Immigration and Emigration

Colonial Laws and the Indentured Servant (Part 1)

Until the laws caught up governing human bondage in the English New World, several systems were in place. One was outright slavery which included political prisoners, criminals, innocent kidnapped individuals, the homeless and orphans sold into bondage. Once shipped to the Caribbean, Virginia or Maryland colonies, many simply disappeared.

Another was the “indentured servant” which was different than outright slavery, however, this is a technicality if the servant didn’t survive. They were basically slaves for a contracted period of time in exchange for either passage over or for promised land. A study of white bondage using England as the focus reveals the following comparison between indentured servants, transported convicts and free immigrants in the colonial period:

Variable Indentured Servants Transported Convicts Free Immigrants

Emigration Reason escape poverty imposed punishment varies

Average age 15-24 years 20-30 years varies

Companions rarely family/friends rarely family/friends family/friends

Social status lower/lower middle lower class middle/upper middle

Select master could not could not not applicable

Marriage none none not applicable

The America before 1776 was a complex time as human slavery fueled the economy. The line between who was a slave and who wasn’t became thin. It took a century for the laws to be put into place that defined who had rights and what those rights were.

Irish Catholics were an important part of this colonial trade. By the 1600s English began to colonize a conquered Ireland. They planted Ireland with Scots and English. Workers left Ireland not only by force as convict slaves, but also were persuaded to leave as indentured servants. Ireland was so bad at the time that many gladly took up the offer to be enslaved for a set number of years. This went on for at least 100 years. The Caribbean islands, Virginia and Maryland were where most of the Irish were transported. Indentured servants would later go in large numbers to the Pennsylvania and New York colonies.

In tomorrow’s blog, I will discuss the laws which governed the practice of bondage and defined human rights, and what constituted slavery. Once the laws were in place, then slavery and servitude became color based.

Irish Passengers to Argentina

9 Dec By Dwight Leave a Comment

As it has already been well documented, most of the Irish who went to Argentina were from concentrated areas in Ireland, making their origin documentable. Some 60% came from counties Westmeath, Longford and North Offaly, 15% from County Wexford, 3% from County Cork, 3% from County Clare and 15% from the rest of the country. It is now easier than ever to document their arrival in Argentina, and for some periods of time, their leaving Ireland.

The passenger lists arriving in Buenos Aires (1821-1870) are on microfilm at the Family History Library: www.familysearch.org The records list the name, age, place of birth (usually country) and relationships between persons traveling together. Sometimes passport information is provided (FHL Microfilm #1840670-84).

The compilation “Irish Passengers to Argentina (1822-1929) includes 7,159 passengers. It is actually a published version of a database compiled from several sources including Eduardo A. Coglan’s El Aporte de los Irlandeses a la Formación de la Nación Argentina (Buenos Aires, 1982). It is online at the website for the Society for Irish Latin American Studies: www.irishargentine.org/passenger.htm This is a free database. When studying the database, remember in Argentina, the Irish were often listed as English. Part of this compilation comes from these passenger arrival records.

Now concerning leaving Irish ports, these are part of the British Board of Trade records (BT 27) and include ships leaving the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (Northern Ireland after 1922) beginning in 1890. This large archive of records is indexed with digitized images on the FindMyPast website: www.findmypast.co.ukas “Passenger Lists Leaving UK 1890-1960.” This is a subscription or “Pay as You Go” website.

From the UK ports, ships in this database were bound to the Argentine ports of Bahia Blanca, Buenos Aires, Campana, Gallegos, Ibicuy, La Plata, Puerto Madrya, River Plate, Rosario, Tierra Del Fuego, Villa Constitucion and Zarate.

Documenting your family or the branch of your family arriving in Argentina has never been easier.

Using Databases to Discover Lost Irish

30 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

Sometimes we get so accustomed to using online databases that we forget the time when they didn’t exist. With these databases comes the opportunity to make discoveries and develop new research strategies.

In the area of Irish immigration, in the old days, discoveries were made microfilm by microfilm, often without indexes. Researchers asked questions such as: Was there an Irish migration? Is there a pattern of immigration from a particular county in Ireland? Was it a Catholic, Protestant or mixed migration into the area in question?

Researchers still ask the same questions, but there is now a wider net to cast online. Where before a study was limited to a particular community, now there’s nationwide coverage through databases on FamilySearch: www.familysearch.org and Ancestry: www.ancestry.com.

When I learn about a new database, I start plugging in Irish names. If in a hurry, I do the most common ones such as Sullivan, Kelly, Lynch from memory. If I want to do a detailed survey, I will get a list of the most common Irish surnames and start down the list.

While this strategy works very well, there are some quirks associated with it. For example, Does Sullivan, Kelly and Lynch look like that in an Afrikaans, Danish, Dutch, French, Hungarian, Spanish or Swedish database? Definitely be careful. This strategy is less definitive when the common name is actually English or Scots-Irish in origin. You can’t determine, without more information, if the names you are seeing are actually from Ireland. In reverse, if you assume that communities, such as the Scots-Irish followed the Scots everywhere, then that will solve part of that quirk.

With current technology, we all have the chance to create something new and exciting in the field of Irish immigrant research. If you make a discovery of “lost Irish” then I recommend you write an article or create your own database to share your discovery. You don’t know how many times I say “What in the heck were they doing there?” So I write a blog!

Argentina Passports and the Irish Immigrant

20 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

During Spanish rule in Argentina, the government in Buenos Aires kept tight control over individuals migrating to locations within Argentina and elsewhere. Many Irish born were issued passports from 1817 to 1821. These are a prime resource for learning intimate details about those applying. For example, a physical description of the person is given.

These official documents are handwritten in both manuscript pages and in a fill in the blank format. They are in Spanish with the official government seal; usually three and sometimes four pages.

On the first page of the passport would be the petition, reason for leaving, the destination, and personal information. Typically, the personal information, such as physical description and the destination were transferred over to the printed form to be filled in. Exact birth places are sometimes listed. However, most only list the “fatherland” of the person, age, marital status, race, physical description, occupation and current residence. Concerning the birth place, immigrants from the United Kingdom and Ireland tended to be listed as being from England. Also be aware that there is no shortage of people from “N. America” also applied for passports.

These are fascinating records. Since Argentina historically has drawn immigrants from throughout Europe, this makes these passports even more important. Passports were granted for business purposes, travelling through Argentina to settle deeper into the inteior or sometimes for visiting another country to visit family. The reasons are stated in the petition part of the passport. Also, don’t neglect the “N. America” immigrants. This could be a valuable clue in tracing family migration patterns.

Why Can’t I Find My Ancestors in the Baltimore Passenger List?

17 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

When you are looking at United States passenger arrival records, sometimes you just wonder how complete they really are. Many people don’t think in these terms, but gaps in the records would go a long way to explain why you’re not finding your ancestors. Many researchers just assume the passenger arrival records are all complete – not so!

A case in point, which is always frustrating to me as a professional genealogist are the arrival records for Baltimore, Maryland. Irish immigrant research can be difficult enough, so the positive of knowing there are gaps in records, such as the Baltimore lists, explains a lot. My discussion below comes from the wonderful book by Michael Tepper American Passenger Arrival Records (1993), pp. 83-85, www.genealogical.com A resource book worth consulting for all the ports.

Many early Baltimore passenger arrival records were destroyed in a fire. However, valuable information has been filled in by way of other transcripts or abstracts. Even with this as a positive, what you need to be aware in Irish immigrant research is there entire years which are missing. Among these are 1842, 1844, 1846, 1847, 1851-56, 1864 and 1867. Of course this is right before, during and after, peek Irish immigration.

Some of this information is supplemented by other sources such as City Lists or Quarterly Abstracts. However, don’t assume all information is duplicated. For a major port such as Baltimore, what you need to be aware of is that there are some substitutes, and this includes four categories:

*State Department Transcripts (1820, 1822-27, 1829)

*City Lists (1833-66)

*Quarterly Abstracts (1820-69)

*Original Lists (1820-91)

The Baltimore passenger arrival records are indexed on microfilm as well on Ancestry as “Baltimore Passenger Lists, 1820-1948, 1854-1957”: www.ancestry.com

American Presbyterian Ministers and their Ulster Origins

11 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

One of the strategies I’m always preaching in Scots-Irish immigrant research is to make sure you research the minister of the congregation where your ancestor’s attended. The reason is that during the 1700s, it was common for ministers to bring all or parts of their congregations to North America with them. To find out where the minister pastored in Ireland may be to find out where your ancestors were from in Ulster.

To assist you in this search, there is a source which I would like to bring to your attention. It is Rev. David Stewart’s Fasti of the American Presbyterian Church: treating of ministers of Irish origin who labored in America during the eighteenth century (Belfast: Bell and Logan, 1943). This work contains record of 156 ministers who immigrated to the United States from Ulster. After much hunting, I finally found a copy at the Presbyterian Historical Society in Ireland: www.presbyterianhistoryireland.com. It’s most impressive. It’s a lesser known resource which should be added to the works already in print on Irish Presbyterian ministers.

When consulting this work, or any others, just be aware, just because a minister was born in Ulster, does not mean he actually pastored in Ulster. He may have immigrated as a child and studied in America. This is one consideration. The main reasons you would check Stewart’s work is if your ancestor was the minister or you suspect a congregational migration from Ulster. If this is found to be true, it goes a long way towards solving your immigration problem.

The average Presbyterian register in Ireland begins in the 1820s and 1830s. If your ancestors immigrated in the 1700s, then church registers in Ireland will not help. Books about ministers trained in Ireland or Scotland may or may not help, making Stewart’s work from the American angle extremely valuable. Definitely consult it. Most research guides actually miss this one source.

Colonial Powers in the Caribbean

10 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

In this blog, I’d like to share an important historical accounting of which European powers had colonial governments on the various Caribbean islands. Many of the islands switched many times between various governments. This does affect the records you will be looking for. The Irish, both Catholic and Protestant, were on most of these islands from at least the early 1600s.

Often seventeenth and eighteenth century records, or transcripts of the records, were sent back to the parent country. This means that even if the island copy was destroyed (think war, earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, mold and mildew) that a second copy may have survived. These second copies are often microfilmed and at the Family History Library: www.familysearch.org.

The island and the colonial powers which you will need to be familiar with are below (see a modern reference map below). The listing was taken from the incredible reference work by Christina K. Schaefer, Genealogical Encyclopedia of the Colonial Americas (1998): www.genealogical.com (pp. 127-128), a book worthy of any genealogical library collection:

Anguilla: England (1650), France (1666), England (1671), France (1689), Great Britain (1713).

Antigua: England (1631), France (1666), England (1671), Moravian settlement added in 1754.

Aruba: The Netherlands (1634).

Bahamas: England (1645), Spain (1684), England (1694), pirates from Spain and France (1703), Great Britain (1708).

Barbados: England (1627).

Barbuda: England (1629), France (1666), England (1671).

Bermuda: England (1612).

Bonaire: The Netherlands (1634).

Cuba: Spain (1511).

Curacao: The Netherlands (1634).

Dominica: England and France (1627), neutral (1748), Great Britain (1756), France (1778), Great Britain (1783).

Dominican Republic: see Hispaniola.

Grenada: England (1609), France (1650), Great Britain (1762), France (1779), Great Britain (1783).

Guadeloupe: France (1635), Great Britain (1759), France (1763).

Haiti: see Hispaniola.

Hispaniola (Dominican Republic/Haiti): Spain (1493), France takes over western end of island (1697).

Jamaica: Spain (1509), England (1655).

Martinique: France (1635), Great Britain (1762), France (1763).

Montserrat: England and Ireland (1632), France (1666), England (1671).

Nevis: England (1628).

Providence Island: England (1630), Spain (1641).

Puerto Rico: Spain (1508).

Saba: The Netherlands (1634).

Saint Bartholomew: France (1648), Sweden (1784), France (1878).

Saint Kitts (Saint Christopher): England (1623), France and England (1625), France (1666), England (1667), France (1689), Great Britain (1713).

Saint Croix: England, The Netherlands and France (1625), England (1645), France (1650), Denmark (1733).

Saint-Domingue: see Hispaniola

Saint Eustatius: The Netherlands (1600).

Saint John: Denmark (1672).

Saint Lucia: France (1639), England (1663), France (1667), Great Britain and France (1713), France (1723), neutral (1748), Great Britain (1756), France (1763), Great Britain (1778), France (1783).

Saint Martin: France and The Netherlands (1648).

Saint Thomas: Denmark (1672).

Saint Vincent: England (1627), neutral (1660), Carib Indians (1672), Great Britain (1722), neutral (1748), Great Britain and France (1756), Great Britain (1763), France (1779), Great Britain (1783).

Tobago: England, The Netherlands and France (1632), neutral (1748), Great Britain (1763), France (1781), Great Britain (1793).

Tortola: The Netherlands (1666), England (1672).

Tortuga: Buccaneers from England, France, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain (1630), Spain (1635).

Trinidad: Spain (1509), French settlement added in 1777, Great Britain (1797).

The Dust Bowl

8 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

The aftermath of an American migration of epic portions can now be studied alongside the 1940 Census. I am referring to the Dust Bowl (1930-1936), with Oklahoma being the center. While affecting blacks, it’s mainly thought of in terms of poor whites and Native Americans. That brings us to why this topic is important for an Irish blog. Scores of these Oklahoma residents were of Scots-Irish descent.

This period of history is sometimes referred to as the “Dirty Thirties.” Severe dust storms, called “Black Blizzards,” and “Black Rollers,” literally made visibility a couple of feet. The storms were intensified by the poor farming methods of the time. It blew away the middle part of the country. It was centered in Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas; destroying the crops, cattle, farms, and the sharecropping way of life.

This caused such upheaval, there is no shortage of books and websites dedicated to this period. The derogatory term “Okie” was popularized for the massive migration of the poor white migrant workers from Oklahoma who went to find work in California. Some estimates are that 15% of the state left for California during the Dust Bowl. Their plight was popularized in the American imagination by the classic novel by John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath (1940).

They are the hidden part of the Depression Era national tragedy that took people with little and left them with nothing. The Dust Bowl exodus constituted the largest mass migration of Americans in the shortest time with 2.5 million people on the move, and at least 200,000 of those headed for California.

A good place to start with learning more about the Dust Bowl is the Oklahoma Historical Society’s Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History & Culture article on the “Dust Bowl” http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/D/DU011.html Ken Burns PBS documentary “The Dust Bowl” premieres on November 18^th and 19^th www.pbs.org/kenburns/dustbowl so mark your calendars.

The Great Migration (1910-1930)

7 Nov By Dwight Leave a Comment

For many African Americans of Irish heritage, they have to first trace their ancestors back into the Southern United States. This blog will focus on “The Great Migration” which was the first massive exodus out of the South. By 1900 about 90% of blacks lived in the South. The years 1910 through 1930 (some historians see 1916-1940) saw 1.6 million blacks leaving. There are some general migration patterns, although not set in stone:

Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas westward to: Oakland and Los Angeles, California.

Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas northward to: a.) St. Louis, Missouri (onward to Quincy and Springfield in Illinois), b.) Davenport, Iowa and c.) Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee northward to: a.) Louisville, Kentucky, b.) Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, Toledo and Cleveland, Ohio, c.) Indianapolis, Indiana, d.) Chicago, Illinois, e.) Milwaukee, Wisconsin, f.) Detroit, Michigan, g.) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia northeastward to: a.) Richmond, Virginia, b.) Washington DC, c.) Baltimore, Maryland, d.) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, e.) Newark, New Jersey, f.) Albany, New York City, Buffalo and Rochester, New York, g.) New Haven, Connecticut, h.) Boston, Massachusetts, i.) Providence, Rhode Island.

There were many reasons for leaving. Racism (lynching, terror, and Jim Crow Laws) was not the only reason. Many left seeking employment away from sharecrop farming. They took urban jobs in the service industry NOT in the factories and in the heavy industry.

Blacks replaced whites who originally held those jobs. Another reason for leaving was to provide a better education for children and have a voice. Other factors contributed, such as the Great Mississippi Flood (1927), which displaced hundreds of thousands of farm laborers.

The majority of migrants were from the rural South. Also during this time period, settling in the same cities were poor rural Europeans. Both groups were competing for the same jobs in the service industry, with the railroads, meatpacking plants and stockyards being favored.

When tracing a Great Migration family, the 1910, 1920, 1930 and newly released 1940 U.S. Census are essential tools. Once you know a state of birth, then you are ready to work backwards. This is where the adventure really begins!

The Irish Connection to Montserrat (Part 1)

20 Oct By Dwight Leave a Comment

The Caribbean Island of Montserrat has a long history with the Irish. It is a small island. This first of a two blog will focus on the early Irish Catholic history of the island. Many North Americans, white and black, are descendants of these the colonial Irish Catholic indentured servants, white slaves, prisoners and settlers.

Montserrat was founded as an English colony in 1632, by Irish Catholic indentured servants from St. Kitts. It became a Catholic colony ruled by Protestants. A second wave of settlers came in 1634; Catholic refugees fleeing persecution in Virginia.

Recruiting schemes successfully brought Irish to the island to grow tobacco. Additional waves of settlers arrived in 1641-45 as the term for many white indentured servants in St. Kitts and Barbados expired. In 1649 the island was used as a dumping ground for Irish slaves and prisoners following the Cromwellian victory in Ireland. By 1666, the population consisted of 3,250 including 300 English, 2,000 Irish and 650 African slaves.

In 1667 many left during war between France and England, both which had colonies in the Caribbean. The Irish Catholics sided with the French, and were sent to Nevis. Montserrat lay in ruins. By 1678 the island was being rebuilt with the economy based on a few large plantations. The census for that year showed 2,682 whites and 992 slaves. About two-thirds of the whites were Irish subsistence farmers. With little opportunity for advancement, the white population steadily decreased.

The wars between England and France (1689-1714) would cause most of the Irish farmers to abandon their holdings and leave. Catholics who remained were subject to harsh laws. The 1756 Census showed a population of 10,283, of whom 1,430 were white and 8,853 black.

In tomorrow’s blog, I will discuss the records of Montserrat.

« Previous Page

Call Today! 801.699.2450

Or send us an Email