KING WILLIAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA
LARGEST SLAVEHOLDERS FROM 1860 SLAVE CENSUS SCHEDULES
and
SURNAME MATCHES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS
Transcribed by Tom Blake, July 2003
PURPOSE. Published information giving names of slaveholders and numbers of slaves held is almost non-existent. It is possible to locate an ancestor on a U.S. census for 1860 or earlier and not realize that ancestor was also listed as a slaveholder on the slave schedules, because published indexes almost always do not include the slave census. The last U.S. census slave schedules were enumerated by County in 1860 and included 393,975 named persons holding 3,950,546 unnamed slaves, or an average of about ten slaves per holder. The actual number of slaveholders may be slightly lower because some large holders held slaves in more than one County and would have been counted in each County. Excluding slaves, the 1860 U.S. population was 27,167,529, with about 1 in 70 being a slaveholder. It is estimated by this transcriber that in 1860, slaveholders of 200 or more slaves, while constituting less than 1 % of the total number of U.S. slaveholders, or 1 out of 7,000 free persons, held 20-30% of the total number of slaves in the U.S. The process of publication of slaveholder names beginning with the largest holders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work. Surname matching of slaveholders with 1870 African Americans is intended merely as suggesting another possibility for further research by those seeking to make connections between slaves and holders.
SOURCES. The 1860 U.S. Census Slave Schedules for King William County, Virginia (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 1392) reportedly includes a total of 5,525 slaves. This transcription includes 85 slaveholders who held 20 or more slaves in King William County, accounting for 3,500 slaves, or about 63% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 281 slaveholders, and those slaveholders have not been included here. Due to variable film quality, handwriting interpretation questions and inconsistent counting and page numbering methods used by the census enumerators, interested researchers should view the source film personally to verify or modify the information in this transcription for their own purposes. Census data for 1860 was obtained from the Historical United States Census Data Browser, which is a very detailed, searchable and highly recommended database that can found at http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/census/ . Census data on African Americans in the 1870 census was obtained using Heritage Quest’s CD “African-Americans in the 1870 U.S. Federal Census”, available through Heritage Quest at http://www.heritagequest.com/ .
FORMAT. This transcription lists the names of those largest slaveholders in the King William County, the number of slaves they held in the County and the first page number on which they were listed. No local districts were shown on this enumeration. The page numbers used are the numbers rubber stamped in the upper right corner of every other page of the census, with the intervening pages being reported here with a B added to the number of the preceding page. Following the holder list is a separate list of the surnames of the holders with information on numbers of African Americans on the 1870 census who were enumerated with the same surname.
TERMINOLOGY. Though the census schedules speak in terms of “slave owners”, the transcriber has chosen to use the term “slaveholder” rather than “slave owner”, so that questions of justice and legality of claims of ownership need not be addressed in this transcription. Racially related terms such as African American, black, mulatto and colored are used as in the source or at the time of the source, with African American being used otherwise.
PLANTATION NAMES. Plantation names were not shown on the census. Using plantation names to locate ancestors can be difficult because the name of a plantation may have been changed through the years and because the sizeable number of large farms must have resulted in lots of duplication of plantation names. In Virginia in 1860 there were 641 farms of 1,000 acres or more, the largest size category enumerated in the census, and another 2,882 farms of 500-999 acres. Linking names of plantations in this County with the names of the large holders on this list is beyond the scope of this transcription.
FORMER SLAVES. The 1860 U.S. Census was the last U.S. census showing slaves and slaveholders. Slaves were enumerated in 1860 without giving their names, only their sex and age and indication of any handicaps, such as deaf or blind Slaves 100 years of age or older were supposed to be named on the 1860 slave schedule, but there were only 1,570 slaves of such age enumerated, out of a total of 3,950,546 slaves, and the transcriber, though not specifically looking for such named slaves, did not notice any such information while doing this transcription, except for 100 year old male black Cuffy held by Wm. N. Berkley on page 272B and 100 male black Hinds held by Wm. Hill on page 287B. Freed slaves, if listed in the next census, in 1870, would have been reported with their full name, including surname. Some of these former slaves may have been using the surname of their 1860 slaveholder at the time of the 1870 census and they may have still been living in the same State or County. Before presuming an African American was a slave on the 1860 census, the free census for 1860 should be checked, as almost 11% of African Americans were enumerated as free in 1860, with about half of those living in the southern States. Estimates of the number of former slaves who used the surname of a former owner in 1870, vary widely and from region to region. If an African American ancestor with one of these surnames is found on the 1870 census, then making the link to finding that ancestor as a slave requires advanced research techniques involving all obtainable records of the holder.
MIGRATION OF FORMER SLAVES: According to U.S. Census data, the 1860 King William County population included 2,589 whites, 416 “free colored” and 5,525 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population had increased almost 14% to 2,943, while the “colored” population had decreased about 25 % to 4,455. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 3,999 whites, about a 54% increase, while the 1960 total of 3,551 “Negroes”was about 40% less than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) In comparing census data for different years, the transcriber was not aware of any relevant changes to County boundaries.
Where did the freed slaves go if they did not stay in the same County? Between 1860 and 1870, the Virginia colored population declined by about 36,000, to approximately 513,000, a 6.5% decrease. Two Virginia Counties that showed a significant increase in colored population between 1860 and 1870 were Henrico, with an increase of over 7,000, and Norfolk, with an increase of over 10,000. States that saw significant increases in colored population during that time, and were therefore possible places of relocation for colored persons from King William County, included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); Alabama, up 37,000 (8%); Florida, up 29,000 (46%); North Carolina, up 38,000 (8%); Ohio, up 26,000 (70%); Indiana, up 25,000 (127%); and Kansas up from 265 to 17,000 (6,400%).
SLAVEHOLDER LIST:
BARKER?, Wm., 40 slaves, page 268B
BERKLEY, Wm. N., 64 slaves, page 272B
BLAKE, Sarah C., 27 slaves, page 257
BRAXTON, Mary, 86 slaves, page 284
BRAXTON, Wm. P., 56 slaves, page 284B
BRAXTON, Wm. H., 38 slaves, page 285B
BROWN, Archie, 40 slaves, page 254B
BROWN, Mrs. H., 22 slaves, page 254B
BURKE, Robert, 30 slaves, page 278
BURRUS?, H. D., 29 slaves, page 266
BURRUS?, Josiah, 41 slaves, page 256B
CAMPBELL, H., 42 slaves, page 277
CARTER, Thos. H., 119 slaves, page 257B
CLEMENTS, G. J., 33 slaves, page 268B
COCKE, John, 30 slaves, page 274
COOK, John, 65 slaves, page 258
CORDWELL, John, 59 slaves, page 260
CORR, Henry, 33 slaves, page 263
COULTER, H. T., 27 slaves, page 269
DABNEY, Mary C., 43 slaves, page 273B
DABNEY, W. W., 23 slaves, page 267B
DOUGLAS, B. B., 33 slaves, page 275
DREWERY, Martin, 22 slaves, page 269B
EDWARDS, Geo., 41 slaves, page 269
EDWARDS, J. B., 31 slaves, page 256B
EDWARDS, Warner, 31 slaves, page 269
EUBANKS, Richd., 21 slaves, page 279B
FAUNTLEROY?, Jon. M., 25 slaves, page 255B
FONTAINE, W. S., 30 slaves, page 269B
FOX, Mary, 27 slaves, page 273
FOX, R. W., 22 slaves, page 273B
GARLICK, M. C., 27 slaves, page 271B
GARY, Wm. M., 39 slaves, page 268
GREGG, D. H., 43 slaves, page 264B
GREGORY, F., 43 slaves, page 284
HARRIS?, R., 49 slaves, page 283
HILL, C. J., 23 slaves, page 259
HILL, Edwd., 53 slaves, page 271
HILL, Harriet, 29 slaves, page 258B
HILL, R. P.?, 25 slaves, page 282B
HILL, Wm., 33 slaves, page 287B
HILLYARD, R. H., 50 slaves, page 270
HUTCHINSON, W. W., 22 slaves, page 282
HYATT, P. H. & Wm. R., 63 slaves, page 255
JOHNSON, J. C., 82 slaves, page 276
JOHNSON, Wm. C., 22 slaves, page 264
JONES, Thos. S., 52 slaves, page 265B
KING, James H., 24 slaves, page 258
KING, R., 33 slaves, page 260B
LATANE, J. S. & W. T., 54 slaves, page 279
LEE, Wm. H., 46 slaves, page 287
LEWIS, John, 27 slaves, page 270
LIPSCOMB, Sterling, 34 slaves, page 287B
LITTLEPAGE, Lewis, 28 slaves, page 258B
MARTIN, F., 39 slaves, page 286B
MCGEORGE, J. F., 27 slaves, page 274B
MOORE, Ann F., 45 slaves, page 262B
MUNDAY, R. H.?, 100 slaves, page 285
NELSON, Henrietta?, 30 slaves, page 281B
NEWMAN, J. J., 21 slaves, page 259
NORMENT?, S. T.?, 25 slaves, page 281
PEMBERTON, Margaret, 21 slaves, page 259B
POLLARD, Lewis, 21 slaves, page 286
ROANE, James, 23V65
ROANE, Mary E., 38 slaves, page 288
RYLAND, W. S., 40 slaves, page 273
SALE, Dandridge, 31 slaves, page 271B
SCOTT, Anderson, 135 slaves, page 275
SLAUGHTER, P. H., 25 slaves, page 263
SPILLER, Wm., 32 slaves, page 278
STEVENS, L. A., 30 slaves, page 281B
SUTTON, E. M., 65 slaves, page 281
SWATHMEY?, Wm., 37 slaves, page 270B
TAYLOR, Geo., 121 slaves, page 280
TAYLOR, J. W., 24 slaves, page 255B
TAYLOR, Wm. P., 105 slaves, page 261B
TIMBERLAKE, Henry, 43 slaves, page 267B
TOMKIN, R. W., 22 slaves, page 270B
TOMLIN, H. B., 32 slaves, page 283B
TRENT, M. B., 48 slaves, page 272
WALKER, J. H., 29 slaves, page 274B
WARD, D. F., 70 slaves, page 262
WHITE, Jas. G., 21 slaves, page 279B
WINSTON, D. M., 20 slaves, page 255B
WORMLEY?, C. W., 49 slaves, page 256
SURNAME MATCHES AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS:
(exact surname spellings only are reported, no spelling variations or soundex)
SURNAME, # in US, in State, in County, born in State, born and living in State, born in State and living in County)
BARKER?, 549, 38, 0, 95, 38, 0
BERKLEY, 69, 26, 41, 25, 0
BLAKE, 889, 60, 2, 92, 59, 2
BRAXTON, 601, 389, 38, 460, 388, 38
BROWN, 27013, 3601, 33, 6106, 3513, 33
BURKE, 452, 54, 2, 95, 54, 2
BURRUS?, 45, 7, 1, 12, 7, 1
CAMPBELL, 2897, 314, 4, 542, 308, 4
CARTER, 7164, 1833, 29, 2810, 1810, 28
CLEMENTS, 364, 68, 0, 100, 66, 0
COCKE, 37, 9, 0, 13, 9, 0
COOK, 3149, 384, 3, 693, 380, 3
CORDWELL, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
CORR, 16, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0
COULTER, 70, 0, 0, 6, 0, 0
DABNEY, 337, 219, 18, 255, 219, 18
DOUGLAS, 906, 94, 0, 176, 93, 0
DREWERY, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
EDWARDS, 3741, 335, 8, 616, 327, 8
EUBANKS, 127, 9, 0, 27, 9, 0
FAUNTLEROY?, 66, 66, 3, 66, 66, 3
FONTAINE, 51, 28, 0, 33, 28, 0
FOX, 820, 152, 6, 259, 151, 6
GARLICK, 24, 16, 10, 17, 16, 10
GARY, 263, 45, 1, 61, 41, 1
GREGG, 224, 16, 0, 27, 15, 0
GREGORY, 726, 178, 1, 226, 163, 1
HARRIS?, 11315, 1877, 33, 2995, 1847, 33
HILL, 6675, 1025, 57, 1627, 1007, 57
HILLYARD, 27, 3, 2, 4, 3, 2
HUTCHINSON, 367, 20, 0, 54, 19, 0
HYATT, 56, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0
JOHNSON, 33402, 4458, 60, 7797, 4773, 60
JONES, 27193, 3894, 9, 6648, 3807, 9
KING, 4979, 484, 8, 923, 469, 8
LATANE, 11, 11, 0, 11, 11, 0
LEE, 6357, 1012, 14, 1786, 987, 14
LEWIS, 8797, 1513, 18, 2588, 1483, 18
LIPSCOMB, 385, 110, 17, 148, 110, 17
LITTLEPAGE, 19, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4
MARTIN, 5318, 436, 1, 820, 429, 1
MCGEORGE, 6, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1
MOORE, 8698, 722, 6, 1434, 697, 6
MUNDAY, 85, 15, 0, 21, 15, 0
NELSON, 3371, 377, 21, 742, 371, 21
NEWMAN, 649, 126, 0, 228, 124, 0
NORMENT?, 10, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
PEMBERTON, 93, 13, 0, 20, 13, 0
POLLARD, 631, 241, 26, 337, 240, 26
ROANE, 173, 120, 16, 133, 120, 16
RYLAND, 26, 11, 0, 20, 11, 0
SALE, 78, 44, 1, 49, 44, 1
SCOTT, 8407, 1609, 13, 2560, 1588, 13
SLAUGHTER, 717, 128, 0, 217, 127, 0
SPILLER, 51, 7, 0, 17, 7, 0
STEVENS, 11271, 145, 1, 226, 142, 1
SUTTON, 8, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0
SWATHMEY?, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
TAYLOR, 11696, 1887, 38, 3129, 1849, 38
TIMBERLAKE, 109, 55, 1, 66, 55, 1
TOMKIN, 2, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0
TOMLIN, 75, 9, 0, 15, 9, 0
TRENT, 219, 143, 9, 183, 143, 9
WALKER, 8492, 1161, 6, 2024, 1142, 6
WARD, 2525, 248, 2, 457, 236, 2
WHITE, 9567, 1395, 10, 2247, 1359, 10
WINSTON, 853, 317, 4, 424, 317, 4
WORMLEY?, 113, 74, 4, 96, 74, 4
You are the visitor to this page.