux and massacred mostly women and children because the men were out hunting. Then Sully rounded up the friendly bands of Little Soldier and Big Head, about 30 men and 90 women and children in all, who were taken as prisoners of war to Crow Creek Agency, where many died from starvation. Some Winter Counts report the death of a Dakota called Big Head, who was taken prisoner by soldiers. This must have been the older Big Head.

After the death of his father, the son took the name Big Head. Big Head and his band were captured by General Sully at White Stone Hill. They were brought down to Old Fort Sully and, after the Treaty of 1868, he and part of the Cut Head bands were placed at Standing Rock, Dakota Territory. Remnants of the bands of Cut Heads can be found at Devil’s Lake, North Dakota; Poplar, Montana; and Crow Creek, South Dakota. During the battle of White Stone Hill, Big Head became separated from his wife and was reported killed. She had a small son. Later, she became the wife of Waanataŋ or Charger, a Mnikowožu chief. When a reunion of the nations took place, Mrs. Big Head saw her former husband alive and well at a dance. She told Waanataŋ she wished to return to her former husband. Waanataŋ felt pretty bad but acted the man. He loaded her horses with costly presents and leading a horse for a present to Big Head, he led the horse of his wife and returned her to Big Head. The chiefs shook hands and became loyal friends.

On October 20 and 28, 1865, the U.S. made treaties with Hunkpapa and Yanktonai at Fort Sully. The signers included Two Bears, Big Head, Little Soldier, and Black Catfish. In these treaties, the Indians agreed to cease all hostilities with U.S. citizens and with members of other tribes. They also agreed to withdraw from overland routes through their territory. They accepted annuity payments, and those who took up agriculture would receive implements and seed.

Three years later, in 1868, Big Head was a signatory to the “Fort Laramie Treaty,” which was actually signed at Fort Rice by the Yanktonais. In 1868, he was a signatory to the Fort Laramie Treaty. In the following year, the Grand River Agency (moved and renamed Standing Rock in 1874) was established.

According to Edward S. Curtis, more or less all Yanktonais lived on reservations by 1869. The 1874 Census revealed the following populations at Grand River Agency: Upper Yanktonai, 1,406; Lower Yanktonai, 2,607; Hunkpapa, 1,556; and Blackfeet, 871.  But many Sioux, who were still living in the un-ceded lands as provided in the 1868 Treaty, were uncounted.

Big Head and his Cut Head band still roamed the upper Missouri and even the Milk River region in Montana in the 1870s. His band settled – at least for a time – at the Fort Peck/Poplar River Agency.  In 1872, Big Head was one of the Yanktonais leaders who travelled to Washington.

The Yanktonais head chiefs – Medicine Bear, Black Eye, Two Bears, Big Head, and others – wanted to negotiate the acceptance of their wish to stay in Montana at the new Milk River Agency (later Fort Peck). In the end they failed.

In 1876, there were only a few Yanktonais in the battle of the Little Bighorn. It is known that a small group of Yanktonais from Fort Peck – Thunder Bear, Medicine Cloud, Iron Bear, Long Tree, and some women – joined Sitting Bull’s camp to hunt and trade. At that time, the Yanktonais skirmished a lot with tribes like the Gros Ventre, the Assiniboines, and the Crows.

In 1876, Big Head was in the Battle of Little Bighorn (Greasy-Grass). After the Battle; he took refuge in Grandmother’s country (Canada) with other chiefs and bands. According to oral history, Sitting Bull told the chiefs to scatter in their return to the United States so they would not be killed prior to his surrender. In the early 1880s, Big Head, who called himself Felix Big Head, moved to Standing Rock, where he had 17 lodges and 168 people under his care in the northern part of the reservation .

In 1882, U.S. Senator George F. Edmund initiated a law that declared polygamy a crime.

In the 1885 Standing Rock Ration List, Chief Big Head is shown to have 17 lodges and 168 people:

  • Natan Hinape (Comes Out Attacking)
  • Wakua Mani (Walking Hunting)
  • Itoye Tate (Wind In His Face)
  • Waciyanpi (Trusting In)
  • Tutiyopa Maza Win (Her Iron Door)
  • Wakeya Win (Carries the Lodge)
  • Naicijin (Stands to Defend Himself)
  • Mato Witko (Fool Bear)
  • Tatanka Ohitika (Brave Bull)
  • Anpetu Wakan (Holy Day)
  • Anpetu Rota (Grey Day)
  • Mato Sabiciye (Bear Makes Himself Black)
  • Sunka Wakantuya (High Dog)
  • Nakpa Ogi (Brown Ears)
  • Tatanka Wakute (Shoot the Buffalo)
  • Nakpa Duta (Bed Ears)
  • Tatanka Wanbdi (Bull Eagle)
  • Tunka Iyotake (Sitting Boulder)
  • Horpi (Nest)
  • Cokab Iyaye (Goes In the Middle)
  • Takana Duta (Red Swift)
  • Maka Okyan (Flying In the Earth)
  • Ota Apapi (Struck Plenty)
  • Kangi Ciqana (Little Crow)
  • Rante Maza (Iron Cedar)
  • Maza Kutepi (Shoot the Iron)
  • Wanbdi Watakpe (Charging Eagle)
  • Ti Wakan (Holy House)
  • Atateya Mani (Walking Wind)
  • Iyutanyan (Mrs. Galpin)
  • Wakiyan Duta (Red Thunder)
  • Keze (Barb of Fish Hook)
  • To wan ota (His Many Arrows)
  • Wasu Rota Win (Grey Hail)
  • Upi Kdeska (Spotted Skirt)
  • Wahacanka Wakan (Holy Shield)
  • Toka Ole (Hunts the Enemy)
  • Kankeca Supa (Black Woodpecker)
  • Hitunkasan Cante (Weasel Heart)
  • Tokicuwa (Warrior)

sioux reservation 1888

Sioux Reservation in 1888, above – Standing Rock near the top right.

On the Standing Rock Reservation and under the tutelage of Agent McLaughlin, Big Head, who had evolved into one of the main Standing Rock leaders, belonged to the strong supporters of the Edmunds plan.  Taking part in reservation politics, Big Head got his hair cut and, in 1888, he went to Washington, dressed in a suit, as part of the Sioux delegation to negotiate the cession of Sioux lands. On this occasion (and with the support of Agent McLaughlin) the Sioux successfully fought against the selling out of reservation land.

1888 sioux delegation

At the taking of their picture Chief Big Head’s hair was cut and he dressed in this suit as part of the delegation from Standing Rock that went to Washington D.C. in 1888.

1888 standing rock delegation

That would change in 1889. When the new Crook commission convened its hearings at Standing Rock in July 1889, Gall, John Grass, Mad Bear, and Big Head were prepared to speak out against the second Sioux bill as they had in Washington. But Major McLaughlin had switched positions and, in private conversations, he turned over Grass, Mad Bear, and Big Head.

1888 standing rock delegation2

Grass, “with the facility of a statesman,” argued convincingly on behalf of the new position. Gall, Mad Bear, and Big Head gave shorter but likewise influential speeches on behalf of the 1889 Sioux bill, which enraged Sitting Bull. These leaders compelled many undecided agency Indians to vote for the new bill. Gall and Mad Bear later regretted their decision.

Major James McLaughlin, Indian Agent at Standing Rock for a time, thought very highly of him as a man. During the negotiation of the treaty of 1889, Big Head worked hard among his people to hold on to their land and not dispose of any more of it in treaties until the previous treaties were fulfilled.

The commissioners from Washington, consisting of Governor Foster of Ohio, Captain Pratt, and General Crook, all threatened war if the Indians did not consent.  Big Head said:

“It is no use to talk about the old times.  The Government has made treaties two or three times and the Commissioners never tell lies.  They told us at Ft. Rice (1868) that they would give every family a yoke of oxen, a cow, a wagon and other things and said nothing about land being selected. The interpreter who explained the treaty to us never told us that way. The Commissioners who were here last fall were asked for the same things and for light wagons, too, and they said they would ask the Great Father for them.  We would like to hear about this last treaty. The Government sends more annuities and provision to other Indians than it does to us because the others are mean and bad. At Cheyenne they have more goods and supplies.  An Indian who came from there told me this.  He may have fooled me, but he told me so. The Indians here did not get enough clothes. One blanket to each man and woman is not enough for the winter time. We don’t know yet which we would prefer—blankets or citizen’s clothes. I suppose we are going to get some working cattle but they are too slow.  We ought to have mules and wagons.  There is no use to ask for horses or ponies as the Government would think we intended to run away with them. One mule and a good cart would be good but we couldn’t haul logs or wood or hay.  We ought to have a strong wagon and a pair of mules. They said all this land of the Indians could be taken by conquest if the Indians did not submit. I was there at that time, and had just returned from Hampton, Virginia the year before the treaty, so could understand both sides, the Indians’ and the whites’.” We have been farming down below (from some seven to fifteen miles south of the Agency on the east side of the river) for many years and we intend to farm there again, but we don’t to go to Cheyenne or Ft. Thompson (Crow Creek), though the Agents and Indians there are trying to get us to go. We have heard this for a long time. I like to hear you talk.  I think you are going to help us.  You don’t allow anyone to buy wood. That’s the way we want it.  The whites below us cut our wood and when the Indians say anything they tell us the land there belongs to the Government. Parkins (in charge of Indian Trader’s Store) sells his wood to the Government too cheaply.  He ought to charge a big price and then we could get a good price, too. We would like to have a Catholic Priest across the river and a school over there.”

They felt opposed to any more treaties. They trusted their chiefs to hold out and not give in to the threats being used in the arguments.  Big Head further stated:

I heard General Crook say,  “This country you want to keep so bad is not all good. About half of it is badlands.”

I heard the crowd murmuring, “Then why do they want it so badly?”

General Crook went on to say they could take this land by conquest and ship all the Indians down south as slaves. This was only eight years after the Indians had surrendered to the United States government. Their guns and horses had been confiscated. The reservation was a semi-arid country with hardly any rainfall and they were depending on the government for rations since all the game was gone. There was nothing left to subsist on, only a few yokes of oxen issued by the government with which to till the soil, but most of these were wild and unmanageable. It seemed to be one of the darkest hours for the Indians. How could there be a war? The Indians had been dispossessed of all their guns and horses and were hemmed in on a half desert reservation. John Grass and Gall, under McLaughlin’s advice, were the first to consent to the conditions of the new treaty. All the head chiefs were taken to Washington where they sullenly sighed away their last hunting grounds, the Badlands, where there was a natural game reserve and where there would always be game. After the return from Washington, the chiefs were down-hearted.

The Indians did not want to dispose of their land. Big Head only lived a month or two after returning and died of grief. Upon his death in 1889, he was buried in the Cannon Ball area.

Parents:
Father: Big Head the older, (died 1863/64)
Mother: Turns Back (born 1814)

Chief Felix Big Head, Nasula Tanka, born 1838
Spouse: Owl Big Head, Hinhan, born 1838

Children:
Son: James Big Head, born 1854
Dau: Jane Big Head, born 1854
Son: Chase Big Head, born 1858
Son: George Big Head, born 1877

Chief Big Head has descendants in Canada and Standing Rock.

Sources:

http://www.standingrocktourism.com/history/chiefView.asp?ID=12
http://www.primeau.org/1888/
Witness: A Hunkpapha Historian’s Strong-Heart Song of the Lakotas  by Waggoner, Josephine

Posted in Dakota, Sioux | 3 Comments

Cherokee Freedmen Rolls

freedman enrollment

Freedmen is one of the terms given to emancipated slaves and their descendants after slavery was abolished in the United States following the American Civil War. In this context, “Cherokee Freedmen” refers to the African-American men and women who were formerly slaves of the Cherokee before and after removal to Indian Territory. It includes the descendants of the former slaves, as well as those born in unions between formerly enslaved or enslaved African Americans and Cherokee tribal members.

During the American Civil War, the Cherokee who supported the Union abolished the practice of African slavery by act of the Cherokee National Council in 1863. The Cherokee Freedmen became citizens of the Cherokee Nation in accordance with a treaty made with the United States government a year after the Civil War ended.

After their emancipation and subsequent citizenship, the Cherokee Freedmen and their descendants had to struggle to be accepted as a legitimate part of the Cherokee Nation. Some Freedmen have been active in the tribe, voted in elections, ran businesses, attended Cherokee stomp dances, knew Cherokee traditions and folklore, knew the Cherokee language, and served on the tribal council, with several holding district seats.

In the early 1980s, the Cherokee Nation administration amended citizenship rules to require direct descent from an ancestor listed as “Cherokee by Blood” on the Dawes Rolls. The change stripped descendants of the Cherokee Freedmen of citizenship and voting rights unless they satisfied this new criterion. About 25,000 Freedmen were excluded from the tribe.

The controversy surrounding the Freedmen’s tribal status and right continues today.  You can read more about the dispute here.

There were two separate rolls or schedules taken of the Cherokee Freedmen which have been extracted today for surnames.

Wallace Roll of Cherokee Freedmen in Indian Territory – 1890

http://www.afrigeneas.com/library/cherokee/wallace.html

The digitized document is a schedule of names of Cherokee freedmen created by Special Agent John W. Wallace. Individuals on the schedule were entitled to share with the Shawnee and Delaware in the per capita distribution of $75,000, appropriated by Congress in October 1888, and issued under the supervision of his office. These records are held by NARA’s Textual Archives Service Division Old Military and Civilian Records Unit (Washington, DC).

Kern-Clifton Roll of Cherokee Freedmen – 1897

http://www.afrigeneas.com/library/cherokee/kern-clifton.html

Census of the Freedmen and their descendants of the Cherokee Nation taken by the Commission appointed in the case of Moses Whitmire, Trustee of the Freedmen of the Cherokee Nation versus the Cherokee Nation and the United States in the Court of Claims at Washington, D.C; the said commission being appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, and Composed of William Clifton, William P. Thompson and Robert H. Kern, this roll being made from the testimony taken before said Commission in the Cherokee nation between May 4th and August, 10, 1896, in accordance with the provisions made and entered in the final decree of record in the above cause. Second, Contesting Freedmen and their Descendants found by this Commission entitled to be enrolled as citizens of the Cherokee Nation, and to share in the distribution of funds found in said decree.

You can read more about the rolls and land records here and find further history here.

Posted in Cherokee | Leave a comment

Tracing Cherokee Ancestors

Cherokee nation sealSeveral years, ago – we’re talking in the decades now – before the internet and e-mail….you know, back in the dark ages…I visited the Muskogee County Genealogical Society in Muskogee, OK.

I was that certain that my oral family history of Cherokee heritage was accurate – I traveled from Indiana to Oklahoma to find and claim my Cherokee heritage.  After all, I had it in writing in letters, for several generations.  But I was, ahem…..wrong.

I was quite unsuccessful when I was there, which made me wish I had prepared better.  Yes, I was exceedingly “green” at the time, and exceedingly excited, and horribly shocked at the outcome.  I just didn’t believe it was true.  I had no Cherokee ancestors, at least none on the rolls?  My great-grandfather lived on Choctaw land!?!  And we’re not Indian? Well, we’re not on the rolls, that’s for sure, and that translated into “not Indian,” at least legally speaking.  So, if you’re researching and you wind up throwing yourself out of the family tree…I feel your pain. It happens, and it’s part of searching of the truth.

Now my prep for a research trip far exceeds the length of the trip itself.

When I was in Muskogee, they sent me away with some hints, and I’m going to paraphrase them here and update them to the internet age with online resources.

In 1962 a payment was made to living Cherokee individuals whose ancestors appeared on the Dawes Roll.  It was necessary at this time to complete the “Proof of Death and Heirship” application to qualify for the payment.

This probably explains why there was a sudden increase in people who were suddenly “Cherokee” beginning about this time and moving into the 70s and 80s.  If there was any family history of Native heritage, it would have surfaced at that time.

If you do have a family member who received a payment, they will be able to identify your ancestor who was on the Dawes Commission Rolls, which was the requirement to qualify.  If you can do this, you’re nearly there.

On the “Proof of Death and Heirship” application we find the name, roll number, place and date of death of the person on the roll and the descendants with their addresses.

In Cherokee research, everything ties back to the roll number.  To obtain a roll number, you had to prove descent from someone on the original Rolls at the time of, or following the removal and resettlement in the 1830s.

You can search the Dawes Rolls here and here.

Cherokee dawes

The Dawes Rolls give the census card number which will give the 1880 or 1896 Tribal Enrollment Number.  The information on the Census card  is taken from the Dawes application or enrollment.  Often, applications that were denied have more information than the applications that were accepted.  You may have to order the application packets from the National archives for denied applications.

Next, search the Guion Miller Roll of 1909 for members of the Eastern Roll of the Cherokee.  You can search here and here.

cherokee guion miller

The second column from the left is the application number which is used to find the application which provide information back to 1851, including Indian names.

cherokee guion miller index

To order copies of the Guion Miller Roll applications from the National Archives, you must submit a completed NATF Form 83 which includes the individual’s name and application number. A separate form must be completed for each file you wish copied. To order an NATF Forms 83. You may also Order Individual Records online for a fee of $17.50.  Orders take about 56-70 calendar days.

You can also search the Final Roll Index here.

cherokee final rolls

At www.fold3.com, a subscription site, you can find the actual application packet.

You can also find it, or request it, from the National Archives branch in Fort Worth, TX.

application packet

After finding your ancestors on any of these rolls, check all of the rolls, because at some point, your ancestor may give their Native name, not their English name, and earlier rolls are more likely to have your ancestor recorded by their Native name.

There are several pre-1851 and a few later rolls that you’ll want to check, most indexed and available free at Access Genealogy.

Here’s another resource for 5 Civilized Tribes research, including the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw and Seminole.

Additional resources can research assistance can be found here.

Information about joining the Cherokee Nation, the Eastern Band of the Cherokee and United Keetoowah Band of the Cherokee.

Posted in Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, Seminole | Leave a comment

The Last Wukchumni Speaker

In central California, before the European arrived, it’s estimated that there were 50,000 Wukchumni speakers.  Today, there is only one, Marie Wilcox, born in 1932, who is making a dictionary of this language so it won’t be entirely lost, while teaching her daughter and grandson.  The Wukchumni is one of about 130 threatened Native languages in the US today.

Wukchumni is the language of the Yokuts tribe.  Today, there are less than 200 members residing on the Tule River Reservation.

Take a look at this short documentary.

 

 

Posted in Yokuts | Leave a comment

George Galphin’s 1776 Will

mcmullan's law reports

In South Carolina’s McMullan’s Law Reports, from Nov 1840-May 1842, we find only one document of interest regarding Native Americans.   But that article is indeed, VERY interesting.

A will, sworn and signed in April of 1776 by George Galphin is being contested.  The portion having to do with the Indian is not being contested. Ironically, what is being contested is whether a mixed race descendant of George can inherit.

In any case, George, back in 1776, freed his female Indian slave and even gave us the name of the Indian slave’s parent.

galphin will

“…one Indian (daughter of Natechuchy)…”

This will was finally sworn, after a codicil, in 1782 in the Ninety-Six District of SC, and George subsequently died that same year.

Ninety-Six District was created on 29 July 1769 as the most western of the seven original districts. Its boundaries included the current Abbeville, McCormick, Edgefield, Saluda, Greenwood, Laurens, Union, and Spartanburg counties; much of Cherokee and Newberry counties; and small parts of Aiken and Greenville Counties. The lands further west were Cherokee Indian lands; and Tryon County, North Carolina infringed on much of its northern boundaries through the 1770s due to poor surveying.

The Journal of Gentry Genealogy published a map showing the 96 District in 1790, the shaded areas taken from Indian lands.

96 district

Given this proximity to the Cherokee, as well as the Creek and other southern tribes, it’s certainly possible, and probable, that the Indian slave freed and her parent were Cherokee or Muskogean, or captives traded to settlers through those tribes.

Given that no “increase” is mentioned, it’s also possible that this was a relatively recent enslavement.  He doesn’t say if the mother is or was enslaved, but that too is likely.  However, either the mother has already been freed, or the mother has died because his language clearly says:

“The testator first gives freedom, from the time of his death, to all legatees devisees not then free…and especially to Barbara, daughter of Rose.  Then having given freedom to two mulatto girls, and one Indian (daughter of Natechuchy).”

This strongly suggests that the Indian freed is indeed a legatee, but who is she?  And why would she be a legatee?

He leaves land and slaves to six individuals, as follows:

  • George – son of Maturney
  • Thomas Galphin – son of Rachel Dupee
  • John – son of Maturney
  • Judith – daughter of Maturney
  • Martha Galpin, child of Rachel Dupee
  • Barbara (Holmes), daughter of Rose, who married a white man

Then, there is this confusing entry in the Law Reports pertaining to this case.  Is it relevant to the Indian portion of this confusing situation, or is it simply comparative ‘legal-speak?’

galphin will legal issue

Is it possible that even though George refers to some of those he freed as mulatto, that they were indeed half Indian, and he was using mulatto in the context of the time as meaning “not entirely white?”  If so, then why did he specifically refer to one individual as “Indian” and the others as mulatto?

There has to be more to this story.  There is no wife in evidence, and George apparently leaves his entire worldly estate to those he had enslaved?

Checking my Native Names Project, I found two items that proved very interesting.

In the “Colonial Records of South Carolina: Documents Relating to Indian Affairs 1750-1754” by William McDowell, we discover that George Galphin was an Indian Trader to the Creek Nation.

You can read more about South Carolina Indian traders at in this article.

Licensed Traders to the Creeks from Carolina

  • George Galphin

In another article by J. Michelle Schohn, Historian of the Pee Dee Indian Nation of Beaver Creek, we discover that indeed, George Galphin did have a son with a Native woman.

“Also listed are additional names associated with the Pee Dee and other Indian communities: … George Galphin (the half-Indian son of Indian trader George Galphin, with whom the Beaver Creek Pee Dee worked). “

Aha, things are becoming to come a bit more into focus.

A little digging around shows us that indeed, there was even more.

A GenForum posting by Bonnie Rapert tells us the following:

George Galphin was a Creek trader, born in Ireland in 1709. He was in South Carolina in 1739 and settled at Silver Bluff, below Augusta on the east side of the Savannah River. By 1746 he was trading with the Creek Indians from Coweta. In 1794 he was described, along with Lachlan McGillivray and John Pate, as a partner in the trading firm of Brown, Rae, and Company. In 1775, the year that trader James Adair dedicated his HISTORY OF THE INDIANS to him and McGillivray, George ws appointed South Carolina’s Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Two years later, he visited the noted naturalist William Bartram. George Galphin at Silver Bluff on December 2, 1780. Historian T. S. Woodward wrote that Galphin “raised a large family; and of the five varieties of the human family, he raised children from three, and would no doubt have gone whole hog, but the Malay and Mongol were out of his reach”.

Galphins wives and concubines included:

1. Bridget Shaw, a white, whom he married on July 1, 1742 at St. Phillips’ Parish.
2. Sapho, a slave
3. Nitehucky, an Indian
4. Rachel Dupee, a white, who died at Placentia, Georgia on October 31, 1795.
5. Metawney, the daughter of Tustenugee Micco, the great Warrior of the Coweta’s.

Gilpin was the father of:

1. Barbara Galphin ( her mother was Sapho) She was given a land grant near Augusta in 1775 which was bounded on one side by Lachlan McGillivray, and on another the Savannah River.
2. Rachel Galphin ( her mother was Sapho)
3. Betsey Galphin ( her mother was Sapho)
4. Rose Galphin ( her mother was Nitehucky )
5. Thomas Galphin ( his mother was Rachel) born in 1762. Served in Capt. Partick Carr’s Loyalist Rangers in Burke County, Georgia 1781 – 1782, along with his brother, George. He was a planter in Barnwell District South Carolina when he died on May 5, 1812. He married Sarah who died November 6, 1802. He had children named; George ( born 1789, died 1807), George, Milledge ( who married Eliza Ardis in 1819), and Martha, who married Capt. Timothy Barnard on October 7, 1800.
6. Martha Galphin ( her mother was Rachel) She married John Milledge who served as Georgia’s governor from 1802 to 1806. She died at Sand Hills near Augusta on November 5, 1811. John died there on February 9, 1818.
7. George Galphin (his mother was Metawney) He served as a private in Capt. Patrick Carr’s Loyalist Rangers in Burke County, Georgia in 1781 – 1782. Married a woman named Frances.
8. Judith Galphin (her mother was Metawney)
9. John Galphin ( his mother was Metawney ) Was the Speaker of the Lower Creeks in 1789. In 1793 he attacked and robbed several traders near St. Mary’s apparantly because Georgians had confiscated some 40,000 acres of his Tory father’s estate.

George Galphin wrote his will on April 5, 1776, providing for his family and many others, including David Holmes, the son of his sister, Margaret, and his trading partner until David’s death at Pensacola in 1779, his sisters Judith Galphin, Margaret Holmes, Mrs. Young who was in Ireland, and Martha Crossley, the wife of William Crossley, to Timothy Barnard, and to all the “poor widows and fatherless children within 30 miles of my home”, as well as to “all the orphan children I have raised, to the poor of Eneskilling and Armagh in Ireland, to John McQueen and his brother Alexander Galphin, and to Parson Seymour and his wife.”

Source of this info:

1. Who Was Who Among the Southern Indians 1698 – 1907, by Don Martini,(book) published 1997, pages 271 – 272
2. English Crown Grants, (book)by Hemperley
3. Adiar’s History (book)
4. Men of Mark in Georgia ( book) Vol 1:99
5. South Carolina Marriages ( book)
6. Abbeville District Wills and Bonds, pages 128 – 129
7. Georgia Intestate Records
8. Men of Mark in Georgia ( book ) M.B. Warren pages 262 – 269

So, yes, indeed, there was much more to the story and now, the story makes sense.  George Galphin left his estate to his children, some of which either were or had been his slaves, or there was some legal question thereof and he made sure to remove any question.  Other children were highly placed within the Creek Nation.

Given the number of children he had, there is certain to be Irish Galphin DNA in the Creek Nation today, especially Y DNA in his direct paternal male descendants, by whatever surname they might have eventually have adopted.

You can see some of his descendants at this link.

Posted in Creek | 1 Comment

Indigenous Law Portal

indigenous law portal

Recently, the Library of Congress introduced the Indigenous Law Portal as a gathering place for legal documents pertaining to the indigenous people of the Americans.  Today, they are working on the US states, but they will be adding Canadian First Nations information next.

To try the new portal and to search for documents by state, for example, click on this link, then click on the state you are interested in.

Here’s what is offered, so far, for Maine.  Enjoy!

Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians

Métis Nation of New England

Passamaquoddy Tribe (Indian Township)

Passamaquoddy Tribe (Pleasant Point)

Penobscot Nation

Previously Penobscot Tribe of Maine

Aroostook Band of Micmacs

Posted in Laws | Leave a comment