THE FIRST CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES. SOME POINTED COMMENTS ON THE MANNER OF TAKING SAME AND THE RESULTS THEREOF. AN INTERESTING PAPER ON A SUBJECT NOT HERETOFORE TOUCHED BY THE SOCIETY.
BY MICHAEL J. O’BRIEN OF NEW YORK CITY, AUTHOR OF “A GLANCE AT SOME PIONEER IRISH IN THE SOUTH,” IN VOLUME VII OF THE JOURNAL, AND OF MANY OTHER WORKS OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH.
By an Act of Congress, entitled “An act providing for the enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States,” and which was signed by President Washington on March 1, 1790, the marshals of the judicial districts throughout the United States were “authorized and required to cause the number of the inhabitants within their respective districts to be taken, omitting in such enumeration Indians not taxed, and distinguishing free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, from all others.” These returns they were instructed to file with the clerks of their respective District Courts, who were directed to carefully preserve them.
This was the First Census taken of the inhabitants of the United States, but it was far from complete, for the reason that “heads of families” only were recorded.
Eighteen months were allowed in which to complete the enumeration. The census-taking was supervised by the marshals of the several judicial districts, who employed assistant marshals to act as enumerators.
When the schedules were all gathered in, they were turned over to the President, who, on October 27, 1791, transmitted to Congress a summary of the result, which was published in what is now a very rare little volume that has not been reprinted for public use. The original schedules are contained in 26 bound volumes and are still preserved in the Census Office. They form a curious and most interesting collection, written as they were by the assistant marshals, “on such paper as they happened to have, and binding the sheets together. In some cases printed blanks furnished by the States were used, in others merchants’ account paper, and now and then the schedules were bound in wall paper.”
A complete set of schedules for each State, with a summary for the Counties, and in many cases for towns, was filed in the State Department, but, unfortunately, they are not now complete, “the returns for the States of Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, Tennessee and Virginia having been destroyed when the British burned the Capitol at Washington during the War of 1812.”
In 1907, Congress authorized the Director of the Census to publish, in a permanent form, the First Census of the United States. “These schedules,” says the Director of the Census, “form a unique inheritance for the nation, since they represent for each of the States a complete list of the heads of families in the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. 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.”
The First Census has a peculiar interest for Americans of Irish blood or descent, for here we find irrefutable evidence of the racial origin of a large part of the people of the United States a few years after the close of the Revolutionary war. There is, of course, no standard, or fixed rule or principle, by which an absolutely correct judgment on the question of the racial composition of the early inhabitants of the United States can now be formed. The available statistics on the subject are incomplete and confusing.
But, if names are to be accepted as a criterion, those who examine the Census Returns, in conjunction with the records of land grants, the parochial registers, the Colonial Records that have been collected and edited by the secretaries of state, the court and church records, the Revolutionary rosters, the old newspapers, the Registers of Historical Associations, and other similarly reliable records, must at once conclude that a goodly percentage of the people were of old Irish stock.
It must be borne in mind also that the Census enumerators made no returns of unmarried persons. This fact is important, when we place beside it the statements of reliable historians that the Irish exodus of the 18th century largely comprised the youth of the country. From the records which we have already quoted, we know that thousands of the Irish youth became indentured servants after their arrival in the Colonies, and it is not likely that these people, even though married while still in servitude, were considered of sufficient importance by the census enumerators to be included in the lists of the “heads of families.”
One who examines these records for traces of the Irish settlers will be surprised to find a most inviting field of retrospect and research ever widening before him. We do not need to wander into the field of romance, as some writers occasionally do, in search of proof that at the beginnings of the Nation the Celtic element figured to a larger extent than it has been credited with at the hands of our historians.
There is so much of dry fact concerning them in these hitherto obscure records as to make it a perplexing thought for the investigator where to begin upon an exposition of the part played by the Irish Colonists and their descendants in shaping the destinies of the future Republic. Theirs is generally a prosaic story of trials bravely borne, of victories snatched from rude nature in the face of many difficulties. The pioneer settlers lived a simple but rude life on the frontiers of civilization, free from the artificialities of our latter-day mode of living, but they made the wilderness which they found to blossom as the rose and to become a fair habitation for the generations that have succeeded them.
Their story would hardly be worth relating were it not for the fact that it affords the proof that men and women of our race and blood were of the “warp and woof” from which has been evolved the new and composite race, miscalled “Anglo-Saxon,” which has made this Western Hemisphere the leader among the nations of the civilized world.
It is in the Census of the Southern States that Irish names appear in the greatest numbers. During the first half of the 18th century there were large immigrations of Irish people to the Carolinas, who spread themselves over an immense area, reaching from the Santee river to the eastern boundary line of Georgia, and as far north as the dividing line of North Carolina. Doubtless, the majority of those on the Census Returns bearing Irish names were descendants of those early settlers, rather than natives of Ireland.
The historian Lossing says: “Between the years 1730 and 1740 an Irish settlement was planted near the Santee river in South Carolina, to which was given the name of Williamsburg Township. Up the Pedee, Santee, Edisto, Savannah and Black rivers settlements spread rapidly, and soon the axe and the plough were plying with mighty energy, and from the North of Ireland such numbers departed for Carolina that the depopulation of whole districts was threatened.”
Williamsburg he calls a “hotbed of rebellion” during the Revolutionary war. As soon as General Francis Marion received his commission from Governor Rutledge, we are told, “he sped to the district of Williamsburg between the Santee and Pedee to lead its rising patriots to the field of active military duties.” (The rosters of General Marion’s brigade contain a large number of Irish names.)
Ramsay also refers to these Irish settlements and deals with them at length in his History of South Carolina. He says that the district was named Williamsburg by an Irishman named James, who came to the Colony with his father in 1733. It is now called Kingstree, and the county in which it is situated is still named Williamsburg.
Sims’ Life of General Marion says: “the people of Williamsburg were sprung generally from Irish parentage. They inherited in common with all the descendants of the Irish in America a hearty detestation of the English name and authority. This feeling rendered them excellent patriots and daring soldiers wherever the British lion was the object of hostility.”
Other local historians of the South also refer to the Irish settlements in this territory, which continued with but intermittent intervals down to the closing years of the 18th century. When we turn to the Census schedules we find that the statements of the historians are amply corroborated.
In the Williamsburg district, that “hotbed of rebellion,” we find mention of such Irish families as Burke, Barrett, Biggen, Butler, Barron, Bryan, Broaderick, Boland, Brady, Bradley, Cain, Cummins, Connor, Cunningham, Collins, Conway, Callihan, Cronan, Cantey, Corbett, Connell, Castlelaw, Creed, Conally, Cochran, Dunn, Dempsey, Dawson, Dollard, Downing, Donoho, Donnally, Delaney, Dillin, Dailey, Dulon, Dogharty, Earley, Flin, Foley, Fitzpatrick, Faning, Gorman, Galaspy, Gibbons, Gallivant, Ganey, Gowen, Gavin, Gallaher, Gill, Garven, Hagan, Hart, Harrington, Hayes, Hainey, Joice, Jordan, Kennedy, Keenan, Kelly, Kelty, Keen, Keefe, Kerns, Kailey, Lynch, Leysath, Murphy, McCalvey, McCartney, McGill, McFarlin, Manning, McCormic, McKenny, McDowell, McKee, McGinney, McCauley, McBride, McMullan, Mulhollen, Mitchel, McConnell, McClare, McIlveen, McGee, McFadden, Moore, McCottery, McElroy, McMelly, McCleary, McDaniel, McDonald, McCarthy, McCall, McSwain, McWilliams, Morrison, McGraw, McCausland, McCune, McElhaney, McFail, McClendon, McGrath, McElduff, McAdams, McCoy, McCary, McCain, Mahon, O’Brian, O’Neil, O’Cain, O’Bannon, Phelon, Powers, Quinn, Rogers, Roach, Riley, Reidy, Rial, Ryan, Sullivan, Shealds, Swiney, Steele, Shannon, Timmons, Toole, Ward and Walsh.
These are not all. Of the Murphys alone there were in the Williamsburg district eleven families, nine Kellys and several distinct families named O’Brian, O’Neil, O’Bannon and McCarty.
We have selected only one of each name, in order to show that the Irish settlements spoken of by Lossing, Sims and Ramsay were drawn from the South, East and West, as well as from the North of Ireland. American historians are in the habit of saying that the immigrants from Ireland were mainly the so-called “Scotch-Irish” element from the northern counties. While it is true there were large settlements of Scotch Gaels in the Carolinas, it is seen from the foregoing list that nearly every county of Celtic Ireland was represented in the “hotbed of rebellion” of South Carolina.
We see from the Census Returns that the collectors wrote down the names phonetically in most cases, having paid little or no attention to spelling, or the use of capital letters where they were needed. Some peculiar transformations in names resulted from the carelessness or ignorance of the enumerators. For instance, we find O’Neill spelled “onailes” and “Ownaile”; O’Brien spelled “Obrient” and “Obriant”; O’Farrell as “Opherl,” and Casey as “Caycey”; Donovan is down as “Dunnevant” and “Dunnaphant”; Doherty as “Dehoitey” and “Dohoty”; Nolan as “noling”; Sullivan as “Sellivent,” “Swillevaun” and “Sewlovan”; Murphy as “Murff,” “Murph,” “Murpry” and “Murfree”; Gallagher as “Gollerhorn”; Flynn as “Phlyn” and “Fling”; Kinsella as “Kincheloe”; McLaughlin as “Maklafflin”; O’Hara as “Oharroe”; and O’Ryan as “Orion.”
To the prefix “Mac” the enumerators, in many cases, gave the sound of “Mag.” Thus we have such name transformations as “Magnamee” and “Magmanous.” We also find “Makmain” for McMahon and “Muckleroy” for McElroy, and so on. Fitzgeralds are down as “Fitzjarrel” and “Jarrel”; Fitzpatrick as “Fitchparterack” and “Pitch Patrick”; Reilly as “Royley” and “Royalley”; Cassidy as “Casaty.” In some Southern city directories we have come across the name of “Pitch,” and we wonder if some of these are not descendants of the “Pitch Patricks” or Fitzpatricks!
It would be difficult to think of an old Irish name that is not represented in the First Census, and which was not, at some time or other, translated into something very different in appearance, and sometimes only partially retaining the sound of the original name. In the mutations of time, even these new names became still further changed, so that many of the present-day descendants of the Irish pioneers of the Carolinas cannot be recognized as at all of the old Gaelic race.
The most numerous Irish name on the First Census of South Carolina is Murphy, there having been 50 distinct families of that name, although the 48 Kelly families gave them a close race. The Gill and McGill families run nip and tuck with the O’Neills and the Nealls. There were 34 of the former to 33 of the latter. The O’Briens and O’Bryans ran the gauntlet of many changes. The Census enumerators failed to appreciate the significance of the regal prefix “O,” so they wrote down the name Obrient, Obriant, Bryan and Briant. There were 53 of these in South Carolina in 1790.
HON. ALEXANDER C. EUSTACE.
Elmira, N. Y.
Ex-President New York Civil Service Commission.
A worthy Member from New York State.
The Celtic “Macs” make a great showing. There are upwards of one thousand of such families in all, the “Macs” that are indigenous to Ireland being more numerous than those that are supposed to be exclusively native to Scotland. When we consider that, in 1790, the total number of free white males of 16 years and upwards in South Carolina was only 35,756, we can readily understand that one thousand heads of families, with their wives and children, must have constituted a large percentage of the total population. An examination of the Census Returns indicates that the average number of children to each of the Irish-named families was five, so that, on a conservative estimate, the “Macs” alone must have contributed nearly 20 per cent to the population of South Carolina!
We find 40 Ward families, 26 McClure families, 26 McDaniels, 23 McKees, 22 McCoys, 20 McDowells, 19 Cauleys and McCauleys, 19 Mahons and McMahons, 18 McCalls, 17 McBrides, 17 McConnells, 16 McCarts and McCartys, 12 McNeills, 11 McFaddens, and 10 McMullan families. There are also numbers of McCormacks, McGees, McGowens, McGraws, McGuires, McCrackens, McCanns, McCartneys, McCarys, McClearys, McClendons, McCollums, McElroys, McKennys, McKelveys, McLaughlins, McManus, and many other similar Irish family names.
There are 41 distinct families of Bradleys recorded, 29 Harts, 24 Sullivans, 28 Reynolds, 22 Canes and Kains, 22 Hayeses, 22 Hendricks, 21 Dunns, 23 Connors and O’Connors, 21 Carrolls, 20 Logans, 20 Reillys and Royleys, 17 Dawsons, 14 Gilmores, 16 Manions and Mannings, 12 Hagans, 13 Walshes and Welches, 13 Higginses, and 11 Lynch and Linch families.
Among names that are common to Ireland and England, there are 113 families named Moore in the First Census of South Carolina, 80 Rogers and Rodgers, 24 Morrows, 46 Collinses, 42 Butlers and 41 Fords. There are 43 heads of families named Mitchell, 41 Montgomery, 26 McDonald, 26 Cunningham, 18 Gillespie, 17 Cochran and 22 Kennedy families, some of whom, no doubt, were Scotch.
Such names as Brady, Burke, Casey, Connelly, Corbett, Cassidy, Callahan, Cleary, Cummings, Curry, Daly, Doherty, Donnelly, Dempsey, Dowling, Duggan, Doyle, Donovan, Ennis, Fitzgerald, Fogarty, Fitzpatrick, Flinn, Garrett, Garvin, Gorman, Hogan, Jordan, Kearns, Lyons, Malone, Mulligan, Madden, Morrison, Nolan, O’Bannon, Quinn, Regan, Roach, Ryan, Rutledge, Shannon and Shiels, as well as others of ancient Irish origin, occur quite frequently in the Census Returns, and in all parts of the state. Indeed, we might say, with startling frequency, if they are examined by that set of persons who are so fond of telling us that the American people are of Anglo-Saxon origin!
Besides the old Irish clan names, it is seen that a very large number of the early inhabitants of South Carolina bore names that have been common in Ireland for centuries, although not all of Irish origin. There are many Browns, Grays, Greens, Whites, Griffins, Grimeses, Rices, Savages, Steeles, Glovers, Raineys, Rays, Flemings, Staffords, Shaws, Gastons, Parnells, Mileses, Reeds, Fergusons, Coxs, Courtneys, Clarks, Carrs, Kerrs, Allens, Pattersons, Berrys, Hails, Henrys, Morrises, Martins, Lowrys, Hollands, Morrows, Jacksons, Laceys, Masseys and Leonards.
That some of these people were Irish seems beyond doubt, particularly when we find such distinctive Irish Christian names as Darby, Malachi, Patrick, Brian, Cormac, Connor and the like. And when we see O’Bryan Smiths, Patrick Smiths, and Michael and Jeremiah Smiths, and other similar name combinations, we can safely assume that in the majority of cases they were of Irish origin or birth.