Search billions of records on Ancestry.com
   

BARNWELL COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA

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 Barnwell County, South Carolina, in 1860, is either non-existent or not readily available. It is possible to locate a free person on the Barnwell County, South Carolina 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 Barnwell County, South Carolina 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 Barnwell County, South Carolina 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.

SOURCES. The 1860 U.S. Census Slave Schedules for Barnwell County, South Carolina (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 1229) reportedly includes a total of 17,401 slaves, ranking it the seventh highest County total in the State and the twenty-first in the United States. This transcription includes 90 slaveholders who held 40 or more slaves in Barnwell County, accounting for 6,123 slaves, or 35% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 1,108 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 (actually shown as "District" on the census page), the number of slaves they held in the County where the slaves were enumerated and the first census page of that County 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 census shows no subdivisions within the County. 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 South Carolina 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. Though not specifically looking for such slaves, the transcriber did notice the following: 100 year old female named January, "an African" held by Julia C. Ervin on page 290B; and 102 year old male named Prince, "an African", held by Robt. Martin on page 291. 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 Barnwell County population included 12,702 whites, 640 "free colored" and 17,401 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population had increased 7% to 13,578, while the "colored" population had increased 23% to 22,146. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 10,004 whites, about 21% less than the 1860 total, while the 1960 total of 17,582 "Negroes"was just slightly less than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) 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 the freed slaves go? Charleston County saw an increase in colored population of almost two thirds between 1860 and 1870, so likely that is where many went. No other South Carolina County showed such a significant increase. Between 1860 and 1870, the South Carolina colored population only increased by 4,000, to 416,000, a 1% increase. States that saw significant increases in colored population during that time, and were therefore more likely possible places of relocation for colored persons from Barnwell County, included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); Alabama, up 37,000 (8%); 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:

AARON, John, 81 slaves, page 269

ALDRICH, A. P., 75 slaves, page 274B

ALLEN, J. D., 40 slaves, page 282

ALLEN, Miss L. A., 61 slaves, page 255B

ASH, Richard, 45 slaves, page 224

ASHLEY, Charles, 51 slaves, page 218B

ASHLEY, William, 108 slaves, page 241B

AYER, L. M. Sr., 142 slaves, page 213B

AYER, L. M. Jr., 57 slaves, page 214B

BAILEY, S. J., 92 slaves, page 246

BARKER, W. R., 49 slaves, page 276B

BELINGER, Lucious, 42 slaves, page 200B

BLACK, Mrs. A. G., 81 slaves, page 249

BOSTICK, W. M., 89 slaves, page 260

BRABHAM, Josiah J., 52 slaves, page 191

BROOKS, Walker J.?, 66 slaves, page 222B

BROWN, James C., 140 slaves, page 280B

BROWN, T. J., 50 slaves, page 250B

BUNN, B. H., M. Jouvers? Overseer, 64 slaves, page 295

BUNN, B. H., John H. Lafitt overseer, 74 slaves, page 295B

BUSH, David, 58 slaves, page 243

BUSH, G. W., 46 slaves, page 237

COONER, Estate of, 52 slaves, page 202B

DOWLING, William B., 40 slaves, page 211B

DUNBAR, A. R., 41 slaves, page 248

DUNBAR, F. F., 43 slaves, page 247B

DUNBAR, George, 90 slaves, page 248B

DUNBAR, Miss C.? F., 60 slaves, page 243B

DUNBAR, W. P., 49 slaves, page 249B

DUNCAN, H. D., 56 slaves, page 221B

DUNCAN, J. G. W., 106 slaves, page 265B

ERWIN, J. D.? Junr., 44 slaves, page 290B

ERWIN, James D., 79 slaves, page 288B

ERWIN, Julia C., 65 slaves, page 290

ERWIN, Samuel M., 40 slaves, page 289

ESTES, A. B., 79 slaves, page 223B

FAUST, Owen R., 50 slaves, page 212B

FOGLER, Ann E., 45 slaves, page 292

GRAHAM, Z. G., 47 slaves, page 215

HAGOOD, E. A.?, 41 slaves, page 240

HAGOOD, J. O., 64 slaves, page 266B

HAMMOND, J. H., 294 slaves, page 252

HARDIN, Robert, 44 slaves, page 224

HARLEY, J. R., 42 slaves, page 272B

HAY, Susan C., 53 slaves, page 287

HAY, T.? J., 40 slaves, page 286B

HICKSON, John, 49 slaves, page 218

HOGG, T. F., 43 slaves, page 276

HOLLY, John, 125 slaves, page 285B

HUTTO, Henry, 42 slaves, page 195B

JEMMISON?, D. F., 77 slaves, page 204B

KIRKLAND, Robert, 59 slaves, page 192

LAWTON, Dr. B. W., 65 slaves, page 261

LAWTON, J. S., 69 slaves, page 222B

LAWTON, Rev. J. W., 62 slaves, page 260B

LAWTON, W. J., 94 slaves, page 257B

MAINER, S. P., 79 slaves, page 259B

MARTIN, J. U.?, 53 slaves, page 296

MARTIN, Robt., 125 slaves, page 291

MARTIN, William A., 63 slaves, page 289

MILHOUSE, C.? H., 44 slaves, page 270

MOYE, George W., 51 slaves, page 193

NEWMAN, William, 52 slaves, page 242B

NIMMONS, William, 121 slaves, page 203B

NOBLES, J. A., 43 slaves, page 250

PATTERSON, Angus Est., by E. L. Patterson Extr., 172 slaves, page 273

PATTERSON, F. E., 60 slaves, page 283

PATTERSON, James, 68 slaves, page 264

PINKNEY, Lucia, 99 slaves, page 200

PLATTS, John, 46 slaves, page 283B

PRIESTER, Elizabeth, 57 slaves, page 278

RANSEY, G. T., 48 slaves, page 238B

RAYZOR, P. Owner, Orange Parish S. C., A. J. Hugis manager, 42 slaves, page 196B

REYNOLDS, Dr. W. S., 64 slaves, page 222

RICE, David H., 62 slaves, page 190B

RICE, Wm. B., 48 slaves, page 191

RICE, Wm., 43 slaves, page 209

RICHARDSON, Mrs. M. A., 175 slaves, page 258

RUSOR?, Mrs. Mary, 41 slaves, page 205

SIMKINS, A. A., 47 slaves, page 239

SIMS, W. G., 70 slaves, page 198

STALLINGS, John, 52 slaves, page 220

SWEAT, B. S., 49 slaves, page 198B

WALKER, W. P., 76 slaves, page 226

WEATHERBEE, Riley, 40 slaves, page 235B

WILLINGHAM, B. F., 104 slaves, page 296B

WILSON, J. J., 43 slaves, page 245B

WOOD, J. A., 64 slaves, page 250B

WOOD, J. J. Est. of, 54 slaves, page 247

ZIEGLER, Ann, 46 slaves, page 208B

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)

AARON, 111, 15, 4, 18, 15, 4

ALDRICH, 26, 2, 1, 7, 2, 1

ALLEN, 6198, 255, 40, 383, 232, 38

ASH, 310, 27, 4, 41, 26, 4

ASHLEY, 285, 47, 38, 56, 40, 35

AYER, 24, 13, 12, 13, 13, 12

BAILEY, 2281, 162, 3, 210, 152, 1

BARKER, 549, 32, 16, 41, 31, 15

BELINGER, 7, 4, 0, 4, 4, 0

BLACK, 2318, 232, 4, 292, 225, 4

BOSTICK, 245, 48, 0, 54, 48, 0

BRABHAM, 26, 26, 22, 26, 26, 22

BROOKS, 4486, 164, 9, 274, 157, 9

BROWN, 27013, 2611, 106, 3423, 2537, 98

BUNN, 156, 4, 0, 11, 4, 0

BUSH, 1228, 123, 57, 158, 122, 57

COONER, 8, 4, 0, 5, 4, 0

DOWLING, 41, 9, 8, 12, 9, 8

DUNBAR, 291, 91, 74, 86, 81, 64

DUNCAN, 1366, 122, 20, 178, 119, 20

ERWIN, 265, 28, 6, 39, 26, 6

ESTES, 188, 25, 0, 37, 24, 0

FAUST, 61, 18, 10, 16, 16, 9

FOGLER, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2

GRAHAM, 1787, 292, 6, 348, 284, 6

HAGOOD, 79, 55, 22, 56, 53, 22

HAMMOND, 632, 101, 12, 121, 91, 12

HARDIN, 451, 22, 1, 27, 22, 1

HARLEY, 140, 36, 21, 45, 35, 20

HAY, 192, 67, 50, 69, 65, 50

HICKSON, 72, 30, 19, 32, 30, 19

HOGG, 98, 15, 11, 20, 15, 11

HOLLY, 387, 37, 15, 46, 34, 13

HUTTO, 18, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15

JEMMISON?, 16, 0, 0, 0, 0,0

KIRKLAND, 173, 51, 27, 61, 51, 27

LAWTON, 149, 63, 19, 74, 63, 19

MAINER, 14, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

MARTIN, 5318, 358, 19, 533, 343, 19

MILHOUSE, 42, 2, 2, 9, 1, 1

MOYE, 34, 15, 11, 16, 15, 11

NEWMAN, 649, 28, 8, 40, 27, 7

NIMMONS, 19, 18, 16, 17, 17, 15

NOBLES, 151, 16, 0, 28, 16, 0

PATTERSON, 2478, 203, 28, 296, 186, 27

PINKNEY, 277, 68, 2, 102, 65, 2

PLATTS, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2

PRIESTER, 7, 6,. 6, 6, 6, 6

RANSEY, 20, 8, 6, 8, 8, 6

RAYZOR, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0

REYNOLDS, 1197, 68, 3, 94, 64, 3

RICE, 1528, 225, 28, 295, 221, 28

RICHARDSON, 3741, 492, 9, 620, 478, 9

RUSOR?, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

SIMKINS, 80, 49, 0, 55, 48, 0

SIMS, 1411, 166, 1, 229, 164, 1

STALLINGS, 167, 22, 22, 18, 15, 15

SWEAT, 67, 17, 0, 23, 17, 0

WALKER, 8492, 515, 53, 778, 486, 52

WEATHERBEE, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

WILLINGHAM, 152, 11, 0, 17, 11, 0

WILSON, 10819, 844, 16, 1210, 819, 16

WOOD, 2672, 109, 9, 174, 105, 9

ZIEGLER, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

Return to Home and Links Page

You are the visitor to this page.