Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma

The Great Seal of the Choctaw Nation
RSS

MCR-14th Article Claimants- Never Terminated by Congress-

Leo Pergson Leo Pergson

posted on February 18 and updated on April 1

Leo Pergson Su-Quah-Natch-Ah Band et.,al., Members of Mississippi Choctaw-

Let me claify- the many thousands of Misconstrued MCR-14th Article Claimants “Rejected-Refused” Dawes Enrollment I.T.D. Indian Terrritory Lands and the Misconstrued “Application” for CDIB for Citizenship in the Choctaw Nation [Oklahoma]

Although, it is true that Dawes Commission was created by Congress in 1893
for the purpose of privatizing tribal land west of the Mississippi. Each successful
claimant of Choctaw, Chickasaw, Cherokee, Creek, or Seminole blood would be
given a parcel of land then under tribal control. The land was offered in Indian
Territory only.

However, The MCR-14th Article Claimants “Rejected-Refused” Claims for I.T.D. Indian Territory Lands was not’ in Exchange-Trade for those Choctaw Lands ceded and abolishment of Mississippi Choctaw Tribal Government in Mississippi- Fact- The "Rejected-Refused “Identification” For “So-Called” Enrollment in the Feb 8, 1887 Final rolls was “Rejected” for “Identification” as Mississippi Choctaw For failure to show evidence that a 14th Article Claimant or any removed ancestors of a MCR-14th Article Claimant in Mississippi either complied or attempted to Comply under Choctaw Act 1842-Choctaw Scrip (5 Stat 513) As an Absentee Ancestor of an MCR-14th Article Claimant entitled to the share in the Proceeds of Suit of (1886) Choctaw Nation V United States in Violation of 14th Article Calims in Mississippi Lands sold by the Government prior to satisfaction 14th article claims in Mississippi in (1886) Choctaw Nation V United States settlement of $9,000,000. Having no bearing whatsoever on the “So-Called” Misconstrued MCR-14th Article exchange Mississippi Choctaw Lands ceded and abolishment of Mississippi Choctaw Tribal Government in Mississippi-in exchange For lands in the Indian Territories-

Under Aug, 1, 1912 S-Bill 7625-Sect (4) Whereby Congress ordered the Secretary and Dawes Commission to Create a "Special Mississippi Choctaw Roll. and for Commissission to contiune adding on to the “Special MCR-14th Article Claimant Rolls” and to pay out of Choctaw Nation Treasurary (3) Times the amout entitled those I.T.D. Indian territory Division lands either sold or Leased by the Choctaw Nation.

Q. Why did the Choctaw Nation Hire attorneys Mansfield, McMurray, Cornish to Defeat the MCR-14th article claimants?

A. The inchoate relationship between the Choctaw Nation Attorneys and the Choctaw Tribe, The Choctaw Nation was trying to keep the Dawes Com., from enrolling thousands of fraudulent- “So-Called” Dawes Com., “White” claimants, and receiving Per capita Claims under said (1886) Choctaw Nation V United States Settlement $9,000,000.

[No. 168.]

Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation.

In this case the proof shows that the claimants are Choctaw Indians
by blood now living in the State of Mississippi: that neither they nor
their ancestors have ever removed into the present Choctaw Nation.

The claimants base their right to be enrolled as Choctaw citizens upon
the terms of the second and fourteenth articles of the treaty negotiated
at Dancing Rabbit Creek on September 27, 1830, and of the conditions
of the patent to the lands of the Choctaw Nation executed by President
Tyler in the year 1842. (Durant Ed. Choctaw Laws, p. 31.)

Native American Data for Jack Amos
Name: Amos, Jack
Tribe: Choctaw
Record Type: enrollment
Age: 72
Sex: M
Enrollment Type: MCR (Minor)
Blood %: FULL
Card No.: MCR2359
Roll No.: 380

SW National Archives, Fort Worth, Texas,
Dawes Enrollment Cards for its National Archives

Others with this Family:
Surname First Name Type Sex Age Blood %
Apatomby P (Parent) M
Nahhatema P (Parent) F
Amos Jack MCR (Minor) M 72 FULL

Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation.
Jack Amos was an MCR-14th Article Claimant who never
removed to the Indian Territories who asserted his Choctaw
rights in Mississippi, that Mississippi Choctaw Citizenship
rights under the 14th Article did not require a Choctaw
to remove to the Indian Territories.

A Choctaw Nation “Application” for a CDIB Card
is a request for Choctaw Nation Tribal Membership- However, unless the Choctaw Nation recognizes- these MCR-14th Article Enrollment Cards- the Choctaw Nation cannot issue a CDIB Card with an MCR-attached to a Roll Number- Borne in Mind- The Choctaw Nation- also cannot issue a CDIB Card to a Choctaw Member who is by Federal Recognition is a Mississippi Choctaw by jurisdiction 14th Article recognition et.,al., Members of Mississippi Choctaw Nation- (4) Criteria Rolls- Federal Choctaw Nation(S) Corrupted- Enrollment Criteria (1) Feb 8, 1887 Choctaw Nation (2) 1,540 Special MCR-14th Mississippi Choctaw on Files with the choctaw Nation[Oklahoma] and (3) Mississippi Band Mississippi (1/2 Blood Blood requirement- (4) Remaining MCR-14th Article Claimants never Terminated by Congress-

If you are a Proven by Vital Records that you are in fact an Ancestor of an MCR-14th Article Claimant- You are’ part of elite group of MCR-14th Article Mississippi Choctaw Claimants- Never Terminated by Congress-

[Sic] Aug 1, 1912 S-Bill 7625- “For the Relief of the Civilized
Tribes” MCR-14th Article Claimants who were Never Terminated
by Congress.

[No. 168.]

Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation.

In this case the proof shows that the claimants are Choctaw Indians
by blood now living in the State of Mississippi: that neither they nor
their ancestors have ever removed into the present Choctaw Nation.

The claimants base their right to be enrolled as Choctaw citizens upon
the terms of the second and fourteenth articles of the treaty negotiated
at Dancing Rabbit Creek on September 27, 1830, and of the conditions
of the patent to the lands of the Choctaw Nation executed by President
Tyler in the year 1842. (Durant Ed. Choctaw Laws, p. 31.)

Page 5
Article 14. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and
become a citizen of the States shall bo permitted to do so by signifying
his intention to the agent within six months from the ratification of this
treaty, and he or she shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of One
section of six hundred and forty acres of land, to be bounded by sectional
lines of survey; in like manner shall be entitled to one-half of that quantity
for each unmarried child which is living with him over ten years of age,
and a quarter section to such child as may be under ten years of age, to
adjoin the location or the parent. If they reside upon said lands, intending
to become citizens of the States for five years after the ratitication of this
treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue. Said reservation shall
include the present improvements of the head of the family, or a portion
of it.

“Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a
Choctaw citizen, but, if they ever remove, are not to be entitled to any
portion of the Choctaw annuity”

However, This clause "Persons who claim under this article will not Lose Choctaw Citizenship but if they “Remove” Are Not entitled to any Annuities, was specifically written under 14th Article “MISSISSIPPI” NOT’ for exchange for I.T.D. Indian Territory Division Lands in Indian Territories-

Robert L. Vaughn Et, Al., M. C. R. 340. Annie M. Duncan Et., Al., M. C. R. 339.

Vaughn – Duncan Consolidated Cases, M. C. R.

The applications in both of these cases were submitted for the enrollment of the claimants as Mississippi Choctaws because of the act of May 31,1900, which prohibited the commission from receiving, considering, or making any record of any application of any person not a recognized and enrolled member of the tribe. This act did not apply to Mississippi Choctaws who were beneficiaries or descendants or beneficiaries under article 14 of the treaty of 1830

The applications in both of these cases were submitted for the enrollment of the claimants as Mississippi Choctaws because of the act of May 31,1900, which prohibited the commission from receiving, considering, or making any record of any application of any person not a recognized and enrolled member of the tribe. This act did not apply to Mississippi Choctaws who were beneficiaries or descendants or beneficiaries under article 14 of the treaty of 1830.

Other witnesses testified before the Commission to the facts as stated by the claimants, and on August 21, 1902, the commission rendered its decision, in which it says:

It also appears that all of the said applicants claim rights in the Choctaw lands under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation concluded September 27, 1830, by reason of being descendants of one Alexander Vaughn, who is alleged to have been a full-blood Choctaw and to have resided in the old Choctaw Nation, States of Mississippi and Alabama, in 1830.

It further appears from the evidence submitted in support of said applications and from the records In the possession of the commission that no one of said applicants has ever been enrolled as a member of the Choctaw Tribe by the Choctaw tribal authorities or admitted to Choctaw citizenship by a duly constituted court or committee of the Choctaw Nation, or by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, or by a decree of the United States court in Indian Territory under the provisions
of the act of Congress approved June 10, 1896.

From the records in the possession of the commission it is found that the name of one Alexander Vaughn appears upon page 27, volume 1, Court of Claims Record, The Choctaw Nation v. The United States, in a list of Choctaw Indians whose reservations were sold under article 14 of the treaty of 1830 .

It Is further found that the name of one Alexander Vaughn appears on page 116 of
volume 7, American State Papers, Public Lands, in a list of names of Choctaw Indians, heads
of families, who resided in Greenwood Le Flore’s district, in the territory occupied by the Choctaws in 1830, and who had land in cultivation, in exchange for which they were to receive stipulated tracts of land. The records referred to in no way relate to or show any compliance or attempted compliance on the part of the persons therein named with the provisions of article 14 of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek.

The commission therefore held that claimants were not, entitled to enrollment and rendered
a decision denying them.

October 17, 1902. The decision of the commission was approved by the Secretary.
====
Counsel for claimants respectfully submit that these people are Indians, children of recognized Indians, and born in the Choctaw Nation; that this made them citizens of the nation, and that no admission by an Indian council could add to their rights; that they should not be deprived of their rights because of an act of Congress conceived by attorneys for the nations who were being paid per head for all persons they could keep off the roll and enacted by Congress without any Member of Congress in the House or Senate realizing its effects-the act of May 31, 1900.

The following persons are entitled to enrollment: Robert L. Vaughn, Edna A. Vaughn, Arthur C. Vaughn, Walter A. Vaughn, Victor K. Vaughn, Ore M. Vaughn, Mary J. Vaughn, Robert Vaughn, Annie M. Duncan, Jesse Duncan, Robert L. Duncan, Mary E. Duncan.

Respectfully submitted.

Walter S. Field, Attorney for Claimants.

Source Citation:
United States Congress. Five Civilized Tribes In Oklahoma, Reports of the Department of the
Interior and Evidentiary Papers in support of Aug 12, 1912- S. 7625, a Bill for the Relief of Certain Members of the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma, Sixty-Second Congress, Third Session. Department of the Interior, United States. 1913.

Source-
http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/vaughn-duncan-consolidated-cases-m-c-r.htm -

Fact- Although, It is True that there are 1,540, MCR-14th Article Mississippi Choctaw Listed on a "Special Mississippi Choctaw Rolls, Separate from the Dawes Final Rolls, However, The Choctaw Nation is prohibited from taking “Application” of a Descendants whose ancestor was an MCR-14th Article Mississippi Choctaw Claimant- Applications submitted for the enrollment in the Choctaw Nation Body of the Tribe, was/is prohibited under the act of May 31,1900, and June 10,1898 which prohibited the commission from receiving, considering, or making any record of any application of any person who is a 14th Article Mississippi Choctaw Claimant. Whether listed on the Final Rolls or not’ Whereas; the 14th Article Claimants’ who were/are the descendants or beneficiaries under article 14 of the treaty of 1830* only making Dawes Com., “Affidavit-Deposition” “For the Identification As Mississippi Choctaw” as a 14th Article Claimant entitled to share in the Proceeds of Choctaw Nation v United States settlement $9,000,000. Res Judicata-

attached: