The Will of Josiah Tatum 1797

Who was  Josiah Tatum  ?

He was my GGGGG Grand Father.

What did he do to make a living ? He rented out servants !

By today's moral standards he would have been an evil man, 

 However by the standards of the mid / late 1700s he was a business man who served the needs of the area.

Why am I posting this ?

I have received a few E-Mails from people researching their ancestors who were slaves, with any luck I hope that the information in this copy of the will can help some one !

I did the best I could on trans scribing the written text, if anyone sees something I missed please  let me know !

 

Will of Josiah Tatum 1797

Will book #5 page 382 Chesterfield county VA.

In the name of God Amen.

" I Josiah Tatum of the county of Chesterfield VA.

Being in a deplorable state of health,but by the blessing of God of a perfect sound disposing mind and memory do make and declare, this my last will and Testament". 

 "First I give to my son Henry Tatum, all that tract or parcel of land lying in the east side of Middle Creek, adjoining my said son's land, also the following Slaves- (to wit)

Yorkie, Dan'l, Sam, Dick, Old Biddy, and all her grown Children now in the possession of my said son Henry , also Curry, Jenny, the Younger Lucy and her children. & their increase to him and his heirs forever."

2nd I give to my son Zachariah Tatum all that land or parcel of land  where I now reside  adjoining my said sons land , also the --

----Following Slaves (to wit) 

Doctor and Lincy, Dinah , Hanna, Bob, Betty, Aggy, Judy and all her children,

Jenny and all her children, and all their increase to him and his heirs forever.

3rdly I give to my Son in Law William Harrington, the following slaves (to wit)

Rachel, Eddie,Ned, Caesor, Phillie and their increase to him and his heirs forever,

4thly I give to my sons, Henry Tatum And Zachariah Tatum, the following slaves (to wit)

Use  and all her children.Sarah and all her children, Onnake and all her Children, together with all the property here to for lent or hired to my son in law Lewellin Hudson and my Daughter Rebeca Hudson and their children and edncating---

the some and my will and desire is that the profits and ??? of the said estate left to my sons Henry and Zachariah ,should be by them solely and applied to the purpose during the life of my said daughter Rebecca

and her death, my will and desire is all the said estate so left in trust to my sons Henry and Zachariah Tatum should be equally divided between all my daughter  Rebecca's children, them and their heirs forever.

5thly It is my desire that the crop of corn, wheat, and tobacco in hand, and that shall be growing at my decease be appropriated by my executors here after maintained to the payments of my just debts.

and the residence  and remainder if any be divided between my three children, Henry, Zachariah Tatum, and Rebecca Hudson , and the deficiency if any be made up by my two sons Henry and Zachariah only, and equally , my will and desire is that the rest and residence of my estate both real--- 

and ???? and revisions to be equally  divided between my two sons.

Henry and Zachariah Tatum, and their heirs forever.

And I hear by appoint my sons Henry and Zachariah my Executors of this my last will and Testament,

hereby annulling  every other will by me here to for made.

 In Witness where I have here ??? set my hand and affixed my seal this first day of 

January in the year of our lord Christ 

Josiah Tatum

The fight to preserve Slavery !

Ya know what shaves my goat?
Yankees that claim that the South was primarily fighting for the right to continue slavery !
OK just for the sake of argument let’s say it’s true, That by a  soldier joining the armed forces he was fighting to maintain slavery . But if we accept this we must also look at what the North was fighting for.
Now the Yankee’s will tell ya it was to preserve the Union and later the focus changed to freeing the slaves. Then they will throw in Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation

OOOOO-K, I’ve heard it all before. But lets look at it from the Yankees perspective and apply the logic evenly.
If the Confederates were fighting to preserve slavery, so were the Yankees!

The Yanks were fighting to preserve a Union that by law included slavery. So by fighting to save the union they were at the same time fighting to save slavery which was a part of the Union.

Even after the Emancipation Proclamation the yanks were fighting to preserve a Union that included slavery ! Lincoln stated- “Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.
So slavery was still an accepted practice in the Union even after the Emancipation Proclamation was issued. 

So the Yankees were still fighting to preserve a Union that included slavery.
As long as we all play by the same rules ya gotta accept the facts !

Freedom in the North !

While the South has been label racist lets take a look at our wonderful neighbors to the north!

OHIO
The state had enacted Black Laws in 1804 and 1807 that compelled blacks entering the state to post bond of $500 guaranteeing good behavior and to produce a court paper as proof that they were free.
"No extensive effort was made to enforce the bond requirement" Likwack wrote, "until 1829, when the rapid increase of the Negro population alarmed Cincinnati. The city authorities announced that the Black Laws would be enforced and ordered Negroes to comply or leave within thirty days."
Citizens of the city's "Little Africa" -- largely a ghetto of wooden shacks owned by whites -- appealed for a delay, and sent a delegation to Canada to try to find a place to settle there. But if the authorities were willing to offer more time, the Ohio mob was not, and whites in packs roamed through the black neighborhoods, burning and beating. The delegation came back from Upper Canada with the offer of a safe home from the governor. "Tell the Republicans on your side of the line that we royalists do not know men by their color. Should you come to us you will be entitled to all the privileges of the rest of His Majesty's subjects."
About half of the city's 2,200 blacks left, most of them apparently going to Canada. The proponents of strict enforcement of the Black Laws then discovered that they had driven off "the sober, honest, industrious, and useful portion of the colored population," which lessened "much of the moral restraint ... on the idle and indolent, as well as the profligate" among the rest

Connecticut
Discrimination against free blacks was more severe in Connecticut than in other New England colonies. Their lives were strongly proscribed even before they became numerous. In 1690, the colony forbade blacks and Indians to be on the streets after 9 p.m. It also forbid black "servants" to wander beyond the limits of the towns or places where they belonged without a ticket or pass from their masters or the authorities. A law of 1708, citing frequent fights between slaves and whites, imposed a minimum penalty of 30 lashes on any black who disturbed the peace or who attempted to strike a white person. Even speech was subject to control. By a 1730 law, and black, Indian, or mulatto slave "who uttered or published, about any white person, words which would be actionable if uttered by a free white was, upon conviction before any one assistant or justice of the peace, to be whipped with forty lashes. As early as 1717, citizens of New London in a town meeting voted their objection to free blacks living in the town or owning land anywhere in the colony. That year, the colonial assembly passed a law in accordance with this sentiment, prohibiting free blacks or mulattoes from residing in any town in the colony. It also forbid them to buy land or go into business without the consent of the town. The provisions were retroactive, so that if any black person had managed to buy land, the deed was rendered void, and a black resident of a town, however long he had been there, was now subject to prosecution at the discretion of the selectmen.

Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania laws forbid blacks from gathering in "tippling-houses," carrying arms, or assembling in companies. These, however, were loosely or unevenly enforced. But throughout Pennsylvania colony, the children of free blacks, without exception, were bound out by the local justices of the peace until age 24 (if male) or 21 (if female). All in all, the "free" blacks of colonial Pennsylvania led severely circumscribed lives; they had no control even over their own family arrangements, and they could be put back into servitude for "laziness" or petty crimes, at the mercy of the local authorities.

ILLINOIS, INDIANA
The legal history of the black codes in these two states is essentially similiar, and in fact Illinois simply continued Indiana's code when it organized as a territory.
The new states that entered the union in the North after the gradual emancipation of northern slaves were just as concerned as the old ones with maintaining their racial purity. To do so, they turned to an old practice in the North: the exclusion law. Slaves could not be brought into the Northwest Territories, under the ordinance of 1787, but slaves already there remained in bondage. Once states began to emerge from the old territories, most of them explicitly barred blacks or permitted them only if they could prove their freedom and post bond. Ohio offered the first example, and those that followed her into the union followed her lead on race.
Both Indiana (1816) and Illinois (1818) abolished slavery by their constitutions. And both followed the Ohio policy of trying to prevent black immigration by passing laws requiring blacks who moved into the state to produce legal documents verifying that they were free and posting bond to guarantee their good behavior. The bond requirements ranged as high as $1,000, which was prohibitive for a black American in those days. Anti-immigration legislation was passed in Illinois in 1819, 1829, and 1853. In Indiana, such laws were enacted in 1831 and 1852. Michigan Territory passed such a law in 1827; Iowa Territory passed one in 1839 and Iowa enacted another in 1851 after it became a state. Oregon Territory passed such a law in 1849.

Ever wonder why the underground Rail Road went to Canada ?

Source (http://www.slavenorth.com)

A Slavers Flag ?

Anyone notice a similarity between the NY State flag and the composit picture below it?

Now then if somebody wants to protest a flag, why not protest one that has 2 slave ships, a A Nazi emblem, and The Rising sun ?

Oh I can hear it now " It's not the same flag, the Nazis and Rising Sun came after the flag wasadopted, and how do you know they are slave ships"? "You can't compare the two"

Ok! Fair enough! But the radical KKK, White Neo Nazis, and other hate groups who use the battle flag as a hate tool came long after the Confederate soldier, who was defending his home from an invading army! So how can "You" connect the two?

Media story's state in essence--------

"A flag used to honor Confederate Veterans is being protested by some who say it is a flag of hate"

So why not protest the NY State flag for the same reason?