The Vinita daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1913, 1909-11-19

EX-COngfe5Smah james D lawn
port has rec@.cl the following letter
regarding Inc payment Of the emf
grant Cherokee claim that is Of in
terest to the Chieftain's readers;
James S. Davenport, Esq.
Vinita, Oklahoma,
Sir: Your letter of November 3, adj
dressed to he clerk Of the court Of
claims, in which you make inquiry as
to whether the court has closed the
time for the filing of exceptions, has
been referred TO me for reply.
You are advised that the court ex,
tended the time for the filing of ex-
ceptions to November IS, 1903. at 4
D. m. This was the final limitation
for the filing of exceptions
Under the original order of the
court all Of the exceptions were set
down for hearing on October lS, 1909
AT this time l presented to the court
for hearing on October IS, 1909. At
this time / presented to the court GER
tain questions for consideration, which
affected large number Of the excep-
tions filed. The court has answered
these questions and you will find en-
closed the copy Of the action Of the
court taken on the same.
The court has not yet set day for
the final consideration of the excep-
tions, as | have been unable as yet to
fix upon a time when | could complete
my report to the court upon the ex-
ceptions filled
Very respectfully,
(signed) GUIoN MILLER
Special Commissioner
Court OF Claims Of the United States.
The Eastern Cherokees VS.. the Unit
ed States. No. 23214.
In response to the following ques-
tions submitted by Special Commits
sioner Guion Miller and counsel rep
resenting various persons claiming the
right to be enrolled as Eastern Chero-
KEGS under the decree Of the court to
share in the judgment in said cause,
the court answers the same in their
order, viz;
Question 1. The ancestors Of the
applicant through whom claim is made
are not shown to have been enrolled
with the eastern cherokees either in
1885 or in 1854, and are shown to have
been living without the Cherokee do
main in 1886 Should such claimant
be enrolled upon testimony tending to
prove that such claimant and his an
cestors were said to be Of Cherokee
descent? Ans, No.
Question 2. Cases where it Is shown
that the immediate ancestor Of the
claimant was living and Of age and
the head Of a family in 1885, but was
not enrolled in 1885 or in 1851 and
was not living within the Cherokee do
main in 1885; the applicant however
bases his claim upon the fact that
remote ancestor was enrolled in 1886
d name similar to the party thus claim
ed through in fact appearing upon said
roll. Does such claim come within
the intent OF the decree, which says
that an applicant must prove that he
was a party to the treaty of 1856 or
descendant of such party, or should
the fact that the intermediate an
cestor was not enrolled at that time or
living with the tribe destroy his right
to claim through the remote ancestor?
Ans. Those only who were mem
bers Of the tribe at the date Of the
treaty Of 1885 or the descendants
Of such persons are entitled to be en-
rolled to share IN said judgment: and
the term descendants Of such per
sons" means descendants Of immediate
ancestors who were parties to said
treaty.
Question g. The claim Of applicant