[ Home ] [ Up ] [ Pratt Collection ] [ Russian Lenap ] [ Stock Stolen ] [ Wallam Olum ] [ Wampum Belts ] [ Wyandotte County ] [ Adams Delawares ] [ Baptist Missions ] [ BigHouse ] [ Brief History of the Lenape ] [ Chiefs ] [ Civil War ] [ Delaware Life ] [ Delaware  Missions ] [ Delaware Town ] [ E.Okla History ] [ The Indian Journals ] [ Kansas ] [ Lenape-Delaware Place Names ] [ Life Among the Delaware Indians ] [ McCoy Journal ] [ Moravian Missions ] [ Old Northwest Confederacy ]

Home Page  Table of Contents
25 November 2006

EASTERN OKLAHOMA DELAWARE HISTORY


An Oklahoma Lenape-Delaware woman, Susie Elkhair, in the 19th century. (From University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia)


Delaware Coat used in Eastern Oklahoma. (From Detroit Institute of Arts as found in Algonquians of the East Coast, a Time-Life book, highly recommended reading)

                                                 
                                                                  A Oklahoma Delaware Family
(A portion of the image on the left was intentionally omitted in the scanning. Western History Collection, University of Oklahoma Library)

                                
A Lesson in Administrative Termination: An Analysis of the Legal Status of the Delaware Tribe of Indians
This history is adapted from Gina J. Kerrigan and Clayton Chambers, preparers, A Lesson in Administrative Termination: An Analysis of the Legal Status of the Delaware Tribe of Indians by the Delaware Tribe of Indians ca. 1995.  220 N.W. Virginia Avenue , Bartlesville, OK 74003. It reflects the history of the Delaware people through their departure from Kansas to the Indian Territory in the present state of Oklahoma. Keep in mind, that this particular history is a part of a legal brief prepared by the Delaware Tribe of Indians, Incorporated, that its the Eastern Oklahoma Delaware Tribe, for their case against the Cherokee Nation in determining the sovereignty of that tribe. As such, it naturally represents that tribe's point of historical view. Email: delawareindian@hotmail.com 

Note: See the end of the article for sources that were used by the authors.


                                              The Early Contact Period--1500 to 1829

At the time of first contact with the Europeans, the Lenape people were residing along the Middle Atlantic coast in parts of the present day states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and New York.1  The Europeans gave varying names to these Algonquian- speaking people, but after 1700 the colonists eventually adopted the name "Delaware Indians" after the middle band of the tribe which resided along the banks of the Delaware River.  The name Delaware comes from Thomas West, de la Warr, an early governor of Virginia. The state of Delaware was named as were the Lenape who lived there.  The Indians have always identified themselves as the Lenape, meaning the original people.  All of the Algonquian tribes respectfully referred to the Lenape as the "Grandfather" tribe.2

When the Europeans arrived, the Delaware were living in three contiguous territorial areas, defined primarily by the dialect. The central group, the Unami (people down the river), resided on the middle Delaware River, controlling nearly all of New Jersey, parts of Pennsylvania and the lower Hudson River; the Munsee or Monsey (people of the stone country occupied the northern territory on the Lower Hudson River and the Upper Delaware River; the Unalachtigo (people who live near the sea) resided to the south.3  The Unami, Munsee, and Unalachtigo territories were further subdivided by smaller communities or villages. Although of distinct dialect, all three groups shared common lineage, customs, and political decisions.4  The Unami group ultimately emerged as the main body of the Delaware Tribe.5  Though during their removals to the west, many of the Munsee broke off and migrated in to New York, Wisconsin, and Canada, identification and communications  with the main Delaware Tribe were maintained.6 The Unalachtigo were eventually absorbed by the Unami during the removals.7

Prior to their removal from the east coast, the political structures of the Delaware were highly decentralized.8  Each village or community appeared to have its own leaders or chief who acted independent of the others; yet, sufficient cohesion existed among all the villages of the three groups that the Europeans recognized them as one people.9  In addition, the Delaware groups acted in concert during hunting drives, for collective defense, and in relations with other tribes.10  Although egalitarianism dominated the tribal organization and decisions of the tribe were made  collectively in general council, the various villages also had chiefs and councils.11 The chiefs, however, were limited by the advice of councils and the elders; their authority flowed only from them power to persuade, and a less than persuasive chief would be replaced.12  hen a singular voice was necessary, the chief with seniority, or commanding the most respect, would act as head chief on behalf of all the leaders.13  In times of war, a war chief would also be selected based on his proven abilities in battle.14  Though decentralized, the Delaware nevertheless maintained an interwoven social and political cohesion through membership in matrilineal clans.15

First recorded contact with the Europeans is believed to pre-date the sixteenth century. For the Delaware, the arrival of Europeans initially meant a new source for the fur trade. However, as the Swedes, the Dutch, and the English began to battle over control of the Mid-Atlantic coast, the Delaware felt the pressures to move west.16  In the late 1600s, many of the Delaware villages were already migrating west to the Ohio River Valley.17  By 1751, the majority of the tribe had settled in eastern Ohio at the request of the Wyandot.18  In 1770, still more of the tribe's villages moved to lands on the White River in Indiana at the invitation of the Miami and Piankashaw Indians.19  Yet another small band of Delaware moved to Cape Girardeau in southern Missouri in 1793, and settled in a tract of land which had been granted to them by the Spanish.20  This "Absentee Delaware" band later migrated to Arkansas. Texas, and Western Oklahoma, and today comprise the federally-recognized Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma.21  Under the Treaty of Greenville in 1795, the main body of Delaware relinquished their claim to land in Ohio and moved to Indiana to join the rest of the tribe on the White River."22 

Increasingly weary of the problems associated with white settlement, the tribe agreed under the Treaty of St. Mary's of 1818 to relinquish all their claims to the lands in Indiana in exchange for new lands west of the Mississippi River.23  Pursuant to the 1818 treaty, the tribe was moved to southwestern Missouri; however, the Delaware found the area unsuitable due to poor natural resources and increasing hostilities with other tribes. The tribe therefore entered a supplemental treaty in 1829 which provided for the Delaware removed to a new, permanent, reservation in northeastern present Kansas on the north bank of the Kansas River  between Lawrence and Leavenworth.24 

By the early nineteenth century, the Delaware tribe of the west scarcely resembled the peaceful and prosperous Lenape people of the east. Two-hundred years of forced removals, disease, acculturation, and wars had ravaged the social, religious, and political structures of the Delaware.25  Of the estimated 20,000 Lenape people occupying the east coast,26  only 2,000 Delaware were accounted for in the removal from Indiana to Missouri.27   The Delaware societal structures had deteriorated almost beyond recognition.  A natural response to the chaos was the development of centralized authority in a head chief.28  In 1778, the matrilineal clans of the Wolf, the Turtle, and the Turkey, re-emerged to dominate the political organization of the tribe.29  Each of the clans were represented by a chief. and of the three chiefs, the "first-among-equals" served as head chief.30  Of primary significance, was the ascendancy of Kik-Tha-We-Nund (William Anderson) of the Turtle Clan to head chief in 1806.31  Chief Anderson wished to unite his scattered people, revive the traditional ways, and settle them far beyond the influences if white civilization.32  Anderson recognized that the centuries of removal and acculturation had broken the spirit of his people; the only possible hope for his tribe was to move as far west as [possible where the tribe could heal from the upsetting influence of the white world In particular, Chief Anderson opposed the work of missionaries who sought to further alienate his people from the tribe.33

By 1831, Anderson led the nucleus of the tribe to Kansas, and continued to try to bring the other alienated Delaware settlements in Ohio, Canada, Arkansas, and Texas to the new reservation to join the tribe.34   Chief Anderson did have some success in reuniting the fragmented tribe; however, the great chief died soon after the removal to Kansas and did not get to fully realize his goal of total reunification.

The Kansas Experience. 1829-1866

Under the supplemental Treaty of 1829, the tribe was resettled on the forks of the Kansas and Missouri Rivers on a reservation which covered some two million acres.35  Before his death, Chief Anderson had made progress in revitalizing the tribe, enabling the Delaware to again stand as the "grandfather" tribe among the removed eastern tribes.36 

The Delaware political structures remained much the same during the early years in Kansas. However, throughout the nineteenth century the Indian agents of the Delaware agency increasingly sought to undermine the ways of the traditionalist in order to better control the tribe. After the death of the great Chief Anderson in 1832, the next "first among equals" of the clan chiefs to ascend to head chief was William Patterson.37  The tribe's clan chiefs or sub-chiefs included Captain Ketchum of the Turtle Clan, Na-coman (Nat Coming) of the Wolf Clan, Ka-cock-ta-wha (Big Man) of the Turkey Clan.38  Nat Coming of the Wolf Clan succeeded Patterson as the "first among equals" to head chief in 1839.39  In 1849, Captain Ketchum, (Turtle) succeeded Nat Coming to head chief, the chiefs of the clans then included, Anderson Sarcoxie (Turtle), Ne-con-he-cond (Wolf), and Ka-cock-ta-wa (Turkey).40 

Upon the death of Captain Ketchum in 1857, one of these three clan chiefs should have succeeded to head chief; however, the tribes U. S. agent intervened and requested that the government recognize Ketchum's successor to the Turtle Clan, James Conner (grandson to Chief Anderson), as head chief.41  James Conner refused, however, claiming that the tribe would not accept him as head chief, but suggested that his estranged brother, John Conner, might agree to the government's proposition.42  Indian agent B.F. Robinson wrote to the Superintendent of Indian Affairs, stating, "...I would be pleased the Indian Department would authorize me to treat him [John Conner] as principal chief."43  John Conner, residing for some thirty years away from the tribe, agreed to the government's proposal and returned to Kansas to take his position as head chief, agreed to the government's proposal and returned to Kansas to take his position as head chief; apparently, his appointment was meant to bring some "civilized" influences to the tribe.44 

During this period, the U. S. Indian agents found the Christian elements of the tribe more palatable and began to undermine the traditional leaders actions in favor of the minority Christian element. Of primary significance was the U. S. appointment of the mixed-blood, Christian convert Charles Journeycake to Chief of the Turkey Clan in 1861.45  It is clear that the tribal leaders did not accept Journeycake as easily as the appointment of John Conner. Under tribal law, Journeycake could not even be a member of the clans because his mother was not a Delaware;46  all clan membership and privileges were derived from matrilineal descendence. The tribe's cool reception to this intrusion in evidenced  in the signatures of the Treaty of 1861, wherein Journeycake signs last, without any designation as chief or tribal delegate. The Treaty was also signed by John Conner, as head chief, Anderson Sarcoxey [Sarcoxie], chief of the Turtle Band, Ne-con-he-con, chief of the Wolf Band, and James Conner, delegate.47

Then in 1864, Journeycake's long-time friend and in-law, Baptist missionary Reverend John Pratt, was appointed as Indian agent for the Delaware Tribe.48  Pratt's influence in Delaware affairs as a missionary was already well known, and the local newspaper openly criticized the appointment in that Pratt had a history of leaning toward his own financial aggrandizement. The Leavenworth Daily Bulletin lamented:

"The removal of Mr. Johnson, and the appointment of Mr. Pratt are significant facts that help to convince us that our conjectures are right...the fraud is not yet complete. The Indians have a few more acres of land. General Lane, the secretary, and the railroad men want them. They have concluded it to accomplish their object through Agent Pratt...We remember well that Mr. Pratt denounced the original treaty with the Delawares, by which they donated their lands to the railroad company, as a swindle, and was quite indignant about it until a quarter section was deeded to him by the company, and secretary Usher sold him another quarter for the low sum of two dollars per acres."49

Pratt and Journeycake had been working in tandem for nearly twenty years to convert the tribe to their Baptist Christianity.50  Just as old Chief Anderson had feared, the work of the missionaries served to further destroy the tribe's traditional social structures, resulting in fragmented allegiances and alienation among the tribal members. Through the missionary schools, the children were lectured daily on the evils of their traditional ways. The elders and the Clan chiefs believed their children were being forced to abandon the tribe's customs and beliefs; references to the traditional Delawares as "non-civilized" or "heathens" were particularly offensive.51  As with all historical attempts to assimilate the American Indians, the missionaries were somewhat successful in destroying the natural harmony of the tribal order and beliefs, but were not as successful in supplanting their own foreign belief systems. In the face of the breakdown of the natural social orders, the tribal council was forced to adopt a code of laws to bring some sort of artificial order to the tribe.52

[For clarification of the above paragraph, there is no evidence that the Reverend Charles Journeycake conspired with John G. Pratt to "terminate" the Delaware, for purposes of converting them to Baptist Christianity. Obviously, both men regarded conversion to Christianity as a desirable goal, but they, or at least Reverend Journeycake, probably didn't choose this means to accomplish their ends. Moereover, there were probably divisions between families as to who were the "rightful" chiefs of the Delaware at this time. Editor, Lenape-Delaware History]

After settlement in Kansas, the Delaware initially resisted the missionaries and the government's efforts to create a sedentary, agricultural existence. The Delaware preferred hunting, trapping, and trading, and continued to send hunting parties deep into the west to find new sources of game.  The Delaware became legendary for their hunting, scouting, and military prowess, their services often sought by the U.S. Government.53

Prior to their removal to Kansas, the U. S. Government had assured Chief Anderson that the removal would be the last, and that the government would protect the rights of the Delaware to their new reservation against infringements by other tribes and white settlers. However, with the United States additions of California. Oregon, and New Mexico, white settlers would soon be overrunning the Indian Territory; the U. S. determined that for their own protection the Indians should be removed from the direct path of the settlers. As early as 1853, Congress authorized the President to negotiate with the Indians for their removal.54 At this point the Delaware vehemently opposed another removal or the creation of a state in Indian Country. In an April, 1854 letter to President Pierce, Chief Ketchum reminds the government that "...our Great Father promised us solemnly that he would never again take this Country from us either by purchase or no other way because this was the last good place that he could ever move his Delaware Children to, therefore he would never again remove them out of this place."55

Nevertheless, on 6 May, 1854, the Delaware were forced to agree to allow the U. S. to offer the majority of the Delaware reserve for public sale which eventually amounted to 558,555 acres.56 The U.S. breached this treaty, however, by selling the lands privately, rather than at public auction, resulting in a fraud of some 1.3 million dollars.57 In addition, the U.S. swindled the tribe out of the 1,000,000 acre hunting strip for a mere $10,000.58 A hundred years later, the Indian Claims Commission determined that the same land was actually worth sixty times that amount in 1854.59 However, the Delaware did manage to reserve a ten mile by forty mile strip in Kansas as their "diminished reserve." The U. S. rationalized to the Delaware that the government could better protect the tribe if they occupied a smaller area. However, the depredations against the Delaware did not cease. In an 1858 letter to President Buchanan, the Delaware chiefs reported that, "Since the opening of the Territory, thieves (white men) have come in  and are constantly stealing our horses, and in many instances have stripped some of our people of everything they owned.60 In addition to stealing their land, squatters usurped Delaware livestock, cut down their timber to build their homes, and otherwise harasses and persecuted the tribe. The Delaware had no recourse in the courts as they were not citizens; they took no action personally for they feared the white vigilante groups who would come and take all their possessions and burn their houses to the ground.61 

Under increasing pressure from the railroads, the Delaware entered yet another treaty with the U. S. in 1860 which provided for the allotment in severalty of the ten mile by forty mile diminished reserve, and the remainder of the reserve to be sold directly to the Leavenworth, Pawnee, and Western Railroad Company under the supervision of the government.62 The treaty specified that, although allotted in severalty, individual Delaware did not receive a fee patent, and the lands were not alienable. In addition, eighty acre allotments were also set aside for those Absentee Delaware residing to the south who were expected to rejoin the tribe.63

In 1861, the tribe signed a supplemental treaty with the U.S. which provided for the additional sale of any surplus Delaware lands to the railroad, and authorized the railroad to issue bonds and mortgages on the lands of the 1860 treaty to raise monies already due to the tribe.64 The 1861 treaty also provided that if the railroad should default on the purchase of lands, the lands would again become the sole property of the U. S. in trust for the Delaware.65

Although the Delaware had given as much as they could to appease the railroads and the government, the tribe was not to be left in peace. The depredations climaxed in the spring of 1860 and the Delaware held a number of council meetings to discuss the state of the tribe. Indian Agent Sykes reported: 

"...Many things tended to bring about their discontentedness. This Winter they have had a great many Ponies stolen from them, not a neighborhood or settlement has escaped the thieves. They are out of money, and have gone to the extent of their credit with their merchants. The white people around them are continually annoying them with threats, telling them they cannot nor shall long own so much land here among them. People are cutting timber continually, and hauling it off, and according to Judge Petit's (the judge for this district) decision they cannot be punished for it..."66

After several general councils on the issue of whether to move to the Rocky Mountains, the southwest, or to the far west, the tribe voted in May, 1860, to leave their Kansas reservation.67

Removal to Indian Territory, 1860-1868

Although the tribe had formally voted to leave the Kansas Territory in early 1860, favoring Cherokee lands for their new reservation, the issue was diverted with the outbreak of the Civil War. The Delaware initially sought to persuade the tribes in Indian Country, especially the Cherokees, to remain neutral as the Delaware had determined to do.68 The Creek had even promised the Delaware protection against the southern sympathizers if they would remain neutral.69 By 1862, however. the Delaware reservation had already been subject to attacks by both white and Indian secessionists, generating sentiments for revenge. The breaking point came with the arrival of the southern Indians, including 200 Absentee Delaware, from the Washita agency relating stories of starvation and robbery of all their possessions at the hands of the southern sympathizers.70 In response, over eight percent of the Delaware able-bodied men men volunteered for service in the Union Army.71 In 1863, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, William P. Dole, proclaimed that "no community within the limits of the loyal states can show a better record than the Delawares."72

As early as 1860, Delaware tribal leaders had been visiting the neighboring Choctaw and Cherokee Tribes to discuss the purchase of lands within Indian Territory.73 Residing on another tribe's land was not new to the Delaware; during their removals to the west, the tribe was first invited by the Wyandot to reside on their lands in Ohio, and then the Piankashaw and the Miami to reside on their lands in Indiana. 74 Much to the dismay of these tribes, the Federal government later gave the Delaware valuable consideration to remove from these lands, even though the tribe had no title to relinquish. In 1853, the Absentee Delaware, under the leadership of John Conner (head chief of the main body by 1857), had entered into an agreement with the Choctaw nation to allow the Absentee Delaware to reside in their Choctaw District75 at no cost to the Delaware, provided that the Absentees would be subject to the privilege, penalties, and laws of the Choctaw Nation. 76 Neither the main body of the Delaware, nor this band of Absentees, were ever considered to have given up their tribal sovereignty or identity when settling among the other tribes.77 It was in light of these experiences that Chief Anderson Sarcoxie and several councilmen visited the Choctaw and Cherokee Tribes in 1860 with the intent of purchasing lands from the tribes with the similar understanding that the Delaware would also be subject to the privileges, penalties, and laws of those tribes.78

However, because of the southern Indians allegiance against the federal government, a Delaware General Council was held in May, 1863, resolving to request that the government allow Anderson Sarcoxie to explore the Rockies rather than Indian Country.79 Commissioner of Indian Affairs, William P. Dole, replied that the government did not believe the climate in the Rockies was suitable, and advised that the U. S. government greatly desired the removal of the Delaware from Kansas.80

Although the U.S. did not specifically demand that the Delaware find a new reservation on Cherokee lands, it became readily apparent that this area had been set aside by the U.S. for the Delaware resettlement. As early as April, 1864, Agent Pratt received a telegram from Commissioner Dole directing Pratt to "(a)rrange to bring here soon the Delaware Chief and two councilors with your interpreter for the purpose of negotiating a further treaty."81 One month later, in May, 1864, Cherokee Chief John Ross, wrote to Commissioner Dole stating, "[W]e have... expressed a willingness to receive...the Delawares...[a]nd we are now ready to negotiate a Treaty with the Government that will accomplish that object, if agreeable to the Government and the Delawares..."82

Accordingly, Sarcoxie made yet another trip down to the Cherokee Nation in the spring of 1864.83 During their negotiations the Cherokee told Sarcoxie that they were not willing to sell outright any of their lands south of Kansas, but that the Delaware could settle on Cherokee land upon the following terms:
   1. That the Delaware invest money equal to that invested by the Cherokee for the annuity; 
   2. That the Delaware pay the Cherokee a bonus for the right to settle on the lands; and
   3. That the Delaware would enjoy equal rights with Cherokee as to laws, votes, and schools.84 To these words the Delaware replied, "none of them would suit our people" and that "we consider our work here finished, further deliberations unnecessary."85

On 7 June 1864, the U. S. government warned the Cherokee that "in case an arrangement cannot be effected whereby the Delawares shall obtain a home in the Cherokee Country upon terms satisfactory to them, our negotiations may be considered at an end."86 To this communication, Cherokee Chief Ross replied: 

["] ...We are fully apprised that the chief object with the Government in opening negotiations was to provide a home for the Delawares in the Cherokee Country south of Kansas and their removal from that state...the Cherokees were not willing to sell any portion of their domain that lies south of Kansas, they were willing to receive the Delawares into their Country upon terms just and liberal [emphasis added]. ["]87

The U. S. government apparently was severely disappointed with the Cherokee's decision to fight on behalf of the Confederates. In a letter to a Union military commander regarding the Indians' sentiment about the Civil War, Indian Agent R. H. Carruth reports, "I can not believe John Ross. of the Cherokees, has done what the papers state. If so, all there is left to do is kindle civil war over his head."88 These correspondences indicate that the U. S. had a two-fold purpose for negotiating a Post-Civil War treaty with the Cherokee:
    1. to punish the Cherokee for fighting on the side of the Confederacy; and, 
    2. to remove the Delaware from Kansas to Cherokee country as soon as possible.

[After the Civil War, the U. S. Government was trying to terminate the tribal relations of all Indians, and they were using all means possible to do it. It appears that one means was to force the Kansas Delaware to dissolve their tribal relations explicitly if they wanted to remain in their homes of forty years and to stay married to their husbands , mostly, who were economically tied to Kansas. The other means was to have the Cherokee Delaware be regarded as "Cherokees by blood," thereby eliminating the Delaware Tribe. We believe both actions by the U.S. Government were wrong and both should be equally opposed. Editor. Lenape-Delaware History Net]

In mid-June, 1864, The Cherokee unilaterally submitted a proposed treaty to the U.S. which was very similar to the treaty made with the Confederate government; however the U.S. refused to acknowledge or act upon the treaty.89 Under the circumstances, the U.S. government felt the terms of the Cherokee's proposed treaty gave the Cherokee Nation more than it deserved, especially in light of the questionable legitimacy of the Cherokee government after its allegiance with the Confederacy.90 Furthermore, the proposed treaty only reiterated the same terms for relocating the Delaware as did their earlier offer which the Delaware had equivocally rejected; the U.S. government had already informed the Cherokee that until terms were reached for the Delaware removal which were satisfactory to the Delaware, the negotiations would be terminated.91

In contrast, the Delaware were invited to Washington, D. C., in June, 1864, where Agent Pratt and Commissioner Dole negotiated a treaty for the removal of the Delaware from Kansas.92 The urgency of the removal on terms satisfactory to the Delaware is better understood in light of the fact that Interior Secretary Usher was the controlling shareholder in the company of Usher, Hallet & Co. which allegedly was trying to secure the remaining Delaware lands on behalf of the Union Pacific Railroad (formerly called the Leavenworth, Pawnee and Western Railroad Co., the railroad still not having paid the Delaware for lands purchased under the Treaties of 1860 and 1861.93 To exacerbate an already putrid situation, Agent Pratt was later subpoenaed to give testimony before a state court concerning his connections to the railroad interests and the disposal of Delaware lands.94  Thus, the circumstances surrounding this 1864 treaty were suspicious at best. This may explain why the Senate did not take action on the treaty for nearly two years, and then the Senate declined to ratify the same just months before a new Delaware Treaty of 1866 was drafted and ratified.95 

On 4 July 1866, the federal government and the Delaware leaders concluded the Treaty with the Delawares, 1866, 14 stat. 793, in Leavenworth, Kansas.96 Special Commissioner W. H. Watson, reported that the negotiations were delayed pending the arrival of Chief Anderson Sarcoxie, detained due to poor weather.97 The federal government's respect for the old chief is significant in light of Agent Pratt's later attempts to discredit Sarcoxie as "those of the unfettered class."98

By this 1866 treaty, the federal government promised that the Delaware would be removed to a reservation of their own in Indian country in exchange for the sale of their lands in Kansas to the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. The quantity of land would be equal to 160 acres for each man, woman and child who removed to Indian Country.99 In addition to these lands. the U.S. was to give to the tribe twenty-three sections of land within their new reservation absolutely free to compensate for prior treaty violations.100 The U.S. `further guaranteed the Delaware peaceable possession of their homes, and protection from hostile Indians, and internal strife and civil war, and full and just participation in any general council or territorial government established for the tribes residing in Indian Country.101

Of utmost significance, however, was that the treaty expressly reaffirmed the tribe's domestic-dependant status, and the commitment of the U.S. to protect and defend the rights of the tribe.102 The Treaty with the Delaware was ratified on 26 July 1866, and proclaimed by the President on 10 August 1866. This renewed commitment has never been repudiated by Congress in any legislation since 1866. Upon completing the Delaware Treaty, the U.S. immediately turned to finalize an arrangement with the Cherokees to allow for Delaware removal to Cherokee lands. The U.S. made it clear that the Cherokee needed to reach an agreement with the Delaware on terms that were favorable to the tribe loyal to the U.S. government.103 The earlier terms that had been proposed by the Cherokee Nation looked to the incorporation of the Delaware as individuals into the Cherokee Nation, and these terms were unequivocally rejected by the Delaware.104 Accordingly, the Cherokee Nation modified their terms and submitted the following proposal to Congress:

"The Cherokees will sell to the Delawares lands for their permanent homes upon these conditions, viz: That the Delawares will not sell these lands to the Government, or to other Indians, without the consent to the Cherokees: and the Cherokees will consent that the Delawares shall be governed by their own laws and customs, have the benefit of all their annuities and property, and will allow them a proper representation, according to numbers in their Legislature, and give them the benefit of their laws and customs, if it shall be the pleasure of the Delawares at any time to accept the same."105

The new proposal recognized the continued existence of the Delaware tribe as a sovereign entity residing on lands owned in common with the Cherokee Nation. This concept was nearly identical to the arrangement negotiated by the U.S. in 1855 for the Chickasaw residing on Choctaw lands.106 With this proposal in mind, the U.S. and Cherokees drafted a treaty which would provide for the removal of the Delaware to the Cherokee Nation. The treaty between the Cherokee and the U.S. was completed on 19 July 1866, two weeks after the Delaware Treaty with the U.S. was ratified 27 July 1866, one day after the Delaware Treaty. With both the Delaware and Cherokee Treaties finally completed, the U.S. immediately acted to remove the Delaware from their home in Kansas to a new reservation in the Cherokee Nation.

All of the Cherokee treaties between the U.S. and the Five Civilized Tribes contained provisions for the sale and relocation of other tribes on their lands, however, the Cherokee Treaty contained a unique provision to allow Cherokees to retain ownership of its lands east of the 96 degrees, while allowing tribes settling on these lands to maintain their "tribal organizations."107 This unique provision was provided for in Article 15 of the Cherokee Treaty. 

The Treaty between the Cherokee and the U.S. was completed on 19 July 1866, two weeks after the Delaware Treaty with the U.S., and ratified 27 July 1866, one day after the Delaware Treaty. With both the Delaware and Cherokee Treaties finally completed, the U.S. immediately acted to remove the Delaware from their home in Kansas to a new reservation in the Cherokee Nation. 

On 13 October 1866, Agent Pratt, under the direction of Commissioner Cooley, wrote to the Delaware Chief John Conner and Assistant Chief Charles Journeycake, directing them to go to Cherokee Country to pick out their new reservation.108  Pratt included in his letter, maps for unoccupied lands in Indian  territory, a copy of the Delaware Treaty, and instructions for the Delaware to pick out blocks of land in quantities of 80 or 160 acre allotments.109 

Again, the U.S. had already fully concluded that the Delaware would be settled with the Cherokee, urging them to go ahead and make their selection of lands. Accordingly, the Delaware held General Council on 13 October 1866, and selected the Delaware delegates and giving them "full and complete authority to select and secure new homes in Indian Country for said tribe."110 The appointed delegates included John Conner, Anderson Sarcoxie, and Charles Journeycake, as chiefs, Joseph Armstrong and Andrew Miller, as councilors, and Isaac Journeycake, as interpreter.

Similarly, on 7 November 1866, the Cherokee National Council passed a resolution giving authority to the "Principal Chief, the Assistant Chief, and three others to enter an agreement with the Delaware Delegation in reference to allowing the Delaware to select a reservation from our lands lying east or west of the 96th degree of longitude...."111 In November, 1866, the Delaware delegation left Kansas to meet with the delegates of the Cherokee Nation. In possession of the 1866 treaties, and U.S. maps indicating the unoccupied `lands of the Cherokee Nation, the Cherokee and Delaware delegates, possessing full authorization to bind the tribes, surveyed lands both east and west of the 96 degree longitudinal. [See the Later Treaties Section for the full text of the agreement.]

Hence, the Delaware delegates, in company with the Cherokee delegates, electing to preserve their tribal organization, chose a ten by thirty mile strip of land on the Caney River, or 192,000 acres as their new reservation. All that needed to be determined was the price. Pursuant to the Delaware Treaty of 1866, and in keeping with the Treaty of 1860, the 192,000 acres would provide 160 acre allotments for every man, woman, and child (1,000) in Kansas, and also provide the same for some 200 Absentee Delawares still residing to the south on lands of other tribes.112

Upon returning home to Kansas, the tribal members were fully apprised that the delegates had entered into an agreement with the Cherokee to purchase the use of a ten by thirty tract of land east of the 96 degree, of which the title would remain with the Cherokee Nation, but as between the Delaware and the Cherokee, the Delaware ownership would not be disturbed.113 The tribal members were also told that. indeed, the tribe would preserve its tribal organization, but that the Delaware would have additional rights in the Cherokee national fund.114 Settling on a ten by thirty mile tract of land along the banks of the Caney River was a natural transition for the Delaware--even if the tribe or individual members would not have the title to alienate. Under the 1860 treaty, the tribe had been residing on a ten by forty mile strip along the Kansas River, and under the same treaty, each man, woman, and child of the tribe had received a 160 acre allotment in severalty, without however the ability to alienate the land.115 Accordingly, the tribe met in council on 18 February 1867, and registered in mass for the removal to Indian Country.116 

The agreement with the two tribes being completed, the tribe sent the delegates to Washington, D. C. in April, 1867, to formalize the purchase of the chosen land. These delegates included John Conner, and Charles Journeycake, chiefs, and Isaac Journeycake, and John Sarcoxie, as delegates.117 Suspiciously missing was the traditionalist Chief Anderson Sarcoxie. 

On 8 April 1867, the Delaware entered a formal contract with the Cherokee in Washington, D.C. for the purchase of a quantity of land east of the 96 degree west longitudinal for the use of the Delaware Tribe pursuant to Article 4 of the Delaware Treaty and Article 15 of the Cherokee Treaty.118 The total quantity was equal to 160 acres for each man, woman, and child who signed the 18 February 1867 registry, and any additional Delaware who might sign within one month of the signing of the agreement.119 The Delaware agreed to pay $1.00 per acre for a perpetual occupancy right on the land, in addition to a sum of money which would sustain the same proportion to the existing

Cherokee National Fund that the Delaware sustained to the total number of Cherokee.120
This was all in keeping with the terms negotiated prior to the 1866 treaties, and with the 9 December 1866 agreement between the two tribes; however, rather than enjoying "all the rights of native Cherokees," the Articles of Agreement further provided that the Delaware would be "consolidated with" the Cherokee would in all respects Nation, and the after-born children of Delaware "so incorporated" would in all respects be regarded as native Cherokee.121  Thus even though the contract's  requirements or terms were taken from the Article 15 provision providing for the preservation of tribal organization, the contract  also lifted part of the incorporation language from the Article 15 provision for abandoning the tribal organization. The contract, therefore, required the Delaware to pay for the rights to preserve their tribal organization, but then,  slipped in ambiguous language of "incorporation" that seemingly could be interpreted to void the very right for which they were paying. 

Although this interpretation of the Articles of Agreement would violate the terms of the Delaware Treaty, the Cherokee Treaty, and the 9 December 1866 agreement, nevertheless, this ambiguity has allowed the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Cherokee Nation to periodically claim--when it suited its interests--that the Delaware terminated themselves in 1867.122  But in fact, the Delaware delegates to the Articles of Agreement had no apparent or actual authority as agents to enter a contract that might contradict the terms of the two treaties of 1866, and the already ratified Delaware-Cherokee Agreement of 9 December 1866.

On 11 April 1867, the President of the United States approved the agreement as required by Article 15 of the Treaty with the Cherokee of 1866. Note, however, that the language of that treaty expressly limited the President's discretion to vary from the requirements of Article 15.123  While receiving the approval of the President, the Articles of Agreement of 1867 were never submitted to or ratified by Congress, and was expressly rejected by the Delaware Tribe acting in General Council. 

The Articles of Agreement were submitted to the Cherokee National Council, and ratified on 13 June 1867.124 However, on 6 May 1867, the Delaware Council flatly refused to ratify the agreement as it was explained to them. 

When the Reverend Pratt and Assistant Chief Charles Journeycake returned from Washington, D.C. in late April, 1867, they notified tribal members that under the agreement, the Delaware were to become merged with the Cherokee, and would be subject to the laws and customs of the Cherokee government.125  In response to this news, the Delaware held a General Council on 6 May 1867, and overwhelmingly passed a resolution rejecting the Articles of Agreement as a violation of the Delaware Treaty of 1866.126 In Particular, Chief Anderson Sarcoxie--who had not been invited to Washington--was enraged that the U.S. would allow such an arrangement in violation of the Delaware Treaty of 1866, and the 9 December 1866 agreement with the Cherokee.127  

Following the council meeting on 6 May, Sarcoxie circulated a petition and obtained the signatures of some 600 of the approximately 1,000 Delaware, and delivered the same to their 'Indian Agent,' the Reverend Pratt.128  The resolution provided in part: " After much discussion and consultation it was agreed unanimously that the Delaware will never give up their nationality and become merged in the Cherokee Nation but on the contrary every consideration of self preservation, pride, and desire for our happiness and prosperity as a people calls upon us to maintain our Nationality and separate existence as a tribe. And to that end whenever they remove from their distant homes they will go in a body to a desired reservation of their own as is clearly contemplated by both the spirit and the letter of the treaty made between the United States and the Delaware tribe of Indians July 4 1866. And to which you attention is respectfully called.129  

However, unbeknownst to the Delaware, Agent Pratt and Charles Journeycake had been in collusion to do away with the Delaware tribal government under the rational that the Baptist missionaries, such as Pratt and Journeycake, would have more control over the members and, thus, be able to convert them more easily.130 

Thus, when Sarcoxie gave the resolution and petition, addressed to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to Agent Pratt in June, 1867, Pratt did not6 forward it to the Commissioner. When Sarcoxie did not get a response from Washington, he wrote directly to the Commissioner in July, inquiring as to whether the Commissioner ever received the petition.131  

Pratt, indeed, had not sent the petition, but in a letter dated 5 July 1867  to the Commissioner, Pratt does state that "[f]or the past months there has been considerable excitement among the Delawares, having for its origins the arrangements entered into by the delegates of this tribe at Washington in April...by which the Delawares are merged into and become a part of the Cherokee people, I believe the matter however is culminated and that the arrangement will be acquiesced in."132 

Apparently the plan had not "culminated", and Pratt was ordered to transmit the petition to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs; in his transmittal letter, Pratt states: In forwarding this paper I feel constrained to say     that I do so only in obedience to official duty....The plan which has been adopted with the approbation of the government was in effect doing for them what emigration to the Indian Country would necessarily result in, that is to say the doing away of a tribal system of government and adopting that which civilization brings...It is not therefore surprising that before this great change should go into effect the most strenuous efforts should be made by the less enlightened portion of this tribe and other tribes, to postpone the time, interpose objections or create dissatisfaction in relation thereto...133 

Thus, Pratt does not deny that the Articles of Agreement were a violation of the Delaware Treaty or that the majority of the tribe had refused to ratify the agreement of the General Council. Pratt only reasons that it is in the best interest of the tribe. and in line with the U.S. assimilation policy.

In conclusion, Pratt maintains that Sarcoxie's petition. which demanded enforcement of the Delaware Treaty of 1866, was an expression of the "unfettered class which seeks to perpetuate and keep alive old Indian customs and traditions.134  It should be noted here that under tribal law Anderson Sarcoxie was the eldest of the chiefs and should have been recognized as head chief. and of such importance that the U.S. would not even negotiate the Treaty of 1866 until Sarcoxie had arrived.135  However, less than a year later, Pratt attempts to portray Sarcoxie to the new Commissioner of Indian Affairs as "Captain Sarcoxie" of the "unfettered class." To counter Sarcoxie's petition. Assistant Charles Journeycake wrote to the Acting Commissioner in November, 1867, maintaining that the "arrangement" entered into in April were in the best interests of the tribe, and that he did not countenance the expression of Captain Sarcoxie.136  Agent Pratt transmitted the letter on behalf of his old friend, Journeycake, and  John Conner, James Conner, and James Ketchum, maintaining that these were the only persons with legitimate authority to act of behalf of the tribe.137  

By the fall of 1867, the Delawares had not received an adequate explanation as to their status, thus, in January, 1868, the famous U. S. scout Captain Fall Leaf filed yet another protest with Washington,. D. C., pointing out that the Delawares already had a previous agreement with the Cherokees which had been authorized by the people, and that the delegates sent to Washington in April, 1867, had no authority to enter such an agreement - under which "the tribal organization of our people could be maintained."138  (Note, however, that Fall Leaf was under the impression that the Delawares could only preserve their tribal organization if settling west of the 96 degree. and believed that this was where the ten by thirty mile strip of land had been chosen.) This Fall Leaf requested that a delegation be sent to Washington "in reference to a selection of lands and location of the Delawares in Indian Territory, west of the Ninety sixth (96) parallel of longitude..."139 This petition was also signed by over two-thirds of the Delaware Tribe.140  

Pratt responded swiftly to this petition, affirming that the Delawares had entered a previous agreement wit the Cherokees - to se the ten by thirty strip of land east of the 96 degree longitudinal, while preserving their tribal organization.141  Pratt, however, also contended that the Delawares would thereby still be subject to the constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation.142  Note, that Pratt's position contradicts the very language of Article 15 of the Cherokee Treaty which provided that a tribe paying to have land set aside would thereby preserve it tribal organization, laws, customs, and usages, not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation.143  The distinction is clear and if the Delawares were to be subject to the authority of the Cherokee Nation, then the language for preservation of tribal organization would be illusory.

During the spring of 1869, Assistant Chief Sarcoxie and Captain Fall Leaf continued to refuse to remove to the Cherokee Nation, and encouraged the tribal members to remain. However, the depredations and harassment against the Delawares had only increased. The people were bordering on destitution, as Pratt would not release any of their annuities until they agreed to remove to Indian Territory. In addition, in anticipation of removal, no preparation of their farms, crops, etc., had been made. The two Delaware leaders were still awaiting an adequate explanation from Washington, D.C., as their faith in Agent Pratt had been exhausted.144  Finally in May, 1868. the Commissioner of Indian Affairs traveled to Kansas to negotiate a removal with Sarcoxie and Fall Leaf.145 (154) What kind of assurances may have been able to provide is not clear, but he was able to obtain written promises from Sarcoxie and Fall Leaf to remove to the Cherokee Nation, and to encourage their followers to do the same.146

By the time of the removal, the ambiguities of the Articles of Agreement of 7 April 1867. had yet to be resolved. Nevertheless, pursuant to the initial 9 December 1866 agreement, the Delaware proceeded in mass to the ten by thirty [mile] strip of land originally selected for their use. This area covers the top two-thirds of present-day Washington County, Oklahoma.147 

The 9 December 1866 agreement between the two tribes provided for the purchase of the entire strip of 192,000 acres, enough to assure a 160-acre allotment for each man, woman, and child in Kansas (1,000) and for the 200 Absentees still living to the south.148  The Articles of Agreement, however, only provided for 160 acres for each man, woman, and child listed on the 18 February 1867b registry, and those names added within a month of the signing of the agreement.149  As Sarcoxie had lamented in his petition, no provision was made for the landless Absentees to the south.150  Thus, the Delaware were to receive 160 acres for each 0f the 985 Delaware who elected to remain with the tribe and remove to Indian Country. a total of 157,600 acres.151  Per the Articles of Agreement, the tribe paid $157,600.00 for this land at $1.00 per acre.152 

In addition to the $157,600.00, the tribe was also to pay the proportional amount of money into the Cherokee National fund which represented a ratio of 985 Delaware to 13,573 Cherokee as compared to the total value of the Cherokee National fund, including the $157,600.00.153  This proportional amount came to a total of $121,824.28.154  Both payments were made pursuant to the requirements of Article 15 of the Cherokee Treaty providing for the settlement of tribes choosing to preserve their tribal organization while enjoying all the rights of native Cherokee. 155 

In comparison, the Shawnee Tribe also settled within the Cherokee Nation in 1869 under the Articles of Agreement between the Shawnee and the Cherokee.156   The Shawnee, however, did not pay for their lands, and the Agreements specifically states that "said Shawnees will abandon their tribal organization."157  In addition, the Agreement also states that "said Shawnee shall be incorporated into and ever after remain a part of the Cherokee Nation, on equal terms in every respect, and with all the privileges and immunities of native citizens of the Cherokee Nation."158   The language of the Shawnee agreement, then, directly tracts the provision of Article 15 looking to the abandonment of tribal organization.

Thus, the Delaware agreed to pay $279,484.28 to the Cherokee for a tract of land on which the 985 Delaware might "preserve their tribal organization," and to "enjoy all the rights of native Cherokees". However, during the removal nearly 200 Delaware died due to illness and hardship.159

[Emphasis added. Not many know that the the Delaware also their own "Trail of Tears". It just didn't happen at one time. Each move--from the Eastern States to Ohio to Indiana to Missouri, to Kansas, and to Oklahoma--was a "Rail of Tears" that  caused significant numbers of deaths, illnesses, and deprivations of homes, and added to the general disillusionment of the Delaware. Editor, Lenape-Delaware History Net]

Nevertheless, in 1869 the U.S. paid the Cherokee the full amount for all 985 Delaware to resettle.160  The Delaware did not object at this time because they were under the impression that they had purchased the land from the Cherokee, with only the limitation being that the tribe could not otherwise alienate the land without the permission of the Cherokee Nation.161 (170) The believed and acted accordingly for nearly thirty years that if one of the 985 individual Delaware had passed away before or after reaching Indian Country, then the individual's right to an allotment would pass to the family.162  Later, the Cherokee would argue, and win, that the Delaware only purchased a life estate for each of the 985 Delaware, and upon their death, the land reverted back to the Cherokee Tribe.163  Note, that the Delaware understood that they did not purchase the land in fee, however, they believed that as between themselves and the Cherokee, the Delaware owned the land.164 

By late 1868, the entire Delaware Tribe had removed to the Cherokee Nation. However, by early 1871, the majority of the tribe was preparing to remove from its wretched situation - even if it meant giving up the quarter of a million dollars already paid to the Cherokee Nation.

[The remaining text is quite long and is  largely of interest to those wanting to follow in detail the history of the contention between the Delaware Tribe of Indians and the Cherokee Nation following the removal of the former to Indian Country. Those having an interest to that detail, are directed to the reading of the complete text that can be purchased from the Delaware Tribe of Indians, at Bartlesville, Oklahoma. We intend to add a summary of events for the Delaware Tribe of Indians for those not wanting to see the detailed history. Editor]

End Notes

 1. Sue N. Roark-Calnek, "Indian Way in Oklahoma: Transitions in Honor and Legitimacy  Pt. 1" (Ph.D. dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, 1977), pp. 91-93.
 2. Roger James Ferguson, "White River Delawares: An Ethnohistoric Synthesis 1795-18657" (Ph.D. dissertation, Ball State University, 1972), p.4
 3. Ibid., pp. 4-5.
 4. Ibid., p. 3.
 5.  Roark-Kalnek, Indian Way in Oklahoma: Transactions in Honor and Legitimacy, Pt. 1, p. 92.
 6.  Herbert C. Kraft, The Lenape: Archeology, History, and Ethnography, (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1986), xvii.
 7.   Ibid., note 3, 5.
 8.  Ives Goddard, Delaware, ed Bruce G. Trigger, Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15 (Washington, D. C,: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1978), p. 216.
 9.  Ibid.
10.  Ibid.
11.  Ibid.
12.  Robert S. Grumet, The Lenapes, ed., Frank W,. Porter III., Indians of North America, (New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1989), pp. 22-23.
13.  Ibid., note 8.
14.  Ibid.
15.  Grumet, The Lenapes, p. 17.
16.  Ibid., note 8.
17.  For a detailed description of the early westward migrations of the Lenape, see Goddard, Delaware, 220-224.
 18. Delaware Tribe of Indians v. United States, 2 Ind. Cl. Com. 2-253, 2-256 (1952).
 19.  Ibid.
20.  Ibid., pp. 2-259.
21.  Delaware Tribal Business Committee v. Weeks, 430 U.S. 73, 76-77 (1977).
22.  Treaty with the Wyandot, Etc. (Treaty of Greenville), Aug. 3, 1795, 7 Stat 49
23.  Ibid., note 2, p. 105.
24.  Ibid.
25.  Ibid., p. 110.
26.  Grumet,  The Lenapes, p. 14.
27.  Clinton A. Weslager, The Delaware Indians: A History. (Somerset, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1970), p. 353.
28.  Goddard, Delaware, p. 216.
29.  Ibid., 222; See also Ruby Cranor, Kik Tha We Nund, The Delaware Chief William Anderson and His Descendants, (no place, no date), p.2.
30.  Ibid.
31.  Ibid., note 27, p. 335; See also Cranor, Kik Tha We Nund, pp. 1-14.
32.  Ferguson, "White River Delawares," p. 105
33.  Ibid., p. 78.
34.  Clinton A. Weslager, The Delaware Indian Westward Migration, (Wallingford, PA: The Middle Atlantic Press, 1978), p. 219.
35.  Treaty with the Delawares, 3 August 1829, 7 Stat. 326; Claimant's Exhibit No. 1,132. Delaware Tribe of Indians v. United States, (Doc. No. 241) 2 Ind. Claims Com. 2-253 (1952).
36.  The removal of the eastern tribes to the west invariably created tensions with the plains tribes who resented the tribes' infringement upon their hunting grounds. During the Indian frontier wars beginning in 1833, the eastern tribes continually sought to confederate with the Delawares for protection. In 1833, the Delawares declined a Cherokee invitation to attend a council  to discuss the formation of such a confederacy; the Delaware council was apparently suspicious of the Cherokee, and feared the Cherokee would be hostile to the United States and to the Delaware representatives. In 1847, the Winnebagos also requested an alliance with the Delawares to defend against the Dakota Sioux. Delaware war chief, Anderson Sarcoxey [Sarcoxie], sent word to the Menominee, Potawatomie, Kickapoo, Shawnee, Wyandots, Sac and Fox of the proposed alliance; however, each chief would agree to the alliance only of the grandfather tribe also agreed. The Delaware, as usual, deferred to the U.S. government's request that the tribes not confederate for an all out Indian war. See Ferguson, "White River Delawares," pp. 148-151
37.  Ferguson, "White River Delawares," p. 169.
38.  Ibid. The Clans' assistant chiefs included Ne-con-he-cond of the Wolf Clan, and Chief Anderson's three sons, Anderson Sarcoxey, war chief of the Turtle Clan, and Swanock of the Wolf Clan.
39.  Ibid., note 37, p. 170.
40.  Ibid., Cranor, Kik Tha We Nund, p. 162. In addition, James Secondine served as assistant chief to Anderson Sarcoxie of the Turtle Clan.
41.  As per tribal law, Chief Ketchum's will had named his nephew. James Conner, to ascend his position "as a chief". Ketchum's appointment was for Chief of the Turtle Clan, not as head chief, since the "first-among-equals" of the clan chiefs had always served as head chief. Will of Capt. Ketchum, Chief of the Delawares, Delaware Nation, Oct. 20, 1856, National Archives, Record Group No. 75, 1858, Delaware R600, Washington, D.C.; See also Weslager, The Delaware Indian Westward Migration, p. 221.
42.   Letter of James Conner, Delaware, to U.S. Government, no date, National Archives, Record Group 75, 1858, Delaware R600. Washington, D.C.
43.  Letter of May 8, 1858, from B.F. Robinson, Indian Agent, Delaware Agency, to A.M. Robinson, Supt. Ind. Affairs, National Archives, Record Group No. 75, 1858, Delaware R600, Washington, D.C.; Weslager, Delaware Indians, A History, p. 389.
44.  Ibid.
45.  Ibid.; See Weslager, The Delaware Indians: A History, 391. Note, Charles Journeycake is a signatory on the Delaware's Treaty with the United States of May 6, 1854 (10 Stat. 1048), but as a councilor and not as a chief.
46. Henry M. Roark, Charles Journeycake. Indian Statesman and Christian Leader, Dallas: Taylor Publishing Co., 1948), 20. Journeycake's mother was half-white, half-Wyandot Indian who had later married into the Delaware Trib
47.  Treaty with the Delawares, July 2, 1861. 12 Stat. 1177
48.  "For President Abraham Lincoln-The Delawares and a Sharp Financial Operation," Daily (Leavenworth} Bulletin, 1804, Pratt Roll No. 6, frame 0281, microfilm. In the spring of 1860, Charles Journeycake's eldest daughter, Nannie Journeycake, married Lucius Pratt, eldest son to Reverend John G. Pratt  . Weslager, Delaware Indians: A History, 385; See also Clara Gowing, "Life Among the Delaware Indians," Kansas State Historical Quarterly, Vol. Xii, )Topeka: State Printing Office, 1911-12), p. 187.
49.  "For President Lincoln - The Delawares and a Sharp Financial Situation. Daily (Leavenworth) Bulletin Newspaper, 1864, Pratt Roll No. 6, frame 0231, microfilm.
50.  Weslager, Delaware Indians: A History, 384-387; (See also Ferguson, "White River Delawares," p. 168).
51.  Ferguson, "White River Delawares," p. 168.
52.  See Report of John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, Delaware Agency, Kansas, September 19, 1866, (enclosing " Laws of the De3laware Nation of Indians" adopted in General Council July 21, 1966) as reprinted in Report of the Secretary of the Interior, 1866, 247-248; See also Memorial of the Delaware Indians, S. Rep. No. 16, 58th Cong., 1st Sess. 189 (1903).
53.  Roach-Calnek, "Indian Way in Oklahoma," 108; See also Ferguson, "White River Delawares," pp. 158-159.
54.  Weslager, Delaware Indians, A History, p. 401.
55.  Letter of April 10, 1854, from Capt. Ketchum, Chief of the Delaware, Delaware County, Indian Territory, to President Franklin Pierce, Kansas Collection, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence, Kansas.
56.  Treaty with the Delawares, May 6, 1854, 10 Stat. 1048.
57.  Delaware Tribal Business Committee v. Weeks, 430 U.S. 73, 79 (1977).
58.  Delaware Tribe of Indians v. United States, 2 Indian Claims Commission, 2-253, 2-256 (1952).
59.  Weslager, Delaware Indians, A History, 404. The Court of Claims determined that the U.S. purchase of the Delaware Outlet for $10,000,000 was an unconscionable transaction. Delaware Tribe of Indians v. United States, 130 Court. Claims 782 (1955).
60. Letter October 26, 1858, from the Delaware to President Buchanan, National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm
61.  Ibid. Letter of February 19, 1860, from Thomas B. Sykes, U.S. Indian Agent, to __________, National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm, as cited in Weslager, Delaware Indians, A History, pp. 407-408.
62.  Treaty with the Delawares, May 30, 1860, 12 Stat. 1129.
63.  Ibid.
64.  Treaty with the Delawares, July 2, 1961, 12 Stat. 1177; See Also Weslager, The Delaware Indian Westward Migration, p. 223.
65.  Ibid.
66.  Letter of February 10, 1860 from Thomas B Sykes, U.S. Indian Agent, to _    __________, National Archives, M234, roll 275. microfilm, as cited in Weslager, Delaware Indians, A History, pp. 407-408
67.  Ibid. Letter of March 12, 1860 from Thomas B. Sykes, U.S. Indian Agent to __________, National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
68.  Letter from the Delawares, John Ross Collection, File No. 69-19, Thomas Gilcrease Museum of American History and Art, Tulsa; The Delawares advised the Cherokees: "...Grandchildren, we are sorry that our white brothers in the states have gone to war with each other. We are sorry for it. Grandchildren, we advise the Indians to take no part in this war between brothers settle their quarrels between themselves.
69.  Letters of 3 January 1861, from the Delawares to O puth la ya ho la, Muscogee Chief Warrior, and our Loyal Grandchildren, Delaware Nation, Kansas, Kansas  recited in Memorial of the Delaware Indians, S. Rep. No. 16, 58th Cong., 1st Sess. 161 (1903): ...If bad men of the south ask you to go to war against the President, stop your ears, don't listen to them; they are your worst enemies...Grandchildren, we are ready and willing to help you. Our warriors will spill their blood for you..."
70.  Ferguson, "White River Delawares," p. 60; Annie Heloise Abel,  The American Indian as Participant in the Civil War (Cleveland: The Arthur H. Clark Co., 1918), pp. 206-207.
71.  Roark-Calnek, "Indian Way in Oklahoma," 108; See also Ferguson, "White River Delawares," pp. 158-159
72.  Ibid., 161.
73.  Letter of November 20, 1860, from Thomas B. Sykes, U.S. Indian Agent, to __________, National Archives, M234, roll 278, microfilm.
74.  Ibid., note 18.
75.  In 1837, the Chickasaw and Choctaw entered into a Treaty with the U.S. providing for the removal of the Chickasaw to lands within the Choctaw Nation, to be "held on the same terms as the Choctaw[] hold it, except without the right of disposing of it...." (11 Stat. 573).  In addition, the Chickasaws would pay for the right to have "all the rights and privileges of the Choctaws," but the Chickasaws reserved to themselves the right to maintain control of their funds. (art. 1, Treaty with the Choctaw and Chickasaw, 17 January 1837, 11 Stat. 573). However, dissensions between the two tribes soon arose as the Chickasaws fund themselves at the mercy of the Choctaw government. To clarify the situation, the U.S. and the two tribes entered another treaty in 1855 specifically setting off a district for the exclusive jurisdiction of the Chickasaw tribe, while leaving the lands held in common by the two tribes. (Treaty with the Choctaw and Chickasaw, June 22, 1855, 11 Stat. 611).
76.  Agreement between a band of Delaware Indians and the Choctaw nation 26 June 1863, Chickasaw, Vol. 58, 9, Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City
77.  This is evidenced by the fact that the U. S. subsequently signed several treaties with the main body to provide the removal of the Delawares from those borrowed lands. In addition, the band of Absentees later left of their own free will and migrated to Oklahoma to eventually settle with the Wichita and Caddo tribes in Anadarko.
78.  Letter of November 12, 1860, from Thomas B. Sykes, U. S. Indian Agent, to __________, National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm; Letter of November 28, 1860 from the Delawares      to the Cherokees, John Ross Collection, File no. 60-16, Thomas Gilchrest Museum of American History and Art, Tulsa.
79.  Pratt Papers roll no. 8, frame 0002, microfilm; See also Memorial of the Delaware Tribe of Indians, 167.
80.  Letter of May 29, 1863, from William P. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., to F. Johnson, U.S. Indian Agent, Quindaro KS., as reprinted in Richard C, Adams, A Delaware Indian Legend and The Story of their Troubles (Washington, D. C, no place: 1899), pp. 47-48.
81.  Telegram of 29 April  1864, from William P. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C. to Reverend John G. Pratt, U. S. Indian Agent, Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 00125, microfilm.
82.  Letter of 25 May 1864, from John Ross, Cherokee Chief, et. al, to William P. Dole, Commissioner of Indians Affairs, Washington, D. C., The Papers Chief John Ross, Volume II, 1840-1866, ed., Gary E. Moulton. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1984), p. 580.
83.  Letter of August 29, 1864, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Agent, to the Honorable W,. P. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C. The letter requests reimbursement to Sarcoxie's delegation to defray the expenses of the trip[ "to explore the Cherokee Country last season." It is unclear whether Sarcoxie went in the fall of 1863, or the spring of 1864.
84.  Letter of June 8, 1864, from John Ross, Cherokee Chief, to Mr. James Steel, Washington, D.C., John Ross Collection, File o. 64-24, Thomas Gilchrest Museum of American History and Art, Tulsa; See also Moulton,. The Papers of Chief John Ross, Cherokee Chief, p. 180.
85. Ibid.
86. Ibid.
87. Ibid.
88. Letter of 9 October 1861 from R. H. Carruth to General J. H. Lane, Commanding K Brigade, Humboldt, KS, as reprinted in Memorial of the Delaware Indians, p. 161.
89. Proposed Treaty at Washington, June, 1864, John Ross Collection, File No. 64-32, Thomas Gilchrest Museum of Art and History, Tulsa; See also Moulton, John Ross, Cherokee Chief, p. 180
90. Moulton. John Ross, Cherokee Chief, p. 180
91. Ibid., note 84.
92. Telegram of 29 April 1864 from William P. Dole, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C., to Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 00125, microfilm; Weslager, The Delaware Indians, A History, pp. 415-416; "The Delawares and a Sharp Financial Operation," Daily (Leavenworth) Bulletin, June 1864, Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 0281, microfilm; In Executive Session, Senate of the United States, 4 May 1866, proclaiming that the Senate failed to ratify the 15 June 1864 treaty, Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 00893, microfilm; See also Pratt Papers, roll no. 6,frame 00892, microfilm.
93. "A Big Swindle on the Tapis: Lane, Wilder, Secretary Usher and High Officials in Washington Implicated, "Daily (Leavenworth) Bulletin, June 1864. Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 0281, microfilm. See also Letter of 22 March 1862, from P. C. Ferguson to the Hon. Lyman Trumbull, U.S. Senator, as reprinted in, Memorial of the Delaware Indians, p. 167.
94. Shoemaker, Miller and Co.. v. William A. Simpson, Civ. No._____, Kan. Scr., 1870.
95. In Executive Session, Senate of the United States, 4 May 1866, proclaiming that the Senate failed to ratify the 15 June 1864 treaty, Pratt Papers, roll no. 6, frame 00893, microfilm. See also Pratt Papers, roll no. 6., frame 00892, microfilm.
96. Message of the President of the United States, 20 July 1866, Exec. Doc. CC, 39th Cong., 1st Sess.
97. Transmittal Letter of 14 July 1866, from W. H. Watson, Special U. S. Agent, Leavenworth, KS., to D. N. Cooley, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
98. Letter of 6 August 1867, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy. Supt. of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
99. Treaty with the Delaware, 4 July 1866, art. 4, 14 Stat. 793.
100. Ibid., art. 14.
101. Ibid., art. 5. Note, Article 9 of the treaty also provided that any "competent" Delaware could choose to dissolve their tribal relations and to become citizens of the United States. Such Indians would then be allowed to remain in Kansas, and receive a fee patent for those Delaware lands already allotted to them under the Treaty of 1861, and would also receive in cash or bonds their proportional share of the funds held by the U.S. to the credit of the tribe
102. Ibid., art. 11.
103. Letter of 8 June 1864, from John Ross, Cherokee Chief, to Mr. James Steel, Washington, D.C.. 8 June 1864, John Ross Collection, File No. 64-24, Thomas Gilchrest Museum of American History and Art, Tulsa; See also Moulton, The Papers of Chief John Ross, Volume II, 1840-1866, p. 586
104. Ibid.
105. Congressional document, John Ross Collection, File-33, no date, Thomas Gilchrest Museum of American History and Art, Tulsa.
106. Ibid., note 75.
107. Treaty with the Cherokee, 19 July 1866, art. 15, 14 Stat. 793.
108. Letter of 13 October 1866, from John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, Washi9ngton, D.C., to Chief John Conner and Charles Journeycake, Delaware Reservation, KS. "For your information all these lands in the Indian country which are open for settlements and selection together with a map thereof and also a copy of your Treaty as well as that of the Cherokee are herewith furnished to you for your guide and you may select lands in quantities of eighty or one hundred and sixty acres as you may deem wise." Reprinted in Roark, Charles Journeycake, Indian Statesman and Christian Leader, p. 47.
109. Ibid.
110. John G. Pratt, Original Account Book of the Delawares, no longer in print. cited in. Roark, Charles Journeycake, Indian Statesman and Christian Leader, p. 48.
111. Cherokee National Records, roll CHN [Cherokee National], Vol. 250, National Council, frame 0273, 0055, and 0095, microfilm, Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City; :Resolution of the Cherokee National Council", 7 Nov. 1866, Laws of the Cherokee Nation, 1839-1867, as cited in Adams. A Delaware Indian Legend, and the Story of Their Troubles, p. 25.
112. Letter of 7 November 1866, from Edward S. Menager, U.S. Indian Agent, Fort Gibson, Cherokee Nation, to __________, Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00021, microfilm; Protest Petition of 13 June 1867, from the Delaware Tribe of Indians. Delaware Nation, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archives, M234, roll 275,microfilm; Treaty with the Delawares, 30 May 1860, 12 Stat. 1129; Letter of 6 February 1868, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U. S, Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Ind. Affairs, Pratt Papers, roll no. 8, frame 00021, microfilm.
113. See Deposition of Simon Secondine, 6 December 1898, Court of Claims No. 21139; See also, Message of Cherokee Delegates, Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs, June 19th, 1890, S2322. S4005, 51st Cong., as cited in, Adams,  A Delaware Indian Legend, p. 26.
114. Ibid.
115. Treaty with the Delaware, 30 May 1860, 12 Stat. 1129.
116. See Letter of 6 February 1868, from John G. Pratt, U. S. Indian Agent, Kansas, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Ind. Affairs, Washington, D. C., Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00212, microfilm
117. Articles of Agreement between the Cherokee Nation and the Delaware Tribe of Indians, 8 April 1867, Washington, D. C., Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00212, microfilm.
118. Ibid.
119. Ibid.
120. Ibid. The Delaware were aware that they were paying $1.00 an acre for only an occupancy right on a quantity of land upon which they might preserve their tribal organization; however, the Delaware believed that as between themselves and the Cherokee these lands belonged to the Delaware without the right alienate. Although the Cherokee Treaty of 1866 and the Articles of Agreement provide that the Delaware would not have aright to alienate the land, Cherokee Chief D. W. Bushyhead gave testimony before the U S. Congress that the Cherokee had absolutely no interest in the lands of the Delaware. The U.S. Supreme Court in Delawares v. Cherokees  (1904) reaffirmed that the Cherokee had paid $1.00 per acre for occupancy right. In consideration that the Cherokee lands just a few miles west sold in fee for $.70 an acre, and some of the Chickasaw lands sold in fee for as low as $.30 an acre, there is little doubt that the Delaware understood that they were paying this high price for a perpetual occupancy on lands to be set aside to preserve their tribal organization while residing within the Cherokee Nation.
121. Ibid., note 126.
122. See, for example, Letter of 24 May 1979, from La Follette Butler, Acting Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs, to Henry A. Secondine, Chairman of the Delaware Business Committee: "Message to Members of the Cherokee Delaware Tribe," 9 June 1979, from Martin E. Seneca, Jr., Acting Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Defendant's Request for Finding of Fact, Delaware Tribe of Indians v. United States, Indian Claim Commission Docket No. 27-A, filed 16 June 1952.
123. Ibid, note 113.
124. Resolution of the Cherokee National Committee, 15 June  1867, Cherokee National Records, roll CHN 8, frame 0014, microfilm.
125. See Protest Petition of of the Delaware Tribe of Indians of Kansas, 16 January 1868, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archive, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
126. Protest Petition of 13 June 1867, from the Delaware Tribe of Indians, Delaware Nation, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
127. Ibid. The authorship of the Petition is attributed to Anderson Sarcoxie whose name appears firm in the names of the petition.
128. Ibid.
129. Ibid.
130. See Letter of 6 August 1867, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Indian Affairs, transmitting the 13 June 1867, Protest Petition of the Delaware Tribe of Indians (supra. note 136), National Archives, M234, Roll no. 275, microfilm; See also , Weslager, The Delaware Indians: A History, pp. 419-42
131. Letter of 8 July 1867, from Chief Anderson Sarcoxie to the Hon. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 8 July 1867, National Archives, M234, roll 278, microfilm.
132. Letter of 5 July 1867, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C., National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
133. Letter of 6 August 1867, from Reverend John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Indian Affairs, transmitting the the 13 June 12867, Protest Petition of the Delaware Tribe of Indians (supra note, 136), National Archives, M234, Roll no, 275, microfilm.
134. Ibid.
135. Letter of 4 July 1866, from W, H, Watson, Special U. S. Agent, Leavenworth, KS., to D. N. Cooley. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., transmitting the negotiated treaty of 1866, Exec. Doc. CC, 39th Cong., 1st Sess. 555 (1866)
136. Letter of 8 November 1867, from Jon Conner, Delaware Chief, Charles Journeycake, Assistant Chief, James Conner, Councilman, Andrew Miller, Councilman, James Ketchum, Councilman to Hon. Charles Mix, Acting Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
137. Letter of 8 November 1867, from John G. Pratt, U.S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Indian Affairs, Atchison, KS, transmitting Delaware letter, Kansas Collection, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence.
138. Letter of 16 January 1868, from Capt. Fall Leaf, Delaware, to the Hon. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, National Archives, M234, roll 275, microfilm.
139. Ibid.
140. Ibid.
141. Letter of 6 February 1868, from Reverend John G. Pratt, roll no. 8, frame 00021, microfilm.
142. Ibid.
143. Treaty with the Cherokee, 19 July 1866, art. 15, 14 Stat. 799.
144. Letter of 1 February 1868, from Rev. John G. Pratt, U. S. Indian Agent, to Thomas Murphy, Supt. Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., Pratt papers, roll no. 8, frame 00020, microfilm: "The removal has not been general with Sarcoxie's people who under the influence of their advisors seem to be awaiting some information from Washington otherwise they would have been enroute. It would be well for your Department to in form Sarcoxie that his action in this matter is working detrimentally to the nest interests of the class he represents."
145. Memorandum of Meeting with Commissioner of Indian  Affairs, Agent Pratt, Capt. Fall Leaf, and other Delawares, 5 May 1868, Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00757, microfilm.
146. Memorandum of Agreement of Capt. Fall Leaf, 5 May 1868, Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00754, microfilm, (providing "...do hereby agree that we ourselves will remove to the Cherokee Country, and use our own influence to do the same, and to settle in that portion of the Cherokee Country designated and described in the Articles of Agreement..."); Memorandum of Agreement of Capt. Anderson Sarcoxie, Chief, John Sarcoxie, Councilman, 6 June 1868, Indian Territory, Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00790, microfilm, (providing "...do hereby agree that we together with our people have come to this country from the later Delaware Reservation....This instrument is not meant to be considered as any impediment in any further negotiations or arrangements which we may wish to make with the Cherokee Nation.") 
147. See Letter of 6 December 1966, John Conner, Delaware Chief, Camp on the Canae [Caney] River, Cherokee Nation. to John Ross, Cherokee Chief, Cherokee Nation, Kansas Collection, Vol. 10, pp. 46-48, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence, Kansas.
148. Ibid.; See also Treaty with the Delaware, 30 May 1860, 12 Stat. 1129
149. Articles of Agreement between the Cherokee Nation and the Delaware Tribe of Indians, 8 April 1867, Washington, D. . Pratt Papers, roll no. 7, frame 00212, microfilm.
150. Protest Petition of 13 June 1867, from the Delaware Tribe of Indians, Delaware Nation, to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, D. C., to National Archives, M234, microfilm
151. Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1869, [Washington, D.C.], p. 484.
152. Ibid.
153. Ibid.
154. Ibid.
155. Treaty with the Cherokee, 19 July 1866, art. 15, 14 Stat., p. 793.
156. Agreement between the Shawnee and the Cherokee, 7 June 1869, as reprinted in, H. Rep. No. 2614. 49th Cong., 1st Sess. 9 (1886).
157. Ibid.
158. Ibid.
159. Memorial of the Delaware Indians, p. 171; Deposition of Simon Secondine, 6 December 1898, Court of Claims No. 21139, p. 8.
160. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1869. (Washington, D. C.), pp. 484-485.
161. Deposition of Mary C. Beysian, 7 December 1898, Court of Claims No. 21139, pp. 36-40; Deposition of Simon Secondine, 6 December 1898, Court of Claims, No. 21139, p. 7.
162. Ibid.
163. Delaware Indians v. Cherokee Nation, 193 U.S. 127, 24 Supreme Court 342 (1903)
164. See Deposition of Simon Secondine, 6 December 1898, Court of Claims No. 21139; Deposition of Mary C. Beysian, 7 December 1898, Court. of Claims No. 21139; See also Message of Cherokee Delegates, Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs, June 19th, 1890, S2322. S4005, 51st Cong., as cited in , Adams, A Delaware Indian Legend.  of 9 December 1866, from John Conner, Delaware Principal Chief, Camp on the Canae, Cherokee Nation, to Wm. P. Ross, Cherokee Principal Chief, Cherokee Nation, Kansas Collection, vol. 10, University of Kansas Libraries, Lawrence.

The above article has been adapted from Gina J. Kerrigan and Clayton Chambers, preparers, A Lesson in Administrative Termination: An Analysis of the Legal Status of the Delaware Tribe of Indians. Published by the Delaware Tribe of Indians ca.1995.  220 N.W. Virginia Avenue , Bartlesville, OK 74003. Email: delawareindian@hotmail.com 

 Times New Roman 12 point. Copy 11 November 2004. Photo check A. TH

More Page Links:  
[ Back ] [ Home ] [ Up ] [ Next ]