SUNLIGHT ON THE SOUTHSIDE Transcribed by Thomas Walter Duda Part 1 Contents of Files ----------------- sun001.txt - (Part 1) Background history, explanation of tithes, etc. sun002.txt - (Part 2) 1748 Tithe List sun003.txt - (Part 3) 1749 Tithe List sun004.txt - (Part 4) 1750 Tithe List sun005.txt - (Part 5) 1751 Tithe List sun006.txt - (Part 6) 1752 Tithe List sun007.txt - (Part 7) 1764 Tithe List sun008.txt - (Part 8) 1769 Tithe List sun009.txt - (Part 9) 1772 Tithe List sun010.txt - (Part 10) 1773 Tithe List sun011.txt - (Part 11) 1774 Tithe List sun012.txt - (Part 12) 1775 Tithe List sun013.txt - (Part 13) 1776 Tithe List sun014.txt - (Part 14) 1783 Tithe List Transcriber's Note: Apart from identifying misspelled words in Part 1, the transcriber has not altered the text. Any comments not clearly marked as being those of the transcriber are either those of the author or of a work cited by the author. The names in the tithe lists have been rendered precisely as found in the published text. It must be stressed that any suggestions as to alternative spellings or questioning that occur within the tithe lists are those of the author. The full text is presented in this transcription with the exception of the index. Each year in contained in its own file. Footnotes are rendered in brackets; page numbers are rendered in braces. Any parenthetical text has been rendered using the brackets or parentheses that appear in the published text. Between pp. 58 and 59 of the published text there appears a fold-out map of Lunenburg County as it existed in 1748, overlaid with the tithe subdivisions and the counties that were created from the original territory of Lunenburg county. A textual representation of the map, together with explanatory text, appears in Part 2 at the end of page 58, but prior to the start of the list of tithes. No copyright notice was printed in the published text. {title page} SUNLIGHT ON THE SOUTHSIDE LISTS OF TITHES Lunenburg County, Virginia 1748-1783 Compiled By LANDON C. BELL CLEARFIELD COMPANY Reprints & Remainders --------------------- {publication page} Originally Published Philadelphia, 1931 Reprinted Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc. Baltimore, 1974 Reprinted for Clearfield Company, Inc. by Genealogical Publishing Co. Inc. Baltimore MD 1991 Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number 74-5468 International Standard Book Number 0-8063-0622-X Made in the United States of America {dedication page} TO HER who has been the inspiration of, and who has given direction to, my maturer efforts -- my partner in romance, song and story -- MY WIFE Mary Walden (Williamson) Bell {contents page} TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION The Southside; Purpose of the Work; The Tithes; The Genesis of Southwestern Expansion; Routes Southward from Virginia; Routes into the Southwest; The Virginia Influence; The First Census of Lunenburg .................................. 9 II LISTS OF TITHES, 1748, 1749, 1750, 1751 .............. 57 At this time Lunenburg embraced area now in eleven counties; Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Char- lotte, Halifax, Pittsylvania, Henry, Patrick, Franklin, Campbell, Bedford and Appomattox. III LISTS OF TITHES, 1752, 1764, 1769 .................... 178 IV LISTS OF TITHES, 1772, 1773, 1775, 1776, 1783 ........ 286 INDEX Transcriber's Note: The Index is not included in this transcription. {page 9} CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION THE SOUTHSIDE The title chosen for this work, makes appropriate some explanation of what is meant by "The Southside." The Southside is territory on the south side of James River but just exactly what area is referred to when the term is used is not always clear. A recent writer says: "That section of Virginia which lies south on the James River and east of the Blue Ridge Mountains is popularly known as the Southside; but the designation is often restricted to a smaller area, excluding the tidewater and upland counties, and sometimes also the northern counties of this region."[1] Obviously this is a little general; and it is doubtful if the entire area thus designated is "popularly" known as the Southside. It is questionable, at least, whether the extreme eastern and western counties of that area are popularly regarded as a part of the Southside. Desiring to develop with as much precision as was reasonably possible the facts in the case as to the extent and location of the section known as the Southside, the writer addressed identical inquiries on the subject to Dr. Philip Alexander Bruce, Honorable William Cabell Bruce, Dr. Lyon G. Tyler, Honorable Armistead C. Gordon and Dr. Joseph D. Eggleston, asking them to give him their understanding of the term. While there was substantial agreement among them, there was variation enough to make it clear that hitherto the section referred to by the designation has not had precise and definite metes and bounds. The highly interesting views of these distinguished authorities are given in the order of the receipt of their responses to the writer's inquiries. ---------- [1] Wilmer L. Hall, Introduction to Watson's _Notes on Southside Virginia_, 5. {page 10} Honorable William Cabell Bruce said: "The territory usually described as Southside Virginia lies between the southside of the James River and the northern boundary of North Carolina, so far as its northern and southern boundaries are concerned. Approximately speaking, its western boundary might, in my judgment, be said to be the right of way of the Southern Railway between Lynchburg on the James and the northern boundary of North Carolina just south of Danville; and approximately speaking, its eastern boundary might, in my judgment, be said to be a straight line drawn southwardly from the mouth of the Appomattox River to the northern boundary of North Carolina. "Senator Swanson, of Virginia, lives at Chatham, in Pittsylvania County, Virginia, on the line of the Southern Railway north of Danville, and I know from my intercourse with him that he would be quick to resent the idea that he is not a Southsider; and John Randolph, who was born near the mouth of the Appomattox, in Prince George County, Virginia, and resided for a large part of his life at Roanoke, in Charlotte County, Virginia, described himself, on one occasion, as I remember at this moment, as a 'moonstruck Southsider'."[2] The Southsider as thus described would embrace practically all of Campbell County, about half of Pittsylvania County, and all the counties eastward thereof, south of James River, to a line drawn southwardly from the mouth of the Appomattox River to the North Carolina line. A line so drawn would split the counties of Prince George, Sussex and Southampton, and embrace in the Southside, approximately a third of Prince George, a half of Sussex and the western corner of Southampton. Upon the definition of the term, Dr. Eggleston wrote: The term 'Southside Virginia' is interpreted differently, but I think the prevailing definition is that it takes the counties south of the James as far west as Lynchburg, and the counties south of the James as far east as Petersburg, but including Prince George and Sussex. "This would mean Campbell, Pittsylvania and Halifax; Ap- ---------- [2] Letter of March 13, 1929. {page 11} pomattox, Buckingham, Prince Edward, Charlotte, Cumberland, Powhatan, Chesterfield, Amelia, Nottoway, Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Dinwiddie, Brunswick, Greenesville, Prince George and Sussex. Certainly all these middle counties between Lynchburg and Petersburg are unmistakably Southside."[3] The inquiry addressed to Dr. Philip Alexander Bruce reached him when he was ill, but he very kindly requested his daughter to answer for him. "He asks me," she writes, "to say that as you know, the Southside shades off into neighboring counties, but it has always been his impression that it runs from Pittsylvania inclusive to Dinwiddie inclusive -- even these two are somewhat shadowy."[4] This description would exclude Prince George and Sussex or at least most of Sussex. The eastern boundary line of the Southside, according to this view might be drawn from City Point and Hopewell, to Petersburg, so as to embrace Petersburg in the Southside, then with the eastern boundary of Dinwiddie County, and with the Atlantic Coast Line Railway to Stony Creek and Jarratt, and from that point following the Greenesville County line to the point where Meherrin River crosses the Virginia-North Carolina line. Mr. Gordon wrote: "So far as I am aware 'The Southside' or 'Southside Virginia,' is a popular term, and incapable of exact definition. I think . . . the expression means generally the territory in Virginia south of the James and north of the North Carolina line, though it is not used in connection with the extreme eastern or western counties of that territory."[5] In Dr. Tyler's response he said: "I have never seen the Southside defined, but I take it to mean all the counties between the James and the North Carolina line as far as a 'line' drawn from the Falls of the James to the North Carolina line," but he adds that in his opinion the line should be so drawn as to embrace in the Southside the counties of Nanse- ---------- [3] Letter of March 14, 1929. [4] Miss Philippa A. Bruce to the writer, March 15, 1929. [5] Letter of March 14, 1929. {page 12} mond, Southampton, Surry, Sussex and Prince George. Dr. Tyler modestly adds: "This is merely an opinion of mine, and not of much authority." He did not, in his letter, indulge any opinion as to the western limits of "The Southside."[6] While, it is noted, Dr. Tyler includes certain of the eastward counties not embraced by the others consulted, this writer agrees with him that at least Southampton, Surry, Sussex and Prince George are entitled to be embraced in that distinctive section of the state known as "The Southside." They have far more of the characteristics of that general section than of any other. It is thus ascertained, so far as such a matter can be resolved upon authority, that the term the "Southside" or "Southside Virginia" designates an area lying between James River and the North Carolina line, as the northern and southern boundaries, respectively of the territory thus designated, and that, with respect to the eastern and western limits of the section, no definite line of demarcation can with certainty be drawn as the section unquestionably "Southside" in characteristics, gradually, to use Dr. Bruce's fitting expression, "shades off" into neighboring territory of doubtful classification. The section from Lynchburg to Richmond, City Point and Petersburg; and from Danville to Emporia, and beyond, has clear right to classification as a part of the Southside. Making something in the nature of a composite of the views expressed by the distinguished authorities consulted, it would seem that the counties of Greenesville, Dinwiddie, Prince George, Surry, Sussex, Southampton, Chesterfield, Brunswick, Mecklenburg, Lunenburg, Nottoway, Amelia, Powhatan, Cumberland, Buckingham, Prince Edward, Charlotte, Halifax, Pittsylvania, Campbell, and Appomattox are entitled to be regarded as comprising the Southside; while neighboring counties eastward and westward in greater or less degree have the traditions and social characteristics which give the Southside its unique position in the history, the politics and the literature of the State. ---------- [6] Letter of March 15, 1929. {page 13} PURPOSE OF THE WORK The genealogical and historical source material of the Southside has scarcely been touched, so far as making its substance available in print is concerned. As to Lunenburg County, a start has been made in _The Old Free State_ and _Cumberland Parish_, the author's previous volumes. But there is much material to be added to these before the field for that county, even, can be said to have been covered. The present volume is intended as a modest addition supplementing the source material of those volumes. If other volumes are added (as may or may not be the case, depending upon many contingencies), it will be the purpose to present material new in the sense that, in the main, it has never heretofore been printed. To start with the Lists of Tithes of Lunenburg County seems very appropriate, for this county as a parent county originally embraced the territory now comprised in ten counties; and the available lists of tithes before any subdivision of the county took place are basic source material for the study of origins, for an expansive domain indeed. A principal object of the writer, in collating, copying, abstracting and printing this material is to make such contribution as he may, small though it be, to the preservation of the subject matter of records which are from historical and genealogical viewpoints invaluable, and which are in process of disintegration through the inevitable effect of time; and which are, moreover, in constant danger of possible loss by fire, or some other such calamity. The deprivation of records already lost in various counties of Virginia, by such means as accidental fires and wanton destruction by invading soldiers in the period 1861 to 1865, make but too plain the irreparable nature of such losses. But this work is not designed only to help preserve such records; it is hoped it may facilitate the work of researchers. If a genealogist were asked to outline an ideal arrangement of source material for his use in making searches for the histories of early generations of Virginia families, it may be imagined that he would, among other things, like to have these: {page 14} An arrangement of the data, in the chronological order of the settlement of the country, with the counties listed in the order of their creation; The records of, or relating to those counties, arranged in groups; these likewise assembled in chronological order, and indexed, or otherwise classified for ready reference. Such records would embrace, among others: Lists of the inhabitants, such as might be secured from a census, if any were taken, and if not, from lists of tithes or of the tax-paying inhabitants, with names of children, "overseers," and others whose names might appear; lists of marriages; lists of births and deaths; lists of those who held offices, civil or military; lists of those making deeds; and lists of all persons making wills, with names of all beneficiaries, and their relationship, respectively to the testator, and lists of administrations and settlements of estates where no wills were made. Such records, for all counties, printed and assembled in a single great library, such as we can imagine the State Library of Virginia might be, would be a near paradise for the researcher. But collecting, archiving, printing and making available such records, on any such comprehensive plan, may never be achieved; certainly it will not be done during any future time, which can now be envisaged. An undertaking of such character would require a volume of financial resources, a systematic organization, a plan over a number of years, and the services of a numerous and well-trained staff, such as it is not only not practicable now to attempt, but which, so far as this writer knows, never has been seriously considered. It has been impossible, in the nature of the case, for researches in, and the publication of ancient records to proceed upon any exact, systematic and scientific plan. Our historical and genealogical magazines, the Virginia Historical Society and the Virginia State Library have done much in this field, and what they have done, has been, in the main, done more systematically than that resulting from the independent and unrelated efforts of individuals who have made contributions of material, resulting from their labors in this general field. These later, while valuable and interesting, have been, at times tantalizing. Thus, for example, in a {page 15} certain section we have had presented the publication of a list of marriage bonds for a given time, but from that section we may have no wills; for another section we may have the publication of abstracts of wills, but no lists of marriages. Moreover, such publications have followed no order of seniority; those for newer sections may precede those for older parts of the country, and appear at random from widely separated parts of the country. And few are the sections for which there have been published, covering any considerable period, records which give lists of residents, lists of those who married, lists of those who made wills, and of the persons mentioned in the wills, etc. Yet, it is apparent, that to present such groups of data covering definite periods, for particular sections makes possible a fuller user, a better identification and correllation [sic] of material than can be otherwise accomplished. Virginia, as a State, has expended, relatively speaking, very little upon the preservation and publication of her priceless records. No other state has such a history, no other state has records of such real worth and value, for no other state contributed so much to the founding and building of a great commonwealth of states; no other has done so much for the freedom of thought, of religion; and of political action; no other contributed so much to the creation of the sentiments which produced the Declaration of Independence. No other contributed so much to the achieving of our independence; and no other had so large and important a part in the framing of the Constitution and founding a Constitutional Union of States; and no other has suffered more from the selfish ingratitude of an ungenerous majority of the states. Comparing what Virginia has done, in the preservation, printing and making available the contents of her great treasure house of records, with what some of the newer and more materially prosperous states have done, one cannot avoid the observation that the states with the abundance of financial resources to devote to such purposes do not have the records and the traditions to preserve; while Virginia with an unmatched abundance of traditions and of records has not enjoyed since the war of 1861 to 1865, such a degree of prosperity as to enable her to do, what otherwise, under happier circumstances might have been done. {page 16} But to pen these lines is not to unduly censure the mother state. She has been the victim of circumstances, beyond her control. From an early day, as an agricultural state, she has been the victim of an economic system the inevitable results of which Mr. Jefferson and others of her sons clearly pointed out; while since the War between the States she has not only struggled against that system, but against the devastating effects of that war and worse still, the effects of the Era of Loot and Brigandage, which even the name "Carpet-baggery" euphoneously [sic] describes. A century is a short time within which to overcome and to recover from the effects of such a conjunction and combination of malign policies, and long continued measures in keeping them in effect. As time goes by there will be, doubtless, improvement in the matter of the publication of Virginia's priceless records. We may confidently expect at least a substantial increase in the volume, and a better grouping of such material made available in print. But the regret of those keenly interested in such sources is that such measures are not materializing fast enough. Moreover, what remains of much invaluable material is gradually disappearing, and where not disappearing, is relatively difficult of access and expensive to consult and explore. Under these circumstances, every transfer to the printed page, of items of information contained in ancient documents and files, thus assuring its preservation, may be regarded as a service not only to the present, but to the future -- one which will be of greater and greater value as the present recedes into the past. In the course of his researches in the preparation of his former work, _The Old Free State_, the author discovered, or probably it would be more accurate to say, became painfully aware of, the great extent of the losses of valuable records which have occurred, even in those counties which have not suffered such holocaustic calamity as the destruction of their records by fire. Thus, for example, in such counties as Amelia, Lunenburg and Mecklenburg, where many records are complete from the beginnings of the counties, and where presumably all records should be complete, many are nevertheless missing, and this despite the {page 17} fact that in recent years they have been cared for with the greatest diligence which the circumstances permit. A knowledge of such facts, and of the physical condition of many of the ancient documents which remain -- in some cases, fragile to the point of disintegration, and faded almost to the point of illegibility -- impelled a desire to do something to help to save their substance for posterity. THE TITHES The lists of tithes of Lunenburg County for the earlier years are almost a unique inheritance, as such records in many of the counties have not survived. Lists for 1748, 1749, 1750, 1751, 1752, 1764, 1769, 1772, 1773, 1774, 1775, 1776 and 1783 are embraced herein. Lunenburg County originally embraced all of the territory from Brunswick County westward to the top of the Blue Ridge Mountains and from the North Carolina line, northward to the divide between the waters of the James and Roanoke Rivers.[7] The first loss of territory from the original area, occurred in February, 1752, when Halifax County was created.[8] It is therefore the fact that the lists of tithes for 1748, 1749, 1750 and 1751, embraced the tax paying population of that great section, which now constitutes the following counties: Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Halifax, Charlotte, Pittsylvania, Henry, Patrick, Franklin, practically all of Bedford, most of Campbell and a considerable part of Appomattox. It is a fortunate circumstance that all the lists for the early years, 1748,[9] 1749 and 1750 are available. They present the earliest complete record, or census, known of the taxable residents of the far-flung domain of the ancient county, embracing as it ---------- [7] _The Old Free State_, I, 136-7. [8] _Hening_, VI, 252; _The Old Free State_, I, 139. [9] For the ability to present abstracts of all the list of tithes for 1748, the author is indebted to Mr. Curtis Bynum, of Asheville, North Carolina. Both Mr. Yates, the Clerk, and the writer had made searches for the lists, but had discovered only two of them. Subsequently, Mr. Bynum, a patient, persistent, painstaking investigator, and scholarly analyst, found the remainder of the lists, and called them to the writer's attention. {page 18} did then, what is now the whole or the greater part of ten counties. The ancestral origins of countless thousands of persons, particularly in the newer parts of the United States run back to this section and are to be found in these records. It could, with an imposing array of facts and reasons, be maintained that this great section has been the mediate or immediate source of as great an array of initiative, enterprise, daring, talent, ability and culture, and of men of superior quality and character, in as great number and in as great a variety of fields of human endeavors, as any other region of similar size in America; and it would be scarcely possible to disprove such an assertion. The interesting character and inherent qualities of those who emigrated from the region are indicated by such facts, as that thirteen persons born within this area became Governors of States other than Virginia;[10] eleven persons born within the ancient domain of Lunenburg became United States Senators from other States,[11] while twenty-three persons born there, served in Congress from not less than seventeen States, scattered over the Union from Alabama, Georgia and North Carolina on the one hand, to Texas, Illinois and Washington on the other.[12] As the author said in his former work:[13] "To call the roll of these native sons who attained to positions of importance and honor in other states, naturally suggests an inquiry of broader scope. If the emigrants from the area of ancient Lunenburg so made their impression in new localities, and amid strange surroundings, what may not be said of the scope of the influence of the descendants of these and other Lunenburgers who cast their lots in other states and have had their part in the building of the nation?" A distinguished foreigner has said: "The only really cultural atmosphere one finds today in America is that of Virginia. The cultured men who were born in its field of force are responsible for most that is of cultural value in America. But how different ---------- [10] _The Old Free State_, II, 101-102, where their names are given. [11] Id., 102-104. [12] Id., 102-104. [13] _The Old Free State_, II, 104. {page 19} Virginia is from other states? Its culture is a particular one; it is not only a matter of age, but of kind as well."[14] A very great part of the cultural forces of Virginia thus described which have leavened America and given the country generally such cultural value as it has, originated in, and went out from that part of Virginia known as the Southside. THE GENESIS OF SOUTHWESTERN EXPANSION There is evidence from an early time that the Virginians were very much more far visioned, respecting westward expansion, and more accurate in envisioning the course of future events in that regard than were North Carolinians. Thus, for example, in October, 1728, when the Commissioners of Virginia, and those of North Carolina had run the dividing line westward from "Coratuck Inlet" only one hundred and seventy miles, or to a point but little west of the present line between Mecklenburg and Halifax Counties, Virginia, the North Carolina Commissioners quit, and went home, refusing to co-operate in running the line any farther westward, claiming that at that point the line had reached "near 50 Miles without the Inhabitants," and that in their opinion there would be no need to run it farther for "an Age or Two."[15] How little did they guess correctly the course of immigration, within "an age or two," and how much more prophetic was the vision of Colonel William Byrd! Commenting upon the views of the North Carolina Commissioners, Colonel Byrd wrote: "And tho' the distance toward the Mountain be not precisely determined . . . yet surely the West Line shou'd be carry'd as near to them as may be, that both the Land of the King, & of the Lords may be taken up the faster, & that his Majesty's Subjects may as soon as possible extend themselves to that Natural Barrier. This they will do in a very few years, when they know distinctly in which Government they may enter the Land, as ---------- [14] Count Herman Keyserling, in the "Atlantic Monthly," September, 1929, (p. 302). [15] See: _Wm. Byrd's Dividing Line Histories of the Dividing Line_. (Edited by William K. Boyd; N. C. Hist. Com., Raleigh, N. C., 1929), pp. 177, 179. {page 20} they have already done in the more Northern Parts of Virginia, So that 'tis strange the Carolina Commissioners shou'd affirm, that the distance of 50 Miles beyond the Inhabitants shou'd be sufficient to carry the Line for an Age or two, especially considering that a few days before the signing of this protest, Astrable[16] had taken up near 2000 Acres of Land, granted by themselves within 5 Miles of the Place where they left us. Besides if we reflect on the goodness of the soil in those Parts, & the fondness of all Degrees of People to take up Land, we may venture to foretell, without the Spirit of Divinahum [divination] that there will be many settlements much higher than these Gentlemen went in less than ten years, & perhaps in half that time."[17] Colonel Byrd's prediction was fulfilled within a short term of years; and in much less than the "Age or two" mentioned by the Carolina Commissioners all that great area was settled and an enormous surge of inhabitants had rolled on over the mountains, and across the streams into the South and Southwest. The opening up of that part of the Colony of Virginia, embraced in the vast expanse of ancient Lunenburg, was the result, in the main, of two influences; the desire of the Colony to expand its settled areas, thus thrusting back the Indian frontier and affording greater security to the thickly settled communities; and the desire of great numbers of persons, residents as well as immigrants to secure cheaper, newer and therefore more fertile lands, as well as to escape, so far as possible, the burdens of taxation. Colonel William Byrd, in his observations as Commissioner from Virginia to fix the boundary line between Virginia and North Carolina was possibly the first to call general public attention to the fertility and desirability of the territory of the original Lunenburg area for settlement. His explorations and observations came at an opportune time. Lands in the older parts of the colonies are becoming more expensive; and taxes were no inconsiderable item. And that state of things was not confined to Virginia, the richest, most favored colony of that era. ---------- [16] Colonel Byrd's name for William Mayo, in _The Secret History_ [17] _Wm. Byrd's Dividing Line Histories_ (Boyd), 181. {page 21} The land policy of Pennsylvania, the land of the benevolent William Penn, was not formulated entirely without consideration of revenue. In fact the incoming Colonists thought the rent charges very high; and the scale of prices there increased. In 1719 the charges were ten pounds and two shillings quit-rents per hundred acres. In 1732 the scale had risen to fifteen pounds ten shillings per hundred acres with a quit-rent of a half penny per acre. In furtherance of a Southwestern Expansion policy in 1738 the General Assembly of Virginia passed an act designed to encourage the settlement of the lands lying upon Roanoke River "on the Southern boundary of the Colony," which lands the act declared were "for the most part unseated and uncultivated." The Act provided: "That all and every person and persons whatsoever, who, within ten years next after the passage of this act, shall import themselves into this Colony, and settle upon Roanoke river aforesaid, on the south branch of the same, above the fork thereof; and on the north branch of the said river, above the mouth of Little Roanoke otherwise called Licking Hole; including all the lands on all the said branches, and the lands lying between them, now deemed to be in the County of Brunswick, and parish of St. Andrew, shall be exempted from the payment of public, county, and parish levies, until the expiration of the said ten years; and be at liberty, at all times hereafter, to pay and discharge all officers' fees wherewith they shall be chargeable, in current money, at the rate of three farthings per pound for tobacco, without deduction; and at all times, after the expiration of that time, shall be at liberty to pay and discharge their public, county and parish levies in current money, at the same rate."[18] The exemptions of this Act applied to all the territory later created into Lunenburg County, except that part embraced in the present (1930) Lunenburg County, Mecklenburg County and about a third of the County of Charlotte. It extended to the territory now embraced in Halifax, Pittsylvania, Henry, Patrick and Franklin, almost the whole of Bedford and Campbell, about two-thirds of Charlotte County, and a part of Appomattox. ---------- [18] _Hening_, 57-8; the act is also set out in full in _The Old Free State_, I, 132-133. {page 22} The attractiveness of the exemptions provided by this legislation is evidenced by the great influx of immigrants into the territory thus favored. They came from almost every quarter. The rapidity of the settlement of the territory is indicated by a few outstanding facts, such as that within seven years there was a population of such numbers in the new section so remote from Brunswick court house that a new County, Lunenburg, had to be created,[19] and this area in turn was subdivided into new counties as follows: Halifax in 1752, Bedford in 1754; Charlotte and Mecklenburg in 1765 and Pittsylvania in 1767. After the great western domain of Lunenburg had been cut off into Halifax and Bedford, and while the mother county still retained the territory later erected into Charlotte and Mecklenburg Counties, the population of the county became so great that the county was subdivided into three parishes, Cornwall Parish being formed in 1757, and St. James Parish being created in 1761. These parishes were co-extensive with the areas later laid off into Charlotte and Mecklenburg Counties respectively. About the time of the passage of the Act above mentioned embodying the ten year exemption from certain taxes for settlers upon the Roanoke, Lord Granville's agents were "disposing of desirable lands in the piedmont region of North Carolina to settlers at the rate of three shillings proclamation money for six hundred and forty acres . . . and was also making large free grants on the condition of seating a certain proportion of settlers."[20] Many of those originally settling the exempted Lunenburg territory remained and became the permanent inhabitants of the area, and the creators of the successive new counties erected from that territory; others paused for a time and then pressed on into the south and southwest. In time a part or all of the children of some of the first settlers moved on into the newer country. Sometimes they emigrated by families and groups of families, and it would be difficult to find a Southside family which did not sooner ---------- [19] It was created by an Act of March 26, 1745, the County to be in existence on and after May 1st, 1746. V. _Hening_, 383-385; _The Old Free State_, I, 135-137. [20] _The Conquest of the Old Southwest_, 9-10. {page 23} or later contribute its quota of sons and daughters to the moving tide of population which flowed on into the south and southwest. Some moved in another direction going to the northwestward, into Augusta and the valley and eventually into the Ohio country by that route; but a great tide of emigration rolled southward into North Carolina, both into what is now the present state of that name, and into what is now Tennessee, and thence westward into Kentucky and southward and westward into Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana; as well as into South Carolina and Georgia; and many went the more direct route into the Kentucky country over the famous Wilderness Trail, or road. ROUTES SOUTHWARD FROM VIRGINIA From an early time there had been avenues of intercourse between Virginia and North Carolina. The commerce of Virginia was earlier developed and better organized; and Virginia had a far better and more stable government than did her sister colony to the south. In the beginning these trade channels were opened up between Virginia and the Indians of North Carolina. As early as 1650 Edward Bland and Abraham Wood made a tour from Fort Henry on the Appomattox, where Petersburg now stands, to the Roanoke, in the interest of the Indian trade. There is extant a record of their travels, but as they used new and unfamiliar names for streams and natural features of the country, some of which have not survived, the route they traveled can be only approximately followed. They crossed what is now Dinwiddie and Brunswick Counties and progressed as far as Roanoke Rapids, or Clarkesville.[21] Returning they passed through the present Lunenburg and Nottoway Counties. Other traders following, in general, this route doubtless developed some trade with the North Carolina Indians, before ---------- [21] There is some difference of opinion as to the point they reached. It was very probably Roanoke Rapids. {page 24} Governor Spotswood's time. Shortly after 1710 he built Fort Christanna, and established an Indian school at that point.[22] This fort was established on the Meherrin River, in the present County of Brunswick, just east of the Lunenburg County line. It was, when established, several days' journey into the interior from the settled parts of the State. In regulation of the Indian trade Governor Spotswood secured the passage in 1714 of a law which incorporated "The Indian Company," and provided that all trade with the Indians in Virginia, both tributary and 'Foreign' should be carried on at one place only, Christanna on the Meherrin River, in open market, by agents of the Company, which was given a strict monopoly of the trade, for twenty years. The plan of trade provided for in the Act was never very effective, and the law was repealed a few years later. But it had the effect of making Fort Christanna a foregathering place for many Indians, and a notable place on the trading paths. Indian commodities in large quantities were brought hither by the Catawhas, the Tuscaroras and other of the Southern tribes. The mention in extant records of fords across the Roanoke and the Dan, and the many licenses granted to ferry owners to operate ferries across these rivers, attest to a degree the extent of communications at an early period between Southside Virginia and the country to the southward, and indicate the many avenues by which access to the southern country was had. Colonel William Byrd in his history of the Dividing Line mentions the Indian Trading Path, which ran from North Carolina northward into Virginia, crossing the Roanoke River, at about the western limits of Brunswick County. One influence which contributed mightily to the creation of roads or trails from North Carolina into Virginia was the superior shipping facilities of the latter colony especially for tobacco. Those parts of North Carolina so situated as to make it more convenient for them to export from the main rivers of Virginia, and the Chesapeake, patronized routes which led them hither -- and ---------- [22] For mention of Christanna, see: _Spotswood Letters_, published by Virginia Historical Society; Edward P. Buford's address, "Fort Christanna", and _The Old Free State_, Vol. I, passim. {page 25} this to the extent possible, despite the fact that Virginia levied an import tax upon North Carolina tobacco, brought into the Colony. Smuggling from North Carolina was not uncommon.[23] The Great Trading Path leading from Southside Virginia to the towns of the Catawhas and other Southern Indians, crossed the Roanoke, and proceeding southerly crossed the Yadkin at the Trading Ford about a mile southeast of Salisbury, North Carolina. The road from Petersburg, by Spains Tavern (in the present Dinwiddie County), crossing the Nottoway River at Cross' Bridge (on the line between the present Lunenburg and Nottoway Counties), thence to North Meherrin River, crossing it at Hawkin's Bridge, the South Meherrin River at Barry's Bridge and thence to Skipwith's Ferry on the Roanoke, and thence southward into North Carolina, was one of the notable roads by which uncounted numbers, from the valleys of the James and of the Appomattox, and from a wide expanse of the Southside, traveled into North Carolina, and to other southern destinations. The route which General Washington, while President, traveled on his famous southern tour, and by which he went from Richmond to Petersburg and thence to Halifax, North Carolina, and on to Charlotte and the South, followed substantially a route traveled ever since communications between the two sections began. He returned by a route roughly paralleling the former, and westward of it, through Southside Virginia.[24] ---------- [23] Referring to the practice of smuggling tobacco by North Carolinians living adjacent to the Virginia line, about 1728, Colonel William Byrd wrote: "They roll it in the Night to Nansimond River, in Defiance of the Law against bringing of Tobacco out of Carolina into Virginia," but Colonel Byrd seems to justify, in a measure, the conduct of the Carolinians, for he adds: "but 'twere unreasonable to expect that they shou'd obey the Laws of their Neighbours, who pay no regard to their own." _The Secret History of the Dividing Line_ (Boyd), 103. [24] _George Washington Diaries, 1748-1799_, IV, 149-198; on General Washington's return from the South he came, on Saturday, June 4, 1791, to the line between North Carolina and Virginia, dined at Wisoms sixteen miles from the ferry and lodged "at Halifax Old Town," from Halifax he proceeded to Banister river, and crossed the Staunton River 12 miles from Halifax, and there met Col. Isaac Coles, formerly a member of Congress from Virginia. He dined at Col. Cole's house; from Halifax Old Court House, crossing Staunton River, the General proceeded to Charlotte County, Virginia, Court House, and from thence to Prince Edward County Court House; from which point he proceeded by way of Treadway's to Cumberland Court House, and from thence across the North Anna, and the Pamunky, through Louisa County and on to Fredericksburg. {page 26} ROUTES INTO THE SOUTHWEST The route into the West which afterward became the Wilderness Road[25] had its beginning at an unchronicled date. It was, doubtless, at least in large part traveled by some of the "Long Hunters," such as Elisha Walden (sometimes erroneously spelled Wallen), before anyone contemplating permanent settlement in the Kentucky country ever undertook to negotiate its passage. The general route of this trail was traveled by Dr. Thomas Walker in 1749, the first explorer into the Kentucky country to chronicle his travels. At the time of beginning his explorations he was a resident of Albemarle County, Virginia. In time the Wilderness Road became the most noted route to the west, and has become "in song and story" one of the most famous roads, of which our annals afford any record. The Wilderness Road is shown on Thomas Speed's map as beginning in Philadelphia, and running westward in Pennsylvania to the Blue Ridge, crossing this range, and thence southwestward from Pennsylvania across Maryland, and down the valley of Virginia between the Blue Ridge and the Alleghany Mountains to "Ft. Chissel" (should be Fort Chiswell), to a point of junction with the other branch of the Wilderness Road, indicated as running from Richmond, Virginia, to Fort Chiswell, in Virginia, on the New River. From this point westward the route is represented as running westward to Cumberland Gap and thence westward into Kentucky. Speed mentions the road from Philadelphia to Fort Pitt, thence to the Ohio River and down that river as another route of travel into the Kentucky country, and records the opinion of Captain Imlay that, especially with much baggage, the "best and most expeditious way to Kentucky" was through "the Wilderness," rather than by way of Pittsburg and the Ohio, even for travelers from Philadelphia and Baltimore. After describing the routes from Philadelphia and Richmond to their converging point, at ---------- [25] _The Wilderness Road_, by Thomas Speed, J. P. Morton & Co., Louisville, Ky., 1886, a Filson Club paper, contains a most interesting description of this famous route. The Speed family was prominent in the early days of Lunenburg, Mecklenburg and Charlotte Counties. Thomas Speed's grandfather emigrated from Charlotte County, Virginia, to Kentucky. {page 27} Fort Chissel he says: "Thus were brought together two tides of immigrants." These two roads converged, according to Speed, at the blockhouse built by Colonel William Byrd in 1758 just after the Americans took Fort Duquesne from the French. It was then an extreme outpost of the white man, and was, of course, intended as a barrier against the Western Indians, especially the Cherokees. It was one of a line of forts on the frontier of the colony to the west, erected in the era of the Colonial Wars against the Indians and the French.[26] Of Fort Chissel (Chiswell) Speed says: "It was an outpost in the wilderness of the West, yet from the point where it stood to Cumberland Gap was nearly two hundred miles. It is a point of great interest in studying the Kentucky immigration. It was there the immigrants reached the 'borders of the great Wilderness.' From the Potomac to New River along the valley, travel was not attended with difficulty or danger of any consequence. The wild, rough and dangerous part of the journey commenced when New River was crossed at Inglis' [Ingle's] Ferry, and the travelers turned squarely toward the setting sun to make their way across the mountains and streams through the 'uninhabited country'."[27] The Wilderness trace, originally a long hunter's trail, by the decade between 1770 and 1780 had become so important a route into the Kentucky country that the Legislature of Virginia, in 1779, lent the aid of the State to opening it up more adequately for travel. It passed an Act directing Evan Shelby and Richard Calloway "to explore the country adjacent to and on both sides the Cumberland mountains, and to trace out, and mark the most convenient road from the settlements on the east side of the said mountains, over the same, into the open country, in the said county of Kentucky; and to cause such road, with all convenient despatch, to be opened and cleared in such manner as to give passage to travelers with pack horse, for the present, and report their pro- ---------- [26] See: _The Old Free State_, I, Chap. V; _The Virginia Frontier, 1754-1763_ (Kontz), The Johns Hopkins Press, Appendix I, III et seq. [27] _The Wilderness Road_, 13. {page 28} ceedings therein to the next session of Assembly."[28] Shelby refused to act under the appointment and the work of locating and clearing the trail devolved upon Calloway. The author of _The Wilderness Road_, while he goes into no details about them was aware that the tide of emigration westward over the Wilderness Trail received accessions from the North Carolina country. He says: "Besides the road which passed along the valley of Virginia, and the one which ran out from Richmond to the intersection at New River, there were other traveled ways or traces which led up to Cumberland Gap from the Carolinas and through the mountains of East Tennessee."[29] Again he says: "From Virginia and the Carolinas all the immigrants naturally entered Kentucky by Cumberland Gap."[30] All of this was true enough, but does not, nor does any other account, so far as investigation has disclosed, call attention to the tide of immigration which flowed from Virginia into North Carolina, and Tennessee, and thence into Kentucky and the West. These Virginians in large measure furnished to those sections the pioneers in leadership and statesmanship of the formative days. It is well understood that countless thousands trekked over the Wilderness Road from Virginia to Kentucky and Tennessee, but for descendants of Virginians, whose ancestors found their way into the West by "the Wilderness Road" to assume that they traveled that route from the Valley of Virginia to Ingle's Ferry, or from the eastern or southern part of Virginia to that point, and thence westward through Wytheville, Marion, Abingdon, King's Meadow, and thence across the Holston, the Clinch and Powells River to Cumberland Gap, is to invite confusion, and possible defeat, in trying to retrace the steps of particular immigrants. For such an assumption entirely overlooks the enormous streams of emigration which flowed into the west by a far more circuitous and therefore much longer route. For example, James Robertson reached the western country by going from Brunswick County, Virginia, to Wake County, ---------- [28] X, _Hening_, 443; _The Old Free State_, I, 126-7. [29] _The Wilderness Road_, 15-16. [30] Id., 22. {page 29} North Carolina (the present city of Raleigh is in Wake County), thence westward through the Yadkin territory, across the mountains which separate the waters of the Yadkin from those of the New River and the Watauga, to a destination somewhere on the last named, beautiful river. Henderson and Boone, and many before and uncounted members after them followed the same route. Most such immigrants traveled "The Wilderness Road," but their first acquaintance with it was upon reaching it somewhere eastward, and probably only a short distance eastward of Clinch Mountain, in the neighborhood of the north fork of the Holston River. Another fact often overlooked in considering the westward migrations is that many of them were not made in one long continuous journey. Often resources were not adequate for that. But the emigrant having turned his face to the west or the southwest made his progress as best he could, often pausing in his course for a season, to raise a crop of corn, kill and cure a supply of meat, and otherwise equip himself and family for making another stage of the journey to some more or less undefined destination. Sometimes what was originally intended as only a temporary stopping place became the permanent residence of the weary migrants. Typical, perhaps, of the way many eventually reached the western country was that described by Snead Davis, a Revolutionary soldier. He was born August 1, 1752, in Prince Edward County, Virginia, and removed when young, with his father, to Wilkes County, North Carolina. In the Revolution, among other services, he fought under General Marion, and later under Colonel Cleaveland at King's Mountain; having active part in battles at Monk's Corner, Ninety-six, Georgetown, King's Mountain and Guilford. He also was engaged in one battle with Indians. In these services he was twice wounded. After his services under General Marion, he returned to his old home in Wilkes County, N. C., to find that the family had moved to Burke County, N. C. He thence proceeded to Burke County, arriving there just as the volunteer forces were being raised to march against Ferguson. He volunteered under Captain Becknell, in Colonel Cleaveland's regiment, and marched against the enemy. Of the encounter he says: "We met him at King's {page 30} Mountain and gained a complete victory. Ferguson was killed and some of his tory officers were hung; I think thirty-two individuals (all tories) were sentenced to be hung. Col. Mills, a noted tory, was one who suffered in this way." After much further service, some of it in the Georgia line, about five years in all, he received his final discharge and returned to his father's house in Burke County. A few months later they removed from Burke County "to Holston River"; thence to Powell's Valley where he left his father three years later, and himself proceeded to the Green River in Kentucky, in what was later Warren County; after six years there he proceeded to the Cumberland River and located in Livingston County, which was his final home; but a son, John, moved, during his father's lifetime, still farther, locating on the Amite River, in Amite County, Mississippi.[31] THE VIRGINIAN INFLUENCE Traveling such routes, the Virginians went to North Carolina, and had an important, if not major influence in its affairs. Indeed Southside Virginia was in fact, and in truth, the cradle of southwestern and westward expansion. It is, doubtless, true that Southside Virginia, area considered, furnished a greater proportion of the inhabitants of the old southwest and the old west than any other territory of America. But the debt of those sections to Southside Virginia has been little chronicled. The facts have been inadequately understood, and certainly little pains have been taken to group and record them. Furthermore, the specific debt of North Carolina to the same section has been little recognized. Due, it seems, to that fact, the historians and genealogists of North Carolina, are yet ignorant of the date and place of birth of one (and the same is doubtless true of others) of the most distinguished of men,[32] connected with the early history of that Colony and State. No broad treatment of this interesting historical subject can be undertaken in this brief chapter, but some indicative facts, ---------- [31] Snead Davis Pension File, Bureau of Pensions, Washington. [32] Willie Jones. {page 31} without in any way attempting to be exhaustive, can be mentioned as illustrative. Robert Jones, Agent of Lord Granville, was a Virginian. Of the third generation of Joneses in Virginia, he was educated in England, was a lawyer of ability, and resided in Surry County. He removed to North Carolina, where he represented Lord Granville, and in 1761 became Attorney General of North Carolina. "He married first Sarah Cobb in 1737 and was the founder of the Jones family of Halifax and Northampton Counties, North Carolina."[33] He had two distinguished son, Allen Jones, born December 24, 1739, who was a Brigadier-General of State Militia during the Revolution, and the more distinguished Willie Jones, who was a member of the Provincial Congress, of North Carolina, which met at Newbern in 1774; co-author of the Bill of Rights and of the Constitution, in 1776; President of the Council of Safety of the State, and Acting Governor, until the election of Richard Caswell in 1776; member of the legislature many years; member of the Continental Congress in 1780. He was elected a member of the Convention of 1787 which met at Philadelphia to propose a revision of the Constitution for the United States, but declined to serve. He was one of the most distinguished members of the Convention in North Carolina, elected to consider the proposed Constitution of 1787, and secured the rejection of that instrument by a vote of 184 to 84. A sketch of this distinguished man in a history of his adopted county in North Carolina gives neither the place nor the date of his birth. This sketch says: "Allen Jones, who held the rank of brigadier-general of State Militia during the Revolution, was born December 24, 1739. Strange that the exact date of his more distinguished brother, Willie Jones, the subject of this sketch, is not given; but it was probably in 1741."[34] Willie Jones was born in Albemarle Parish, Surry County, Virginia, May 25, 1741.[35] ---------- [33] Allen: _History of Halifax County_, North Carolina, 153. [34] Allen: _History of Halifax County_, North Carolina, 153. [35] The entry of his birth, made by Rev. William Willie (for whom he was doubtless named), is as follows: "Willie, son of Robert Jones, {page 32} Ramsey, in his _Annals of Tennessee_, in his account of "Jonesboro, Oldest Town in Tennessee," says: "The legislature of North Carolina, this year [1779], laid off and established Jonesborough as the seat of justice for Washington County. . . . This was the first town in what is now Tennessee. Jonesboro was so called after Willie Jones, Esq., of Halifax, N. C., a friend to the growth and prosperity of the western counties. He was an active patriot and statesman in the days of the Revolution, as well as before and after. He was an intelligent, useful and honest legislator, exercising great candour and independence."[36] While Willie Jones was a resident of Halifax, N. C., after his removal to that State, he was, as we have seen, a native of Surry County, Virginia. He probably did not permanently remove to North Carolina until he was grown. James Robertson, who had such a large, important and honorable part in the early annals of the Tennessee and western country, was, as already stated, a Southside Virginian, though he is usually credited to North Carolina. Thus the Goodspeed _History of Tennessee_[37] says: "Early in 1770 came James Robertson, from Wake County, N. C., who, henceforth, for many years, was destined to be one of the most useful and prominent of the pioneers of Tennessee." This is an accurate statement; but it is further true that James Robertson was a Southside Virginian. He was a native of Brunswick County, Virginia, having been born there June 28, 1742. Haywood, the historian of Tennessee, who knew Robertson well, said of him: "He is the same person who will appear hereafter by his actions, to have merited all the eulogiums, esteem and affection, which the most ardent of his countrymen have ever bestowed upon him." ---------- Jr., and Sarah his wife, born May 25, christened July 5, 1741; Godfathers: Howell Briggs, Wm. Willie; Godmothers: Lucy Briggs, Eliza Willie." The Albemarle Parish Register also contains the entry of the death of the father of Willie Jones as follows: "Robt. Jones Jr. (son of Robt. Jones of this Parish) and Atto. Genl. of No. Carolina, died Oct. 2, 1766, (in the 49th year of his age)." The record shows that the fact was certified by Willie Jones. [36] P. 189. [37] P. 122. {page 33} The first white child born in Tennessee was Russell Bean. The historians do not give the date of Russell Bean's birth, but all seem to agree that he was the first white child born in what is now Tennessee. His father, Captain William Bean, went from Pittsylvania County, Virginia, and with his family settled on Boone's Creek, a tributary of the Watauga River,[38] "about the time of the incipiency of the Watauga settlement." John Sevier was a Virginian, one of the few early prominent pioneers of Tennessee, not from Eastern or Southside Virginia. Matthew Talbot, founder of the Virginia and Tennessee family of that name, was one of the first Justices of Lunenburg County. His son of the same name lived in that part of the county later cut off into Bedford County, and emigrated to North Carolina, and settled near the present Johnson City, Tennessee. He "was a large land owner and a leader among the Wataugans." It was at the Talbot house that the early courts of that section were held.[39] His son emigrated to Georgia and became Governor of that State. Isham Talbott, of the same family, went to Kentucky, where he became a prominent member of the bar, distinguished politician, and was twice United States Senator from that State.[40] Colonel Robert Weakley, of Tennessee, was a son of old Lunenburg. His father, Robert Weakley, appears on the List of Tithes taken by William Caldwell in 1748, the earliest in existence, for Lunenburg County. Another Weakley, William, probably his father, or brother, appears on the same list. Robert Weakley, the father of Colonel Robert, resided in that part of Lunenburg which was in 1752 cut off into Halifax County, Virginia -- and there his son Robert Weakley was born July 2, 1764. Colonel Robert Weakley had a distinguished career in Tennessee. He was a member of the State Legislature, and presiding officer of the Senate, when Weakley County, named in his honor, was formed; he was a member of the North Carolina Convention, before Tennessee was formed, to consider the adop- ---------- [38] _History of Tennessee_, (Goodspeed), 121. [39] Judge Samuel C. Williams to the writer, Aug. 15, 1930. [40] There is a brief sketch of the Talbot family in _Cumberland Parish, 1746-1816_, (Bell), William Byrd Press, Richmond, Va., 1930. {page 34} tion of the Federal Constitution, proposed by the Philadelphia Convention of 1787; and he was a member of the Tennessee State Constitutional Convention of 1834; he was a member of Congress from 1809 to 1811. He died near Nashville, Tennessee, February 4, 1845. Judge Richard Henderson, whose prominent part in the westward expansion has been so brilliantly told by his gifted descendant, Dr. Archibald Henderson, [41] was a Virginian, while neither Daniel Boone nor John Findley, the man who first guided him to "the dark and bloody ground," were North Carolinians. While not the first to penetrate the Southwest, the major honors for the extent of influence in developing it undoubtedly belongs to George Rogers Clark. His enterprises, political, civil and military, were carried out under and by authority of Virginia. The schemes of Colonel Richard Henderson and his associates were ambitious, if somewhat fantastic; and had far-reaching effect. Colonel Henderson, it seems, designed a great land proprietorship in the southwest, which, presumably, would have yielded no allegiance to any of the States. The title which he acquired from the Indians, he claimed to be supreme and paramount. He denied that the States had any rights in the lands or jurisdiction over them. Claiming entire ownership in the land, and denying the jurisdiction of any State, he and his associates proceeded to grant the lands to settlers, as if they were "the State." Carried to its logical conclusion his scheme would have created an anomalous situation. The adventure, however, in any event would probably, in time, not have prevented the formation of the territory involved into a State much upon the order of the other American commonwealths. But as the lands were within the State of Virginia, it asserted and maintained its title thereto, and jurisdiction thereover. These facts, however, in no way minimize the importance of the great service to the cause of exploration and settlement, rendered by Colonel Henderson and his associates. Whatever their political and business plans, they resulted in the emigration of great ---------- [41] Richard Henderson was born in Hanover County, Virginia, in 1742; Dr. Archibald Henderson is the distinguished author of _The Conquest of the Old Southwest_, (The Century Company, 1920), _The Star of Empire_, and many other historical works. {page 35} numbers into the Kentucky country, and the first of these held some of the outposts through the most trying times. Some writers, making no exception in this case, have been over-zealous in claiming major honors in the southwestern expansion for North Carolina. That State had its share in the business, but one looks, almost in vain, for natives of that State (or Colony), who were major figures in that movement. The cradle of southwestern expansion was rocked by Virginian mothers. Among the most distinguished names in pressing back the line of the frontier in the old Southwest were Byrd, Walker, Boone, Clark, Robertson, Henderson, Sevier and Harrod. With the single exception of Boone, these were all Virginians, and Boone was not a North Carolinian. The influence of Virginia, particularly Southside Virginia, in North Carolina, is not confined to those immediately connected with the westward expansion; but is found in the names of many prominent men who had no very direct connection with that era or that movement. Thus for example: Governor Montfort Stokes, of North Carolina, was a native of Lunenburg County, Virginia.[42] The Nash family of North Carolina were taken from Lunenburg County, Virginia. Governor Abner Nash, of North Carolina, General Francis Nash of the Revolution, and Colonel Thomas Nash, were all Virginians -- from the area of old Lunenburg -- [43] and the distinguished North Carolina Revolutionary patriot, Judge John Stokes, was of the Virginia family of that name. John Motley Morehead, Governor of North Carolina, was a native of Southside Virginia. He was born in Pittsylvania County, Virginia.[44] Governors Albert M. Scales and Robert Brodnax Glenn of North Carolina, were descendants of Southside Virginians,[45] and Governor Wilson Lumpkin, of Georgia, was born in Pittsylvania ---------- [42] _The Old Free State_, II, 333; _Congressional Biographical Directory_. [43] _The Reads and Their Relatives_, (Alice Read Rouse), 81. [44] _Virginia Historical Magazine_, XI, 81; _The Old Free State_, II, 102. [45] Clement: _History of Pittsylvania County_, 58. {page 36} Transcriber's Note: The use of the caveat, "sic", contained in the second paragraph of this page, is contained in the published text. Therefore, it is noted here that the spelling of the surname HENDRICKS appears once in that paragraph as HENDRICK and is in both instances as per the published text. County, Virginia, and was a descendant of the same Pittsylvania pioneer as Governor Scales and Governor Glenn.[46] The Pages, that family of which North Carolina so justly boasts, were of Lunenburg stock. Burton J. Hendrick, the biographer of Walter Hines Page, records of this particular Page family, the fact that: "The first existing bit of family history is the record of the marriage bonds [sic][47] given by Lewis Page to Sallie Justice in Lunenburg County, Virginia, on February 13, 1778."[48] "This Lewis Page," says Hendricks, "was Walter Page's great-grandfather,"[49] Lewis Page's father was Edward Page. The Bynums, the Ruffins, the Camerons, were Virginians; some of them in several ways, as for example the Bynums. Originating or at least one time seated in Surry County,[50] the Bynums moved to Lunenburg County, Virginia,[51] were in Pittsylvania when it was erected into a county, and thence emigrated into the adjacent territory of North Carolina. The Terrys, the McDowells, the Averys, the Alexanders, the Boyds, the Selfs, the Dukes, and almost innumerable other families ---------- [46] Id., and _The Old Free State_, II, 101. [47] The record of the Marriage Bond of Lewis Page and Sally Justice was first published in _The Old Free State_, II, 392. The bond bears date February 13, 1778, and the surety on it was Daniel Justice. [48] _The Training of an American_, 6. Mr. Hendricks seems to have little idea of what a "marriage" bond was. Lewis Page did not give "marriage bonds" to Sallie Justice. He executed a marriage bond to the State, as a prerequisite to securing a license to wed Sally Justice. [49] Genealogists can but smile at Mr. Hendricks' next sentence: "His first name suggests an association with the Lewis Family of Virginia -- to which belonged the famous Meriweather Lewis, who, with William Clark, blazed the trail across the prairies and the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Coast." There is, so far, not a shadow of basis, except pure surmise, for any such assumption. [50] Albemarle Parish Register (Surry County, Virginia), contains the entry of the birth of Arthur, son of John Bynham [Bynum] and Mary his wife, June 14, 1740. [51] The lists of tithes for 1749 in Lunenburg County shows John Bynum and his son John Bynum, Jr. John, Jr., was at this time, doubtless, past sixteen years of age, -- older than Arthur. The records show that they were residents of that part of Lunenburg later cut off into Pittsylvania County. This family intermarried with the Cox and Shipp family, and subsequently moved on into North Carolina, where the name has been legion. This family well illustrates the processes of immigration and emigration which were going on throughout the formative period of southward and westward expansion. {page 37} of North Carolina were mediately or immediately of Virginia stock. The earliest preachers of the Presbyterian, Baptist and Methodist Churches to preach in Western North Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky, went to their labors in those fields from Southside Virginia. For example, Rev. Henry Ogborn, of Mecklenburg County, Virginia, was the first Methodist preacher to preach in Kentucky. At "Kenton Station" in the home of Thomas and Sarah Stevenson he organized the first Methodist Society in Kentucky.[52] And Matthew Talbot is said to have been the first Baptist preacher to preach in the Watauga section.[53] The Virginian influence in North Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky was but little if any greater than in Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Arkansas and Texas. One has but to pick up works on genealogy, or such historical-biographical works as _Early Settlers of Alabama_[54] or _Sketches of Some of the First Settlers of Upper Georgia_, ("Gilmer's Georgians"),[55] to fully realize that fact. This situation is further illustrated by comments of Honorable John Sharp Williams upon the writer's former work, _The Old Free State_. He wrote, "It is remarkable that I recognize so much of its genealogy -- continuance of families in Mississippi."[56] and proceeding he specified and commented upon several such "continuances of families" which he recognized. THE FIRST CENSUS OF LUNENBURG The lists of tithes presented in this volume are, in fact, the first census records of the section. So far as this writer knows there has never been any serious attempt made to compile a census record of the Colony of Virginia, as of any particular date. A ---------- [52] _The Old Free State_, I, 392. [53] Judge Samuel C. Williams, letter to the writer, August 15, 1930, referring to Benedict's _History of the Baptists_. [54] By Col. James Edmonds Saunders and Elizabeth Saunders Blair Stubbs, New Orleans, 1899. [55] By George R. Gilmer -- Reprint: Americus Book Co., Americus, Ga., 1926. [56] Letter of October 1, 1929. {page 38} list of the heads of all families, or of all tax-payers in the Colony at any given date, would be a record of major interest; while such lists at given intervals, for the whole colony, during the Colonial Era would provide material whose value could scarcely be computed. A complete list of the tax-paying population of a given section is in substance a census record of the territory. No other public records of the times, so far as is known, contained so complete a record of the population at a given date, as the tax lists or lists of tithes. Certainly from no other sources could lists be compiled giving the names of those who contemporaneously resided in a given part of the state, with such completeness and authoritativeness, as the same are given in the lists of tithes. Lunenburg probably has such records in a relatively good state of preservation for a longer period than any other county. These records make it possible, it is believed, to construct for this part of the Southside a census record, earlier in point of time, and more complete and authentic, than for any other comparable section of the state. Such records, valuable in any case, take on a character and value of the highest degree of importance, when it is remembered that records for Virginia, or the First and Second Federal Censuses, were entirely destroyed. The destruction of those records was, for Virginia, an irreparable loss. When the First Census of the several States of the Union was taken in 1790, it disclosed the fact that Virginia had a population of 747,160.[57] The state with the next largest population was Pennsylvania, but Virginia had over 300,000 more people than did Pennsylvania.[58] The census returns of the First Census, for Virginia, were destroyed when the British burned the Capitol at Washington during the War of 1812.[59] The Bureau of the Census, in the official publication issued from the Government Printing Office, entitled _Heads of Families at the First Census of the United States taken in the year 1790, Record of the State ---------- [57] _First Census of the United States, Virginia_, 3. [58] Id. [59] The census returns for the First Census (1790) from Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey and Tennessee, were also destroyed at that time. {page 39} Enumerations: 1782 to 1785, Virginia_, says: "The loss of Virginia's original schedules for the First and Second Censuses is so unfortunate that every endeavor has been made to secure data that would in some measure fill the vacancy. The only records that could be secured were some manuscript lists of state enumerations made in the years 1782, 1783 and 1785; also the tax lists of Greenbriar County from 1783 to 1786. . . . The Counties for which the names of the heads of families are returned on the state census lists are 39 in number and contained in 1790 a population of 370,000; 41 counties with 377,000 population are lacking; this publication covers, therefore, only about one-half of the state."[60] The Introduction to _Heads of Families at the First Census, 1790_, from which these quotations are made, then goes on to emphasize the importance of the lists of heads of families at that date as being a "unique inheritance for the nation," because they were of the generation of those who adopted the Constitution. In this connection it is said: "The framers were the statesmen and leaders of thought, but those whose names appear upon the schedules of the First Census were in general the plain citizens who by their conduct in war and peace made the Constitution possible and by their intelligence and self-restraint put it into successful operation."[61] This introduction further mentions the interest of patriotic societies and other persons interested in genealogy and in the early history of the country, whose efforts resulted in Congressional authorization to publish these invaluable records. It will thus be seen that any omission to secure available data of the character here discussed was not due, presumably, to any lack of understanding of its importance or a widespread public interest in it. It is, therefore, exceedingly unfortunate that this Introduction, in such an official publication, one that is consulted and read by multiplied thousands, should contain a statement so misleading as that "every endeavor has been made [by the Bureau of the Census] to secure data that would in some measure fill the va- ---------- [60] _Heads of Families at the First Census, Virginia_, 3. [61] Id. {page 40} cancy" by the loss of the records for Virginia of the First and Second Censuses. This erroneous statement has been exceedingly misleading. Many, accepting it as accurate, have assumed that, for the forty-one counties of Virginia not embraced in this governmental publication, no data are available as a substitute for the first census, such as are printed for the thirty-nine, for which state lists are given for one or other of the years from 1782 to 1785. Not only does the statement tend to confuse the average non-professional investigator of family pedigrees, but even specialists have been misled. One would naturally think that no county or parish enumerations, or records from which lists might be compiled, existed in the forty-one counties whose names do not appear in this publication, for if they were in existence and the "every endeavor" claimed, had been made, surely they would have been found. The volume referred to, issued by the Bureau of the Census, embraces no lists for the following counties: Augusta, West Augusta, Accomack, Botetourt, Buckingham, Berkley, Brunswick, Bedford, Culpeper, Charles City, Caroline, Campbell, Dinwiddie, Elizabeth City, Fauquier, Franklin, Goochland, Henrico, Hardy, Henry, James City, King William, King and Queen, King George, Lunenburg, Loudon, Louisa, Montgomery, Northampton, Ohio, Prince William, Prince George, Pendleton, Randolph, Russell, Rockbridge, Spotsylvania, Southampton, Washington, Westmoreland and York. Transcriber's Note: See _Virginia Tax Payers, 1782-87: other than those published by the United States Census Bureau_ by Augusta B. Fothergill and John Mark Naugle (Reprint: Genealogical Publishing Co. 1971) for a compilation of persons in those counties not included in the Bureau of the Census publication that Mr. Bell describes in the present work. While no exhaustive search has been made to determine what data, of the character mentioned, are available in these several counties, sufficient is known to justify the statement that the implication of the publication mentioned, of the Bureau of the Census, is highly erroneous. This is shown by such facts, for example, as that in Lunenburg County the original lists of property owners, taypayers, land owners, etc., more or less complete for the period from 1748 to 1783, and after, are preserved in quite good condition. These lists, in general, show the name of the taxpayer, to whom the tithes were chargeable, and gave usually the names of the tithes in such fashion as to enable one to eliminate the names of slaves, leaving {page 41} thus the name of the taxpayer, usually the head of a family, together with the names of male children old enough to be taxed, and the names of other white persons charged as tithes, such as overseers and indenture servants. For certain years, 1783, for example, the list for Lunenburg, giving the data for that county, in much the same form as that employed by the Bureau of the Census for the thirty-nine counties reported, has always been available. It therefore appears that not only was "every endeavor" not made to secure all of the available material, which would fill the gap caused by the loss of the records of the early Federal enumerations, but that much useful material could have been secured with a minimum of endeavor. Not only so, but it has been now about a century and a half since such records were made, and over twenty years since congress, recognizing the widespread interest in such records, ordered them printed. So far as we have been able to discover the Bureau of the Census has not, during the past twenty years, added anything to the published data for the period in question respecting any of the forty-one counties mentioned above. It would seem, therefore, that either the keen interest declared in the Introduction to exist has waned, or the Bureau has been singularly lacking in enterprise in discovering the existence of available material. The lists now presented for the first time in print, from Lunenburg County, are of unusual interest and value. They present in substance an important chapter in the history of the origins of Virginia families, and afford evidence of indispensable facts, in tracing the immigrations of vast numbers of the early colonists. The records here appearing present the names of the rank and file of the citizenry of a great part of the Southside in the generation preceding the Revolutionary War. They were the people who in large measure shaped the destiny of the cause of Independence in Virginia. It was this generation that produced the sturdy patriots who stood shoulder to shoulder with Patrick Henry in his demand for Liberty or Death; and it is undoubtedly true, that population considered no soil of the United Colonies sent as many men to the front in the Revolution as did the terri- {page 42} tory embraced in Lunenburg and the counties carved out of her original domain. Transcriber's Note: The preceding sentence is transcribed exactly as published. Any ambiguity in the last clause of the sentence exists in the published text. To have lived in that era and had part in shaping the sentiments of liberty and to have had part in achieving our Independence in the Revolutionary struggle is a far greater honor than to have lived in the time when a ratification of the Constitution was achieved under such circumstances as to leave grave doubts as to whether the popular will of the state was not outraged in so doing.[62] The lists of tithables, or in other words, the lists of persons taxable of these early years, valuable to those of that day as tax records only, have now become priceless genealogical heritages, of a value they could never have dreamed. In order that the information contained in the lists of tithables may be properly interpreted and therefore of the greatest use, it is important to note the provisions of the statutes respecting the lists, and especially with respect to the ages and classes of persons to be listed. For present purposes it is not necessary to examine the provisions of the laws on the subject, earlier than the Act of the 4th Queen Anne, October, 1705.[63] That act provided: "That all male persons, of the age of sixteen years, and upwards, and all negro, mulatto, and Indian women, of the age of sixteen years, and upwards, not being free, shall be, and are hereby declared to be tithable, or chargeable, for defraying the public, county, and parish charges, in this her majesty's colony and dominion; excepting such only, as the county court, and vestry, for reasons, in charity, made to appear to them, shall think fit to excuse." It also provided: "That the owner or purchaser of every child, being a servant, and the parent or importer of every child, being free, at the first, second or third court, held for the county where such child shall be, after the arrival of the said child in this country, shall bring the said child before the county court, to have its age adjudged by the court; otherwise the said child to be accounted, and thereafter immediately become tithable as afore- ---------- [62] See _The Old Free State_, I, 475; _Richmond: It's People and Its Story_, 58. [63] III _Hening_, 258-260. {page 43} said, although not of the age of sixteen years; And the age of such child being adjudged by the court, shall be entered upon the records of the said court; and be accounted, deemed and taken, for the true age of the said child, in order to its becoming tithable, within the intent and meaning of this act." Another provision of this act was: "That the court of each county, divide the same into convenient precincts, and annually appoint one of the justices for each of the said precincts, to take a list of the tithables; every which justice, in convenient time, before the tenth of June then next following, shall give notice of his being appointed thereto, and of the place he designs to take the same at, by setting up a note thereof, at the church or chapel door of the precinct he is appointed for; and shall attend the same, on the said tenth day of June, if it happen not to be of a Sunday, and then on the next day following. And also in August court the next following, shall deliver the list so by him taken, together with the subscriptions of the tithables, to the clerk of the county court; who shall, the next court day, set fair lists thereof, up in the court-house, there to remain during the sitting of the court, for the view and inspection of all that please, for the discovery of such as shall be concealed." This law provided: That every master or mistress of a family, or in his or her absence, or non-residence at the plantation, his or her attorney, or overseer, shall, on the said tenth day of June, by a list under his or her hand, deliver, or cause to be delivered, to the justice appointed to take the same, the names and number of all the tithable persons abiding in, or belonging to, his or her family, the ninth of June, or the master or owner thereof, shall be adjudged a concealer, and be liable as a concealer of such and so many tithables as shall not be listed and given in; and listed, as afore is directed, shall forfeit and pay one thousand pounds of tobacco to the informer; to be recovered, with cost, by action of debt, bill, plaint, or information, in any court of record in this her majesty's colony and dominion wherein no essoin, protection or wager of law shall be allowed. And if any justice appointed to take the list of tithables, shall not truly enter and list the names and number of his own tithables in that district, in the list he gives {page 44} in, he shall be adjudged a concealer; and for every tithable person so by him concealed, and not listed, shall forfeit and pay one thousand pounds of tobacco, to the use aforesaid; and to be recovered, with costs as aforesaid, in manner and form aforesaid." It was provided that if a person whose duty it was to make the return failed to do so on the tenth of June, because of sickness, absence or ignorance, the list could be returned up to the last day of June. The governor and his family and "beneficed ministers" within the colony were exempted from the operation of the law. By an act of 9th George I, May 1723,[64] it was enacted: "That all free negroes, mulattoes, or Indians (except tributary Indians to this government) male and female, above the age of sixteen years, and all wives of such negroes, mulattoes, or Indians (except before excepted) shall be deemed and accounted tithables; any law, custom, or usage, to the contrary, in any wise, notwithstanding." An act of 12th George II, November, 1738,[65] indicates that there were tax dodgers in those early days. It recited that some persons owning plantations in different counties and parishes "when they have known, or been apprehensive that the levies would run high in one of those counties, or parishes, by reason of public buildings, or other emergencies" had been known "to remove their tithables, some small time before the ninth of June, out of the said county, or parish, to some other plantation in another county, or parish; and afterwards, in a short time," return them "to the county, or parish, from whence they were so removed," etc. The act provided that any person so doing should be adjudged a concealer; and liable to penalties and forfeitures provided by law for that offense. By this act mariners and seafaring persons, not freeholders, commonly employed in navigation, and who out of their wages paid "toward the support of Greenwich Hospital" were "exempted from being listed as tithables." The lists of tithes for the years 1748, 1749 and 1750, printed ---------- [64] IV _Hening_, 133. [65] V _Hening_, 35. {page 45} hereinafter, in this volume, were taken under the provisions of the laws thus briefly reviewed. In the 22nd year of George II, October, 1748,[66] an act was passed covering the subject of tithables, and repealing the above noticed act of 4th Queen Anne, and 12th George II, to be in force "from and immediately after the tenth day of June, which shall be in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and fifty-one." This law defined tithables as "all male persons of the age of sixteen years and upwards, and all negroe, mulatto, and Indian women of the same age, except Indians tributary to this government and all wives of free negroes, mulattoes, and Indians, except as before excepted," and "excepting such only as the county court, for charitable reasons appearing to them, shall think fit to excuse." The law exempted the governor and his domestic servants, the president, masters, scholars, and domestic servants of William and Mary College, beneficed ministers, and constables, while in office. It made provision for having the county court adjudicate the ages of "every imported child, being a servant or slave," and of every imported "free male child." Provision was made for dividing every county into convenient precincts for taking the lists; a justice to be assigned to each precinct; the lists were to be taken on June 10th of each year of the person tithable therein on the 9th of June. The provisions for taking and returning the lists were similar to, practically identical with those of the act of 1705. There was provision of a fine of two thousand pounds of tobacco upon any justice who failed or refused to take the list; a provision for a fine for concealing tithes; another making owners liable for the payment of levies, in case overseers failed to make returns, in the same manner as if the return were duly made; a provision against moving tithes from one county or parish to another, similar to that of 12th George II, above mentioned; and the provision respecting mariners, mentioned foregoing, was embodied in the act. ---------- [66] VI _Hening_, 38. {page 46} After the foregoing act no law has been noted changing the definition of the tithables until 1777. The act of October, 1777,[67] provided among other things a tax of "five shillings per poll upon all tithables above the age of twenty-one years (except soldiers, sailors, parish poor, and such as receive an annual allowance in consideration of wounds or injuries received in the public service, except also slaves and mulatto servants to thirty-one years of age, who, being property, are rated ad valorem as aforesaid)." This act provided a tax of ten shillings for every hundred pounds value on "all manors, messuages, lands, and tenements, slaves, mulatto servants to thirty-one years of age, horses, mules, and plate," etc. An act of May, 1779,[68] abandoned the plan of taxing slaves on a valuation, and provided for the taxing of them as polls. It provides "That a tax of five pounds per poll shall be paid for all negro and mulatto servants and slaves" except those who through old age or bodily infirmity were incapable of labor. There seemed to be no express provision for a minimum age for slaves in order to be taxable under this law. In May, 1780,[69] a law was enacted reverting to the plan of 1777 of taxing slaves on the basis of valuation instead of per poll. This act, respecting tithables provided for a tax as follows: "for every white male tithable above the age of twenty-one years" there "shall be paid three pounds six shillings and eight pence (except the officers of the line or navy, soldiers or sailors in the service of this commonwealth or of the United States, or persons disabled in such service; except also such of the militia who may be in actual service at the time when the said taxes shall have respectively become due, and those who have been or shall be exempted from the payment of levies by the county court;) for every white servant whatsoever, except apprentices under the age of twenty-one years," there "shall be paid the like tax." In November, 1781,[70] the legislature passed an act for estab- ---------- [67] IX _Hening_, 349 et seq. [68] X _Hening_, 9 et seq. [69] X _Hening_, 241 et seq. [70] X _Hening_, 501 et seq. {page 47} lishing a permanent revenue. One of the provisions of it was for a tax of ten shillings on "every free male person, above the age of twenty-one years, who shall be a citizen of this commonwealth, and also upon all slaves, to be paid by the owners thereof, except such free persons and slaves as shall be exempted on application to the respective county courts through age or infirmity." A similar provision was contained in an act passed in October, 1782,[71] and this law required "every master or owner of a family" to annually give in his lists of "the names of all free male persons above the age of twenty-one years, and the names, and numbers of slaves, distinguishing those that are tithable," etc. During the Revolutionary period, and thereafter, largely as a consequence of it, various and sundry tax laws were passed. Considerable uncertainty and confusion resulted respecting many provisions of these laws. One such law, that of May, 1783,[72] it seems, must have been deemed to raise a question respecting the taxation of tithes. In consequence of this a later act in the same year, among other things provided: "That nothing in said act contained, shall be construed to prevent the several county courts from causing lists to be taken of all free male tithables, between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one years, and of imposing taxes upon all such for the purpose of county or parish levies." The act of which this provision was a part was to be in force from and after July 1, 1783. The statutes, thus briefly reviewed, indicate the character of information respecting tithables afforded by the lists for various years. For certain years all male persons of the age of sixteen years and up are listed; while for other years as to free white males only those above twenty-one years of age are listed. And it will be seen that the laws at no time required the listing of the wife of the head of the family nor daughters of any age, and children under sixteen years of age. Keeping these provisions in mind, the lists often afford genealogical facts of great importance. They not only are evidence of the fact of the existence of the person chargeable with the ---------- [71] XI _Hening_, 112 et seq. [72] XI _Hening_, 196. {page 48} tithables at a given time, but of the place of his residence at that time, and moreover often afford evidence of the names and approximate ages of children. If a person returned his list of tithes of a certain number made up of his own name, the names of other persons of his name, and certain slaves, there is a reasonable presumption that the tithables bearing his name may be his children, who were that year between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one years of age. Thus, for example, on Cornelius Cargill's list for 1748, there appears an entry as follows: "Andrew Wade, John Wade, Benjamin Wade, Henry Wade, negro bob & Lucy" 6 tithes. It may be assumed, prima facie, that John Wade, Benjamin Wade and Henry Wade were children of Andrew Wade and above sixteen years of age in 1748. Then again in 1750 on the list of Cornelius Cargill is this entry: Andrew Wade, Senr., John Wade, Henry Wade, Benjm. Wade, Andrew Wade, Jr., Bob, Pompey, Gloster and Lucy" 9 tithes. There is some presumption that John Wade, Henry Wade, Benjamin Wade and Andrew Wade, Jr., were children of Andrew Wade, Senior, and that Andrew Wade, Jr., had but recently passed his sixteenth birthday. When none of these persons are found upon any of the lists for 1752, all the lists being extant, there is a presumption that the family had moved away, or were in that part of the county cut off into another county -- Halifax. These brief illustrations of the utility of such lists merely in- {page 49} dicate the way in which they furnish facts or clues of importance to the genealogical investigator. In the early days of the county the justices designated to take lists of tithes were assigned to precincts or districts which were described with a particularity, for which after the lapse of nearly two centuries, we are grateful indeed, for we are able to locate geographically, at least approximately, the persons upon these lists with respect to the counties afterwards created from the original territory of Lunenburg. We are thus enabled to know in what county to look for such records as there may be useful in tracing the lineages and movements of these pioneers. It would be interesting to present a complete transcript or abstract of all available lists of tithables for every year. But such a plan has not been deemed feasible for this work. Rather the plan, in general, pursued here, is to endeavor to give the equivalent of a census, at intervals close enough to each other, to present a fairly complete list of the tax-paying population from time to time. In the early decades of the county's existence, there was much moving about. Immigrations and emigrations into and from the territory were numerous; and lists from year to year would, in all probability, enable a closer and more certain check of all names, than would lists taken at longer intervals. Still the duplication of names, from year to year, would be so enormous as to probably more than offset any countervailing advantage. In making up the abstracts from the original lists, care has been taken to preserve all information that would be valuable from a genealogical standpoint; and at the same time the effort has been to eliminate all unimportant material, which, while it might have an interest and a value of a kind, was not deemed sufficiently important to justify reproduction. Thus the names of slaves have been omitted from all lists. The tithes were, in general, the taxpayer himself, and the male white members of his family over sixteen years of age, or such other age as the statute at the time might prescribe, and the slaves, male and female, over that age. The common form of making up the lists was to give the name of the taxpayer, and the names of children over sixteen, overseers or bound servants, and the names of the slaves, extended {page 50} in a total in an appropriate column. In case of a person chargeable with tithes, but not himself a resident of the county, his name was followed, usually, by the word "list." This usually, but not invariably, indicated that he was chargeable with the number of tithes set opposite his name, but he was not himself included as taxable. In several of the earlier lists, columns were appropriately headed, gave the number of crow heads, squirrel scalps or wolf scalps produced by the taxpayer. These items have been, for the most part, omitted as unimportant for present purposes. It has been assumed by some that these were listed in order to obtain a bonus or a credit upon taxes. This seems an erroneous assumption. The statute no doubt provided that the taxpayer should kill and destroy a given number of these pests, in proportion to his number of tithables, and failing so to do, should be liable to a penalty or additional tax for such failure. There had been such laws in Virginia. Thus, for example, by an act of 1734[73] the inhabitants of the Northern Neck and the Eastern Shore were required by law to produce to the justice taking the tithes three crow heads or squirrel scalps for every tithable listed by him for the year. The delinquents were fined two pounds of tobacco for each head or scalp wanting. And while the law governing the subject, in Lunenburg, at the time here being considered, has not been found, it is highly probable it was similar to that above mentioned for the Northern Neck and the Eastern Shore. The lists herewith reproduced, in abstract form, present an important and informing study in the variant forms of spelling of many names. It will be seen that ordinary names, at the hands of different officials, were spelled in a variety of ways, and not only so, but were spelled in different ways by the same official, on the same lists, as if serving notice on posterity that he was in doubt, and was leaving the matter open for the determination of others. Thus we have among others the following unusual or variant forms sprinkled throughout the lists of tithes embraced in this volume. ---------- [73] IV _Hening_, 446. {page 51} Abbet, Abbett, Abbit, Abbott, Abot; Abinatha (for Abernathy); Addams; Adkins, Atkins; Allan, Allin; Almon; Ambros, Ambrus; Amos; Anderus, Andres, Andrus; Andrenson; Arnal (for Arnold); Arshworth, Ashworth; Atkinson; Atwild; Ayres. Baile, Baley, Bayly; Barns; Barret, Barrot; Barrnet; Bozwell (presumably for Boswell), Bizwell; Beauford, Blewford, Bluford, Buford; Bellow; Benet, Bennet; Biard; Billips; Blacke; Blaikley; Bleavins; Bohanon; Boicheau, Boissaus, Boisseau, Borssaus; Boing; Bolden, Bolten, Boulden, Bouldin; Botright; Boush; Bowrs; Bracey, Brasie, Bressie; Briant; Brigindine; Brodnax; Brookes, Brooks, Brox; Brunsfield; Buckingham, Beckinham; Burrell; Burtchit; Buttler, Bynom, Bynum. Calhoun, Caldhound; Caldwell, Coldwell, Collwell, Colwell; Callaway; Cambil, Cambile, Cammel, Campbil, Campell; Cassady; Caviness; Cawkerham, Cockerham, Cockram; Chambers, Chamburs; Chamlis; Cheatham, Cheatham, Cheattum, Cheatum; Childres, Childrey, Childus; Chisolm, Chesolm; Choat, Chote; Chorkley; Cirtland (for Kirtland); Claiborne, Claborn; Clarday, Clarde; Cole, Coal; Cobb, Cobbs; Cochran; Cock, Cocke, Coock; Collier, Colier, Colillar; Collins, Collens; Cousens, Couzzins, Cozens; Covington, Coventon, Coverton; Craddock, Cradock; Craighton, Crighton; Crenshaw, Cranshaw, Crinshaw; Crew, Crews, Cruse; Criddenden; Crimes; Cristian; Culbreth; Cuningham; Curby (probably for Kirby); Cuttilow, Cuttilar. Dardean; Davies, Dafes, Davis; Dejarnett, Degarnet, Degernett, Dejernate, Dejonnatt; Delony; Dickson, Dixon, Dixson; Dier; Donathan; Dorch, Dortch; Dougharty, Dougherty; Dozar; Dunken; Drue, Drysdeal; Duffey; Dunahow, Dunahoe; Dupray, Dupree, Duprey. Ealam (for Elam); Eallidge; Earnest; Eastis, Estice; Eavans, Eavens, Evans, Evens, Evins; Ecchols, Echolds, Eckholes, Eckolds; Edeings; Edloe, Edlow; Ellet, Elliott, Ellot; Elmoor; Emmanuel; Eppison; Eppse, Epts, Epps, Epes; Erl; Erwin; Eyers,, Eyres. Fequay, Fuqua; Feris, Ferres; Finlo; Flin, Flyn; Floid; Fountain; Frankling; Franklyn; Frisell; Fulilove, Fullilove, Fullelove; Furguson. Gaford; Gains; Garret, Garrit; Geeter; Ghee (probably for {page 52} Gee); Giddian; Gilas (for Giles), Gyles; Gilleam, Gillum; Glen; Good, Goode; Gordain (for Gordon or Jordon), Gorden, Gordin; Grada; Granger; Graveat, Gravit, Gravitt; Greagory, Griggory, Grigory; Grier; Grifeth, Griffeth; Grisel, Grissell; Groce; Grymes; Guin, Gwin; Gustavers, Gustavous; Guthry. Hagon; Haies, Hayes, Hays; Haile, Alle (probably for Haile), Haill; Hamblen, Hamblin; Hamilton; Hammock, Hammuck; Hannah, Hanna, Hannah; Handcock, Hencock; Harden; Harres, Harris, Harriss; Harvey, Harvey; Hayly; Hazellwood, Hazelwood; Hearn; Helton; Hendrake; Hicks, Hix; Hide; Hightour; Hodg; Hollingsworth, Holonsworth; Homes; Hongerford; Hoopper; Howel; Hubbart; Hundly, Huntley; Hus; Hutchins. Ierland; Ingraham, Ingran, Ingron; Irwin; Iseball; Izzard. Jacson; Jarret, Jarrot; Jenings; Jeter, Geeter; Johnston, Jonson; Jordaine. Kates, Keates, Keates, Keatt; Keeth; Kerby, Curby, Kirbey; Kitchin. Laderdale; Lain, Lane, Lanne; Lambeart; Lanrum; Larance; Ledderdale; Leverat; Leverrit; Liles; Linch; Linsey; Lockrom; Loury; Loveless; Lualen (for Llewellyn); Lucass; Lynas; Lyster. Macdowel; Macfaull; Mackbay (probably for McBee); Mackey; Mackfarling (for MacFarlin); Macklin (probably for McLin or Maclin), Maclin; Macky; Macneal; Maddox, Matox; Man, Mann (bracketed together as occurs in several places with different names, and spelled both ways, as if serving notice that the writer did not know which was correct); Manen, Mannen, Maning; Marable, Marrable; Martain; Masson; Mathis, Matthews, Matthis; Maurel; Maurey, Mawry; Mayes, Maze; McAndrow; McClaughlin, McGlaulin, McGlawlin, McLaughlin; McConel, McConnal, McConnel; McConnico, McConnicow; McCutchings, McCutchion; McDade, McDead; McDaniel, McDanil, Medanil, Mcdannold; Mcdowl, McDuel; McKene; McKey; Mclard; McMurday; McNeese; Mcranalls (evidently for McReynolds); McRandal; McTyre; Megee (probably for McGhee); Meloon; Merriman, Merryman, Merrymoon; Middleton, Middelton, Midelton; Millican; Millings; Miner, Minor; Mitchels; Moodey; Moor, More; Morgain, Morgin; Muckelhuney; Mulins, {page 53} Mullens; Munday; Mundford; Murfey, Murphey; Murray, Murry; Murrel. Neail; Nevels; Nibblet, Niblet; Nicholls, Nickols; Normant; Norvil; Nuby. Oar; Oharo; Orsborn, Orsburn, Orzbond, Osborn, Osbron; Orgain, Organ, Orgins; Ossling; Overbey; Oen, Owen, Owin, Owings. Pamphlet; Parish; Peaw, Pew, Poo, Pou; Perren, Perrin; Perrey, Perry; Petypool, Pettey pool, Petty Pool, Pettipool, Pettpool, Pettypoole, P. Pool; Pettey; Pettie, Petus; Phifer; Philips, Phillips, Phillups; Phips; Pirkens; Pool; Powel; Prat; Prise; Pruet, Pruiet; Puitt; Pully; Puryer. Qualls. Raa (probably for Ray or Rhea), Rea; Randol; Rawlins; Raynolds, Renolds; Rentfro; Rhods; Richerson; Richie; Rickes; Rissell; Rite; Robert, Roberts; Robison; Roddgers, Rodgers; Rottenberry, Rotten Burray, Rottenburg; Rowlit; Ruffen; Russel; Rutlidg, Rutlidge; Ryall, Ryell. Sanders; Sansom; Saterwhite; Semkins; Shalbond, Shelborn, Shelburn, Shelburne; Shephard, Sheperd; Silcock, Sillcock; Snead, Sneade; Soulgrave; Spears; Spens; Spenser; Standeford; Steavons; Steuart, Stuart, Stwarte; Stookes, Stoeks; Stow; Studdervant; Sulivan, Sullivant, Sullyvant, Swelevant, Swillivent; Sweathen, Swithen. Taber; Tait; Tally; Thombson, Thomson, Tompson, Tomson; Thrustin; Tibbs; Tisdail, Tisdeal, Tisdell, Tisdle; Tounsend, Townsend, Townslin; Tub; Turbefeil. Ursery, Userey, Usery, Ussary, Ussey, Ussury. Vanbeber, Vanbibber, Vanveber; Vandike, Vandycke; Vaughn; Vernnon, Vernon, Vernor. Waldin; Walters; Warrand, Warren, Warrin; Warters, Waters; Watkens; Wats; Watton; Waveer, Weafer, Webbear; Weakley, Weakly, Weighley; Weatherford; Weekes; Welch, Welsh; Wetherford; Wheler; Wiatt; Wilborn; Wildes, Wilds; Wilken; Wilkson; Willeham, Willinham; Willes, Willis, Williss; Willmut, Willmutt, Wilmot, Wilmott; Willson, Wilson; Winingham, Wininham, Winninham; Winn, Wynn, Wynne; {page 54} Wix; Wommack; Wooch; Wood, Woods; Wooton; Worch; Worshenhaml Wray; Wright. Yarbrough. This considerable array of unusual and variant spellings, from a single county, occurring in so short a span of years, should certainly serve to impress upon the genealogist the importance of searching for every possible variant, in obscure and difficult cases, such as are only too frequently encountered. While, as explained, no effort will be made to here present a transcript or abstract of all the Lists available from 1746 (the year the county was organized), to 1783, the period selected to be considered herein, and while only representative lists, at given intervals, will be used, still it may serve a purpose to note, through this period, the appointments of list takers, so far as they have been discovered from the Order Books, although, as stated, the lists taken by some of these officers are not reproduced. At May Court, 1746, the County Court of Lunenburg County, Virginia, made appointments of list takers, as shown by the following orders: "John Phelps, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the Mouth of Otter River to the extent of the County upwards." "Matthew Talbot, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the mouth of Falling River to the mouth of Otter River." "William Caldwell, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the mouth of Falling River to the mouth of Little Roanoke River." "Cornelius Cargill, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this county from the mouth of Little Roanoke River to the mouth of Blew Stone, and so to the county line, and also in the Fork of Roanoke." "William Hill, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the mouth of Blew Stone to the mouth of Allen's Creek." "Lewis Delony, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the mouth of Allen's Creek down to the line that divides this from Brunswick County." {page 55} "Hugh Lawson, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the line that divides this from Brunswick County upwards to the mouth of Hounds Creek." "Liddall Bacon, gent., is appointed to take the list of tithables in this County from the mouth of Rounds [sic] Creek to the extent of the County upwards." None of the lists taken pursuant to these appointments have been found. However, at September Court, 1746, John Burn, Daniel Smith, Thomas Shadwell, George Shadwell, Zachariah Ashworth, John Ashworth (and one negro Roger), and Anthony Pouncy (and one negro Cate), were, upon their respective motions, added to the general list of tithables. At June Court, 1747, the following persons were appointed to take the lists of tithables, after giving notice according to law, within the respective areas described: Lyddall Bacon, "between Hounds Creek and Nottoway River upward." Hugh Lawson, "from Hounds Creek downwards." Lewis Delony, "from Allen's Creek to the extent of the County downwards." Abraham Cook, "from Allen's Creek to Blew Stone Creek." Cornelius Cargil, "in the fork of Roanoke." Robert Jones, "From Blew Stone to Little Roanoke." Matthew Talbot, "from Blew Stone to Little Roanoke." William Caldwell, "from Little Ronoke [sic] to Falling River." John Phelps, "from Falling River to the extent of the County upwards." None of the lists taken for 1747, pursuant to these appointments, have been found. At June Court, 1748, the Court appointed the list takers and ordered them to give notice of the time and place of taking the lists according to law. The persons appointed, and the precincts within which they were to act, were as follows: Hugh Lawson, "from upper Hounds Creek to Maherrin [sic] and to the extent of this County downwards." {page 56} Lyddall Bacon, "from Hounds Creek to the head of Nottoway and Maherrin Rivers." Cornelius Cargill, "in the fork and to Butcher's Creek." Lewis Delony, "from Butchers [sic] creek to Meherrin and from there to the extent of the county downwards." Matthew Talbot, "from the fork to Cubb creeks [sic]." William Caldwell, "from Cubb creek to Falling River." John Phelps, "from Falling River to the extent of the county upwards." ************************************************************************ USGENWEB NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of this consent. ************************************************************************