Similar name, different man: Devereaux Jarratt Bell vs Deveraux J. Bell

“If taken at face value, records and their “facts” can deceive, mislead, or confuse us.” - Elizabeth Shown Mills 

 

Anyone who has done genealogical research very long is aware of the “mischievous facts” that can sneak into our work and throw us off track. Recently while doing my reasonably exhaustive search for information on a Cherokee man named Devereaux “Jarratt Bell”, I encountered some “facts” that could have misled me if I hadn’t evaluated those “facts” through the lens of their time as well as in comparison with other established facts about Jarratt Bell.

Similar name, but not the same man 

Jarratt Bell, an Indian and citizen of the Cherokee Nation, was well documented throughout his life. Between the years 1837 and 1842, he was found on twenty-two documents. He was an interpreter for U. S. Indian agents before removing from Georgia to Indian Territory in the detachment led by his older brother, John A. Bell. Upon his arrival in Indian Territory, he carried mail for the detachment. Later, he was recorded as working as a blacksmith assistant; writing letters and documents as a clerk for the National Committee of the Cherokee Nation; witnessing claims filed by his father and brother; and acting as a claim’s agent in Flint district.

In a plethora of documents, records, family correspondence, and newspaper articles, Jarratt Bell is never found in the Republic of Texas or the state of Texas. Many in his family settled in the state of Texas shortly before and during the U. S. Civil War. While those relatives are documented as being there, Jarratt is not.

Despite the absence of records of Jarratt Bell in the Republic of Texas and the state of Texas, a different man named Deveraux J. Bell was found on a clerk’s list of those receiving land grant certificates between December 5, 1839 and January 11, 1840. That same man, Deveraux J. Bell, was also listed on the 1840 Tax Roll of Nacogdoches County. He owned one horse and one watch. He was not found in any other records in the Republic of Texas after a reasonably exhaustive search of those records.

While a novice researcher or someone cherry picking “facts” might argue “the name’s the same, so they are the same person”, they are not the same man. First, the names are similar, not the same. We have no indication for what the J in the name of Deveraux J. Bell represents. Second, even if it was an exact match on the name, it doesn’t mean it was the same man. Same name is not always the same person.

During the analysis of the numerous records found on Jarratt Bell, he is never recorded as using the name Devereaux on any document created during his lifetime. As a child, a young man, and to his family, he was “Jarratt.” In his legal and professional life which started in 1837, he was D. J. Bell. This is a key factor in his identity. His given name appears to have been Devereaux, but he was never known by that name, and he never used it on documents. “Devereaux” does not appear in records as his name until forty years after his death when his siblings, nieces, and nephews filed Eastern Cherokee applications and claimed through him. The two records in the Republic of Texas for a man named “Deveraux J. Bell” do not match the well-established identity of Jarratt Bell.

Some might believe the name “Devereaux” is too unique to belong to two different men, but it wasn’t unusual or rare in the early 1800s. A highly respected minister throughout Virginia and North Carolina was named Devereux Jarratt. He died in 1801 and some devout parents may have named their sons after him. An examination of the U. S. censuses of 1830-1850 on Family Search revealed over 100 men named Devereux (various spellings.) Because Bell* is a common surname, it would not be beyond the realm of possibilities to find other men with the same or a similar name to the Cherokee man named Devereaux “Jarratt Bell”.

Though one might be tempted to stop the evaluation of evidence after establishing the differences in the identities of Jarratt Bell and Deveraux J. Bell, it’s not enough to review only “facts” attached to names. We must also analyze “facts” within the context of the place and time they occurred. When comparing the two men, it is important to remember the bitter climate that existed in the Republic of Texas toward Cherokees in 1839. The Bowl and his followers were nearly annihilated by the Texans in July that year. Those that survived either fled to the Cherokee Nation or they tried to get to Mexico for safety. Cherokees were not trying to get into the Republic of Texas that year. They were trying to get out. It was not safe for them there.

To reiterate that point, in December 1839, soldiers encountered the Cherokee remnant trying to get to Mexico. They killed John Bowles, son of The Bowl, and captured other Bowles family members. The few remaining survivors of that attack managed to escape and cross into Mexico where they remained until 1843 when Sequoyah found them.

In stark contrast, while Cherokees were fleeing from the Republic of Texas in 1839, white settlers were flooding into the area chasing free land. The Republic was awarding land grants to those who qualified. A single man named Deveraux J. Bell arrived December 16, 1839 and was granted a certificate for 320 acres by the Board of Land Commission Office. He received a third-class headright grant. Only free white men were eligible for those land grants.

Clearly there were two men, one Indian and one white, with similar names. Only one was eligible for the land grant in the Republic of Texas. It was not the Cherokee man named Devereaux “Jarratt Bell”. Inept analysis of the “facts” on one man or the other could deceive a researcher, leading them to believe all the “facts” apply to only one man. Unfortunately, in research involving Cherokees, there are also some people who carelessly or intentionally combine “facts” from more than one person to create the ancestor they want. Whether accidental or deliberate, playing with “facts” in such a way would be an injustice to the legacy of both men.

We, as genealogists and researchers, are the only voice people from the past have today. They are not characters in a fictional story we want to tell, but instead, real people who lived upon this Earth and left their mark in some way or another. If we are going to tell their story, the least we can do is tell it correctly. It’s important to be aware that “facts” can mislead us if we don’t carefully examine and evaluate each piece of data we find, ensuring those “facts” belong in the narrative of another person’s life.

Those are my thoughts for today,

Polly’s Granddaughter 

 

*Bell is the 67th most common surname in the United States

Tweet

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 3

"Thorough research, I would argue, is not just "looking everywhere." It's not "a search in all logical places" for the one document that answers a specific question. That's just a search. But a search is only one step in the research process. It's not even the first step. And no conclusion should ever be based on one document." (Elizabeth Shown Mills)

That's worth repeating. Thorough research is not a search for the one document that answers a specific question and no conclusion should ever be based on only one document. Understanding this, every effort has been made to thoroughly research the lives of Rider Fields and Katie Vann. Not only were the documents and records made during their lifetimes reviewed, but also some that were created after they both died.

Ben Vann was not the only living child of Katie Vann at the time of allotment. Martha Johnson and Chick Vann, sisters of Ben, both applied and were enrolled by the Dawes Commission. One would expect the information they gave on their mother to match the information Ben provided about her. It didn't.

Martha Johnson, Ben's sister, listed George Fields, not Rider Fields, as the owner of her mother. Was this George Fields the father of Rider? It's possible, but there were several Cherokee men named George Fields so we don't know. What we do know is Martha indicated her mother was a slave and that she was owned by someone other than Rider Fields.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Dawes Census Card for Five Civilized Tribes, Martha Johnson, F341. Ancestry.com

Chick Vann, another sister of Ben Vann, said Katie Vann (daughter of Ave Vann and Cherokee by blood) was the owner of her mother, Katie Vann, a slave. The siblings agree that Ave Vann or his daughter Katie was the owner of their father but the name of their mother's owner is still in question. While neither of Ben's sisters gave information that would support the answers of each other, neither offered information that supported the answer Ben gave either.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Dawes Census Card for Five Civilized Tribes, Dunk Vann, F850. Ancestry.com

Results from the exhaustive search indicated Catherine Fields, daughter of Rider Fields, was listed by name in only one record during her lifetime. Despite this, we do have additional information on her. She is mentioned in at least three Eastern Cherokee applications filed by the grandchildren of Rider Fields. Randolph Ballard, Susie Mayes, and Elizabeth Montgall included Catherine Fields as a sibling to their parent and said she died without descent.

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Susie Mayes, 2221, fold3.com

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Randolph Ballard, 2143, fold3.com

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Elizabeth Montgall, 17483, fold3.com

These grandchildren descended from two different daughters of Rider Fields and grew up in different nations; one in the Creek Nation, the others in the Cherokee Nation, yet the information they individually provided on Catherine Fields is corroborated by the others. Catherine Fields never had children. This makes it clear that Catherine Fields, daughter of Rider Fields, was not the same person as Katie Vann, the slave and mother of Ben Vann. Rider Fields has no descendants through his daughter Catherine.

Rider Fields did own slaves. One was named Andy Fields. The Dawes Census cards for Andy's sons reveal something interesting.

Dawes Census Cards, Freedmen, Jackson Fields, D771, fold3.com

Dawes Census Cards, Freedmen, Calvin Ross, D777, fold3.com

Andy Fields, former slave of Rider Fields, was considered a CREEK Freedmen. Though Rider Fields was a "Cherokee by blood", he surrendered his Cherokee Nation citizenship when he moved to the Creek Nation. Any slave of his would have been considered a Creek Freedmen. Katie Vann was a Cherokee Freedmen. She would not have had rights to Cherokee citizenship if she'd have been Rider's slave. He didn't return to the Cherokee Nation until two years after the Cherokee slaves had been set free.

None of the evidence uncovered at this point in time substantiates Ben Vann's testimony given in his Eastern Cherokee application. In fact, the evidence uncovered at this point in time contradicts Ben's testimony.

• Ben Vann was a slave, as indicated on his Dawes Census Card and other Cherokee Nation rolls where he is listed as "adopted colored."
• Katie Vann, mother of Ben Vann, was a slave, as indicated by three of her children on their Dawes Census Cards and other Cherokee Nation rolls where she was listed as a "Freed Person" or "adopted colored."
• Richard Fields was the brother of Rider Fields, not the father. Therefore, even if Rider was the father of Katie Vann, Richard would not be Ben Vann's great grandfather.
• Katie Vann, mother of Ben Vann, might not have had any siblings, but Catherine, daughter of Rider Fields, had at least 6 sisters and that fact is well documented.

As genealogists, we must weigh each source for its quality, credibility, and strength against other sources, information, and evidence. How much weight should we give to the testimony Ben Vann gave in his Eastern Cherokee application? That testimony by its very nature is not unbiased. Ben was a claimant and had something to gain. Having something to gain does not automatically make him dishonest, but it does mean we must use the information provided in context with why that information was given. It was given in an attempt to get money. Ben's testimony was only a claim. It is not evidence proving a claim. In order to conclude that Rider Fields was the father of Katie Vann, evidence to support that claim independent of Ben Vann's testimony is needed. There is none.

After reviewing hundreds of records that provided direct, indirect, and negative evidence, it appears the only conflicting information uncovered during the exhaustive research is the testimony of Ben Vann. Let me repeat that. The only conflicting evidence to hundreds of other documents and sources is the testimony of Ben Vann. The only reason anyone claims Rider Fields was the father of Katie Vann is because Ben Vann said it. Had he not made the claim, no one would have anything else upon which to base their belief and this story  would likely not be prevalent today. Someone found one document that supported what they wanted to believe and that was the end of their "research."

To quote the premier genealogist of our time, Elizabeth Shown Mills, "Finding random documents to support what we want to believe is not research. It's self-delusion. Family tales, beloved or otherwise, carry no credibility unless they meet common standards for family history research..."

If Katie Vann's descendants want to make the claim that they descend from Rider Fields, then they are responsible for providing proof of that claim. This family tale only carries credibility if it meets the common standards for family history research. At this point, it does not. There is no credible evidence to support the claim that Katie Vann, Cherokee Freedmen, was the slave or daughter of Rider Fields, Cherokee by blood.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.






*click to enlarge images

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 1 The Story
Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 2 The Evidence and Evaluation
 

copyright 2017, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 2

A group of historical documents form a body of evidence which allows us to draw conclusions about events and relationships in a person's life, even when those things are not directly recorded in any document. The following includes direct, indirect, and negative evidence that allows us to put together a narrative of the lives of Rider Fields and Katie Vann.

In 1824, Rider Fields filed a claim against the U.S. for property lost four years earlier. Because he was old enough to own property in 1820, yet too young to fight in the Creek War of 1813-14, he was likely born about 1800. This estimation is supported by the fact his daughter, Susan, gave birth to his grandchild, Jane, about 1839.

Based on the ages listed for Katie Vann in various U.S. and Cherokee records, she was born circa 1833. According to Ben Vann, Katie's oldest child was born in 1847. Katie Vann would have only been fourteen years old when she gave birth to that child if the estimation of her age is correct. Based on the projected age at the time of that child's birth, we can presume Katie might have been born earlier than 1833 but it is unlikely that she was born after that year.

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Benjamin Vann, 44082, p.5, fold3.com

The first time Rider Fields was found on a record that included information about his family was in 1835 on the Cherokee Nation census. He was living in Jackson County, Alabama (the old Cherokee Nation) and had 8 in his family, all quarter-bloods, with a breakdown of one male over 18, one female over 16, and 6 females under 16. There were no mixed Negroes (an actual question on the census) and Rider Fields had no slaves. If Katie Vann, the mother of Ben Vann, was the daughter of Rider Fields, she should have been found in his household on this census since she was a child at this time. She wasn't.

The Trail of Tears Association, 1835 Cherokee Census, Monograph Two, Park Hill, OK. 2002

In 1837, Rider Fields received payments for subsistence and transportation for voluntary removal to Indian Territory. He collected money for seven people; his family included six Indians plus he had one slave with him. We cannot determine if Rider owned this slave. We cannot determine if the slave was male or female. All we know is Rider had a slave with him when he removed to Indian Territory. He received a small payment for the use of a wagon, team, and teamster (someone to drive the wagon) during the voluntary removal. Perhaps that is why he had a slave with him. All we know for certain is Rider Fields had a slave with him in 1837 that was not with him in 1835 nor with him in 1839 when he again received subsistence and transportation money, but only collected for five people, no slaves.

In 1847, the year Katie Vann gave birth to her first child, Rider Fields was living in the Cherokee Nation and filed a claim for improvements and spoliation. Two years later, Katie Vann gave birth to her second child (listed in the records by the names Julia, Juna, and Chick.) That same year, the Cherokee Advocate twice published information about Rider Fields. In July, there was a cholera outbreak near Rider's home on the Verdigris and in September, he was the administrator of the estate of his father, George Fields.

Cherokee Advocate, July 23, 1849. Tahlequah, OK. p2.

Cherokee Advocate, September 24, 1849. Tahlequah, OK. p3.

When the Drennen Roll was made in 1851-52, Katie Vann had already given birth to her third child. Rider Fields was enrolled by Drennen and living in Saline District with his daughters, Ellen, Rachel, and Catherine. If Katie Vann, the mother of Ben Vann, was the same person as Catherine Fields and she was living in Rider's household when the Drennen Roll was prepared, her children should have been listed too. They weren't. This is strong evidence indicating that Catherine Fields and Katie Vann are not the same person. Katie Vann was not listed on the Drennen Roll in her own household either, suggesting she was not considered a citizen of the Cherokee Nation at that time.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Indian Censuses and Rolls, 1851-1959, Drennen Roll, Rider Fields, Saline 663, Ancestry.com.

By January 7, 1852, Rider Fields was living in the Creek Nation. His daughter, Susan, died about 1850 leaving minor children. Based on later records, it is possible Rider moved to the Creek Nation to take care of her children. Despite Rider's move to another nation, Katie Vann remained in the Cherokee Nation. If she would have been the slave of Rider Fields, one would assume he would have taken her with him to the Creek Nation. He didn't.

Katie Vann had two children born in the Cherokee Nation between 1852 and 1857. One of those children was Ben Vann. Rider Fields was still in the Creek Nation after the birth of those two children. He was listed on the 1857-59 Creek Roll with Billy, Peggy, and Bluford (his grandson) in his household.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Indian Censuses and Rolls, 1851-1959. Creek Rolls, 1857-1859. Ancestry.com.

Katie Vann gave birth to her sixth child in the Cherokee Nation in 1859. The next year, Rider Fields was listed on the U.S. Slave Schedule, still living in the Creek Nation, and as the owner of two slaves. Both slaves were male, aged 45 and 5 years old. Clearly Katie Vann was not his slave at this time.

1860 U.S. Federal Census - Slave Schedules, Ancestry.com.

Katie Vann had another child, Ruthie, about 1861. Two years later, in 1863, the Cherokee Nation freed their slaves. At this time, Rider Fields was still a citizen of the Creek Nation. He did not become a citizen of the Cherokee Nation again until 1865 when he and his family were readmitted by an Act of the Tribal Council. That year, Katie Vann and her family were found on the Kansas State census and living there.

Laws of the Cherokee Nation passed during the years 1839-1867, p. 114.

1865 Kansas Territory Census, Ancestry.com.

In 1867, while Rider was found on the Tompkins Roll as a "Half breed" Cherokee and living in the Illinois District, Katie Vann and her family were found listed as Freed People, "Colored", and living in Saline District. After this, Rider disappears from records so it is presumed he died between 1867 and 1880.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Indian Censuses and Rolls, 1851-1959. Tompkins Roll. Ancestry.com.

In 1880, Katie Vann was listed on the Census of the Cherokee Nation as adopted colored. Her household included William, Rachel, and Jane.

Oklahoma and Indian Territory, Indian Censuses and Rolls, 1851-1959. 1880 Cherokee Nation Census. Ancestry.com.

Katie Vann was listed on the Wallace Roll for the Authenticated Cherokee Freedmen (1888-89) living in Cooweescoowee District. This roll was only for Freedmen. Native Cherokees were not listed on it.

In 1891, Katie Vann died, according to her son, Ben Vann.

In documents, we never see the lives of Rider Fields and Katie Vann intersect. They are never found on any record or in any source together. In fact, while Katie was still a slave and having babies in the Cherokee Nation, Rider Fields was living in the Creek Nation. For thirteen years, from 1852 to 1865, Rider Fields and Katie Vann were not living in the same nation. When Rider Fields is found in the Creek Nation, Katie Vann is found in the Cherokee Nation. When Rider returned to the Cherokee Nation, Katie was found in the United States living in Kansas.

Documents show that Rider Fields had no "mixed blood Negroes" in his household in 1835 nor any slaves. When Rider's daughter, Catherine, was living with him in 1851-52, Katie Vann was married and having babies. When Rider was living in the Creek Nation, Katie Vann, still a slave of someone, was living in the Cherokee Nation. Every document found on Katie Vann indicates she was black, "colored", or a "Freed person." At this point, only Ben Vann's testimony suggests she had Indian blood.

Stay tuned for more conflicting evidence and a conclusion to this genealogical mystery concerning this widely accepted Cherokee lineage. Rider Fields and The Freedmen - Part 3, The Conclusion coming soon.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.






*click to enlarge images
Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 1, The Story
Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 3, The Conclusion (coming soon)

*additional sources available upon request

copyright 2017, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 1

In October 1907, a Freedman (former slave) named Benjamin (aka Ben) Vann filed an Eastern Cherokee application for a share of the money owed the Cherokees for their land in the southeastern United States. He claimed he had Indian blood through his mother. Today, his claim is used as genealogical evidence by numerous Freedmen descendants to support the claim that they descend from a by blood Cherokee and therefore they have Indian blood.

The claim that Rider Fields was the progenitor of a line of Freemen descendants is so widely accepted, it has been repeated in articles, podcasts, and blog posts. The story alleges that Rider Fields' daughter, Catherine, was 1/2 black, the ancestor of several Freedmen including Ben Vann, and that she was also known as "Katie Vann." Is this story true? Being believed by a great number of people does not make a story true. In order to be accepted as true, it must be supported by historical documents. Does the historical documentation on the people mentioned above support the testimony Ben Vann gave in his Eastern Cherokee application?

In this application, Ben said he was born November 23, 1857 in Saline District, Indian Territory, the son of Jesse and Katie Vann. He stated his maternal grandparents were Rider (Cherokee by blood) and Tina Fields.

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Benjamin Vann, 44082, p.5, fold3.com.

Nearly a year later, in September 1908, Ben Vann gave sworn testimony for his claim. Statements from his testimony include:

• "I was not a slave. I enrolled as a freedman from choice. I said I would go the way the rest went. My mother was not a slave. She was part colored and Indian."
• "My mother was Katie Fields and Katie Vann...She got her blood from her father, Rider Fields. He lived in Saline District, Locust Grove."
• "Richard Fields was my (gt) grandfather."
• "My mother never had any brothers or sisters to my knowledge."

Eastern Cherokee Applications, Benjamin Vann, 44082, p.8, fold3.com.

This contradicts what Ben said in 1901 when he applied to the Dawes Commission for inclusion on the Freedmen section of the Dawes Roll:

• Q. You were a slave? A. Yes sir.
• Q. Who was your owner?  A. My father belonged to the Vanns.
• Q. What was your father's name?  A. Jess Vann
• Q. Your mother's name?  A. Katie
• Q. They were both Cherokee Freedmen?  A. Yes sir

Applications for Enrollment of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, 1898-1914, Ben Vann, Cherokee Freedmen, F737, p.3, fold3.com.

Ben Vann's Dawes Census Card listed Ave Vann as the owner of both him and his father. It listed Rider Fields as the owner of his mother. When asked if his parents were both Cherokee Freedmen, he said yes. He did not say his mother was 1/2 Indian or the child of an Indian.

Native American Enrollment Cards for the Five Civilized Tribes, 1898-1914, Ben Vann, Cherokee Freedmen, F737, p.1, Ancestry.com

Native American Enrollment Cards for the Five Civilized Tribes, 1898-1914, Ben Vann, Cherokee Freedmen, F737, p.2, Ancestry.com

Because Ben Vann's answers to key questions were inconsistent, there is a crucial need for additional research. Ben gave entirely different answers on two similar questions. At one time he said he and his mother were slaves. At another time, he said they were not slaves. One time he said Rider Fields was his mother's owner. Another time he said Rider Fields was his mother's father. Are any of those statements true? If so, which ones?

After exhaustive research, Ben Vann's testimony in his Eastern Cherokee application is the only source found that supports the notion that Rider Fields was the father of Katie Vann. Over twenty independent sources with information on Rider Fields and several other sources with information on Katie Vann and her children were found. Combining the information from those records along with key historical events, a timeline of over 35 entries was produced to evaluate the available evidence.

As genealogists, we do not look to prove or disprove something. We look at the available information and then form a conclusion. We must evaluate evidence without personal bias. We cannot decide to only use a source that supports what we want to believe while ignoring all other sources. We must look at the group of sources as a body of evidence and draw a conclusion from the whole, carefully weighing each source and piece of information against the others while evaluating each source for quality, credibility, and value. We must also resolve any conflicting evidence.

Alone, the testimony given by Ben Vann in his Eastern Cherokee application supports the idea that his mother, Katie Vann, was the daughter of Rider Fields. When, instead, added to a body of evidence, evaluated for its veracity against all other sources, and after resolving the conflicting evidence, Ben Vann's story crumbles.

Stay tuned for more on this widely accepted Cherokee lineage and why we must resolve any conflicting evidence before we can come to a conclusion about any genealogical mystery. 

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 2, The Evidence and the Evaluation coming soon.

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.










*click images to enlarge

Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 2, The Evidence and Evaluation
Rider Fields and the Freedmen - Part 3, The Conclusion (coming soon)

copyright 2017, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet

Resolving Conflicting Evidence Series

What if some of the stories we've been told about our ancestors are not true? What if the stories we've loved and cherished and clung to are not based in fact? It's time we revisit some of the things we've been taught, told, or forced to believe. I've not blogged in a while, but I will soon.

I'll examine two commonly accepted Cherokee genealogies and explain why it is important that we do an exhaustive search and resolve any conflicting evidence before we draw a conclusion about a lineage.

This series will be of interest to many Cherokees, so please check back soon for an interesting and likely controversial group of posts. 

Those are my thoughts for today.
Thanks for reading.

copyright 2017, Polly's Granddaughter - TCB

Tweet