A Labor Contract Made on February 23, 1864?

Yes! That is right! A system of labor was organized before the Freedmen's Bureau was created.  In the State of Louisiana, Iberville Parish, under General Order No. 23, an agreement was entered into between Victorine Duprey and 31 named "negroes" for 14 percent of one year's proceeds from the crop of sugar and molasses on Victorine's plantation. The 31 negroes were not called freedmen as was the case with other labor contracts I have indexed after the establishment of the Freedmen's Bureau.

The Southern part of Louisiana was under the control of the federal government almost a year before this agreement was made. General Order No. 23 mentioned above refers to an order issued by General Nathaniel Banks, Commander of the Department of the Gulf, on February 3, 1864 as part of the wartime politics to institute a policy which paved the way for freedmen to realize liberties and earn wages while helping to keep order and plantation work going. See Civil War Book Review:  Binding Contracts.

I think it is wonderful that these records have been included. It would be interesting to research how much was learned from the implementation of this policy for the eventual formation of the Freedmen's Bureau. You just never know what you might discover while indexing.  I hope I am raising your curiosity by now. You can get a feel for the wealth of information in these records as you help make them available to the descendants of over 4,000,000 African ancestored freedmen.

The men were listed separately from the women. One thing that really stood out to me about this labor contract is how three of the men's surnames were given. I think it is because they all had the given name, Jim:

• Jim Low
• Jim Montesquieu (You would think I would be able to find him with a name like that. Can you?)
• Jim Wilson

I was able to trace Victorine Duprey to 1900 where she was still living in the household with her father.  I tried to compare residents next door in 1870 and 1880, but I was not able to connect anyone with the freedmen on this labor contract. It is more difficult to discern who may be related on this contract because of how they separated the males from the females. 

Read Full Story...

What Do Freedmen's Bureau Labor Contracts Have to do With Free People of Color?

The batch I downloaded to index last night came from Concordia Parish, Louisiana. Concordia Parish was created on April 10, 1805. Even though the parish suffered some loss from tornado and flood, a quick call to the Clerk of Court of Concordia Parish confirms the following records are available on site:

• deeds from 1802 from the time of the Spaniards
• marriage records from the 1800's
• criminal records from the early 1900's 
• probate records (kept downstairs but available for viewing)

Using these other resources to learn more about freedmen ancestors and the relationships between them and the people they entered into labor contracts with can be very helpful. The first page of the batch had no extractable data, but it was useful nonetheless because it listed the plantations in Concordia Parish with recorded labor contracts for the years 1866-1868. If you were searching the names of a plantation in this area during that time period, this would prove very useful. Here are screenshots showing the names of the plantations listed: 

Concordia Parish, Louisiana with Labor Contracts 1866-1868

Plantation, Year	Plantation, Year	Plantation, Year
Bothgrown, 1867	Fletcher, 1867	Moreville, 1868
Experience, 1866	Lucerna, 1867	Sycamore, 1867
Cotton Ridge, 1867	Good Hope, 1867	Refuge, 1867
Connor, 1866	Helena, 1868	Rifle Point, 1866, 1867 & 1868
Elba, 1868	Innesfail, 1866 & 1867	Spoken, 1867
William Earhart, 1868	Killanrey, 1867	Ft. Genevieve, 1867

If I knew I had an ancestor that was emancipated in Concordia Parish and I did not know the name of the former owner, I would research these plantations to discover the names of the owners. Then I would determine the name of the local field office and search those records for the plantation owner and my ancestor.

It is not as difficult as you might think to research if you know how to use online resources.  I decided to search to see what interesting tidbits I could find out about a few of these plantations. I first searched out Ft. Genevieve Plantation.  It has an intriguing history where I learned enough to peak my curiousity to learn more about the history of a family who were freed long before Emancipation.

William T. Johnson and his sister, Adelia, were children of a free woman of color, Amy Johnson, who gained her freedom in 1814.  Her children were freed by planter, another William Johnson, in Adams County, Mississippi.  Adams County, Mississippi is adjacent to Concordia Parish, LA. William was freed in 1820, and his sister was freed in 1818.  William married Ann Battles who was freed along with her mother in 1822.  They had 10 children.

William found himself in a dispute over the property line of his plantation.  He was assasinated by one of the parties in dispute with him on June 16, 1851. His son, Byron became head of the family. Byron served in the Mississippi Federal Colored Milita. See Black Soldiers in the Civil War.  As it turns out, Ft Genevieve was owned by Ayers P. Merrill, Jr. in 1869.  Byron Johnson whose parents were free prior to Emancipation leased Ft. Genevieve from Ayers P. Merrill.

This could solve a very tangled web for anyone who had ancestors who were emancipated on Ft Genevieve Plantation. You could now begin researching Freedmen's Bureau Records to learn if documentation exists mentioning Byron Johnson from 1869 to 1872. The question in my mind is why did Byron lease Ft. Genevieve? Prior to that, it is quite possible that Ayers P. Merrill may appear on records with freedmen on his plantation. That would be an interesting avenue of research to persue.

If this story excites you as much as it does me, then you are in for a real treat! You can access the entire digitized collection at Free People of Color in Louisiana: Revealing an Unknown Past.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Citation:  William T. Johnson and Family Memorial Papers, Mss. 529, 561, 597, 770, 926, 1093, Louisiana and Lower Mississippi Valley Collections, LSU Libraries, Baton Rouge.

Read Full Story...

South Carolina's Freedmen's Bureau Contract Provides Post Civil War Snapshot of Ancestors

FamilySearch recently made South Carolina, Freedmen's Bureau Records, 1865-1872, accessible online.  Because I have researched each of my ancestral lines back prior to 1870, it was not too difficult for me to know where to start researching.  I will share the records of my family as I find them in this collection, and hopefully it will help others researching in the same area.

First, I clicked on the link under "View Images in this Collection."  The images in this collection are not indexed at this time.  My 3rd great grandparents, Henry and Sciller (Druscilla) Sims, were listed on the 1870 Census living next door to James A. Tucker in Union County, South Carolina. 

Because I had documented them living in Union, I knew it was very likely I would find documentation among the records for Union District.

FamilySearch Historical Record Collection: South Carolina, Freedmen's Bureau Records, 1865-1872 
Freedmen's Bureau Office or Subordinate Field Office Location

After selecting Union District, I chose to browse through the images on Roll 106, Labor contracts, series II, S-Y, 1866 since the surname of the last owner would be among records S-Y (Tucker).  There are 62 images in this set, and the labor contract between James A. Tucker and his former servants covers images 21-22.

"South Carolina, Freedmen's Bureau Records, 1865-1872," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1961-36714-25122-35?cc=2127881&wc=M9HH-DRD:1944265844 : accessed 01 Jan 2014), Union district > Roll 106, Labor contracts, series II, S-Y, 1866 > image 21 of 62.

When you find a record on FamilySearch, you can click on Sources and save the record in your source box, or you can attach it to your ancestor on Family Tree.

My 3rd great grandparent's names were listed on the 1866-1867 contract among the freedmen laborers on the plantation of James A. Tucker.  I expected to find Henry Sims. I am still trying to determine if Sims was the surname of a previous owner.  Tuckers and Sims were among several different families who moved from Virginia to Union before 1810.

It was interesting to see that Sciller (Druscilla) used Tucker for a surname.  One of her children later changed from using Sims to using Tucker later in life.  I plan to trace each of the Tucker freedmen to see if any of them may be related to Henry or Sciller.

"South Carolina, Freedmen's Bureau Records, 1865-1872," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1942-36714-23533-29?cc=2127881&wc=M9HH-DRD:1944265844 : accessed 01 Jan 2014), Union district > Roll 106, Labor contracts, series II, S-Y, 1866 > image 22 of 62.

This is the first evidence that I have found that Henry and Sciller lived on the Tucker plantation aside from the fact that their daughter Martha (my 2nd great grandmother) and the grandson of James A. Tucker, (George Epps Tucker) had a son after 1880.

The story as told to me by my grandmother, was that Martha was freed when she was a small child.  She grew up in the household of the former slave owner where her mother was a cook.  This put her in close proximity to George who was adopted by his grandfather, James, after the death of his parents.

I added this record to my source box as I mentioned earlier.  I can attach this record as a source for either Henry Sims, Sciller, or James A. Tucker:

  Choose "Attach from Source Box" on person view to attach records that you saved in the Source Box to your ancestor's record.

The contract gives details about

• daily tasks required
• consequences for absence from work or damaging equipment
• how crops would be divided
• furnishings provided by employer 

Part of the first article of the contract reads:

"They are not to keep fire arms or deadly weapons or ardent spirits, no invite visitors nor leave the premises during working hours without written consent of the proprietor or his agent."

It seems they still had restrictions during this period just after the Civil War.  That makes me question just how free they were really.  They could not have weapons to protect themselves, and they had to have permission to come and go or have visitors.  I am wondering just how they felt about these restrictions and if it really felt like they had more freedom compared to what it was like being enslaved.

I realize how fortunate I am to have this documentation given the scarcity of records for African Americans during this time period.  I am just elated to have found this.  To learn more about this collection see South Carolina, Freedmen Bureau Field Office Records (FamilySearch Historical Records) and South Carolina, Freedmen's Bureau Records, 1865-1872.  I will keep you up to date on my next discoveries.  Please subscribe above so that you do not miss out. 

Read Full Story...