Elizabeth Warren's Mother Lied

When reading the Boston Globe article, this section jumped out at me:

"One day Warren, then about 7, asked her mother about her own wedding dress, and her mother said she had not had one. When Warren pressed for details, “she said no one came to her wedding at all."

That isn't true. Alyne Geren, a friend of Pauline's from school, possibly her best friend, attended the wedding. We know because she was a witness to the marriage.

Remember I explained in the post, "When is an elopement not an elopement":

"Who was this Alyne Geren who witnessed the marriage? Apparently she was a friend of Pauline Reed, Ms. Warren’s mother. According to the Ada Evening News; April 3, 1929; Alyne attended a debate where Pauline competed. Donald Herring, father of Ms. Warren, attended the same debate. Pauline’s sister, Maxine Masterson, lived in Ada, and there were often snippets in the society column about her, her family, and her visitors. Every high school student that attended the debate was not mentioned but Pauline, Donald and Alyne were. Since we already know Pauline and Donald later married and that Alyne was their witness, it is not a stretch to assume these three were good friends while in high school and that both Donald and Alyne attended the debate to watch Pauline."

In that previous post, I wrote about why I thought there was no elopement, but instead, just a Depression Era wedding. I still think that. I think Pauline made up a story to explain the reasons she didn't have a formal wedding and a fancy dress.

One thing is clear. Pauline lied when she said no one came to her wedding at all. And we all know, once someone is found to be a liar, then everything else they say about the same topic is suspect as well. Everything Warren has credited her mother with saying about their purported Cherokee ancestry has been suspect to me from the start. Now it should be suspect to you as well. We know Pauline apparently lied about one thing. What is to say she didn't lie about it all?

How do you sort through family lore to get to the truth? By doing just what I did here. Compare the story to the documents and evidence and see if it matches. This is only one example with this story. We will explore other examples later.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.






Clips from the society column about the debate.

copyright 2012, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

Pinch Hitters in the Bottom of the Ninth Inning

*Part 4 in response to the Boston Globe article from September 15, 2012.

Has anyone wondered why now, after all this time has passed, Elizabeth Warren's brothers finally decided to publicly speak in support of her claims? I did and I think they are nothing more than pinch hitters called in at the bottom of the ninth inning when everyone fears Elizabeth Warren will strike out.  Basically, she needed her big brothers to come in and save the game because she couldn't do it herself.

In my opinion, they struck out anyway. From the Boston Globe article,

"David Herring of Norman, Okla., one of Warren’s three brothers, said in an interview that even when he was a child his relatives were reluctant to talk about the family’s Native American heritage because “it was not popular in my family.” Only when he begged his grandparents, said Herring, did they finally explain to him: “Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee. It was not the most popular thing to do in Oklahoma. [Indians] were degraded, looked down on.” "

Is he trying to tell us he was talking to his grandparents and one of them said, "Your grandfather....and your grandmother..."? If a grandparent was telling the story, wouldn't they say, "Your grandfather...and I..." or "Your grandmother...and I..."?

And what about "pappaw"? Why did he all of a sudden become "grandfather"?

And if this was such an important part of their lives and how they lived, why does he say he had to beg for them to tell him about it? Elizabeth Warren says it was an important part of their lives, yet her brother says the family was reluctant to talk about it? I wish they would make up which story they want to tell and stick with it because this ever evolving one is starting to get on my nerves!

Also from the Boston Globe:

"Warren’s brother David, eight years her senior, calls the public controversy over the subject “a bunch of baloney.” He remembers relatives cautioning him when he played cowboys and Indians as a child. “My aunts said, ‘Be careful shooting the Indians because some of them are your relatives.’ ” But most shied away from the subject of the family’s heritage, Herring added, because “it wasn’t something you were proud of.” "

Did you notice they did not tell him he was Indian, but instead, that some of his relatives were Indian? Maybe they were referring to the Matneys. Remember? Elizabeth Warren's great grandma's second cousin married an Indian. It wouldn't make them Indians, but it would make some of their relatives, the children of David Matney, Indians.

And how much more insulting can this Herring/Reed/Warren family be when it comes to real Indians?  First they claim to be us. Then one from the family, Elizabeth Warren, uses that claim to benefit her career. Then she refuses to speak with any American Indian that requests a meeting and refuses interviews with Native journalists. Now they say being an Indian isn't something "you" were proud of. Uh, sorry, jackass, but in my family, it was something we were and are proud of. Never have we denied who we were.

And as for the group statement made by all three of Warren's brothers, pfftttt!

“The people attacking Betsy and our family don’t know much about either. We grew up listening to our mother and grandmother and other relatives talk about our family’s Cherokee and Delaware heritage. They’ve passed away now, but they’d be angry if they were around today listening to all this.”

Sure you grew up listening to your relatives talking about your family's Cherokee and Delaware heritage. Sure you did! After all, like David said earlier, they were reluctant to talk about it!  Ha ha ha. I think it would have been wiser if her brothers would have continued to keep their mouths shut.

Sorry Betsy, but this was the bottom of the ninth, with one out, and you called in your pinch hitters. They struck out. Now it is two down and one to go before game over. Who are you going to send in to bat for you now? You are almost out of options. If you don't choose carefully, you are going to lose this game.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.

copyright 2012, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

The Problem with William J. Crawford

**September 15, 2012, a story came out in the Boston Globe that had a picture of Harry Reed and a caption that said, "Harry Reed was part Indian, say descendants." The article that followed was very long, full of misconceptions about Cherokee history and based on nothing but family lore. The article is so long, I will write a series of posts dealing with one topic at a time so my readers don't get lost in the information.**
 

I hate it when I have to publicly point out a person's mistakes in genealogy, but in this case, because of the extreme damage it has done to genealogy and by encouraging the myth of Cherokee genealogy without documentation in a very public forum, the media, I feel this is too important to allow to go unmentioned.

Do you want to see how family myths are born and grow to something that is difficult to beat down? Then pay attention. This is one such example.

This entire fiasco concerning Elizabeth Warren's false genealogy has grown to mythological proportions in the media. Over and over and over, various media outlets have stated that Warren's great great great grandma, "OC Sarah Smith" was supposed to be full blood Cherokee. This information was supposed to have come from a marriage license of "OC Sarah Smith's" son, William J. Crawford. 

click to enlarge

Even though it has been shown the marriage license did not say "OC Sarah Smith" was Cherokee, and that the information from the Lynda Smith family tree on Rootsweb.com was incorrect, no one has bothered to stop and consider, if one thing was wrong, then maybe a lot is wrong with that tree.

There was no OC Sarah Smith. Please see The Warren/Boraker Families - Are They Really Related? for more on this. There is no documentation to show this woman, OC Smith, was actually Warren's ancestor either. Everyone seems to assume she is because one person said she was. But, the conclusions that person came to are flawed.

From Lynda Smith's family tree posted on Rootweb.com (my comments in blue),

• This William Crawford is a mystery. (He isn't to me.)
  
• It appears that the William who married Oma C. Nipper in Roane Co., TN was not the same William Crawford who was the son of Jonathan H. Crawford and Neoma or Oma Smith. (According to his Civil War pension application, he WAS the the same man. He married Naomi C. Nipper in Roane County, Tennesse on 18 October 1857.)
  
• John or Jonathan H. Crawford was a common name. (There were several men in Tennessee at living at the same time who used variations of the names, John H. Crawford, Jonathon Crawford, John Crawford, etc...)
  
• Several Crawford researchers have stated that the William who married Oma C. Nipper in 1857 in Roane Co. TN is the same man who married Mary E. Long in Oklahoma in 1894. (And those researchers would be correct.)
  
• The William who married Oma Nipper lived with his father John H. Crawford in Roane Co. (This might be his father.)
• John is listed on the 1850 Roane Co census: John H. Crofford, 47, b. Va; Rebecca, 52, b. N.C.; Lucinda, 18; WILLIAM, 17; Rebecca J., 15; John W., 14 and Edmund H., 12 (John H. Crawford married Rebecca Woody 15 September, 1829 in Roane Co.) (This might be the family William came from. But he listed his mother as OC Smith on his marriage license. Is the Rebecca listed on the census his mother, stepmother, or is this an entirely different family? I don't know.)
  
• This Roane Co. John Crawford is not the same man who married Neoma Smith (No, he isn't.One is always found in Roane County, married to Rebecca, using the name John H. Crawford. The other is found in Bledsoe and Jackson Counties, married to Neoma, and using the name Jonathon Crawford. No middle initial ever listed/found.)
• The statement was made on the marriage application that his mother was O.C. Sarah Smith and his father Jonathan H. Crawford. (Incorrect. William J. Crawford, of the marriage license controversy, listed his parents as JH Crawford and OC Smith. No John H. No Jonathon. Just JH. No OC Sarah. No Sarah. No Neoma. Just OC.)
  
• It is not known whether William was married before he married Mary Long. He would have been over 50 at the time of this marriage. (As stated above, it is known. He was first married to Namoi C. Nipper according to his Civil War pension application.)
• William J Crawford stated on his marriage license application when he married Mary E. Long that his father was Jonathon H. Crawford and his mother was O.C. Sarah Smith. (No, he did not state that! No matter how many times this is repeated, it won't make it true. He did not state what is being claimed here, repeatedly.)
  
• He also said that his mother was Cherokee Indian. (See for yourself. Look at the marriage license and see if there is anything that says "OC Smith" was Cherokee Indian. If you are blind and can't see, I will tell you -- no, it doesn't say that anywhere on the license.) 
• 1860 census of Roane Co., TN: Wm Crawford, 25; Oma C., 25; James J.,7/12; Sarah Nipper, 40; Richard Nipper, 17. (All b. TN) (This is the family which has been confused with that of William probable son of Jonathan and Neoma.) (Yet this is the man who had the marriage license that everyone is trying to use for proof that Elizabeth Warren's ancestors might have been Cherokee! Not only can this man not be linked to Lynda Smith's family, he can't be linked to Warren's either.)

Ah......the birth of a genealogical myth. See how it happens? One person makes a mistake and people come along behind them and copy the mistake and because it gets repeated over and over and over, people assume it is true, never bothering to check the documents for themselves. 

  

In the last bullet point, Lynda Smith says this William who was married to Oma C. Nipper has been confused with a probable son of Jonathon and Naoma Crawford. She came to the conclusion that the William who married Mary Long was the son of Jonathon and Naoma Crawford and the William who married Oma Nipper was the son of John H. and Rebecca Crawford. The problem is, the William J. Crawford who married Naomi C. Nipper is the same one who married Mary Long in Logan County, Oklahoma. Lynda Smith has assumed there were two men when there was only one man. And that one man, William J. Crawford, cannot conclusively be linked to the family of Lynda Smith/Robert C. Boraker or to that of Elizabeth Warren through documentation. But a legend has now been born.

Now everyone believes that Preston Crawford, Elizabeth Warren's ancestor, had a brother named William J. Crawford and that their parents were named Jonathon H. Crawford and OS Sarah Naoma Smith. Nowhere are documents found at this point in time to show this is true.

What does Lynda Smith have to say about publishing these errors and causing such a fiasco? What does she say after she knows the Cherokee reference is not there and after she has been notified of other errors in her tree as well?

"I'm sorry that I posted something that wasn't correct (the Cherokee reference on the marriage record) but I'm not sorry about the rest of it being posted because it can be a starting point for others to do research."

No, Lynda, it was not just a starting point for others. Instead, it started a firestorm of controversy and helped perpetuate myths. As a genealogist, I would think one would want to be more careful about making a lot of assumptions and posting them on the internet, not making it clear that they are only assumptions and not set in stone fact. Now, unfortunately, not only do some people still believe Warren has Cherokee ancestry, others believe Preston Crawford was, without a doubt, the son of Jonathon and Neoma Crawford.

So what can we learn from this? If you are a genealogist, do your own work and don't copy from anyone. Insist on viewing the primary or secondary documents yourself. If you are a journalist, be careful who you use a a source. Don't assume they are correct, especially when Cherokee ancestry is an issue. If you want to get to the bottom of an issue in Cherokee genealogy, ask someone experienced in Cherokee genealogy. Don't assume anyone with a subscription to ancestry.com knows what they are doing.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.

copyright 2012, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

The Warren/Boraker Families - Are They Really Related?

**September 15, 2012, a story came out in the Boston Globe that had a picture of Harry Reed and a caption that said, "Harry Reed was part Indian, say descendants." The article that followed was very long, full of misconceptions about Cherokee history and based on nothing but family lore. The article is so long, I will write a series of posts dealing with one topic at a time so my readers don't get lost in the information.**

From the Boston Globe:

"Robert C. Boraker, a retired journalist and amateur genealogist who said he is Warren’s fourth cousin — their great-great-grandfathers were brothers — said his father often told him that his grandmother, a Crawford, was one-eighth Indian. “It was Cherokee blood,” said Boraker, who lives in St. Albans, England, and publishes a family newsletter that includes the Crawford line. “There was no documentation, but it was what we knew, what we were told.” "

What they fail to mention is this Boraker is the Boraker who was responsible for the newsletter that put out false information about "the marriage license" and confused people into believing Elizabeth Warren's direct line ancestors had a relative that listed his mother as Cherokee on that marriage license.

This information was shown to be false and the Boston Globe had to issue a retraction on their story about this. Yet, once again, the Globe uses information from this source to try to show Elizabeth Warren might be Cherokee. You would think they might be more cautious the second time around. I guess not.

The connections between the Boraker family and Warren's family cannot be shown through documentation. There is NO known documentation to show who the parents of Warren's great great grandfather, Preston Crawford, were. NONE. The media has gone wild with the stories of "OC Sarah Smith" and repeatedly claimed this is Warren's third great grandmother.Where does this information come from? Apparently, once again, the Boraker family newsletter and its source, Lynda Smith.

Let's be VERY clear about something. The team and I have NEVER found any documentation on a woman named "OC Sarah Smith."

We can show that a man named William J. Crawford listed his mother as "OC Smith."

familysearch.org

We can show that a man named Jonathon Crawford from Bledsoe Co, Tennessee was married to a woman named Neona Smith.

Bounty Land Warrant Application - click to enlarge

We can show that a man named John H. Crawford from Roane County, Tennessee was married to a woman named Rebecca.

ancestry.com - click to enlarge

Heck, we can even show there was purportedly a man named John H. Crawford from Bledsoe County, Tennessee married to a woman named Mary Polly.

These men all lived at the same time in Tennessee and were relatively close to the same age. We never find any of them married to a woman named Sarah.

If there is no documentation of a woman named "OC Sarah Smith", where did the now "commonly accepted as true" legend come from? According to Lynda Smith, who stated in an email,

"The Crawford descendents at the 1951 meeting have her name as Sarah due to the marriage record of William J. Crawford who said that his mother's maiden name was O. C. Sarah Smith."

and

"In any event there's much speculation due to the lack of records."

We all know the marriage license does not say "OC Sarah Smith." And Lynda Smith admits there is lots of speculation. But the media has grabbed this name and run with it.

In the same email, Lynda Smith stated,

"There are very few documents that survived the courthouse fire in Bledsoe Co. Tn. So no there isn't a document that would link Preston to Jonathan and Neoma/Sarah."

and

"Those that need a document are not likely to find it."

Was there a fire that destroyed records in Bledsoe County, Tennessee? Yes. And Lynda Smith is right. It is unlikely a document will be found to link Elizabeth Warren's ancestor, Preston Crawford, to the Jonathon and Naoma Smith so many now claim are his parents. The document they want to base so much of this speculation on is a marriage license of William J. Crawford, who may or may not actually connect to either family. It seems he may actually be from a different Crawford family who lived in Roane County, Tennessee. (More on this later.)

If no document is likely to be found link Preston Crawford to his parents, whoever they were, then how can Robert C. Boraker claim to be Elizabeth Warren's fourth cousin since he claims to descend from the parents of Preston Crawford? He can't, at least not with any degree of genealogical certainty. Anything he said about HIS family lore or legend, as mythological as I think that is as well, has no bearing on the ancestry or genealogy of Elizabeth Warren. It is just another example of the smoke and mirrors trick the media is using to confuse the public about Elizabeth Warren and her claim of being Cherokee.

Next - The William J. Crawford Confusion


Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.

copyright 2012, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

Elizabeth Warren - Genealogy Vs. Mythology

**September 15, 2012, a story came out in the Boston Globe that had a picture of Harry Reed and a caption that said, "Harry Reed was part Indian, say descendants." The article that followed was very long, full of misconceptions about Cherokee history and based on nothing but family lore. The article is so long, I will write a series of posts dealing with one topic at a time so my readers don't get lost in the information.**

In the article by the Globe, Ina Mapes says her grandmother, Laura Crawford, said her grandfather, Everett Reed, "had one-quarter tribal blood." Everett was the brother of Elizabeth Warren's grandfather, Harry Reed. Later in the article, Warren's brother says Harry Reed was "part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back." Everett and Harry had the same parents, Joseph H. Reed and Charity Gorman. So how could one be a quarter Indian blood and the other be a little bitty bit?

If they were truly Indian, whatever parent that blood came through would most likely be identified as an Indian. The grandparent definitely would have. No matter what people like to claim today, full bloods and half bloods did not pass for white. It was not how one identified themselves, but how the community they lived in viewed them.

Indians did not exist in a vacuum. The blood would come through a continuous line of Indians, not just one. And at some time, those Indians that blood came through would have to be found living among their people. They would not be found in genealogical records listed as white going back to at least 1760, as the Reeds are. You can find their genealogy by going to Elizabeth Warren, who do you think you are? and Elizabeth Warren, Who Do You Think You Are - Part 2. Notice in Part 2, the aunt of Harry and Everett Reed writes a letter to her son, cousin to Harry and Everett, telling him his pa is afraid he will be exposed to the Indians. 

Because Ina Mapes and Warren share two lines of ancestry, it is also important to mention the differences the two families claim about the Crawford family. While Elizabeth Warren and her brothers say they were told Hannie Crawford was Cherokee, Ina Mapes indicates her grandma, Laura Crawford, sister to Hannie, was not Indian. 

Born and raised in Arizona, Ina Mapes visited her grandmother and other Reed relatives in Okmulgee, Okla., every summer. Her grandmother, by then widowed, often talked about her son’s Indian blood, which she said he inherited from his father, Everett Reed.

Hannie and Laura had the same parents, John H. Crawford and Plinia Bowen. You can find the Crawford genealogy by going to Elizabeth Warren's Ancestry - Part 1, Elizabeth Warren's Ancestry - Part 2 and Elizabeth Warren's Ancestry - Part 3. Notice in Part 3, the aunt, America Crawford, of Hannie and Laura is clearly stated to be white by both her husband and her daughter.

In both lines, we have several stories to consider. Some claim Delaware Indian blood. Some claim Cherokee Indian blood. Both families are documented as white in all historical documents. Are we supposed to believe that there huge conspiracies in both families to cover up Indian blood and record themselves as white for as long as records have been kept in the United States? Or is it more likely someone along the way either got confused or made up stories about each of the families and now some descendants accept the stories as true?

Though the Globe says, "Both the Reeds and the Crawfords are identified as “white” on federal Census forms in the early 20th century that rely upon self-identification." That isn't telling the whole story. Enumerators did not have to accept answers they felt were untruthful. See the post titled, Indians on the US Census, for more information. Both the Reeds and Crawfords are ALWAYS found on federal census forms as white, going back as far as they can be traced on the federal census. They are white in EVERY other record they are found on as well. They are also found in NO Cherokee records, ever. Because the Delaware were adopted by the Cherokee Nation, from that time forward, they should be found in the Cherokee historical records if they were truly Cherokee or Delaware. They are not. 

What's that old saying? Genealogy without documentation is mythology.  I have shared the genealogy of this family. The Boston Globe has shared the mythology of the family. Both of us are reporting. You decide which story to believe.

Next, The Crawford/Boraker families - Are they really related?

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.

copyright 2012, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet