MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA
LARGEST SLAVEHOLDERS FROM 1860 SLAVE CENSUS SCHEDULES
and
SURNAME MATCHES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS
Transcribed by Tom Blake, May 2003
PURPOSE. Published information giving names of slaveholders and numbers of slaves held in Marion County, Florida, in 1860, is either non-existent or not readily available. It is possible to locate a free person on the Marion County, Florida 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 Marion County, Florida 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 Marion County, Florida 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 Marion County, Florida (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 110) reportedly includes a total of 5,532 slaves. This transcription includes 114 slaveholders who held 20 or more slaves in Marion County, accounting for 5,532 slaves, or about 61% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 401 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. 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. The term “County” is used to describe the main subdivisions of the State by which the census was enumerated.
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 Florida in 1860 there were 77 farms of 1,000 acres or more, the largest size category enumerated in the census, another 211 farms of 500-999 acres, and 1,432 farms from 100 to 499 acres in size. 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, and the transcriber, though not specifically looking for such named slaves, did not notice any such information on the enumeration of these transcribed slaveholders. 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 Marion County population included 3,294 whites, 1 “free colored” and 5,314 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population had decreased about 11% to 2,926, while the “colored” population had increased about 48% to 7,878. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 33,586 whites, about ten times more than in 1860, while the 1960 total of 18,001 “Negroes”was just over three times more than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) In comparing census data for these years, the transcriber was not aware of any relevant changes in county boundaries.
Where did the Marion County freed slaves go if they did not stay in the County? Between 1860 and 1870, the Florida colored population increased by about 29,000, a gain of approximately 46%. Florida Counties posting the greatest increases were: Alachua and Duval, where the colored population almost tripled: Jefferson, Madison and Marion, with about 50% increases; and Leon which went up about one third. Other states that saw significant increases in colored population during that time included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); Alabama, up 37,000 (8%); North Carolina, up 31,000 (8%); Ohio, up 26,000 (70%); Indiana, up 25,000 (127%); and Kansas up from 265 to 17,000 (6,400%).
SLAVEHOLDER LIST:
AGNEW, Dr. E., 25 slaves, page 338
AGNEW, Saml., 26 slaves, page 362
BADGER, Dr. J. N., 37 slaves, page 349
BARNES, Mrs. F. Est., 20 slaves, page 366
BARNES, Thomas, 35 slaves, page 346B
BECKETT, E. M., 28 slaves, page 333B
BRANTLEY, William, 26 slaves, page 340B
BROOKS, Wiley, 53 slaves, page 361B
CALDWELL, J. &? T., 39V slaves, page 365
CHAMBERS, S. C. C., 44 slaves, page 335
CHAMBERS, W. E., 52 slaves, page 352B
CLARK, Albert, 25 slaves, page 358B
COMMANDER?, James M., 21 slaves, page 355B
CONWELL?, James J., 24 slaves, page 343B
CRANKFIELD, Isaiah, 47 slaves, page 351B
DEMERS?, Lewis, 50 slaves, page 364B
DICKSON, H. W., 29 slaves, page 354B
DUPONT, B. E., 62 slaves, page 357
DUPUIS, D. S., 21 slaves, page 351
EICHELBURGER, A. L., 29 slaves, page 348
EICHELBURGER, J. C., 39 slaves, page 346
EICHELBURGER, J. W. F., 24 slaves, page 349
EICHELBURGER, W. S., 23 slaves, page 349
FENDLY, D. D., 21 slaves, page 340B
GARLINGTON, W. H., 34 slaves, page 362B
GORDON, A. G., 47 slaves, page 350B
GUNNEL?, Geo. M., 27 slaves, page 363
HAMBLEN, N. C. & Bro., 22 slaves, page 347B
HARDEE, Geo. W., 40 slaves, page 343
HARRISON, J. G., 42 slaves, page 338
HENDERSON, L. H., 22 slaves, page 339
HICKSON, Wm., 24 slaves, page 336B
HOLLY, William, 27 slaves, page 359B
HOPKINS, James T., 124 slaves, page 358B
HOPKINS, John D., 40 slaves, page 339B
hOUSTON?, Col. Geo., 57 slaves, page 353
HOWARD, Geo. W., 70 slaves, page 342
HUGGINS, Henry?, 40 slaves, page 334
IRWIN, Dr. O. B., 37 slaves, page 350B
KEITH, Dr. W. J., Estate of, 21 slaves, page 333B
LEWIS, Dr. J____?, 59 slaves, page 365B
LUCIUS, Mrs. Nancy, 22 slaves, page 348B
MARSHAL, J. Foster, 46 slaves, page 344
MARSHALL, J. F., 41 slaves, page 354
MARTIN, E., 77 slaves, page 366B
MASTEN, John M., 55 slaves, page 352
MCDONELL, A. H., 25 slaves, page 361
MCFALL, Audry?, owner, [by] J. A. Scott, 31 slaves, page 365
MCFALL, John, 22 slaves, page 337
MCGAHAGIN, J. L., 48 slaves, page 356B
MCGAHAGIN, Wm., 28 slaves, page 346
MCMAHON, John J., 37 slaves, page 338B
MEANS, W. J., 27 slaves, page 336B
MEYER, B. F., 22 slaves, page 347B
MEYER, Fred, 23 slaves, page 348B
NIXON?, E. M., 23 slaves, page 351
NIXON?, Joice J., 20 slaves, page 350
OWENS, Col. S. H., 156 slaves, page 334
OWENS, Rich. J. B., 89 slaves, page 355B
OWENS, W. A., 119 slaves, page 335B
PASTEUR?, Thos. J., 47 slaves, page 354
PAYNE, Mrs. E. D., 40 slaves, page 336B
PEARSON, John W., 20 slaves, page 340
PRICE, Zacheus, 37 slaves, page 345
PYLE, Mrs. F. M., 67 slaves, page 332B
RATCLIFF, Benj., 32 slaves, page 363B
ROBERDS, R. W., 23 slaves, page 339B
ROGERS, Col. St. Geo., 83 slaves, page 363
SIMINGTON, James, 34 slaves, page 345B
SLOWN, John B., 46 slaves, page 343
SMITH, J. Porter, 31 slaves, page 360B
STAGGERS, Dr. J. G., 63 slaves, page 344B
STANDLEY, Thos. C., 27 slaves, page 338B
STEEL, R. J., 44 slaves, page 355
STRAW, J. E., 32 slaves, page 344B
SULLIVAN, Dr. S. C., 26 slaves, page 338
SUMMER, A. G., 65 slaves, page 358
TANNER, John C., 25 slaves, page 364B
TAYLOR, John M., 64 slaves, page 357
VENNING, R. D., 25 slaves, page 347B
VOGT, J. M., 32 slaves, page 348
WALDO, Dr. Ben, 38 slaves, page 366
WIGGINS, James A., 31 slaves, page 357B
WILLIAMS, Dr. Jesse, 35 slaves, page 362
WILLIAMS, John E., 32 slaves, page 347
YOUNG, A. W., 63 slaves, page 353B
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)
AGNEW, 69, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0
BADGER, 81, 3, 0, 2, 2, 0
BARNES, 2155, 48, 14, 24, 21, 5
BECKETT, 69, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
BRANTLEY, 192, 5, 0, 3, 3, 0
BROOKS, 4486, 108, 4, 51, 47, 2
CALDWELL, 1034, 12, 0, 7, 5, 0
CHAMBERS, 1237, 16, 3, 5, 5, 0
CLARK, 5807, 96, 6, 54, 44, 2
COMMANDER?, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
CONWELL?, 21, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
CRANKFIELD, 17, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
DEMERS?, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
DICKSON, 1134, 28, 2, 9, 8, 1
DUPONT, 25, 11, 0, 8, 7, 0
DUPUIS, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
EICHELBURGER, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
FENDLY, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
GARLINGTON, 55, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
GORDON, 1952, 24, 2, 8, 6, 1
GUNNEL?, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
HAMBLEN, 33, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
HARDEE, 102, 5, 1, 3, 2, 0
HARRISON, 3639, 134, 9, 69, 59, 2
HENDERSON, 3706, 81, 15, 33, 24, 0
HICKSON, 72, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
HOLLY, 387, 5, 0, 2, 2, 0
HOPKINS, 1286, 30, 5, 12, 9, 0
HOUSTON?, 976, 33, 2, 26, 22, 0
HOWARD, 3850, 63, 14, 30, 26, 2
HUGGINS, 194, 9, 0, 5, 4, 0
IRWIN, 278, 6, 2, 1, 1, 0
KEITH, 265, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
LEWIS, 8707, 118, 7, 39, 31, 2
LUCIUS, 17, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
MARSHAL, 816, 12, 3, 3, 2, 0
MARSHALL, 1756, 27, 3, 20, 11, 0
MARTIN, 5318, 98, 8, 44, 38, 2
MASTEN, 29, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
MCDONELL, 19, 3, 0, 1, 1, 0
MCFALL, 55, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
MCGAHAGIN, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
MCMAHON, 22, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
MEANS, 238, 3, 1, 1, 1, 0
MEYER, 64, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
NIXON?, 524, 12, 2, 2, 1, 0
OWENS, 1727, 29, 4, 10, 9, 1
PASTEUR?, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
PAYNE, 1603, 21, 1, 13, 10, 0
PEARSON, 626, 3, 0, 2, 1, 0
PRICE, 2888, 23, 2, 11, 9, 1
PYLE, 13, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
RATCLIFF, 107, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1
ROBERDS, 24, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
ROGERS, 2129, 28, 2, 10, 10, 0
SIMINGTON, 13, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
SLOWN, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
SMITH, 29087, 398, 26, 201, 168, 7
STAGGERS, 27, 1, 0, 0, 0. 0
STANDLEY, 87, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0
STEEL, 335, 6, 1, 3, 2, 0
STRAW, 20, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
SULLIVAN, 482, 5, 0, 1, 1, 0
SUMMER, 80, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0
TANNER, 300, 9, 1, 2, 2, 0
TAYLOR, 11696, 165, 14, 90, 69, 1
VENNING, 14, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
VOGT, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
WALDO, 25, 8, 2, 1, 1, 0
WIGGINS, 753, 35, 1, 19, 17, 0
WILLIAMS, 28865, 1071. 70, 595, 515, 25
YOUNG, 6185, 142, 4, 76, 68, 0
You are the visitor to this page.