Family Tree > Mason Family > Cousin Notes 2a

Cousin Notes 2a

This page references to Cousin Notes 2 .  Based on my research, I feel good that Francis was my Bluford's father.

The last we see of Francis is in the 1850 Pickens County, SC census.
After that, I can only seem to find evidence that some of his children are in Cherokee County, Georgia. The other children I haven't yet found at all.

I decided to trace Francis backwards in the census records, to see if I could extend the line any further up (nope):

1850 Pickens Co SC; Western Divison:
Francis Mason      age 43 M      b. SC
Cele                          46 F           ""
Eliza                          20 F           ""
Asa                           19 M           ""
John                          18 M          ""
Richard                      16 M          ""
Matilda                       14 F          ""
Merrel                        12 M          ""
Beaufort                     10 M          ""

1840 Pickens County, SC
Francis Mason

3 males under 5 (Richard 6/Merrill 2/Beaufort (Bluford) 0)
2 males 5 to under 10 (Asa 9/John 8)
1 male 30 to under 40 (Francis 33)

1 female under 5 (Matilda 4)
1 female 10 to under 15 (Eliza 10)
1 female 30 to under 40 (Cele 36)

1830 Pickens County, SC
Francis Mason

1 male 20 to under 30 (Francis 23)

1 female under 5 (Eliza 0)
1 female 20 to nder 30 (Cele 26)


Based on the fact that Francis and family resided in Pickens County, SC for at least those 20 years, I decided there was a good chance he'd lived there with his parents prior to marrying.
I checked the 1820 Pickens County (Pendleton District) SC census for Masons:

The age brackets were:
Males: 0-10/10-16/16-18/16-26/26-45/45+
Females: 0-10/10-16/16-26/26-45/45+

Ambrose Mason   001210-01011
Andrew               200010-42010
Daniel                340001-11110
James                021210-30110
John                   200001-01001
Joseph                000100-10010
Joseph               110110-12010
N.                       100001-30000
Nathan                100001-30000
Thomas             210010-30010
William                100010-02010

Francis would have been 13 in 1820; the highlighted names are the familys with sons that age.


1810 Pendelton District SC

The age brackets were:
Males: under 10/10-16/16-26/26-45/45+
Females: under 10/10-16/16-26/26-45/45+
Other free persons

Ambrose Mason         11010-00011-05
(Hunt h/h)
John                         11201-20010-00
Danl                         50110-40111-00
(Smith h/h) 
James                      10100-00100-00
Nancy                      00000-20010-00

Francis would have been 3 years old in 1810. 
- Ambrose had a son under 10, but did not have a 13 year old son in 1820.
- John also had a son under 10, but no 13 year old son in 1820. 


If we assume Francis was born and raised in the same Pendleton/Pickens County SC area, and that Daniel and James are the same people from census to census, and that one of them was Francis's guess would be James.
Following the names of the descendants of Francis, there are no Daniels' (until you get to my son, and since I was there when he was born, I can tell you, he wasn't named for that fellow) but there were alot James' in the family. 
Although that could have just been coincidence, as James was a more common name, there are even more Bluford's in our line than there were Daniels, and Bluford wasn't that common.

However, if Francis wasn't born in Pendleton/Pickens district, and wasn't there in 1810, he still could have been Joseph or Thomas' son. I haven't looked for them in the 1810 census.

Then again, he may not be in either in the 1810 or 1820 Pendleton/Pickens census, and only shows up for the first time as a married fellow in 1830.

I dunno.


Looking closer at James, just for the heck of it.

In 1810, James' age was between 16 and 26.
His wife was also aged between 16 and 26, they had one son under the age of 10.

In 1820, James' and wife's ages are between 26 and 45. (Going by the 1810 census age, they would be between the ages of 26 and 36 now.)
There are 2 unknown males in the home between the ages of 16 and 26 - one of those is between 16 and 18.
There is also an unknown female in the home aged between 16 and 26.
There are 2 males aged 10 to 16; one of these should be the son born between 1800 and 1810, the other could be a son born about 1810 after the census-taker had already visited.
Then there are 3 females under 10, born since the last census.

In 1830, James is listed as James Mason Sen., age 50-60. (Going by the 1820 census, he really should only be aged between 36 and 46.) 
His wife (assuming it is his wife) lists her age as 40-50, which should be more right.
There are 2 females aged 10-15, and 1 female aged 5-10 in the home.
They are missing about 4 males and 2 females from 1820.

One of the males is probably John R. Mason, living next door to James.
He is age 20-30, and so is his wife. They have no children yet.  He is likely right around 20 years old, the one I thought might have been born in 1810, after the census-taker visit.

Then we find James Mason (not sure where he lives in reference to James Sen, but same county anyway).
He is age 20-30, and so is his wife.
In the household there is a 15-20 year old female, and possibly a 15-20 year old male (it's hard to read if there's a mark there or not). I think this female, and male if he's there, is too old to be James children.
Otherwise there are 2 males under 5, and 1 female under 5.

Four households from James (Jr) is Francis Mason, age 20-30, wife age 20-30, 1 female under 5.

With James - possibly, most likely, being a Junior - having 3 kids under 5, whereas Francis has 1 and John has none, it almost would seem that James (Jr) was the oldest son, not Francis, who I assumed was the oldest because according to census records he should have been 3 years old in 1810.

I only have the 1850 census where Francis lists his age as 43. It could be wrong, as they often were. (Maybe he lied so he wouldn't be as much younger then his older wife?)

It's not making sense; there was one son under 10 in 1810. By 1820 there were four males (not counting James Sr.) in the home, all over the age of 10. They should have been shown in the 1810 census.
Unless, far-fatched as it would be, there were twins born in 1810, after the census-taker had already visited.
If James Jr was 6 to 8 years old in 1810, he could have been the 16-18 year old in the home in 1820, and then John and Francis could have been twins born 1810, so they'd account for the two 10-16 year old males.
There would still be an unaccounted for older male, 16 to 26 we don't know, but maybe he was married to the older female, 16 to 26, who we don't know either.

(*Note to self - look for James, James, and John in the 1840 & 1850 census)


Francis' oldest son was named Asa J.  -  James?
His next son was named John, and the next one Richard - John R. Mason?

Francis' oldest daughter, Eliza, married Joseph L. Jones, and their first son's name was James A. (Although, that might not mean alot, since after a couple of census's, Joseph's name changed to James.)

Francis' oldest son Asa named his first son James M.
Asa's daughter, Elizabeth, married Andrew Robison and they named a son James (and another son Bluford).

Francis' daughter, Martha/Matilda/Patsey, married Thomas King, and - if I found them correctly in the census records - they named their first son James M.

Francis' son, Merrill, named his first son James H.

Francis's son, Bluford, named his son James Bluford.


Still, it could just be a popular name. None of them named a child Daniel, but apparently none of them named a child Francis, either.