Woodland Indians Forum

soapbox please!

My feelings.. (i may get flack for it) Chad Smith is right. The tribe has the right to decide the criteria of their tribal enrollment. I don't know of any legit tribe that allows non-bloods to be on their rolls. Once again, the government is trying to dictate their views on what is right and it's none of their business. The government is the cause of this mess.

just my 02 cents... we now return you to your show..

ramapoughnative wrote:

soapbox please!

My feelings.. (i may get flack for it) Chad Smith is right. The tribe has the right to decide the criteria of their tribal enrollment. I don't know of any legit tribe that allows non-bloods to be on their rolls. Once again, the government is trying to dictate their views on what is right and it's none of their business. The government is the cause of this mess.

just my 02 cents... we now return you to your show..

littleoldman wrote:

I may be incorrect but I believe that it is just this one Black Congresswoman who is behind all this B/S.  She is the most raciest of them all she wants to allow these non blood Freedmen to have the same rights as the other Black Freedmen who do have Cherokee blood.  She also thinks that all Black people should  get reparations because some of their ancestors were chattel slaves.  If you buy her argument then all people of Jewish descent should get reparations form Egypt form the time of Moses.  I believe that the U.S.Gov. in their treaties and congressional legislation determined that the Cherokee citizenship did not pass to the descendants of the Freedmen unless said Freedman also had Cherokee blood.  Blood, (Cherokee) was to be the future determining factor for Tribal Citizenship.  She need to stay the H**L out of business  not her own.  Work to defeat her in the next election.  I get so tired of the you owe me because set, and their arrogance.  "LittleOldMan"

Preach on brothers,,,, 100% correct

From David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Chevy wrote:

intermarried whites,

That's what I was thinking, that there are white persons with no Cherokee blood, who are members of the Cherokee Nation.

Well, if they are able to kick the Freedmen out, then I don't see why they can lord it over the Delaware any longer. If the Cherokee don't have to abide by the treaty re the Freedmen, then what treaties have to be honored by whom? I think they're on a slippery slope.

There are no longer any "white persons with no Cherokee blood" who are citizens of the CNO. They were expelled at the same time the Freedmen were.

"Lord it over the Delaware"? The Delaware regained federal recognition last year.

The relationship between the Cherokee and the Delaware and Shawnee is not the same as the relationship between the Cherokee and the Freedmen. People use the argument that the Delaware and Shawnee are citizens of the CNO, so the Freedmen should be too. That's like comparing apples to oranges. The Delaware and Shawnee are Indian; the Freedmen aren't.

The Freedmen issue is a hard one; I can see both sides of the argument. However, it's not my decision to make. The citizens of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma made their decision; they had an election and it was decided by a majority vote. To be a citizen of the CNO, you must have Cherokee blood, documented on the Dawes Roll. It's their decision, not mine and not Diane Watson's.

I posted the last MOA bet the Cherokee and Delaware on fait, and MOLA deleted it, why? because the MOA is not liked that's why!

It's just bs from the Cherokee Nation, because the Delaware bought their land.Delaware Tribe restored to federal recognition


Monday, August 3, 2009
Filed Under: Recognition

The Delaware Tribe of Oklahoma is official again.

After losing its federal status, the tribe voted to reorganize under the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act. The Bureau of Indian Affairs approved the tribe's election on July 28.

"The election has the effect of restoring a direct Federal relationship with the Tribe consistent with the Memorandum of Agreement entered into with the Cherokee Nation on October 24, 2008," the BIA said. "The Delaware Tribe of Indians will now be included in the next list of recognized tribal entities published in the Federal Register."

The Delawares have been considered a part of the Cherokee Nation since an 1866 treaty. But when the BIA treated the Delawares as a separate entity, the Cherokee Nation went to court and won a decision that removed the Delawares from the list of federally recognized tribes.

The two tribes resolved their differences through the October 2008 agreement. Delaware voters approved the agreement and voted to reorganize in May.

Relevant Documents:
Delaware Tribe Recognition (July 28, 2009)

Related Stories:
Delaware Tribe about to regain federal status (07/14)
Delaware Tribe awaits answer on recognition (06/25)
Delaware Tribe gets closer to federal recognition (6/9)
Delaware Tribe seeks to restore federal recognition (4/13)

No, respectfully,  you're wrong, bls. There were white ppl, on the Dawes, listed as Cherokee, not white. They were white, but put on the Dawes as Cherokee.

http://www.afrigeneas.com/forume/index. … d;id=14733

Explanations of Cherokee Dawes Roll Sections
by Marilyn Vann

Tribal leaders in the Cherokee nation day and night use the phrase "Cherokee by blood". Those such as deputy Chief Joe Grayson, CHief Chad Smith, Councilwoman Cara Cowan Watts, as well as petition proponents Fishinghawk and Ketcher constantly pointed out to the people that freedmen are not "Cherokee by blood". Councilwoman Cowan even told the people that if I were really descended from "Cherokees by blood" I must not want to retain my tribal membership as I could just use a "by blood roll number and remain in the tribe. However, none of these people really explain the term and what it means. Read on:

"Cherokee by blood" is a class of citizenship. The term was used prior to the Dawes enrollment as it was used in the Whitmire case Moses Whitmire, Trustee for the Cherokee Freedmen Vs The Cherokee nation and the United States 30 Ct Cl 138 (1895) as an identified class of citizens. The term was often interchanged with the term "Native Cherokees". Such persons originally were recognized as being descended from "Cherokee Indians" by the Cherokee government and were entitled to all lands, and benefits of being tribal members. The Dawes Commission listed members of the cherokee nation on this roll that they deemed did not fit into the classes of citizens they listed on separate rolls such as Intermarried Citizens, Freedmen, or Delaware citizens. but who was on the other rolls?

Delaware Cherokee roll: These Delaware tribal members who immigrated to the Cherokee nation, were granted Cherokee citizenship and were entitled to 160 acres of alloted land by treaty rather than the 110 given to other Cherokee citizens. Some Delaware tribal members immigrating with treaty rights were white persons as well as "Indians". The whites listed had treaty rights just as did the Delaware tribal members who were "indians". Whites such as Robert Lunday on the Delaware roll were identified as 'white" on their Dawes census card and on the Delaware Cherokee roll and not given blood quantums by the Dawes Commission.

Freedmen section of the Dawes Roll - ALL of these people had a guaranteed treaty right to CHerokee citizenship under the 1866 treaty. Review of the documetation prepared by the DAwes Commission for each tribal member (census cards, testimonys, etc) given a freedmen roll number shows that this was never meant to be a roll of persons with no Indian ancestry. The person enrolled could have a right to citizenship under other treaties such as the Shawnee treaty (for example Solomon Baldrige) or could have been recognized as a citizen prior to 1866 as a 'native Cherokee" Indian by the tribes standards (such as Perry Ross). However, every one of these persons listed as a freedmen who was an adult got their land unrestricted in 1904 by Act of Congress. Also, spouses of freedmen did not get allotments as "intermarried citizens" even if they had married prior to 1875. It was clearly in the US governments interest to have as many citizens in the freedmen class as possible to limit the number of allotments given to tribal members. None of the freedmen tribal members were given degrees of "Indian blood" by the Dawes Commission regardless of any testimonies taken by the Commission, notations of Indian ancestry on the Dawes Census card made by the Commission, or the fact that the freedmen might have been listed on the 1880 authenticated roll made by the Cherokee nation as a "native Cherokee". For purposes of the date when an allotment became unrestricted, the date of unrestriction was fixed for 1904 for a person with freedmen status whether or not the freedmen had an ancestor listed on the "Cherokee by blood" or Delaware rolls. For purposes of the date of lifting of land allotment restrictions, freedmen were not "Indians" although they might be Indians for other purposes. (Sango case)

Intermarried citizens Roll- THese were whites who had Cherokee citizenship thru their marriages to Cherokee Indians prior to 1875. They lost their rights to an allotment prior to the Dawes roll closing in 1906 if they divorced their Cherokee spouse, or if widowed, married a non CHerokee Indian. THere were about 284 such persons listed on the Dawes rolls, none younger than 44 years of age.Their children appear on the "cherokee by blood rolls section of the DAwes rolls.

Cherokee by blood/Cherokee by blood Minor section of the Dawes Rolls:
This included adopted Natchez, adopted Creeks, Cherokee Indians, adopted Shawnees citizens, descendants of the original adopted Delaware Indians, and ALL adopted white citizens who were not "intermarried whites". These adopted whites included persons whose families had purchased citizenship (such as Clem Bennett), white persons who were Shawnee citizens and had a treaty right to citizenship (such as George Franklin), and Richard Byrd who was descended from missionary Jones who had been adopted by the Cherokee council in 1856. None of these persons had a blood quantum and were identified as "aw" by the Dawes commission for "adopted white". Several white children were listed on the "Cheorkee by blood minor roll". ALL persons listed on the Cherokee by blood roll were free to marry and divorce any person they wanted to without it affecting their right to hold an allotment. When their allotments became unrestricted depended on whether or not the person listed on the "cherokee by blood roll" was a white person, a person listed with a degree of blood less than 1/2 or a person with a higher degree of blood such as a "full blood Indian".

some things that all of the rolls had in common"
1. EACH and every person listed was a bona fide recognized citizen of the tribe regardless of what section of the roll he was listed on.

2. Every section of the Dawes rolls was subject to the Cherokee Agreement made in 1902 with the United states. This agreement required that persons dying prior to September 1 1902 be stricken from the rolls. This results in a person descended from a person listed on the freedmen roll such as Thomas Downing whose Dawes testimony and a Dawes Census card identified his deceased father William Downing as a "Cherokee by blood" not being able to present a "Cherokee by blood roll number in 2007 for their dead ancestor to the bia to obtain a cdib card. This explains how tribal leaders mislead the public when they state that freedmen are not "Cherokees by blood".
(The BIA only uses the blood quantum listed on the "by blood rolls" to issue the CDIb card).

The recently passed constitutional amendment removes all persons whose tribal enrollment is derived strictly from intermarried white or freedmen roll numbers. According to the attorney generals opinion, any person whose tribal membership is derived using any roll number on the "Cherokee by blood, cherokee by blood minor, or delaware rolls remains in the tribe. There is no requirement that the person have a blood quantum listed on the "by blood rolls" This is why the ballot was not designed to remove whites as the descendants of intermarried whites are on the "by blood rolls". It was only designed to remove descendants of Dawes enrolled freedmen - with or without documented Indian ancestry.

Marilyn Vann

I'm not going to address the subject of whites who were adopted by or had purchased citizenship in the Delaware or Shawnee Nations and in turn were put on the by blood rolls. I don't know enough about that to even try to discuss it intelligently. And since both the Delaware and Shawnee aren't Cherokee citizens anymore, it's really a moot point.

However, this one I can and will discuss.

This is why the ballot was not designed to remove whites as the descendants of intermarried whites are on the "by blood rolls". It was only designed to remove descendants of Dawes enrolled freedmen - with or without documented Indian ancestry.

Let's look at this logically. If a white woman married a Cherokee man, she would be on the roll as "intermarried white" and he would be "by blood"; their children would be half white and half Cherokee, therefore on the roll as "by blood minor". All the descendants from this union would have an ancestor on the "by blood" roll and their citizenship would never be questioned.

If one of their children had married a white person, that spouse would be considered an "intermarried white" and would have been a citizen of the Nation.

That's the way it was, but not any more. The 2007 vote stripped all "intermarried whites" of their citizenship, same as it did the Freedmen.

What are you talking about . . . "start getting Delaware dis-enrolled, which they did"?

Google it.

Futhermore, it does not matter in the scheme of things how many treaties the U.S. kept or didn't keep. To me, when the CNO does not keep/abide by a treaty, it just gives the U.S. Gov. an excuse to not keep/abide by a treaty, or any treaty with the CNO. and as far as the Freedmen, bad for them if they get kicked out, but it'd be wonderful for the Delaware and Shawnee. If the CNO can kick out the Freedmen, and not abide by the what? 1866 treaty, and get away with it with the U.S. Gov., then it's adios to the CNO running the Delaware Nation.

Chevy wrote:

Futhermore, it does not matter in the scheme of things how many treaties the U.S. kept or didn't keep. To me, when the CNO does not keep/abide by a treaty, it just gives the U.S. Gov. an excuse to not keep/abide by a treaty, or any treaty with the CNO. and as far as the Freedmen, bad for them if they get kicked out, but it'd be wonderful for the Delaware and Shawnee. If the CNO can kick out the Freedmen, and not abide by the what? 1866 treaty, and get away with it with the U.S. Gov., then it's adios to the CNO running the Delaware Nation.

The Delaware and Shawnee are not part of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma anymore. They are both federally recognized in their own right.

So, all things in the 1866 treaty haven't stayed the same.

10/30/2009     I have a question. For those who have delaware/shawnee citizenship thru cherokee nation, will they have to get new cards from the Delaware tribe or are thier cherokee cards still valid?
lynnsherrie

http://www.cherokeephoenix.org/20774/Article.aspx



The Delaware WERE fed recognized apart from the Cherokee Nation, but thanks to the Cherokee Nation, the Cherokee Nation got them UN RECOGNIZED, and now the only way they have fed recognition is with a MOA with the cherokee.


http://www.jstor.org/pss/20070766

Rusty Creed Brown 10/10/2006
Let me start by saying, I absolutely support the Delaware Tribe having our federal recognition restored; we should be
actively pursuing all options that will not harm our people and/or our tribe. However, I am concerned with the avenue
our current chief and council have chosen. Other options are available and after this legislation is marked up by
Congress there is no guarantee the Cherokee Nation will continue to support it; which in my opinion is a good thing.
I do not want this legislation to pass.
In 1867, an agreement was made by the Delaware and the Cherokee, this agreement has been of much heated debate
since its signing. The 1867 agreement specifically violates the Delaware Treaty of 1866; this treaty has never been
abrogated, meaning it is still the supreme law of the land under the U.S. Constitution. In a letter Chief Chad Smith sent
to the Delaware several months back, he specifically stated our two tribes could not enter into an agreement violating
federal law. He is correct on that point
Today, our Delaware chief and council are making yet another agreement with the Cherokee Nation and attempting to
have Congress pass legislation restoring our federal recognition. As I mentioned, I am absolutely for the restoration of
our federal recognition. We were the first Indian nation to sign a treaty with the newly formed U.S. government. We
have fought many wars on the side of the U.S. government. We have retained our culture and our heritage through at
least six major removals. We are a tribe; we are a nation
The currently proposed legislation gives our authority to the Cherokee Nation. We will not be able to do anything
without consulting the Cherokee Nation. Our federal monies will go through them and they will have the authority to
regulate and tax our businesses. The prospect of having land into trust does exist within our last reservation and our
aboriginal homelands, but I believe this legislation caps how many acres we will be allowed to take into trust. This deal
is not in our best interest; why make hasty decisions?
It is also important for Delaware people to realize our trust fund payout does not need to be tied to our federal
recognition legislation. Our council voted to tie the two together; we are entitled to and will get our settlement. This
legislation will also affect groups other than the Delaware Tribe. The legislation will also have potentially detrimental
affects on the Freedmen, the Shawnees, and the United Keetoowah Band (UKB) of Cherokees.
The legislation, for all practical purposes, abolishes our inherent rights as a tribal aation. Our council members have
said the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is not finalized. Whether or not the MOA is finalized the US Congress
can still pass this legislation; the legislation that our current chief and council support. A draft copy of the MOA does
exits; however, tribal members are not allowed copies for review and we have not been told of the current status of any
further negotiations.
There is quite a bit of concern over whether the council and chief will allow the Delaware people to vote on accepting
the MOA, as required by the Delaware Constitution, before they and the Cherokees sign it. The “Adult Voting Mem-
bership” of the tribe is the “Supreme Governing Authority,” not the tribal council or the chief. However, our Delaware
administration seems to have forgotten that point.
As a candidate for Delaware tribal council, I absolutely support giving the governing power back to the people, where
it rightfully belongs. I will work endlessly to restore our recognition and our rightful place among Tribal Nations.
Nevertheless, I do not support the legislation and if I had a copy of the MOA, I am certain I would not support it either.
My family does not support it, many other Delaware families do not it, and I know of many elders that do not support
it.
In the last year there has been a 180 degree turn in this council and chief with no explanation. For 140 years, our
Delaware people have fought the 1867 agreement. Now we are willing to enter into another agreement and have
congress pass legislation supporting the 1867 agreement. I ask Why? There is nothing favorable in the legislation to
the Delaware Tribe and I can only imagine what we are giving up in the MOA.
Our ancestors did not want the 1867 agreement. Our ancestors have fought continuously for our survival, our federal
recognition, and have never given up our inherent rights to govern ourselves. We are not Cherokee. We are Delaware
people, we are Lenape. We must never forget that.
When the Delaware Tribal Court fails its people, the Delaware Tribal Council is not sharing information, tribal elders
are left out and their views not respected, something is incredibly wrong. Read the Delaware Indian newspaper, read
the Delaware Court opinions, and read the tribal council minutes, you will see our current administration is not looking
out for the interest of our tribe.
It is time the Delaware people, stand up and assert our constitution rights and require accountability from the chief and
the council. Our general elections are on November 4, 2006. Now more than ever it is time for our Tribal Leaders to
make well educated, well informed, and calculated decisions; not hurried decisions that will detrimentally affect us
and all of our future generations.
About the author: Rusty Creed Brown is a candidate for Delaware Tribal Council

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:9k_ … =firefox-a