Search billions of records on Ancestry.com
   

WILCOX COUNTY, ALABAMA

LARGEST SLAVEHOLDERS FROM 1860 SLAVE CENSUS SCHEDULES

and

SURNAME MATCHES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS

Transcribed by Tom Blake, February, 2002

PURPOSE. Published information giving names of slaveholders and numbers of slaves held in Wilcox County, Alabama, in 1860, is either non-existent or not readily available. It is possible to locate a free person on the Wilcox County, Alabama census for 1860 and not know whether that person was also listed as a slaveholder on the slave census, because published indexes almost always do not include the slave census.

Those who have found a free ancestor on the 1860 Wilcox County, Alabama census can check this list to learn if their ancestor was one of the larger slaveholders in the County. If the ancestor is not on this list, the 1860 slave census microfilm can be viewed to find out whether the ancestor was a holder of a fewer number of slaves or not a slaveholder at all. Whether or not the ancestor is found to have been a slaveholder, a viewing of the slave census will provide an informed sense of the extent of slavery in the ancestral County, particularly for those who have never viewed a slave census. An ancestor not shown to hold slaves on the 1860 slave census could have held slaves on an earlier census, so those films can be checked also. In 1850, the slave census was also separate from the free census, but in earlier years it was a part of the free census.

African American descendants of persons who were enslaved in Wilcox County, Alabama in 1860, if they have an idea of the surname of the slaveholder, can check this list for the surname. If the surname is found, they can then view the microfilm for the details listed regarding the sex, age and color of the slaves. If the surname is not on this list, the microfilm can be viewed to see if there were smaller slaveholders with that surname. To check a master surname list for other States and Counties, return to Home and Links Page.

The information on surname matches of 1870 African Americans and 1860 slaveholders is intended merely to provide data for consideration by those seeking to make connections between slaveholders and former slaves. Particularly in the case of these larger slaveholders, the data seems to show in general not many freed slaves in 1870 were using the surname of their 1860 slaveholder. However, the data should be checked for the particular surname to see the extent of the matching.

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 they would have been counted as a separate slaveholder 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 larger slaveholders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work.

Those who have found a free ancestor on the 1860 Wilcox County, Alabama census can check this list to learn if their ancestor was one of the larger slaveholders in the County. If the ancestor is not on this list, the 1860 slave census microfilm can be viewed to find out whether the ancestor was a holder of a fewer number of slaves or not a slaveholder at all. Whether or not the ancestor is found to have been a slaveholder, a viewing of the slave census will provide an informed sense of the extent of slavery in the ancestral County, particularly for those who have never viewed a slave census. An ancestor not shown to hold slaves on the 1860 slave census could have held slaves on an earlier census, so those films can be checked also. In 1850, the slave census was also separate from the free census, but in earlier years it was a part of the free census.

African American descendants of persons who were enslaved in Wilcox County, Alabama in 1860, if they have an idea of the surname of the slaveholder, can check this list for the surname. If the surname is found, they can then view the microfilm for the details listed regarding the sex, age and color of the slaves. If the surname is not on this list, the microfilm can be viewed to see if there were smaller slaveholders with that surname. To check a master surname list for other States and Counties, return to Home and Links Page.

The information on surname matches of 1870 African Americans and 1860 slaveholders is intended merely to provide data for consideration by those seeking to make connections between slaveholders and former slaves. Particularly in the case of these larger slaveholders, the data seems to show in general not many freed slaves in 1870 were using the surname of their 1860 slaveholder. However, the data should be checked for the particular surname to see the extent of the matching.

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 they would have been counted as a separate slaveholder 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 larger slaveholders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work.

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 they would have been counted as a separate slaveholder 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 larger slaveholders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work.

SOURCES. The 1860 U.S. Census Slave Schedules for Wilcox County, Alabama (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 36) reportedly includes a total of 17,797 slaves, ranking it the ninth highest total in the State and the nineteenth highest in the United States. This transcription includes 139 slaveholders who held 36 or more slaves in Wilcox County, accounting for 9,581 slaves, or 54% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 905 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 County, the number of slaves they held in the County and the first census page on which they were listed. The page numbers used are the rubber stamped numbers in the upper right corner of every set of two pages, with the previous stamped number and a "B" being used to designate the pages without a stamped number. The slaveholders on page 507 and lower were listed as in the Eastern District, while those on 509 and above were in the Western District. 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. The term "County" is used to describe the main subdivisions of the State by which the census was enumerated.

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 Alabama in 1860 there were 482 farms of 1,000 acres or more, the largest size category enumerated in the census, and another 1,359 farms of 500-999 acres. Linking names of plantations in this County with the names of the large holders on this list should not be a difficult research task, but it 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 nationwide. Though not specifically looking for named slaves, the transcriber did not notice any such slaves named in this county. 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 Wilcox County population included 6,795 whites, 26 "free colored" and 17,797 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population of Wilcox County had remained about the same at 6,767, while the "colored" population increased about 21% to 21,610. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 4,141 whites, about 39% less than 100 years earlier, while the 1960 total of 14,592 "Negroes"was about 18% less than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) Where did the freed slaves go who did not stay in this county? Dallas, Montgomery and Mobile counties in Alabama all saw increases in the colored population between 1860 and 1870, so that could be where some of these Alabama freed slaves went. Between 1860 and 1870, the Alabama colored population increased by 37,000, to 475,000, a 17% increase. It should be noted however, that in comparing census data for 1870 and 1960, the transcriber did not take into consideration any relevant changes in county boundaries.

Where did freed Alabama slaves go if they did not stay in Alabama? States that saw significant increases in colored population during that time, and were therefore more likely possible places of relocation for colored persons from Wilcox County, included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 to 545,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); North Carolina, up 31,000 (8%); Florida, up 27,000 (41%); Ohio, up 26,000 (70%); Indiana, up 25,000 (127%); and Kansas up from 265 to 17,000 (6,400%).

SLAVEHOLDER LIST:

BECK, F. K., 149 slaves, page 492B

BECK, Thos. K., 134 slaves, page 465

BECK, William K., 65 slaves, page 536

BELL, Joseph, 53 slaves, page 456

BENNETT, Bowen, 51 slaves, page 511B

BENNETT, Burgess, 128 slaves, page 509B

BENNETT, Burgess in trust for one minor, 107 slaves, page 512B

BLIXUM, Washt., 49 slaves, page 483B

BONNER, J. H., 42 slaves, page 472

BOYKIN, Francis, 150 slaves, page 466B

BOYKIN, Russell Est., 73 slaves, page 501B

BOYKIN, S. F., Plantn., 90 slaves, page 500B

BRYAN, Sarah, 48 slaves, page 565B

BURFORD, L. M., 63 slaves, page 533B

BURPO, Eliza, 41 slaves, page 512

CALHOUN, James M., 80 slaves, page 496

CARSON, T. T., Plant., 65 slaves, page 487

CARTER, Alfred, 38 slaves, page 499

CARTER, Francis & Co., 51 slaves, page 499B

COCHRAN, S. G., 52 slaves, page 470

COLLEY?, John, 66 slaves, page 502

COOK, A. M., 41 slaves, page 487B

COOK, Daniel, 52 slaves, page 534B

COOK, E. H., 54 slaves, page 509

COOPER, A. B., 91 slaves, page 515B

CRAWFORD, J. W., 43 slaves, page 550B

CREAGH, John W., 101 slaves, page 540

CREAGH, M. W., 166 slaves, page 516B

CRUM, A. S., 50 slaves, page 480

CRUMB, J. H., 49 slaves, page 498

CRUMPH, W. M., 70 slaves, page 478

CURTIS, H. E., 37 slaves, page 507

DAVIS, John P., 117 slaves, page 554

DEER, Charles, 93 slaves, page 546

DORTH, J. F., 63 slaves, page 468, ends on 469

DUMAS, Joel, 92 slaves, page 527

EDWARDS, Jesse, 37 slaves, page 518

ELLIS, Catherine, 74 slaves, page 466

ERVIN & GULLETT, 83 slaves, page 563B

ERVIN, Robert H., 110 slaves, page 534

FAIL, Jerry, 81 slaves, page 468B, ends on 468

FISHER, James R., 42 slaves, page 529

FORNISS, P. D., 79 slaves, page 519

FOX, D. J., 51 slaves, page 504

GODBOLD, L. D., 41 slaves, page 546B

GRACE, J. B., 49 slaves, page 474

GULLETT, Geo. S., 45 slaves, page 531B

GULLETT, John Eades, 46 slaves, page 564

GULLETT, see also Ervin & Gullett

GULLY, Jas., 68 slaves, page 495

GULLY, John, 59 slaves, page 496B

GULLY, Wm., 52 slaves, page 493B

HAILE, C., 71 slaves, page 498B

HAMNER, George M., 46 slaves, page 518B

HAMNER, George M. in trust for one minor child, 38 slaves, page 518B

HAWTHORN, J., 73 slaves, page 500

HAWTHORN, J. R., 110 slaves, page 488

HORN, J. A. C., 39 slaves, page 555

HUNTER, Sill, Plantn., 44 slaves, page 501B

IRBY, C. P., 80 slaves, page 464

IRBY, Josiah E., 54 slaves, page 513B

IRBY, Wm., 56 slaves, page 460B

JENKINS, T. G., 39 slaves, page 470B

JONES, A. L., 36 slaves, page 503B

JONES, Amos, 95 slaves, page 457

JONES, J. W., 88 slaves, page 510B

KELLY, John, 76 slaves, page 517B

KENNEDY, David, 62 slaves, page 552B

KETCHUM, Wm. H., 35 slaves, page 539B

KETCHUM, Wm. H., in trust for four minor heirs, 93 slaves, page 539B

LEE, W. E., 70 slaves, page 519B

LINAM, W. H., 45 slaves, page 503B

LUKE, James, 36 slaves, page 491

MARSH, John P., 52 slaves, page 532B

MARSH, Stephen, 50 slaves, page 566

MASON, L. W., 82 slaves, page 551B

MATTHEWS, Samuel B., 126 slaves, page 559

MATTHEWS, Virginia, 179 slaves, page 523

MATTHEWS, Wm. T.?, 97 slaves, page 530B

MCCONICO, C. T., 70 slaves, page 504

MCCRACKEN, Wm., 44 slaves, page 504B

MCDOWELL, John, 46 slaves, page 551B

MCGUIRE, Francis S., 53 slaves, page 539

MCINTOSH, D., 38 slaves, page 504B

MCLEAN, Hugh, 38 slaves, page 542B

MCLEOD, Alexander, 65 slaves, page 539B

MCLEOD, Daniel, 43 slaves, page 560

MCPHERSON, Nathan, 87 slaves, page 555B

MILLER, George D., 93 slaves, page 537

MONTGOMERY, J. H., 72 slaves, page 525

MOORE & WESTRAY, 65 slaves, page 555B

MYERS, Robt., Plantn., 37 slaves, page 501

NICHOLSON, Joseph W., 44 slaves, page 547B

ODOM, John B., 70 slaves, page 522B

OLIVER, Est. S. W., 68 slaves, page 456B

PACKER, David, 66 slaves, page 558

PARKER, R. C., 72 slaves, page 528

PARKS, Levi, 40 slaves, page 514

PETTWAY, Mark? A.?, 160 slaves, page 461

PHARR, E. A., 41 slaves, page 538

PHARR, George M., 76 slaves, page 536B

POWE, Calvin S., 47 slaves, page 558B

POWE, Thomas A., 39 slaves, page 560B

POWE, Wm. E., 36 slaves, page 545

POWELL, A. H., 38 slaves, page 482B

PRESSLY, Joseph, 55 slaves, page 471

PRITCHARD, J. B., 43 slaves, page 544

RAND, N. G., 44 slaves, page 541B

RAND, Walter R., 56 slaves, page 541B

RATCLIFF, Leonidas, 81 slaves, page 526

ROBINS, Joe, 156 slaves, page 520B

ROBINSON, A. A., 47 slaves, page 526B

SATTERWHITE, Charles, 106 slaves, page 542

SAVAGE, Elizabeth, 74 slaves, page 494B

SAVAGE, M. E., 48 slaves, page 535B

SCOTT, John B., 42 slaves, page 490

SELLERS, Daniel C., 69 slaves, page 538B

SELLERS, Daniel C., in trust for ten miner heirs, 48 slaves, page 539

SMITH, D. W., 43 slaves, page 490

SMITH, Daniel, 63 slaves, page 535

SMITH, Jeanette, 56 slaves, page 556

SMITH, M. W., 60 slaves, page 543

SPENCER, William F., 110 slaves, page 556B

STEEL, John, 153 slaves, page 524

STEEN, Peggy A., 70 slaves, page 450B

STERRETT, Est. D. W., 102 slaves, page 481

STEWARD, A. J., 43 slaves, page 503

STROTHER, G. H., 36 slaves, page 531

TAIT, Felix, 129 slaves, page 564B

TAIT, James G., 99 slaves, page 553

TAIT, Robert, 148 slaves, page 532B

VAUGHN, Fielding, 88 slaves, page 520

WATSON, Geo. T., 83 slaves, page 532

WESTRAY, see also Moore& Westray

WHEELER, W. F., 40 slaves, page 464B

WILLIAMSON, George and three others, 64 slaves, page 550

WILMER, John, 53 slaves, page 471B

YELDELL, Robert, 66 slaves, page 485B

YOUNG, John C., 61 slaves, page 471B

YOUNG, Mrs. E. C., 42 slaves, page 459B

YOUNG, Robert E., 52 slaves, page 458

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)

BECK, 302, 58, 32, 54, 42, 26

BELL, 4784, 485, 32, 388, 280, 23

BENNETT, 1319, 148, 46, 114, 87, 30

BLIXUM, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

BONNER, 658, 122, 29, 119, 81, 28

BOYKIN, 399, 146, 40, 92, 78, 22

BRYAN, 1098, 103, 8, 74, 50, 7

BURFORD, 116, 28, 16, 28, 15, 6

BURPO, 10, 10, 9, 10, 10, 9

CALHOUN, 560, 119, 11, 78, 61, 6

CARSON, 617, 80, 31, 70, 52, 24

CARTER, 7164, 478, 30, 397, 263, 24

COCHRAN, 252, 51, 6, 36, 30, 4

CALLEY, 64, 13, 8, 12, 11, 8

COOK, 3149, 409, 43, 339, 253, 35

COOPER, 3459, 214, 8, 212, 126, 5

CRAWFORD, 1876, 236, 6, 191, 146, 5

CREAGH, 27, 26, 18, 19, 18, 12

CRUM, 96, 38, 15, 30, 29, 10

CRUMB, 21, 8, 3, 2, 2, 0

CRUMPH, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

CURTIS, 962, 58, 9, 41, 28, 5

DAVIS, 13725, 1122, 35, 1004, 698, 27

DEER, 17, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1

DORTH, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

DUMAS, 202, 73, 46, 49, 43, 29

EDWARDS, 3741, 355, 7, 296, 203, 4

ELLIS, 2094, 192, 26, 164, 114, 17

ERVIN, 221, 20, 6, 14, 9, 5

FAIL, 9, 8, 5, 6, 6, 3

FISHER, 1953, 92, 16, 89, 57, 15

FORNISS, 5, 5, 5, 3, 3, 3

FOX, 820, 31, 10, 34, 20, 6

GODBOLD, 48, 12, 5, 10, 10, 5

GRACE, 188, 46, 18, 42, 34, 14

GULLETT, 39, 32, 28, 20, 19, 19

GULLY, 86, 51, 37, 47, 40, 26

HAILE, 47, 2, 0, 3, 2, 0

HAMNER, 46, 19, 3, 17, 16, 2

HAWTHORN, 108, 46, 4, 40, 38, 4

HORN, 379, 63, 7, 59, 38, 6

HUNTER, 2838, 378, 35, 306, 230, 26

IRBY, 251, 100, 61, 56, 51, 33

JENKINS, 3848, 247, 34, 205, 144, 31

JONES, 27193, 2497, 102, 2155, 1451, 77

KELLY, 1747, 180, 20, 167, 117, 15

KENNEDY, 781, 148, 10, 129, 100, 7

KETCHUM, 32, 5, 2, 2, 2, 1

LEE, 6357, 644, 18, 490, 371, 14

LINAM, 40, 30, 26, 19, 19, 18

LUKE, 92, 8, 0, 13, 8, 0

MARSH, 391, 67, 39, 65, 48, 28

MASON, 2858, 235, 20, 216, 159, 18

MATTHEWS, 801, 88, 6, 68, 46, 4

MCCONICO, 30, 16, 16, 12, 11, 11

MCCRACKEN, 47, 6, 2, 4, 4, 2

MCDOWELL, 415, 49, 22, 29, 20, 6

MCGUIRE, 230, 26, 1, 24, 18, 1

MCINTOSH, 408, 58, 19, 52, 31, 14

MCLEAN, 446, 46, 11, 32, 26, 8

MCLEOD, 260, 36, 13, 31, 25, 10

MCPHERSON, 364, 45, 14, 42, 37, 12

MILLER, 6577, 346, 28, 292, 190, 23

MONTGOMERY, 1303, 151, 25, 113, 82, 7

MOORE, 8698, 1016, 29, 917, 635, 17

MYERS, 1335, 56, 6, 60, 33, 6

NICHOLSON, 453, 42, 5, 53, 28, 5

ODOM, 211, 36, 4, 31, 24, 2

OLIVER, 1482, 217, 6, 177, 139, 3

PACKER, 71, 44, 14, 33, 32, 10

PARKER, 4448, 353, 13, 287, 203, 8

PARKS, 920, 55, 1, 51, 34, 0

PETTWAY, 5, 4, 1, 2, 2, 0

PHARR, 80, 24, 20, 15, 15, 14

POWE, 120, 19, 13, 20, 15, 11

POWELL, 2420, 298, 23, 232, 183, 21

PRESSLY, 39, 22, 15, 21, 21, 15

PRITCHARD, 114, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0

RAND, 56, 19, 7, 19, 13, 6

RATCLIFF, 107, 8, 8, 8, 6, 6

ROBINS, 226, 54, 28, 40, 34, 16

ROBINSON, 8046, 459, 10, 430, 270, 7

SATTERWHITE, 90, 13, 9, 14, 10, 7

SAVAGE, 484, 50, 17, 33, 31, 13

SCOTT, 8407, 565, 16, 473, 322, 8

SELLERS, 225, 37, 15, 24, 22, 8

SMITH, 29087, 2290, 100, 1820, 1286, 79

SPENCER, 1560, 163, 26, 154, 113, 23

STEEL, 335, 33, 0, 29, 18, 0

STEEN, 64, 19, 18, 15, 15, 15

STERRETT, 7, 3, 0, 3, 3, 0

STEWARD, 786, 61, 5, 55, 39, 5

STROTHER, 392, 47, 5, 20, 19, 3

TAIT, 50, 32, 28, 21, 21, 18

VAUGHN, 864, 113, 12, 86, 64, 10

WATSON, 3567, 253, 33, 209, 144, 21

WESTRAY, 26, 9, 9, 8, 8, 8

WHEELER, 1016, 60, 12, 67, 36, 11

WILLIAMSON, 1289, 197, 19, 137, 118, 12

WILMER, 120, 17, 14, 15, 15, 13

YELDELL, 22, 15, 3, 12, 12, 1

YOUNG, 6185, 407, 48, 356, 246, 32

Return to Home and Links Page

Wilcox Co. AL GenWeb site

You are the visitor to this page.