Hi Paula, 1. Most Native Americans have a darker skin tone, high cheekbones, straight normally black hair. They will look a lot like what you know of as Mexicans, simply because the people that you think of as "Mexicans" are really Apache, Commanche or some of the indigenous tribes that populated Mexico. You must remember that, at one time not long ago, Mexico encompassed Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, California, Nevada, etc., and, hence, most of the "Mexicans" are "Indian". On the other hand, most Spaniards are European and many of the true Spainards are blonde and blue-eyed. 2. As for the information on the "packet", it varied according to the information available at the time. For example, my Grandmother's "packet" contains a wealth of information due to the fact that she was Creek and her husband was Choctaw and her mother was Chickasaw....and she was living in the Choctaw Nation.....which was very confusing to the White People who were trying to figure out what Nation she was a citizen of, and what nation her four children were citizens of. So, after several hearings in front of the Federal Magistrate, and after hours of testimony by friends and relatives, I have a VERY good picture of what transpired and what amount of "degree of Indian blood" that I am. By-the-way, the Federal Magistrate came up with an ideal solution, reminiscent of Solomon of the Bible. He split the kids up, so that two of them were Choctaw and two of them were Creek. So, like I say, it depends. You could have an almost complete family history, such as I do, or you could have nothing buy a couple of papers. 3. Why would they be denied? Because they weren't Native American, or, at least, if they were, they couldn't prove it. You must understand, the U.S. Gubbermint was giving away free money and, well, everybody always wants a little free money, so there were a lot of Indians of the Wannabe Tribe suddenly showing up. AND, you also must understand that the REAL Indians did not want the Wannabes anywhere near the Nations or the Tribal Rolls. Why? Because the more Indians there were, the less each individual Indian would receive. In other words, the Gubbermint had, say, $200,000.00 and that was all they had. Splitting $200K between LESS Indians would be, shall we say, MO BENIFICIAL, if you were one of the REAL Injuns. 4. Nope, not me. Larry Payne The half-breed son of the half-breed son. "THEY MADE US MANY PROMISES, MORE THAN I CAN REMEMBER, THEY ONLY KEPT BUT ONE; THEY PROMISED TO TAKE OUR LAND AND THEY TOOK IT." --RED CLOUD (LAKOTA) CA. 1900 ----- Original Message ---- From: PSmith35@aol.com To: choctaw@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:31:23 PM Subject: [CHOCTAW] Hooper I am searching for information on a John Hooper (b. Jan 1860 TN) and his wife Martha E. Aldridge (b. May 1860 AR). I've been told by my family that they are suppose to be full blooded Indians. However, I have a picture of them and he doesn't appear to be Indian, but she does (not sure if full though). In my search I have found a John Hooper who was listed on the roll as being Choctaw but was denied. I haven't made it to Oklahoma City, OK to the History Center yet to look at any paperwork. My questions are: 1. How does one know by looking at a photo if a person is Indian? 2. What information will be given on the application that I will be able to know if in fact this is my family? 3. Why would they be denied? 4. Is there anyone else related to this line? Thanks, Paula ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CHOCTAW-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Halito Paula and Larry: You must also understand that this was in the center of a genocidal process. One of the authors of the Dawes' Act, I have forgotten his name just now, stated that,' We want fewer Indians, not more Indians.', while debating the language of the act. So you see, the entire process was designed to decrease the number of Indians recognized by the guv. I am certain that the interviewers were told to eliminate as many as possible as well. Then there was also a lot of fraud, people speculating in Indian land, incompetence and corruption, William Ward, e.g. and so on and so on... Imafo Larry Payne <paynengineering@yahoo.com> wrote: Hi Paula, 1. Most Native Americans have a darker skin tone, high cheekbones, straight normally black hair. They will look a lot like what you know of as Mexicans, simply because the people that you think of as "Mexicans" are really Apache, Commanche or some of the indigenous tribes that populated Mexico. You must remember that, at one time not long ago, Mexico encompassed Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, California, Nevada, etc., and, hence, most of the "Mexicans" are "Indian". On the other hand, most Spaniards are European and many of the true Spainards are blonde and blue-eyed. 2. As for the information on the "packet", it varied according to the information available at the time. For example, my Grandmother's "packet" contains a wealth of information due to the fact that she was Creek and her husband was Choctaw and her mother was Chickasaw....and she was living in the Choctaw Nation.....which was very confusing to the White People who were trying to figure out what Nation she was a citizen of, and what nation her four children were citizens of. So, after several hearings in front of the Federal Magistrate, and after hours of testimony by friends and relatives, I have a VERY good picture of what transpired and what amount of "degree of Indian blood" that I am. By-the-way, the Federal Magistrate came up with an ideal solution, reminiscent of Solomon of the Bible. He split the kids up, so that two of them were Choctaw and two of them were Creek. So, like I say, it depends. You could have an almost complete family history, such as I do, or you could have nothing buy a couple of papers. 3. Why would they be denied? Because they weren't Native American, or, at least, if they were, they couldn't prove it. You must understand, the U.S. Gubbermint was giving away free money and, well, everybody always wants a little free money, so there were a lot of Indians of the Wannabe Tribe suddenly showing up. AND, you also must understand that the REAL Indians did not want the Wannabes anywhere near the Nations or the Tribal Rolls. Why? Because the more Indians there were, the less each individual Indian would receive. In other words, the Gubbermint had, say, $200,000.00 and that was all they had. Splitting $200K between LESS Indians would be, shall we say, MO BENIFICIAL, if you were one of the REAL Injuns. 4. Nope, not me. Larry Payne The half-breed son of the half-breed son. "THEY MADE US MANY PROMISES, MORE THAN I CAN REMEMBER, THEY ONLY KEPT BUT ONE; THEY PROMISED TO TAKE OUR LAND AND THEY TOOK IT." --RED CLOUD (LAKOTA) CA. 1900 ----- Original Message ---- From: PSmith35@aol.com To: choctaw@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:31:23 PM Subject: [CHOCTAW] Hooper I am searching for information on a John Hooper (b. Jan 1860 TN) and his wife Martha E. Aldridge (b. May 1860 AR). I've been told by my family that they are suppose to be full blooded Indians. However, I have a picture of them and he doesn't appear to be Indian, but she does (not sure if full though). In my search I have found a John Hooper who was listed on the roll as being Choctaw but was denied. I haven't made it to Oklahoma City, OK to the History Center yet to look at any paperwork. My questions are: 1. How does one know by looking at a photo if a person is Indian? 2. What information will be given on the application that I will be able to know if in fact this is my family? 3. Why would they be denied? 4. Is there anyone else related to this line? Thanks, Paula ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CHOCTAW-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CHOCTAW-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.