State of VT's Response to Petition for Federal Acknowledgment of the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of the Abenaki Nation of Vermont: Pages 180 to 190:

Table 4

Analysis of Swanton Birth Records Cited in Petition Appendix E

Name: Clarence Brow

Clearly marked as White: X (yes)

Siblings clearly White: X (yes)

Vital Records shows as White: marriage

Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Leonard James Brow

Clearly marked as White:
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: birth, and birth of daughter
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Raymond Brow
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: marriage, death
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: William Brow
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Delia Genevin Hoague
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Marion Alice Janes
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Violet May Perry
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Fred Harry Vincellette
Clearly marked as White: X (yes)
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Clarence A. Bohannon
All or none crossed out: X
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: (Henry) Harrison Brow
All or none crossed out: X
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: marriage
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Loretta Brow
All or none crossed out: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Mary Eva Goodreau
All or none crossed out: X
Not in the Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Henry Mitchell Hakey
All or none crossed out: X
Vital Records shows as White: marriage, father's birth
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: (male) Grignon
Ambiguous: X (yes)
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: (female) Curtis
Appears marked as white and Indian: X
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Ernest Duval
Appears marked as white and Indian: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: birth, death, and mother's death
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: X
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Leonard Brow
Appears marked as white and Indian: X (yes)
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: birth, marriage, death
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: No

Name: Blanche Brow
Appears marked as white and Indian: X (yes)
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: birth, marriage
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Chart's: No

Name: Olive Frances Cota
Appears marked as white and Indian: X (yes)
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Chart's: No

Name: Emma St. Francis
Appears marked as white and Indian: X (yes)
Siblings clearly White: X (yes)
Vital Records shows as White: birth
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Chart's: No

TOTALS:
Clearly marked as White: 8
All or none crossed out: 5
Ambiguous: 1
Appears marked as white and Indian: 6
Siblings clearly White: 8
Vital Records shows as White: 9
Not in Family Descendancy Charts: 7
Possible Indian in Petitioner's Family Charts: 0

In the petitioner's discussion of these twenty birth records, it declared these children were identified as Indian-white in the records (which was inaccurate) and said this was partly due to the influence of midwife Cordelia Brow. The petitioner claims she was "by all reports proud of her Abenaki heritage" (Petition: 211). On closer examination, this assertion does not hold up. Not only are most of the twenty individuals listed in petitioner's Appendix E indisputably identified as White in the records, but five of the seven grandchildren of Cordelia Brow who appear on that list are not recorded as Indian-White. Because of the petitioner's reliance on this evidence and the large number of descendants in the petitioner's lists who come through this line, this issue is worth looking at in detail.
Cordelia Brow is individual #20 on the petitioner's St. Laurent Family Descendancy Chart. Petitioner assigns her a prominent place in the early twentieth century history of the petitioning group (Petition: 74-75, 211). There are three children of Cordelia's son Henry (#92 on the St. Laurent Family Descendancy Chart) in the list in Appendix E: Leonard

James, William, and Harrison (Henry) Brow. The records for Leonard James and William indicate they are White. The record for Harrison has all colors or races crossed out, indicating nothing. In addition, the record for Eleanor, another child of Henry born during this time period, but omitted from petitioner's list, indicates she is White. All four of these birth records list the father Henry as the informant. His name appears on the signature line certifying the accuracy of the records. While petitioner may claim that Cordelia Brow was proud of her Abenaki heritage, and that she raised her children with an Indian identity, there is no indication in these birth records that her son Henry identified as Indian in any way (Petition:74). These four birth records, which he signed, do not list his children as Indian (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920).

Two children of Cordelia's son Edward (individual #90 on the St. Laurent Family Descendancy Chart) are included in the list of twenty in Appendix E: Clarence and Leonard. Their father was the informant for both of their births. One indicates the child is White; the other appears as Indian-White. However, a third child, Lain (Lillian) was born to Edward during this time period, and her record lists her as White (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920). She is not included on petitioner's Appendix E.
A third set of grandchildren of Cordelia appears on Appendix E. These are the children of Cordelia's son James (individual #93 on the St. Laurent Family Descendancy Chart)—Blanche and Raymond Brow. Both of their records indicate their father was the informant, and his name appears in the signature line. One clearly indicates the child is White; the other appears as Indian-White. Again, these erratic, and sometimes ambiguous, notations on birth records are weak evidence of Indian Identity (Swanton, Vermont, Town

Clerk 1904-1920). They are not consistent with the petitioner's account of a family that strongly maintained its Indian heritage (Petition: 74-75).

In sum, these twenty individuals from petitioner's Appendix E do not provide the supporting evidence of Indian ancestry that petitioner attributes to them. These individuals have been extensively examined because of the petitioner's reliance on this list (Petition:74- 75, 211). Petitioner made no mention of any concerns about hiding Indian identity during this time period (Petition:75). Indeed, the argument, frequently put forth by petitioner, that Indians had to disguise their identity due to discrimination, should not carry much weight during these years, which predated the Eugenics Survey of Vermont. The fact that these records, on careful examination, do not all indicate Indian identity suggests that these individuals and their parents did not have any sense of Indian identity.

Individual Family Genealogies Contain Unproven Assumptions of Abenaki Heritage
It is also worthwhile to examine a couple of families in more detail to assess the strength of their claims of Abenaki heritage and the clarity of their family genealogies. According to the Family Descendancy Charts Chief Leonard "Blackie" Lampman is part of the Flavien Hoague and John Morits lines. His ancestry, as extracted from the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts, is shown below. The progenitors are shown in bold.

John Morits and Elizabeth Salisbury

(their son)
William Morits  and (his wife) Mary Jane Martin
(their son)
John Walter Lampman and (his wife) Martha Morits
(their son)
Herbert John Lampman and (his wife) Josephine Hoague
(their son)
Leonard "Blackie" Miles Lampman

Flavien Hoague and (his wife) Adele Bellaire
(their son)
Napolean "Nep" Hoague and (his wife) Joseph "Jessie" Sharkey
(their daughter)
Josephine Hoague and (her husband) Herbert John Lampman
(their son)
Leonard "Blackie" Miles Lampman

In order to establish Abenaki tribal ancestry, there needs to be, at a minimum, one ancestor who is a member of the historic Abenaki tribe that resided in the Missisquoi area. An examination of each line leading to Leonard "Blackie" Miles Lampman undermines petitioner's claims. John Morits is listed as one progenitor, but there is no evidence that he is Abenaki. Further even if he were Abenaki, there needs to be a clear line from him to Leonard Lampman. However, the John Morits line turns cloudy with his son William Morits. There are records that suggest there were at least two men named William Morits living in northwestern Vermont at that time.
One of them was born in Highgate in 1820 and married Mary Jane Martin at age 50 on September 1, 1870 (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1760-1870: Marriage-Groom card). His father was John Morits and his mother was Betsy Salisbury, as indicated on petitioner's charts. The federal census for Highgate appears to show this William Morits and his wife Mary Jane in 1880 with four children. In the census, his birthplace is given as Vermont. However, the age of the man shown in the census (age 45 in 1880) does not

correspond with the age of the one in the marriage record (age 50 in 1870). There is also a death record for a William Morits born in Canada, who was a basketmaker. He died in 1885 in Swanton at age 56 (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1871-1908:Death card). The age of the man in this death record does not match either of the two previous records. These three records give three birth dates-1820, 1829, and 1835—and two places of birth—Highgate, Vt., and Canada. The petitioner's charts assume there was only one William Morits. It is not at all clear that all three of these records describe the same person.

In addition, according to the Family Descendancy Charts, William Morits and his wife Mary Jane Martin are the parents of Martha Morits, the next link in the family tree down to Chief Leonard "Blackie" Miles Lampman. However, Martha was born in 1865, five years before Mary Jane and William were married (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1871-1908: Marriage - Bridecard). She seems to be a child of a previous marriage. The possibility that William Morits had been married before he wed Mary Jane Martin is strengthened by additional evidence regarding his children. Information about a prior marriage is not included in the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts though.
The list of William Morits's children in the Family Descendancy Chart includes George, born in 1862. According to his marriage record, however, he was actually born in 1858 (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1871-1908:Marriage-Groom card). Either way, he too was born before William and Mary Jane were married in 1870. George's marriage record lists his mother as Betsey, not Mary Jane Martin. This adds weight to the theory that William Morits had been previously married when he married Mary Jane Martin in 1870. When you consider that William was age 50 when he married her, this inference seems reasonable.

It is also possible that the William L. Moretts shown in the house next to William H. Moretts on the 1880 census is another child of William's first marriage. William L. is shown as age 26 in 1880. There is a marriage record that seems to roughly correspond with this individual, though it raises more questions. It shows this younger William Morits marrying for the second time at age 35 in 1892. The confusing thing is that while his father is listed as William, his mother is listed as Matilda not Betsey and not Mary Jane. This again raises the question of whether there were two older William Moritses. The confusion in this second generation is increased by the fact that there is another Willie Morits, much younger than William L. Morits. Willie Morits is clearly the son of William and Mary Jane, according to his marriage record in 1901 when he wed Mary Hoag at age 21. The Family Descendancy Charts do not resolve this confusion.

The Family Descendancy Charts revise a statement made in the Petition that Leonard "Blackie" Lampman's parents were first cousins. The petition had declared that their mothers were both daughters of William Morits (Petition:77). This account was changed in the 1995 submission where Leonard's mother is shown as descending from the Hoagues, not the Moritses.

Examining the Flavien Hoague line next, one looks again for evidence that progenitor Flavien Hoague was Abenaki, but the records do not provide it. The marriage record of Flavien and his wife Adele Bellaire can be found on the Drouin microfilms 83. for St. Rosalie parish, County of Bagot, Quebec, for 1855 (Drouin Genealogical Institute 1989). This Catholic French Canadian marriage record indicates that Flavien Hogue was a day laborer,
________________
FOOTNOTE:
83. These microfilms were created by the Drouin Genealogical Institute in the 1940's. The collection contains 2,366 microfilms of French Canadian vital records organized by church. They can be found at the Bibliotheque Centrale de Montreal, among other places.

living in that parish. He was the minor son of Frangois Hogue and Marie Plante of that parish, and married to Adele Vetu dit [known as] Bellaire, minor daughter of Joseph Vetu dit Bellaire and of Genevieve Cadieux. The bride's father was also a day laborer of that parish. There is nothing in that record that gives any hint of Indian ancestry. The individuals all appear to be French Canadian.

In addition, this record led to the marriage record of Flavien's parents. The petitioner did not include Flavien's parents on the 1995 Family Descendancy Chart, but their marriage record exists. It can be found on the Drouin microfilms for St. Hyacinths parish, in St. Hyacinths County, Quebec, for 1833 (Drouin Genealogical Institute 1989). This record shows Flavien's father Frangois Hogue was a day laborer residing in that parish. He married Marie Plante, also of that parish. The parents of Frangois were Frangois Hogue, a farmer, and Marie Ann Cusson. The parents ofthe bride were Jean Baptiste Plante and Madeleine Malboeuf. These individuals also appear to be French Canadian.
The fact that Flavien's grandfather was listed as a farmer suggests they were not transient; instead it indicates they were settled in that area. So, there were two generations of Hogues living in Quebec before Flavien's birth. Several years after Flavien married in 1855, he moved to Vermont, as the record of his children's births in Swanton in the late 1850's demonstrate. Nothing in the Flavien Hogue line gives any indication of Abenaki ancestry.
An examination of the genealogy of another well-known member of the contemporary Abenaki community is in order. The genealogy of Homer St. Francis is provided in the St. Francis family line in the Family Descendancy Charts. His genealogy, according to those charts, goes back to several ofthe progenitors: Mitchell St. Francis,

Flavien Hoague, Joseph Colomb, Hippolyte St. Laurent, and Eli Hakey. For ease of reference, his genealogy is extracted here, with progenitors shown in bold:

Joseph Colomb
(his son)
Lewis Colomb and (his wife) Sophie St. Laurent, (dau. of Hippolyte St. Laurent and Elizabeth LaFrance)
(Lewis and Sophie's daugher)
Cordelia Colomb Flavien and (her husband) Mitchell St. Francis and
(their son)
Nazaire St.. Francis and (his wife) Clara Hoague, (dau. of Flavien Hoague and Adele Bellaire)
(Nazaire and Clara's son)
Nazaire St. Francis Jr. and (his wife) Florence Ethier Ethier Hakey
(their son)
Homer Walter St. Francis, Sr.

Before tracing back to the progenitors, some observations about the records related to recent generations are in order. Homer St. Francis was one of thirteen children, according to the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts. Although he was born in 1935, some of his eldest siblings were born between 1904 and 1920 the time period during which petitioner claimed midwife Cordelia Brow was exercising her influence to ensure that Abenaki children were indicated as Indian in birth records (Petition: 74-75, 211). None of Homer's three siblings who were born in Swanton during that time period is designated as Indian in the original records. 84.
____________________
FOOTNOTE:
84. The records for Dorothy St. Francis 1914, unnamed female child 1917, and John Alfred St. Francis 1920 are included in the State's Exhibits (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920).

In the previous generation of Nazaire St. Francis, Jr., the father of Homer Walter St. Francis Sr., there are also two Swanton births recorded during the first two decades of the 1900's. One is for Nazaire's younger sister Ida Zelda St. Francis, born in July 19, 1908. The informant on her birth record is her father Nazaire (Sr.). Her birth record states she is White. The 1910 birth record for Nazaire Jr.'s brother Clarence (Leo) also indicates his color as White. These records are included in the State's Exhibits (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920).

One way to trace Homer's ancestry is through his mother Florence Hakey. According to the Family Descendancy Charts she was the daughter of Eli Hakey. There is no indication that Eli Hakey was part of any Abenaki community in Swanton in the nineteenth century. He was born in Massachusetts and the 1900 census records indicate that his parents were born in Canada (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1900e). His family did not move to the northwest Vermont area until about 1890.

Tracing the line from Nazaire St. Francis, Jr., to his grandfather Mitchell St. Francis one looks again in vain for evidence of Abenaki ancestry. Although it is tempting to draw the conclusion that the St. Francis surname comes from the St. Francis Abenakis of Quebec, there are absolutely no individuals with that surname in any of the historic censuses, or rolls, of Indians at Odanak/St. Francis. The petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts for this line states that Mitchell St. Francis was born in Vermont in 1841. This gives the impression that this family was always resident in northwestern Vermont. However, the 1900 Federal Census records state that Mitchell was born in Quebec in 1835, that he immigrated to the United States in 1850, and that his parents were both born in Canada (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1900e). Other evidence from Canada confirms that the St. Francis family was a late arrival to Vermont.

The Canadian marriage records for two of Mitchell's sisters are available on the Drouin microfilms (Drouin Genealogical Institute 1989). These two sisters were married in Quebec in January 1851, just around the time Mitchell apparently migrated to the U.S. The records are both from the parish of Ste. Brigide, in Iberville County. The church marriage records describe the girls as minor daughters of the late Francois St. Francis and Charlotte Lacombe of St. Gregoire. 85. They are not described as Indian; they are not described as transients; they are described as local residents.

Examining the line through Nazaire Jr.'s mother, Clara Hoague, leads to Flavien Hoague. As discussed in the Lampman analysis, Flavien appears to be French Canadian, not Indian. The records for Clara Hoague are somewhat confusing, since she does not appear on the 1880 census with the rest of her siblings. She also appears to be called Persis Hoague at certain times and was married previously to John Brow (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1871-1908).
If the line to an Abenaki goes back through Nazaire St. Francis's mother, Cordelia Colomb, then we need to check for Abenaki heritage in her grandfathers Joseph Colomb and Hippolyte St. Laurent. Both these men were born in Canada. In fact, according to the Family Descendancy Charts, all of Joseph Colomb's children were also born in Quebec. Gordon Day, the expert on Canadian Abenaki, did not believe either the Colomb or St. Laurent names were Abenaki. He said they were both French (Day 8/2/1977). In sum, there is no evidence of any Abenaki heritage in the genealogical records for Homer St. Francis. Even Gordon Day commented on this lack of documentation (Day 8/1988).
__________________
FOOTNOTE:
85. These names match those of Mitchell St. Francis's parents as listed in the Petition and in Moody (Petition:222, Moody 1979:58, n.36).

State of VT's Response to Petition for Federal Acknowledgment of the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of the Abenaki Nation of Vermont: Pages 170 to 179:

claims money, providing allotments, or other purposes" (25 C.F.R. 83.7(e)(1)(i)). Although there are no rolls of Abenakis maintained by the State of Vermont or the United States government, there do exist two historic land documents, three historic Canadian rolls, and one petition to the Canadian government: Robertson's Lease, the Durham, Quebec, land grants, 1832, 1873 and 1875 censuses of the Abenakis of Odanak/St. Francis, and an 1842 petition to Canada. To determine whether the current members are descendants of the historic Missisquoi tribe, we compared the names on these historic lists of known Abenaki Indians with the names of the ancestors shown on these charts. Not a single name matched. 78.
The first document examined was Robertson's lease, dated 1765 (Day 1981b: 68). This is the only known list of Abenaki Indians in Missisquoi. None of the twenty Abenakis listed in that lease appears in the 1995 Family Descendancy Charts of the petitioner. Despite this, the 1986 Petition Addendum asserted that: "Genealogy linking eight Central, Small and Ancestral families in the present community directly back to Robertson's lease have emerged from the data" (Petition Addendum: 3 26-27). As support for this claim, the petition cited the family histories provided in "Section V," which were contained in Addendum C (Petition Addendum:iii; 327, n. 1472). However, Addendum C was apparently never provided to the Branch of Acknowledgment and Research (U. S. Bureau of Indian Affairs 10/23/2001). When genealogies were finally provided to the BIA, in the form of the Family Descendancy Charts in 1995, no indication of any connection to Robertson's Lease was indicated in any of the family charts. In fact, four families that were listed in the Petition Addendum as having
_________________
FOOTNOTE:
78. This analysis, and those that follow, was based on the names that were disclosed in the charts in response to the Attorney General's Office request under the Freedom of Information Act. Obviously, names of living individuals were redacted from the 1995 Family Descendancy Charts. This had no effect on the analyses, since we made the comparison based on ancestors of living members, not the current members themselves.

genealogies linked "directly back to Robertson's lease" are not even included in the revised genealogies of present-day petitioner: LeDoux (Peckenowax), Mitchell, Crapo, and St. John (Compare Petition Addendum:327, n. 1472 and Family Descendancy Charts). Apparently, the contention that the present-day families can be traced to Robertson's Lease has been dropped. , perhaps because there was no real evidence to support it

The second document examined was the 1805 grant of land in Durham, Quebec, to the Abenakis who had lost their lands at Missisquoi (Canada, Indian Affairs 1805, 79. Day 1981b:60-61; Charland 1964:175-76). If the Missisquoi Abenakis left Vermont at the time of the American Revolution and sought refuge in Canada among their kinsmen at Odanak./St. Francis, then their names should appear in this grant. However, none of the grantees shows up in the Family Descendancy charts of petitioner
In 1832 a census was conducted by the Canadian authorities of the Abenaki village at Odanak/St. Francis (Canada, Indian Affairs 1832). It listed the names of the heads of households. In 1842 the Abenakis of Odanak/St. Francis sent a petition to the government of Canada. This petition was signed by the chiefs and warriors of Odanak (Canada, Indian Affairs 1842). Since the migration of petitioner's ancestors to Swanton did not really start in earnest until the 1830's and continued slowly through the 1940's, these lists should show the names of Abenakis who had not yet left Odanak. A comparison of the names on these two lists with the Family Descendancy charts reveals no matches. The surnames do not even correspond, except for the Obomsawins. 80.
_________________
FOOTNOTES:
79. The title given to the documents in the file is "Saint Francois Agency Correspondence Regarding an Abenaki Woman's Claim to a Lot in Durham Township as Part of Inheritance, Forty Years Later," and it includes a copy of the 1805 Durham Grant.
80. The only other name that is somewhat similar is that of Hannisse, which one might imagine could be the same as Hance. However, the Family Descendancy Chart for the Hance family does not

The next available lists consulted were two censuses of the Abenaki village at

Odanak conducted in 1873 and 1875 (Canada, Indian Affairs 1873, 1975). Although these lists are late in some ways, they are unique in that they include specific identification of the members of the Abenaki tribe who lived in the United States. Thus, if there was an Abenaki family that was temporarily living in the United States, or had recently moved there, it should show up on this list. None of the Abenaki Indians listed as residing in the United States corresponds with any on the people on petitioner's Family Descendancy charts.
Moreover, since a number of the families in the Family Descendancy charts did not migrate to the United States or settle in Swanton until the late nineteenth century, there should be indications of those families on the 1875 census of residents of the Odanak/St. Francis reserve. A check of all the names on the 1875 census again came up empty: none of them appears in the petitioner's charts as ancestors of the present day group. The inescapable conclusion from these comparisons is that the current day petitioner is not descended from the historic Missisquoi tribe of Abenaki, or from the Abenaki at Odanak/St. Francis. Without evidence of descent from documented lists of Abenakis, the petitioner cannot establish proof under Criterion (e). This same deficiency undercut the Nipmuc claim for acknowledgment (BIA Nipmuc Nation (#69A) 2001:207).

Petitioner's Family Charts Do Not Include Anyone Identified by Federal Census as Indian From 1870 to 1910
There is another way to examine the evidence. It is to check to see whether the
individuals identified as Indian in Vermont in the federal census records are ancestors of the
__________________
FOOTNOTE:
80. (continued) present any evidence of this connection. Furthermore, the petition claims that the Hance family derives its name from Annance (Petition Addendum: 343).

petitioner. The names of the heads of Indian households enumerated in the 1870 federal census areas follows:

COWIN, William

JACKSON, Dennison

JACKSON, John

LARMONT, Mary

LIGER, Lewis

POQUETTE, Thomas

(U.S. Bureau ofthe Census, Index 1870). Even giving latitude for misspellings, none of these names shows up in the Family Descendancy Charts.

A review ofthe 1880 federal census for individuals identified as Indians in Vermont reveals the following names:

JACKSON, Dennis, Salina, Edward, Fred, Henry, and Nellie

EMORY, Josiah and Lucy

KOSKA, Franklin and Franklin

BOMSAWIN, William and Mary

(U.S. Bureau ofthe Census, Index 1880). None ofthese names shows up in petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts. 81.
There is no index of the 1900 or 1910 census, so it was impractical to comb the microfilm records for all counties looking for the individuals identified as Indian. The
___________________
FOOTNOTE:
81. William and Mary Obomsawin do not show up in the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts. Only Simon Obomsawin appears there, and he did not come to the U.S. until the early twentieth century.

summaries of the 1900 census gave no Indians in Franklin or Grand Isle counties (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1901). Since any other Indians listed would not be part of the community in northwestern Vermont, there was no reason to search for their names. Limiting the search in 1910 to Franklin County, 82. the following names appeared as one household:

Age-Birthplace-Father's-Mother-Birthplace-Birthplace

ROBERTS
Frank head 33 Vermont Fr. Canada Vermont
Nellie wife 22 Fr. Canada Ireland Fr.Canada
Susan daughter 7 Vermont Vermont Fr.Canada
Francis daughter 5 Vermont Vermont Fr.Canada
Lillian daughter 5 mos Vermont Vermont Fr.Canada

HANCES
Edward grandfather 92 Canada-Indian Canada-Indian Canada-Indian

(U.S. Bureau ofthe Census 1910). The grandfather, Edward Hances, corresponds pretty closely with the Antoine Edward Hance who is progenitor of the Hance line in the Family Descendancy Charts. However that Family Chart submitted by petitioner in 1995 includes no grandchildren with the surname Roberts. So, even if this Indian family lived in St. Albans in 1910, it did not keep in touch with the petitioner, and is not a part of the petitioner's alleged tribal group.
_________________
FOOTNOTE:
82. There were no Indians listed in the summary tables for Grand Isle County in the 1910 U.S. census.

Petitioner's Other Lists From Censuses Are Speculative

We can also examine the self-created lists that the petitioner compiled from the U.S. federal census records in Vermont to test this conclusion further. The federal censuses prior to 1860 did not use a separate code to indicate Indian race in their enumerations. However, the petitioner extracted the names of those it thought were Indians by making assumptions based on similarity of names or occupations (Petition:62-65). This method is not entirely reliable. It is not enough to simply match a surname and thereby claim descent: "Name recognition is not sufficient evidence on which to base one's ancestry" (BIA Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy 1985a:65). Nonetheless, petitioner listed the names of the individuals who it believed were Abenakis in Franklin and Grand Isle Counties. In the 1810, 1820, 1830, and 1840 lists of names provided by petitioner in its 1982 submission there is not a single one who appears as an ancestor in the Family Descendancy Charts supplied in 1995 (Petition:62-65, Davis Affidavit, Attachment AA-5).
At first glance, the 1800 census appears to reveal one possible match in John Moritz. (Petition:62; Family Descendancy Chart, John Morits line). However, the 1800 census only lists heads of households. The John F. Morits who is shown as a progenitor in the Family Descendancy Charts was born in 1790. He would have been only 10 years old in 1800—not old enough to be the head of household. So, these cannot be the same person.
The petitioner expanded its lists of Abenaki names from the 1800 census in its 1986 submission. Whereas the 1982 petition listed five and fifteen families in 1800 and 1810 respectively, the 1986 material listed 38 and 96 families which petitioner contended were Indian (Petition: 62-63; Petition Addendum: 28-34). There are also some curious changes between names from the censuses submitted by petitioner in 1982 and 1986.

For example, in 1982 petitioner asserted that the following were Abenaki names found on the 1800 census:

Simon Bumson, North Hero

John Battis, Middle Hero

Nathan Canance, Highgate

John Moritz, Highgate

(Petition:62). In 1986 petitioner did not list any of those names as Abenaki. Instead, its greatly expanded list of names found on the 1800 census included the following:

Simon Burnson, North Hero

Nathan Canard, Highgate

John Minels, Highgate

(Petition Addendum: 30). This is just one example of the transformation of names that occurs throughout the petitioner's submissions. It plants considerable doubt over the reliability of petitioner's lists of "likely" and "confirmed" Abenakis extracted from the census (Petition Addendum:26). One wonders which list is a correct transcription of the census documents. Is the absence of John Moritz from the 1986 submission a realization that he is really John Minels? Or, is his absence due to a discovery that he is not Abenaki, or not even the same John Morits as the one listed as a progenitor in the Family Descendancy Charts.
All these questions are compounded by the fact that a comparison of the "likely" and "confirmed" Abenaki names on the 1986 Petition Addendum from the 1790, 1800, and 1810 censuses with the names in the 1995 Family Descendancy charts once again turns up no matches. There is simply no evidence that the families of the petitioner descended from the

people who they claim were Abenaki Indians living in northwestern Vermont at the beginning of the nineteenth century (Davis Affidavit, Attachment AA-5).

Petitioner's Evidence of Indian Births is Contradicted by the Original Records
As part of its evidence of Indian identity and ancestry, petitioner included a list of twenty individuals who it claims "are all identified as mixed or Indian-White in the Swanton birth records during the first two decades of this [twentieth] century." (Petition:211, Appendix E (listing births from 1904 to 1920)). John Moody made a similar statement regarding the same time period, though he claimed there were thirty such individuals (Moody 1979:64). An examination of the original birth records in the Swanton Town Clerk's Office belies both these claims.
Births in the State of Vermont during this time period were reported on standard
forms provided by the state. The forms required that the child's color be indicated by striking out words from a list of choices, leaving only the applicable color or race. The list was comprised of the following five choices: White, Black [Negro or mixed], Indian, Japanese, and Chinese. In some instances the person filling out the form drew a separate line through each inapplicable word; these are clear markings and unambiguously indicate the child's race. In other cases the person used a slanted line to strike through two or more colors at once; the intention of the recorder in some of these is not always obvious. The information on many of these birth records was provided by the child's father; only a few indicate a physician as the informant. Each form includes a place for the informant to sign, thereby certifying the accuracy of all the information provided. Copies of the twenty birth

records for all of the individuals in petitioner's list are included in the State's Exhibits (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920).

Although petitioner asserts that all of the twenty births listed in its Appendix E were identified as mixed or Indian-White in the Swanton birth records, the original birth certificates for eight of them unmistakably identify the individuals as White. Another five of the twenty birth records do not identify the race or color of the individual at all: they either crossed out all colors or crossed out none. That leaves only seven of the twenty as possibly identified as Indian-White because of the way in which the lines were drawn through the list of colors. Only four of these are individuals who appear in the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts; the other three are unrelated to the petitioner and are thus irrelevant. So petitioner's attempt to prove Indian ancestry through twenty birth records from 1904 to 1920 really amounts to only four birth records that appear to indicate Indian-White race.
However, even for these four individuals, the assertion that they definitively have Indian ancestry is exaggerated. That is because the birth records of these individuals' siblings from the same time period clearly indicate their race as White. Two examples illustrate this. One is the birth record of Olive Cota. Seen in isolation, this record suggests she is Indian-White. However, the records of six of her siblings born during in the eleven years following her birth unmistakably indicated their race as White. Moreover, the children's father signed three of these records himself (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920).
The same is true of Emma St. Francis. While the person filling out Emma's birth record may have meant to cross out both Black and Indian with one small vertical line drawn on the form, he did not draw the line fully through the word Indian. Therefore, one could argue, as petitioner does, that the informant intended to leave both the words Indian and

White untouched, designating the child as Indian-White. To better determine which was intended one can examine the Swanton birth records for three of Emma's siblings (Swanton, Vermont, Town Clerk 1904-1920). All three ofthe siblings born in Swanton in the three years immediately following Emma's birth have records clearly indicating their color as White. Two of these birth records list the father, Michel St. Francis, as the informant. Those two records have clear horizontal lines striking through the inapplicable races, leaving no doubt that the child's color is reported as White. This bolsters the conclusion that the person filling out Emma's birth certificate did not draw the line quite far enough through the word Indian, even though he meant to. Taken together, this evidence strongly implies Emma St. Francis was White. And indeed, that is how the handwritten copy of the birth record appears in the state's central repository of Vital Records in Middlesex, Vermont (State of Vermont, Public Records Division 1904-1941).

The following table summarizes the markings on the twenty birth records listed in petitioner's Appendix E, along with information from the Swanton birth records of those individuals' siblings from 1904-1920, information found in the state's central depository of Vital Records, and the petitioner's Family Descendancy Charts.

State of VT's Response to Petition for Federal Acknowledgment of the St. Francis/Sokoki Band of the Abenaki Nation of Vermont: Pages 160 to 169:

Summary of Failure of Evidence to Satisfy Criterion (c)
The petitioner has not submitted evidence of political authority or a political organization governing an Abenaki tribe in Vermont from 1800 to 1974. There is a glaring example of the absence of political authority in the 1950's when Caughnawagha Mohawks laid claim to lands in Vermont. While a new political organization was created in 1974, it appeared to be a separate organization from whatever might have existed in the eighteenth century. As discussed under Criteria (b) and (e), there is no significant overlap of individuals and their descendants between the eighteenth century tribe and the group created in the 1970's.
Moreover, the organization created in the 1970's was not generally accepted as representing all Abenakis in Vermont. In the 1970's and again in the 1990's the organization splintered as people became disenchanted with the chief, disputed his authority, and disagreed with his exclusionary practises. The fact that petitioner might be able to point to a few events since 1974 as evidence of political authority is not enough to satisfy Criterion (c) since this is not evidence of a continuous political government from historical times to the present.
Criterion (e)—Descent from Historic Tribe

To qualify for federal acknowledgment under 225 C.F.R. 83.7(e), the petitioner's membership must consists [sic] of "individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or from historical Indian tribes which combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity." It is essential that members trace their genealogy back to a group of people known to a historical tribe. Although it is not necessary to trace ancestry to the earliest history of a

group, petitioner must trace it to "rolls and/or other documents created when their ancestors can be identified clearly as affiliated with the historical tribe" (BIA Nipmuc Nation #69A, 2001:202).

A model example of proof under Criterion (e) is the Huron Potawatomi case. There all members of the tribe could prove descent from people listed on a 1904 roll of Potawatomi Indians prepared as a result of a federal court decision (BIA Huron Potawatomi 1995:3, 21). Standard genealogical documentation such as birth certificates and other vital records show the line of descent from the 1904 roll to the present.
In contrast, the Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy was seriously deficient in its proof of historical descent. For many of its families, the evidence of Indian ancestry consisted of nothing more than a statement that they "knew that there was 'Indian' in their family," but they did not know what tribe or which relative was connected to it (BIA Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy 1985a:64). The Southeastern Cherokee tried to excuse this lack of evidence of Indian ancestry, claiming, like the St. Francis/Sokoki Abenaki " that they and their immediate forebears had to suppress their Cherokee heritage under threat of reprisals." The Southeastern Cherokee asserted "that they lived in denial of their Indian heritage, and were compelled never to mention it."

The BIA responded to this argument as follows:

While this claim is probable and in consonance with the general history of the area during the period in question, it is impossible to verify. In fact, it is impossible to verify whether all those members of the SECC who claim Indian ancestry are actually Indian descendants. (BIA Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy 1985a:14).

When the Southeastern Cherokee tried to fill this gap with personal affidavits from current members, the BIA rejected this material "as insufficient evidence of Indian heritage since

they were of recent origin and unsupported by other corroborating evidence" (BIA Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy 1985b). The lack of documentary evidence in the Southeastern Cherokee case was summed up this way:

Little if any documentary evidence could be found to document a member's Indian heritage. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that their ancestor(s) did not maintain a relationship with their hereditary tribe(s) but rather mingled with non-Indians or were assimilated into the non-Indian community. (BIA Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy 1985a:8).

Without sufficient evidence of Indian ancestry traced to a historic tribe, federal tribal acknowledgment cannot be granted. The reason that individuals may not know their ancestry is immaterial; the BIA requires that the group have a distinct Indian identity that can be traced in behavior and lineage to a historic tribe.

An Overview of the Progenitors
The petitioner has submitted various charts and lists of people who it claims are Abenaki Indians of Franklin County. These lists have the quality of shifting sands ever changing and impossible to grasp. In the 1982 submission, petitioner included family charts of approximately fifteen extended families (Petition: 62-65). Petitioner also provided a small group of names from the federal censuses from the first half of the nineteenth century to demonstrate the presence of Abenakis in northwestern Vermont. In 1986 petitioner vastly expanded its submission and included names of hundreds of families from the early nineteenth century (and into the twentieth) who it claimed were Abenakis (Petition Addendum Appendices). The 1986 list of names from the 1800 through 1830 censuses was over five times as large as the previous list submitted in 1982. The number of names that

petitioner gleaned from the 1840 census and labeled as Indian grew fifteen fold between its 1982 and 1986 submissions (Petition: 62-65; Petition Addendum, Appendix 1B:28-49).

The narrative portion of the 1986 Petition Addendum attempts to trace connections among family names that appear similar in historic Abenaki records and early nineteenth century birth and marriage records. While this complicated web may look interesting, it is entirely irrelevant to the present day community. The web it weaves is limited to the nineteenth century. The narrative does not connect the families who appear in the records in 1800 to 1830 with the petitioner's family descendants in the 1995 Family Descendancy Charts. For example, Madam Crapo who figures in the narrative does not appear on any of the Family Descendancy Charts as an ancestor (Petition:54; Petition Addendum:24, 26). In addition, two families described as front families on the island of North Hero, the Patnodes and Cameron, are not listed as ancestors of petitioner in the Family Descendancy Charts either (Petition Addendum:306, 326). This might be due to the fact that they may actually be French Canadian families (see DeMarce 1994).
Most recently, in December 1995, petitioner submitted twenty Family Descendancy Charts. It declared that these genealogies replaced the earlier material that had been submitted in 1982 and 1986 (Second Addendum: 1). Compared with the 1986 material, this drastically cut back on the number of individuals claimed as members of the tribe. Each chart traces the descendants of a different progenitor. The families are substantially the same as the families shown in the 1982 papers filed by petitioner (Petition, Part VI). Three couples listed as progenitors in the 1982 papers have been omitted from the 1995 filing, and five new families have been added. 74.
___________________
FOOTNOTE:
74. The following progenitor couples and their descendants shown in the Family Charts in Part VI of the 1982 Petition do not appear as separate family lines in the 1995 Family Descendancy Charts:

Page 164-b

We assume that the petitioner is claiming that each of the twenty progenitors is an Abenaki Indian of the St. Francis/Sokoki Abenaki Tribe of Vermont. Otherwise there would be no point in providing the charts. Presumably the living descendants on these charts comprise the current membership of the St. Francis/Sokoki Abenaki Tribe of Vermont. Of course, due to privacy rules, the State has not had access to the petitioner's current membership list. Three of the five progenitors that have been added seem to be ancestors of individuals who married into some of the families shown in the 1982 charts. See, e.g., Desmarais family (some Demers from this family married Gardners); Hakey family (Florence Hakey married Nazaire St. Francis); Belrose family (Mary Belrose married William Medor); LaFrance family (a LaFrance married a Vanselette descendant of the St. Laurent family).

The two other new progenitors are noteworthy in that they are the only two with proven Abenaki heritage: Jean Nepton and Simon Obomsawin. 75.  If these two were added to lend legitimacy to the claims of Abenaki descent, the effort is transparent. The ancestors of these two families did not live in Swanton and did not maintain close ties with the rest of the petitioner's families. Jean Nepton was born in Massachusetts and lived in Canada. His descendants do not appear in Vermont records for six generations, hardly qualifying them as part of the Swanton community. Simon Obomsawin was born at Odanak/St. Francis. His descendants, William and Marion, show up repeatedly in the research by Gordon Day and John Huden--but never with any ties to any community in Swanton. (In fact they are not even included in the Family Descendancy Charts submitted by petitioner.) Their ties were
____________________
74. (Continued from previous page FOOTNOTE)

Levi Bellvue/Mary Gonyea, Charles Guyette/Aurilla Bushey, Thomas Lapan/ Turner. Occasional members of these families do appear as spouses of people in other families that are traced.

75. The other three progenitors added in the 1995 charts are Margaret Gibeau, Antoine Edward Hance and Theodore Ouimette.

NOTE: APPARENTLY I AM WORKING WITH A DIGITAL PDF COPYof which was published in 2003...and the PAGE content between that and the "hard copy" I am in possession pulished in 2002 or visa-versa is typographical-constructively "in conflict" with the transcriptions I am putting into this blog. So, as a result I will post both of Pages 164 and 165, from each publication of this "State of Vermont Response"...in green highlight is the "distortion" sections between the [2] pages of 164 and 165...

Page 164

We assume that the petitioner is claiming that each of the twenty progenitors is an Abenaki Indian of the St. Francis/Sokoki Abenaki Tribe of Vermont. Otherwise there would be no point in providing the charts. Presumably the living descendants on these charts comprise the current membership of the St. Francis/Sokoki Abenaki Tribe of Vermont. Of course, due to privacy rules, the State has not had access to the petitioner's current membership list. Three of the five progenitors that have been added seem to be ancestors of individuals who married into some of the families shown in the 1982 charts. See, e.g., Desmarais family (some Demers from this family married Gardners); Hakey family (Florence Hakey married Nazaire St. Francis); Belrose family (Mary Belrose married William Medor); LaFrance family (a LaFrance married a Vanselette descendant of the St. Laurent family).

The two other new progenitors are noteworthy in that they are the only two with proven Abenaki heritage: Jean Nepton and Simon Obomsawin. 75. If these two were added to lend legitimacy to the claims of Abenaki descent, the effort is transparent. The ancestors of these two families did not live in Swanton and did not maintain close ties with the rest of the petitioner's families. Jean Nepton was born in Massachusetts and lived in Canada. His descendants do not appear in Vermont records for six generations, hardly qualifying them as part of the Swanton community. Simon Obomsawin was born at Odanak/St. Francis. His descendants, William and Marion, show up repeatedly in the research by Gordon Day and John Huden--but never with any ties to any community in Swanton. (In fact they are not
____________________
74. (Continued from previous page FOOTNOTE)
Levi Bellvue/Mary Gonyea, Charles Guyette/Aurilla Bushey, Thomas Lapan/ Turner. Occasional members of these families do appear as spouses of people in other families that are traced.

Page 165

NOTICE that in this type-set FOOTNOTE 75. of Page 165 is NOT ADDED to this Page 164; but instead has been placed on Page 165-b.

 even included on the Family Descendancy Charts submitted by petitioner. Only Simon's daughter Elvine is shown there.) Their ties were strictly to Abenakis at Odanak/St. Francis and Albany, N.Y. Petitioner has not cited any sources establishing Abenaki identity for the other eighteen progenitors. Presumably this is because their "ancestry is assumed," rather than proven, as petitioner stated was the case for the Louis Gardner line (Petition: 86).

According to these Family Descendancy charts, the progenitors were born at various times between 1790 and 1900. Their births are concentrated between 1800 and 1839. Eight of them were born at the beginning of this period, between 1800 and 1817, and another five were born at the end between 1830 and 1839. The remaining ones are scattered, with three born between 1790 and 1800, and four born between 1850 and 1900.76 The first thing that

becomes apparent from this selection is that the progenitors are not the basis of a community cross-section at a single point in time. This means that the progenitors were not all taken from one historic list and traced forward in time to the present. Rather, it appears that the list was prepared in reverse, starting from the current membership and tracing back as far as possible.

Since there are no lists of tribal members in Vermont after Robertson's Lease in 1765, the petitioner tried to reconstruct lists from the early census records. Each of its submissions to the BIA presented a different list of names. The rest of this section examines those reconstructed lists and the weaknesses in petitioner's attempts to connect them to the present day members.
________________

FOOTNOTE:

76. Margaret Gibeau's birth date is estimated to be around 1900, since she was married in 1924; the date was redacted from the copies provided to the State. Michel St. Francis's birth is estimated to be approximately 1800.

Page 165-b

NOTICE that in this type-set FOOTNOTE 75. instead has been placed on this Page 165-b

strictly to Abenakis at Odanak/St. Francis and Albany, N.Y. Petitioner has not cited any sources establishing Abenaki identity for the other eighteen progenitors. Presumably this is because their "ancestry is assumed," rather than proven, as petitioner stated was the case for the Louis Gardner line (Petition: 86).
According to these Family Descendancy charts, the progenitors were born at various times between 1790 and 1900. Their births are concentrated between 1800 and 1839. Eight of them were born at the beginning of this period, between 1800 and 1817, and another five were born at the end between 1830 and 1839. The remaining ones are scattered, with three born between 1790 and 1800, and four born between 1850 and 1900.76 The first thing that becomes apparent from this selection is that the progenitors are not the basis of a community cross-section at a single point in time. This means that the progenitors were not all taken from one historic list and traced forward in time to the present. Rather, it appears that the list was prepared in reverse, starting from the current membership and tracing back as far as possible.
Since there are no lists of tribal members in Vermont after Robertson's Lease in 1765, the petitioner tried to reconstruct lists from the early census records. Each of its submissions to the BIA presented a different list of names. The rest of this section examines those reconstructed lists and the weaknesses in petitioner's attempts to connect them to the present day members.
________________
FOOTNOTE:
75. The other three progenitors added in the 1995 charts are Margaret Gibeau, Antoine Edward Hance, and Theodore Ouimette.
76. Margaret Gibeau's birth date is estimated to be around 1900, since she was married in 1924; the date was redacted from the copies provided to the State. Michel St. Francis's birth is estimated to be approximately 1800.
OK, now that we have figured out that "Typographical Derailment" within these 2002 v. 2003 2-sets of published pages 164 and 165 in this transcription process.....onward, to Page 166:

Moody's Genealogical Work is Incomplete and Speculative

John Moody's 1979 manuscript claimed that the present day Swanton group was descended from the historic Missisquoi. However, he never fully supported his claim with genealogical research, a point made by Gordon Day upon reading Moody's manuscript. Day called on him to focus on the genealogies:

You remember that I never said there were not Abenaki descendents on Lake Champlain. I said there were. I didn't realize how many. From the time of the first propaganda by Ronnie Cannes and company my position about the Abenaki "Nation" at Swanton was: examine their genealogies and see instead of taking anti-polar positions and arguing. (Day 4/27/1979).

Instead of clear genealogical lines between the present-day Abenaki petitioner and the historic tribe, Moody relied upon hypothetical connections that he described in his manuscript. Interestingly, these theoretical links were not incorporated into the Family Descendancy Charts submitted by petitioner in 1995.
Three examples of Moody's method of drawing conclusions from incomplete evidence illustrate the deficiencies in his analysis. First, in some instances Moody took names from the present group of petitioners and noted the similarity to names of Abenakis found in historic church records. Then without tracing the generations in between he drew the conclusion that the two were related. One example is with the 1800 marriage record found in Chambly, Quebec, of "Marie Morins, Abenakis of the Saint Francis village." Moody asserted this name developed into the following contemporary variations: Moricette, Morisseau, Molise, Morrisey, Morris, and Morits (Moody 1979:43, n.22). While this is intriguing speculation, it is not proof of Abenaki heritage.
Second are instances in which Moody documented Indians (not necessarily Abenakis) living in Quebec near the Vermont border. While these observations are interesting in

themselves, they do nothing to establish that the present day petitioners are Abenakis. For instance, Moody wrote of the Wabisan family, but there is no such family in the 1995 Family Descendancy Charts (Moody 1979:45). He wrote, too, of "Catherine, Indienne" marrying Pierre Lanoue, but acknowledges that she might not be Abenaki (Moody 1979:46-47). Moreover, she did not show up in the Family Descendancy Charts of the petitioner.

The third misleading assumption that infused Moody's genealogical work is his unquestioning acceptance of the current day petitioner as Abenaki. He traced the current members back through the records and then declared he had found the enclaves of Indian families. However, he declared the earlier generations to be Abenaki only because their descendants claim them to be. And, he leapt to make connections between these family names and others that appear on proven rolls of Odanak Abenakis.

So, for example, he wrote that:

The majority of families discovered so far lived on Missisquoi Bay and Lake Champlain with the other areas being maintained by individual families at different periods from 1820 to 1850. Not one of the families is cited as being "Indian," "Abenaki" or anything of the kind. The names are variants of those familiar at Odanak like Panadis (Benedict), Lazare, Gonzague, Benoit, Laurent, Denis, Saint Denis, Marie and Maurice in various combinations with names developed exclusively at Missisquoi like Campbell, Peter, CoulombCadoret, and Francis. (Moody 1979:49).

In this passage, Moody's claim that the names are "variants of those familiar at Odanak" indicates that he was unable to find an exact match of names in the Odanak records. It suggests that he only found names in the Odanak records that could be construed to sound similar to Vermont names. For example, he traced one family named Banady or Parody through civil and church records from 1826 to 1860 and proclaimed theirs to be "unmistakable Abenaki names," despite the fact that they "were not once acknowledged as such in any of the records cited, Catholic or civil" (Moody 1979:54). His assertions were

based on name similarity, rather than genealogical links or Indian identification in the records.

Another instance of Moody's attribution of Abenaki identity to ancestors, without proof, occurred in his description of the Freemore, St. Laurent, and Coulomb families. He wrote that he had found no Freemore name at Odanak and thus could not substantiate it as Abenaki through any such association (Moody 1979:57, n.34). However, since there were Freemores who married into other families whose descendants are among the current day group, he declared they are Missisquoi Abenaki. He knew there were Laurents at Odanak, so when he found Saint Laurents in Vermont he decided their name must have been changed by a priest (Moody 1979:57, n.35, 59, n.36). He did not consider that it could just be a French name on its own, though Gordon Day advised him as much (Day 8/2/1977). 77. Likewise, while he wrote that "Coulombe or Collaret is also an unsolved connection thus far," he speculated that the old Missisque name Cadenait or Cadenarat is sufficiently close to Cadoret and Collart to suspect a connection there" (Moody 1979:57, n.35). Despite these expressions of uncertainty, he went on to assert, totally without proof, that Cordelia Coulomb was an Abenaki woman (Moody 1979:57-58).
Moody's analysis of the St. Francis family was also full of guesswork. He spun a tale of name changes to connect Mitchell St. Francis with "Charlotte, widow of the late chief of the Abenackque Nation at Missisque" who signed Robertson's lease in 1765 (Moody 1979:58-59, n.36). His jumping off point was the statement that "Michael, or Mitchell (M chel) St.
_________________
FOOTNOTE:
77. In that letter, Gordon Day told John Moody that "Saint-Laurent and Coulomb are French names, and I have never found them as the names of Abenakis."

Francis's sisters, which clearly state that his parents lived in Iberville County, Quebec (Drouin Genealogical Institute 1989).

John Moody also implied that Mitchell St. Francis's mother had dark Indian skin, by pointing to an unrelated woman in another town with the surname St. Francis who is listed on the census as black (Moody 1979:58, n.36). He offered this as evidence that Mitchell's family was Indian. However, there is not a shred of evidence that this black woman is related to Mitchell's family. Mitchell's mother and sister are listed on the 1860 census in Swanton, but no color is given. Indeed the census enumerator for that district left the column for color blank for everyone, suggesting all were white. Mitchell St. Francis's mother's and sister's birthplace is given as Canada and they live in a house owned by another Canadian—Paul Charland. The black woman mentioned above is not another of Mitchell's sisters she is far too old. Her age is 50, the same as Mitchell's mother. Moreover, her birthplace is given as Vermont, and she is specifically listed as a domestic. Mitchell's mother and sister have no occupation listed, though the census taker clearly indicated "family domestic" when appropriate on that same page. A careful examination of the records discloses the errors in Moody's speculations (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1860a, 1860b). This raises serious doubts about his conclusions.

Petitioner's Family Charts Do Not Trace Back to Any Historic Lists of Known Abenaki Indians

The best type of evidence of descent from a historical tribe would be genealogical material showing descendants from Indians listed on an official roll or membership list (BIA Nipmuc Nation (#69A) 2001:205-06). The federal regulations suggest the use of "rolls prepared by the Secretary [of the Interior] on a descendancy basis for purposes of distributing