صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

find, for example, such a document as the oath of William Bright, an 1804 resident of Hightowee River in the Cherokee Nation, which records that James Crittington's wife Nelly was the daughter of Nancy Hughes. 10 Or he might find something as potentially valuable as a copy of the 1829 will of Young Gaines, the original of which is presumed to have been burned in the 1887 courthouse fire in Perry County, Mississippi.11

and Choctaw lands showing the exact location of sites of settlements of frontier intruders on Indian land near Muscle Shoals on the Tennessee River in present-day Alabama.14 The value of such records to a variety of researchers is obvious.

While some undertake research as a profession, the genealogist in many cases is doing research for personal pleasure. His ultimate objective in research is usually to find ancestors. Nevertheless, the genealogist should realize that his discoveries may have such importance that their public disclosure might bring scholars to a formerly ignored topic, which might in turn result in the uncovering of more documents of interest to the genealogist. Though a genealogist may seek only the personal satisfaction of a successful search, with little effort he might multiply the productiveness of his work-and ultimately his pleasure -by pointing out to researchers of other disciplines items of unusual value or areas of great promise.

In the never-ending search for useful records, genealogists will surely see many "lost" records that would interest others. For example, Mississippi attorney Owen Roberts, in securing the Revolutionary pension of Ephraim Bates of Monroe County, Ohio, learned that Samuel Mason, the notorious outlaw on the Natchez Trace served as a captain in a Virginia regiment during the Revolutionary War.12 Educator Etoile Loper Hopkins recently discovered the sworn declaration and corroborating affidavit of Joel Wadman Loper which proved him to be the son of Absolom Loper, who died July 20, 1857.13 Researchers interested in the Graduation Act of August 4, 1854, would likely be interested in this record of the Loper family. Hopkins observes that the record also provides evidence of actual settlement, the existence of Supreme const of logistated one certain characters within the Indian Coming I cannot suppose they for transactions willin the Indian Comitry. They certainly for such are. certainly for suck are hidpundant they

have

the United States.

The present author, for example, in an effort to search for the place of the October 12, 1810, marriage of Adam Lackey to his second wife, who according to unofficial records was Catherine Lester, discovered a considerable amount

on Native Indians

a dwelling house and other outbuildings, and seventy acres of land under cultivation by 1857 in Newton County, Mississippi. The author found, to give another example, an 1810 map of parts of the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek,

10 Oath of William Bright, 1808, Records of the Cherokee Indian Agency in Tennessee, 1801-35, File 1808, Records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, RG 75, NA, M208, roll 4.

11 Will of Young Gaines, Apr. 9, 1829, Miscellaneous Records, file box 1324, Land Entry Files of the St. Stephens Land Office, Records of the Bureau of Land Management, RG 49, NA. For an abstract of this record, see Richard S. Lackey and Etoile Loper Hopkins, eds., Mississippi Genealogical Exchange 20 (Spring 1974):23-24.

12 Revolutionary War pension application for Ephraim Bates, Mar. 26, 1833, Virginia Service, File S-2051, Records of the Veterans Administration, RG 15, NA, M804, roll 174. Located by Owen Roberts.

13 J. W. Loper Declaration, Sept. 28, 1857, Certificate no. 11240, file box 40, Land Entry Files of the Augusta-Paulding (Miss.) Land Office, RG 49, NA. Located by Etoile Loper Hopkins.

althin the United flakes have

of information about "Doublehead's Reserve." 15 About six hundred people are reported to have lived in 1810 on the land reserved for the Cherokee Chief Doublehead, which was located in what are now Limestone and Lauderdale Counties, Alabama.16 Of course, the settlement preceded the formation

14 "A Sketch of a Section of the U. States including parts of the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek & Choctaw lands" enclosed in Return J. Meigs to William Eustis, secretary of war, June 29, 1810, Letters Received by the Secretary of War, Main Series, 1801-70, File M-147 (5), RG 107, NA, M221, roll 38.

15 Revolutionary War pension application for Adam Lackey, Virginia Service, File W-8030, RG 15, NA. See also "Biographical Sketch of John P. Weger" in William Henry Perrin, History of Crawford and Clarke Counties, Illinois (Chicago, 1883), pp. 369-370.

16 Meigs to Eustis, Oct. 15, 1810, Records of the Cherokee Indian Agency in Tennessee, 1801-35, File 2540, RG 75, NA, M208, roll 5.

of county government by many years, so the use of county records is precluded. 17 Since it was unlawful for citizens to purchase land from Indians, these white settlers leased the land from Doublehead for a term of ninety-nine years. Dr. John D. W. Guice of the University of Southern Mississippi History Department agrees that this information may provide an overlooked example of American citizens living on Indian land with color of title, rather

investigation of the claim papers, one wonders if the entire story has been carefully covered. The National Archives holds claims grouped with "Papers relating to the Tennessee Land Claims," which include those filed before a United States commission interested in settling the Yazoo dispute.20 Lawful claims were finally settled by issuance by the United States of noninterest-bearing certificates called "Mississippi Stock." 21 Excitement comes to the re

only be boomd in a national capacity for offences garnist the Law of Nations. This mistake in the Cart has arisen. suppose frion the extension of Jurisdiction of that fruity sissippi territory to the Chattohocks.

than as intruder.18 Professor Guice suggests that an investigation of the subject-uncovered through a genealogical search-might result in a better interpretation of our nation's frontier history. In such an investigation the private or official papers of Col. Alexander Smyth and Lt. Col. Robert Purdy, commanders at Fort Hampton on the Elk River near the Tennessee, might not only be valuable to the historian but may reveal data of significance to genealogists.

Sometimes genealogists may find that the records they are examining tend to disprove historical work done without reference to their records. This author suggests that such might be the case with the records relating to the socalled "Yazoo Frauds." Readers with a knowledge of the history of the old Southwest will recall the interesting manner in which the state of Georgia disposed of her western land after the Revolutionary War. The circumstances of the Yazoo land sales have commanded the attention of several writers. 19 However, after an

17 Cherokee treaty, Jan. 7, 1806, in Charles J. Kappler, Laws and Treaties, vol. 2 (Washington, 1904), pp. 90-92; Charles C. Royce, Indian Land Cessions in the United States (New York, 1971); Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of Indian Ethnology (Washington, 1900), p. 674, map plate 108, cession designation no. 85. The Chickasaws also claimed part of the land ceded by the Cherokees in this treaty.

18 The most useful published records on this settlement include Thomas E. Blades, "Petition Against Removal From Lands of Doublehead Reserve," National Genealogical Society Quarterly 35 (Dec. 1947):106-107; and James M. Puckett, Jr., "Some Lists of White-Indian Connections," Georgia Genealogical Society Quarterly 3 (Mar. 1967):41. Neither Blades nor Puckett provide full citations on the documents published. The author is engaged in a project that perhaps will aid genealogists and others interested in the settlement on Doublehead's reserve.

19 Charles H. Haskins, "The Yazoo Land Companies,"

in the Mid

Ido not know whillers I have

searcher when he realizes that this stock had to be redeemed for land, but only at land offices located in the Mississippi Territory (Mississippi and Alabama). 22 A genealogist would immediately search to see if his party paid for land there with such stock so that ultimately a search could be made for a claim.23 These claims files may represent an unexplored source for the genealogist with southern ancestry. They may also shed new light on migration to the area prior to 1820 as well as on the land investment by speculators from the upper South and New England. Ideally, evaluation of these claims should be made by historians and genealogists and the papers inventoried so that both could properly utilize the source.24

The results of excellent work by genealogists have become available in recent years. Nacogdoches-Gateway to Texas, by Carolyn Reeves Ericson, Federal Land Series, by Clifford Neal Papers of the American Historical Association 5 (Oct. 1891):61103; William E. Heath, "The Yazoo Land Fraud," Georgia Historical Quarterly 16 (Dec. 1932):274-291.

20 Papers relating to the Tennessee land claims, Records of Boundary and Claims Commissions and Arbitrations, RG 76, NA.

21 Act of Mar. 31, 1814, with amendments, in Richard Peters, ed., The Statutes at Large of the United States, 17891873, 17 vols. (Boston, 1850-73), vol. 3, pp. 116-120. A few canceled certificates are found in records of Yazoo claims, Records of the United States General Accounting Office, RG 217, NA.

22 Josiah Meigs to secretary of the treasury, Sept. 29, 1815, in Clarence Edwin Carter, ed., The Territorial Papers of the United States, 26 vols. (Washington, 1934-62), vol. 6, pp. 557558.

23 Since stock could be sold and redeemed by a party other than the original holder, all who redeemed stock will not have filed a claim.

24 I hope NARS will consider this group of records a potential microfilm publication.

Smith, Gulf Coast Colonials, by Winston DeVille, The Virginia Genealogist, edited by John Frederick Dorman, and The South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research, edited by Laurence K. Wells, are but a very few examples. 25 These and others contain information that will interest researchers in many fields. Abstracts of records by Margaret M. Hofmann and Joseph W. Watson of North Carolina as well as those by Caroline T. Moore of South Carolina are examples of careful work. 26 Unfortunately, too often publications such as these are overlooked by researchers other than genealogists. Certainly, the shelves of most libraries contain items produced by charlatans and pseudo-genealogical researchers. However, the researcher willing to investigate and separate the wheat from the chaff may be rewarded well for his efforts.

Several years ago the archivist of the United States reported that 60 percent of the research applications received at the National Archives were for genealogical research.27 Further, he noted that the Guide to Genealogical Records in the National Archives qualified as a "near best

25 Carolyn R. Erickson, Nacogdoches-Gateway to Texas (Fort Worth, 1974); Clifford N. Smith, Federal Land Series (Chicago, 1972- ); Winston DeVille, Gulf Coast Colonials (Baltimore, 1968); John F. Dorman, ed., The Virginia Genealogist (Washington, 1957- ); Laurence K. Wells, ed., The South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research (Kingstree, S.C., 1974- ).

26 Margaret M. Hofmann, Genealogical Abstracts of Wills, 1758-1824, Halifax County, North Carolina (Roanoke, 1970); Joseph W. Watson, Estate Records of Edgecombe County, North Carolina, 1730-1820 (Durham, 1970); Caroline T. Moore, Abstracts of the Wills of the State of South Carolina, 1760-1784, vol. 3 (Columbia, 1969).

27 James B. Rhoads, "Genealogists and the National Archives: Profile of a Partnership," National Genealogical Society Quarterly 59 (June 1971):84.

givon the best disse or not

seller" among government publications.28 Genealogists need not be shackled with undue modesty at these figures, for probably no group in the country is using the primary sources at the National Archives to a greater extent than they. The novice soon learns that an orderly and profitable search requires a unique understanding of the records. Consequently, thousands of dollars are spent each year by dedicated amateur genealogists on workshops, lectures, and published guides or manuals to provide themselves with a knowledge of methods and sources.

Few of my colleagues who are engaged in serious genealogical research deny the necessity of utilizing primary sources, nor would they fail to recognize the long-range potential value of their discoveries. However, scholars representing various other fields observe that too often-though certainly not always-genealogists fail to make their discoveries available. A frequent complaint of fellow researchers whose primary interest is not in genealogy is also the fact that we sometimes neglect to sufficiently cite our sources or that we are timid about evaluating the significance of our "finds." In response to such criticism, I would like to end this essay with a call to arms: I challenge my fellow genealogists to accept a mutually beneficial partnership with searchers in all related fields and to share with them the fruits of our untiring labors. I think we may then expect a reciprocity which will add to the proficiencies of our respective disciplines.

28 Ibid.; Meredith B. Colket, Jr., and Frank E. Bridgers, Guide to Genealogical Records in the National Archives (Washington, 1964).

whether it ought to have been

refered for the pornox of the attorney Comial of the Unitedstates

But it trust me that as the wist

where

it must be brought to ifne it is it jugment should be

was

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

and retune tuada removed as I have advosed

xgamist the defendant

[graphic]

American judges of the U. S. military tribunals hearing the trials of German war criminals at the Nuernberg Palace of Justice. They are: (front row, left to right) Edward F. Carter, Lincoln, Nebr.: J. T. Crawford, Ada, Okla.; Lee B. Wyatt, LaGrange, Ga.; Michael A. Musmanno, Pittsburgh, Pa.; H. C. Anderson, Jackson, Tenn; Curtis G. Shake, Vincennes, Ind.; Charles F. Wennerstrum, Chariton, lowa; William C. Christianson, Red Wing. Minn.; John C. Young, Colorado Springs, Colo.; William J. Wilkins, Seattle, Wash.; John J. Speight, Dothan, Ala.; Daniel T. O'Connell, Newton, Mass.; (back row, left to right) Col. John E. Ray, San Antonio, Tex., secretary general to the tribunals: Robert F. Maguire, Portland, Oreg.; Edward F. Daly, Hartford, Conn.; Paul M. Hebert, Baton Rouge, La.; Clarence F. Merrell, Indianapolis, Ind.; Richard D. Dixon, Edenton, N.C.: James M. Morris, Bismarck, N.D.; George J. Burke, Ann Arbor, Mich.; Winfield B. Hale, Rogersville, Tenn.; Leon W. Powers, Denison, lowa; Justin W. Harding, Franklin, Ohio; and Col. Samuel L. Metcalfe, Austin, Tex., marshal of the court.

Trial by Document:

The Problem of Due Process for War Criminals at Nuernberg

JOHN MENDELSOHN

Matters of morality are often complex, and rarely can one render a simple moral judgment without reservation. Nevertheless, there are times in history when complex situations may appear to dissolve into simple good or evil. One such time came at the conclusion of the Second World War, when the Nazi leadership appeared beyond any reasonable doubt to have committed war crimes and atrocities against civilians. But today, in retrospect, the culpability of the defendants at Nuernberg, in the opinion of many, seems to require more elaborate proof; the validity of the judgments rendered in the thirteen trials is more frequently questioned.1 Although hundreds of books and articles have been written on various aspects of the trials, the problem of procuring documents for the defense has not been sufficiently appreciated. This essay is concerned with the treatment of the defendants before the military tribunals. It analyzes the fairness and efficacy of document procurement procedures as determined from the Nuernberg court files. It will show that while procedures varied from case to case most of the defendants were treated fairly, consider

'This fact was brought out at a conference entitled "The Nuernberg War Crimes Trials Today- History, Law, Morality," held at the National Archives Mar. 13-14, 1975, sponsored by the Conference Group for German Politics.

ing the intense feelings of the early postwar period. Nevertheless, a number of the indicted, particularly members of the SS, found the procedures harsh and an impediment to their defense. Yet considering the crimes charged one wonders if there were many exonerating records at all.

At Nuernberg 210 individuals were indicted as war criminals before thirteen military tribunals. The International Military Tribunal (IMT) tried the major German war criminals, including Hermann Goering, Rudolph Hess, and Joachim von Ribbentrop, from November 1945 to October 1946. Subsequently another 185 defendants were indicted before twelve United States military tribunals. They were generally tried in homogeneous groups either by organization or by the type of crime. SS members were tried in four cases, general officers of the German armed forces in three, industrial managers in another three, and administrators from various ministries in the remaining two. The SS cases consisted of United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al., which tried twenty medical doctors and three SS administrators for complicity in illegal medical experiments on human beings; United States of America v. Oswald Pohl et al., which adjudicated charges against eighteen defendants pertaining to the administration of concentration camps and profiteer

« السابقةمتابعة »