Home
Genealogy Research
Transcribing Services
Family Tree Publishing
Family Stories
Current Specials
Genealogy Links
Free Records Search
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Partial Transcription of John E. Irons Application to be Identified as Mississippi Choctaw

It also appears that all of said applicants claims rights in the Choctaw lands under article fourteen of the treaty between the Unites States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded September twenty seventh, eighteen hundred and thirty, by reason of being descendants of Me Shune Tubbee, who is alleged to be a full blood Choctaw Indian and to have resided in Mississippi in eighteen hundred and thirty.


It also appears from the evidence in support of the said applications and from the records in possession of the Commission that none of the said applicants has ever been enrolled by the Choctaw tribal authorities as a member of the Choctaw tribe, 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 (29 stats., 321).


The applicants have filed in support of their claim to rights as Mississippi Choctaw the original patent issued by the United States Government April 15, 1853, to Jasper H. Harvey, assignee of Ish Te Min Che, representative of Me Shune Tubbee deceased, conveying to the said Jasper H. Harvey  certain lands which have been conveyed to the said Me Shune Tubbee as a beneficiary of article fourteen of the treaty of “Dancing Rabbit Creek” and they claim that the said Me Shune Tubbee is the identical person mentioned by them as the great great grandfather of the principle applicants in MCR 612, 613 , 491.


It is found on pages 570, and 690 of Volume 1 of the Claimants’ Brief and Evidence in the Case of the Choctaw Nation verses the United States before the Court of Claims, number 12742, that the Me Shune Tubbe mentioned in the patent filed by the applicants was the child of Ta Namp Ha Cubbee, and under ten years of age at the date of the treaty, and it appears from the transcript of the proceedings had in the case of Ta Wamp Ha Cubbee deceased, which was heard before Commissioners Tyler, Gains and Rush, who were appointed under the act of Congress approved August 23, 1842, that the rights of Me Shune Tubbee were adjudicated by the said Commission in 1843, he having been represented by his mother, Ta Min Cha, his father having died the previous winter, and that he was present at the hearing had in said application. By virtue of said adjudication, scrip was given to Me Shune Tubbee, in lieu of which the patent filed by the applicants was finally issued.


It appears from the record relating to the adjudication of the claim of Me Shune Tubbee by Commissioner Tyler, Gains and Rush, that the said Me Shune Tubbee could not have been the great great grandfather of the principle applicants in MCR 612, 613 and 491 inasmuch as the oldest one of them, to wit, John C. Irons, is fifty two years of age at this time, which shows conclusively that whoever was his great great grandfather must have been over the age of ten years in eighteen hundred and thirty; in fact the testimony fully bears out said conclusion, for by reference to certain affidavits filed in support of these applications it is found that one of the affiants states that Me Shune Tubbee’s wife died in 1857 and that the “old man  migrated to the Indian Territory one or two years later”; while another affiant states that he was acquainted with Me Shune Tubbee, the great great grandfather of John C. Irons, and knows he had a daughter named Eliza, or Lizzie, Tubbee,  who married a white man named Elisha Baker and that after their marriage they removed to the state or Arkansas and in 1825 returned to Mississippi with grown children, on a visit to the said Me Shune Tubbee; while another affiant states that he knew Elisha Baker who married Me Shune Tubbee’s daughter Eliza, and visited him in the state of Arkansas in 1836, at which time the said Elisha Baker told him that his daughter had married a man by the name of John Irons and had moved to Texas. The Commission is aware of the necessity of great leniency regarding testimony relating to dates and ages, but in the light of the positive testimony as to the Me Shune Tubbee  through whom the  applicants claim having a family of children and grand children as early as 1825, no doubt is entertained that the Me Shune Tubbee to the patent is herewith filed was issued, was not the Me Shune Tubbee through whom the applicants claim.


On page 540 of volume 1 of the Claimants’ Brief and Evidence in the case of the Choctaw Nation, verse the United States before the court of claims, No. 12742, appears the name Mish Oon Tubbee, the same being found in a list of “Twenty five cases fully adjudicated by the Commissioners Tyler, Gaines and Rush, 3rd June, 1845, he being there represented as the head of a family at the date of which included two children over ten years named Ma La Ho Na and Le Ash In Tubbee, and one child under ten named SaK Ka Cubbee, and it appears that said persons received scrip by reason of the adjudication of their claim to benefits under article fourteen of the treaty of eighteen hundred and thirty, but the testimony of the applicants herewith fails to show the Mish Oon Tubbee is identified with the Me Shune Tubbee through which they claim, and the record relating to the adjudication of the claim of the Me Shune Tubbe who received the patent herein filed above shows that he is not the same person mentioned in the record last cited. 


The records in the possession of the Commission relating to persons who received benefits under other articles of the treaty of “Dancing Rabbit Creek” or received no benefits but were removed by the government to the county West of the Mississippi now known as the Choctaw Nation, Indian Territory, show the names of the following persons, they being similar to the name of the ancestor through whom these applicants claim:
“Meshoontabe, was a beneficiary under the 19th article of the treaty, having had awarded to him the W/2 of section 9, T.17, R. 18E; there were 15 persons in his family who lived on the Tombigby River; was a member of Meshobanowa’s company;
“Meshonatubbe, was a beneficiary of the 19th article of the Choctaw treaty, and there was awarded to him the NW/4 of section 22, T. 15, R19E,; there were four persons in his family who lived on Sukenatcha  creek; he was a member Jeremiah Folsom’s company;
“ Meashonatubbee, who was transported to the Choctaw Nation west, by the government, there were four persons in his family, one male under ten, one over 25, one female under ten and one over 25: he was a member of Mussalaka’s company;
“ Mishuntubby, who was transported west by the government; there was one male person over twenty five years of age in his family, and he belonged to Mussalaka’s company;
“Meashontubbee, was transport west by the government, and there were in his family one male under ten, one over twenty five, one female under ten and two over ten; he was a member of Toblah’s company;
“Mishuntubbee, who was transported west by the government; there were in his family one male over twenty five and under fifty, two females under ten, one over ten and under twenty five and one over twenty five; he was a member of Hoshinshabona’s company;
“Meashintubbee, who was transported west by the government; there were in his family one male over twenty five and under fifty, two females under ten, one over ten and under twenty five and one over twenty five; he was a member of Punasa Carnes company;
“Mishontubbee, was was transported west by the government, there were in his family one male under ten, two over ten, one over twenty five, two females under ten, one over twenty five and one over fifty; he was a member of Nashbanowa’s company;
“Meashintubbee, who was transported west by the government, there were in his family two males under ten, one over twenty five and one female over twenty five; he was a member of Bill Fry’s company;
“Me a Sheen Tubbee, who was transported west by the government, there was one male under ten in his family, and he was a member of Lawson’s company.”


As will be seen from the records the first two above mentioned were beneficiaries under article nineteen and therefore, even if the applicants are descendants of either of them they could derive no benefits as fourteenth article claimants, and the same is true in regard to the other persons mentioned, as they removed to the Choctaw Nation, Indian Territory, during the general removal of the Choctaw tribe of Indians to that country.
In order to account for the applicants having in their possession the original patent filed with their application it would be reasonable, in the event said patent had been issued to a full blood Choctaw, for the Commission to take cognizance of the fact that such patents were considered valueless by many of the more ignorant full bloods and were easily obtainable from the rightful owners by anyone, but in view of the fact that the patent in question was issued to Jasper H. Harvey, a white man, as the assignee of Ish Te Min Che, the relative of Me Shune Tubbe, deceased, it is reasonable to conclude that the assignee was an ancestor of the applicants, or they were collaterally related to him and it was through him that the patent came into their possession.


It does not appear from the testimony and evidence offered in support of these applications or from the records in possession of the Commission relating to the persons who complied or attempted to comply with the provisions of said article fourteen of the treaty of eighteen hundred and thirty, and to persons who heretofore were claimants there under, that the said Me Shune Tubbe through whom these applicants claim, or an ancestor less remote, signified (in person or by proxy) to Colonel Wm. Ward, Indian Agent, Choctaw Agency, an intention to comply with the provisions of said article fourteen, or present a claim of rights there under to either of the Commissions authorized to adjudicate such claims by the acts of Congress approved March 3, 1837 (5. Stats.,180) and 23 August, 1842 (5 stats., 513).


It is therefore the opinion of this Commission that the evidence herein is insufficient to determine the identity of John C. Irons, Carrie B. Mackey, Annie Elvira Mackey, Lula May Irons, Myrtle Lee Irons, William N. Irons, Roxy A. Irons, John Roberts, Leila Belle Roberts, Lily Ellis Roberts, John Edward Irons, Loyd Irons, James Henry Roberts, Henry Roberts, Julia Roberts, Johnnie Roberts, Ida Roberts, Mandy Lee Roberts, Elias Roberts, Cashier Roberts and O. D. Roberts as Choctaw Indians entitled to rights in the Choctaw lands under the provisions of said article fourteen of the treaty of eighteen hundred and thirty, and that the application for their identification as such should be refused, and it is so ordered.

                                                  Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes