What are EC Numbers?

Within a few minutes of talking to someone who has spent years proving their native ancestry they always quote at least one EC Number. So what is this number and how do you get one?

EC Numbers, or Eastern Creek Numbers, were created by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, during their processing of land claim settlements ordered by the Indian Claims Commission. Settlements for descendants of Creek Indians who did not relocate were processed under Docket 21 (first ruling on 6/4/1951), Docket 272 (on 12/8/1971), Docket 275 (on 4/15/1970), and Docket 276 (on 12/15/1965).

The final ruling on Docket 21 (September 21, 1968) by the Indian Claims Commission ordered the United States "to provide for the disposition of funds appropriated to pay a judgment in favor of the Creek Nation of Indians in Indian Claims Commission docket numbered 21." Creek Indian descendants east of the Mississippi fought for, and won, the right to be included in this disbursement during the deliberations leading up to the 1968 ruling. Docket 21 provided for the disbursement of $3.9 million. Docket 276 added a little more than $1 million for 2+ million acres of land in Oklahoma ceded under the Treaty of August 7, 1856. Dockets 272 and 275 added additional funds with Docket 275 requiring a separate application process -- even if the applicant had already been found eligible under Docket 21, they were required to submit a separate application to apply for Docket 275 funds.

Each individual submitting a Docket claim was required to:

• Complete and submit an application before the deadline (December 31, 1969 for Docket 21 and November 15, 1979 for Docket 275).
• Identify their Creek Indian Ancestor and attach documents proving their ancestor was a Creek-by-Blood. To meet this requirement their ancestor had to appear on the Final Rolls of Creeks by Blood (1907), Census of the Creek Nation (1833), Land location registers (1832), or other acceptable record.
• Attach documents (such as census records, birth certificates, death certificates, etc.) to prove lineal descent -- a proven, unbroken connection between themselves and their Creek Ancestor.

Keep in mind these applications were being completed and reviewed prior to the wide-spread implementation of many resources we take for granted today – such as computers, Xerox machines, “finding resources” such as census indexes, marriage indexes, etc., “genealogy” sections in local libraries, and even the Internet. Because of these limitations, applicants submitted certified transcripts of Census and other records which they obtained from a qualifying government office (i.e., "record custodians"). Many applicants hired lawyers or researchers because they lacked the resources or skills to locate the required documents.

Because many of the Ancestors claimed by descendants in the East never resided within Creek Nation Oklahoma (DAWES Roll, Old Settlers Roll), or were not living in a Creek Indian Town enumerated in the early 1830s (Parsons & Abbott Roll) -- their descendants had to rely on "other acceptable records" for proof of ancestry. For many, this resulted in sworn statements from individuals who personally knew their Ancestor was a Creek Indian (i.e., "eye witness" or "first-hand" affidavits and sworn statements).

Completed applications were submitted to the Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Muskogee Area Office.

The folks on the receiving end of these applications did not have computers or other modern conveniences, either. The Bureau had to rely on folders, metal filing cabinets, manually stamping control numbers on each application, manual lists, and other forms of managing the mounds of paper records. Each application was reviewed, letters sent back to the applicant outlining missing documentation or other errors, and eventually ended with either a letter finding them eligible or not eligible.

Since the Bureau was also processing similar claims from American Indians who were citizens of federally recognized tribes (each already assigned a roll number), they created EASTERN CREEK NUMBERS (EC Numbers) for each ancestor reported by non-enrolled applicants EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI. Most likely the creation of EC Numbers allowed the processing of applications from "non-enrolled" Indians to better conformed to their processes. Therefore, EC Numbers are not "roll numbers" nor do they indicate citizenship or membership in any tribe.

To provide a more complete picture of this process:

• More than 500 Eastern Creek ancestors were reported on applications. Of these, about 350 were issued EC Numbers. It is unknown how many were proven to be Creeks by Blood.
• More than 29,270 Eastern Creek applications were received and processed.
• At least 19,925 applications were found eligible to receive a portion of the disbursement. Of those, about 7,725 people were found eligible for both Docket disbursements (Dockets 21/276 and 275).

Unfortunately, after the Docket disbursements were completed, all supporting documents were returned to the applicant and, for the most part, only their 3-page application and final letter from the BIA remained on file.  Therefore, it is unknown which document or documents the Bureau used to “prove” most ancestors.

There are a handful of instances where these documents were not returned. In reviewing Docket applications with attachments we find:

• letters sent by the BIA to applicants reveal the agency worked with each applicant when genealogy or other problems were found. 
• the BIA relied heavily on a primary contact for each family group, and,
• when a EC Numbered Ancestor was “proven to be Creek by Blood” by one family group, it was proven for all family groups claiming that ancestor. In other words, each applicant was not required to prove their ancestor was Creek by Blood.

Examples of dialogs supporting these processes include:

• Letter from Clyde Busey, Supervisory Claims Examiner, BIA, to Maxine [redacted] dated 4/26/1971 says:  "If official written documents are submitted by any rejected applicant who claims eligibility through James Hall, which proves that James Hall is a descendant of a Hollinger, a McGhee or a Stiggins, or any other person known to be a Creek Indian, eligibility of the James Hall group will be assured."
   
• Letter from C. Springwater, Area Tribal Operations Officer to Stacey [redacted], dated 10/9/1980 says:  "You also stated that one of your ancestors was an illegitimate child.  Therefore, we cannot accept affidavits in this case. Only documents we can accept is if the father signs the child's birth certificate, a statement which swears that he is the child's father or decree issued by a court of law establishing who the father is."
   
• Letter from Clyde Busey, Supervisory Claims Examiner, to Jimmie [redacted] dated 5/18/1971 says:  "... you are given forty-five days from 5/21/1971 to submit this evidence.  You state that given time you will prove that all of the James Hall group are eligible.  We hope that you can do this because we would like to see all applicants prove their eligibility.  Please do not write us anything else about the Indians word meaning nothing to the White Man. Lets just stick to the business at hand"
   
• Carbon copy of letter from C.C. Carshall, Deputy Area Director to Senator Sparkman dated 12/23/1971 says:  "Thank you for forwarding the documents ... Mrs. Adams mailed the originals of these documents to us and they were placed in her file to be considered as evidence in determining whether or not she is eligible to be enrolled to share in the distribution of Creek funds from Docket 21.  We enclose copies of our letters of November 18, 1970 and November 23, 1971, to Mrs. Adams which sets out the proof which she must submit to prove her eligibility.  The proof which we request is basic and very material to her case and cannot be waived."
   
• Carbon copy of letter from Clyde Busey, Supervisory Claims Examiner, BIA to Mrs. Adams dated 11/18/1970 says:  "Because many applicants to be enrolled to share in the Creek payments we are to make refer to the documents attached to your application for proof of eligibility, we are writing you for additional proof.  Please send us documentary evidence which proves that Benjamin Adams is a son of Sarah Durant and Sam Adams. Also documentary evidence which proves that Harriett [redacted] is a daughter of Benjamin [redacted] and Pollie [redacted].  Also documentary evidence which proves that Jincy [redacted] is a daughter of William [redacted] and Harriett [redacted]."
   
• Form letter from Dennis Springwater, Area Tribal Operations Officer, BIA, to Frances [redacted], dated 4/28/1981, says:  "We have examined the applications(s) for enrollment to share in the Eastern Creek judgment funds Docket 275 for the following applicant(s):  Frances [redacted].  Before enrollment of these applicant(s) can be considered, you must submit the following document(s):  birth certificate for Frances [redacted] which states that she is the daughter of Rosie [redacted].  Birth certificate or other official document for Rosie [redacted] which states that she is the daughter of William [redacted].  You need to provide us with a marriage license or death record of Mary [redacted] which shows that Mary [maiden name] and Mary [married name] are one and the same person.  We need an official document which shows her parents name.  In the Will of William Hollinger it does not say my daughter Mary [redacted].  Also, we do not believe William [redacted] on the 1880 Census and William [redacted] on the 1860 Census are one and the same person because of the age difference.  We are returning the copy of the driver licenses since it does not state parents name."
   
• Carbon copy of letter from Clyde Busey, Supervisory Claims Examiner, BIA, to Loyce [redacted] dated 10/13/1970 says:  "... please send us documentary evidence which proves that either [list of names], your great grandparents, are Creek Indians.  Affidavits based on information and belief, or hearsay, are not, as a rule, acceptable as proof."
   

Copies of these and other applications are in the Federal Archives. Even without the supporting documents, these applications continue to be a great resource for genealogy researchers because most of them include a hand-written pedigree chart. You can request copies by sending email to ftworth.archives@nara.gov or by calling (817) 831-5620.

Does an EC NUMBER prove my ancestor is Indian?

Maybe. Each applicant had to identify their qualifying Creek ancestor on their application. To see a partial list of the Creek Ancestors identified during this process, visit: genealogytrails.com/ ala/baldwin/ eastern_creek_ancestor_list.html

Some of the issues with EC Numbers include:

• If an applicant identified multiple ancestors, they were found eligible under only one ancestor. Even if they provided proof all of their ancestors were Creek by Blood, only one of them was issued an EC Number. For example, if John and Mahalia Smith were both proven to be full blood Creek Indians, then only John was issued the EC Number. However, if Mahalia had children by more than one husband, she received an EC Number if, and only if, descendants of her children by the other husband also submitted applications.
   
• Sometimes the applicant would say their qualifying ancestor was a descendant of a previously proven ancestor. For example, if John and Mahalia's grandson was named Billy, the applicant would summit their application claiming Billy Smith as their ancestor. The Bureau corrected their application and awarded under John Smith's EC Number. This happened frequently with Weatherford, Hollinger, and Moniac descendants.
   
• In some cases, the EC Number was issued to the ancestor reported on the application, however the ancestor was never proven to be Creek by Blood. For example, Peter Anderson was issued EC Number 11372 when 203 applications were received claiming him as their qualifying ancestor. Every application was rejected. Most were rejected because they failed to prove they were a lineal descendant.
   
• In other cases, the ancestor reported by the applicant was never issued an EC Number because the application was rejected. Reasons for rejection include failing to produce the required documentation, the documentation submitted disproved the person's claim, applicant didn't meet the criteria (either born after the starting period, died during the process, or application not received before the deadline), applicant submitted a blank application and failed to provide the missing information by the deadline, etc.
   
• In many cases, not all applications claiming the same ancestor were approved. Many applicants proved their ancestor was Creek by Blood but failed to provide documents proving they were a lineal descendant. For example, they could not prove the parents of their great-grand father or great-grand mother. Or, due to common misspellings of last names or their ancestors adopting a different last name, the documentation they provided wasn't accepted. This means the ancestor was proven to be a Creek Indian, but all descendants from their great-grandparents down were unproven. In cases like this, where one or more children cannot be proven, other branches of the family tree going through proven children were eligible while branches going through the unproven children were rejected.
   
• Today, with so many records online and easily searched it is much easier to find and prove ancestry. Back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s when these applications were being submitted, it required spending many hours in libraries. Today, there are cases where the BIA reviewed an application and found the documentation submitted by the application adequate to prove their lineal descendant -- which have now been proven wrong or questionable. For example, new documents indicate the wife's real name was something other than submitted. On the flip side of that coin, there are cases rejected by the Bureau which have now been proven.

So, what exactly is an EC Number? It is a number assigned by the Federal Government to individuals living around 1830 and reported to be "Creek by Blood" by their descendants living in the 1960s & 1970s. The number alone does not provide proof that someone has native ancestry. However, the EC Number AND proof that a descendant was awarded Dockets disbursements DOES prove Creek Blood and native ancestry.

There is one more important thing to realize -- only Creek Indians receive EC Numbers. If you are researching your native roots and suspect your ancestor comes from another tribe (such as Cherokee) -- they will not have an EC Number.