 |
Supreme Court Decision on the
Removal from Dawes Rolls -- 4 March 1907
On the last day of the
sign up for the Dawes Rolls (March 04, 1907), the Secretary of Interior E.
A. Hitchcock made a unilateral decision to remove certain Indians and
Intermarried Whites from the Dawes Rolls. He based his decision on the
belief that he (and the Department of Interior) had the authority to
correct said rolls within the time fixed for the completion of the Dawes
Rolls. In Secretary Hitchcock's judgment, several hundred Indians were
stricken from the rolls because he made a determination that these people
were unlawfully or improperly enrolled, and, in some instances, because
their enrollment had been procured by fraud. In addition, Secretary
Hitchcock did not advise them of the actions that he had taken against
them, and because it was done on the very last day of enrollment, the
Indians and Intermarried Whites were not afforded the opportunity to
appeal Secretary Hitchcocks' unilateral decision.
Three of the Indians who were affected by Secretary Hitchcock's
decision were John E. Goldsby (Chickasaw), Ida Allison (Cherokee), and
George A. Allison (Cherokee). These individuals filed a lawsuit against
the Department of Interior for illegally removing them from the Dawes
Rolls from which they had previously been approved and assigned a Roll
Number.
The lawsuits made it all the way to the Court of Appeals of the
District of Columbia and then to the United States Supreme Court (U.S.S.C
Number 20975, dated February 1, 1908, No. M.3 21).
In the Supreme Court of the United States – October Term, 1907, the
following individual cases numbers were submitted to the Supreme Court
under a "Motion to Advance" by Henry M. Hoyt,
Solicitor-General:
Number 572. James Rudolph Garfield,
Secretary of Interior, plaintiff in error –vs- U.S. EX REL. John E.
Goldsby.
Number 573. James Rudolph Garfield,
Secretary of Interior, plaintiff in error –vs- U.S. EX REL. Ida
Allison.
Number 574. James Rudolph Garfield,
Secretary of Interior, plaintiff in error –vs- U.S. EX REL. George A.
Allison.
MOTION TO ADVANCE
Comes now the Solicitor-General, on behalf of the plaintiff in
error, and moves the court to advance the above-entitled cases for hearing
during the present term, if possible.
These cases are similar in their nature and involve
matters relating to the allotment of lands in severalty in the Five
Civilized Tribes in the Indian Territory. They present two questions of
considerable gravity and importance. (1) As to the jurisdiction of the
courts of the District of Columbia to control the action of the Secretary
of the Interior in these allotment matters; and (2) if such jurisdiction
exists, as to the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to correct
the approved rolls of members of said tribes upon which allotments and
distribution of tribal property are made, within the time fixed by law for
the completion of the same, to wit, prior to the close of March 4,
1907.
Citing under the belief that he (Sec. Hitchcock) had the authority to
correct said rolls within the time fixed for the completion of the same,
the predecessor of the present Secretary of the Interior (James Rudolph
Garfield) struck several hundred names from said rolls because they were,
in his judgment, unlawfully or improperly enrolled, and, in some
instances, because their enrollment had been procured by fraud.
The present suits are but the forerunners of many similar actions which
have been or may be filed in the courts of the District by or on-behalf of
the persons so stricken from the approved rolls of the Five Civilized
Tribes. Nearly a hundred such persons have already brought suit. The
property interests involved are very large and probably amount to
$1,000,000 or more, as each allotment is valued at not less than
$5,000.
Pending the determination of the questions involved in these suits, the
work of completing the allotment of lands and distribution of the other
property of the Five Civilized Tribes must necessarily be delayed to the
great embarrassment not only of the Department of the Interior, but of the
several tribes and the particular individuals concerned.
For those reasons an early determination of the cases is requested.
Opposing counsel concur in moving their advancement,
Respectfully,
Henry M. Hoyt
Solicitor-General
In the Supreme Court Decision (Mr. Justice Day
delivered the opinion of the Court), dated November 30, 1908, the court
ruled in the favor of all the Indian's stricken from the Dawes Rolls on
March 4, 1907 by then Secretary of Interior A. E. Hitchcock.
This information was obtained from
the Rueben Freeny family Census Card stored at the NARA in Ft Worth, Texas
by Nanette Chopin-Cook. The above and below was transcribed and submitted
by Mrs. Cook. If you have any questions or information on any of this,
please contact Nanette
Martha "Mattie" Laxton Freeny, wife of Rueben Freeny
(great grand parents to my husband Clay Cook) was approved and accepted on
the Dawes Rolls as citizen by marriage of the Choctaw Nation on March 29,
1905. Her Roll Number was 1421. On March 29, 1907, a letter was sent to
Mattie Freeny Fitzhugh, Indian Territory, advising her, "that in
accordance with the opinion of the Attorney General of the United States
of February 19, 1907, the Secretary of the Interior, on March 4, 1907,
directed the cancellation of her enrollment upon the roll of citizens by
marriage of the Choctaw Nation." The letter stated that, "she was being
denied citizenship of the Choctaw Nation (by marriage) by the Commission
to the Five Civilized Tribes under the Act of Congress approved June 10,
1896, and that no appeal was taken from said decision to the United States
Court in Indian Territory, the Secretary of the Interior (Hitchcock) on
March 4, 1907, directed the cancellation of the enrollment of Mattie
Freeny upon the roll of citizens by marriage of the Choctaw
Nation".
On February 8, 1909, a letter was received from the Acting
Commissioner at Muskogee, Oklahoma advising Mattie of the following:
Madam:
I am instructed by the Department of the Interior that
your case falls within the principles of the decision of the Supreme Court
of the United States in the case of John E. Goldsby, et. al., seeking to
have their names restored to the rolls of citizens of the Choctaw and
Chickasaw Nations, and that the notations striking your name from the roll
of citizens by intermarriage of the Choctaw Nation shall be erased and
that you have all the rights to allotment and payments enjoyed by other
citizens as if no attempt had ever been made to cancel your name from this
roll.
Said instructions have been carried out
by this office, and you are now advised that the status of your name on
the approved roll of citizens of the Choctaw Nation and of your allotment
selection in said nation is the same as prior to March 4, 1907, when the
Secretary of Interior (Hitchcock) directed that your name be stricken from
the roll. Signed - Acting Commissioner (BIA)
Attached to this letter is the following letter (which
lists all the citizens of the Five Civilized Tribes who were removed from
the original Dawes Rolls) and states that they are to be reinstated
because their suits and potential law suits fall under the purview of the
Goldsby Case.
Department of the
Interior
Washington
Address only The Secretary of the Interior
January 19, 1909
The Commissioner to
the
Five
civilized
Tribes
Muskogee,
Oklahoma
Sir:
November 30, 1908, the Supreme Court rendered decisions
in what are known as the Goldsby and Allison cases. These suits were
brought to obtain mandates against the Secretary of the Interior to
correct the rolls as to said Goldsby and Allisons, on the ground that the
Secretary of the Interior after placing their names upon approved rolls of
citizenship had attempted to strike them from those rolls without notice
and an opportunity to be heard. The decision of the Supreme Court is that
mandate shall issue in those cases.
There are many suits of a similar nature pending against the Secretary
of the Interior, and after careful conferences between this Department and
the Department of Justice, it is decided that judgment should be allowed
in all pending mandamus actions in which the relators stand clearly in the
same position as Goldsby and the Allisons. Pursuant to these conferences
and to the judgments which may be entered on account of the above
decisions of the Supreme Court, you are hereby directed to erase the
interlineations and notations which purport to strike any of the following
names from the rolls of the citizens of the respective nations of the Five
Civilized Tribes:
PERSONS WHO HAD PRIOR TO THE GOLDSBY DECISION INSTITUTED SUITS, THE
PRINCIPLES OF WHICH ARE UNDOUBTEDLY SIMILAR TO THE OPINION OF THE SUPREME
COURT IN THAT DECISION. (Note: U.S.S.C. is the Supreme Court Suits -
S.C.D.C. is the Supreme Court of District of
Columbia)
Click on the "Next" button below to view page 2 containing the names of
the Native Americans
    
All of these Native American
graphics are not to be copied or used without checking with the artist.
Click on the link above to check out the artist's web site of Native
American graphics.
I would appreciate if you would
keep in mind, while visiting this web site and others, that the
information found within each page is not to be copied in any manner,
or used for profit or public use. The information on this page is the
property of the writter/submitter.
This page was last updated on February 2005 - Copyright Jacque Hopkins, 1996-2005
|
