Genealogy | Native American | DNA | About Us
Tell A Friend!




Genealogy Records

Genealogy
Biographies
Cemetery Records
Census Records
DNA
Family Tree Search
History Books Online
Military Records
Native American Records
Surnames
Vital Records
World Genealogy

Indian Genealogy

Proving Your Indian Heritage
Native American Rolls
Indian Tribal Histories
Indian Tribes by Location
Indian Books and Articles
Indian Genealogy Queries
Indian Census Records
Indian Cemetery Records

Indian Tribes

Abenaki Indians
Algonquian Indians
Apache Indians
Arapaho Indians
Blackfeet Indians
Caddo Indians
Cherokee Indians
Cheyenne Indians
Chickasaw Indians
Chinook Indians
Chippewa Indians
Choctaw Indians
Comanche Indians
Cree Indians
Creek Indians
Crow Indians
Dakota Indians
Delaware Indians
Fox Indians
Hopi Indians
Huron Indians
Illinois Indians
Iowa Indians
Iroquois Indians
Kansa Indians
Kickapoo Indians
Kiowa Indians
Menominee Indians
Miami Indians
Missouri Indians
Modoc Indians
Mohawk Indians
Mohegan Indians
Munsee Indians
Natchez Indians
Navajo Indians
Nex Percé Indians
Omaha Indians
Onondaga Indians
Osage Indians
Oto Indians
Ottawa Indians
Paiute Indians
Pawnee Indians
Pottawatomie Indians
Sauk Indians
Seminole Indians
Seneca Indians
Shawnee Indians
Siouan Indians
Sioux Indians
Stockbridge Indians
Tuscarora Indians
Winnebago Indians
Zuni Indians


 

 Scott Dumas Final Roll Packet

Scott Dumas on Dawes Roll

Page 2

Dumas Brief

Charles von Weise
Attorney at Law

Tishomingo (Muskogee is crossed out) Ind. Ter.

July 12, 1903

I was Principal Law Clerk of the Mississippi Choctaw Legal Department at the time the case of Scott S. Dumas et al. as MCR 4006 was decided and at that time I directed Charles M. Wrigley, one of the law clerks in my dept. to write a decision in said case, but first to prepare a brief of the evidence offered by the applicants for the purpose of proving an attempted compliance on the part of their ancestors. This brief I submitted to Mr. P(?) B. Hopkins, Chief Law Clerk of the Commission, and suggested that it was the opinion of Mr. Wrigley and myself that the applicants had made a fairly good case on the point of an attempted compliance and in our opinion should be given the benefit of a doubt and a decision written in their favor, but that the records failed to show that any persons bearing the names as borne by their ancestors had ever attempted to comply. My instructions from Mr. Hopkins at that time was to write a decision denying applicants if their ancestors did not appear on the records as having complied or attempted to have complied as the (Dawes) Commission was adverse to identifying parties who could not trace their descent back to someone who had so complied or attempted to comply and had their names of record as having done so. This matter had been submitted just before my leaving for the state of Mississippi on Commission business and I turned the matter over to Mr. Wrigley with instructions to write the decision as suggested by Mr. Hopkins and myself. This was done and upon my return said decision, with a few minor changes made by me (part of which were suggested by Mr. Hopkins), was submitted to the Commission, and as I understand, signed by them (I having left the service prior to said signing). At the time the matter was submitted to Mr. Hopkins first I took it from his conversation that the Commission did not care to identify these people upon testimony proving an attempted compliance and that if the Department saw fit to overrule the Commission in this view it would be better than for the decision to be written identifying parties in the first instance. The above is about all that I can remember now of any conversation between myself and Mr. Hopkins.  About the same kind in substance was had between myself and Jus. Bixby except that he did not see the brief of the evidence, only taking my statement as to what that was. Mr. W. O. Beall who is, and was then, Chief Clerk of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Enrollment Division never had an official consultation with me in regard to this case but did say this was too a lot of people to let go in on such testimony.

Charles von Weise (signature)

There was a general rumor among those who were writing decisions in Mississippi Choctaw cases at this time that the Commission considered this too large a case to identify on testimony proving attempted compliance where parties were not of record and that a decision denying applicants would be written as it was considered best for the Department to decide that matter.

Charles von Weise (signature)
Second statement


     Transcribed by Kitty Garber from photocopy she personally made of original handwritten testimony submitted by Charles von Weise two months after the decision of the commission on May 15, 1903, which denied the application. Presumably, this document was part of the subsequent appeal. Original is in the Scott S. Dumas et al. (MCR 4006) file, Mississippi Choctaw applications, National Archives, Washington, DC.)

Page 2 | Index

Dawes PacketsFree Genealogy | Indian Genealogy | Dawes Packets

 

Genealogy Websites

Other Websites

Disclaimer:

This site includes some historical materials that may imply negative stereotypes reflecting the culture or language of a particular period or place. These items are presented as part of the historical record and should not be interpreted to mean that the WebMasters in any way endorse the stereotypes implied.


Access Genealogy is the largest free genealogy website not owned by Ancestry.com. As such, it relies on the revenue from commercial genealogy companies such as Ancestry and Footnote to pay for the server and other expenses related to producing and warehousing such a large collection of data. If you're considering joining either of these programs, why not join from our pages, and help support free genealogy online!

Copyright 1999-2009, by Access Genealogy.com
A project by Webified Development