The John Coffee Hays Club's 2020 Annual Roundup -- Guest Speaker Tom Correa

Here I am signing books before speaking 
at the John Coffee Hays Club Annual Fundraiser
Photograph by Troy Ellis

Dear Friends, 

Well, here's the rest of the story about my first speaking engagement with the John Coffee Hays Club . This is about how it all came about. And frankly, you might find this interesting. My subject was "Vigilantes in the Old West." As for the overall message of my speech, it was a simple one: As Americans, we are the law.

Below is the backstory! 

It all started, if I remember right, in May of last year, 2019, when I was contacted by Dan Terry, who is one of the board of directors of the John Coffee Hays Club. He invited me to speak at their annual dinner, which was supposed to be held later in October 2020. Along with the invitation to speak at that event, he advised me that his organization would cover my transportation costs, and he even offered me an honorarium. He also asked me to become a member of the John Coffee Hays Club.

Before going on with how I ended up speaking at the dinner, let me just say that since starting my blog The American Cowboy Chronicles in December of 2010, there have been several groups who have invited me to attend and speak at their events. All have requested me to speak to them about some subject or another, but surprisingly not every group has wanted me to talk about my favorite subject which is Old West History. Surprising as it is to me, some groups have wanted me to talk about my Conservative views. Well, either way, history or Conservatism, I've always politely declined.

Please understand that all of them have been very gracious. All have been very respectful. But, even though that has always been the case, I have not accepted any invitations to speak to any other group. Again, please understand, that's not to say that I haven't been flattered to have been invited. And that's not to say that some groups haven't made some very enticing offers of compensation for me to do so. It's just that I haven't been very comfortable talking to a group of people who I don't know.

Let's be frank here. I don't mind talking to the folks here in our small rural community. I don't mind standing up at our Americans Legion post during our local Memorial Day observance or when I've had to officiate the funerals of friends. In those cases, folks know me. And besides, a few minutes of talking with a group where everyone more or less knows everyone else, and a few good words and prayers are needed to comfort those there, that's a lot different than giving a speech in front of people who I don't know. 

Since Dan Terry said he was familiar with my work, I decided to look into the John Coffee Hays Club almost immediately after getting his invitations. The group's website says it is "a private, fraternal organization, with a selective membership." 

Their website also states, "We organized a club through which we, as free men, may unite: to address the responsibilities we have to defend, protect and promote our shared American heritage, American culture and The American Way.

To educate the members and the public at large as to what The American Way has contributed, contributes in the present and will further contribute to the security of free men and the promotion of ordered freedom as defined by Natural Law and the Greco-Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Hebraic-Christian deposit of social capital here in the United States of America – the crowning glory and zenith of milenia of Western Civilization.

We advocate and support the timeless truths of the Natural Law, the triumphs of Western Civilization, and the supremacy of The American Way.  This organization promotes our American heritage generally, the cultural legacy of the American West more distinctively, and the patrimony and ideals of northern California specifically."

Yes indeed, they say, "We, as free men, may unite: to address the responsibilities we have to defend, protect and promote our shared American heritage, American culture and The American Way." How can anyone not like that? 

So yes, I immediately liked what I read including when they said, "John Coffee Hays was an American icon who lived by, respected, and honored the heritage of the American firearm."

The mission of the John Coffee Hays Club is "Defending The Republic." Their motto is "Virtuti, Honor, Traditio" which is Latin meaning "Virtue, Honor, Tradition."

The event which I was being invited to was their second dinner. By the way, their first dinner, their founding dinner, had a very prestigious speaker who is a world-renown author and scholar. The previous speaker at their founding dinner was the famous Dr. Victor Davis Hanson. Friends, I'm a great admirer of Dr. Hanson and enjoy hearing his views on Fox News. I couldn't see myself following him for their second year. We are cut from two different types of cloth. Dr. Hanson is a very polished brilliant speaker. I'm just Tom.

While that's all the truth, to my absolute surprise, 12 hours after receiving Dan Terry's email, I accepted his invitation to join his group as a member and to speak there. I found out later in an exchange of emails that the event was actually a fundraiser for a charity that they sponsor. In fact, the charity which they sponsor is the Happy Trail Children's Foundation started by Roy Rogers and Dale Evans.

My Book & A Glass Of Whisky
Photograph by Troy Ellis

So now, I replied to Dan Terry, and in my reply, I let him that I did know a little about John Coffee "Captain Jack" Hays. From what I know about him, Capt. Jack was really an impressive individual. He is a legend among Texas Rangers, a man who was also the first Sheriff of San Francisco County, and he was a die-hard Indian fighter. 

If I remember right, I think I let Dan Terry know that I've been working on an upcoming book that may have a story about Capt. Jack's relationship with the San Francisco Committee of Vigilance of 1851. When I say "may have" --  it's only if I'm satisfied and feel I do justice to the Captain.

Since I accepted his offer to become a member, I let Dan Terry know that I would set up a back-link so that my readers can visit The John Coffee Hays Club website. Yes, that's why I now have a back-link to The John Coffee Hays Club website on my blog. I put it there so that my readers can read more about the famous Texas Ranger. As for my speaking to the John Coffee Hays Club, I did ask Dan Terry if there would be other speakers? When was it being held? And of course, I wanted to know what topic they wanted me to cover? 

I later learned that I was the only speaker scheduled. It became very obvious to me that I had no idea what took place at such events. And yes, my friends, it was then that I realized that my habit of avoiding such functions, and worst not speaking at them when I have been asked, had caught up to me.

As for the club covering my transportation costs and any sort of an honorarium, I turned it down. While it was a very gracious offer, the fact is I wasn't interested in letting them do that. You see, besides liking what I read about the group on their website, I didn't feel right about taking an honorarium since I'm obviously not a professional speaker. Also, after finding out that it was to raise money for a charity, I figured that whatever they wanted to spend on me would be better off sent to their charity. After all, as I said before, it was a charity fundraiser. That's a good cause. 

Instead, if the club did really want to do something, then I suggested the club simply buy my wife and my dinner. Friends, the dinner was held at one of the best steakhouses in Northern California -- the Back Forty Texas BBQ Roadhouse & Saloon in Pleasant Hill. From everything that I heard about the Back Forty Texas BBQ, those folks know how to Bar-B-Q. That was enough by itself. 

So okay, a few months go by and I hadn't heard from them to confirm a time or date. Frankly, I started to wonder if the invitation still held. Then, after a few emails, they let me know that they had some bad news. Their dinner had to be postponed until January or February because of scheduling with the folks at Back Forty Texas BBQ. 

By the way, when I was informed of the date, they also let me know that there was an initiation to the club that I needed to do. Yes, an initiation. Imagine that.

I was informed that the initiation was going to be held at the grave of John Coffee Hays himself. Yes, at his grave.

When I told my wife about that, she asked me what sort of initiation? When I told a couple of close friends about it, they laughed and wanted to know if it included booze. Two of my very close friends who wanted to go to the dinner also wanted to go to the initiation just to see what that was all about. Trust me when I say that I was very curious.

So yes, my wife, my close friends Kevin and Brett Haight, and I arrived at the grave of John Coffee Hays in Mountain View Cemetery in Oakland at about 2pm on February 8th. It was there that I had the pleasure of meeting part of the club's board of directors, Dave Yuers, Dan Terry, and Keith Schwartz. 

I met the rest of the board, Chuck Baumann and Daryl Chilimidos, later when I arrived at the Back Forty Texas BBQ.

Among the very famous people buried in Mountain View Cemetery in Oakland are railroad magnate and banker Charles Crocker, J. A. Folger who was the founder of Folgers Coffee, Domingo Ghirardelli who was the founder of the Ghirardelli Chocolate Company, and Austin H. Hills who founded with his brother, R. W. Hills, Hills Bros. Coffee in San Francisco in 1878. 

Also, Henry J. Kaiser is buried there. Many know Kaiser Hospital, but some might not know that he's considered the father of modern American shipbuilding. Besides such industrialists and businessmen, a large number of California governors and military men whose deeds are found in history books are also buried there. Many are Medal of Honor recipients.

As for those who are greats of American History who are buried there, of course, there is none other than Texas Ranger legend John Coffee "Capt. Jack" Hays. The first time I visited Capt. Jack's grave was in 1980. I would have never thought that I'd be drinking outstanding whisky at his grave some 40 years later. But frankly, that was the situation in a nutshell. 

My wife Deanna, along with my friends Kevin and Brett, witnessed my initiation. Yes, it did entail booze. Dave Yuers, Dan Terry, and Keith Schwartz presented me with a whisky glass embossed with my name. They poured drinks all around and I took the oath. After that, we toasted Capt. Jack! And then, we poured a little bourbon on the grass near the three flags that sit atop his grave. The three flags represent his being a Texas Ranger, a California Pioneer, and the American Patriot that he was. 

It was a good thing all the way around. These are good men. Very fine Americans. 

Talking with Keith Schwartz, Daryl Chilimidos, and Chuck Baumann
John Coffee Hays Club Annual Fundraiser
February 8, 2020
Photograph by Troy Ellis

When we arrived at the steakhouse, the club had set up a table for me to sell and sign books. This was also my first time doing a book-signing. I can report that everyone I met was all very nice and interested in the Old West. 

Believe it or not, some said they had already bought my book The American Cowboy Chronicles Old West Myths & Legends: The Honest Truth Book 1. They bought it online when they heard that I was going to be the keynote speaker.

We took pictures at the bar, we had a few drinks, then we had dinner. Soon enough, I was introduced. David Yuers is the president and he gave me a very nice introduction. He opened by telling those there that I might explain where the 3-7-77 comes from.

The 3-7-77 was a vigilante group in Montana. I sort of decided to stick to my notes and pass on that. The reason that I did so has to do with the 3-7-77 itself. I felt that since no one knows exactly where the numbers originated or really meant, and it is a real Old West mystery, explaining all of the different theories as to where that came from might have been too time-consuming. 

Looking back on it now, I could have simply told those there that the accepted version of what the 3-7-77 means really has to do with the dimensions of a grave back then. And frankly, I wish I had. 

Below is the link to the video, I hope you enjoy it: 

John Coffee Hays Annual Roundup - Speaker Tom Correa 

Tom Correa speaking at the John Coffee Hays Club Annual Fundraiser
February 8, 2020
Photograph by Troy Ellis

It was my first experience as a public speaker. They say we're all our worse critics. For me, that's always been the case. I admit that I was sort of nervous at first and I did lose track of time. And besides not addressing where the 3-7-77 is believed to have come from, my only regret as far as my talk goes is that I had so many great stories about vigilantes that I wanted to tell, but time got away from me. 

As for the video, I cannot thank photographer/cinematographer Troy Ellis enough. He did such a great job making me look better than I felt by the end of the night. As for the sound, I think I sound horrible. 

My friends who've seen the video say that doesn't sound like me. But there may be a reason for that. And yes, that goes to my coming down with the flu. That morning, my throat was killing me so I loaded up on flu medications. So while that night was great, I felt horrible and fought the flu for the next three weeks after that. 

Brett & Kevin Haight

As for the dinner, it was outstanding. The food and drinks were simply outstanding. But more than the great meal and drinks, the sense of camaraderie was wonderful. Frankly, it made me think I should leave the farm more often. 

As for my friends who were there, besides Kevin and Brett, my friends Rudy and his wife Paula showed up, so did my in-laws Tom and Fran Prickett. All seemed to have had a very good time. 

I have to say that the people who attended the dinner were very nice. And as for the John Coffee Hays Club's board of directors, folks would have a hard time finding a nicer group of guys. 

After the dinner, my wife and I were surprised when Dan Terry's wife presented my wife with a bouquet of roses. Dan presented me with a Bowie Knife. It caught me by complete surprise at that. 

I was touched by their graciousness and class. Little did they know that I have a small collection of Bowie knives, bayonets, my old K-Bar from my days in the Marine Corps, and such. So yes, it was very much appreciated. I enjoyed it a lot.

After my talk, a few people came up to me to ask questions. All said they enjoyed what I had to say. Which frankly, surprised me since I thought I was rambling. A couple of people who I spoke with asked where and when would be my next speaking engagement. They said they wanted to learn more. I told them they were very nice to say that, but that I don't usually do public speaking even though I've been asked to in the past. I told them that I'm a lot more comfortable writing. 

So now, with all of that said, I have to admit that I left the door open to do it again for the same group simply because I like the guys who are the board of directors. They are some of the nicest guys I've ever met. While it felt like they were going out of their way to be gracious, I think it just comes naturally for them.

Every once in a while I get to meet a person who impresses me. Sometimes it's because of their craftsmanship, skills, or maybe because of their fighting the good fight. Sometimes, every blue moon or so, I'll meet someone with truly exceptionally good character. Well, I've never met a group that impresses me as much as Dave Yuers, Dan Terry, Keith Schwartz, Chuck Baumann, and Daryl Chilimidos, did that day. They are truly exceptional.

Dave Yuers, Keith Schwartz, Tom Correa, Daryl Chilimidos, Chuck Baumann, Dan Terry
Me with the John Coffee Hays Board of Directors
February 8, 2020
Photograph by Troy Ellis

Because of who they are and how they treat others, they impressed me. They treated my wife and me as welcomed friends. They treated my friends and in-laws wonderfully to the point that my friends still talk about how nice they were that night. Yes indeed, these are guys who I'd ride to the river with.

My grandfather once told me, "When telling a story, always to tell the truth while remembering that people won't believe it anyway." My favorite Gunny Sgt. put it this way, "When telling a fish story, always keep the fish the same size. Just try to make the catching sound better."

What do those quotes have to do with my speech? Well, it goes to the heart of my telling stories about what took place in the real Old West -- when I tell real stories about what took place in American History. While some people like fiction, I believe the truth about what took place in the Old West is much more fascinating and enjoyable than the tall tales and fabrications Hollywood and fiction writers come up with.

As a writer, as a storyteller, I enjoy telling stories about life in the Old West as it really was. Or better put, as close to being how it really was with what I've learned over the years. I like telling folks what I've learned about our heritage. I like telling others why we need to celebrate our history as Americans. And while some will not believe it, it will be the honest truth.  

Tom Correa

The Thomas Livingston Correspondence 1863

This is just a short tale of something that happened during the Civil War. It has to do with the practice of Confederate troops killing prisoners of war. One Union commander found a way to stop local Confederates from doing just that. Below is the correspondence between that Union commanding officer and the Confederate commander.

In May of 1863, near the town of Sherwood, Missouri, an exchange of letters took place between Union Colonel James M. Williams, 1st Kansas Colored Infantry, and Confederate Major Thomas R. Livingston, commander of the "Partisan Rangers". The letter is in regards to the treatment of captured black Union troops held by Major Livingston's command.

In the letter to Major Livingston, dated May 26th, 1863, Colonel Williams states:

"I desire to call to your attention to the fact that one of the colored prisoners in your camp was murdered by your soldiers. And I therefore demand of you the body of the man who committed the dastardly act. And if you fail to comply with this demand, and do not do so within forty-eight hours, deliver to me this assassin, I shall hang one of the men who are now prisoners in my camp."

On May 27th, 1863, Major Livingston responded:

"I confess my surprise that an officer of your rank should have fixed such conditions to your demand as you are doubtless aware that the one who committed the offense charged is not a member of any company over which I have any control, but was casually at my camp and became suddenly enraged and an altercation took place between him and deceased which resulted in a way I very much regret, and that said offender's whereabouts are to me unknown, consequently making it impossible for me to comply with your demand."

After receiving Major Livingston's reply, it's said Colonel Williams realized that the Confederate Major was not taking his demands to heart. So with that, Colonel Williams used another tack in his effort to convince the Confederate commander that his behavior of killing prisoners of war would not stand.

Colonel Williams ordered that one of the Confederate prisoners in his possession be shot and that prisoner's body be returned to Livingston personally while under a flag of truce. Colonel Williams' orders were carried out within a matter of thirty minutes. And right after that, he informed Major Livingston of his action. 

It's said that that ended the practice of the Confederates murdering prisoners of war black or white. At least that was the case in Missouri since Major Livingston's command never again murdered Union prisoners.

So who was Confederate Major Thomas Livingston?

Major Thomas R. Livingston was a "Border Ruffian" or "Bushwhacker" who murdered blacks and Republican abolitionist without hesitation. In the 1850's, Livingston was made a Captain of a "Border Ruffian" unit which was tasked with the defense of western Missouri against Kansas Jayhawkers. 

Jayhawkers were militant bands affiliated with the free-state cause during the Civil War. They were marauding gangs who were guerrillas. But make no mistake about what they did, they more than not fought pro-slavery groups such as the "Border Ruffians" or "Bushwhackers" in the Kansas Territory.  

At the start of the Civil War in 1861, Livingston joined the Confederacy by joining the 11th Cavalry Regiment of the Missouri State Guard as a Captain. As a Captain, he commanded a Confederate cavalry battalion which became known as "Livingston's Rangers." As insurgents creating chaos and death, they were authorized under the Partisan Ranger Act of the Confederate government to conduct guerrilla attacks. Because the Confederacy knew there was no way for them to conquer and hold Missouri, their plan was to destroy and terrorize Missouri using guerrilla warfare.

Livingston entered Jasper County, and then over into Arkansas and Indian Territory. Union Colonel James M. Williams, 1st Kansas Colored Infantry, was advised of Livingston's policy of shooting Union prisoners -- especially black Union troops who he had a personal grudge against. Because of his actions which was seen as barbarism even by the standards of the times, he was labeled an "Outlaw Bushwhacker."

On July 11th, 1863, Livingston led his Partisan Rangers northeast to Stockton, Missouri, with the plan of capturing Union supplies at a small Union garrison there. His unit of 250 cavalry surprise the town. Against them was 20 Union militiamen who sought cover in the town's courthouse. Those 20 made a stand and actually survived against overwhelming odds.

In fact, during the attack, one soldier in that group of 20 Union militiamen, of those who were holed up in the courthouse, actually shot Livingston out of his saddle. Soon after that, thinking their leader dead, Livingston's men retreated.  

After the fight, the 20 Union militiamen emerged from the courthouse. It's said it was then that they looked over the dead Confederates and found the wounded Major Livingston. Some say he reached for a rifle as they approached him. Others say he tried to get to his feet. Other say he simply laid there in pain begging for help. Fact is no one really knows what happened to make those Union militiamen shoot Livingston to pieces, but they did just that. And some say, it was done to make sure he was dead.

From there, he and the other dead Confederate invaders were buried in a mass grave. With Major Livingston's death, his leaderless battalion disbanded. And while it is said that some of his men may have fought on with other Confederate guerrilla groups bend on pillaging, burning, and murder, there were those who celebrated knowing that Livingston's guerrillas would not bother anyone again.

Tom Correa

Gilleland's Civil War Double-Barrel Cannon

The story of the double-barreled cannon has to do with an experimental weapon during the Civil War. Of course, while that's true, the concept of such a field piece goes back to an arms maker in Italy in 1642. That particular gun maker did in fact cast a double-barrel cannon which was intended to be fired simultaneously. It was designed to fire two cannonballs linked by a chain from its side-by-side barrels. The rounds were to act as a mower or sickle to cut down enemy soldiers as if they were wheat. Imagine that!

In 1862, an Athens, Georgia, dentist by the name of John Gilleland, no relation to Georgia dentist Doc Holliday, raised money from Confederates there and cast a double-barrel cannon. It had twin side-by-side 3 inch bores. As with the Italian gun maker's design of 1642, Gilleland's cannon was designed to simultaneously shoot two cannonballs connected with a chain. For things to work out without a hitch, simultaneous ignition was key. The powder in each barrel had to ignite at the exact same moment in time to have things go well. An instant off in either barrel meant trouble. 

April 22nd, 1862, was the day of the first test of the Gilleland cannon. It's said that his double-barrel cannon was aimed at a couple of upright poles. The poles were going to be used to gauge the effect of the shot so that it could be accurately measured. Well, as with the best laid plans of mice and men, the powder ignited unevenly. 

Because of that and imperfections in the casting process, the twin barrels gave the connected balls a spinning movement in a direction other than where the targets were located. Witnesses reported that its rounds "plowed up about an acre of ground, tore up a cornfield, mowed down saplings, and then the chain broke, the two balls going in different directions." 

And no, things didn't go any better during the second test. During its second test, the chain broke when the barrels ignited a second or two apart and subsequently shot that chain over the horizon. Witnesses during the second test reported, "The thicket of young pines at which it was aimed looked as if a narrow cyclone or a giant mowing machine had passed through it."

On its third and last test, when fired, the chain snapped almost instantly. With that, one cannonball slammed into a nearby cabin and took out its chimney. The other cannonball took off in a whole different direction and killed a cow. 

So believe it or not, during those tests, the Gilleland cannon mowed down trees, cut through a cornfield, and showed that it was capable of taking out a cabin and killing a cow who wasn't a threat to the Confederacy. Were those trees, cornfield, cabin, or that cow even near the intended targets of Gilleland's double-barrel cannon? No. Not even close. In fact, none of those things including that poor cow were reported to be anywhere near its actual targets or impact area. 

Because it was such a failure, the Confederacy didn't want anything to do with it. In fact, no matter how much Gilleland tried to pawn it off on the Confederates, no one in the South's military wanted it. But its rejection wasn't the end of the story of Gilleland's double-barrel cannon. The folks in Georgia agreed to use if as a blank firing signal cannon to be used to warn the city of Monroe in the event of approaching Union troops. 

On July 27th, 1864, Gilleland's double-barrel cannon was actually fired once for just that reason. It was on that day when there was a report of several thousand Union troops being sighted approaching Monroe. The Gilleland cannon was loaded with shot but not cannonballs, it was readied and fired to signal the city that Yankees were advancing on Monroe. The cannon's signal did in fact incite mass hysteria in the city of Monroe. The hysteria died down and calm was regained in the city later when it was found that the reported sighting of Union troops turned out to be false. 

While that was the last time it was fired, today Gilleland's double-barrel cannon is on display in front of the City Hall of Athens, Georgia. As part of the Downtown Athens Historic District, it's said to be one of the city's most popular and well-known attractions there. 

And while Gilleland's double-barrel Civil War cannon never saw battle, and is today a very popular landmark, the folks in Athens, Georgia, found it fitting to point it facing north when they positioned it in front of their City Hall. Though it never used in battle, some say it's pointing North as a symbolic gesture of defiance against the Yankees that it was built to fight. Of course there are those who say the Yankees probably had spies in the South who reported how it was useless weapon all the way around. Unless of course the target was something other than what was being aimed at.  

Tom Correa 

Joshua Abraham Norton -- America's Self-proclaimed Emperor Of The United States

I was in a conversation recently, and we were talking about Hawaiian history. Our conversation had to do with the surrender of the Queen in 1893 then again in 1895, the fact that the Queen attempted a coup to overthrow her own brother, and how the United States didn't even want Hawaii.

I was asked about a group in Hawaii that wants to return things to the days when the islands were ruled by an absolute monarchy. An absolute monarchy is a form of monarchy in which the monarch holds supreme autocratic authority. That would mean that the King or Queen would be free from any authority. Absolute monarchies are usually hereditary monarchies. They don't believe in subjects having even the slightest rights that Americans citizens see as being basic to our existence.

In monarchies, Kings and Queens believe they were chosen by God and the people answer to them. In contrast, in a representative republic, the politicians voted into office must answer to the people. Under a monarchy, the people are subjects without any rights. In a representative republic, the people are citizens with rights. These are huge differences.

While obviously such a return is the wishful thinking of power-hungry individuals, we can be thankful that such a thing will never happen since the residents of Hawaii are citizens of our 50th state. But that doesn't mean that there aren't people living in the state of Hawaii who claim they are in fact today's "Hawaiian royalty" and want to see a King or Queen on the thrown there.

As for the wannabe Hawaiian monarchs and their desire to rule the islands as was done over 130 years ago, I have to admit that whenever I think of American citizens declaring themselves some sort of royalty, including "Hawaiian royalty," I think of Joshua Abraham Norton.

Joshua Abraham Norton was known as "Emperor Norton." He was a resident of San Francisco during the California Gold Rush. He became quite the celebrity after proclaiming himself "Norton I, Emperor of the United States" in 1859.

Of course, we all need to remember, just because someone declares himself or herself "royalty" doesn't make it so. In Norton's case, that certainly didn't make it so. But frankly, that didn't matter to Norton -- especially after he started making a living off his new found royalty.

Joshua Abraham Norton is believe to have been born in England on February 4, 1818. Though born in England, he is said to have spent his early life in South Africa. It's believed he left South Africa and sailed to San Francisco in late 1849 after inheriting a large sum of money when his parents passed on. 

He arrived in San Francisco as a businessman at the age of 31, and established himself as a prominent citizen. Things changed for him a year or so after arriving when he supposedly lost everything making bad investments. While trying to recover, it's said he was connected with this and that business deal but failed to recover his losses. 

It was about then that he disappeared for almost eight years. In reality, after he filed for bankruptcy, it's said that he went from being a prominent member of the San Francisco business community to living at a working-class boarding house and working menial jobs to feed himself.

He reappeared seemingly out of nowhere in September of 1859. It was at that time that he proclaimed himself "Norton I, Emperor of the United States." Yes, he declared himself the "Emperor of the United States." And just like other make-believe monarchs, he even created his own royal uniform. Yes, with ceremonial sword and all.  

San Francisco has a long history of embracing the strange, the eccentric, and swindlers. Like those with worthless royal titles in Los Angeles and New York City today, Norton was perfect for San Francisco upper-class who saw him as a fascination, a novelty, a curiosity, someone to fawn over. Fact is he gained a sort of celebrity status, and the people in San Francisco went crazy over him.

Norton found his self-proclaimed royal status a lot better than simply being a down and out businessman. San Francisco's upper-crust paid him to appear at their social events, everyone did him favors, people provided him with a hotel room and even servants from time to time simply because it was believed that's what a man of "royalty" deserved.

Why? Well, mostly because he was entertaining while being extremely harmless. People support such non-sense for one reason of another, and in Norton's case he seem to add a needed diversion from the world. This was a period in American History when tellers of tale tales were prized for the entertainment value. In fact, telling tall tales was how Mark Twain got started.

Besides, people there liked him. They actually helped him keep it all going. They allowed him to think he was royalty even when they knew full well there's no such thing in America. Yes, all in the exact same way that some have allowed people in Hawaii, Los Angeles, and New York City to continue calling themselves "royalty" when in fact America does not have, nor recognize, royalty among our citizens.

Allowing the "royalty" shtick to keep going is how a lot of such things continue to manifest themselves. In the case of so-called royalty today, whether it's getting people to contribute their money to a "foundation" run by "royals," or to get people to contribute their money to a group touting the need of funds for "official state business" of "the Kingdom," people calling themselves "royalty" are not above taking money from others.

Not everyone accepted what Norton was selling without questioning what he was all about. But then again, that was part of what made him a curiosity. People wanted to know what made him think he really could be Emperor Of The United States. As for profiting from his behavior, when you think about it, it was probably no different than today since both the wealthy aristocrats and merchants alike capitalized on his behavior. It's true. It didn't matter to them what his reasons were, there were people in San Francisco who milked it for all it was worth.

Citizens of San Francisco celebrated Norton's "imperial presence." The high-brows used Norton's royalty and notoriety by inviting him to events. His invited presence at a soiree was used to show off their supposed blue-blood pedigrees and taste for the avant-garde. He really was seen as a charming eccentric.

Of course, there were those who saw Norton as being very profitable. That's why merchants loved him. While we think of things like souvenirs as being a modern occurrence, they're not. In fact, San Francisco merchants loved his celebrity status so much that they sold all sorts of souvenirs bearing his name and face. One quick thinking entrepreneur wanting to cash in on his self-proclaimed royalty actually created fake currency with his likeness and issued it in his name.

s

Tailors wanted to dress him and restaurateurs sought him out to have meals at their establishments, all free of charge of course, just so they would be able to publicize his being an honored visitor of their establishments.

San Francisco newspapers also saw him as a gift when trying to sell papers. As with tabloids today who carry what some former-royal from England says about something or other, the newspapers in San Francisco jumped at the chance to publish his declaration of a secondary title as "Protector of Mexico" in 1863. They also carried Norton's proclamations, such as when he decided to order that the United States Congress be dissolved by force. 

So was he a con artist or simply insane? Was it all a scam or did he really believe that he was what he claimed he was? Some hold to the theory that he went from successful businessman to bankrupt, and that drove him insane. But since he didn't really profit monetarily from his declaration of being Emperor, what were the reasons for his deciding to proclaim himself "Norton I, Emperor of the United States?" 

There is a reason that I keep mentioning the possibility of he being a con artist. There have been a lot of people in the world who have scammed others by pretending to be royalty. If Norton was a con artist, he wasn't the first to try to pull off a royalty fraud to bilk people out of money. There have been a lot of others who have tried to claim the status and wealth of royal families.

Take for for example, Anna Anderson who professed to be Princess Anastasia Romanov. In 1918, Russian Bolshevik revolutionaries murdered the entire Romanov royal family. Of course that small fact didn't stop people from spreading the story that the Princess Anastasia was spared and swept to safety. Anna Anderson showed up years later claiming to be Princess Anastasia, the Grand Duchess Anastasia of Russia.

Anastasia was the youngest daughter of the last Tsar and Tsarina of Russia, Nicholas II and Alexandra. She along with the rest of the Romanov royal family was murdered on July 17th, 1918 by Communist revolutionaries in Yekaterinburg, Russia. They were all dumped in a shallow grave, but the location of her body was not known until 2007. 

Anna Anderson turned out to be a real con artist who had used several different names. She was a Polish-German factory worker from Pomerania, and probably the best known impostor of several other impostors who showed up over the years trying to make claim to the Romanov name. In her case, she migrated to the United States and died in 1984. 

Karl Wilhelm Naundorff was a German watchmaker, but he went down in history as a German swindler who went to his grave insisting that he was the eldest son to the King of France. His story started out when he arrived in Paris in the 1830s and immediately claimed to be Prince Louis-Charles, the son of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. Of course King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were beheaded when they were executed for treason by guillotine in 1793 during the French Revolution.

The French people were suspect of Naundorff from the start since several men had already come forward to say they were the long-dead eldest son of the King of France. But, while that was the case, Naundorff did win over many high profile figures and kept up his claims, even as he was branded a fraud. Believe it or not, after being expelled from France, Naundorff moved to the Netherlands where he was known as Prince Louis-Charles. He was able to convince people there of his claim. With that, he lived the life of a royal. Well, in reality, he lived the life of an exiled prince until his death.

As for his true identity, Naundorff's relation to the royalty of France would be in question for more than 150 years. But, as with the case of Anna Anderson who professed to be a Romanov, years later the advent of DNA testing revealed the truth. Her DNA was tested and it was found she was not related to the Romanov royal family. As for Karl Wilhelm Naundorff, his DNA proved he too was a fraud and was not related to Marie Antoinette. Both were impostors.

Whether it's wishful thinking by a handful of people trying to pass themselves off as actually representing a fictional royal Hawaiian nation, or someone like Joshua Abraham Norton who proclaims himself the Emperor of the United States on a September day, there are all sorts of con artists and delusional people out there. 

As for whether he was simply eccentric to the point of really believing that he was some sort of fictional Emperor of the United States? Who knows why he did it. And as for those like myself who wonder if he simply woke up one day to suddenly find himself a royal who could issue proclamations pertaining to the building of bridges and more? Again I say, who knows. I don't know if anyone will ever know Norton's true motives other than getting the attention he wanted.

Again, that takes us to the question of motive for other so-called royals out there. For example, there's a group of self-proclaimed Hawaiian royalty in Hawaii. That group wants to "restore relationships with royal houses around the world, especially among those nations that recognized the independence of the Hawaiian Kingdom."

Okay, so they want to restore the Hawaiian monarchy to the throne. Of course it doesn't matter that the Hawaiian Kingdom is as dead as Julius Caesar. It doesn't matter that the last Queen who tried to overthrow her own brother was also overthrown later. Nor does it matter that the United States only annexed Hawaii after it was being threatened for annexation by other foreign powers at the time. None of that matters to delusional people who haven't realized that the world has outgrown such rulers a long time ago. While they might not like it, the world has progressed.

People don't mind governments that are governed. People don't want to be ruled -- especially by people who have no idea how it is to live in a world where you are not pampered royalty. There is a reason the world has fought against monarchies. Most have been tyrannical. The signing of the Magna Carta proves that monarchies only change at the point of a sword, or by overthrow for the good of everyone.

The days of Kings and Queens setting themselves above the people are thankfully gone. And for those who pretend to be royalty when they are in reality just plain old citizens, I really believe they are sort of like actors at a costume party all playing bit parts that they've created for themselves. 

The sad part is that the truly delusional ones really believe they are better than others, that they really see themselves as Kings and Queens chosen by God. In Hawaiian history, the people never had the right to vote even during the royal elections. And really, why would anyone want to return to the days when the monarchy ruled and the people had no rights and no voice. What's that all about? 

Royalty today, like that in Great Britain, is great for tourism the same way that Norton was great for selling souvenirs in San Francisco from 1859 to 1880. Sadly, for San Francisco that all came to an end on January 8th, 1880, when Joshua Abraham Norton collapsed on a corner in the city of San Francisco and died. Most believe he died of a massive heart attack. 

What people may find interesting is that even though everyone there knew darn well that no one could be "Emperor of the United States," no differently than how we know that we shouldn't take seriously people pretending to be members of a royal family that's long gone, more than 10,000 people lined the streets of San Francisco to pay their respects at Norton's funeral. And believe it or not, legendary writers such as Mark Twain and Robert Louis Stevenson actually immortalized him by making him the basis of characters in their books.

Seeing how he was admired, I really understand why it's said that Joshua Abraham Norton was special in a city that was finding itself. We can call him quirky, a little crazy, a half a bubble off plum, delusional as all get out, or mad as a hatter. And really, all of that might be true. He may have really believed that he was what he said he was. Of course, if that's so, than I say so what!

All in all, Emperor Norton got the attention he wanted, gained a sort of celebrity status, and reaped the admiration of thousands. Some say he did so to became a San Francisco fixture without personal gain or harming others in the process. While I might not agree with that, and really think he really was some sort of a nut and probably a con man, no one will ever know the truth of his eccentric behavior. We will never know.

Tom Correa

Americans Always Help During Disasters

In March of 2017, wildfires swept across Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Colorado. Dry conditions and high winds drove fires across what was later learned to be over a million acres. Besides the absolute destruction of homes, barns, businesses, the fires wiped out pastures and hayfields, But worse of all, it claimed the lives of seven people and killed an untold number of cattle.

Ranchers were in bad straits after wildfires swept through the Great Plains. That fire left a trail of loss, tragedy, devastation, death, and despair in its wake.

Because of its widespread destruction and sheer magnitude, it was called the heartland's Hurricane Katrina. Of course, as was the case in other disasters in America, Americans came forward to help when Congress wouldn't because of political reasons. Knowing that the surviving cattle needing to be fed, ranchers and farmers from around the region starting donating hay and feed.

Since I've been asked about my link to the WRCA Foundation, I want to take a minute to say that among the many who showed up to help was the WRCA.

The Working Ranch Cowboy Association was started in 1995 by a group of men and women from across the West who wanted to promote ranching on a National and International level. Among their goals was their desire to keep the American Cowboy lifestyle alive and well. 

Their focus is on the working ranch cowboy, and to do so, the WRCA produces the World Championship Ranch Rodeo to showcase the skills of the working ranch cowboy.

But above all, the WRCA's events are used to raise funds for the WRCA Foundation. Their WRCA Foundation has a Crisis Fund that provides financial and other assistance to working ranch cowboys and their families who are suffering significant hardship and cannot provide for their immediate needs.

According to the WRCA, a working ranch cowboy is any person, male or female, who derives a significant portion of his or her income from taking care of cattle on a cattle ranch. Day workers are included. In March of 2017 when wildfires swept across Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Colorado, they were the hardest hit. 

Whether it was the many firefighters who rush toward the fire to try to contain the destruction, or the ranchers and farmers, friends and families, who stepped forward to help in the aftermath, Americans always help during disasters. We can all pray for those who were lost, pray for those who lose everything, and of course, step forward and help in any way that we can. 

For me, I support the WRCA Foundation. I have for years in whatever small way that I can. Whether it's the WRCA or another organization, it's up to us to step forward to help during disasters. And by the way, think about this, many who don't have the money to make a donation actually gave their time to help recovery efforts. 

Because helping is what real Americans do, they gave of themselves. God bless them for that. After all, all is appreciated. 

That's just the way I see it.

Tom Correa 

Typhoid Mary's Refusal To Change Killed Others

Dear Friends,

While all of us have to take measures to deal with the Coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic, a few of you have written to ask if isolating is really needed to combat this crisis. A couple of you have told me about family members who refuse to take this seriously enough to change their social lifestyle and stay home. A couple of you have also said that you can't get through to some of your family member who don't realize that they can be carriers --knowingly or not.

So now, since a couple of you have asked about her, let's talk about a woman who went down in history for all of the right reasons as a notorious disease carrier. Many of us know her as "Typhoid Mary." What you may not know is that she was a very healthy carrier the whole time she was infecting others. It's true. As an "asymptomatic carrier," she was a very "healthy carrier" of typhoid fever.

Typhoid fever is a deadly communicable disease that kills over a hundred thousand people worldwide each year still today. Typhoid fever, also known simply as "typhoid, is a bacterial infection. It's actually a type of Salmonella and the symptoms vary from mild to severe, but usually starts about 6 to 30 days after exposure.

Symptoms are similar to those of many other infectious diseases. Typhoid fever starts out slow with the victim having a high fever, overall weakness, abdominal pain, constipation, headaches, and vomiting in the first few days. After that, those infected get a skin rash with rose colored spots. That's all just the beginning. 

By the second week, most patients become agitated, and experience confusion and delirium. The "muttering delirium" led doctors back in the day giving typhoid the nickname "nervous fever". And soon, the victim's spleen and liver becomes enlarged and tender. Liver enzymes become elevated. If the patient lasts into the third week, the patient will experience intestinal hemorrhaging due to gastrointestinal bleeding. Intestinal perforation can be fatal. Of course, this is all accompanied by respiratory diseases such as pneumonia and acute bronchitis. Without treatment, this can all go on for weeks to months.

Typhoid is spread by eating food or by drinking water that's been contaminated with the feces of an infected person. Yes, human feces. Keep in mind that sanitation conditions of congested cities of the late 1800's and early 1900s were horrible. Those living there at the time were at risk of all sorts of diseases just living in the squalor taking place back East. 

As for today, think about places like San Francisco where people are defecating on the streets. Risk factors include poor sanitation and lousy hygiene, or non-existent hygiene practices as seen in many big cities. Of course, travelers to Third World countries put themselves and others at risk. 

Then there are those people who may carry the bacterium, and are still able to spread the disease to others, but aren't affected. Mary Mallon became known in the newspapers as "Typhoid Mary" because she was one of those carriers who was never ill. 

Mary Mallon was born on September 23rd, 1869, in Cookstown, Ireland. She emigrated to the United States in either 1883 or 1884. Upon arriving in New York City, she lived with her aunt and uncle for a time before finding work as a cook for a few wealthy families. 

From 1900 to 1907, Mary Mallon worked as a live-in cook and servant for seven different families in New York City. Remember, typhoid is spread by eating contaminated food or by drinking contaminated water. 

Investigation later showed that in 1900, within two weeks of her starting a job as a cook, the residents where she was cooking all developed typhoid fever. Then in 1901, another who she cooked for started to develop the symptom of typhoid fever. In that home, one of the servants who hate what she cooked died a week later. When she went to work for another family, she was fired after seven out of the eight people living there came down with the fever. 

Again in 1906, while working in Long Island, it took only two weeks for 10 family members to come down with typhoid fever. Later, after getting another position as a cook with other families, the same thing happened. 

She was the common denominator when looking at what was making those families ill. Wherever Mary Mallon was hired to cook, those families came down with the fever. 

In late 1906, a typhoid researcher who was a sanitation engineer by trade, George Soper, was hired by an infected family to investigate what was taking place. It was Soper who said that Mary Mallon may have been the source of the outbreak. He said so in a paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in June of 1907.

According to George Soper in his paper: "It was found that the family changed cooks on August 4. This was about three weeks before the typhoid epidemic broke out. The new cook, Mallon, remained in the family only a short time and left about three weeks after the outbreak occurred. Mallon was described as an Irish woman about 40 years of age, tall, heavy, single. She seemed to be in perfect health."

Soper discovered that Mary Mallon was the woman who matched the physical description of the Irish cook involved in every one of the typhoid outbreaks. Though she was known to have left their employment or was fired after an outbreak started, remarkably for the time, Soper found her after she was connected to a household where she was the cook. It was a household where the daughter of the family died of typhoid fever. 

In March of 1907, Soper met with then 37-year-old Mary Mallon who worked as a cook at a Park Avenue brownstone. When he demanded that she give him a sample of her blood, urine and feces, she became enraged. Soper later wrote: "It did not take Mary long to react to this suggestion. She seized a carving fork and advanced in my direction."

George Soper found her and immediately accused her of causing the illness and deaths. Of course Mary Mallon became angry and rejected the notion that she was the cause of the outbreaks, after all, she was healthy. Besides the distrust of authorities by immigrants fresh off the boat, at the time it was unheard of for a healthy person to be a "disease carrier." 

No one at the time realized that an individual can become infected from consuming contaminated food and drinks prepared by an infected individual who shows no symptoms of the disease. Of course not one at the time realized that someone who recovered can also be a carrier. Today, we know that the spread of many infectious diseases fall under the "80–20 rule" which says 80% of the disease transmission is conducted by only 20% of people in any given population. In the case of Mary Mallon, it's believed that most of Mary Mallon's transmissions which infected others were through her handling food.  

Besides George Soper, New York City's public health officials were also looking for a common denominator and found that she was it. When they got involved, they tried to restrict her from cooking as a way to make a living. Surprising for the times, they didn't want to quarantine her on a permanent basis. At least that was their plan initially. But frankly, that changed because she refused to comply with the city's request to stop handling food -- and the newspapers put pressure on the authorities to quarantine her. 

After newspaper got the story, they ran with it. They saddled her with that moniker "Typhoid Mary". Then in 1908, the Journal of the American Medical Association also labeled her "Typhoid Mary" after a news story which also pointed out how the city of New York refused to act.  

Because of her continued refusal to give up the only occupation that she believed she was able to do, and the pressure from the newspapers, New York City's public health officials ordered that she be quarantined as a prisoner on one of the islands that surround Manhattan. While in prison, she was forced to give stool and urine samples. And while she maintained that she was not the carrier, tests results for those samples showed that she carried the disease. 

Mary Mallon was freed from quarantine in prison after agreeing that she would stop working as a cook. On February 19, 1910, Mary Mallon agreed that she was "prepared to change her occupation (that of a cook), and would give assurance by affidavit that she would upon her release take such hygienic precautions as would protect those with whom she came in contact, from infection." 

Upon her release from quarantine, she was given a job as a laundress. Since that position paid a lot less than cooking, she changed her name to Mary Brown and took jobs cooking. It is said that for the next five years, Mary Mallon was hired to cook in several restaurant kitchens. She even took a cooking job in a local hospital under an assumed name, and was working there when a typhoid outbreak took place. Of course, outbreaks of typhoid followed her wherever she worked.

By 1915, those who believed that "disease carriers" should not be kept in isolation started to change their minds. Helping to change their minds was the fact that Mary Mallon was responsible for other outbreaks. In those, people also died. Because of her failure to cooperate, she was found and arrested.

On March 27, 1915, under sections 1169 and 1170 of the Greater New York Charter, Mary Mallon was held in isolation quarantine at a clinic located on North Brother Island. She spent the rest of her life in quarantine at the Riverside Hospital. She remained there until she died of pneumonia at age 69 on November 11, 1938. Mary Mallon's body was cremated. 

I find it interesting that doctors believed that Mary Mallon likely passed along typhoid germs by failing to vigorously wash her hands before handling food. But there is something else, though it is believed that temperatures necessary to cook food would have killed the bacteria, some wonder just how did she transfer the germs? Well, it's believed that Mary Mallon did so through one of her more popular dessert dishes which was ice cream with peaches. After dishing the ice cream, she would cut up the raw peaches. 

Her not washing her hands and cutting up the peaches was the perfect transferable state for germs.  According to George Soper, "I suppose no better way could be found for a cook to cleanse her hands of microbes and infect a family."

New York saw thousands of cases of typhoid fever by 1910. It's believed that thousands of asymptomatic carriers probably walked the streets of New York. Of course, who knows how many were cooks and food handlers who didn't wash their hands? 

She lived in isolation for 26 years in large part due to public opinion which turned against her when she refused to change and stay out of the kitchen. Mary Mallon was linked to 47 people being infected and 3 deaths as a result of her negligence, poor sanitation habits, and stubbornness. But, because she used more than one alias while refusing to change her ways and give up cooking for a living, it's speculated that she may have infected hundreds and caused the death of at least 40 people. Frankly, as with all such speculation, we'll never know the honest truth about that.

When I first wrote this story, I left out one thing because I couldn't prove whether it was true or not. Supposedly, before there was a vaccine, doctors are said to have believed that the typhoid fever bacteria lived in the gallbladder of the host. Supposedly they wanted to remove her gallbladder to "cure" her, but she wouldn't let them do the surgery since the death rate during surgeries at the time was incredibly high. The rest of that story says that after her death, they did an autopsy and found the typhoid fever bacteria present in her gallbladder. There's no telling whether that story is true or no. It might simply be just myth.

While, I was contacted by my reader Vivian Schuler who researched this. Vivian sent me what she found. According to Science Today: Humans who harbor these bacterial communities in their gallbladders, even without symptoms, are able to infect others with active typhoid fever, especially in developing areas of the world with poor sanitation. The disease is transmitted through fecal-oral contact, such as through poor hand-washing by people who prepare food. Scientists and physicians have known for decades that these bacteria, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi, accumulate in the gallbladder. In fact, the most widely accepted treatment of chronic typhoid infection is removal of the gallbladder.

Knowing this, thanks to Vivian Schuler and Science Today, I can report that it's a safe bet to say that the story about finding the typhoid fever bacteria present in Mary Mallon's gallbladder during her autopsy is probably true.  

As for Mary Mallon, the poor gal was a "healthy carrier" of the disease. Yes, no different than today where some who appear very healthy are carrying the bacteria for the Coronavirus. She was able to pass it onto others by handling food while exhibiting no symptoms herself. That too is happening today with the Coronavirus. As for her becoming the first known "asymptomatic carrier" of typhoid fever, it's only that way because she was linked to those outbreaks. It's said that there were probably others, but she was the one who was found and stopped before she could do more harm.

She needed to be isolated so that others would not become infected and die. That's why we are going through what we are today with the mandatory isolation taking place. Many today are carriers who may appear perfectly healthy right now. I can't help but wonder how many carriers out there are refusing to change their lifestyle and isolate to save others, especially those they say they love.

In the case of typhoid fever with the symptoms starting anywhere from 6 to 30 days after being exposed, a healthy carrier could be long gone after exposing others. So no, they might not even know they're the ones who are spreading the disease. Of course that goes to Mary Mallon's legacy as "Typhoid Mary," which as most know is a term used for anyone who spreads disease -- knowingly or not.

Tom Correa

Native American Tribes Shaking Off The Shackles Of Socialism

In my last post on American Indian reservations, I talked about how the majority of them are perfect examples of how Socialism has failed in America. The bottom line is that since the 1870s, Native American tribes were promised free stuff -- and the federal government failed to meet its promises.

Like it or not, the federal government created tracts of land called reservations for Native Americans with a multi-purpose mission in mind: Bring Native Americans under the complete control of the federal government, minimize conflicts between Indian tribes, stop the violence against American settlers, and encourage tribes to change their ways, accept peace, and hopefully assimilate.

The American Indian reservation system is a Socialist "care program" which has treated Native Americans as wards of the Federal Government. Since many of you have written to ask what is meant by "wards of the Federal Government," let's look at that for a minute or two.

As defined, a ward is someone placed under the protection of a legal guardian. Children who are in the custody of the government are considered "wards of the state." In the case of Native Americans on reservations, that Socialist system makes the government "in loco parentis" as if they were children. The Latin term "in loco parentis" means "in the place of a parent".  That's what Socialism is. It refers to "the legal responsibility of a person or organization that takes on the functions and responsibilities of a parent."

As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court case Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1 (1831), Native Americans were legally made "wards of the federal government." Yes, "with a relationship to the United States like that of a ward to its guardian," which is how Supreme Court Justice Marshall put it.

That means, Native American tribes gained the status of being dependents of the Federal Government. As stated in my previous article, the Indian Appropriations Act passed in 1871 reaffirmed that all American Indians were made "wards of the state." 

Please understand, the problem here is that no one should be treats like children. The federal government is not my parent. It's certainly not the parent of Native Americans. The reservation system enabled the federal government to strip Indian tribes of their rich heritage of self-governance, religious freedom, and most importantly their property ownership. 

Ever hear of the Burke Act of 1906? According to it, Indian lands and resources must be held in trust by the federal government on the premise that Native Americans were not "competent and capable" to manage their own lives and affairs. 

Such a horrible premise came about when the federal government got involved when the question of the citizenship status of American Indians came up. In 1887, Congress passed the General Allotment Act, or Dawes Severalty Act, which stated that "Indians who received land allotments or voluntarily took up residence away from their tribes were to be given United States citizenship." The land allotments they speak of are essentially Indian homesteads. 

While that seemed simple enough, some folks in the government had a real problem with that since they believed that allotments of land were to be held in trust on behalf of the Indians by the federal government for twenty-five years. Some courts held that an Indian gained citizenship at the end of the twenty-five-year trust period. Other courts said that Indians possessed citizenship as soon as they received an allotment of land was received.

The Dawes Act exempted the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, and Creek Indians as well as five other tribes residing in the Indian Territory, present day Oklahoma. Later that was fixed when it was amended in 1901. As for the Burke Act of 1906, it pertained to Indians who took allotments. 

The condescension in that act is obvious to anyone reading it. The law withheld citizenship for American Indians until the end of the twenty-five year trust period or until the allottee received a fee patent from the Secretary of the Interior. It also states that any Indian who had taken up residence away from their tribe and who had "adopted the habits of civilized life" was declared a citizen and was "entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizenship." Although, the Burke Act also stated that its "provisions shall not extend to any Indians in the Indian Territory".

Under the Burke Act, the Secretary of the Interior was given a great deal of authority over Indians who took land allotments. He had the power to decide whether an Indian was "competent" enough to handle his own affairs before he could even receive an allotment. And here's something else, the Secretary of the Interior actually was responsible for choosing the legal heirs of a deceased allottee.

If he determined there were no legal heirs, the allotted land could then be sold. Imagine how the system was used by crooks wanting to steal Indian lands. Of course, as you can see, Indians were cheated out of their legal lands through such asinine notions that Indians were simple-minded children incapable of acting on their own behalf or in their own best interest.

This was Socialism at it's worse. This is the concept of Socialism that's being pushed today. It's what Socialist believe in. It goes to the heart of the Socialist belief that the federal government should act as our parent. Socialists believe that only government should be trusted to know what's best for us. 

The Burke Act of 1906 believed that if Indians with allotments were completely free of federal guardianship -- that they would be prey to unscrupulous persons who would soon cheat them out of their lands. Of course the irony there is that government officials cheated more Indians out of their lands than anyone else. All while using the law to do so. 

My post on Socialist reservation system aggravated some die-hard Bernie Sanders supporters. Yes, I've gotten all sorts of hate mail from people who want Socialism and have a desire for a Communist America. For those who are writing to tell me how Socialism works on reservations, please don't bother spreading such lies here. I've visited reservations in the past. I've listened to what friends who have lived on reservations have told me. Comments spreading such Leftist propaganda, such lies and distortions of the truth, won't be published here.

And as for you name callers, you are a pathetic group. Why is it that you pretend to be caring people when you spew some of the most vile hate? And by the way, this is not a discussion forum. You people who call me a racist because I hate the slavery that Socialism brings with it. My rejecting Socialism is not racism. It's Patriotism!

As for you folks who hate America, you are not going to get your venomous comments posted here. As for you folks who love Socialism and the enslavement of people by the government, I don't feel sorry for you -- I pity your stupidity and desire to be treated as children by a government that has never given anything away free.

You think I'm kidding? Name a government program that's free? Simply the fact that it's a "government program" tells us that it's an "American Taxpayer program." Veterans benefits were paid for by veterans when they served. Unemployment is paid for through payroll taxes and by businesses. Welfare, Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing, Medicare, are all paid for through taxes. The police, fire departments, public hospitals, are all paid for through taxes that come out of our wages. None of that is free.

All of the "free stuff" that Bernie Sanders is promising is not free. We would have to pay for it through higher taxes being taken from our wages. You think Sanders wants to raise the minimum wage to help you? He wants more of your money! And by the way, if he actually did get the government to pay off student loans, or my credit cards, my mortgage, my car loan, and pay for my electric bills and healthcare as he's promised, who do you think will pay for those things? We will. American taxpayers pay for everything.

Whether some folks want to admit it, and you should really see the hate mail that I received about this, over the last 150 years or more, the people in power in Washington D.C. have viewed the tribes as children needing to be cared for as children. Subsequently, the government has attempted to care for the tribes with little respect for their heritage, independence, or honor. Instead, the federal government has traditionally treated Native Americans as children -- unable to make their own way in the world. Yes, no different than how Democrats saw black slaves before, during, and after the Civil War.

Like it or not, while not all have had it rough, the overwhelming majority of tribes on reservations have had it very tough dealing with a Socialist reservation system where the government is nothing more than a benevolent master. Fact is, any way anyone wants to spin the truth of what takes place on most reservations, the federal government controls production and distribution of goods, forbids private ownership of land, and is in charge of all services. That's Socialism. And yes my friends, that's a problem.

And as for people who have written to tell me that their particular reservation is doing great and how wonderful it is that the federal government cares for you like children, I doubt you live on a reservation. And if you do, if I'm wrong and in fact you do, then it's a safe bet to say that you probably live on one of the few reservations that are doing better than the majority that are not.

In 2016, half of all Native Americans lived at the poverty line as "working poor." One in four, were below the poverty line. This is made up statistics, this is government statistics. And don't kid yourselves, there is a huge difference when it comes to employment between American Indians and other Americans. When compared to Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics, fact is Native Americans with similar factors such as age, sex, level of education, marital status, and state of residence, have it tougher to find jobs. In fact, their odds of being employed is about 30 percent lower than that of other Americans.

While my last article on this subject had to do with how bad things were as a result of Socialist policies, there are remedies to the problems faced by tribes. First, instead of the government limiting employment and investment for the good folks on reservations by treating them like children, something Bernie Sanders wants to do with all of America, government should support their independence, their self-determination, and allow them to create innovative Capitalist solutions.

Second, the federal government should stop the "care-giver" system and allow Native American communities to development financial institutions of their own. The feds should stop limiting Native Americans through regulations and Socialist ideals, and allow them to improve their lot in life. Native Americans need an improved healthcare system, high-quality early childhood education, and they need to support tribal programs supporting higher education and employment. As for employment, Native Americans should be allowed to harvest the fossil fuels on reservations. Not for the federal government, corrupt politicians, corrupt tribal leaders, or some outside concern, but to benefit their needs. 

My grandparents were young parents in the opening days of the Great Depression. My grandmother used to say, "a man feels better about himself when he's holding a job and working." As with society in general, all of social ills that reservations face today with rampant drug use, alcoholism, domestic violence, child abuse, depression, and suicides, are tied to non-existent employment opportunities on reservations. Whether people want to face the facts or not, idle hands create problems.

According to statistics, there are "326 Indian reservations in the United States associated with a particular Native American nation. Not all of the country's 567 recognized tribes have a reservation." But some tribes have more than one reservation, while some tribes actually share reservations.

Now for the flip side of what's taking place on some Indian reservations ... 

As for people writing to say that their particular reservation is doing better than others, and you really do live on a reservation, I think that's wonderful to hear. It really is. In my first article on this subject, I talked about those that were shackled to Socialism and how those places resemble Third World countries. Since I was contacted by a friend who belongs to a tribe, and he asked me to research and write on the problems with Socialism on reservations, I did so. That was part one. As for the reservations that are doing well, there are a few reasons why that's taking place. This is part two.

Fact is, more and more Americans Indian tribes are working very hard to shake off the shackles of Socialism which is the primary evil of the reservation system. They are doing so through increased income and wealth through new and innovative economic development. Yes, by embracing good old fashion "Capitalism" where the federal government is a pain in the butt -- but not one's master or guardian.

You don't think tribes aren't embracing Capitalism? Well according to studies published in the last 5 years, more and more tribes have increased their control over their own destiny by harvesting their natural resources and becoming players in our nation's energy sector. Some have embraced Capitalism through building casinos and resorts. Others are doing so by attempting to bring in manufacturing onto reservation lands.

Democrats fail to understand that tribes don't need more short-term federal handouts. Tribes don't need a parent in the form of the federal government. They need to bring in revenue and long lasting economic development. Yes, they need what Democrats don't know how to provide -- especially since Democrats see revenue and economic development as something that people are incapable of creating.

Some Socialists in our federal government believe Americans are not "competent and capable" of managing our own lives or our own affairs. Those same foolish people feel Indian lands and resources must be held in trust by the federal government for all of the same dubious reasons. And if you think they will ever relinquish their hold on Native Americans, remember that they are the same people who want to be the parent for all Americans. 

Some Call It "Reservation Capitalism"

According to the Washington Times, law professor and tribal member Robert Miller, in his book  "Reservation Capitalism," points out that "Tribes are making profits and creating economic development and jobs." 

Thankfully, some tribes are finding ways to open themselves up to the economic potential of their communities while they shake the shackles of Socialism for good. Take for example, Lance Morgan, who is the CEO of Ho-Chunk Inc. which is a $100 million Winnebago Indian tribal corporation. It employs nearly 400 people with good paying jobs.

In an interview in August of 2019 with the Washington Times, he said, "We’ve taken control of our destiny, gotten a taste of independence, and don’t plan on giving it up. Government-led economies have been a total failure. I refuse to believe the Winnebagos are Karl Marx's last hope."

About now, it should be noted that there are differences between reservations. In fact, as most who live on prospering reservations already know, there is very little similarity between those embracing Capitalism and those wedded to Socialism. Reservations embracing Capitalism and more economic development show the benefits of doing so with good homes with all of the amenities available off the reservation, better healthcare, better schools, great child care, and an education system that also encourages heritage learning among other things. They also don't have the widespread social ills that truly plague other reservations that are not doing as well. Yes, that's the flip side to the Native American reservation story.

The Washington Times article that I referenced a moment ago also talked about the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana "exemplifies" this new Native American spirit of restoring their rich heritage of self-governance through entrepreneurial development and capitalist concepts. The Coushatta Indians regained their recognition as a tribe and began to rebuild their culture and economy. They started out with a few acres which they put into federal trusteeship so they could build a successful casino. Now that tribe has more than 6,000 acres of private land which they use for "everything from crayfish farming to oil development." 

The great news is that the Coushatta Tribe has expanded from merely a local Indian casino to now being the second-largest private employer in Louisiana. And frankly, there are similar success stories seen with the Flathead Reservation in Montana, the Yakama and Colville reservations in Washington, the Warm Springs Reservation in Oregon, and the Fort Bidwell and Hoopa Valley reservations in California.

As for energy resources such as oil and gas? More and more tribes are reasserting their ownership and sovereignty to harness their natural resources to benefit their tribes. For example, on the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota, the Three Affiliated Tribes have used special legislation to assert their control of oil and gas leases. 

Tribal chairman Tex Hall said, "The potential here is to obtain financial independence for our nation, education for our youth, sustenance for our elders, maintenance of our culture and above all to set the people of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation on the road to independence."

While not all resource-rich tribes have achieved the autonomy that some have, chairman A.J. Not Afraid of the Crow Tribe in Montana pointed out that his tribe's "land is rich in energy resources, natural resources, and minerals, but over-regulation prevents the tribe from capitalizing on its resources." He went on to say, "We wait for permission from the federal government. By law, we need the BIA [Bureau of Indian Affairs] to bless our business contracts."

As most know, in regards to the needs of Native Americans, a group that's only 1.5% of our entire population, the biggest hurdle to their success is that which face most tribes: Most reservation lands are owned by the federal government. That means many tribes wanting to shake off the shackles of Socialism, and get out from under the thumb of the federal government, needs the blessing of the federal government to achieve economic prosperity for their people.

So now, looking at things honestly, we know that the majority of reservations are still economically disadvantaged. But, also looking at things honestly, we can see there's a lot of good news. The good news is that there's hope in that "Reservation Capitalism" is taking place. And yes, that's a positive. 

If American Indians can get the government out of the way by lifting draconian regulations or by simply streamlining the permit process, then I believe more tribes will prosper. And maybe after more than a hundred years of insufficient good intentions and broken promises of free stuff, we will hear the good news that more and more tribes have rid themselves of Socialism -- and the horrible effects that it has had on a people rich in heritage and honor.  

Tom Correa