This text was obtained via automated optical character recognition.
It has not been edited and may therefore contain several errors.


Essentially, if any area was left out previously, it certainly was included in this treaty. Dancing Rabbit is also significant because it was perhaps the most exploitative.
As said by Cushman, in History of the Indians . ,[I]n September, 1830, the climax of the white man’s greediness as far as the Choctaws were involved, was reached, by forcing that people to cede the last acre of land they possessed east of the Mississippi River.”
The treaty did not pass easily. It was not agreed to until the insertion of Article 14, promising 640 acres - one square mile - to any Choctaw family head who desired to remain in the state. Each child over ten was to receive 320 acres, and those under ten, 160 acres.
But when the time came to file claims, the federal agent grossly mismanaged his office; he was often not available and often drunk when he was available. He allowed only 69 claims, mostly to mixed-bloods of white men’s union with Choctaw wives. One case in point was that of a half-breed chief named Greenwood Leflore. He was one of the negotiators because he spoke both languages. Like him, other half-breeds were more likely to be conciliatory. He got 1,000 acres.
Leflore profited immensely. His estate in central Mississippi unabashedly was named Malmaison.
Choctaw lands were divided up and sold in large chunks to settlers who came from many states and several countries, but mostly from the Carolinas and Georgia. The wealthy ones, like the Russes and the Poitevents, came early on. Others were MacArthurs, Whites, Parkers and Prays. Some came with their gold and slaves. At $1.25 per acre, they could buy 80 acres for a minimum purchase of $100.
Many bought larger parcels. For those who did not have $100, Jackson even expressed a desire to reduce that requirement.
Still, thousands of Choctaws remained, but they could not secure land. They took to the land that white men did not want; they attempted to live in areas like Devil’s Swamp and along Bayou LaCroix.
Devil’s Swamp is just northeast of the intersection of 1-10 and Hwy. 604, not far from present-day Stennis; it a dense swamp reported in other postings as the place where the Koch sons hid in order to escape being conscripted during the Civil War.
Even now, the Bayou LaCroix area, like Devil’s Swamp, is a wilderness. A low, uninviting natural drainage, the stream eventually winds toward the Jourdan River, far above the lands inhabited by most of the settlers.
In all, it is estimated that 5,000 Indians remained in Mississippi; 20,000 Choctaws were removed. The departure spanned several years in the 1830s. Many died on the Choctaw’s own “Trail of Tears,” a term usually applied to the Cherokee experience, but nonetheless descriptive of the Choctaw ordeal.
Not all Americans chose to look the other way. One who did not but chose instead to fight on principle was J.F.H. Claiborne, soon to become a settler in Hancock County. Claiborne had already won national recognition by becoming the youngest member of Congress in 1835. In that capacity, he had urged the passage of a bill creating the Chickasaw school fund. He was not reelected in 1837, but was sufficiently respected to be appointed president of the Board of Choctaw Commissioners in 1842. The purpose of this body was to adjudicate claims by which the Choctaws may be entitled under the terms of Dancing Rabbit Creek. Greedy speculators had purchased many of these claims, and a bitter fight ensued. Claiborne exposed the schemes, calling the attempts to get rich on the part of the speculators frauds. Influential people were behind the claims, and they employed S.S. Prentiss on a contingency basis with an astronomical fee of $100,000.
Claiborne had written a pamphlet detailing the schemes and placed copies on the desks of all members of Congress. Prentiss then challenged Claiborne’s competency, subsequently inviting Claiborne to a duel. One man named Forrester issued another challenge of honor,


Choctaws of Hancock County Guerin-Article-2006-(3)
© 2008 - 2024
Hancock County Historical Society
All rights reserved