Cooks in Surry County, NC Censuses

 

1786 Surry County State Census

The State census is missing several districts, and therefore is missing several Cooks.  The Surry court ordered the justices in each of its fifteen districts to take the census on 15 November 1785, and at the following court on 16 February 1786 thirteen of the fifteen districts had returned a census.  Surry’s census was returned to the State the same month.  The two missing districts were Lewis’s and Adkins’, which included five Cooks in the 1785-6 tax lists, so it appears that those two districts were not included in the census.  [They included all of northern present Yadkin County.] 

 

It appears, though, that other districts were either subsequently lost or were incomplete.  Luckily, both the 1785 and 1786 tax lists survive, from which we can determine the number and locations of the adult males.  Several Cooks on these tax lists do not appear in the census.  For example, Henry Cook’s district was turned in, but Henry Cook himself does not appear in the census.

 

		Males 21-60	Other Males	Females	Blacks
	William Cock	1	3	5	--	Humphrey’s District
	James Cook	1	1	2	--	Gaine’s District
	William Cook	1	0	3	--	Blackburn’s District
	Thomas Cook	3	0	5	--	Blackburn’s District

 

1790 Surry County Census

This census appears to have been taken separately by district, then recopied into a single list.  Some of the districts were roughly alphabetized in the copying process.  When we compare this to the 1790 tax list, it appears some Cooks were missed in the census.  (The 1786 state census is known to be incomplete;  perhaps this one is as well.)  For example, the two William Cooks and John Cook were all polls in Benge’s District, but John Cook does not appear in the census.  The first two names are clearly in one district, the others each in a different district. 

 

Note that Stokes County was carved out of Surry in 1789 (though a part of it was added back to Surry in 1796), and some Cooks now appear in the Stokes County census.

 

		Males >16	Males <16	Fem.	Other	Slaves
Page
517	William Coock Jr.	1	4	3	--	--	Benge’s Dist in tax lists
	[3 names]
	William N. Cook	2	2	1	--	--	Benge’s Dist in tax lists
520	William Cook	3	--	5	--	10	Meredith’s Dist in tax list
522	William H. Cook	5	2	7	--	--	Possibly Blackburn’s Dist

 

1800 Surry County Census

It appears that the census was taken in several districts, then recopied into a single, roughly alphabetical list.   The 1800 tax lists exist, and can be compared to this census.  The last three names (John, Matthew, and Windle Cook) are all taxed in Hudspeth’s district.  All the rest are taxed in Wilbourn’s district except for Phillip Cook, who is taxed in the adjoining Burch’s district.

 

Note that there are two Peter Cook’s in the census, but only one in the tax lists.  The first Peter Cook below is surely Peyton Cook, who appears in the tax list but not the census.  This is probably a clerical error which occurred in the recopying of the census into its final form.    

 

		Males					Females
Page		<10	10-16	16-26	26-45	>45	<10	10-16	16-26	26-45	>45	Other	Slaves
640	William Cook Sr.			1		1			1	1	1		9
	[10 names]
	Phillip Cook	3			1		2			1
	[7 names]
	William Cook Jr.	2	1		1		1	1	1	1			3
	[2 names]
641	John Cook	4	2	1		1	2				1
	David Cook	3			1		3			1			3
	[2 names]
	Peter Cook				1		1		1				1
	William N. Cook					1					1
	[2 names]
	William Cook Jr.			1					1
	Astage Cook				1			2		1			1
	Grove Cook	2		1						1
	[5 names]
	Peter Cook	2	3	1		1	3			2
	[3 names]
	John Cook	4	2	1		1	2				1
	[9 names]
642	Matthew Cook	1	1		1		3		1
	[15 names]
643	Windle Cook				1		1		1

 

 

1810 Surry County Census

 

		Males					Females
Page		<10	10-16	16-26	26-45	>45	<10	10-16	16-26	26-45	>45	Oth	Slaves
167	Orson Cook			1			1		1
171	William Cook					1					1		2
180	William Cook H.	1			1		2			1
181	Peter Cook	1	1			1		1	1		1
188	William Cook	1	1	1		1	3	1	1	1
191	William Cook			1			2		1
196	Isaac Cook	1		1			1		1
196	Betsey Cook	2	2	2					1		1
	[3 names]
196	Keziah Cook	1						1			1		6