Duke(s) Families of the Camden District, SC

Duke(s) Families of the Camden District, SC, 1730-1830
This document is copyright (c) 2005 by Tony Cox. All rights reserved. The copyright must appear on all copies
Send Comments to Tony Cox

Camden District, South Carolina
The South Carolina Circuit Court District of Camden was created from a portion of Craven County in 1769. The bounds of the Camden District were: North Carolina to the north, the Lynches River to the northeast and east, the Broad, Congaree, and Santee Rivers to the west and southwest, and the Georgetown District to the southeast. The modern counties of Chester, Clarendon, Fairfield, Kershaw, Lancaster, Lee, Richland, Sumter, and York lie within its boundaries. Over the years these counties have formed and reformed, changing borders and sometimes names; but, except for part of Lee, always staying within the original bounds of the old Camden District. Two county names, Claremont and Salem, are now extinct, replaced, more or less, by Sumter. In 1800 the Camden District ceased to exist when it was split into smaller circuit court districts, generally along the present county lines.

Although the lifetime of the Camden District spanned only thirty years and I cover a greater time period, it still provides a convenient frame of reference for the temporal and geographical scope of this note. The focus of this note are the persons of Duke heritage who lived in the area of South Carolina defined by the boundaries of the Camden District during the 100 years after 1730.

Before 1730, according to early historians, most of the population of South Carolina lived in the coastal regions. Few non-indigenous people, other than hunters and Indian traders, lived more than fifty miles from the coastal regions. After 1730, the religious tolerance of the South Carolina colony leaders toward non-Anglicans and the easy availability of free, or nearly free, land attracted many settlers from within the colonies and from Europe. The population of the inland areas, including the Camden District, began to grow at a prodigious rate.

The well-drained portions of land in the South Carolina colony were suitable for the cultivation of indigo, the most popular cash crop of 1750. Another popular cash crop of the period was rice which was grown in fertile swamps along the rivers. In the first part of the 1700s settlers throughout the colony cultivated rice using the same methods that are used to raise corn and wheat today. Later, in the latter half of the century, field-flooding techniques were developed to grow rice more efficiently. Field-flooding is a labor intensive activity which depends on the availability of great amounts of water. Because of these factors, the field-flooding method was most productive on the large coastal area plantations where slave labor was readily available and the owners were capable of making the large capital investments required to develop the necessary fields. In that part of South Carolina, rice surpassed indigo as the major cash crop in the latter half of the century.

Further inland, the estates were smaller and lands suitable for flood agriculture were scarce. Transportation to markets for cash-crops such as rice and indigo was difficult and costly from these plantations. The newly-emigrated owners were poor and had few additional laborers other than family members, and the land available for a cash crop was necessarily small because the land owner first needed to provide for his family. The typical mid-eighteenth century landowner of the Camden District area did subsistence farming. That is, on a few cleared acres they raised a variety of food crops and tobacco for their own use. This was supplemented with wild game and open range beef and pork. As years passed, more land was cleared, and the inland planters were able to commit more of their land to the production of cash crops. Those that did well obtained more land. By 1830, the region was densely settled, the land was being merged into large plantations, and many descendants of the early pioneers were leaving South Carolina for opportunities further west.

The Prince Frederick Winyaw Parish Book records a son, named William, born to Benjamine and Mary Dukes on 27SEP1745. The child was christened on 29OCT1745.¹ While the parish records were kept in a church situated on a bluff overlooking the Black River² near Williamsburg, the bounds of Prince Frederick Winyaw Parish in 1745 were quite large, covering nearly a third of the entire colony of South Carolina and included the area later known as the Camden District. At infrequent times, the cleric would travel to the remote inland regions of the parish to hold services, marry couples, and baptize children³. The Prince Frederick Winyaw Parish Book records these remote trips by listing many baptisms over a short span of days and by listing children of various ages rather than just newborns. For example, two children of William and Ann Harrison, well-known early settlers of the Wateree River area of the Camden District, were baptized on 09DEC1753. The age of James, was listed as one year, while the age of his sister, Sarah, was six months. In all, there were twenty three children baptized on that single December day. Their ages ranged from one month to twelve years⁴. Similarly, indications of a remote trip, although not as oblivious, are found with the William Duke entry. Seventeen baptisms were done on Sunday, the 27^th, three on the 29^th, and twelve on the 30^th of October 1745, a total of thirty-two children from twenty-four sets of parents in a four day period. The clergy may have traveled to a different nearby location on the 28^th, or that may have been a day of rest following a Sunday full of sermons and seventeen baptisms.⁵ The ages for the children baptized over the four days range from one month to twenty years. Their parents were:

John and Rebeccah Evans [27^th]
Abraham and Amey Paul [27^th]
Burlingham and Elizabeth Rudd [27^th]
John and Margaret Booth [27^th]
Martin and Sarah Johnston [27^th]
Hardy and Beatrix Councill [27^th]
James and Elizabeth Griffin [27^th]
Daniel and Elianor Short [27^th]
Harmon and Elis Johnston [27^th]
Benjamine and Mary Duke [29^th]
Bartholomew and Elizabeth Ball [29^th]
Joseph and Elizabeth Thornhill [29^th]
Henry and Elizabeth Isbell [30^th]
Thomas and Jemina Wally [30^th]
Muhall and Francis Wool [30^th]
Thomas and Hannah Harington [30^th]
Charles and Sarah Dewitt [30^th]
Francies and Martha Whitington [30^th]
William and Sarah Wilkinson [30^th]
James and Cassia Crawford [30^th]
John and Elizabeth Leith [30^th]
Sollomon Huges and Judith Haughton, widow [30^th]
Bryan and Mary Kennedy [30^th]
John and Susannah Man [30^th]

A survey of the early South Carolina deed conveyances⁶ indicates the majority of the parents of the baptized children were landowners on the south side of the Peedee River in, or near, the Queensborough Township and the Welch Tract. It is likely that the church meetings were held nearby. In the decade since the creation of the Welch Tract, an area of South Carolina reserved exclusively for settlers from Wales⁷, the region had become a well-known Baptist stronghold and might have been considered a worthy mission for the Anglican clergy. Although the choices for transportation were limited and arduous, the religious meetings drew people from a large surrounding area. William was less than a month old when he was baptized as a member of the Anglican Church, and even though it was autumn, a good time for traveling, it is not likely the Benjamin Duke family traveled a great distance to the meeting. So, it is plausible that Benjamin Duke and his family lived in or near the Queensborough Township in 1745. There is no record of him owning land in the area. However, at that time, few ungranted tracts of desirable land were available in the area and those that remained were more or less reserved for the Welsh protestants. Another possibility that can't be discounted is the Duke family was emigrating, traveling either by ship or overland from one of the northern colonies and just happened to be traveling through or visiting the area at the time of the services.

Further inland, near the present day city of Camden on the east bank of the Wateree River, was another township, named Fredericksburg, which was created for poor protestants about the same time as Queensborough. Although the Fredericksburg Township was also approaching capacity, settlers were taking land grants in the surrounding land on both sides of the river; some immigrants coming down river from the northern colonies and some, upriver from the settlements along the South Carolina coast. It is likely Benjamin traveled the latter route when he came to the Camden region from Queensborough.

Benjamin Duke was the first settler of the Duke surname to appear in the colonial records for the region that became the Camden District. On 02MAY1749, Benjamin petitioned the South Carolina Council for a tract of two hundred and fifty acres on the north side of the Wateree River.⁸ From his petition we know that this was his first request for a land grant in South Carolina, and that he was married with three children. At fifty acres a head and five heads, Benjamin petitioned for the maximum number of acres his family was allowed with a headright land grant. A warrant of survey was issued by George Hunter Esqr. on 04MAY1749 and the survey for his grant was certified by Jno. Pearson on 10OCT1749.⁹ The land grant was issued on 15MAY1751.¹⁰ It was located on the northeast bank of the Wateree, or Catawba River, at the mouth of Singleton Creek. The plat depicts a building, perhaps a fence or clearing, and a path that goes downstream to a neighbor, Jno. Dinkins. This indicates that the site was inhabited prior to the time of the survey, perhaps for several years, if not by the Dukes, then by some earlier settler. John Dinkins' warrant of survey for 300 acres was issued 06MAR1749 and the survey was certified 13DEC1750; but he abandoned his land before getting a grant. On 04FEB1752, William Stewart, with a wife and seven children, petitioned for the three hundred acres due John Dinkins, plus an additional one hundred and fifty acres. William Stewart was issued a grant 12MAR1752.¹¹ The Council record mentions an affidavit from John Dinkins, signed 10FEB1752, so the man was still living at that time.¹²

Another neighbor of the Duke family might have been James Lynah who, on 04JUN1759, was granted one headright or fifty acres of bounty [free] land on Singleton Creek northwest of Benjamin. The warrant of survey for Lynah's grant was issued 06APR1756, the day he petitioned for it, and the survey was recorded by John Wade on 25DEC1756. The plat indicates the "... tract hath no good plantable lands thereon, but hath a gristmill on the same..."¹³ A grist mill, completed in seven months, seems ambitious for a single man, poor enough to qualify for bounty land. The Lynah land was sold by Anthony Gillmore to Robert Harrison, mariner, both of Charleston on 27AUG1767.¹⁴ On 02FEB1770, Robert Harrison of Charlestown, Berkley County, SC sold the Lynah land to Benjamin Farar of St. Mathews Parish. The latter deed was recorded 26MAR1778.¹⁵

On 09MAY1778, John Chesnut sold the Benjamin Duke land to James Perry. The James Perry deed was recorded circa 22APR1789.¹⁶ The lease and release land conveyance indicates Benjamin's wife was named Mary. Chesnut obtained the land from Nehemiah Joiner, Junior who, in turn, had received it from Robert Humpheries. Unfortunately, the dates and details for the latter two transactions were not noted.

Nehemiah Joiner is listed as a bounding neighbor on a one hundred acre land grant to John Dixon. The precept was dated 03OCT1769 and the grant was registered 15JAN1770. This tract of land is situated on the northeast bank of the Wateree River and the starting point on the river, the surveyed angle and length of the northwest side of the Dixon tract is identical to that of the southwest side of the Benjamin Duke land.¹⁷ It is likely that Joiner owned the Duke land by 1770.

Robert Humphries was in the area as early as 10NOV1752 when he witnessed the lease and release land conveyance of John Todd, Junior to William Harrison.¹⁸ Additional witnesses were Richard and Moses Kirkland. Robert Humphreys, along with Richard and Joseph Kirkland, also witnessed the 23-24SEP1753 lease and release, William Harrison and wife Ann [Nancy] to John Dukes, a tract of one hundred and fifty acres.¹⁹ This tract of land was situated about five miles northwest of Benjamin Duke's land and on the same side of the Wateree River . Robert Humpheries is the only commonality found in the records between Benjamin and John Duke. Only two possible additional records concerning the man have been found. In January 1769, R. Humpherys surveyed a two hundred acre land grant for Frances Phillips on Beaver Dam Branch.²⁰ In 1776, a Robert Humphreys enlisted in the Third Continental Regiment from South Carolina.²¹

The fifteen years from 1750 to 1765 were difficult for the pioneers in the South Carolina back country. The multitude of people moving into the region included many outlaws who took advantage of the lack of local civil authority. The great and rapid increase in population and their attitudes caused the already strained relationship with the western Indians to worsen, and around 1760 a few of the Indian raids actually reached the Wateree River watershed. Outlaws and Indians weren't the only hardships the pioneers endured. On 15SEP1752, a large hurricane and devastating flood struck Charleston causing much damage.²² Doubtless, the storm caused great flooding further inland and destroyed many riverbank homesteads. Benjamin's neighbor, John Dinkins, abandoned his claim soon after it was surveyed. Likewise, after 10NOV1752, William Harrison moved away from his grant on the banks of the Wateree to higher ground on Dutchman's Creek.²³ Whatever the reason, it appears likely Benjamin Duke sold his Wateree homestead to Robert Humpheries between 1766, the year he petitioned for land on the Black River, and 1770 when he received the Black River grant.

On 01JUL1766, Benjamin Duke petitioned the Council for land in Prince Frederick Parish, west of the Black River. The square two hundred acre tract was surveyed 20AUG1766²⁴ and the land was granted 19SEP1770.²⁵ The plat contains few markings to indicate the exact location of the land; however, in 1757 the boundaries for Prince Frederick Parish were redrawn so the parish no longer included the area later known as Camden District. This fact, and the mention of Black River, places the tract within the present-day county of Williamsburg. Benjamin petitioned for another two hundred acres on 04SEP1770. It was surveyed on 04Jan1771²⁶ and granted on 15MAR1771.²⁷ There is not enough detail on this plat to locate it precisely. Benjamin Duke is listed as a bounding neighbor on the 100 acre plat of William Guess, surveyed 06JUN1771,²⁸ memorialized 10MAR1772.²⁹ The Guess plat also lists William Jackson and Wm. McCunes [McKuens on the memorial] as bounding neighbors. Benjamin Duke and William Guess are on the 1778-1779 Jury Lists for Prince Frederick Parish. They are listed as both Grand³⁰ and Petit Jurors.³¹

On Easter Monday, 20APR1778, Benjamin Duke was elected overseer of Prince Frederick Parish.³²

Benjamin Duke was apparently involved in the Revolutionary War effort. Claim number 2066 of the SC Accounts Audited of Claims Growing Out of the Revolutionary War³³ itemize and show receipts for the payment of two indentures: Book C, page 151 and Book P, page 377. The first, dated 30NOV1782, was for six beeves weighing a total of 1200 pounds and 1 sheep. The amount of the claim, sixteen pounds, two shillings, with interest was paid in full 16JAN1784. The second indenture, dated from 27APR1780 to 28FEB1783 was for 5 steers and the repair and crafting of saddles, bridles, stirrups, and leather caps for Colonel Peter Horry's Cavalry, part of Francis Marion's Brigade. Colonel Horry approved the second indenture in "Santee" on 28FEB1783. This indenture amounted to seventy-eight pounds and five shillings. It was paid in full; the date was not specified. A comparison of the signatures on the receipts indicate both indentures were paid to the same person. Note the hidden middle initial; the signer names himself as Benj. A. Duke. The two sales of livestock seem to indicate Benjamin A. Duke was a land owner and stock raiser in addition to being a saddle maker.

A Benjamin and William Duke were listed as a potential petit jurors in the Jury Lists for Georgetown in 1783.³⁴

[One may ask where is the proof that the Benjamin Duke who settled on the Wateree River is the same Benjamin Duke of the Peedee and Black River and the same Benjamin A. Duke who aided the patriots in the Revolutionary War. It is not here, at least not yet. I would argue that the above sketch is a reasonable arrangement for the known data UNLESS Benjamin Duke of the Wateree River died before 1766.--TLC]

John Duke of Lancaster, deceased before January 1786.
The John Duke, mentioned above who purchased the tract of land from William and Ann Harrison, was the second settler of the Duke surname to appear in the colonial records of the region that became the Camden District. On 23 and 24SEP1753, John Dukes transacted a lease and release agreement with William and Ann Harrison for one hundred and fifty acres "... on the North side of the Wateree River, butting and bounding to the South Eastward on the said same River and on all other sides on vacant land ..."³⁵ William Harrison William Harrison 1766 Land Grant

petitioned the Council for this land 06MAR1749/50, stating "... your petitioner is a setler [sic] on the Wateree River and hath a wife and one child ..."³⁶ He requested the maximum headright for three persons, 150 acres. The grant was actually made on 09JAN1752³⁷, rather than the 06MAR1749 date written in the lease and release conveyance. The total price John Duke paid for the land was sixty pounds and fifteen shillings. It is interesting to note that in the release document William Harrison's wife is referred to several times as Nancy, yet when she made her mark at the end; it was a capital 'A,' and the writer of the document inscribed the mark as Ann Harrison. The three witnesses to the conveyance were Richard Kirkland, Robert Humphris and Jo. Kirkland. The document lists the occupations of both Harrison and Duke as "carpenters." The term likely means they had not cleared enough land to achieve the status of "planter" and were self employed, cutting logs off their land for local use or to be sold downriver.

A copy of the plat for the William Harrison land grant has not been found; however, the tract of land John Duke purchased can be precisely located using the above description and several other land records. On 22OCT1762, another survey was certified for William Harrison. It was for 100 acres that bounded on "... a tract of land formerly surveyed for the said Harrison on the bank of the river ..." The plat shows the land east of the Wateree in a right angle river bend that forms the north and west sides of the tract. On the plat, the east or southeast side ends in a shared boundary with "William Harrison's old survey".³⁸ William Harrison was granted the 100 acre tract on 29OCT1766,³⁹ and identifies the land in both of his wills, dated 25JUL1769⁴⁰ and 16DEC1773⁴¹ respectively, as "... one hundred acres Joining John Dukes ..." With this, it becomes obvious that the tract of land identified as "William Harrison's old survey" is the one John Duke purchased.

When William Harrison died, the one hundred acre tract of land was inherited by his daughter, Patience, and was bought and sold several times before ending up in the possession of Thomas Thompson. The lease and release conveyance of John Miles to Thomas Thompson, 09APR1783, aptly describes the sales history this way: "... one hundred acres of land be the same more or less Situate on the North Side of Cataba [sic] River bounding S. W. [sic, should be SE] on an old Survey of William Harrison N.W. [sic, should be NE] on Vacant Land and all other sides by the Wateree River and hath such Shapes, forms & Marks as appears by a Plat thereto the Original Grant being Granted by his Majesty's letters patent unto William Harrison the twentieth [sic, the preceding lease has the correct date -- the twenty-ninth] day of October 1766 Which he gave unto Patience Hill her Heirs Executors Adm'rs and conveyed by James Harrison to more fully confirmed the same and also conveyed Thomas Hill to Richard Burge by Indenture bearing date the twentieth day of January in the year one thousand seven hundred & seventy eight and by the said Richard Burge conveyed to John Miles by Indenture bearing date the fourth day of November one thousand seven hundred and eighty two ...⁴²

The one hundred acres owned by Thomas Thompson can be doubly linked to the Duke land by the 21MAY1785 land grant to Reuben Stark for two islands in the Wateree River "... opposite Thos Thompson and Widow Dukes..." Stark's Island is identified on the Fairfield District map in Mills Atlas. It is located in a wide counter-clockwise bend of the Catawba River in the northeast corner of Fairfield District not far from the Chester District border. The map also identifies Duke's Ford and Aldridge's Shoal at the north end of Stark's Island. Another island, a few miles upriver, is named Montgomery's Island. In the same Atlas, on the Lancaster District map, Stark Island is mis-identified as Montgomery's Island. The land John Duke purchased from William Harrison is located directly east of Stark's Island in southwestern Lancaster County inside the wide counter-clockwise bend, one of the few places on the river which can be described by the words from the lease and release conveyance as "... on the North side of the Wateree River, butting and bounding to the South Eastward on the said same River..." This land is located about ten miles from the Great Falls of the Catawba River. The first figure of this note, the 1779 map of South Carolina, shows a road going northwestward from Camden up the Wateree River. It appears this road crosses the river at Dukes Ford. The Duke Ford was likely the first place below the Great Falls to safely cross the Wateree River. Aldridge Shoal was likely the upper limit of ordinary boat travel up river from the coast.

The land that bounded John Duke of Lancaster on the other side was originally granted to William Ingram. The warrant of survey was issued 07APR1752 and the plat was certified 23APR1752. The grant was for "... three hundred acres Situate lying and being in Craven County on the North side of the Wateree river butting and bounding to the Southwestward on the said river to the Northwestward part on Lands laid out to William Harrison and part on vacant lands ..."⁴³ This tract of land completes the river bend. William Ingram petitioned the South Carolina Council for the land on 07APR1752, the day the warrant of survey was issued. In his petition he stated: "...[he] came from the northeast last year and began a settlement on the north side of the Wateree River having built a home and Clear ground for planting ... [he] has a wife and four children ..."⁴⁴

The Harrison-Duke conveyance was copied into record 09SEP1765⁴⁵, twelve years after the transaction. Six days earlier, on 03SEP1765, John Duke petitioned the SC Council for an additional one hundred acres on the Wateree River. The petition was approved and a warrant of survey was issued. The survey was certified on 17JAN1766 by Jn^o. Belton⁴⁶, granted on 25SEP1766, and was described in the memorial as "...on Wateree Creek the Waters of Wateree bounded NE by Moses Kirkland's Land..."⁴⁷ The one hundred acres was located on the west side of the Catawba/Wateree River, a few miles southwest of John's other land. The records show the association between John Duke and Moses Kirkland continued, on 01AUG1769, John Duke petitioned for five hundred acres in the Saxe Gotha township, Berkley County. The survey was certified 24JAN1770. This land was "...butting and bounding SE and SW part on Moses Kirkland..."⁴⁸ The grant for this land has not been found, apparently John Duke abandoned or assigned this survey to someone else. John Duke petitioned for another five hundred acres on 07NOV1770. The survey was certified 22JAN1771 for land "...on a branch of Edistoe river called Rocky Creek..."⁴⁹ According to the memorial dated 30JUL1771, the tract of land was granted 12JUL1771.⁵⁰ The plat indicates this latter tract of land was bounded on all sides by vacant land; however, in a memorial dated 04FEB1772, Moses Kirkland indicated he was in possession of "... 300 Acres ... on a branch of Edistoe river Called the Rocky branch bounding SE on land laid out for John Dukes ... NW on land Held by Benjamin Kirkland ..."⁵¹ This tract of land is located in the southern part of present-day Edgefield County south of Johnston.

In 1778-1779, John Dukes was a potential petit juror of Camden District from east side of the Wateree River.⁵² During the same time period, a John Dukes was a potential petit juror in the Ninety Six District from the area between Turkey Creek and the Savannah River.⁵³ The latter John Duke was likely the person that is mentioned in the Edgefield District Deed Conveyance between John and Ann Arledge and Samuel Jenkins, 100 acres "... on Turkey Creek a branch of Stevens Creek, waters of Savannah River...to include the spot whereon the Old Houses stood which John Duke once lived ..."⁵⁴ The one hundred acres is identified elsewhere in the Edgefield deed books as being part of a 464 acre land grant to Richard Johnston on 01MAY1786.⁵⁵ Thus the tract of land where John Duke had houses and lived was several miles north of his 500 acre land grant. Moses Kirkland lived nearby, “...where in Coll. Moses Kirkland fomerly lived ... near the head of Turkey Creek ...”⁵⁶ ⁵⁷The land records indicate he and other Kirklands did own several tracts of land nearby. The 1778-1779 Jury Lists were generated from earlier district and precinct household tax lists, so it is possible, and perhaps likely, that the Wateree River and the Turkey Creek John Dukes entries refer to the same person.

A Jno. Duke witnessed on 04 and 06JAN1779, a Chester District, SC lease and release conveyance between Robert Duke of Kershaw/Fairfield and John Leonard for "... 300 acres on the waters of the Fishing Creek, between it and the Catawba River ..."⁵⁸ This land is in southeastern Chester District, SC across the river and a few miles north of John Duke's place in Lancaster District. The record represents the only known connection in the records between the two Duke men unless one counts the fact both John Duke and a Robert Duke registered land memorials in Charleston on the same day, 30JUL1771.

John Duke of Lancaster died sometime between 06JAN1779, the date of the above conveyance, and 21MAY1785, the date of the Stark land grant for the two islands which refers to the Widow Duke.

There is no record of John Duke aiding, or supplying, the patriots during the Revolutionary War. A John Duke enlisted in the South Carolina Continental Sixth Regiment in 1776 and was court-martialed 01APR1778 [National Archives #853, I have not viewed these records -- TLC]⁵⁹

There are at least two, maybe four, John Duke(s) who fought with the British and who are found in the South Carolina Loyalist lists. One, of English heritage, was deported to Canada. This is likely the John Duke listed with the Queen's Rangers from 25AUG1777 to 25AUG1780. When he was discharged, he claimed English nationality. Another John Duke served in Savannah, GA and the Ninety Six District, SC with the New Jersey Volunteers from before 24OCT1779 to 25APR1781. Still another, or the perhaps the same one since the service dates are not concurrent, served with Crenshaw Duke in the Camden Loyalist Militia under Colonel Robert English from 01JUN1781 to 12NOV1781. Finally, in Charleston, SC from 01MAR1781 to 31DEC1782, a John Duke was a porter at the refugee hospital.⁶⁰

John Duke of Lancaster Co., SC may have been the John Duke who served with Crenshaw Duke in the Camden Loyalist Militia. Many of those who did serve were neighbors of John's. His homestead and Wateree River ford was just a few miles downriver from the British post at Rocky Mount and lay directly in the path of much of the action. His apparent friend, Moses Kirkland, was a known loyalist. Two sons of John Duke's nearest neighbor in 1780, Richard Burge, actively participated in the burning of the house of Reverend John Simpson, a known patriot and minister of a Presbyterian church on Fishing Creek.⁶¹ However, John would likely be at least fifty years old in 1780 and too old to be drafted for active South Carolina militia duty. He was also too old for the British to press into active service⁶², as they did many of his neighbors. It doesn't appear any of his property was confiscated, as it might have been if he'd joined the loyalist militia and survived the conflict. However, if he had joined and was killed, then it was likely that his widow and children could avoid property confiscation. There are no data to indicate he supported either side, or provided either army with provisions. There is a possible explanation for his lack of support. Since he was directly in the path of the early action, perhaps the British stripped his farm of all stock and provisions. Thus, he would have been destitute, barely able to provide for his family and not likely to be able to sell farm produce to the armies.

John Duke of Lancaster's widow continued to live on the Wateree River land. She appears at least twice in the records after his death. In the January 1786 term of the Fairfield County Court, the minutes show a road was ordered to "... be laid out from Stark's Ferry to join the road from Widow Duke's to Nicholas Thompson's old place ..."⁶³ [Mrs. Dukes mentioned in a petition for a Wateree River ferry, 11FEB1788, S165005-00169]. Another probable reference to John's widow is the second will of Benjamin Perry, a close neighbor of the Duke family on the Wateree River. The will, dated 08OCT1789, is witnessed by Esther Dukes and Elizabeth Benson.⁶⁴ About 1790, Moses Duke the son of John Duke, had a daughter he named Esther, possibly after his mother. The records show the surname of the mother of the child was Benson,⁶⁵ likely the Elizabeth Benson who also witnessed the will.

Lynn Teague found names for three of John Duke's sons in the diary of David Gavin: "Great grand-father Gavin was injured by being security and had to sell property, and is buried on the N. East side of Catawba river in South Carolina on a plantation then owned by Zadie [sic, Zadoc] Perry, who had a brother named James Perry; the river was wide and deep here where Grandfather Gavin lived, he lived not far from the line of North & So. Ca. One of his neighbors was named Dukes, she had two sons John & Moses, Elijah died. My grand-father had moved from Meclenburg Co. No. Ca. near Rocky creek [sic] enters the Catawba river ..."⁶⁶ The two surviving brothers are known to genealogists as John Duke of Tattnall County, GA and Moses Duke of Barnwell County, SC.

The records show that Moses Duke, along with Andrew Armstrong and John Thompson, were executors of the estate of John Duke of Lancaster.⁶⁷ The existence of executors indicate John Duke of Lancaster left a will. Unfortunately, he left it in a Burnt County: Lancaster County, SC. No known copy of the will exists. Perhaps one day, a copy will be discovered in someone's attic, or it will appear in an EBAY auction, and there will be hard evidence identifying John Duke's daughters. For now, one can only speculate using the land and probate records. Moses Duke of Barnwell indirectly refers to one sister in his will: "... bequeath unto my nephew Moses D. Hughes, son of Micajah Hughes his executors administrators and assigns forever my negro boy slave called Ceaser ..."⁶⁸ The wife of Micajah Hughes, the sister of Moses Duke, is not named in the will; however, Joe Lineberger has traced Micajah Hughes to Tattnall County, GA, circa 1818. Joe suggests a search of the county land conveyances involving Micajah Hughes may reveal the name of his wife.

A number of loose ends remain concerning the family of John Duke of Lancaster. Tracing these may resolve some of the unanswered questions about John's family. The first loose end has already been discussed. This is the 100 acres of land "... which John Duke once lived ..." sold by William and Ann Arledge in Edgefield District, SC in 1788. Two years earlier, Thomas and Mary Duke sold 100 acres of land in Fairfield County on Wateree Creek⁶⁹, part of a tract of 150 acres originally granted to John Arledge in 1750. Thomas was the eldest known son of Robert Duke of Fairfield/Kershaw. His wife, Mary, was the daughter of John and Judith Dougherty. The conveyance does not indicate how Thomas and Mary Duke came into possession of the John Aldridge land, nor is there an earlier conveyance in the records concerning the transaction. The John Arledge grant was located nearby, if not adjacent to, the land granted to John Duke in 1766. John may have acquired the land in a trade, one that didn't make the record books. The absence of a transaction history to Thomas Duke may indicate a family conveyance or inheritance. There could be a tradition of this in the Duke family. John's son Moses bequeathed property to his nephews, Moses D. Hughes and Elijah Duke.⁷⁰

Although John's name is omitted, it appears the 1766 John Duke land grant was sold by Charles Pickett to John Ellison.⁷¹ The land description in the conveyance appears to be quoted from the John Duke land plat: "... a certain Plantation or tract of Land Containing one hundred Acres more or Less, Situate Lying and being on the Wateree Creek the waters of the wateree River Bounded N. E. by Moses Kirkland Land and all other sides by vacant Land when first Surveyed or run out and hath such shapes form and Marks, as appears by a plat thereof unto the grant Annexed under the hand of his Exelency Charles Grevil Montague Esquire bearing date the twenty fifth day of September anno Domini 1766 ..." In the conveyance Charles Pickett indicates he purchased the land from Robert Thompson in 1784. One of the three executors of John Duke's estate was named Thompson: John Thompson. Again, there is no transaction history to indicate how Robert Thompson became the owner of the land.

During the late 1790s, there were several state land grants to unknown Duke women in Barnwell District, SC. They seem connected to the sons of John Duke of Lancaster. Elizabeth Dukes was granted 406 acres on Jack Savannah 23JUL1801.⁷² It was surveyed 04FEB1796. Harriot Duke was granted 150 acres on Toby's Creek 10SEP1796.⁷³ It was surveyed 02MAR1796. On 15JUL1797, Claricy Dukes received her state grant for 106 acres on Fishing Branch of Hartless Creek.⁷⁴ The survey was done on 10FEB1797. Finally, Charity Creel was granted 500 acres on 07MAY1800⁷⁵, originally surveyed for Elizabeth Duke on 28FEB1797. The grants were all next to, or near, one of the Duke men's land. Either Moses or John was issued a grant on each of the days the three Duke women received theirs. The wife of John Duke of Tattnall was named Elizabeth. It is possible that she was the Elizabeth Duke mentioned above; however, I've rarely encountered land grants during this time period to married women. Several of the grants mention Thomas Loveless as a neighbor. Sarah Loveless witnessed several of the land sales by John and Moses Duke.

The Manning Genealogical Collection contains a transcription of a bible record for one of the descendants of Esther (Bensen/Duke) Dyches, the daughter of Moses Duke of Barnwell Co., SC. It lists the following children as siblings of Esther: "... Harriet Dukes, b. Mar. 15, 1793; Clarissa Dukes, b. Mar. 12, 1795; Moses Kirkland Dukes, b. Jan. 12, 1797, died June 5, 1821, and Sarah Dukes, b. March 4, 1800 ..." The transcription indicates the bible record was in possession of H. H. Dyches, Norway, SC.⁷⁶ The data of the transcript contain many known errors and the children do not seem consistent with Moses Duke's conveyances or probate. The numerals '9' and '7' are easily confused in the old script, it's possible the dates refer to the 1770s rather than the 1790s. Perhaps a re-examination of the bible record may show it actually refers to siblings, rather than children, of Moses Duke of Barnwell. Certainly, the similarity of names with those of the land grants seem to suggest some sort of connection. However, an argument against these young (coming of age in the 1790s) daughters for John Duke of Lancaster can be made using the US Census. Below are the listings:

Widow Duke may be the female in Moses Dukes' 1790 household; however, it is more likely the enumerated female is the mother of Moses' daughter Esther, who was apparently born that year. Admittedly, it is possible the Widow Duke remarried or died prior to the census enumeration and the girls are living in a different household. On the other hand, there are four young females in John Dukes' 1800 household that seems to support the Dyches bible record, except they are in John's household rather than Moses'.

The 1800 US census listings set the upper limit for the ages of Moses and John at forty-five, or a birth year of 1755 or later. In 1810, their age is listed as forty-five or older, yielding a birth year of 1765 or earlier.

In conclusion, while at least three sons of John Duke of Lancaster are known, there are numerous loose ends and questions that must be resolved before one can name John's daughters, even his known one, the wife of Micajah Hughes.

Robert Duke of Lancaster, Cedar Creek
Less than four miles miles north, or upstream, of John Duke of Lancaster's homestead and on the same side of the Wateree River, is the site of the next colonial grant to a person with the Duke surname. On 06MAR1764, Robert Duke petitioned for 150 acres of land on the Wateree River.⁷⁷ Plat for Robert Duke 18AUG1764

A warrant of survey was issued the same day and according to the plat, the survey was certified by John Belton on 18AUG1764;⁷⁸ however, according to the memorial exhibited by Robert Duke on 02JUL1765, the plat was certified 07MAY1765 and granted 03JUN1765.⁷⁹ The plat describes the land as: “ ... one hundred and fifty acres on the mouth of Cedar Creek in Craven County Bounded SW by Wateree River and on all other sides by vacant land ...” There are at least two Cedar Creeks in the Camden District. The one mentioned above is in southern Lancaster County and flows into the Wateree or Catawba River. The other is in southern Fairfield County and northern Richland County and is a tributary of the Broad River. Early Duke researchers often mis-located this grant to the latter location even though the plat clearly identifies Cedar Creek as a tributary of the Wateree River. The tract is long, narrow, and includes both sides of Cedar Creek as well as a tributary identified on the plat as Dry Branch. The Lancaster District map in the Mills Atlas locates a number of mills near the mouth of Cedar Creek. It is possible Robert Duke of Lancaster, Cedar Creek was more interested in acquiring water access for a mill than he was in obtaining land for crops.

The records don't indicate when or whether Robert Duke ever resided on this land. He is not on the South Carolina jury lists that were created before 1778 from the district and precinct household tax rolls.⁸⁰ Likewise, the records don't contain a deed conveyance for the next owner of the Robert Duke land grant. There is a 10MAR1786 state grant to James Bredin for two hundred and fifty acres of land which connects several other tracks of land owned by him.⁸¹ The Bredin grant identifies Robert Duke as an adjacent owner on two sides, northwest and northeast. James Bredin sold part of his land grant to Andrew McIlwain on 18JUL1806. The deed, recorded 23OCT1806, also included part of the Robert Duke colonial land grant. The above conveyance describes the land: “... that Tract or parcel of land Situate in the District of Lancaster aforesaid on the East Side of the Catawba River and on both Sides of the mouth of Cedar Creek ...” and there is a plat attached to the conveyance, which further details the land as: “... three hundred and eighty nine Acres the same being part of three tracts of land one of which was granted to Robert Duke ...”⁸² ⁸³ The attached plat was made for Patrick Graves and was recorded 15MAY1803. The Lancaster County records show James Bredin used the Duke land as part of a 18OCT1802 security bond⁸⁴ for the 28OCT 1803⁸⁵ purchase of several slaves owned by Patrick Graves. It appears Graves never took possession of the land. Two years after the McIlwain conveyance, 14DEC1808, Mary Bredin, the widow of James Bredin, and other heirs sold two hundred and eighty nine acres to George Hayes “in Lancaster District on both Sides of Cedar Creek and Rocky Creek on the North East side of the Catabaw [sic] River ...” This conveyance has an attached plat which describes the land as: “... part of two tracts of land the one granted to Robert Duke the 3^rd day of June 1765 for 150 Acres and one granted ...” The plat was made at the request of Mary Bredin.⁸⁶ ⁸⁷

James Bredin definitely possessed the Robert Duke Cedar Creek land in 1802. Given his earlier encompassing land grant, it is probable he was in possession of the land as early as 1786. None of the later conveyances mention how James Bredin acquired the Duke land and no Robert Duke to James Bredin conveyance has been found in the record books. There are several possibilities: one, the deed was never recorded or the record was lost, a good possibility because the early deed books of Lancaster County are incomplete; two, James Bredin acquired the tract of land through his wife, Mary; or three, he acquired it after the Revolutionary War as result of loyalist property confiscation. The first possibility can be easily argued. The second has merit considering Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek died in 1784. His land was nearby. Mary could have been his daughter. Robert Duke of Fairfield/Kershaw died at the end of the same year, but he left a will which does not mention the Cedar Creek land. Finally, Joe Lineberger found a record in the Carolina Genealogist which suggests a Robert Duke from the Camden District was a loyalist. The accusation was apparently made by Jesse Tilman, a close neighbor of Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek. We will probably never know which Robert Duke was granted land on Cedar Creek in Lancaster County, SC.

Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek, deceased before 30APR1784
A land grant for Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek does not exist in the SC records. Nor was a petition or plat made in his name. The Council Records show he acquired the five hundred acre tract of land from Benjamin Cook who, in turn, acquired t Robert Duke of Lancaster, land on Dry Creek

Robert Duke of Lancaster, land on Dry Creek

he land from Nathaniel Anderson, or Henderson as he was sometimes identified. The original precept of Nath'l Henderson for the five hundred acre tract was dated 06AUG1765, it was prolonged on 01SEP1767, and the plat was certified 26SEP1767 by Wm Glascock. The tract is described as “... five hundred acres situate lying and being on Dry Creek in Craven County, Bounding S. E. & S. W. on Wm Stuarts land and on all other sides on vacant land ...” The plat further states “or'd of co. for Benj'n Cook on 02MAR1773”.⁸⁸ According to the map of Lancaster District in Mills Atlas, Dry Creek is the first major southern tributary of Camp Creek. Camp Creek is the next tributary of the Catawba River upstream from the previously mentioned Cedar Creek. The Council records show that the five hundred acres was certified first for Nath'l Anderson on 07FEB1769,⁸⁹ later re-certified by Benjamin Cook on 01MAY1770,⁹⁰ and again on 05MAR1771⁹¹ and 02JUL1771⁹² by Robert Duke. Benjamin Cook received a land grant on 02APR1773⁹³ and memorialized the Dry Creek land on 05AUG1773.⁹⁴ The 500 acre tract is about three miles northeast of the 150 acre tract of Robert Duke of Lancaster, Cedar Creek.

The records don't show when or whether Robert Duke ever resided on this land. He is not on the South Carolina jury lists of 1778-9 which were created from the district and precinct household tax rolls during the late 1770s. However, it is interesting to find a Micajah Granger in the list for petit jurors east of the Wateree.⁹⁵ In the 1700s, Granger was an alternate spelling for Crenshaw and the two spellings are used interchangeably in the records. A Micajah Crenshaw, likely the same one, later had a 202 acre land grant adjacent to the Duke land on Dry Creek. The land was “... on a branch of Rocky Creek ...” surveyed by James Bredin on 24MAR1787 and recorded on 25MAY1787, and granted 19OCT1791.⁹⁶ By then, Robert Duke was deceased and the plat refers to Widow Duke as a bounding neighbor to the northwest along with Jesse Tillman. The surrounding neighbors listed, in a clockwise direction from Widow Duke, are: John Simpson, Wm. Curry, and Jesse Tillman

The Jesse Tillman 540 acre land grant, survey certified 07OCT1784, also refers to the Widow Duke's land, a northeast bounding neighbor. The Tillman tract locates the land “... in the District of Camden on Dry Creek a prong of Camp Creek and on the branches of Camp Creek and on the spring and drains of Rocky Creek waters of Cedar Creek ...” The surrounding neighbors listed, in a clockwise direction from Widow Duke, are: W. Grant, Geo. Currey, Widow King, Thomas Lewis, James Houzes, Jesse Tillman, and William Ashley.⁹⁷

Another neighbor of the Duke family was Francis Boykin who had at least three grants in the area. The first, certified 08NOV1784, is for 150 acres “on a branch of Dry Creek, waters of Camp Creek NE Side of the Catabaw [sic] River ..”⁹⁸ The neighbors are listed as David Nelson, Robert Duke, William Ashley, and Francis Boykin. The second and third grant were both certified on 17DEC1784, and total another 150 acres “... on both sides of Camp Creek ...”and “... springs and drains of Dry Creek ...” The last two grants are odd shaped and were probably used to consolidate and fill in Boykin's holdings in the area. Bounding neighbors mentioned on the latter two plats are David Nelson, James Rogers, Wm. Magara, Robert Duke, and Francis Boykin.⁹⁹

A single record exists concerning the death of Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek. It was found in the Kershaw County probate file for Robert Duke of Fairfield/Kershaw.¹⁰⁰ This mis-filing was fortunate, because otherwise it would have been filed with the rest of the probate papers for Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek in the Lancaster County, a burnt county, courthouse. The 30APR1784 record is an administrative bond for three thousand pounds sterling, a substantial bond during that time. It was made by George Wade and Frederick Kimbal, witnessed by Zach. Cantey, and secured the services of George Wade as the administrator of Robert Duke's estate. George Wade was listed as a potential Camden District grand juror for east of the Wateree, Waxall, in 1778-9.¹⁰¹ The Waxalls were the general area of SC and NC lying between the Waxall Creek and the Cain Creek, the next two tributaries of the Wateree to the north and up stream from Camp Creek and Dry Creek. The area was less than ten miles northwest of Robert Duke's land. Frederick Kimball is listed as a potential petit juror for east of the Wateree during that same time period.¹⁰²

Because of the association with Benjamin Cook and Micajah Crenshaw, it is likely that Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek, deceased before 30APR1784, was the one mentioned by Evelyn Duke Brandenberger (EDB) in her book: The Duke Family. EDB correctly identified his wife as Priscilla Crenshaw; however, as we shall see, she erred in the identification of their children by confusing them with those of Robert Duke of Fairfield/Kershaw.

Robert's widow, with their children, is not listed on the 1790 US Census for the Lancaster District portion of the Camden District, SC. Nor is there a 1790 listing for Micajah Crenshaw, although the 1800 US Census indicates he and his sons continued to live in the area. Analysis of the 1790 census for the neighbors of Widow Duke yield no clear results. It is probable the households in the Dry Creek area are missing from the 1790 US Census.

The 1790 census does list the household of Stephen Dukes, a suspected son of Robert and Priscilla Duke. However, he is listed with people who were known to live between Beaver and Cedar Creek, a region of the Lancaster District which is now in northern Kershaw County, SC. After 18JUL1787¹⁰³, perhaps prior to 1790, Stephen Duke married Mary McKee, the widow of James McKee. The land grant of James McKee was on Cedar Creek, not adjacent to, but within a few miles south of the Duke and Crenshaw land in the Dry and Rocky Creek area. After 21DEC1786, Mary McKee inherited land on Beaver Creek from her father Thomas Geothe.¹⁰⁴ Stephen and Mary were a couple by 13APR1793 when “Stephen Duke & Mary Duke his wife” sold twenty-five acres of the Thomas Geothe land grant to Reuben Roberts.¹⁰⁵ Listed near Stephen on the 1790 census is a Widow McKee. Her identity is unknown.

Stephen Dukes was born in 1766 (email 07/04/2002¹⁰⁶). By various accounts, the names and birth years of Stephen's children were: Joel (abt. 1789), Green R. (1790), Margaret (abt. 1794), Thomas G. (1795), Anna (), Delilah () Joseph (), Moses Stephen (abt. 1804).

A known brother of Stephen Duke was Green R. Duke, born 1773 according to various accounts. The names and birth years of his children were: Green R. (1798), Martha Jane (1801), Thomas Mitchell (1803), and Ann Young (1805).

By the providence of a sheet of paper tucked between the pages of an old Duke family bible, Jesse Duke was a known son of Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek. His family was reported first in Sentimental Journeys (1974) and repeated by Evelyn Duke Brandenberger (EDB) in her book: The Duke Family. According EDB, Jesse was born in 1770. His children were named: John M. (1791), Robert G. (1793), Stephen H. (1795), Littleberry Robert (1798), Edward S. (), Tempsey (1802) Seaborn J. (1804), Crenshaw (1807), Hiram (1809), Jesse M. (1821[sic?]), Jason (1813) and James Nelson (1823).

In the records, Jesse first appears on the 1800 U. S. census for Lancaster District, SC, the only Duke in the midst of a number of Crenshaw households. With Jesse are five young males, Jesse's wife and two other adult females, one older, possibly his mother Priscilla Duke.

On 07NOV1804, Jesse sold land to Thomas Macky. The tract is described: “...the certain tract or parcel of land supposed to contain One hundred & seventy five acres more or less lying the South side of dry Creek in the district aforesaid and N. E. side of Catawba River Bounded as followeth to wit beginning said Creek on a Hickory thence S. to a Mapole on the Branch thence up Sd Branch to the Seeons Bottom thense up S^d Bottom to Parkersons Line thence along S^d Line to Wm Currys Line thence along Currys Line to a poast Oak corner on Tillmons line thence along said Line to a Hickory line on the widow Dukes line thence along S^d Line to dry Creek thence up said Creek to the beginning. It being the plantation whereon Thomas Crenshaw formerly lived...”¹⁰⁷ This appears to be part of Widow Duke's land, south of Dry Creek. It also appears to include part of Micajah Crenshaw's 1791 land grant.

On January 1799, Micajah Crenshaw sold 100 acres of the 202 acres in his 1791 land grant to William Rowel. The land was described as: “...beginning at a stake on the plantation whereon the s^d Micaijah Crenshaw Sen^r now lives thence south to land belonging to John Massey, thence along said line to a red Oak corner on said line, thence William Currey's line to Rocky creek, thence up said creek to the mouth of Buffalo hollow, thence up said hollow to a pissimmon corner made by the said Micaijah Crenshaw and George Parkerson, thence NE to the said Micaijah Crenshaws Plantation where he now lives thence along said line to the beginning ...”¹⁰⁸

On 02JAN1804, the same year Jesse Duke sold his land, the elder Micajah Crenshaw gave his homestead to his son Micajah Crenshaw Junior. The land is described in this manner: “... whereon I [Micajah Crenshaw Senior] now live ... one hundred fifty acres ... on the south side of Dry Creek ...”¹⁰⁹ In this area, the Robert Duke land grant lay on both sides of Dry Creek. This conveyance implies that Micajah Crenshaw Senior lived on Dry Creek, likely on land once owned by Robert Duke, rather than on his 1791 land grant . There was no release of dower attached to this deed for the Crenshaw homestead, as one would expect.

Micajah wasn't the only Crenshaw to sell Duke land. On 19JAN1809, Joseph Crenshaw of Jackson County, GA conveyed to Henry Horton: “... One Hundred Acres More of Less lying and being in Lancaster Dist. South Carolina on The North Side of Dry Creek the Waters of Catawba River being the Northeast Side of said River It being a part of a tract of five hundred Acres Originally Granted to Benjamin Cooks Beginning on a Ceder Corner on the Bank of the aforesaid Creek from thence to a Hickory Corner in N. E. Corse to a Hickory Station from thence to another Hickory ditto from thence to a Hickory Corner from thence in S. E. Course to a black Jack Corner being the Dividing Corner on the Original line thence a S. W. Course to the ??? a Water Oak Station in a small Drain said course to the old original Line thence a N. W. course along the Old Line to the beginning cedar Corner ...”¹¹⁰

Henry Horton already owned 113 acres northwest of this tract. On 19MAR1807 he purchased the Francis Boykin 1786 land grant from Samuel Crenshaw of Jackson County, GA.¹¹¹ That county must have been a popular destination for sons of Dry Creek settlers. Jesse Duke moved there too. The pair, Jesse Duke and Samuel Crenshaw, were on the 1808 Capt. John C. Watkins tax defaulters list for Jackson County, GA.¹¹²

*The first listing for Micajah Crenshaw Junior was crossed out on the 1810 Census.

Micajah Crenshaw and his namesake son continued to live on Dry Creek. The senior Crenshaw and his wife are likely buried there. Micajah Crenshaw, no longer a junior, must have had a family crises in 1823. On 24MAY1823 he mortgaged his 150 acre homestead plus his household items to Simon Bowden, a storekeeper in the area.¹¹³ The following year, on 02NOV1824, he borrowed against the corn in his crib, perhaps a desperate thing to do in late fall.¹¹⁴ He didn't lose his farm. Ten years later, on 25APR1834, Micajah Crenshaw, and his wife Hapsey, sold seventy-six acres to James Bailey.¹¹⁵ A plat of this 76 acres is in the records; it indicated the land was originally granted to Nathaniel Henderson.¹¹⁶ As described earlier, the Benjamin Cook/Robert Duke land grant was platted for Nathaniel Henderson. On 18NOV1839, the couple sold the remaining 100 acres to the same person.¹¹⁷ Sometime after that, perhaps as late as 1851 according to descendant James Fort, Micajah Crenshaw moved with his family to FL.

The Crenshaw family sold a total of 376 acres on Dry Creek. Not bad, considering the records show them acquiring only 202 acres. The total becomes 541 acres when the 175 acres sold by Jesse Duke are included. With 150 acres unaccounted for and the possible exception of a widow's dowry of one-third: the 175 acres sold by Jesse Duke, the Crenshaws owned most if not all of the 500 acres of Cook/Duke land grant on Dry Creek. Rather than being Micajah Crenshaw's original SC homestead, his 202 acre land grant likely augmented the land he already owned, perhaps acquired at Robert Duke's death or soon after.

How did Micajah Crenshaw acquire the Duke land? The records suggest two possibilities. Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek died before 30APR1784. The 07OCT1784 Jesse Tilman plat names Widow Duke as a bounding neighbor. The plat dated 08NOV1784 by Francis Boykin names Robert Duke as a bounding neighbor. In 1784, SC followed the English rule of primigenture where the eldest son inherits his father's land. The Boykin plat bounding on the north side of Dry Creek could have referred the new owner of the land, the eldest son of Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek, also named Robert. A later plat by Micajah Crenshaw, dated 24MAR1787 also refers to the Widow Duke, but that could easily refer to the land on the south side of Dry Creek which was allowed her through the right of dower. This interpetation of the records would have the eldest son selling the land to the Crenshaws prior to 1800, perhaps as early as 1785. As a caveat, the surveyors sometimes refered to the names on earlier grants when naming bounding neighbors. However, in this case, those names would be William Cook, receiver of the original grant, or Nathaniel Henderson, petitioner of the original plat, rather than Robert Duke. In any case, the dismal lack of records concerning the transfer of land between Benjamin Cook, Robert Duke, and Micajah Crenshaw argue for a close family relationship between the three.

A second possibility would have Robert Duke, or his sons, losing the land because of their loyalist activities. The records indicate Cranshaw Duke, and pehaps more of the sons were loyalists. Joe Lineberger discovered a record in the Carolina Genealogist that suggests a Robert Duke from the Dry Creek area was a loyalist. Perhaps the Crenshaws acquired the land to prevent it from being confiscated. Retribution against loyalists eased in the decade following the end of the Revolutionary War and was nearly non-existant by 1790.

There was a young Robert Duke in the area at that time. He, along with Micajah Crenshaw and Britton Chappell, witnessed a 14NOV1792 deed between John Roper of Richmond County, NC and Cranshaw Duke. The land Cranshaw Duke bought is described as: “... on the South Side of the Catawba River ...”¹¹⁸ However, this description is corrected on a later deed dated 03JAN1816 when Cranshaw Duke sells the land.¹¹⁹ The later deed describes the land as being northeast of the Catawba River on Crooked Creek in Lancaster District. Crooked creek was a branch of Campcreek just north of the Dry Creek and the Robert Duke of Lancaster, Dry Creek acreage.

Crenshaw Duke's first post-war appearance in the Lancaster deed books was on 16NOV1791 when he witnessed the transfer of land on Beaver Creek granted to Elizabeth Gougher [sic: Geothe] by Edward and Jane Sims to Alexander Carruth.¹²⁰ Elizabeth Gougher was the sister of Mary Geothe, the wife of Stephen Duke.¹²¹ At that time, the Stephen Duke family lived nearby on Beaver Creek land granted to Thomas Geothe, the father of Elizabeth and Mary.

On 25JUL1797 Ashbourne Sims sold land on the Persimmon Branch of Cedar Creek near the modern border of Lancaster and Kershaw Counties to William Duke. William was deceased by 19MAR1810, when his heirs are listed as adjacent neighbors on a deed conveyance.¹²² According to Joe Lineberger, William Duke's wife was Nancy Cauthen. ¹²³

*The 1820 U. S. Census for Lancaster District, SC was ordered by first letter of surname.

By 1820, most of the Lancaster District, SC Dukes had emigrated to other places: Crenshaw Duke likely went to TN, Stephen, Green R. (deceased 30OCT1818), and Jesse went to Georgia. Robert Duke was gone. The 1820 US Census for Lancaster District, SC lists only two Dukes: William and Prissilla. The first-letter surname ordering makes it difficult to determine where they lived or how close they lived to one another. However, the records show on 06DEC1824 a Precilla Duke was granted land on Cedar Creek not far from the land William Duke purchased from Ashbourne Sims.¹²⁴ She is likely one of the William Duke heirs mentioned above. Given her age listed on the census, the teenage children in her household are likely siblings. Priscilla is not listed on the 1830 US Census for Lancaster district, SC. Perhaps she was married by then. However, there is a Robert Duke listed, age 20-30, which is consistent with the teen-aged boy listed with Prissilla on the 1820 US Census.

Robert appears again on the 1850 US Census for Lancaster Co., SC, this time with a daughter Priscilla, aged 16. According to James Fort, a descendant, this Robert Duke, along with Micajah Crenshaw Junior and a number of other Dry and Cedar Creek families, emigrated to Florida.

1850 US census for Lancaster Co., SC, 15OCT1850, enumerator: K. G. Billings, #186

Robert Duke of Fairfield, deceased before 28JAN1785
Robert Duke of Fairfield has been referred to by many names: RD of Kershaw Co., SC, because some of his probate papers, including his will, is on file there; RD of Camden District, because that is where he lived and died; RD of Fairfield District, because it is the specific part of the Camden District where he lived and died; and finally RD of Kershaw/Fairfield, because it removes the ambiguity of the others and of the other Robert Dukes in the same region. This note will use Robert Duke of Fairfield even though that part of the old Fairfield District, SC where he lived and died is now part of Richland County.

[INFORMATION BELOW HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED AND IS KNOWN TO CONTAIN ERRORS, USE WITH CAUTION -- TLC]

Robert Duke of Camden
- Born: unknown
- Married: Unknown date, to Nancy Unknown
- Died: Circa 1785
- Known Children: Thomas, Rachael, Moses, Aaron, Hestor, Anne, Jesse
- Suspected children: Jeremiah
- Known siblings:
- Suspected siblings: John
- Parents:

Robert Duke of Camden died between December 10, 1784 when he signed his will and January 28, 1785 when the will was recorded by probate court. We have written extensively about Robert Duke of Camden in the research note concerning his Last Will and Testament. During the Revolutionary War, Robert Duke of Camden sold livestock and foodstuff to the military. A record of the several transactions can be found in the South Carolina Revolutionary War Account Audited File number 2067A, account number 252

Robert Duke, Junior
- Born: Before 1765
- Married:
- Died: After 1790
- Known Children:
- Suspected siblings: Crenshaw (or Granger), Stephen, and Jesse
- Suspected parents: Robert Duke of Lancaster, Prescilla Cranshaw

Robert Duke, Junior, is known because of his service in the Revolutionary war and his subsequent claim for pay. His service record can be found in the South Carolina Revolutionary War Account Audited File Number 2067A. This File contains two accounts and two indents for Robert Duke, the first, Number 251 was signed by Robert Duke, Junior. The second account, Number 252, was signed by Robert Duke and contains a note authored by Moses Duke. We believe the second account belongs to Robert Duke of Camden who had a son named Moses Duke.

Sometimes a young person is called Junior by others to differentiate him or her from an older person with the same name. This not the case with the files. The records were all for persons named Robert Duke. The Robert Duke of Account Number 251 named himself by signing the record and adding Junior after his name, thus, we believe, implying his father was also named Robert Duke.

Robert Duke, Junior was paid for forty-eight days on horse, sixty-two days on foot, and thirty-two days on foot with the rank of Lieutenant. This service occurred during 1781 and 1782 with Colonel Thomas Taylor's Regiment under Captain William Goodwin and Lieutenant Thomas Trap. The first service was "at the Congaree and Junerper", the second, "at Orange Burg and Ft. Nimrod", and the last, as a Lieutenant, "at Orange Burgh". The service account was certified by "Thos Taylor". We believe Robert Duke, Junior would have to be at least 16 years old to accomplish all this. So we conservatively place his birth as before 1765.

He made oath and signed the account as "Robt Duke Junior" on December 21, 1783. The file also contains a note, signed in 1787, as "Robt Duke Junior", where he requests the proceeds from the Indenture be delivered to William Simmons. After October 27, 1787 and prior to January 17, 1788, it appears Robert Duke, Junior assigned the remainder of the Indenture to William Dortch in payment, perhaps partial, for 445 acres of land.

The 445 acres granted to William Dortch were on Cedar Creek. His neighbors are listed as Ben Sims, Jacob Bethinie, Hoigwood, and A. Canady. The plat depicts Cedar Creek running through the land from northeast to the southwest, making about a forty five degree angle with geographic north. There were two Cedar Creeks in the Camden District. One is in the southern part of present-day Lancaster County. It flows mostly west to the Catawba, or Wateree, River; however, there is a portion that flows southwest. The other Cedar Creek begins in Southern Fairfield County and flows through northwestern Richland County to empty into the Broad, or Congaree, River. The South Carolina census for 1790 lists the following heads of household in the Fairfield District: Benjamin Sims, Jacob Bethany, and Alexander Kenneday. In addition, there were four Haigwood and two Dortch households listed in Fairfield. Although we believe the 445 acres were likely located in southern Fairfield District or northern Richland District; the question of which Cedar Creek is still being investigated.

Robert Duke, Junior had to be close to William Simmons, to trust him with his indent money. Perhaps they served together in the Revolutionary War. There was a Robert Duke from South Carolina that served under a Captain William Simmons, Colonel Robert Goodwyn, and General Williamson during the Florida Expedition, circa 1778. This Robert Duke apparently moved to Mississippi after the war.

In 1792, a Robert Duke signed as a witness for a Lancaster District deed conveyance between John Roper and Micajah Crenshaw. We believe, with no proof, this was very likely Robert Duke, Junior and that the deed links him to the Crenshaw family and to Robert Duke of Lancaster.

There are two heads of household listed on the 1790 South Carolina census named Robert Duke, one for Richland District and one for Fairfield. We believe, with no proof, Robert Duke, Junior is listed in the Richland District.

Robert Duke, son of Elizabeth
- Born: before 1774
- Married:
- Died:
- Known Children:
- Known siblings: Samuel, Sarah, Margaret, Nancy, Celey, and Rodney
- Parents: Unknown Duke and Elizabeth Unknown

Robert Duke, son of Elizabeth is likely listed 1790 South Carolina census, in Fairfield District. If this is true, his birth date was prior to 1774. He is also named in the 1815 probate record for Elizabeth Duke along with his surviving brothers and sisters.

Robert Duke, son of Thomas Duke
- Born: January 1774 - December 1786
- Married: Suspected wife: Ann
- Died:
- Known Children:
- Known siblings: Mary, John D., and James
- Suspected siblings: Jeremiah
- Parents: Thomas Duke and Mary Dougherty

According to the 1790 South Carolina census, Robert Duke, son of Thomas Duke, was likely born after 1774. On the 1790 census Thomas Duke had 5 males in the household under the age of 16 and none over that age. Robert was one of the older sons of Thomas Duke and Mary Dougherty. On December 5, 1807, Robert signed a receipt for his share of his father's movable estate. To do this he had to be at least 21. With this information, we can place an upper bound on his birth year of 1786.

Reuben C. Duke, deceased before 13AUG1827
Unknown Brother, no issue
Frances Duke married James D. Craig
Anna Duke married James Armstrong
Catherine Duke married John Smith
Charlotte Duke unmarried
[01JUL1828 testimony of D. B. Lee, Fairfield District, SC, Probate Papers for Reuben C. Duke, Number 699, thanks, Bill Duke for the data]

Aaron Dukes 1800 11010 30010 0 0 #227 Fairfield, SC Aaron Duke 1810 30110 21110 0 1 #193 Fairfield, SC Aaron Duke 1820 000201 01101 #147 Fairfield, SC Aaron Duke 1830 0100000010000 0000100010000 00 #359 Fairfield, SC

The Children of Robert Duke of Camden District, SC
Robert Duke named five children specifically in his will: Thomas, Rachel, Moses, Aaron, and Jesse. We believe, but have yet to prove, the children are named in order, oldest first. Two additional girls: Hester or Easter and Anne, are named along with Jesse in subsequent probate court data. In total, there are seven named and documented children. We argue that, at the time of the will, the seven were all of Robert's living children.

In the will, Robert directed his slaves, livestock, equipment, all other movable estate, and two tracts of land to be sold and the proceeds divided among his "six youngest children". He leaves Moses, Aaron, and Jesse tracts of land, bare of "moveable estate"; that is, no livestock and no farming equipment. In our opinion, Robert, being an experienced and successful farmer, would not leave his very young "beloved sons" tracts of land without providing operating capital for seed, tools, and livestock. To do so, would doom them to failure. They surely shared in the proceeds of the sale of the movable estate and were part of the "six youngest children".

Robert specifically excluded Thomas from the inheritance by giving him one shilling. We believe the phrase "six youngest children" to be just another mechanism for excluding Thomas, giving the proceeds to the other six children.

In the will, Robert named Thomas, Rachael, then Moses. When the will was made, Moses was described as under the age of 21. We believe if there were other living children, age 21 or older, Robert would have named them along with Thomas and Rachael, even if he planned to exclude them, as he did in the case of the oldest son, Thomas.

According to the will, Moses was not 21 on December 10, 1784, the date of Robert Duke's will, but he was 21 when it was proved, January 28, 1785. We know this because on that date he legally signed as a witness. This places his birth between December 10, 1763 and January 28, 1764.

Anne, Hester, and Jesse had to be between the ages of 14 and 21 to need, and to request, a guardian on May 12, 1789. This places their birthdates between May 12, 1768 and May 12, 1775. It is extremely likely, although, admittedly, not necessary, if there were other children between the ages of 14 and 21 they would have also requested a guardian at the same time.

Jesse is described in the will as the "youngest son", therefore Robert had no sons born later than Jesse. It is possible, but not probable, that Robert had daughters born later than Jesse. If there were any minor children under the age of 14 with a claim to the portion of the estate that was settled in 1789, a guardian would have been appointed for them by the probate court. We could find no such court action.

Aaron was listed in the will after Moses and before the "youngest son", Jesse. He did not request a guardian with Hester, Anne, and Jesse and he is not mentioned in the probate. We believe Aaron was not 21 when the will was written but attained the age of 21 before May 12, 1789, when the guardian request was made. Moses and Aaron could have been twins, so we must set Aaron's birth date between December 10, 1763 and May 12, 1768. We believe Moses and him to be the Robert's only surviving children born during that period. The age of Aaron Duke is listed as 86 on the 1850 US Census for Fairfield District, SC. This would yield a birth year of about 1764.

In summary, we believe that if Robert had unnamed living children over 21, he would have specifically mentioned them in the will even if he planned to exclude them. If he had unnamed living children under 21 on May 12, 1789, they would have been named in subsequent probate court proceedings. We believe Aaron and Moses to be the only children that turned 21 after the will was written and prior to May 12, 1789.

The Wife of Robert Duke of Camden District, SC
Robert Duke, in his last will and testament, refers to his "beloved wife Nancy". We know this much for sure. It has been claimed that Nancy was Robert's second wife. We have not encountered a convincing argument for this. And we have found no data to substantiate any wife other than Nancy. Another researcher believes that Nancy was a popular nickname for Ann during this time period. There may be an example of this in the William Harrison to John Duke indenture and release. In the record, William Harrison refers to his wife as Nancy; however, she signed her name as Ann. The wife of Robert Duke is believed to have a witnessed a deed transfer along with her son, Aaron. As witness to the conveyance, she used the name, Nancy.

In the will, Robert left his "beloved wife, Nancy" only the use of a certain slave during her lifetime. She inherited no estate, no tracts of land. It is possible that she owned property prior to the death of Robert, but not likely, given the customs prevailing at the time. A check of Lancaster District land grant and plat data proves the "Widow Duke" listed as an adjacent land owner on both the Micajah Crenshaw and Jesse Tillman plat surveys, is not Nancy, the widow of the Robert Duke of Camden District. The Jesse Tillman Survey was certified on October 7, 1784, several months before Robert Duke of Camden died. More information on this Widow Duke can be found in another genealogy note.

Nancy's surname is unknown. Just after the death of Robert, Daniel Muse, Junior, gave Jesse, Robert's youngest son, the land on Sawney's Creek. Because this land is mentioned in the will, it was apparently discussed prior to Robert's death. We suggest Muse may be an appropriate direction of search for her surname.

The Land of Robert Duke of Camden District, SC
The South Carolina Archive records show, prior 1785, seven land grants in Craven County were issued to a person, or persons, named Robert Duke:

June 3, 1765, 150 acres on the mouth of Cedar Creek, tributary of the Wateree
July 13, 1770, 100 acres on Twenty Five Mile Creek, adjacent Foy and Bradley
July 12, 1771, 100 acres on north side of Twenty Five Mile Creek
May 7, 1774, 100 acres on Twenty Five Mile Creek
June 23, 1774, 300 acres on Fishing Creek
September 9, 1774, 100 acres on Flatt Creek, adjacent to Ferguson
September 9, 1774, 100 acres on Horsepen Branch

The 150 acre tract on Cedar Creek was not mentioned in Robert Duke of Camden's will. So, if the tract of land was granted to him, he sold it prior to 1785. In 1786, James Breden added a land grant to his holdings that were adjacent to the Robert Duke grant, surrounding it on at least two sides. In 1806 James Bredin sold part of the Robert Duke Cedar Creek grant to Andrew McIlwain. Later, in 1806, the heirs of James Bredin, including his widow Mary, sold the rest of it to George Hays. We know the Bredins owned the Robert Duke tract by 1803. We are searching for an earlier conveyance that will help us identify which Robert Duke originally owned the land. We believe the time and the location of the grant make Robert Duke of Camden the most likely candidate of the several Robert Dukes who lived in the Camden District. Robert Duke conveyed the 100 acres of land granted to him on May 7, 1774 to Henry Miley by lease and release recorded December 29-30, 1774. The land was situated on Twenty Five Mile Creek.

According to the memorial, the 100 acres of land granted to Robert Duke on July 12,1771 was conveyed by him to William Simmons on September 28, 1772.

At least three tracts of land were conveyed to Robert Duke of Camden by memorialists.

July 13, 1775, from Thomas Duke, 100 acres on Twenty Five Mile Creek
July 13, 1775, from Samuel Nipper, 100 acres on Round Top Branch
July 13, 1775, from William Simmons, 300 acres on Twenty Five Mile Creek

The tributary of the Wateree, or Catawba River, called Twenty Five Mile Creek has a major fork near the point where the three modern-day South Carolina counties: Fairfield, Kershaw, and Richland meet. The south branch of the fork, draining northern Richland County is called Rice Creek and the north branch, draining southern Fairfield County before it flows through Richland County and, afterwards, Kershaw County retains the name Twenty Five Mile Creek. Round Top is a south branch of Twenty Five Mile Creek in Richland County. Near Round Top Branch is another branch of Twenty Five Mile Creek called Flatt Branch that enters Kershaw before flowing into Twenty Five Mile Creek. All but three of the Robert Duke land grants were in this area, east and north of Blythewood, SC. All three land grants conveyed to Robert Duke by other memorialists are also in this area. Of the other land grants, the one on Horse Pen Branch is a few miles north of this area in Fairfield County near Sawney's Creek. The Fishing Creek land grant is in southern Chester County on the west side of the Wateree. The 1765 grant can be found on the East side of the Wateree in southern Lancaster County on Cedar Creek. We have yet to prove the Lancaster tract was granted to Robert Duke of Camden. However we are inclined to believe it was his.

The tracts of land mentioned in the Robert Duke's will are: "a plantation and a tract of land on 25 mile creek", "a tract of land on Twaney's Creek", and two tracts to be sold at "public vantage": a tract of land "near the mouth of Fishing Creek" and a tract of land "near Carey's old saw mill". The will implies these four tracts are the extent of the land Robert owned or controlled at the time of his death.

The "plantation and tract of land on 25 Mile Creek" consisted of 600 acres located near the borders between Kershaw, Fairfield, and Richland Counties, SC. Of the six hundred acres, three hundred were originally granted to William Simmons. After the death of Robert Duke, in compliance with his will, the tract was divided by heirs, Moses and Aaron Duke, each taking 300 acres. Moses took the upper, or west, half.

Jesse Duke inherited a 150 acre tract on "Sawney's Creek." This land was actually provided by Daniel Muse, Junior rather than Robert Duke. Apparently, the mention in the will was a mechanism to insure that Jesse, a minor, would receive the land when he became of age. The headwaters of Sawney Creek lie in eastern Fairfield County, SC. The creek then flows into Kershaw County and into the Wateree, or Catawba, river. The deed conveyance was recorded in Fairfield County.

The tract of land "near Carey's old sawmill" is likely the 100 acres on Horsepen Branch that Moses Duke of Fairfield District, SC (and later of Richland District, SC) "as heir and administrator of the estate of Robert Duke, dcd," sold to Mary Turner in 1796, recorded in Kershaw County. The source of Horsepen Branch is in Fairfield County. It then flows into Kershaw County and into Sawney's Creek, a tributary of the Wateree river. According to Mills Atlas, published in 1825, Horsepen Branch joins Sawney's Creek less than a mile from Crim's Mill. We believe, but have yet to prove, that Crim's Mill was built on the site of Carey's or Curry's old saw mill near where the old Catawba Path crosses Sawney's Creek.

The Fishing Creek is in Chester County, SC. The "mouth of Fishing Creek" lies in Southeastern Chester County where the creek flows into the Wateree River. Apparently, the 300 acre tract of land had been sold by Robert Duke on a Lease and Release conveyance that was still pending at the time the will was written.

Elizabeth Unknown
- Born: before 1755
- Died before May 24, 1815
- Suspected husband: Jeremiah Duke
- Died: before May 24, 1815
- Known Children: Robert, Samuel, Sarah, Margaret, Nancy, Celey, Rodey

The application for a Letter of Administration concerning the estate of Elizabeth Duke was made in Fairfield District, South Carolina on May 24, 1815. Elizabeth died prior to that date. She apparently was a widow for a number of years. She is listed on both the 1800 and the 1810 United States census for Fairfield District, South Carolina. Two of her sons, Robert and Samuel are listed on the 1790 census. It is likely she and her at-home children were included as part of Samuel's household. From later census data we know Samuel was less than 25 years old in 1790 when his household contained four males under the age of sixteen and six females.

There are very few records prior to 1790 concerning Elizabeth and her husband. It is not likely she was the Elizabeth Duke that witnessed the Ephraim Mabry will in 1778. Testimony associated with the Mabry probate places that Elizabeth Duke as a resident of Wilkes County, Georgia in the late 1780s. Also, it is not likely she is Elizabeth Ragland, wife of Adam Duke. We believe Adam spent little time in South Carolina. Like many of his relatives, he took advantage of South Carolina's land grant policy on his way through the colony to Georgia. In South Carolina, a single head of household was entitled to a first time grant of 100 acres. Adam was granted 100 acres on the south side of the Broad River. The tract was surveyed on April 25, 1773, granted on August 31, 1774, and deeded it to John Armstrong, the person who surveyed the plat, on February 15, 1775. Later, when the estate of his wife's father was settled, Adam apparently avoided a trip to South Carolina by selling the tract of land Elizabeth inherited from John Ragland to Henry Duke on April 25, 1775, Henry, in turn, sold it to Aaron Looncock on July 24 and 25, 1775. Additionally, it appears Elizabeth (Ragland) Duke, married Jacob Curry after Adam Duke died. Her son, James sued the heirs of Jacob Curry in Amite County, Mississippi during the 1820s.

We are unable to find a record that names the spouse of Elizabeth Duke. Despite the absence of supporting data, several potential candidates have been suggested for her husband. Our choice for her significant other is Jeremiah Duke who, we believe, was a close relative of Robert Duke of Camden, possibly a son who died prior to December 10, 1784, the date of Robert's Last Will and Testament.

Thus far, we have found only three records in South Carolina that name a Jeremiah Duke. The three records concern two individuals. One record was a receipt in the Thomas Duke probate file. We describe this record in the last paragraph of the research note on Thomas Duke and his family. The other two records are older and involve the 1773 land grant of Samuel Nipper. Both the memorial and the plat describe the tract as bounded on the northeast by Jeremiah Duke and William Simmons. In 1775, Samuel Nipper conveyed his grant of land to Robert Duke. The 100 acre tract was on both sides of Round Top Branch, a tributary of Twenty Five Mile Creek. We believe the Nipper land became part of the 600 acre plantation home that Robert Duke bequeathed to his sons, Moses and Aaron. In any event, this places the

older Jeremiah in the right place and the right time to be the husband of Elizabeth Duke. We continue to search for data to prove this.

The Elizabeth Duke estate settlement was recorded December 2, 1818. John Brown was administrator of the estate. The Administration Bond of $500 was signed by John Brown, John D. Dukes, and Jesse Horn. The appraisers were James Cammer, Robert Duke, and Isaac Perry, chosen from a pool of five that also included Moses Dukes and Jesse Horn.

Buyers at Elizabeth Duke's estate sale were Lewis Duke, James Kennedy, John Simmely, Ralph Wilson, James Norris, James Craig, James Duke, John Wilson, Samuel Duke, Isah Neeley, John Simons, John Simmons, Sarah Wells, and Eli Elkins.

The heirs of Elizabeth Duke were Robert Dukes, Sam'l Dukes, Sarah Wells, Margaret Perry, Nancy Vann, Celey Horn, and Rodey Simmons, each receiving $14.225. The husband of Margaret was Lemuel Perry.

The final accounting shows both Elijah Jones and Lewis Duke received a judgment against the Elizabeth Duke estate. The document implies Sarah Wells was involved in a lawsuit with Lewis Duke, perhaps Elijah Jones also. Her lawyer fees were paid from the estate. We have not located the details of the court proceedings. There is a July 14, 1818 entry in the minutes of the Fairfield District, SC Court of Common Pleas; Sarah Wells vs Admor of the Estate of Elizabeth Duke. There was a decree for the defendant. We found no listing for Elijah Jones or Lewis Duke vs the estate of Elizabeth Duke in any court document.

In the absence of concrete data, we explain the documents as follows. Elijah Jones and Lewis Duke both had claims against the Elizabeth Duke estate which the administrator agreed to pay. The family disagreed with the claims and on their behalf, Sarah Wells hired a lawyer and sued the administrator. She lost. Both Elijah and Lewis received judgment in their favor. Since Sarah sued on behalf of the heirs, her lawyer fees were paid out of the estate before it was divided.

1The Register Book for the Parish Prince Frederick Winyaw, reprint, Southern Historical Press, 1982, page 21

2The Register Book for the Parish Prince Frederick Winyaw, reprint, Southern Historical Press, 1982, page vi

3For a good reference on the life and times of an Anglican itinerant minister see: The Carolina Backcountry on the Eve of the Revolution, The Journal and Other Writings of Charles Woodmason, Angelican Itinerant, Edited by Richard J. Hooker, U of NC, 1953

4The Register Book for the Parish Prince Frederick Winyaw, reprint, Southern Historical Press, 1982, page 40

5The Register Book for the Parish Prince Frederick Winyaw, reprint, Southern Historical Press, 1982, page 20-21

7The Welsh Tract in South Carolina was created in 1736 by the Council to encourage poor Welsh Protestant settlers. Some came directly from Wales, but many came from the Welch Track located in Pennpek, NewCastle County, Pennsylvania. This part of Pennsylvania became Delaware in 1776.

8Holcomb, Brent H.; Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume II:1748-1752, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 41.

11Holcomb, Brent H.; Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume III:1752-1753, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 5.

12Holcomb, Brent H.; Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume III:1752-1753, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 19.

14Langley, Clara A.; South Carolina Deed Abstracts 1719-1772, Volume III, Southern Historical Press, 1984,page 362 [H-3, page 48]

15Holcomb, Brent H.; South Carolina Deed Abstracts 1773-1778, page 225 [W-4, page 313-315]

16Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book B, page 71 [John Chesnut to James Perry, 250 A., May 9, 1778]

18Clara A. Langley, South Carolina Deed Abstracts 1719-1772 , Volume II, Southern Historical Press, 1984, page 320 [O-O, page 299]

21Moss, Bobby Gilmer: Roster of South Carolina Patriots in the American Revolution, Genealogical Publishing Co., Baltimore, MD, 1983

22Ramsay, David, Ramsay's History of South Carolina, reprint, complete in one volume, Walker, Evans & Co., 1858

23Clara A. Langley, South Carolina Deed Abstracts 1719-1772 , Volume II, Southern Historical Press, 1984, page 320 [O-O, page 299]

29SC Colonial Memorials, Volume 11, Page 152, Item 1, SC Dept. of Archives entry

30Hendrix, Ge L. C. and Lindsay, Morn M., The Jury Lists of South Carolina, 1778-1779, GPC, 1980, page 31

31Hendrix, Ge L. C. and Lindsay, Morn M., The Jury Lists of South Carolina, 1778-1779, GPC, 1980, page 37

32The Register Book for the Parish Prince Frederick Winyaw, reprint, Southern Historical Press, 1982, page 221

33SC Accounts Audited of Claims Growing Out of the Revolutionary War, AA-2066, SC Dept. of Archives entry 0015-003-0037-00521

34Warren, Mary B., South Carolina Jury Lists, 1718 Through 1783, Heritage Papers, 1977, page 50

36Holcomb, Brent H.; Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume II:1748-1752, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 124.

42Lancaster District, SC Deed Book A, pages 101-104 [John Miles to Thomas Thompson, 09APR1783]

44Holcomb, Brent H.; Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume III:1752-1753, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 26

51Hendrix, Ge L. C. and Lindsay, Morn M., The Jury Lists of South Carolina, 1778-1779, GPC, 1980, page 50, SC Colonial Memorials, Volume 11, page 119, Item 1, 04FEB1772,

52Hendrix, Ge L. C. and Lindsay, Morn M., The Jury Lists of South Carolina, 1778-1779, GPC, 1980, page 50

53Hendrix, Ge L. C. and Lindsay, Morn M., The Jury Lists of South Carolina, 1778-1779, GPC, 1980, page 80

54Hendrix, Ge L. C., Edgefield County South Carolina Abstracts of Deed Books 1-12, Volume 1, Page 20 [Deed Book 2, page 95-97]

55Hendrix, Ge L. C., Edgefield County South Carolina Abstracts of Deed Books 1-12, Volume 1, Page 20 [Deed Book 2, page 59-62]

56Hendrix, Ge L. C., Edgefield County South Carolina Abstracts of Deed Books 1-12, Volume 1, Page 20 [Deed Book 27 page 91-96]

57Hendrix, Ge L. C., Edgefield County South Carolina Abstracts of Deed Books 1-12, Volume 1, Page 20 [Deed Book 4, page 46-51]

59Moss, Bobby G., Roster of South Carolina Patriots in the American Revolution, GPC, page 272

60Clark, Murtie J., Loyalsts in the Southern Campaign, Volume III, GPC, 1981

611785 Affidavit of Charles Lewis, transcribed from the John Simpson Papers, Manuscript Collection in the Archives of the South Caroliniana Library, University of South Carolina.

62Clark, Murtie J., Loyalsts in the Southern Campaign, Volume I, GPC, 1981, Major Ferguson's General Plan for Regulating the Province and Forming a Militia, page xvi.

63Holcomb, Brent H., Fairfield County, South Carolina, Minutes of the County Court, 1785-1799, Southern Historical Press, 1985, page 8

64Kershaw Co, SC Probate, Apartment 56, Package 1858 [second will of Benjamin Perry]

66Gavin, David, Diary of David Gavin, 1850's to 1870's, published by Jim Lay, Dorchester, SC, page 146,

67Lancaster Co., SC Deed Books C&E, page 61, Indenture, William and Thomas Starke to Executors of John Duke Estate, 23FEB1790

68Barnwell Co., SC Will Book B, page 146, also Barnwell Co., SC Probate Records, Bundle 37, package 11

69Fairfield Co., SC Deed Book B, page 152-154, Thomas and Mary Duke to Robert and John Ellison, 100A, 07DEC1785/28OCT1788

70Barnwell Co., SC Will Book B, page 146, also Barnwell Co., SC Probate Records, Bundle 37, package 11

71Fairfield Co., SC Deed Book B, page 155-158, Charles Pickett to John Ellison, 100A, 16MAY1788/01NOV1788

76Manning Collection, Volume V, Barnwell County Records, page 155, Ancestors and Descendants of Sheriff Boncin H. Dyches Sr

77Holcomb, Brent H., Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume V:1757-1765, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page ??

80Warren, Mary B., South Carolina Jury Lists, 1718 Through 1783, Heritage Papers, 1977

82Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book G, pages 15-16, Conveyance, James Bredin to Andrew McIlwain, 18JUL1806

83Holcomb, Brent H., Lancaster Co., SC Deed Abstracts, 1787-1811, Southern Historical Press, page 166

84Holcomb, Brent H., Lancaster Co., SC Deed Abstracts, 1787-1811, Southern Historical Press, page 156

85Holcomb, Brent H., Lancaster Co., SC Deed Abstracts, 1787-1811, Southern Historical Press, page 142

86Holcomb, Brent H., Lancaster Co., SC Deed Abstracts, 1787-1811, Southern Historical Press, page 189

87Lancaster Co., SC Deed Books G, pages 192-193, Conveyance, Mary Bredin, et al to George Hays

89Holcomb, Brent H., Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume VI: 1766-1770, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 221

90Holcomb, Brent H., Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume VI: 1766-1770, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 282

91Holcomb, Brent H., Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume VII: 1771-1774, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 15

92Holcomb, Brent H., Petitions for Land From South Carolina Journals, Volume VII: 1771-1774, SMAR, Columbia, SC, 1996, page 36

95Warren, Mary B., South Carolina Jury Lists, 1718 Through 1783, Heritage Papers, 1977, page 50

101Warren, Mary B., South Carolina Jury Lists, 1718 Through 1783, Heritage Papers, 1977, page 45

102Warren, Mary B., South Carolina Jury Lists, 1718 Through 1783, Heritage Papers, 1977, page 49

103Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book A, page 110, Affidavit concerning the land of Thomas Goutcher Junior

105Kershaw Co., SC Deed Book D, page 175, Stephen and Mary Duke to Reuben Roberts, 13APR1793

106email, cc'd to me by Joe Lineberger: '... I read with much interest on your webpage, http://web.infoave.net/~danshell/nti00291.htm , the following: "A notation in the old family Bible of his son, Moses S. Duke reads 'at his residence, Upson County, Georgia, departed this life Stephen Duke, Oct 1844, age 78 years. As a husband, parent and master, he was kind, indulgent, gentle and affectionate. As a citizen, he was amiable and exemplary. In all the private walks of life much loved and much esteemed by all who knew him. His spirit has taken its flight. Blessed are those who die in the Lord. M.S.D." ... '

107Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book M, page 233, Jesse Dukes to Thomas Macky, 07NOV1804

108Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book D, page 163, Micajah Crenshaw to William Rowel, JAN1799

109Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book F, page 198, Micajah Crenshaw Senior to Micajah Crenshaw Junior

110Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book G, page 359, Joseph Crenshaw to Henry Horton, 19JAN1809

111Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book G, pages 76-77, Samuel Crenshaw to Henry Horton, 19MAR1807

113Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book L, pages 27-28, Micajah Crenshaw to Simon Bowden, 24MAY1823

114Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book L, page 115, Micajah Crenshaw to Austin Coil, 02NOV1824

115Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book M, page 552, Micajah and Hapsey Crenshaw to James Bailey, 20APR1834

116Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book M, page 553, plat of land sold to James Bailey, 25MAR1834

117Lancaster Co., SC Deed Book N, pages 538-539, Micajah Crenshaw to James Bailey, 18MAR1839

118Lancaster Co. SC Deed Book G, pages 91-91, John Roper to Cranshaw Duke, 14NOV1792

119Lancaster Co. SC Deed Book H, pages 229, Cranshaw Duke to Jacob Champion, 03JAN1816

120Lancaster Co. SC Deed Book B, pages 279, Edward Sims to Alexander Carruth, 16NOV1791

122Lancaster Co. SC Deed Book G, pages 252, Jonathon Tompson to John Stevens, 19MAR1810

Head of Household	Males >15	Males <16	Females	Other	Slaves	Location
Moses Dukes	2	3	1	0	0	#025 Lancaster Co., SC
Jno. Dukes (Estate)	0	0	0	0	7	#026 Lancaster Co., SC
John Dukes	2	0	0	0	2	#100 Orangeburg Co., (South)

Head of Household	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	Other	Slaves	Location
John Dukes	20110	40100	0	0	#056 Barnwell Co., SC
Moses Dukes	10010	10001	0	6	#056 Barnwell Co., SC

Head of Household	Males >15	Males <16	Females	Other	Slaves	Location
David Grainger	1	0	2	0	0	#023 Lancaster
Stephen Dukes	1	4	2	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Walter Stropshire	2	4	2	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Thos. Duran	2	5	3	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Hugh Hamilton	2	3	5	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Frances Adams	2	5	1	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Wm. Young	2	3	2	0	0	#025 Lancaster
Widow McKee	1	2	1	0	0	#025 Lancaster

Head of Household	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	Other	Slaves	Location
Mary Duke	11000	11011	0	0	#419 Kershaw
Stephen Dukes	01110	41010	0	1	#419 Kershaw
Cransha Dukes	20010	11010	0	0	#003 Lancaster
James Cransha	21010	01010	0	0	#003 Lancaster
McGage Cransha	02001	00010	0	0	#003 Lancaster
Jesse Tilman	30102	11100	0	17	#004 Lancaster
Jesse Dukes	41010	00111	0	0	#004 Lancaster
Samuel Cranshaw	00010	00111	0	0	#004 Lancaster
William Duke	31001	21010	0	0	#111 Chesterfield
William Dukes, Sr	21001	22020	0	2	#935 Sumter
William Dukes, Jr.	10100	10100	0	0	#935 Sumter
William Dukes	41010	00010	0	2	#011 Lauren
John Dukes	00100	10200	0	0	#217 Union
Major Dukes	00001	32101	0	0	#217 Union

Head of Household	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	Other	Slaves	Location
James Cranshaw	32210	10010	1	0	#388 Lancaster
*Micajah Granger II	20010	10100	0	0	#387 Lancaster
Michj Grainger Sr.	00101	00001	0	0	#381 Lancaster
Michj Granger Jr.	20010	10100	0	0	#381 Lancaster

Head of Household	<10 <16 <18 <26 <45 >44	<10 <16 <26 <45 >44	Other	Slaves	Location*
Mathias Crenshaw	200010	00100	0	1	#170 Lancaster
James Crenshaw	300301	01001	0	3	#170 Lancaster
Macojiah Crenshaw	330010	11011	0	2	#169 Lancaster

Head of Household	<5 <10 <15 <20 <30 <40 <50 <60 <70 <80 <90 <100 >99	<5 <10 <15 <20 <30 <40 <50 <60 <70 <80 <90 <100 >99	O	S	Location
Robert Dukes	2000100000000	100000000			#076 Lancaster

Household	Name	Age	Sex	Occupation	Birth State
815/815	Robert Dukes	45	M	Overseer	South Carolina
	N. Dukes	45	F		South Carolina
	T. Dukes	21	M		South Carolina
	L. Dukes	18	F		South Carolina
	S. Dukes	19	F		South Carolina
	P. Dukes	16	F		South Carolina